alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CHARYS HOLDING COMPANY, INC





EXHIBIT 10.8

SAN WEST, INC.

CHARTER OF THE GOVERNANCE AND NOMINATING COMMITTEE

Purpose

The purpose of the Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors is to assist the Board in identifying qualified individuals to become Board members and determining the composition of the Board and its committees.

Membership And Procedures

Membership and Appointment.  The Committee shall consist of not less than three members of the Board, with the exact number being determined by the Board.  The members of the Committee shall be appointed and replaced from time to time by the Board.

Independence.  Each member shall meet the independence requirements of applicable provisions of the federal securities laws and the rules promulgated thereunder and the applicable rules of The Nasdaq Stock Market, the New York Stock Exchange, or any other exchange where the shares of the Company may be listed or quoted for sale.

Authority to Retain Advisers.  In the course of its duties, the Committee shall have sole authority, at the Company’s expense, to engage and terminate search firms, as the Committee deems advisable, to identify director candidates, including the sole authority to approve the search firm’s fees and other retention terms.

Evaluation.  The Committee shall annually review and reassess the adequacy of this Charter and recommend any proposed changes to the Board.

Duties And Responsibilities

The Committee shall:

1.

Evaluate and make recommendations regarding the composition and size of the Board.

2.

 

Determine the composition of committees of the Board, with consideration of the desires of individual Board members.


 

3.

Monitor compliance with Board and Board committee membership criteria.

 

4.

 

Recommend nominees to the full Board to fill vacancies on the Board.

 

5.

Investigate suggestions for candidates for membership on the Board and shall recommend prospective directors, as required, to provide an appropriate balance of knowledge, experience and capability on the Board, including stockholder nominations for the Board.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

LOUBERT JULES, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-3625

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed April 3, 2019.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court 

for Lee County; Margaret O. Steinbeck, 

Judge.

Loubert Jules, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See § 921.0024(2), Fla. Stat. (2007); Moore v. State, 882 So. 

2d 977 (Fla. 2004); State v. Roby, 246 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1971); Carpenter v. State, 884 

So. 2d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Burttram v. State, 846 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); 

Lopez v. State, 833 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).

MORRIS, BLACK, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM,JJ., Concur.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Reportof Tower Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Jeff B. Shank, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant tosection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)           The information contained in the Report fairly presents,in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofthe Company.
|        | /s/ Jeff B. Shank       |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   | August 9, 2006          |

 

----
463 A.2d 32

#### Commonwealth v. Palmer, Appellant.

Submitted March 1, 1983.

Jonathan Blum, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant; Robert J. Gillespie, Jr., District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

*633Before CERCONE, P.J., CAVANAUGH and WIEAND, JJ.

The judgment of sentence of the lower court is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       5,183,694
<SECURITIES>                                42,608,043
<RECEIVABLES>                                  247,981
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    220,171
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            49,330,057
<PP&E>                                       2,747,592
<DEPRECIATION>                                 252,785
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              83,691,369
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,309,984
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   102,053,375
<OTHER-SE>                                (22,799,515)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                83,691,369
<SALES>                                        140,900
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               140,900
<CGS>                                          842,330
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  842,330
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            18,452,347
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,836
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (16,077,413)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (16,077,413)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (16,077,413)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.36)


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 18, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 27784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-11881]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


Final Effect of Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition 
to the Special Exposure Cohort

AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: HHS gives notice concerning the final effect of the decision 
to designate a class of employees from Lawrence Livermore National 
Laboratory in Livermore, California, as an addition to the Special 
Exposure Cohort (SEC) under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
Compensation Program Act of 2000. On April 5, 2010, as provided for 
under 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b), the Secretary of HHS designated the following 
class of employees as an addition to the SEC:

    All employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor 
agencies, and their contractors and subcontractors who worked at the 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California from 
January 1, 1950 through December 31, 1973, for a number of work days 
aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under 
this employment or in combination with work days within the 
parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in 
the Special Exposure Cohort.

    This designation became effective on May 5, 2010, as provided for 
under 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C). Hence, beginning on May 5, 2010, members 
of this class of employees, defined as reported in this notice, became 
members of the Special Exposure Cohort.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Interim Director, 
Division of Compensation Analysis and Support, NIOSH, 4676 Columbia 
Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 877-222-7570. 
Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3d797e7c6e7d7e797e137a726b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="97d3d4d6c4d7d4d3d4b9d0d8c1">[email protected]</span></a>.

John Howard,
Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2010-11881 Filed 5-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-19-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 23, 2019

b1216 

# Order

Clerk December 23, 2019

159072 & (36)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 159072

COA: 344196

Wayne CC: 14

- 006130

- FC

FREDRICK KYLE YOUNG,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 7, 2018

order of the Court of Appeals is considered. We DIRECT the Wayne County Prosecuting

Attorney to answer the application for leave to appeal within 28 days after the date of this

order, addressing only the defendant’s factual assertion in I ssue V of his application that

he filed a motion for a new trial in the circuit court, and not a motion for relief from

judgment.

The application for leave to appeal and motion for peremptory reversal remain

pending.
`[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 199 Reported in Senate (RS)]






                                                       Calendar No. 257
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 199

  For the relief of Alexandre Malofienko, Olga Matsko, and their son, 
                          Vladimir Malofienko.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 19, 1999

    Mr. Lautenberg (for himself and Mr. Torricelli) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

                             August 5, 1999

                Reported by Mr. Hatch, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL


 
  For the relief of Alexandre Malofienko, Olga Matsko, and their son, 
                          Vladimir Malofienko.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Alexandre 
Malofienko, Olga Matsko, and their son, Vladimir Malofienko, shall be 
held and considered to have been lawfully admitted to the United States 
for permanent residence as of the date of the enactment of this Act 
upon payment of the required visa fees.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

  Upon the granting of permanent residence to Alexandre Malofienko, 
Olga Matsko, and their son, Vladimir Malofienko, as provided in section 
1, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce 
by the appropriate number during the current fiscal year the total 
number of immigrant visas available to natives of the country of the 
aliens' birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)).
                                     





                                                       Calendar No. 257

106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 199

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  For the relief of Alexandre Malofienko, Olga Matsko, and their son, 
                          Vladimir Malofienko.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             August 5, 1999

                       Reported without amendment`
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A2 08 5 . BARNES v . THE STATE.

Th e ap p el l an t , Bo y zi e Barn es , rep res en t ed t o t h i s Co u rt t h at h i s ap p eal fro m t h e d i s m i s s al b y t h e Su p eri o r Co u rt o f M u sco g ee Co u n t y o f Mo t i on fo r Ret ri ev al o f
Pers o n al Pro p ert y wo u l d b e m o o t if t h e St at e rem i t ted $ 12 0 2 to h i s d es i g n at ed ag en t ,
as ag reed b et ween t h e p art ies

. On D ecem b er 8, 2 0 1 6 , t h i s Co u rt d irect ed t h e
rep res en t at i v e o f th e St at e t o ad v i s e t h e Co u rt i n wri t in g wh en t h e cu rren cy h as b een d i s b u rs ed

. On D ecem

b er 1 9 , 20 1 6 , t h e St at e fi l ed a Pro o f o f Rel eas e o f Pro p ert y

. Al l

m at t ers at i s s u e i n Barn es ’ s ap p eal hav i n g b een res o l v ed
, t hi s cas e i s h ereb y DISM ISSED as m o o t

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i t n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. January 12, 2017

01/12/2017
Exhibit 99.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
                         PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Annual Report of SIGA Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Thomas N. Konatich, Acting Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1.    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                        /s/ Thomas N. Konatich
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Thomas N. Konatich
                                        Acting Chief Executive Officer
                                        and Chief Executive Officer
                                        March 31, 2003
EXHIBIT 10.53


               FIRST AMENDMENT TO RETIREMENT PLAN FOR DIRECTORS
               ------------------------------------------------

     This  First Amendment to Retirement Plan for Directors (this "Amendment")
is  executed by Triton Energy Limited, a Cayman Islands company ("Triton"), as
of  January  13,  1998.

                               R E C I T A L S:
                               ---------------

     A.       Triton (through its predecessor company) has adopted the Amended
and  Restated  Retirement  Plan  for  Directors  (the  "Plan");  and

     B.      The Board of Directors has adopted certain amendments to the Plan
effective  as  of  January  13,  1998.

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  the  Plan  is  amended  in  the  following  respects:

     1.          Section  5  is  amended  to  read in its entirety as follows:

     "5.  Amount  of  Benefits.  The  total  benefits  payable  hereunder to a
Dorector  for  each  fiscal  year that he receives benefits hereunder shall be
equal  to  $25,000."

     2.       Except as amended by the provisions of this Amendment, all other
provisions  of  the  Plan  remain  in  full  force  and  effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Triton Energy Limited has caused this Amendment to be
executed  by  its  duly  authorized  officer effective as of the date and year
first  above  written.


                              TRITON  ENERGY  LIMITED


                              By:_________________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF HOPPER HOLMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF JUNE
30, 1999 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CASH FLOWS FOR
THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      34,877,002
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               24,444,339
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,080,151
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            64,050,439
<PP&E>                                      23,430,938
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,056,705
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              94,891,173
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,428,378
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,157,349
<OTHER-SE>                                  74,853,461
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                94,891,173
<SALES>                                    107,411,260
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           107,411,260
<CGS>                                       73,430,305
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               73,430,305
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            17,069,585
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,481
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             17,356,864
<INCOME-TAX>                                 7,785,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          9,571,864
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 9,571,864
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .31


</TABLE>
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**20 CA 15-00816**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN ONONDAGA-CORTLAND-MADISON BOARD OF COOPERATIVE EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

AND MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ONONDAGA-CORTLAND-MADISON BOCES FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

FERRARA FIORENZA P.C., EAST SYRACUSE (CRAIG M. ATLAS OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

RICHARD E. CASAGRANDE, LATHAM (MATTHEW E. BERGERON OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Anthony J. Paris, J.), entered August 19, 2014. The order denied the petition to stay arbitration and granted the cross application to compel arbitration.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 seeking a permanent stay of arbitration. Respondents are labor organizations that represent separate groups of employees, and they filed grievances alleging that petitioner violated a certain provision of each collective bargaining agreement (CBA) by changing the prescription copay benefit for retirees. Supreme Court denied the petition and granted the cross application of respondents to compel arbitration. We affirm.
It is well settled that the court must conduct a two-part analysis in determining whether an issue is subject to arbitration pursuant to a CBA. First, the court must determine “whether there is any statutory, constitutional or public policy prohibition against arbitration of the grievance” ( Matter of Mariano v Town of Orchard Park , 92 AD3d 1232, 1233 [internal quotation marks omitted]). Second, the court must determine “whether there is a reasonable relationship between the subject matter of the dispute and the general subject matter of the CBA” ( Matter of Board of Educ. of Watertown City Sch. Dist. [Watertown Educ. Assn.] , 93 NY2d 132, 143). Petitioner correctly concedes that only the second part of the analysis is at issue here.**-2- 20 CA 15-00816** 
We reject petitioner’s contention that the matter is not arbitrable because the CBA provisions apply only to the employees, and not to retirees, and thus that there is no reasonable relationship between the copay benefit for retirees and the general subject matter of the respective CBAs. “Rather, issues concerning [respondents’ respective] relationship[s] to retired employees, issues concerning whether retirees are covered by the grievance procedure, and issues concerning whether the clauses of the contract[s] support the grievance are matters involving the scope of the substantive contractual provisions and, as such, are for the arbitrator” ( Mariano , 92 AD3d at 1233-1234; see Matter of Village of Kenmore [Kenmore Club Police Benevolent Assn.] , 114 AD3d 1185, 1186, lv denied 23 NY3d 903).

Entered: February 5, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT 99.1

                WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SEC.1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Sec.1350, I, the undersigned
Chief  Executive Officer of American Ecology Corporation (the "Company"), hereby
certify,  based  on  my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
Company  for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with
the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents, in all material
respects,  the  financial  condition  and  results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Stephen A. Romano
------------------------
Stephen A. Romano
May 12, 2003


<PAGE>