alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.14
                                                              -------------

             MYSTIC FINANCIAL, INC.
                 RETIREMENT PLAN
                       FOR
             NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS

          Effective as of November 8, 2000


                                  AMENDMENT
                                  ---------

      Effective as of November 8, 2000, Section 2(d) of the Plan shall be
amended to read in its entirety as follows:

            (d)   The term "Annual Compensation" means, on any date
      for any Eligible Director, the amount of compensation earned by
      such Eligible Director for service as a member of the Board of
      Directors of the Company during the calendar year preceding
      such date as consisting of all retainer payments, a;; fees and
      payments made solely on the basis of attendance at meetings of
      the Board and committees thereof, and all other payments of
      compensation not attributable to stock options or restricted
      stock. Any payments related to stock options or restricted
      stock are excluded from "Annual Compensation" for all purposes.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed by the undersigned
officer of Mystic Financial, Inc. pursuant to authority given by resolution
of the Board of Directors.

                                       MYSTIC FINANCIAL, INC.


                                       By /s/ Ralph W. Dunham
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Name: Ralph W. Dunham
                                          Title: President and CEO


<PAGE>  1
#### Lena C. Tedesco, Individually and as Executrix of Frank J. Tedesco, Deceased, Respondent, v A.P. Green Industries, Inc., et al., Defendants, and Insulation Distributors, Inc., Appellant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

[801 NYS2d 867]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (James B. Kane, J.H.O.), entered May 26, 2004. The order, inter alia, granted the cross motion of third-party defendant to dismiss the third-party complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by denying the cross motion with respect to the third-party complaint and reinstating the third-party complaint and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced an action (hereafter, underlying action) alleging that products supplied to E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (DuPont), her husband’s former employer, by defendant Insulation Distributors, Inc. (IDI), among others, exposed her husband to asbestos and caused his death. IDI thereafter commenced a third-party action against DuPont seeking indemnification from DuPont. It is undisputed that IDI was dissolved pursuant to Tax Law § 203-a on December 29, 1999, before plaintiff’s husband was diagnosed with asbestos-related illnesses and thus before plaintiff commenced the underlying action.

We conclude that Supreme Court erred in granting DuPont’s *1419cross motion seeking dismissal of the third-party complaint, and we therefore modify the order accordingly. In support of its cross motion, DuPont contended, inter alia, that IDI lacks the capacity to sue DuPont pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 1006 (b), inasmuch as the claim of IDI for indemnification did not arise prior to the dissolution of IDI. Although DuPont is correct that a claim for indemnification does not accrue until a judgment for damages has been entered *(see Bay Ridge Air Rights v State of New York,*44 NY2d 49, 56 [1978]), here IDI’s claim for indemnification is based upon the underlying claim of plaintiff for damages based upon her husband’s exposure to asbestos, which occurred prior to the dissolution of IDI *(see generally Consorti v Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.,*86 NY2d 449, 451-452 [1995], *cert granted and judgment vacated on other grounds*518 US 1031 [1996]). We therefore conclude that IDI, as a defendant, may commence a third-party action against DuPont, which “may be liable to [IDI] for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim against [it]” (CPLR 1007; *cf. Lorisa Capital Corp. v Gallo,*119 AD2d 99, 109-111 [1986]). Finally, we note that the alternative ground for DuPont’s cross motion also lacks merit. Present—Green, J.P., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Gorski and Lawton, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE T-NETIX, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             983
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,594
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,259
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,438
<PP&E>                                          56,868
<DEPRECIATION>                                  29,544
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  51,038
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,192
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            86
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,444
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    51,038
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,709
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,773
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,448
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 239
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,751)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       714
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,037)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,037)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.12)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2023235EN.01002002.xml

| 3.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/20

---

Appeal brought on 18 April 2023 by ClientEarth AISBL against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 01 February 2023 in Case T-354/21, ClientEarth v Commission

(Case C-249/23 P)

(2023/C 235/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: ClientEarth AISBL (represented by: O. W. Brouwer, and T. C. van Helfteren, advocaten)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment under appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment under appeal;

| — | render final judgment and annul the Commission Decision C(2021) 4348 final of 7 April 2021 refusing access to certain documents requested pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, or alternatively |
| --- | --- |

—

render final judgment and annul the Commission Decision C(2021) 4348 final of 7 April 2021 refusing access to certain documents requested pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, or alternatively

| — | refer the case back to the General Court for determination in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Justice; and |
| --- | --- |

—

refer the case back to the General Court for determination in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Justice; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings and of the proceedings before the General Court, including the costs relating to any intervening parties. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings and of the proceedings before the General Court, including the costs relating to any intervening parties.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on two pleas in law.

First plea: the judgment of the General Court is vitiated by contradictory reasoning, a denaturation of evidence, and an error of law in the application of the legal standard for assessing if there is an overriding public interest that can justify disclosure within the meaning of Article 4(2) of Regulation 1049/2001.

Second plea: the judgment of the General Court is vitiated by insufficient reasoning as regards the rejection of the existence of an overriding public interest.

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43.

---
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

# **OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION**

# ** **

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 63 – 1350, the Chief Financial Officerof Western Sizzlin Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies that the Form10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 and the financial statements containedtherein, fully comply with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Qand the financial statements thereto fairly present, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| November 15, 2004 |              |
|-------------------|-------------------|
|              |              |
|              | /s/ Robyn B. Mabe |

 

----
KMART CORP. v. GUASTELLO.

No. COA07-777.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 20, 2008.

Certification Date June 9, 2008.

Appeal from Wake (01CVS12138).

Cases reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 174 (Friday, September 9, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 53621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17968]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Sunshine Act Notice

AGENCY: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Date and Time: Friday, September 16, 2005, 9:30 a.m., Commission 
Meeting.

Place: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 624 9th Street, NW., Room 540, 
Washington, DC 20425.

Status: 

Agenda

I. Approval of Agenda
II. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held Friday, July 22 and Continued 
on Friday, August 26, 2005
III. Commission Briefing: The PATRIOT Act as it Relates to Anti-Arab 
and Anti-Muslim Intolerance
    <bullet> Introductory Remarks by Chairman
    <bullet> Speakers' Presentations
    <bullet> Questions by Commissioners and Staff Director to Speakers
IV. Announcements
V. Staff Director's Report
VI. State Advisory Committee Issues
    <bullet> State Advisory Committee Reports
    <bullet> Other State Advisory Committee Issues
VII. Program Planning
    <bullet> Elementary and Secondary School Desegregation
VIII. Discussion of Commission Briefings
    <bullet> Stagnation of the Black Middle Class Briefing Report
    <bullet> Future Briefing

    IX. Future Agenda Items

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terri Dickerson, Press and 
Communications (202) 376-8582.

Kenneth L. Marcus,
Staff Director, Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 05-17968 Filed 9-7-05; 8:49 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-M
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 539/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 539/2013 of 12 June 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 539/2013                     

# of 12 June 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 June 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
csgs-ex1025cb_201.htm



Pages where confidential treatment has been requested are stamped “Confidential Treatment Requested and the Redacted Material has been separately filed with the Commission,” and places where information has been redacted have been marked with (***). 

Exhibit 10.25CB

 

EIGHTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT

TO

AMENDED AND RESTATED

CSG MASTER SUBSCRIBER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

CSG SYSTEMS, INC.

AND

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDING COMPANY, LLC

 

 

This Eighty-seventh Amendment (the “Amendment”) is made by and between CSG Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“CSG”), and Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Customer”).  CSG and Customer entered into that certain Amended and Restated CSG Master Subscriber Management System Agreement dated February 9, 2009, as amended (the “Agreement”), and now desire to further amend the Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Amendment.  If the terms and conditions set forth in this Amendment shall be in conflict with the Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Amendment shall control.  Any terms in initial capital letters or all capital letters used as a defined term but not defined in this Amendment shall have the meaning set forth in the Agreement.  Upon execution of this Amendment by the parties, any subsequent reference to the Agreement between the parties shall mean the Agreement as amended by this Amendment.  Except as amended by this Amendment, the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect according to their terms. 

 

CSG and Customer agree to the following as of the Effective Date (defined below):

 

1.  Pursuant to the Ninth Amendment to the Agreement executed by CSG and Customer dated January 10, 2010 (CSG document no. 2301479) (the "Ninth Amendment"), Customer has requested and CSG has agreed to provide an ****** Prepaid Volume, No Attachments Precision eMail® bundle at the ********** bundle level.  

 

2.  Therefore, pursuant to Schedule F of the Agreement and for the fees provided therein, CSG shall provide the ****** Prepaid Volume, No Attachments Precision eMail bundle to Customer, commencing as of the Effective Date. 

 

 

THIS AMENDMENT is executed on the days and year last signed below to be effective as of the date last signed below (the "Effective Date").

 


		
	
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDING COMPANY, LLC (“CUSTOMER”)

 

By: Charter Communications, Inc., its Manager
	
CSG SYSTEMS, INC. (“CSG”)

	
 

 

By: /s/ Mike Ciszek
	
 

 

By:  /s/ Gregory L. Cannon

	
 

Name:  Mike Ciszek
	
 

Name:  Gregory L. Cannon

	
 

Title:  VP, Billing & Collections
	
 

Title:  VP & Chief Compliance Officer

	
 

Date:  6/8/16
	
 

Date:  6-9-16
# C_2023286EN.01004101.xml

| 14.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 286/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 286/41

---

Order of the General Court of 27 June 2023 — RT France v Council

(Case T-75/23) (1)

(2023/C 286/55)

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 127, 11.4.2023.

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Sherrone J. GREENE.

No. 388P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

Richard E Jester, for Greene.

Kelly L. Sandling, Assistant Attorney General, C. Branson Vickory, III, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 7th day of August 2007 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the State of NC, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of March 2008."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 7th day of August 2007 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 6th day of March 2008."
**Exhibit
      23.1**


**Consent
        of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
  We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
        S-3 Nos. 333-143454 and 333-141588) of China Precision Steel, Inc. of our
        report
        dated October 11, 2007(October 15, 2007 as to the subsequent event disclosed
        in
        Note 20) with respect to the consolidated financial statements of China
        Precision Steel, Inc., included in this Amendment No. 3 to the Annual Report
        (Form 10-K) for the year ended June 30, 2007.
  October
        26, 2007
  /s/Murrell,
        Hall, McIntosh & Co. PLLP
Amendment 3 to the Second Letter of Amendment to the Master Services Agreement



  
 Exhibit 10.2

 August 30, 2010 

 

 

 David Cathcart 

Chief Financial Officer 
 TRX, Inc. 

2970 Clairmont Road 
 Suite 300 

Atlanta, GA 30329 
  

	Re:	Amendment 3 to Second Letter of Amendment 

 Dear
David: 
 The purpose of this letter is to amend the Second Letter of Amendment dated December 23, 2009 as amended on June 7, 2010 and
July 30, 2010. Effective August 30, 2010, Expedia and TRX now agree to amend the Second Letter of Amendment as follows: 

Section 3 is hereby deleted and replaced with the following: 
 3) Renewal of Pricing and Exclusivity for 2011. The pricing and exclusivity terms set forth in Section 1 and Section 2 of this Second Letter of Amendment will automatically be extended
for calendar year 2011 unless either Party gives the other Party written notice of non-renewal of such terms on or before October 1, 2010. If such notice is given, Section 1 and Section 2 will cease to apply, effective
December 31, 2010, and the pricing terms under the Agreement (and associated SOWs) that were in place prior to this Second Letter of Amendment will apply in calendar year 2011. 
 Please acknowledge your agreement to the foregoing by signing in the space provided below and returning a signed copy to me as soon as possible. If you do not agree with any of the foregoing, please
contact me as soon as possible so that we can determine how best to proceed. 
  

	
	Yours truly,
	
	Expedia, Inc.
	
	/s/ Dominique Bourgault
	Dominique Bourgault
	Vice President, Finance – Partner Services Group


  

			
	Acknowledged and Agreed:
	
	TRX, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ David D. Cathcart

	Title:	 	 Chief Financial Officer



			
	Date Signed:	 	 31 August 2010
Amendment 2 to the Second Letter of Amendment to the Master Services Agreement



  
 Exhibit 10.1

 July 30, 2010 

 

 

 David Cathcart 

Chief Financial Officer 
 TRX, Inc. 

2970 Clairmont Road 
 Suite 300 

Atlanta, GA 30329 
  

	Re:	Amendment 2 to Second Letter of Amendment 

 Dear
David: 
 The purpose of this letter is to amend the Second Letter of Amendment dated December 23, 2010 as amended on June 7, 2010.
Effective July 30, 2010, Expedia and TRX now agree to amend the Second Letter of Amendment as follows: 
 Section 3 is hereby
deleted and replaced with the following: 
 3) Renewal of Pricing and Exclusivity for 2011. The pricing and exclusivity
terms set forth in Section 1 and Section 2 of this Second Letter of Amendment will automatically be extended for calendar year 2011 unless either Party gives the other Party written notice of non-renewal of such terms on or before
September 1, 2010. If such notice is given, Section 1 and Section 2 will cease to apply, effective December 31, 2010, and the pricing terms under the Agreement (and associated SOWs) that were in place prior to this Second Letter
of Amendment will apply in calendar year 2011. 
 Please acknowledge your agreement to the foregoing by signing in the space provided below and
returning a signed copy to me as soon as possible. If you do not agree with any of the foregoing, please contact me as soon as possible so that we can determine how best to proceed. 

 

	
	Yours truly,
	
	Expedia, Inc.
	
	/s/ Kerri Landeis
	 Kerri Landeis
 Vice President,
Global Supply Operations



  

			
	Acknowledged and Agreed:
	
	TRX, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ David D. Cathcart

	Title:	 	 Chief Financial Officer



			
	Date Signed:	 	 30 July 2010