alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment to Employment Agreement with Hermann Waldemer



 Exhibit 10.25 

 

 

 PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL 
 Hermann Waldemer 
 Lausanne, April 1, 2009 
 Dear Hermann, 
 Further to your annual performance assessment and discussion with your supervisor, we are pleased to confirm that effective as of April 1, 2009, your
annual base salary is being increased by 4%. 
  

					
	from	 	CHF 1,032,500.00 p.a.*    	  	/        CHF 79,423.08 p.m.*
	to	 	CHF 1,073,800.00 p.a.	  	/        CHF 82,600.00 p.m.

 Your new Position in Range as a result of this salary increase is now 19%. 
 All other conditions
relating to your employment with Philip Morris International Management S.A. remain as stated in your letter of employment issued at the time of the engagement and, if applicable, in any subsequent amendments. 
 We take this opportunity of wishing you continued success and satisfaction. 
  

	
	Yours sincerely,
	
	 Peter-Paul Adriaansen
 Director Human Resources Decision Support &
 Business Partner Switzerland


	
	




	


  

	*	p.a. = annual 


	*	p.m. = monthly
**Exhibit 32**

**Written Statement of Chief ExecutiveOfficer and Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and theChief Financial Officer of Regal Entertainment Group, a Delaware corporation(the “Company”), each hereby certifies that, to his/her knowledge on the datehereof:

(a)                                  theForm 10-Q of the Company for the second quarter ended June 28, 2007, filed onthe date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(b)                                 theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|        |   | /s/ Michael L. Campbell |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|   |   | Michael L. Campbell     |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   |   | August 7, 2007          |
|   |   |                    |
|   |   |                    |
|   |   | /s/ Amy E. Miles        |
|   |   | Amy E. Miles            |
|   |   | Chief Financial Officer |
|   |   | August 7, 2007          |

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eric Ballard, Appellant.

[718 NYS2d 888]

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Meyer, J.), rendered August 25, 1998, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court (Hubsher, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his prior conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is reversed, the defendant’s admission to a violation of probation is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings.

Since the finding that the defendant had violated a condition of probation was predicated upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree, which has been reversed *(see, People v Ballard,*279 AD2d 529 [decided herewith]), the amended judgment must also be reversed, and the matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings *(see, People v McLaughlin,*229 AD2d 549, 550; *People v Hines,*200 AD2d 634, 636). Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Krausman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
STATE of North Carolina v. Porschia Lanee SPARKS, Defendant.

No. COA18-1102

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 18, 2019

AFFIRMED.
No. 09-10108.

#### Montgomery Carl Akers, Petitioner v. Sam A. Crow, Judge, United States District Court for the District of Kansas, et al.

560 U.S. 915, 130 S. Ct. 3302,

176 L. Ed. 2d 1203,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3987.

May 17, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 343 Fed. Appx. 319.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 10305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5050]



[[Page 10305]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,339]


Pentagon Technologies Group, Inc. Portland, OR; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on February 23, 2009 in response to a 
worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of 
Pentagon Technologies Group, Inc., Portland, Oregon.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of February 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E9-5050 Filed 3-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Opinion filed July 28, 2011



## In The



# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________



### No. 11

- 1 1

- 00 0 3 6

- CR

__________

ANDREI LADON CHRISTIAN , Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 104 th District Court

Taylor County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1747 4 B

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Andrei Ladon Christian entered an open plea of guilty to the offense of aggravated

robbery, and the trial court assessed his punishment at confinement for twenty

- five years. We

affirm.

In his sole issue on appeal, appellant argues that the trial court abused its discretion in

overruling his motion for new trial. Appellant asserted in his motion for new trial that he was

su rprised by the State’s failure to call the victims to testify at the punishment stage, which2

impacted appellant’s sentence because appellant was unable to cross

- examine the victims and

ma k e the court aware of their character, reputation, and criminal histo ry.

An appellate court reviews a trial court’s denial of a motion for new trial for an abuse of

discretion. Holden v. State , 201 S.W.3d 761, 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). The appellate court

may not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court bu t, rather, must decide whether the trial

court’s decision was arbitrary or unreasonable. Id. A trial court abuses its discretion in denying

a motion for new trial only when no reasonable view of the record could support the trial court’s

ruling. Id.

Nothing in the record from the punishment hearing or the hearing on the motion for new

trial in this case shows that the victims were available to testify at the punishment hearing or that

the victims had been subpoenaed to testify. Furthermore, appellant has not show n what the

victims’ testimony would have been or how the character, reputation, or criminal history of the

victims would have been helpful to appellant or relevant to hi s punishment. We hold that the

trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion for new trial. See

Melancon v . State , 66 S.W.3d 375, 379 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1 4 t h Dist.] 2001, pet. ref’d).

Appellant’s issue is overruled.

T he judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

July 28, 201 1

Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Hill, J. 1

1 John G. Hill, Former Justice, Court of Appeals, 2nd District of Texas at Fort Worth, sitting by assignment.
Chandra B. DOMMARAJU, M.D., Respondent, v. Sudhir S. BATCHU, M.D., Appellant.

No. ED 105187

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

Filed: June 12, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 24, 2018 Application for Transfer Denied October 30, 2018

FOR APPELLANT: Timothy R. Gerding, 501 Cherry, Ste. 200, Columbia, MO 65201.

FOR RESPONDENT: William F. Whealen, Jr., 11970 Borman Dr., Ste. 250, St. Louis, MO 63146.

Before Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., P.J., Robert M. Clayton III, J., and Angela T. Quigless, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Sudhir S. Batchu, M.D. ("Defendant") appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of Chandra B. Dommaraju, M.D. ("Plaintiff") finding Defendant liable on Plaintiff's breach of contract action. Defendant also appeals the judgment, entered after a hearing, awarding Plaintiff $141,830.68 in damages plus post-judgment interest and court costs on Plaintiff's breach of contract action.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The decisions of the trial court are affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).
STATE of North Carolina v. Dante Lorenzo ROSS

No. 247P19

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2019

Kirby H. Smith, III, Attorney at Law, New Bern, For Ross, Dante Lorenzo

Anne J. Brown, Special Deputy Attorney General, For State of North Carolina

James R. O'Neill, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina *837***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th of June 2019 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2019."
#### MANLEY J. WILLIAMS, et al. v. J. EMORY JOINES, et al.

(Filed 19 October, 1949.)

Appeal by plaintiffs from *Coggin, Special Judge,*at June Term, 1949, of Watauga.

Civil action by grantors to enforce resale and reconveyance of land pursuant to alleged stipulation in deed poll.

Upon issues joined, the jury found that the clause of repurchase was surreptitiously inserted in the deed by the plaintiffs with intent to defraud the defendant, J. Emory Joines.

Judgment on the verdict for defendants. Plaintiffs appeal, assigning-errors.

*Bowie & Bowie and Higgins & McMichael for plaintiffs, appellants.*

*Trivette, Ilolshouser & Mitchell for defendants, appellees.*

Pee Cueiam.

It appears that the case has been tried in accordance with our former opinion, *Williams v. Joines,*228 N.C. 141, 44 S.E. 2d 738, and no exception is presented which requires a disturbance of the verdict and judgment. Hence, they will be upheld.

No' error.
OrrrcnoFTHEGovnnNonRICKPERRYGOVERNOROctober3l,20IlAlArmendariz,Ph.D.RegionalAdministratorU.S,EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,Region61445RossAvenue,Suite1200Dallas,Texas75202-2133DearDr.Armendariz:PursuanttotherequirementsinSection107(dX1)(A)oftheFederalCleanAirAct,enclosedisarevisedrecommendationfordesignationofareasinTexaswithregardtothe2008NationalAmbientAirQualityStandardforeight-hourozoneof0,075partspermillion.TheTexasCommissiononEnvironmentalQuality(TCEQ)developedtheenclosedrevisiontotheMarch2009Texasrecommendation,consideringthelatestavailable,certifiedmonitoringdataforallareasinTexasfromthe2008-2010period.ThisrevisedreçommendationreflectstheimprovedairqualityinTexasbetween2005and2010.ThecommissionunderstandsthattheUnltedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgencyplanstoutilizethemostrecentlycertifiedthreeyears(2008-2010)ofmonitoringdataasthebasisfordesignations.Ifyouhaveanyquestionsorneedadditionalinformation,pleasefeelfreetocontactTCEQChairmanBryanShawaL(512)239-5510,Sincerely,Q*2"*sRickPerryGovernorRP:tbpEnclosurecc:BryanW.Shaw,Ph,D.PosrOmcBB,oxL2428Ausnn,Tnøs78711(512)463-2000(Vorce)/Dw7-1-LronRrrevSnnvlcssVrsrrwv.TexÀsO¡uJr.{E.coÀarHnOrncnr'W¿sSnEortrBSr¡18orTrr<esStateofTexas2008Eight-HourOzoneStandardRevisedDesignationRecommendationThefollowingcounties,listedbyairqualityplanningarea,shouldbedesignatednonattainment.AlltherestofthecountiesinTexasshouldbedesignatedattainmenlluncIassifiabIe.Dallas-FortWorthAreaCollinDallasDentonEllisJohnsonKaufmanParkerRockwallTarrantHouston-Galveston-BrazoriaÃreaBtazoriaChambersFortBendGalvestonHarrisLibertyMontgomeryWaller
**Exhibit
      32**





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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





The
      undersigned, Wilson Cheng, the Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board
      of
      Directors and Treasurer of BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC. (the "Company"), DOES
      HEREBY CERTIFY that:





1.
      The
      Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended August 31,
      2007
      (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
      Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.





IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement this 22th
      day of October ,
      2007.





