alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.20





LAND DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, S.E.
Doral Building, 7th Floor
650 Munoz Rivera Avenue
Hato Rey, Puerto Rico  00918-4149

July 13, 2001

Mrs. Carmen Rocafort
Vice President
FirstBank Puerto Rico
Santurce, Puerto Rico

Re:  KEMBT Corporation

Dear Mrs. Rocafort:
Reference is made to that certain Loan Agreement between Land Development Associates, S.E. ("LDA") and FirstBank Puerto Rico ("you"), dated August 3, 1995, as amended, (the "LDA Loan Agreement") and that certain Non-Revolving Credit Agreement between KEMBT Corporation ("KEMBT") and you, dated the date hereof (the "Credit Agreement").

Pursuant to the LDA Loan Agreement, LDA is required to deliver to you as repayment of its obligations under the LDA Loan Agreement an amount equal to seventy percent (70%) of the sales price of the portions of the real estate forming part of the Parque Escorial Office Park and of the real estate identified as the Parque Escorial Development and from the assigned distributions made to Borrower by Eli, S.E. (the "LDA Payment").

In order to repay certain obligations to KEMBT arising from a certain Cash Flow Note dated August 15, 2000, LDA requests your consent for the application by you of an amount equal to 40% of the LDA Payment, to KEMBT's obligations under the Credit Agreement, without such bifurcation of the LDA Payment constituting a release or waiver of any covenant or condition (whether of payment or otherwise) under the LDA Agreement.

Furthermore, as a condition of you entering into the Credit Agreement and extending credit thereunder, LDA agrees to modify and hereby modifies, with your consent, the LDA Loan Agreement to the effect that the occurrence of an event of default under the Credit Agreement shall constitute an event of default under the LDA Agreement as if such was caused by LDA, giving you the right to foreclose on the collateral guaranteeing the LDA Loan Agreement.  Notwithstanding the said cross-default and cross-guarantee rights granted to you herein, LDA shall retain the right to cure any such default as such may be cured by KEMBT pursuant to the terms of the Credit Agreement.

Sincerely,
Land Development Associates, S.E.
By:	Interstate General Properties Limited
	Partnership, S.E., its Managing Partner
By:	IGP Group Corp., its General Partner
By:	/s/ Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Carlos R. Rodriguez
	President

Agreed and Acknowledged:
I.G.P. Group Corp (Guarantor)
By:	/s/ Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Chief Executive Office

American Community Properties Trust (Guarantor)
By:	/s/ Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Authorized Officer

American Land Development U.S., Inc. (Guarantor)
By:	/s/ Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Authorized Officer



Interstate General Properties Limited Partnership, S.E. (Guarantor)
By:	I.G.P. Group Corp., its General Partner

By:	/s/ Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Carlos R. Rodriguez
	Chief Executive Officer



FirstBank Puerto Rico (Lender)
By:	/s/ Carmen Rocafort	Carmen Rocafort
	Vice President
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2032

CHERI LANGEHENNIG,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MICHAEL L. CHAPMAN, Sheriff, Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:16-cv-00466-AJT-MSN)

Submitted: May 23, 2017 Decided: May 25, 2017

Before KING, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harvey Joseph Volzer, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Alexander Francuzenko, 

COOK CRAIG & FRANCUZENKO, PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Cheri Langehennig appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her 

employment discrimination action as untimely. We have reviewed the parties’ arguments 

and the record submitted on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

for the reasons stated by the district court. Langehennig v. Chapman, No. 1:16-cv-00466-

AJT-MSN (E.D. Va. Aug. 18, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
## NO. 12

- 1 0

- 00 0 8 5

- C R

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

OSCAR CESAR VEGA

, APPELLANT ' APPEAL FROM THE 114TH

V. ' JUDICIAL DISTRICT C OURT OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS, ' SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

APPELLEE

MEMORANDUM OPINI ON

PER CURIAM

Appellant pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana in a drug f r ee zone, and the

trial court assessed punishment at imprisonment for eight years. We have received the

trial court’s certification showing that Appellant waived his right to ap peal. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 25.2(d). The certification is signed by Appellant and his counsel. Accordingly,

the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Opinion delivered April 7 , 2010

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

( DO NOT PUBLISH)
II

Calendar No. 7

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 46

To amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to make preferential treatment

an unlawful employment practice, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 19, 1999

Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read the first time

JANUARY 20, 1999

Read the second time and placed on the calendar

A BILL

To amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to make preferential

treatment an unlawful employment practice, and for

other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Civil Rights Restora5 tion Act of 1999’’.
2

•S 46 PCS

1 SEC. 2. PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT.

2 (a) UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE.—Section

3 703(j) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–

4 2(j)) is amended to read as follows:

5 ‘‘(j)(1) It shall be an unlawful employment practice

6 for any entity that is an employer, employment agency,

7 labor organization, or joint labor-management committee

8 subject to this title to grant preferential treatment to any

9 individual or group with respect to selection for, discharge

10 from, compensation for, or the terms, conditions, or privi11 leges of, employment or union membership, on the basis

12 of the race, color, religion, sex, or national origin of such

13 individual or group, for any purpose, except as provided

14 in subsection (e) or paragraph (2).

15 ‘‘(2) It shall not be an unlawful employment practice

16 for an entity described in paragraph (1) to recruit individ17 uals of an underrepresented race, color, religion, sex, or

18 national origin, to expand the applicant pool of the individ19 uals seeking employment or union membership with the

20 entity.’’.

21 (b) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in the amendment

22 made by subsection (a) shall be construed to limit the au23 thority of courts to remedy, under section 706(g) of the

24 Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–5(g)), inten25 tional discrimination under title VII of such Act (42

26 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.).

Calendar No. 7

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 46

A BILL

To amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to make

practice, and for other purposes.preferential treatment an unlawful employment

JANUARY 20, 1999

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
#### O. B. Ayres, Appellant, v. Johanna Grill *et al.,*Appellees.

Homestead: abandonment: judgment: lien.

*Appeal from Clinton District Court.*— IIon. C. M. Waterman, Judge.

Thursday, January 28, 1892.

This is a petition in equity to quiet the title of the plaintiff to fifteen acres of land. There was a hearing upon the merits, and a decree for the defendants. The plaintiff *appeals.*

Reversed.

*A. R. McCoy,*for appellant.

*P. B. Wolf,*for appellees.

Rothrook, J.

The plaintiff claims title to the land by virtue of a deed of conveyance from Petrina Momsen and John Momsen, her husband, made and delivered on the twenty-fifth day of March, 1882. Mom-sen and his wife commenced to occupy the land as a homestead in the month of February, 1870, and continued to occupy it as a homestead until August, 1880, when they changed their residence to Marion county. The evidence shows that the 'occupancy of the homestead was not continuous. There was a period when it was unoccupied, and Momsen and his wife occupied a dwelling house in the city of De Witt, a few miles distant from the land in controversy. There is a conflict in the evidence as to the time the said parties resided in De Witt, and whether the homestead right to the land in controversy was abandoned by reason of the said residence in De Witt. The preponderance of the evidence shows that said residence was for about six months. It appears that Momsen bought the house in which he lived in De Witt. This is a strong circumstance tending to show an abandonment of the homestead on the land. But he made no payment on the home he purchased, and the evidence shows by a clear preponderance that he did not intend to abandon his homestead. The defendants claim title to the land by a certificate of a sheriff’s sale made upon a judgment upon a promissory note against John Momsen. The note was executed, and the obligation for which it was given was contracted, after the homestead right attached. The judgment was not a lien on the homestead unless it was abandoned. There is no evidence that there was any abandonment by the removal to Marion county, and it appears to us that the conveyance made to the plaintiff conferred a good title as against any claim of the defendants.

There are other questions presented by the record which are not important to consider. They involve a conveyance of the land from Momsen to his wife through a trustee, and the fact that the execution was not issued on the judgment under which the defendants claim until *721after the conveyance of the land to the plaimtiff. We place our decision of the case upon the ground that the land in controversy was a homestead; that it was not at any time abandoned; and that the debt of Momsen, which was put in judgment, could not be made a lien on the homestead, because it was contracted after the homestead right was acquired.

The decree of the district court will be Reversed.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-12-00656-CR

ERNEST PARR

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

County Criminal Court No 2 of Denton County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CR-2011-07658-B

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 9, 2014
EXHIBIT 23.1
                                                                    ------------




INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 333-93895) pertaining to the Amended and Restated 1996 Stock
Option Plan of Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc. of our report dated January
28, 2000 (with respect to Note L, February 9, 2000; Note M, February 29, 2000
and Note C, March 14, 2000), with respect to the financial statements of
Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc. included in its annual report on Form 10-KSB
for the year ended December 31, 1999 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.



Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP

New York, New York

March 21-, 2000
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86337-86338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25217]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0449; FRL 10095-03-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; 
GreenChill Advanced Refrigeration Partnership (Revision); Correction 
and Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; correction and extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting 
the Docket ID number under the ADDRESSES section of the Federal 
Register notice, which was published on October 16, 2024. This 
correction is associated with an information collection request (ICR), 
``GreenChill Advanced Refrigeration Partnership (Revision)'' (EPA ICR 
No. 2349.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0702). Due to the incorrect Docket ID 
number in the previous notice, EPA is extending the comment period by 
15 days to December 31, 2024.

DATES: The comment period has been extended until December 31, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Annie Kee, Stratospheric Protection

[[Page 86338]]

Division--Office of Air and Radiation, (3204A), Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; 
telephone number: (202) 564-2056; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of October 16, 2024, in FR Doc. 2024-23835, 
on page 83495, in the second column under the ADDRESSES section, 
correct the Docket ID No. from ``EPA-HQ-QAR-2022-0449'' to ``EPA-HQ-
OAR-2022-0449''.

Cynthia A. Newberg,
Director, Stratospheric Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 2024-25217 Filed 10-29-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 10.10

                                  E-MEDSOFT.COM
                        200 Brickstone Square, Suite 403
                          Andover, Massachusetts 01810

                                                               October 18, 2001

Mr. Stephen Savitsky
Mr. David Savitsky
Mr. Dale R. Clift
c/o Tender Loving Care Health
       Care Services, Inc.
1983 Marcus Avenue
Lake Success, New York  11042

Gentlemen:

         We refer to (i) the Employment Agreements, each dated as of the date
hereof (collectively, the "Employment Agreements"), between Tender Loving Care
Health Care Services, Inc. ("Company") and Stephen Savitsky, David Savitsky and
Dale R. Clift, respectively, and (ii) the Agreement, dated the date hereof, by
and among Company, Stephen Savitsky, David Savitsky and Dale R. Clift (the
"Additional Payment Agreement").

         E-MedSoft.com hereby guarantees the payment by Company to Stephen
Savitsky, David Savitsky and Dale R. Clift of (i) their respective "Signing
Bonus" (as such term is defined in the Employment Agreements) payable by Company
to each such person and (ii) the amounts payable by Company to each such person
under the Additional Payment Agreement. E-MedSoft.com shall make such payments
to such persons directly or shall contribute such amounts to Company and cause
Company to make such payments to such persons when due.

                                            E-MEDSOFT.COM

                                            By: /s/ Frank Magliochetti
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Frank Magliochetti
                                                President and Co-Chief
                                                Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT (23)

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Banc Corporation
Birmingham, Alabama

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-72747, No. 333-58170, No. 333-70953, No.
333-123397 and No. 333-123398) of The Banc Corporation of our report dated April
20, 2005, except for the restatement described in Management's Report on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting, as to which the date is February 17,
2006, relating to The Banc Corporation management's assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting of The Banc Corporation and
subsidiaries appearing in the Company's Amendment No. 3 on Form 10-K/A to the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

/s/ Carr, Riggs & Ingram LLC

Montgomery, Alabama
February 17, 2006
CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, the undersigned officer of Tix Corporation (the “Company”) hereby
certifies:





(i)
            The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March
      31, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, 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
      as of and for the periods covered in the
Report.





DATE:
        May 6, 2009
              /s/ MITCH FRANCISMitch
      Francis,Chief
      Executive Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (Section 906), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to Tix Corporation and will be retained by Tix Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.





The
foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission as an Exhibit to the Form 10-Q and shall not be considered filed as
part of the Form 10-Q.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE COFFEE
PEOPLE, INC. QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-26-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-19-1998
<CASH>                                             843
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,961
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,071
<INVENTORY>                                      4,886
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,563
<PP&E>                                          17,474
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,863
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,619
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,182
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        44,637
<OTHER-SE>                                       (344)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,619
<SALES>                                         11,042
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,249
<CGS>                                            5,926
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,926
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,371
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (92)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,107)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       486
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (621)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (621)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

LUIS GONZALEZ,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 

 State.

 

§

§

§

 

§

§

§ 

 

§

'

'

No. 08-14-00203-CR

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 1

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20120C10382)

 O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time to file the brief 

until February 6, 2015. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE 

APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Veronica Teresa Lerma, the Appellant’s Attorney, 

prepare the Appellant’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before February 6, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of December, 2014.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, CJ, Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
**Exhibit 31.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

** **

I, J. T. Malugen, certify that:

 

# **1.**                                       Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form l0-Q of Movie Gallery, Inc.;

# ** **

# **2.**                                       Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

# ** **

# **3.**                                       Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

# ** **

# **4.**                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

# ** **

(a)       designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

(b)         evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)       disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

# **5.**                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors:

# ** **

(a)       all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

## **(b)**      anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date: May 14, 2004      |
|-------------------------|
|                    |
|                    |
| /s/ J. T. Malugen       |   |
| J. T. Malugen           |
| Chief Executive Officer |

 

----