alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
10.2


 


AMENDMENT
TO


 


EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE AGREEMENT


 


WHEREAS, IMC Global Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”)
and C. Steven Hoffman (the “Executive”) entered into that certain Executive
Severance Agreement as of October 24, 2000 (the “Agreement”); and


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend
the Agreement in certain respects.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements and
covenants contained in the Agreement, and in consideration of the agreements
and covenants contained herein, the sufficiency of which is acknowledged, the
Executive and the Company hereby agree to the amendment of the Agreement as
follows:


 


Paragraph 3 of Section 5(h) is amended to read as
follows:


 


3.                                       for
the three (3) year period following Termination, the Executive will not induce
or persuade or attempt to induce or persuade any employee or agent of the
Company to terminate his or her employment, agency, or other relationship with
the Company in order to enter into any employment, agency or other relationship
with any business that is not affiliated with the Company;


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
undersigned have executed this Amendment to the Agreement this 20 day of October,
2004.


 


	
   

  	
  For the Company:

  	
      /s/
  Douglas A. Pertz

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Executive

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
      /s/
  C. Steven Hoffman
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 9 , 2022

NO. 03
- 21
- 00046
- CV

Pools Unlimited, Inc.; Randy Lee Morrow; and Rhonda Jean Morrow , Appellant s

v. John Houchens and Brenda Houchens , Appellee s

APPEAL FROM THE 207T H DIST RICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND KELLY AFFIRMED I N PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART

ON MOTION FOR R EHEARING

– OPINION BY JUSTICE KELLY

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on January 14, 2021

. We withdraw our June 3, 2022 opinion and judgment and substitute the following opinion and judgment in their place. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ ar gumen ts, the Court holds that there

was reversible error in the trial court ’s judgment Therefore, the Court reverses the tr i a l court ’s judgment as to appellees’ fraudulent

- lien claim and breach

- of

- contract claim , incl uding the trial
court ’s award of actua l dam ages, exemplary damages, attorney ’s fees, and exp enses . The Court

reman ds appe llees ’ fra u dul ent

- lien claim and breach

- of

- contract claim f

or a new jury trial. The Court affirms th at portion of the judgment ordering that appellants take nothing on the ir br each

of

- contract claim. Each party shall pay the costs of appeal incurred by th at party, both in this
Court and in the cour t below.
exv10w1



 





Exhibit 10.1



MEMORANDUM



To: Mr. Ted Field            Chairman of the Board




From: Keith Yokomoto




Re: Artist Direct Inc.




Dear Mr. Field,



I, Keith Yokomoto, am hereby resigning from the Board of Artist Direct,
Inc. as of October 22, 2004.



Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have further questions.




Sincerely,



Keith Yokomoto
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
PRESENTED IN THE FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         577,284
<SECURITIES>                                 1,953,531
<RECEIVABLES>                                  536,642
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,180,675
<PP&E>                                          96,377
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,203,856
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,085,651
<BONDS>                                        594,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           666
<OTHER-SE>                                     907,970
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,203,856
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,271,632
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  920,872
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,768
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 85,279
<INCOME-TAX>                                    34,524
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             50,755
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    50,755
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.76
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 179 (Monday, September 16, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75628-75629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-20978]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12535]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Being 
Imported for Exhibition--Determinations: ``The Time is Always Now: 
Artists Reframe the Black Figure'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby

[[Page 75629]]

determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to 
agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for temporary 
display in the exhibition ``The Time is Always Now: Artists Reframe the 
Black Figure'' at the Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania; the North Carolina Museum of Art, Raleigh, North 
Carolina; and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be 
determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their 
temporary exhibition or display within the United States as 
aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public 
Notice of these determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6f1c0a0c1b0600015d5b5a562f1c1b0e1b0a41080019"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5d2e383e293432336f6968641d2e293c2938733a322b">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 
2021.

Nicole L. Elkon,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2024-20978 Filed 9-13-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.5



             FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONSOLIDATED RENEWAL PROMISSORY NOTE

         This First Amendment to Consolidated Renewal Promissory Note (the
"Amendment") is entered into as of June 30, 1999 by PRECISION RESPONSE
CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, as "Borrower", and BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
d/b/a NATIONSBANK, N.A., successor to NATIONSBANK, N.A., as "Bank."

         A. Section 2 of the $5,120,000.00 Consolidated Renewal Promissory Note
dated May 29, 1998 executed by Precision Response Corporation, as "Borrower", in
favor of NationsBank, N.A., as "Bank", is hereby modified to read as follows:

                  2.       PAYMENTS:

                           (a) INTEREST. Borrower shall remit to Bank payments
                  of all accrued interest on the first day of September, 1998
                  and continuing on the first day of each December, March, June
                  and September to and including December 1, 1999. Thereafter,
                  Borrower shall remit to Bank payments of all accrued interest
                  on January 31, 2000 and continuing on the last day of each
                  April, July, October and January thereafter until the Maturity
                  Date (the "Payment Dates").

                           (b) PRINCIPAL. Principal payments shall be due on
                  each Payment Date commencing on January 31, 2000, and on the
                  last day of each April, July, October and January thereafter
                  until the Maturity Date. The amount of the principal payment
                  due on each Payment Date shall be in an amount as determined
                  by Bank such that constant quarterly payments of that amount
                  would fully amortize and pay-off the outstanding principal
                  balance by January 31, 2020.

         B. Except as expressly modified herein, the Promissory Note is
unchanged and is reaffirmed by Borrower in its entirety.

                                     BORROWER:

                                     PRECISION RESPONSE CORPORATION

                                     By:  /s/   Joseph E. Gillis
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                     Name:  JOSPEH E. GILLIS
                                     Title: VP AND TREASURER

                                     ACCEPTED BY BANK:

                                     BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., d/b/a NATIONSBANK,
                                     N.A., successor to NATIONSBANK, N.A.

                                     By: /s/ Gregory Viejo
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                     Name:  GREGORY VIEJO
                                     Title: VICE PRESIDENT
### 2002 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

1-30-2002 

# C o x v . C omm S o c i al S ec ur it y

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al :

D ock e t 1-2143

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w
. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2002

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2002 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w
. v i l l a no v a

. e du

. 

### R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" C o x v . C omm S oc i al S e c ur it y " (2002). 2002 D e cisio n s

. P a pe r 66. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w
. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2002/66NOT PR ECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 01-2143

CAMILLA COX, for Camilla N. Cox

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Camilla Cox,

Appell ant

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civ. No. 99-03478) District Judge: Honorable Nicholas H. Po litan

Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1( a) January 16, 2002

BEFORE: SCIRICA, GREENBERG, and BRIGHT,* Circ uit Judges

(Filed: January 29, 2002)

MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT

*Honorable Myron H. Bright, Senior Judge of the Uni ted States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

GREENBERG, Circuit Judge.

Camilla Cox for Camilla N. Cox appeals from a final order entered March 12, 2001, affirming the decision in this matter rejecti ng her claim for childhood disability SSI payments. The administrative law judge in her deci sion dated February 4, 1998, and the district court in its letter opinion dated March 9, 2001, set forth the background of thecase and, as the parties are fully familiar with it , we do no recite it.

Insofar as we review the order of the district court we exercise plenary review but insofar as we review the Commissioner's findings we determine whether the ad ministrative record contains substantial evidence for the findings. See Knepp v . Apfel, 204 F.3d 78, 83 (3d Cir. 2000). After a careful review of this mater we are c onvinced that there were no errors of law and that the Commissioner's findings are fully supported in the record. Consequently, the order of March 12, 2001, will be affirmed.

TO THE CLERK: Please file the foregoing memorandum opinion.

/s/ Mor ton I. Greenberg Circuit Judge

DATED: January 29, 2002
115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2679 

AN ACT 

To provide access to and manage the distribution of excess 

or surplus property to veteran-owned small businesses. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 2679 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Small Busi3 ness Enhancement Act of 2018’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ACCESS TO SURPLUS PROPERTY FOR VETERAN5 OWNED SMALL BUSINESSES. 

6 Section 32 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

7 657b) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(g) ACCESS TO SURPLUS PROPERTY FOR VETERAN9 OWNED SMALL BUSINESSES.— 

10 ‘‘(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection— 

11 ‘‘(A) the term ‘foreign excess property’ has 

12 the meaning given the term in section 102 of 

13 title 40, United States Code; and 

14 ‘‘(B) the term ‘state agency’ has the mean15 ing given the term, including the roles and re16 sponsibilities assigned, in section 549 of title 

17 40, United States Code. 

18 ‘‘(2) REQUIREMENT.—The Administrator, in 

19 coordination with the Administrator of General Serv20 ices, shall provide access to and manage the dis21 tribution of surplus property, and foreign excess 

22 property returned to a State for handling as surplus 

23 property, owned by the United States under chapter 

24 7 of title 40, United States Code, to small business 

25 concerns owned and controlled by veterans (as 

26 verified by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under 
3 

†S 2679 ES

1 section 8127 of title 38, United States Code) pursu2 ant to a memorandum of agreement between the Ad3 ministrator, the Administrator of General Services, 

4 and the head of the applicable state agency for sur5 plus properties and in accordance with section 549 

6 of title 40, United States Code.’’. 

Passed the Senate December 6, 2018. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2679 

AN ACT 

To provide access to and manage the distribution of 

small businesses. excess or surplus property to veteran-owned
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 3730

_____________________________ C HRIS B EISLER , a n individual,

Appellant,

v.

U NIVERSAL M ORTGAGE & F INANCE , I NC

. , a Maryland corporation
, Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Adrian G. Soud , Judge

. January 7, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R OBERTS , W ETHERELL , and O STERHAUS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Lee S. Haramis, Richard J. Plotkin, and Ashlea A. Edwards of GrayRobinson, P.A., Jacksonv ille
, for Appellant.

Christopher J. Hand, Thomas J. Fraser, and Cole Johnathon Sullivan of Eavenson, Fraser, Lunsford & Ivan, Jacksonville
, for Appellee.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Joseph Andrew Beach v. Christine Nicole Beach

Appellate case number: 01-19-00123-CV

Trial court case number: 18-DCV-0224

Trial court: 328th District Court

Appellant filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs in the trial court. The appellate record 

does not indicate that the trial court overruled the party’s claim of indigence. See TEX. R. APP. 

20.1(b)(1). Appellant also filed an an affidavit of inability to afford costs in this Court. We 

construe appellant’s filing as his communication that he is presumed indigent. See TEX. R. APP. 

20.1(b)(2). Appellant may therefore proceed on appeal without payment of costs. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 20.1(b)(1). 

The Clerk of this Court is ORDERED to make an entry in this Court’s records that 

appellant is indigent and is allowed to proceed on appeal without payment of costs. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 20.1(b)(1).

The trial court clerk is ORDERED to provide a complete copy of the clerk’s record and 

the reporter’s record to appellant without charge. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 145.

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Chief Justice Sherry Radack______

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __March 19, 2019__
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit



## FILED

November 3, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-30868

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SAMMIE L. WILLIAMS,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 03-CR-30006-ALL

--------------------

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Sammie L. Williams appeals his conditional guilty-plea

conviction for possession with intent to distribute five kilograms

or more of cocaine and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a

drug trafficking crime. He argues that the district court erred in

denying his motion to suppress the cocaine and firearm seized in

conjunction with the traffic stop that led to his arrest.

Given the incon sistencies in Williams’s statements to the

trooper, his inability to explain a portion of his travels, hisNo. 03-30868

-2-

nervous behavior, the fact that he was not the owner of the van and

could not locate any paperwork for the van, and, most importantly,

the large number of air fresheners in the van, we conclude that the

tro oper had a reasonable suspicion of drug trafficking before he

ran the computer check on the vehicle. S ee Unite d States v.

Brigham , 382 F.3d 500 (5th Cir. 2004) (en banc).

The trooper also learned th at Williams had a drug-related

criminal history. It is unclear from the record when the trooper

learned this information. B ut see United States v. Muniz-Melchor

,

894 F.2d 1430, 1433-34 (5th Cir. 1990) (evidence must be viewed in

the light most favorable to the prevailing party)

. E ven if, as

Williams asse rts, the trooper asked about his criminal history

between the check on the vehicle and his criminal history, the

timing of the question did not ren der the detention

unconstitutional because the computer check on the vehicle had not

dispelled the trooper’s suspicion of drug trafficking. Moreover,

Williams does not argue that the time it took to ask that question

unreasonably prolonged his detention. “[D]etention, not

questioning, is the evil at which Terry ’s second prong is aimed.”

Brigham

, 382 F.3d at 508 (quoting United States v. Shabazz

, 993

F.2d 431, 436 (5th Cir. 1993)). Finally, the record indicates that

the criminal history check took five minutes, not because the

trooper was trying to delay the detention, but because the check

involved an out-of-state license.No. 03-30868

-3-

As there was no Fourth Amendment violation, Williams’s consent

to search the van was not unconstitutionally tainted. S ee Brigham

,

382 F.3d at 512. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7640

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMES FELTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CR-93-88; CA-04-737) Submitted: March 29, 2006 Decided: April 19, 2006 Before NIEMEYER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Felton, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: James Felton seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his “Motion for Permission to File a First § 2255 motion.” The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Felton has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
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 Quarterly Report of ICT Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Vincent A. Paccapaniccia, Executive Vice President, Corporate Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:



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



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



|                 |  |  | 
|---------------- |  |  | 
|October 31, 2003 |  |  | 
|                 |  |  | 
|                 |  |  |