/s/**Wilson
                Cheng**Wilson
                ChengCEO,
                Chairman of the Board of Directors and
                Treasurer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC. and will be retained by BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC.
      and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
Michael MCKINZY, Appellant, v. Carletha GASTON (McKinzy), Respondent.

WD 81013

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Filed: June 26, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 31, 2018 Application for Transfer Denied September 25, 2018

Michael E. McKinzy, Sr., Overland Park, Appellant Pro Se.

Carletha Gaston, Kansas City, respondent pro se.

Before Division One: Lisa White Hardwick, Presiding Judge, Thomas H. Newton and Edward R. Ardini, Jr., Judges

**ORDER**

Per Curiam *480Michael McKinzy ("Father") appeals from the circuit court's judgment ordering him to pay a combined arrearage of child support and maintenance to his former wife, Carletha McKinzy ("Mother"). Father contends the court erred in denying his request to set aside the original administrative order for his child support obligation as void due to lack of proper service of process in the administrative proceeding. For reasons explained herein, we affirm.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b)
Exhibit 32.1

                            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 Minden Bancorp,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, A. David Evans,  the
President and Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 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.


                                       /s/ A. David Evans
                                       Name: A. David Evans
                                       Title: President and Chief Executive
                                                  Officer

Date: May 16, 2005

A signed  original  of this  written  statement  required  by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act has  been  provided  to  Minden  Bancorp,  Inc.  and will be
retained by Minden  Bancorp,  Inc. and furnished to the  Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       23
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Bay View Capital Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John
Okubo, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

     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 for the periods presented therein.

Date: March 15, 2004

                                        /s/ John Okubo
                                        ----------------------------
                                        John Okubo
                                        Executive Vice President and
                                        Chief Financial Officer

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Bay View Capital Corporation and will be retained by Bay View
Capital Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Sarah S. KEARNEY, Appellant.

WD 80325

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: JUNE 19, 2018

Julia E. Neidhardt, Jefferson City. MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Carol D. Jansen, Columbia, MO Counsel for Appellant.

Before Division Two: James Edward Welsh1 , Presiding Judge, Alok Ahuja, Judge, Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judge

**ORDER**

1

Judge Welsh retired as an active member of the court on April 1, 2018, after oral argument in this case. He has been reassigned by the Chief Justice of the Missouri Supreme Court to participate in this decision as a Senior Judge.

Per Curiam:

*472Sarah Kearney appeals her conviction and sentence for possession of a controlled substance, Section 195.202, RSMo 2015, and for tampering with physical evidence, Section 557.100, RSMo. 2015. She argues the trial court erred by denying her motion for a mistrial. First, she argues the trial court abused its discretion, because the court did not require the State to rebut a presumption of prejudice resulting from juror misconduct. Second, Kearney requests plain error review, arguing the court's comments following witness testimony resulted in juror prejudice that was manifestly unjust. We affirm. Rule 30.25 (b).
Exhibit 32.2  URANIUM RESOURCES, INC. 405 State Highway 121 Bypass, Building A, Suite 110, Lewisville, TX 75067 972.219.3330 Phone 972.219.3311 Fax  March 30, 2011  Securities and Exchange Commission 450 5th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20549  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Thomas H. Ehrlich, Vice President - Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Uranium Resources, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  (1)  The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2010 which this certification accompanies 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.   /s/Thomas H. EhrlichThomas   H. EhrlichVice   President and Chief Financial OfficerMarch 30,   2011
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5479 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5479

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat certain amounts 
 paid for exercise equipment and physical fitness programs as amounts 
                         paid for medical care.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 25, 2006

   Mr. Weller (for himself, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Mr. 
    Shuster, Mr. Smith of Washington, and Mr. Renzi) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat certain amounts 
 paid for exercise equipment and physical fitness programs as amounts 
                         paid for medical care.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Personal Health Investment Today Act 
of 2006''.

SEC. 2. CERTAIN EXERCISE EQUIPMENT AND PHYSICAL FITNESS PROGRAMS 
              TREATED AS MEDICAL CARE.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (d) of section 213 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to medical, dental, etc., expenses) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(12) Exercise equipment and physical fitness programs.--
                    ``(A) In general.--The term `medical care' shall 
                include amounts paid--
                            ``(i) to purchase or use equipment used in 
                        a program (including a self-directed program) 
                        of physical exercise, and
                            ``(ii) to participate, or receive 
                        instruction, in a program of physical exercise.
                    ``(B) Limitation.--Amounts treated as medical care 
                under subparagraph (A) shall not exceed $1,000 with 
                respect to any individual for any taxable year.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5428 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5428

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and six

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
   202 East Washington Street in Morris, Illinois, as the ``Joshua A. 
                 Terando Morris Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. JOSHUA A. TERANDO MORRIS POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 202 East Washington Street in Morris, Illinois, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Joshua A. Terando Morris Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Joshua A. 
Terando Morris Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```