alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.49

Mr. Robert L. Pevenstein
5283 Golden Sky Court
Columbia, MD 21045

Dear Bob:

Welcome to UNC!

It is with great pleasure that I summarize and confirm the employment details
upon which we have agreed.

Your position will be Vice President and Controller, reporting directly to
me as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.  You will be
joining UNC Incorporated at the earliest possible date; however, in no case
will this be later than 30 days after giving notice to your current employer.

Your base salary will be $110,000 (annualized) and will be reviewed
periodically in accordance with the Company's salary review policies.  You
will have an opportunity to earn Incentive Compensation equal to as much as
30% of your base salary (pro-rated in 1987 to reflect the number of months
you will have been with UNC).  In addition, you will receive a $3,000 per
year allowance for car expenses and other perquisites.

Your responsibility will include the full scope of controllership functions,
i.e. general accounting, taxes, public and SEC reporting, operations
analysis, annual operating plan preparation, asset management and working
capital performance, and acquisition, divestiture and capital expenditure
analysis.

We have recommended to the Chairman of the Compensation Committee of the UNC
Board of Directors that, incident to employment, you be granted options on
20,000 UNC Incorporated shares.  Certain of these options will be Incentive
Stock Options (ISOs) with the remainder being Non-Qualifying Options.  The
date of the grant will be either your starting date or the date of the
Committee approval, whichever is the latter.  Vesting is as follows: 5% on
the date of grant, 20% on each January 2 thereafter until the award is
totally vested.

You will be a participant in our Supplementary Executive Retirement Plan
(SERP).

Beginning on January 1, 1988, you will be eligible for UNC's's Retirement
Income Savings Plan (RISP), our 401 (k) plan wherein each year we deposit an
amount equal to 2% of your annual salary and match the first 4% of your
savings, dollar-for-dollar.  Your savings in the RISP, to a maximum of
$7,000, are before-tax dollars.

A Change-in-Control letter will be provided.

Also, in the event of involuntary termination, for any reason other than for
cause or a Change-in-Control, you would be entitled to six (6) months of
salary and employee benefits continuance from the termination date.

In addition to the above, you will be entitled to participate in any other
programs and benefits available generally to executive officers of the
Company.

Bob, I think I have covered all the bases.  If you agree, please sign below. 
(Return one signed copy to me and retain the other for your files.)

I feel very good about this, Bob.  I think both of us have made the right
decision.

Sincerely,



/s/ G. Vern Diedrick
GVD/ad

ACCEPTED:

/s/ Robert L. Pevenstein
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7274

VICTOR MANUEL MUNOZ,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

SHERWOOD R. MCCABE, Superintendent of Harnett

Correctional Institute,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace Wade Dixon,

Magistrate Judge. (CA-02-01)

Submitted: December 16, 2002 Decided: December 20, 2002

Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Victor Manuel Munoz, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Victor Manuel Munoz seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s

order granting Respondent’s motion for summary judgment and

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). On appeal, Munoz reasserts the Fourth

Amendment claim he raised in the district court. Because the state

courts afforded Munoz a full and fair opportunity to litigate the

substance of his Fourth Amendment claims, he has not made a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See

Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 482 (1976). Munoz waived appellate

review of his remaining claims because he did not raise them in his

informal brief in this court. 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma

pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 19 Filed 01/28/2008 Page 1 of 5Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 19 Filed 01/28/2008 Page 2 of 5Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 19 Filed 01/28/2008 Page 3 of 5Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 19 Filed 01/28/2008 Page 4 of 5Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 19 Filed 01/28/2008 Page 5 of 5
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 15, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 26855]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12158]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA-1366-DR]


Kansas; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Kansas (FEMA-1366-DR), dated April 27, 2001, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 1, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madge Dale, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3772.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this disaster is closed effective May 1, 2001.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community 
Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis 
Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression 
Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 
83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 
83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)

Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 01-12158 Filed 5-14-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
Case 1:07-cv-05773-LAK-GWG Document 16 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05773-LAK-GWG Document 16 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 2 of 2
```

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 24139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12033]

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

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 10:22 a.m. on 
Tuesday, May 8, 2001, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters 
relating to the Corporation's supervisory activities.
    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Director 
John M. Reich (Appointive), seconded by Director Ellen S. Seidman 
(Director, Office of Thrift Supervision), concurred in by Director John 
D. Hawke, Jr. (Comptroller of the Currency), and Chairman Donna Tanoue, 
that Corporation business required its consideration of the matters on 
less than seven days' notice to the public; that no earlier notice of 
the meeting was practicable; that the public interest did not require 
consideration of the matters in a meeting open to public observation; 
and that the matters could be considered in a closed meeting by 
authority of subsections (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), and (c)(9)(A)(ii) of 
the ``Government in the Sunshine Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), (c)(6), 
(c)(8), and (c)(9)(A)(ii)).
    The meeting was held in the Board Room of the FDIC Building located 
at 550-17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.

    Dated: May 8, 2001.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
James D. LaPierre,
Deputy Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-12033 Filed 5-9-01; 12:17 pm]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-M
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF AMBER RESOURCES COMPANY OF COLORADO

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Amber Resources Company of Colorado for the year ended December 31, 2008:

(1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of Amber Resources Company of Colorado.

/s/ Kevin K. NankeKevin K. NankeChief Financial OfficerApril 15, 2009

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Amber Resources Company of Colorado and will be retained by Amber Resources Company of Colorado and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.

---
Order filed November 25, 2014.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-14-00591-CR

____________

MOHAMMAD SAEED ALZAHRANI, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from County Criminal Court at Law No. 7

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1905659

ORDER

The reporter’s record has not been filed in this appeal. The court reporter 

has informed the court that appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay the 

reporter’s fee to prepare the reporter’s record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c)(2)(A). 

This court is unaware whether appellant is entitled to proceed without the payment 

of costs. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c)(2)(B). Accordingly, we enter the following 

order. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c).
We ORDER the judge of County Criminal Court at Law No. 7 to 

immediately conduct a hearing at which appellant, appellant’s counsel, and counsel 

for the State shall participate, either in person or by video teleconference, to 

determine whether appellant desires to prosecute his appeal, and, if so, whether 

appellant is indigent and, thus entitled to a free record on appeal. The judge shall 

see that a record of the hearing is made, shall make findings of fact and 

conclusions of law, and shall order the trial clerk to forward a record of the hearing 

and a supplemental clerk’s record containing the findings and conclusions. The 

transcribed record of the hearing, the court’s findings and conclusions, and a 

videotape or compact disc, if any, containing a recording of the video 

teleconference shall be filed with the clerk of this court within thirty days of the 

date of this order.

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s 

active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket when the 

trial court’s findings and recommendations are filed in this court. The court will 

also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by either party, or 

the court may reinstate the appeal on its own motion. It is the responsibility of any 

party seeking reinstatement to request a hearing date from the trial court and to 

schedule a hearing in compliance with this court’s order. If the parties do not 

request a hearing, the court coordinator of the trial court shall set a hearing date 

and notify the parties of such date.

PER CURIAM
Exhibit
      10.1(a)

    


    List
      of
      Directors executing the Rescission Agreement

    


    Alger
      Chapman

    Stuart
      Cornew

    Robert
      Goodman
May 11, 2006

Ms. Jean A. Webb

Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three Lafayette Center

1155 21" Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Reference File # 2672.01

Rule Certification
Dear Ms. Webb:
Pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6(a), the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT®) hereby
submits the following revised e-cbot® electronic trading hours for CBOT Denatured Fuel
Ethanol futures (all times shown are Chicago time):

- 6:36 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. (The 9:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m.
trading period is new.)

The CBOT intends to implement this trading hours change beginning May 31, 2006.
There were no opposing views concerning this change.

The CBOT certifies that this change complies with the Commodity Exchange Act and the rules
thereunder.

Sincerely,

Paul J. Draths
Vice President and Secretary

042506
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Calvin Coleman, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), rendered February 19, 1987, convicting him of murder in the second degree (four counts), arson in the second degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to concurrent indeterminate terms of 20 years’ to life imprisonment upon the convictions of murder in the second degree (counts one and two), *8 Vs*to 25 years’ imprisonment upon the conviction of arson in the second degree (count five), *2 Vs*to 7 years’ imprisonment upon the convictions of reckless endangerment in the first degree (counts six and seven), and concurrent indeterminate terms of 20 years’ to life imprisonment upon the convictions of murder in the second degree (counts three and four) to be served consecutively to the sentences imposed under counts one and two.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision providing that the terms of imprisonment imposed on the conviction of murder in the second degree (counts three and four) be served consecutively to the sentences imposed under counts one and two, and substituting therefor a provision that said terms of imprisonment shall run concurrently with each other; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

The majority of the prosecutor’s summation comments to which the defendant now ascribes impropriety were not objected to at trial and thus are not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Nuccie,*57 NY2d 818; *People v Cade,*138 AD2d 388, 389, *affd*73 NY2d 904). Moreover, a *757review of the record indicates that the prosecutor’s summation comments were either made in response to defense counsel’s summation or constituted fair comment on the evidence *(see, People v Martin,*149 AD2d 534; *People v Dupree,*148 AD2d 465; *People v Miller,*143 AD2d 1055).

The court erred, however—as the People concede—in imposing consecutive sentences with respect to the counts of murder in the second degree of which the defendant was convicted. Since the deaths of the two victims resulted from the defendant’s single act of arson, any sentences imposed should have run concurrently *(see,*Penal Law § 70.25 [2]; *People v Day,*73 NY2d 208, 211-212; *People v Underwood,*52 NY2d 882). Kunzeman, J. P., Kooper, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
704427_1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

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

GEORGE EDWARD McCAIN, an individual, 

Plaintiff, 

-againstRAHAL LETTERMAN RACING, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

Index No.: 07-CV-5729

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

I, ABIGAIL SNOW, a member of the Bar of this Court, hereby certify that on the 

22nd day of August, 2007, I caused a true and correct copy of the ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE 

DEFENSES AND CROSS-CLAIM and RULE 7.1 STATEMENT of Defendant Gannett Co., 

Inc. to be served on those parties who do not receive service via the Court’s ECF system, by 

sending a true copy of same enclosed in a post-paid properly addressed sealed wrapper by United 

States Postal Service first class mail to:

David J. Pasternak, Esq.

Pasternak, Pasternak & Patton

A Law Corporation

1875 Century Park East, Suite 2200

Los Angeles CA 90067

John W. Patton, Jr., Esq.

Pasternak, Pasternak & Patton

A Law Corporation

1875 Century Park East, Suite 2200

Los Angeles CA 90067

H. Ritchey Hollenbaugh, Esq.

Carlile Patchen and Murphy, LLP

366 East Broad Street

Columbus OH 43215

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Dated: New York, New York

August 22, 2007

 /s/ Abigail Snow

ABIGAIL SNOW (AS-2960)

Case 1:07-cv-05729-JSR Document 54 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>
                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


         In connection with the Form 10-Q of OMNI Energy Services Corp. (the
"Company") as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I certify that the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

         This certification should not be deemed to be filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission as part of the Report, except to the extent required to
satisfy 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.



                                          /s/ G. DARCY KLUG
                                          ------------------------------
                                          G. Darcy Klug
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          November 14, 2002
#### PETTEE v. PETTEE.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.

July 14, 1894.)

Action by Frank H. Pettee against Mary H. Pettee.

No opinion. Motion for leave to go to the court of appeals 'denied, with $10 costs. See 28 N. Y. Supp. 1067.
- 498 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

306 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. GALVAN

Cite as 306 Neb. 498

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Braden M. Galvan, appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed July 17, 2020. Nos. S‐19‐623, S‐19‐624.

supplemental opinion

Appeal from the District Court for Hall County: Mark J. 

Young, Judge. Former opinion modified. Motion for rehearing overruled.

Gerard A. Piccolo, Hall County Public Defender, for 

appellant.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Melissa R. 

Vincent for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, 

Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.

Per Curiam.

This case is before us on a motion for rehearing filed by the 

appellee, State of Nebraska, concerning our opinion in State v. 

Galvan, 305 Neb. 513, 941 N.W.2d 183 (2020).

We overrule the motion, but modify the opinion as follows:

In the analysis section, under the subheading “Plain Error,” 

we withdraw the first two sentences of the fifth paragraph, 

including footnotes 24 and 25. State v. Galvan, 305 Neb. at 

521, 941 N.W.2d at 190.

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

Former opinion modified.

Motion for rehearing overruled.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

09/18/2020 09:08 AM CDT
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tyrone Ashlay, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.), rendered November 29, 1984, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree, assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The trial court committed reversible error by submitting to the jury, over defense counsel’s objection, a verdict sheet which listed not only the crimes charged and the possible verdict thereon *(see,*CPL 310.20 [2]), but also one of the elements of each of those charges *(see, People v Nimmons,*72 NY2d 830; *People v Jackson,*148 AD2d 750; *People v Testaverde,*143 AD2d 208).

In light of the foregoing disposition, the defendant’s remaining contentions need not be addressed. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 1 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 2 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 3 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 4 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 5 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 6 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 7 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 8 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 9 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 10 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 11 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 12 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 13 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 14 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 15 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 16 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 17 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 18 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 19 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 9-9 Filed 01/30/2008 Page 20 of 20
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 3.1.4


                              ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                              AMENDED AND RESTATED
                            ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                         SUMMIT BROKERAGE SERVICES, INC.
                             (a Florida corporation)

        Pursuant to the provisions of Section 607.1006, Florida Statutes, this
Corporation adopts the following articles of amendment to its Amended and
Restated Articles of Incorporation:

        1. The name of the Corporation is SUMMIT BROKERAGE SERVICES, INC.

        2 Section A(1) of Article V of the Amended and Restated Articles of
Incorporation is amended to read in its entirety as follows:

               "...(1) The maximum aggregate number of shares of common stock,
        par value $.0001 per share (the "Common Stock"), that this Corporation
        shall have the authority to issue is 50,000,000 shares."

        3. The foregoing amendment to the Articles of Incorporation of the
Corporation was adopted and approved by (i) unanimous consent of the
Corporation's Board of Directors at a meeting held on July 9, 2002, and (ii) the
holders of a majority of the Corporation's issued and outstanding capital stock
entitled to vote thereon, representing the number of votes sufficient for
approval at an annual meeting of shareholders held on August 24, 2002.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, these Articles of Amendment have been executed this
24th day of August, 2002.

                                           SUMMIT BROKERAGE SERVICES, INC.


                                           By: /s/ Marshall T. Leeds
                                              --------------------------------
                                              Marshall T. Leeds, Chairman and
                                              Chief Executive Officer