alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2

 



 

AZURE MIDSTREAM PARTNERS GP, LLC.

 

July 1, 2016

 

I.J. “Chip” Berthelot, II

19121 FM 1094

New Ulm, Texas 78950

 

Re:  Retention Agreement

 

Dear Chip:

 

This letter confirms that Azure Midstream Partners GP, LLC (“ Employer”) has agreed to retain your services on behalf of Azure Midstream Partners, LP (the “Partnership”) as President and Chief Executive Officer of Employer (and in a similar position for any of the Partnership’s subsidiaries for which you currently act in such capacities), and you have agreed to serve it in such capacities, from the date of this letter through March 31, 2017 (the “Retention Period”).

 

Employer and you have discussed entering into longer-term arrangements concerning your employment beyond the Retention Period.  During the Retention Period, Employer and you will continue to negotiate in good faith with a view toward entering into definitive written agreements regarding your further employment (“Definitive Agreements”) prior to the end of the Retention Period.  Neither Employer nor you will be under any obligation in connection with your employment following the Retention Period unless and until Employer and you execute and deliver such Definitive Agreements.

 

As consideration for your agreeing to provide services to the Employer during the Retention Period, the Employer will pay you retention compensation in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand & 00/100 ($500,000.00), payable in three equal installments on each of July 1, 2016, October 1, 2016 and January 1, 2017.  The amount of such retention compensation for payments to be made after the Definitive Agreements are entered into may be modified by the Definitive Agreements, and amounts paid or to be paid may be credited against amounts payable under the Definitive Agreements, all as may be set forth in the Definitive Agreements.  Such Definitive Agreements are intended to supersede and replace both this agreement and the Retention Agreement with Azure Midstream Holdings, LLC (“Holdings”). Such retention compensation is payable in addition to salary, benefits and other compensation you currently receive for providing services to Employer.  Such retention compensation is also in addition to 

 

12377 Merit Drive, Suite 300  ·   Dallas, Texas  75251   ·   Tel:  972-674-5200   Fax:  972-385-8775

www.azuremidstream.com

 











 

any payments due you under a separate agreement or otherwise related to your services to Holdings and its subsidiaries during the Retention Period.

 

If this letter correctly sets forth the agreements between Employer and you, please so indicate by signing and returning a counterpart of this letter agreement.

 

	
 
    	
Azure Midstream Partners GP,   LLC
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By: 
    	
/s/ Thomas Whitener
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Thomas Whitener,
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Chairman of the Board of   Directors
    


 

	
Accepted and agreed to as of   the above date:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/ I.J. “Chip”   Berthelot, II
    	
 
    
	
I.J. “Chip” Berthelot, II
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 25, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 29366]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12505]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and 
Training


``Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Program (HVRP) National 
Technical Assistance Center Cooperative Agreement(s)''

May 25, 2010.
AGENCY: Veterans' Employment and Training Service, Department of Labor.
    Announcement Type: New Notice of Availability of Funds and 
Solicitation for Grant Applications. The full announcement is posted on 
http://www.grants.gov.
    Funding Opportunity Number: SGA 10-06.

DATES: Key Dates: The closing date for receipt of applications is 30 
days after publication via http://www.grants.gov.

Funding Opportunity Description

    The U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL or Department), Veterans' 
Employment and Training Service (VETS), announces a cooperative 
agreement competition under 38 U.S.C. Section 2021, as added by Section 
5 of Public Law 107-95, the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance 
Act of 2001 (HVCAA). Section 2021 authorizes programs to expedite the 
reintegration of homeless Veterans into the labor force. In order to 
assist the USDOL-VETS in carrying out 38 U.S.C. 2021, it is announcing 
the availability of funds for cooperative agreement(s) to assist in 
maintaining and improving upon the National Technical Assistance Center 
(NTAC) for the Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Program (HVRP) to 
include the Homeless Female Veterans and Homeless Veterans with 
Families Program (HFV/HVFP) and the Incarcerated Veterans Transition 
Program (IVTP).
    HVRP grants are intended to address two objectives: (1) To provide 
services to assist in reintegrating homeless veterans into meaningful 
employment within the labor force, and (2) to stimulate the development 
of effective service delivery systems that will address the complex 
problems facing homeless veterans.
    The full Solicitation for Grant Application is posted on http://www.grants.gov under U.S. Department of Labor/VETS. Applications 
submitted through http://www.grants.gov or hard copy will be accepted. 
If you need to speak to a person concerning these grants, you may 
telephone Cassandra Mitchell at 202-693-4570 (not a toll-free number). 
If you have issues regarding access to the http://www.grants.gov Web 
site, you may telephone the Contact Center Phone at 1-800-518-4726.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 19th day of May, 2010.
Cassandra R. Mitchell,
Grant Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-12505 Filed 5-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-79-P
#### MAGGIE RICHARDSON v. ZELLA WELCH and WINIFRED A. FISHEL, Guardian for ZELLA C. WELCH.

(Filed 9 June, 1950.)

Pleadings § 31—

Allegations against one who is not a party to an action, and which have no bearing on the plaintiff’s right to obtain the relief sought, do not constitute proper pleadings and should, on motion, be stricken therefrom.

Appeal by defendant, Winifred A. Eisbel, Guardian for Zella C. Welch, from *Crisp, Special Judge,*at February Term, 1950, of Foksyth.

Civil action instituted to recover for services rendered to Zella Welch. Thereafter Zella Welch was adjudged incompetent and Winifred A. Fishel was duly appointed as her Guardian, and made a party defendant.

An amended complaint was filed and tbe plaintiff alleges that compen.sation was denied tbe plaintiff by reason of tbe improper influence and •conduct of tbe brother of Zella Welch, who is not a party to tbe action.

Tbe defendant moved to strike these allegations, tbe motion was denied, .and tbe defendant Guardian appealed, assigning error.

*Geo. W. Braddy for plaintiff.*

*Elledge & Bro.iuder for defendant.*

*332Per Curiam.

Allegations against one who is not a party to an action, and which have no bearing, on the plaintiff’s right to obtain the relief sought, do not constitute proper pleadings and should, on motion, be stricken therefrom.

The motion to strike, interposed below, should have been granted. The ruling of the court below is

Reversed.
### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 08 -0 00 25 -C V

______________________________ NEL WYN MI L L ER, Appellant

V. J OHN R. MERCY, Appellee
On Appea l from the County Court at L aw Bow ie County , Texas Tr ia l Co ur

t N o. 06 C16 43 A- CCL

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C
. J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Memorandum Opinion by J ustice Carte r2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON Appellant, Ne lwy

n Miller, and appe llee, John R . Merc y , have f iled with this C ourt a joint motion to di smiss t he pendingappea l in this matter and re mand the ca use to the trial cour

t. The parties r epre sent to this Court they have rea ched a full and final settlement. In such a case , no rea l
c ontr ov e rs y

e xists , a nd in t he a bs e nc e of a c ontr ov e rs y , th e a

pp e a l is moo t. We gr ant the motion. We set aside without reg ard t o the merits the judg ment of the trial court a nd rema nd the ca se to the trial cour t for re nditi o n o f judgme nt in accor dance with the agree ment. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a)( 2)(B ).

J ack Ca rter J ustice Date Submitted: J une 26, 2008 Date D ecide d: J une 27, 2008
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Shared Hospital Services for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 (the Report) for the purpose of
complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or
Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the
United States Code. Ernest A. Bates, M.D., the Chief Executive Officer and Craig K. Tagawa,
the Chief Financial Officer of American Shared Hospital Services, each
certifies that, to the best of his knowledge: 1. the Report 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
American Shared Hospital Services. /s/ Ernest A. Bates, M.D.

Ernest A. Bates, M.D.
Chief Executive Officer/s/ Craig K. Tagawa

Craig K. Tagawa
Chief Financial Officer
#### Edward P. Donnell v. John B. McDonald.

*Negotiable*Instruments— *Note*— *Consideration*— Agency—Practice— *Sec. 33, Chap. 110, R. S.*

In an action on a promissory note, this court holds, the declaration having formally notified defendant that he was charged with having exeecuted the same, that he could only deny such execution in case he filed an affidavit in compliance with Sec. 33, Chap. 110, R. S.

[Opinion filed June 30, 1890.]

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding.

*145Messrs. G. W. *&*J. T. Kretzinger, for appellant.

Messrs. Dupee, Judah & Willard, for appellee.

Garnett, J.

This was a suit on a promissory note, signed “ E. P. Donnell Mfg. Co., E. P. Donnell, proprietor.” The declaration averred that the defendant (E. P. Donnell) made the note in question by the name, style and description of “ E. P. Donnell Mfg. Co., E. P. Donnell, proprietor.” Defendant filed the general issue and an affidavit, stating in the latter that the note was obtained by one Clark from defendant’s bookkeeper by fraud and misrepresentation, that no consideration was paid for the same, and that it was obtained without appellant’s knowledge. On the trial the note was read in evidence without objection by the defendant, and no proof was offered by him to sustain the charge set forth in the affidavit.

The affidavit does not deny the agent’s authority to execute the note, and to deal with Clark in the transaction referred to, nor does it say that the action of the bookkeeper was without the defendant’s knowledge. Everything that is said is consist ent with full authority in the bookkeeper. If the maker of a note adopts such a signature as that found subscribed to the note in question, no good reason can be given why he should not be held to a personal liability. The declaration formally notified the defendant that he was charged with having individually executed the note, and having that notice he could only deny the execution in case he filed an affidavit in compliance with Sec. 33, Chap. 110, R. S.; Davis v. Cleghorn, 25 Ill. 212.

The judgment is affirmed. *Judgment affirmed.*
Exhibit 10.2


 


BENEFIT AGREEMENT


 


This BENEFIT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”)
is made by and between Image Sensing Systems, Inc. (“ISS”) and Richard Ehrich (“Ehrich”) on this date,
July 28, 2014 (“Effective Date”).


 


RECITALS:


 


		A.	ISS wishes to extend a severance benefit to Ehrich.



		B.	ISS and Ehrich have negotiated the terms and have memorialized those terms in this Agreement.



 


AGREEMENT:


 


		1.	Severance upon Termination of Employment.



		(a)	Voluntary Termination. Should Ehrich terminate his employment
for any reason, ISS shall pay Ehrich all earned and unpaid amounts due to him for salary through the termination date and a pro-rata
portion of any incentive pay to which, at ISS’s discretion, Ehrich would have been paid had he remained in ISS’s employ.



		(b)	Termination by ISS “With Cause”. Should ISS terminate Ehrich’s employment for any of the following reasons,
Ehrich shall not be entitled to any severance:



		(i)	Conviction of, or a plea of “guilty” or “no contest” to, a felony under
the laws of the United States or any state thereof or conviction of, or a plea of “guilty” or “no contest”
to, any act involving moral turpitude;



		(ii)	Breach of fiduciary duty involving personal profit;



		(iii)	Willful and material misconduct in the performance of duties assigned to Ehrich as the Corporate
Controller of ISS;



		(iv)	Consistent failure to perform the reasonable stated duties assigned to Ehrich under this Agreement;
or



		(v)	Illegal or unethical business
practices, including but not limited to the commission of fraud, misappropriation or embezzlement in connection with ISS’s
business.



 


Ehrich shall have thirty (30) days to cure any alleged breach,
failure, or misconduct under Subsection (iv) above, if such alleged breach, failure or misconduct is curable, after ISS provides
Ehrich written notice of the actions or omissions constituting such breach, failure, or misconduct.




     

     

    


 


 


		(c)	Termination by ISS “Without Cause.” Should ISS terminate Ehrich’s employment for any reason other
than (1) those reasons set forth in subparagraph (b) above, or (2) because of Ehrich’s inability to perform his duties
because of death or disability, Ehrich shall be entitled to six (6) months of salary continuation, without eligibility for bonus,
upon entry into a release agreement provided by JSS (in a form substantially similar to that set forth at Appendix B to
this Agreement). ISS and Ehrich have the ability, however, at any time, to terminate this Agreement by mutual written agreement,
with or without the severance benefit.



 


Image
Sensing Systems, Inc.


 


	By:	/s/ Dale Parker	 	/s/ Richard Ehrich
	 	Dale Parker	 	Richard Ehrich
	 	 	 	 
	Its:	CFO/COO
#### THE STATE, Appellant, v. WALTER MILLER.

Division Two,

November 23, 1909.

APPEAL. The State is not entitled to an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court sustaining defendant’s plea in abatement to the indictment.

Appeal from Jasper Circuit *Court.*— Hon. *Henry L. Bright,*Judge.

Appeal dismissed.

*Elliott W. Major,*Attorney-General, *James T. Blair*and *Charles G. Bevelle,*Assistant Attorneys-General, for the State.

*B. M. Sheppard*for respondent.

BURGESS, J.

This is an appeal by the State from a judgment of the circuit court of Jasper county setting aside the indictment on a plea in abatement thereto filed by the defendant.

The record in this case is in all respects similar to those in the eases of State v. Craig, *ante,*p. 201, and State v. Firey, *ante,*p. 194, the opinions in which cases are handed down at this delivery, and for the reason therein given, that the State has no right of appeal from'the judgment of the circuit court sustaining a plea in abatement, the appeal of the State is dismissed.

All concur.
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2949 Filed: 07/12/19 Entered: 07/12/19 12:15:06 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2949 Filed: 07/12/19 Entered: 07/12/19 12:15:06 Page 2 of

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           5,410
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,125
<ALLOWANCES>                                       231
<INVENTORY>                                      1,440
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,630
<PP&E>                                             759
<DEPRECIATION>                                     162
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  38,029
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,366
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        676
<COMMON>                                           152
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,945
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    38,029
<SALES>                                         17,996
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,249
<CGS>                                            3,015
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,055
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 238
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,102
<INCOME-TAX>                                       385
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,717
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,717
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15




</TABLE>
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 305 Filed: 02/05/19 Entered: 02/05/19 15:17:37 Page 1 of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 305 Filed: 02/05/19 Entered: 02/05/19 15:17:37 Page 2 of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 305 Filed: 02/05/19 Entered: 02/05/19 15:17:37 Page 3 of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 305 Filed: 02/05/19 Entered: 02/05/19 15:17:37 Page 4 of 4
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2460 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2460

     To authorize the payment of rewards to individuals furnishing 
   information relating to persons subject to indictment for serious 
 violations of international humanitarian law in Rwanda, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 25, 2000

 Mr. Feingold introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To authorize the payment of rewards to individuals furnishing 
   information relating to persons subject to indictment for serious 
 violations of international humanitarian law in Rwanda, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. EXPANSION OF REWARDS PROGRAM TO INCLUDE RWANDA.

    Section 102 of the Act of October 30, 1998 (Public Law 105-323) is 
amended--
            (1) in the section heading, by inserting ``or rwanda'' 
        after ``yugoslavia'';
            (2) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting ``or the 
        International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda'' after 
        ``Yugoslavia''; and
            (3) in subsection (c)--
                    (A) by inserting ``(1)'' immediately after 
                ``Reference.--''; and
                    (B) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(2) For the purposes of subsection (a), the statute of the 
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda means the statute contained 
in the annex to Security Council Resolution 955 of November 8, 1994.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Felicci Tocci, Respondent, v. James Andrews and others, Appellants.

Order denying motion to vacate attachment affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA , Respondent ,

v.
JOSE LUIS AVITIA , Petitioner

. No. 1 CA

- CR 18

- 0599 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR1993

- 005724 The Honorable Dewain D. Fox , Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELI EF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent
Jose Luis Avitia , Buckeye Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen, Judge Maria Elena Cruz and Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the Court. FILED 1-3-19STATE v. AVITIA Decision of the Court

2 PER CURIAM : ¶1 Petitioner Jose Luis Avitia seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post

- conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner's fifth successive petition. ¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will not disturb a superior court's ruling on a pe tition for post

- conviction relief. State v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner's burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition for post

- conviction relief. See State v. Poblete , 227 Ariz. 5 37, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review). ¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court's order denying the petition for post

- conviction relief, and the petition for review. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion. ¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief.