alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Executive Summary Compensation Sheet


 Exhibit 10.1 
 Sunoco Partners LLC 
 Independent Director Compensation Summary Sheet 
 for 2008 
 Directors who are employees
of Sunoco Partners LLC or its affiliates receive no additional compensation for service on the general partner’s board of directors or any committees of the board. The table below summarizes compensation program for independent directors of
Sunoco Partners LLC, effective as of April 1, 2008. 
 2008 INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR COMPENSATION SUMMARY 
  

							
	 Component
	  	 Amount
 ($)
	  	 Medium of Payment
	  	 Timing of Payment

	 Annual Retainer
	  	41,000 per year	  	Restricted Units	  	$10,250 credited quarterly1
		  	41,000 per year	  	Cash	  	$10,250 paid quarterly
	 Board Meeting Fee
	  	1,500 per meeting	  	Cash	  	Paid quarterly
	 Committee Meeting Fee
	  	1,000 per meeting	  	Cash	  	Paid quarterly
	 Compensation Committee Chair Retainer
	  	3,500 per year	  	Cash	  	$ 875 paid quarterly
	 Audit/Conflicts Committee Chair Retainer
	  	8,000 per year	  	Cash	  	$2,000 paid quarterly

 Note to table: 
  

	(1)	The fair market value of each quarterly payment of Restricted Units is calculated as of the payment date. The portion of the annual retainer paid in the form of Restricted Units is
required to be deferred, and is credited to each independent director’s account in the Sunoco Partners LLC Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan. 

 In addition to the foregoing, each independent director is reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses in connection with attending meetings of the board of directors or committees
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**FNBH Bancorp, Inc.
Shedrick JENRETTE, a/k/a Shedrick Jenrette Smith, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2621

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 02

- 00058

- CR

Michael Fruin, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 961194, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING

Appellant Michael Fruin pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a child. See Tex. Pen.
Code Ann. ' 22.011 (West Supp. 2002). He was convicted of this offense and placed on community supervision. He now appeals from an order revoking supervision based in part of his pleas of true to
some of t he alleged violations. Appellant

= s court

- appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California
, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State
, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State
, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). A copy of counsel =

s brief was delivered to appellant, and appell ant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed. We have reviewed2

the record and counsel =

s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and wit hout merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

______________________________________ Lee Yeakel, Justice
Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices B. A. Smith and Ye akel
Affirmed Filed: August 30, 2002
Do Not Publish
Marcus Earl GRAY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-2682

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 7, 2018

Marcus Earl Gray, pro se, Petitioner.

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

Per Curiam.

*577The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits.

Wolf, Winokur, and Jay, JJ., concur.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-20-00001-CR

KENNIE LEWIS COOK, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 5th District Court

Cass County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019F00062

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.
2

O R D E R

Our review of the reporter’s record in each of these cases indicates that they contain 

“sensitive data” as that phrase is defined in Rule 9.10 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(a). Sensitive data includes “a birth date, a home address, and the name 

of any person who was a minor at the time the offense was committed.” TEX. R. APP. P. 

9.10(a)(3). Volume three and defense exhibit one of the reporter’s record in each of these cases 

contain the names of persons who were minors at the time the offense was committed. Rule 

9.10(b) states, “Unless a court orders otherwise, an electronic or paper filing with the court,

including the contents of any appendices, must not contain sensitive data.” TEX. R. APP. P. 

9.10(b).

Rule 9.10(g) provides, “A court may also order that a document be filed under seal in 

paper form or electronic form, without redaction.” TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(g). Therefore, because 

volume three and defense exhibit one of the reporter’s record contain sensitive data, we order the 

clerk of this Court or her appointee, in accordance with Rule 9.10(g), to seal the electronically 

filed volume three and defense exhibit one of the reporter’s record in each of these cases.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: December 28, 2020
H. Res. 349 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 18, 2013. 

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is 

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE: Mr. Yarmuth. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Kristen Yvette KOHL f/k/a Kristen Yvette Rammacca, Appellant, v. Brent Nicholas RAMMACCA, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2906

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed November 16, 2018

Geoffrey D. Smith, Susan C. Smith, Tallahassee, and Stephen B. Burch, of Smith & Associates, Melbourne, for Appellant.

James H. Fallace, and Andrew J. Williams, of Fallace & Larkin, L.C., Melbourne, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

*172The former wife, Kristen Kohl, appeals an order granting in part and denying in part her amended motion to enforce. We agree that the trial court improperly awarded a setoff of $871 for dental bills paid by the former husband, Brent Rammacca. Pursuant to the final judgment of dissolution of marriage, the former husband was obligated to pay these bills. We further agree that the trial court improperly awarded a setoff of $2896.06 for monies voluntarily paid by the former husband for the purchase of a motor vehicle for one of the parties' minor children. *See**Onley v. Onley* , 540 So.2d 880 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (holding that former husband was not entitled to credit of $2000 which represented cost of automobile given by former husband to parties' teenage son). The trial court's order is otherwise affirmed.

AFFIRMED, in part; REVERSED, in part; REMANDED.

EVANDER, BERGER and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.
##### 



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
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
 /s/ G. RICHARD WAGONER, JR.G. Richard Wagoner, Jr.Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 99.2

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 Multilink Technology Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2002 (the Report), I, John U. Soenksen, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, 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.

| | By: | /s/ JOHN U. SOENKSEN                                      
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                           
| |     | John U. Soenksen Chief Financial Officer November 14, 2002
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 127 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 13
113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 127

                          [Report No. 113-22]

       Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of 
 Representative from the Twenty Eighth Congressional District of Texas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 19, 2013

 Mrs. Miller of Michigan, from the Committee on House Administration, 
  submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the House 
                   Calendar and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
       Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of 
 Representative from the Twenty Eighth Congressional District of Texas.

    Resolved, That the election contest relating to the office of 
Representative from the Twenty Eighth Congressional District of Texas 
is dismissed.
                                                  House Calendar No. 13

113th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 127

                          [Report No. 113-22]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

       Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of 
 Representative from the Twenty Eighth Congressional District of Texas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 19, 2013

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
EXHIBIT
13.1


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The
undersigned, Manny Dhinsa, President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and
Treasurer of Strata Oil & Gas Inc. (the “Company”), certify, under the
standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the fiscal
year  ended December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information
contained in that Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and  results of operations of the
Company.





Dated:  July
10, 2009











By:
            /s/ Manny DhinsaName:
            Manny
      DhinsaTitle:
            President,
      Chief Executive Officer, Secretary, and Treasurer(Principal
      Executive Officerand
      Principal Financial Officer)








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

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 102185-102186]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29717]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 17, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

[[Page 102186]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 29, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 841 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-553, K2025-551.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-29717 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6083

CLOVIS RATTIGAN, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

LONNIE M. SANDERS, Warden, Augusta Correctional Center,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District

Judge. (CA-96-1005-R)

Submitted: May 29, 1997 Decided: June 10, 1997

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clovis Rattigan, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court's

order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint under

28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(A) (West Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is

frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. Rattigan v. Augusta Correctional Ctr., No. CA96-1005-R (W.D. Va. Dec. 17, 1996). 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
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 412 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 412

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require a reading 
 of the names of members of the Armed Forces who died in the previous 
                month as a result of combat operations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 14, 2013

 Mr. Cartwright (for himself, Mr. Jones, Mr. Conyers, Mrs. Napolitano, 
Mr. Cramer, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Wolf, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Poe of Texas, Mr. 
  Bentivolio, Mr. Peters of California, Mr. Foster, Mr. Pascrell, Ms. 
  Sinema, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mrs. Bustos, Ms. Norton, Mr. Enyart, Mr. 
 Barber, Mr. Marino, Mr. Rothfus, Mr. Barletta, and Mr. Collins of New 
  York) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                           Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require a reading 
 of the names of members of the Armed Forces who died in the previous 
                month as a result of combat operations.

    Resolved, That (a) clause 1 of rule XIV of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives is amended by adding after the third item the 
following new item:
            ``Fourth. On the first legislative day of each month, a 
        reading of the names of members of the Armed Forces who died in 
        the previous month as a result of combat operations.''.
    (b) Clause 1 of rule XIV is amended by redesignating the fourth 
through the ninth items as the fifth through the tenth items.
    (c) Rule XIV of the Rules of the House of Representatives is 
amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
    ``7. The Speaker shall not read the name of any member of the Armed 
Forces under clause 1 if any family member informs the Speaker that 
they do not wish to have the name of that individual read.''.
                                 <all>
```
IV 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 13 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require that general 

appropriations for military construction and veterans’ affairs be considered as stand-alone measures. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2013 

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia (for himself, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. POSEY, and 

Mr. CONAWAY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to 

require that general appropriations for military construction and veterans’ affairs be considered as stand-alone 

measures. 

1 Resolved, That rule XXI of the Rules of the House 

2 of Representatives is amended by adding at the end the 

3 following new clause: 

4 ‘‘Stand-alone requirement for military construction 

5 and veterans’ affairs appropriations 

6 ‘‘12. It shall not be in order to consider any bill or 

7 joint resolution, or conference report thereon, containing 

8 appropriations within the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with 
2 

•HRES 13 IH 

1 on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related 

2 Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations if such 

3 measure also contains appropriations within the jurisdic4 tion of any other subcommittee of that committee. The 

5 preceding sentence shall not apply to any measure making 

6 supplemental appropriations or to any measure continuing 

7 appropriations for a period of not to exceed 60 days.’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with
CONDOTTE/DE MOYA JV, LLC, et al., Appellants, v. P & S PAVING, INC., etc., Appellee.

No. 3D17-1310

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 5, 2018

Vezina, Lawrence & Piscitelli, P.A., and W. Robert Vezina, III, Eduardo S. Lombard and Megan S. Reynolds (Tallahassee); Joseph W. Lawrence, II (Fort Lauderdale), for appellants.

David A. Vukelja, P.A., and David A. Vukelja and Jarett A. de Paula (Ormond Beach), for appellee.

Before SUAREZ, LAGOA, and LOGUE, JJ.

LOGUE, J.

The damages sought by P & S Paving, Inc. did not arise from the termination of the subcontract agreement. Accordingly, the remedy sought by P & S was not barred by the termination provision in the subcontract agreement. *See**309*Bernecker v. Bernecker*, 60 So.2d 399, 406 (Fla. 1952) (Concluding that the law had been erroneously applied where it was determined that "the termination of the contract, even with proper notice, terminated rights already accrued under it at the time of such termination."); *Chicago Title Ins. Co. v. Title Consultants, Inc.*, 472 So.2d 1380, 1381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) ("The termination of a contract in pursuance of a provision therein, even with proper notice, does not terminate the rights already accrued under it at the time of such termination.") (citation omitted). We affirm on all other points.

Affirmed.

**ANY POST-OPINION MOTION MUST BE FILED WITHIN SEVEN DAYS. A RESPONSE TO THE POST-OPINION MOTION MAY BE FILED WITHIN FIVE DAYS THEREAFTER.**
EXHIBIT 31.1Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002I, Ann L. Schmitt, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:1) I have reviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of Across America Real EstateCorp.; 2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the smallbusiness issuer and we have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure the material information relating to the smallbusiness issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation;  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small businessissuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting;and5) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer (s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’sability to record, process summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’s
Lisa DAILY, Appellant, v. Thomas P. DAILY, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4570

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 17, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Alexis TOUCHTON-WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D16-3306

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

November 21, 2018 Rehearing Denied December 28, 2018

William Mallory Kent, Kent & McFarland, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Virginia Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Wetherell, Osterhaus, and Jay, JJ., concur.