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








AMENDMENT TO THE MARKEL CORPORATION VOLUNTARY DEFERRAL PLAN




WHEREAS, Markel Corporation (the “Company”) sponsors the Markel Corporation Voluntary Deferral Plan, effective as of April 1, 2016 (the “Plan”);


WHEREAS, the Company has the power to amend the Plan and now wishes to do so;


NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows, effective as of January 1, 2019:


		
	1.
	Section 4.01(a)(ii) of the Adoption Agreement to the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety as follows:




(ii) Bonuses [do not complete if you complete (iii)]
	
						
	Type of Bonus
	Dollar Amount
	% Amount
	Increment

	Min
	Max
	Min
	Max

	(a) Annual Bonus Plan
	 
	 
	0%
	75%
	5%

	(b) Executive Bonus Plan
	 
	 
	0%
	75%
	5%

	(c) 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 






		
	2.
	Effective for Participant distribution elections made for Compensation earned during periods beginning on or after January 1, 2019, the last paragraph of Section 6.01(b) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety as follows:




Installments may be paid [select each that applies] 
	
		
	 
	Monthly

	 
	Quarterly

	X
	Annually






		
	3.
	In all respects not amended, the Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed.




   *    *    *    *


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be signed as of the effective date set forth above. 


	
				
	 
	MARKEL CORPORATION

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	By:
	 
	/s/ Linda V. Schreiner

	 
	Name:
	 
	Linda V. Schreiner

	 
	Title:
	 
	Sr. Vice President, Strategic Management
STATE of Louisiana v. Derrick FRANCOIS

No. 2017-KP-0700

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 15, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Relator fails to show that he received ineffective assistance of counsel *1043under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington* , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
### EXHIBIT 99.2



### Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Rick L. Hurt, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
of Intermountain Refining Co., Inc. certify that

1. I have reviewed the annual report on Form 10-KSB of
Intermountain Refining Co., Inc;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain
any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which
such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this annual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows
of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual
report.

Date: May 17,
2006/s/ Rick L.
HurtRick L.
HurtTreasurer and Chief Financial
Officer
Charles WATLINGTON, individually and as Father of Jesse Watlington, Deceased, and Alda Watlington, individually and as Mother of Jesse Watlington, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. NORTHSTAR FUNERAL SERVICES OF FLORIDA, LLC, d/b/a Fort Myers Memorial Gardens Funeral Home and Northstar Cemetery Services of Florida, LLC, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4590

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 09, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
EX PARTE Antonio L. DAVIDSON

CR-15-1069

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Ramon CASTELLANOS, Francisco Fernandez, Ivan Gonzalez, Elaine Prats, Ana Satt, and Sunny Isles Resort Developers, LLLP, Appellants, v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee.

Nos. 3D17-1585 3D17-1566

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 27, 2018

Marko & Magolnick, P.A., Joel S. Magolnick, Veronica M. Rabinowitz and Omar Ali-Shamaa, Miami; Ross & Girten, Lauri Waldman Ross and Theresa L. Girten, Miami; St. Denis & Davey, P.A. and Michael Schiffrin, Miami, for appellants.

Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Farrokh Jhabvala, Thomas J. Meeks and Michael N. Wolgin, Miami, for appellee.

Before LAGOA, FERNANDEZ and LUCK, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Having carefully considered the issues raised by the appellants in these consolidated appeals, as well as the responses advanced by the appellee, together with the record, we affirm without discussion. We write only to recognize and commend the trial court for its excellent, well-reasoned order thoroughly analyzing the relevant issues and correctly disposing of the case below.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 21

 

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

(as of December 31, 2008)

 

Subsidiaries of Terra Energy & Resource Technologies, Inc.

 

1. Terra Insight Corporation, a Delaware corporation, 100% owned

2. Terra Insight Technologies Corporation, a Delaware corporation, 100% owned

3. Terra Insight Services, Inc., a New York corporation, 100% owned

 

 

Subsidiary of Terra Insight Corporation

 

1. Terra Resources, Inc., a Delaware corporation, 100% owned

 

 

Subsidiaries of Terra Resources, Inc.

 

1. Terra Resources Operations Co., Inc., a Texas corporation, 100% owned

2.  Namterra Mineral Resources (Proprietary) Limited, 95% owned

 

 

Equity Interests of Terra Resources, Inc.

 

1. Tierra Nevada Exploration Partners, LP, a Delaware limited partnership

2. TexTerra Exploration Partners, LP, a Delaware limited partnership
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Richard A. Ross, as Chief Financial Officer of The FINOVA Group 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 to my knowledge:

(1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



|                       |  |  |  |     |  |                              
|---------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------
|                       |  |  | 
|Date: November 7, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Richard A. Ross          
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Richard A. Ross              
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | (principal financial officer)
Kenneth George MOORE, Jr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. LIVINGSTON FAMILY COMM., LLC, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4957

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 07, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Joshua Carlton BELL, Appellant, v. Jeanine Katherine BELL, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1397

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 18, 2018

Joshua Carlton Bell, pro se.

Jeanine Katherine Bell, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, VILLANTI, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mario BARAJAS, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-41457 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed August 21, 2017

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Mario Barajas, Pro, Se

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Mario Barajas has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Barajas has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant parts of the record reflected therein, as well as Bara-jas’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, Barajas’s motions to vacate *163his sentence and remand the case to the district court, incorporated in his response, are DENIED; counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit
23.1











CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








The Board
of Directors


Pacific
Continental Corporation and Subsidiary








We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Pacific Continental Corporation and Subsidiary (Pacific Continental Corporation)
of our report dated March 14, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance
sheets of Pacific Continental Corporation as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and
the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders’ equity,
and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, and of our
same report, with respect to Pacific Continental Corporation’s internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, which report is included in
this annual report on Form 10-K of Pacific Continental Corporation for the year
ended December 31, 2007.











Portland,
Oregon


March 14,
2008
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-4481

_____________________________

RAKESH PATEL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Marianne L. Aho, Judge.

August 14, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, ROWE, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Rachael E. Reese of O’Brien Hatfield, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Robert Quentin Humphrey, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Ronny CROOK, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0338

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.
Terrance J. EDWARDS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-2371

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 21, 2018

Terrance J. Edwards, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied on the merits.

Roberts, Wetherell, and Osterhaus, JJ., concur.
DEBRA SANFORD

, Appellant,

v.

CUMULUS BROADCASTING, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, STAR BROADCASTING, INC., GULF COAST BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC., QANTUM COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION, RONALD HALE AND QANTUM OF FT. WALTON BEACH LICENSE COMPANY, LLC

, Appellee s

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 5117

_ ____________________________/

Opinion filed August 9, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. John T. Brown , Judge

. Lynn G. Waxman of Lynn G. Waxman, P.A., Palm Beach Gardens, and Adam S. Doner of Gordon & Donor, P.A., Palm Beach Gardens , for Appellant.

T.A. Borowski, Jr. and Darryl Steve Traylor, J r. of Borowski & Traylor, P.A., Pensacola, and Jack McKay of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, pro hac vice

, for appellee Cumulus Broadcasting, LLC.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS

, WINOKUR

, and JAY

, J J

. , CONCUR.
tdw-ex1015_239.htm



Exhibit 10.15

 

 

Tidewater Inc.

Summary of Director Compensation Arrangements

as of December 31, 2018

 

For service as a non-management director, compensation is as follows:

 


	
 
	
•
	
A base annual retainer of $225,000, 25% of which is paid in cash and 75% of which is paid as time-based restricted stock units (with a 15% decrease in the cash portion effective January 1, 2018);





	
 
	
•
	
An additional annual cash retainer of $50,000 for the chair of the board;





	
 
	
•
	
An additional annual cash retainer of $15,000 for the chair of each of the audit committee and the compensation committee and $5,000 for the chair of the nominating and corporate governance committee; and





	
 
	
•
	
Reimbursement of reasonable travel and other out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attendance at meetings of the board of directors and its committees.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mario Delgado CRUZ, also known as Mario Delgado, also known as Mario Cruz Delgado, also known as Daniel Delgado, also known as Mario Cruz-Delgado, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-20785 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed July 5, 2017

Paula Camille Offenhauser, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Scott Andrew Martin, Assistant Federal Public Defender, John Moreno Parras, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Mario Delgado Cruz appeals following his guilty plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry. He asserts that the district court reversibly erred by convicting, sentencing, and entering judgment against him under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based upon its determination that his prior Texas conviction for burglary of a habitation qualified as a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) and therefore an “aggravated felony” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F).

Cruz argues that the definition of a “crime of violence” in § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague on its face in light of the Supreme Court’s holding in *Johnson v. United States,*— U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015).1 He concedes that his constitutional challenge to § 16(b) is foreclosed by *United States v. Gonzalez-Longoria,*831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), *petition for cert. filed*(Sept. 29, 2016) (No. 16-6259). The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance based on Cruz’s concession.

The parties are correct that *Gonzalez-Longoria*forecloses Cruz’s facial constitutional challenge to § 16(b). *See Gonzalez-Longoria,*831 F.3d at 672-77. Cruz also moves to hold the appeal in abeyance until the Supreme Court decides whether *188§ 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague in *Sessions v. Dimaya,*137 S. Ct. 31 (2016) (granting certiorari). *Gonzalez-Longona*is binding precedent unless overruled by this court en banc or by the Supreme Court, and a grant of certiorari does not override this court’s precedent. *See Wicker v. McCotter,*798 F.2d 155, 157-58 (5th Cir. 1986).

Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief and Cruz’s motion to hold the appeal in abeyance are DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

. While Cruz also argues that his Texas conviction does not constitute an "aggravated felony” under § 1101(a)(43)(G) (i.e., "a ... burglary offense for which the term of imprisonment [is] at least one year”) because the Texas burglary statute sweeps more broadly than the generic definition of burglary, we need not reach that issue given the result regarding.§ 16(b).
Samuel LEVY, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Ana VELEZ, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1873

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

NOVEMBER 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Charles Zwebner, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Yak Communications Inc.;

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

3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure
controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the
Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
Registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal control over financial
reporting.

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of the Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                     |  |     |  |                                    
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------
|Date: April 21, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ Charles Zwebner                
|                     |  |     |  | Charles Zwebner                    
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer & President
#### IN RE: Bruce W. KOENIG, Appellant, Christopher Jarboe, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; Carroll Connelly, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly *228situated; Vander Davis, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; Gary Denmark, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; Garfield Redd, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, and Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS); Maryland Division of Corrections; Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, Division of Workforce Development and Adult Learning (Correctional Education); Maryland Correctional Enterprises; Maryland Correctional Institution, Jessup (MCIJ); Western Correctional Institution (WCI); Gary D. Maynard, Secretary, Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services; J. Michael Stouffer, Maryland Commissioner of Corrections; Paulette Francois, Assistant Secretary, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation Division of Workforce Development and Adult Learning; Stephen M. Shiloh, Chief Executive Officer Maryland Correctional Enterprises; Dayena Corcoran, Warden Maryland Correctional Institution, Jessup; J. Philip Morgan, Warden Western Correctional Institution, Defendants.

No. 17-1131

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 20, 2017

Decided: July 24, 2017

Bruce Wayne Koenig, Appellant Pro Se.

Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Bruce W. Koenig seeks to appeal the district court’s order returning his . motion to reopen a prior proceeding in which he was not a party. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P; 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P, 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” *Bowles v. Russell,*551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on August 16, 2016. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on January 24, 2017. Because Koenig failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the' appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED*