alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                EXHIBIT 10.14(a)


                  AMENDMENT TO DEFERRED COMPENSATION AGREEMENT


                  THIS AMENDMENT to the Deferred Compensation Agreement made
this 4th day of May, 2000, by and between Pennzoil-Quaker State Company, a
Delaware corporation (the "Company"), and James L. Pate ("Employee").

                                    RECITALS:

                  WHEREAS, the Company and Employee have previously entered into
that certain Deferred Compensation Agreement made the 31st day of December,
1998; and

                  WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has authorized
the amendment of the Deferred Compensation Agreement and Employee is agreeable
to the amendment.

                  NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the Company
and Employee agree as follows:

         1. Effective as of the date first written above, paragraph (3) of the
Deferred Compensation Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:

                  "Upon Employee's termination of employment with the Company
         for any reason other than death at any time, Employee shall be entitled
         to monthly payments of deferred compensation for the remainder of his
         life equal to the sum of (a) the excess of (ii) 57% of Employee's
         monthly salary as in effect on the date of his termination of
         employment, over (ii) the total amount of monthly amounts payable to
         Employee during each applicable month from the Retirement Plan, the
         U.S. Social Security Act, the Company's Short-Term Disability Plan, the
         Company's Long-Term Disability Plan, the Company's Supplemental
         Disability Plan, as defined benefits under the Excess Benefit Agreement
         between the Company and Employee, and from any retirement plan with a
         former employer (whether or not received in the form of monthly
         payments) and (b) $9,666.67."



<PAGE>   2

                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and Employee have executed
this Amendment to Deferred Compensation Agreement as of the date first above
written.

                                               PENNZOIL-QUAKER STATE COMPANY



                                               By  /s/ JAMES J. POSTL
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                   James J. Postl
                                                   President
                                                   Pennzoil-Quaker State Company
Accepted and agreed to by:


/s/  JAMES L. PATE
--------------------------
James L. Pate



                                      -2-
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-62012) pertaining to the
CompuCredit Corporation 2000 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-78409) pertaining to the CompuCredit Corporation Amended and
Restated 1998 Stock Option Plan and in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-92889) pertaining to the CompuCredit Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan
of our report dated January 24, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of CompuCredit Corporation and subsidiaries included in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2002.



/s/
BDO Siedman, LLP

Atlanta,
Georgia
March 18, 2003

---

QuickLinks
#### VIRGINIA INSURANCE RECIPROCAL, as subrogee of Scottish Rite Children’s Medical Center, Inc., Appellant, v. William P. SIMMONS, M.D., Appellee.

No. 1D00-0763.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 24, 2003.

Michael T. Callahan and Weslee L. Klin-ka of Callahan & Martinez, St. Petersburg, for appellant.

Esther E. Galicia of George, Hartz, Lun-deen, Fulmer, Johnstone, King & Stevens, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The final order is reversed and this cause is remanded for further proceedings pursuant to *Walker v. Virginia Insurance Reciprocal,*842 So.2d 804 (Fla.2003).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

WOLF, C.J., and BOOTH and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4814 

To prohibit the further extension or establishment of national monuments 

in Arizona except by express authorization of Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 10, 2010 

Mr. FLAKE (for himself, Mr. SHADEGG, and Mr. FRANKS of Arizona) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To prohibit the further extension or establishment of national 

monuments in Arizona except by express authorization 

of Congress. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON FURTHER EXTENSION OR ES4 TABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN 

5 ARIZONA. 

6 This proviso of the last sentence of the first section 

7 of the Act of September 14, 1950 (64 Stat. 849, chapter 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4814 IH

1 950; 16 U.S.C. 431a), is amended by inserting ‘‘or Ari2 zona’’ after ‘‘Wyoming’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Adam T. CHEATHAM, Sr. v. TOWN OF TAYLORTOWN

No. 388P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Adam T. Cheatham, Sr., for Cheatham, Adam T. (Sr.).

William C. Morgan, Jr., Attorney at Law, for Town of Taylortown.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 2nd of November 2018 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, 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 5th of December 2018."
### FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT DEC 9 2000 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

___________________ No. 00-15981

___________________ D.C. Docket No. 00-9009 NED L. SIEGEL, GEORGETTE SOSA DOUGLAS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus THERESA LEPORE, CHARLES E. BURTON, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

___________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

___________________ ON PETITION FOR REHEARING BEFORE: ANDERSON, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES, BARKETT, HULL, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges. BY THE COURT: Appellants’ Petition for Rehearing is DENIED. Judges Tjoflat, Birch, Dubina and Carnes dissent. ENTERED FOR THE COURT:
/s/ R. Lanier Anderson III CHIEF JUDGE
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF OUR CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Norman Dority, certify that:



1.    I have reviewed this Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Denia Enterprises Inc.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of

material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements

made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made,

not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial

information included in this report, fairly present in all material

respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of

the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for

establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as

defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant

and have:



(a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such

disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our

supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the

registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known

to us by others within those entities, particularly during the

period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls

and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about

the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of

the end of the period covered by this report based on such

evaluation; and



(c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal

control over financial reporting that occurred during the

registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth

quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially

affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the

registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



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



(a)   All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design

or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are

reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to

record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or

other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's

internal control over financial reporting.



/s/ Norman Dority

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

Norman Dority

Chief Executive Officer



June 18, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JANUARY 1, 2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 1, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE FORM
10-K FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 1, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-01-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,289
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   35,035
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,804
<INVENTORY>                                     33,025
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,082
<PP&E>                                          37,080
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,688
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 107,867
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           54,683
<BONDS>                                         76,322
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           32,864
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                    (55,768)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   107,867
<SALES>                                        150,680
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               150,680
<CGS>                                           96,973
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   96,973
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                72,735
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                50,809
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,250
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (29,389)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (29,389)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (32,427)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (53.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (53.33)


</TABLE>
In the MATTER OF: R.L.O., L.P. O., C.M.O.

No. COA18-593

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 18, 2018

AFFIRMED IN PART. REVERSED IN PART. VACATED IN PART. REMANDED.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification

I, Robert H. Lorsch, certify, pursuant to Rule 13(a)-14(b) or Rule 15(d)-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MMR Information Systems, Inc. for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and (ii) the information contained in such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the MMR
Information Systems, Inc.

|/s/ Robert H. Lorsch
|--------------------
|Name:               
|Title:              
|Date:               

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and is not being "filed" as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document for purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), or otherwise subject to liability under that section.
This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act except to the extent that this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

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.

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Neil Wayne HOYLE

No. 239A18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Anne Bleyman, Attorney at Law, for Hoyle, Neil Wayne

Tiffany Y. Lucas, Assistant Attorney General, David Learner, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by State of NC on the 21st of August 2018 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition *805for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."

Accordingly, the new brief of the Plaintiff shall be filed with this Court not more than 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.33

                        HCA DIRECTORS' COMPENSATION/FEES
                           (As revised May 24, 2001)

Director Compensation

- Non-employee directors have the choice of (i) receiving an annual retainer of
  $40,000 payable in restricted stock that vests one year from the date of
  grant; or (ii) receiving, in lieu of annual retainers for the following 5
  years, $200,000 in restricted stock units that vest annually over a 5 year
  period at a rate of 20% per year.

- Non-employee directors will receive a competitive option award.

Other Fees

- Non-employee directors are paid an attendance fee of $1,500 per meeting for
  all scheduled meetings of the Board.

- Non-employee director committee members are paid a committee meeting fee of
  $1,200 per meeting (Committee Chairpersons $1,500) for attendance for all
  scheduled meetings of a respective committee in which that director serves.
  The Board of Directors currently has Audit, Compensation, Ethics and
  Compliance, Executive, Finance and Investment and Nominating Committees.

HCA Foundation, Inc. - Matching Gift Program

- Gifts from each Director to organizations and programs exempt from taxation
(pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code), including civic,
cultural, educational and health and human services institutions, will be
matched on a dollar-for-dollar basis, from a minimum of $500 per gift, up to an
aggregate maximum of $15,000 annually. The Matching Gift Program will be
administered by the HCA Foundation, Inc. To qualify for a matching gift,
contributions must be personal gifts from the Director's own funds (including
personal or family foundations and gifts made jointly with spouses), paid in
cash or securities. Pledges do not qualify for matches. Directors who have
retired from service on the Board may participate in this program through the
end of the first year following the year in which retirement was effective. The
Company reserves the right to determine whether gifts to organizations are
within certain guidelines for qualification for matching.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TERRANCE WONGUS,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 45 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TERRANCE WONGUS,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 46 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TERRANCE WONGUS,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 47 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM
[45 EAL 2023, 46 EAL 2023 and 47 EAL 2023] - 2

AND NOW, this 18th day of July, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Exhibit
31.2






Certification
Pursuant To


Rule
13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934








I,
      Shawn K. Poe, certify that:




1.    I
have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Ply Gem Holdings, Inc.;






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






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




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






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






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






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






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






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




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









Date:
August 11, 2008


/s/
      Shawn K. PoeName:
            
            Shawn
      K. PoeTitle:
            
            Vice
      President, Chief Financial Officer,Treasurer
      and Secretary
STATE of North Carolina v. John Scott HUDSON

No. 348P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 30, 2019

Phillip K. Woods, Special Deputy Attorney General, Ben R. David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

John Scott Hudson, Shelby, for Hudson, John Scott.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 11th of October 2018 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, New Hanover County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of January 2019."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of October 2018 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of January 2019."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of October 2018 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of January 2019."
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 FEBRUARY 4, 2011

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 ________________________

 No. 10-11865 

Non-Argument Calendar

 ________________________

 D.C. Docket No. 1:09-cr-00073-JRH-WLB-6

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DERRICK D. KING,

a.k.a. Dirty Red, 

a.k.a. Dirt,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

 Appeal from the United States District Court

 for the Southern District of Georgia

 ________________________

(February 4, 2011)

Before EDMONDSON, PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

J. Edward Enoch, Jr., appointed counsel for Derrick D. King in this direct
criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the

appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct.

1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals

that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit,

counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and King’s conviction and sentence

are AFFIRMED.

2
Order entered February 7, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 01530 - CV IN THE ESTATE OF ROB ERTO REFUGIO DE JESU S GONZALEZ BARRERA, DECEASED On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PR - 14 - 02697 - 1



### O RDER Before the Court is the February 6, 2019 request of Jackie Galindo, Official Court Reporter for Probate Court No. 1, for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record . We GRANT the request and extend the time to March 11 , 2019

. /s/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE