alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3

                                AMENDMENT No. 11

                                       to

                       AMETEK RETIREMENT AND SAVINGS PLAN

              WHEREAS, there was adopted and made effective as of October 1,
1984, the AMETEK Retirement and Savings Plan (the "Plan"); and

              WHEREAS, the Plan was amended and restated in its entirety,
effective January 1, 1997; and

              WHEREAS, Section 10.1 of the Plan provides that AMETEK, Inc.
("AMETEK") may amend the Plan at any time, and from time to time; and

              WHEREAS, AMETEK now desires to amend the Plan in certain respects;

              NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

              FIRST: Section 6.4(b) of the Plan is amended to read in its
entirety as follows:

              "(b) Retirement Participants. A Retirement Participant or Former
         Retirement Participant who has terminated his employment on or after
         his Normal Retirement Age or because he was Disabled shall be entitled
         to receive a distribution or a direct transfer to another plan of the
         value of his Accounts as soon as administratively practicable."

              SECOND: Section 6.4(c) of the Plan is amended to read in its
entirety as follows:

              "(c) Terminated Participants. Upon a Participant's or a Retirement
         Participant's termination of employment with the Employer, either
         voluntarily or involuntarily, prior to his Normal Retirement Age (other
         than by reason of his death or Disability), he shall be entitled to
         receive a distribution or a direct transfer to another plan of the
         value of his Accounts, pursuant to Section 6.1; as soon as
         administratively practicable after returning a completed benefit
         distribution form to the Committee provided, however that his Accounts
         must be distributed no later than his Mandatory Distribution Date as
         determined under Section 6.5.
<PAGE>   2
              Until benefits are distributed, a Participant's or a Retirement
         Participant's Accounts shall be held and invested in accordance with
         Section 9.2 pursuant to the instructions of the Former Participant or
         Former Retirement Participant."

              SECOND: The provisions of this Amendment No. 11 shall be effective
as of May 1, 2000.

              IN WITNESS WHEREOF, AMETEK has caused these presents to be
executed, in its corporate name, by its duly authorized officer on this 18th day
of May, 2000.


                                                 AMETEK, Inc.

                                                 By: /s/ Donna F. Winquist
                                                     ---------------------------

Attest:


/s/ Kathryn E. Londra
---------------------------



                                       2
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 4.2

                           CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                      OF
                          CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION

                                      OF
                         CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION



        e.spire Communications, Inc., a corporation organized and existing
under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,
DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

        FIRST: That on June 8, 2000, at a telephonic meeting of the Board of
Directors of e.spire Communications, Inc. resolutions were duly adopted setting
forth a proposed amendment to the *Certificate of Designation of the
Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, the proposed amendment is as
follows:

        WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of e.spire Communications, Inc. (the
"Corporation") desires to amend the Certifictae of Designation (the
"Certificate") and the resolution of the Board of Directors of the Corporation
contained therein as filed with the Secretary of State of Delaware on March 3,
2000; and

        WHEREAS, all of the holders of the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
of the Corporation have consented to the proposed amendment;

        NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that the Certificate be amended as
follows:

        The reference to "100 days" in Section 3(h) of the Certificate shall be
amended to read "150 days"; and

        RESOLVED, that the officers of the Corporation be, and each of them
acting alone hereby is, authorized and empowered, to execute and file said
amendment to the Certificate with the Secretary of State of Delaware.

        SECOND: that said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the
provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said e.spire Communications, Inc. has caused this
certificate to be signed by Juliette Williams Pryor, its Secretary, this 12th
day of June, 2000.


/s/ Juliette Pryor
------------------
By: Juliette Williams Pryor
     Secretary
#### HUDSON v. STATE.

No. 25425.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 31, 1951.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 12, 1951.

Further Rehearing Denied Jan. 30, 1952.

*842No attorney on apipeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is transporting illicit alcoholic beverage on which no state tax had been paid; the punishment, a fine of $500,00.

An agent of the liquor control board testified that he received a telephone call to the effect that a certain truck was being loaded with whiskey in Louisiana. In answer to this call he went to the state line where the truck was pointed out to him, and he observed appellant riding in the cab. As soon as the truck entered Panola County, where the prosecution was had, the witness stopped the truck and found it to be loaded with whiskey bearing no Texas tax stamps. In the cab he found an invoice from a wholesale whiskey house in Louisiana made out to appellant for a quantity of whiskey. He then placed appellant under arrest.

Appellant moved to quash the information, alleging that the charge consisted of two separate and distinct offenses; i. e., unlawful transportation and unlawfully failing to pay the state tax. We do not so view it. Article 666-3a(4), Vernon’s Ann. Penal Code, names sixteen means by which one may be criminally connected with untaxed alcoholic or “illicit beverage”. To transport is one of these. Austin v. State, 141 Tex.Cr.R. 1, 146 S.W.2d 990.

The trial court properly overruled the motion.

Bills of exception 1 and 2 seek to raise the question of the insufficiency of the evidence, which is unnecessary since this Court passes upon the sufficiency of the evidence in all cases whether raised by a bill or not. The finding of the invoice made out to appellant for the-whiskey in question, together with the other facts, made out the state’s case.

Bill of exception 3 complains because the state’s witness was not required to reveal the name of the person from whom he got the information upon which he based his right to search the truck on probable cause. In Sadler v. State, 118 Tex.Cr.R. 318, 40 S.W.2d 91, this Court said “Bill of exception No. 2 complains of the refusal of the court below to compel the officer who arrested appellant to disclose from whom he got the information on which he was seeking appellant, and which led him to make the trip. We know of no reason why the court should attempt to compel the officers to disclose such information.” See also Hawthorne v. State, *843110 Tex.Cr.R. 646, 10 S.W.2d 724. For a discussion of the reason for the rule, we refer to Underhill, Criminal Evidence, 4th Ed., Sec. 332, p. 633, and Wigamore, Evidence, 3rd Ed., Vol. 8, Sec. 2574, p. 715.

Our disposition of appellant’s first two bills of exception disposes of the fourth. Allegation or proof of a dry area are not elements of the offense charged herein.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00074-CV

Gail Rigsby

v.

EECU

§

§

§

§

From the 236th District Court

of Tarrant County (236-265926-13)

April 2, 2015

Opinion by Justice Meier

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the 

trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part. We reverse that portion of the 

trial court’s judgment that dismisses Gail Rigsby’s intentional infliction of 

emotional distress, negligence, and gross negligence claims and remand this 

case to the trial court to consider EECU’s motion to dismiss those claims for the 

reasons advanced in EECU’s motion to dismiss. We affirm that portion of the 

trial court’s judgment that dismisses Gail Rigsby’s defamation claim.

It is further ordered that Appellant Gail Rigsby shall pay all costs of this 

appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Bill Meier 

 Justice Bill Meier
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

RICARDO RODRIGUEZ, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v. No. 4:22-CV-00164-P

COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant.

ORDER

The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, 

and a Recommendation in this case. ECF No. 14. No objections were 

filed, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is ripe for review. 

The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District 

Judge believes that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate 

Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and 

Conclusions of the Court. The Court therefore AFFIRMS the 

Commissioner’s decision.

SO ORDERED on this 2nd day of March 2023.

Case 4:22-cv-00164-P Document 16 Filed 03/02/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1290
<PAGE>   1


                              AMRESCO CAPITAL TRUST

                 EXHIBIT 11 - COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                      (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                             Period from
                                                                              February 2,
                                                                                1998
                                                            Year Ended         through
                                                           December 31,       December 31,
                                                               1999               1998
                                                          ---------------   ---------------
<S>                                                       <C>               <C>
Basic:
    Net income available to common shareholders           $         7,320   $         3,952
                                                          ===============   ===============

    Weighted average common shares outstanding                     10,000             7,027
                                                          ===============   ===============

    Basic earnings per common share                       $          0.73   $          0.56
                                                          ===============   ===============

Diluted:
    Net income available to common shareholders           $         7,320   $         3,952
                                                          ===============   ===============

    Weighted average common shares outstanding                     10,000             7,027
    Effect of dilutive securities:
      Restricted shares                                                12                 4
      Net effect of assumed exercise of stock options                  --                --
                                                          ---------------   ---------------
    Adjusted weighted average common shares outstanding            10,012             7,031
                                                          ===============   ===============

    Diluted earnings per common share                     $          0.73   $          0.56
                                                          ===============   ===============
</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Annual Report of Dynabazaar, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Melvyn Brunt, the
chief financial officer of Dynabazaar, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that

      (i)   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

      A signed original copy of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

       Date: April 2, 2007                  By: /s/ Melvyn Brunt
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Melvyn Brunt
                                                Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT A - State Court Petition - Page 1 of 7

Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 1 of 7   PageID 6Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 1 of 7   PageID 6

EXHIBIT A - State Court Petition - Page 2 of 7

Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 2 of 7   PageID 7Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 2 of 7   PageID 7

EXHIBIT A - State Court Petition - Page 3 of 7

Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 3 of 7   PageID 8Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 3 of 7   PageID 8

EXHIBIT A - State Court Petition - Page 4 of 7

Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 4 of 7   PageID 9Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 4 of 7   PageID 9

EXHIBIT A - State Court Petition - Page 5 of 7

Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 5 of 7   PageID 10Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 5 of 7   PageID 10

EXHIBIT A - State Court Petition - Page 6 of 7

Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 6 of 7   PageID 11Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 6 of 7   PageID 11

EXHIBIT A - State Court Petition - Page 7 of 7

Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 7 of 7   PageID 12Case 3:22-cv-01000-G-BK   Document 1-2   Filed 05/04/22    Page 7 of 7   PageID 12
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 208 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 208

  Declaring the sense of Congress regarding periods of silence in the 
                            public schools.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 23, 1994

  Mr. Jacobs submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
 referred jointly to the Committees on the Judiciary and Education and 
                                 Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Declaring the sense of Congress regarding periods of silence in the 
                            public schools.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the Constitution of the United States does not preclude 
        a short period of silence to be used, solely at the discretion 
        of the individual student in public schools, for silent prayer, 
        meditation, contemplation, or introspection;
            (2) public school authorities should recognize the value of 
        such a short period of silence to be used at the discretion of 
        the individual student in public schools, for silent prayer, 
        meditation, contemplation, or introspection.

                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 23.2**

**CONSENT OF BEARD MILLER COMPANY LLP**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements (No. 333-53295, 333-85025 and 333-87932) on Form S-8 of BCSB Bankcorp, Inc. of our report dated November 30, 2004 relating to the consolidated financial statements of BCSB Bankcorp, Inc., which is incorporated byreference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of BCSB Bankcorp, Inc. for the year ended September 30, 2006. 

/s/ BeardMiller Company LLP 

Baltimore, Maryland 

December 15,2006
Order entered February 11, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00852-CV

PAYSON PETROLEUM, INC., ET AL., Appellants

V.

J. MICHAEL WHEELER, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-06306

ORDER

We GRANT appellants’ February 9, 2015 unopposed motion for an extension of time to 

file a reply brief. Appellants shall file a reply brief by March 25, 2015.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED D AX DEVON LAMPKINS , A ppellant ,
v. Case No. 5D22

- 159 LT C ase No. 2019

- CF

- 011849 -A-O

STATE O F F LORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed November 15, 2022 Appeal f rom t he Circuit C ourt for Orange County , Bob Leblanc, J udge. Matthew J. M etz, Public Defender, a nd Kathryn Rollison Radtke, A ssistant P ublic Defender, D aytona B each, f or Appellant. Ashley Moody, A ttorney G eneral, Tallahassee, an d Whitney Brow n Hartless, Assistant A ttorney General, D aytona Beach, f or Appellee. PER CUR IAM. AFFIRMED. COHEN , SASSO a nd TRAVER , JJ. , c oncur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           8,683
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,973
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      2,108
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             532
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               532
<LOANS>                                         68,153
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,382
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  98,600
<DEPOSITS>                                      55,339
<SHORT-TERM>                                    23,620
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,769
<LONG-TERM>                                      3,573
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                         5,482
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,280
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  98,600
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  7,246
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  452
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 7,484
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,835
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,122
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,527
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,256
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 34,192
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,671)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    (12,671)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,922)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.45)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.57
<LOANS-NON>                                      3,106
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,590
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    3,286
<RECOVERIES>                                        36
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,382
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,382
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 24 - 0116 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JACOB TYLER POWELL ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including November 25 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 3 2024

10/03/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0116