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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6761 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6761

   To amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to require certain 
Tennessee Valley Authority employees to include their annual salary in 
         annual disclosure reports, and for the other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 18, 2022

Mr. Cohen (for himself and Mr. Burchett) introduced the following bill; 
      which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to require certain 
Tennessee Valley Authority employees to include their annual salary in 
         annual disclosure reports, and for the other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT.

    Section 102(a) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 
App. 102(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(9) In the case of an individual occupying a position 
        described under section 101(f) within the Tennessee Valley 
        Authority, the total compensation (including annual rate of 
        basic pay, bonuses, allowances, differentials, and benefits) 
        for such position.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.42

                                 MOTOROLA, INC.

                DESCRIPTION OF COMPENSATORY ARRANGEMENTS FOR 2005
                     APPLICABLE TO NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Set forth below are compensatory arrangements as of March 3, 2005, applicable
to the Company's current executive officers who will be named in the summary
compensation table of the Company's proxy statement for the 2005 annual
meeting of stockholders ("Named Executive Officers"). These arrangements are
in addition to the various other compensatory plans, contracts and
arrangements in which the Company's Named Executive Officers participate and
which are filed as exhibits to this report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2004.

ANNUAL BASE PAY
---------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edward J. Zander                                       $1,500,000
Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David W. Devonshire                                    $625,000
Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory Q. Brown                                       $600,000
Executive Vice President
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adrian R. Nemcek                                       $600,000
Executive Vice President
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


PERQUISITES
-----------

Executive Financial Planning Program: The plan provides for up to $15,000 in the
first year and $10,000 per year in subsequent years for financial planning, tax
planning and preparation and estate planning

Executive Health Coaching: This benefit will be introduced in 2005 and will
provide Motorola executives with personal health coaching recommendations and
encouragement to reach exercise, weight management, nutrition, smoking cessation
and stress management goals.

SEVERANCE ARRANGEMENTS
----------------------

David W. Devonshire: If Mr. Devonshire is terminated without cause, Motorola
agrees to pay him severance equal to one year's base salary plus his targeted
incentive payout.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

February 27, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132586 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132586 

 COA: 262019 

Wayne CC: 05-000168-01

ERIC LENIER GIVAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 17, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t0220 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

February 27, 2007 

 Clerk
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 15 - LETTER RE UNAUDITED INTERIM FINANCIAL INFORMATION


The Board of Directors
Polaroid Corporation

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Re:      Registration Statements No. 33-36384 on Form S-8, No. 33-44661 on Form
         S-3, No. 33-51173 on Form S-8, No. 333-32283 on Form S-8, No. 333-32285
         on Form S-8, No. 333-67647 on Form S-3 and No. 333-96051 on Form S-3 of
         Polaroid Corporation

With respect to the subject registration statements, we acknowledge our
awareness of the use therein of our report dated April 18, 2000, related to our
review of interim financial information.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933 ("the Act"), such
report is not considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified
by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the
meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


                                                      Very truly yours,

                                                      /s/ KPMG LLP


Boston, Massachusetts
May 16, 2000

                                                                              32
Amendment of Employment Agreement between NW Mutual Ins. Co. and Greg Lashutka



 Exhibit 10.31.1 
  
 AMENDMENT 
  
 THIS AMENDMENT (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of March 1, 2005, by and between Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (the
“Company”) and Gregory Lashutka (the “Executive”). 
  
 WHEREAS the Company and the Executive have entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of January 1, 2000 (the “Employment Agreement”), and the parties now wish to amend the Employment Agreement.

  
 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, intending
to be legally bound, hereby agree that the Employment Agreement is amended as follows: 
  
 1. Section 2.3(b)(vi) is hereby amended to revise the last two sentences to read as follows: 
  
 The benefits under this subsection (vi) shall be paid in the same forms and at the same times as Executive’s benefits under the
applicable Plans described above are paid (or would have been paid had Executive’s interest in the applicable Plans been fully vested). The benefits payable under this subsection (vi) and subsection (vii) below shall not result in any
duplication of benefits. 
  
 2. Section
2.3(b)(vii) is amended by revising the last sentence to read as follows: 
  
 The benefits under this subsection (vii) shall be paid in the same forms and at the same times as Executive’s benefits under the applicable Plans described above are paid (or would have been paid had
Executive’s interests in the applicable Plans been fully vested). 
  
 3. Section 3.4(b)(vii) is revised by amending the last sentence to read as follows: 
  
 The benefits under this subsection (vii) shall be paid in the same forms and at the same times as Executive’s benefits under the
applicable Plans described above are paid (or would have been paid had Executive’s interests in the applicable Plans been fully vested), as in effect immediately before the Change of Control. 
  









 4. In all respects not amended, the Employment Agreement is hereby ratified and
confirmed. 
  
 WITNESS the following signatures:

  

									
	 	 	 	 	 NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE

	 	 	 	 	 COMPANY

				
	 	 	 	 	 By:
	 	 
	Gregory Lashutka	 	 	 	 	 	 
					
	 Date
	 	 	 	 	 	 Name:
	 	 
					
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 Title:
	 	 

  

 2
#### STATE ex rel. FLORIDA BAR v. CAFFEE.

Supreme Court of Florida. En Banc.

July 30, 1954.

Darry A. Davis, Miami Beach, Richard T. Earle, Jr., St. Petersburg, for complainant.

Wilson R. Caffee, in pro. per., for respondent.

TERRELL, Justice.

Pursuant to Article XI, Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, an amended complaint was filed against respondent charging him with unprofessional conduct as an attorney at law, in that he did (1) On August 8, 1952, appropriate to his own use the sum of $500 the property of his client, and (2) that he did on May 26, 1952, appropriate to his own use the sum of $7,500, the property of another client, that he was indicted, tried and convicted for grand larceny in Pinellas County, Florida, on both charges and was sentenced to serve a term of five years in the State Penitentiary in each case, the sentences to run concurrently.

A referee was appointed, respondent was served with notice of the complaint; he entered a- plea of guilty to each of the charges and filed no responsive pleading to the complaint. Evidence was taken which consisted mainly of the record of his indictment, trial, and conviction for grand larceny. He offered no evidence in his defense but did request an opportunity to produce testimony of extenuating circumstances which was denied for absence of any reasonable excuse for not having such testimony at the trial.

The referee found respondent guilty of “acts which by the law of Florida constituted felonies” and recommended that he be disbarred. The Board of Governors of the Florida Bar approved the report and recommendation of the referee and recommend to this Court that an order be entered disbarring respondent, Wilson R. Caffee from the practice of law in the State of Florida. The record in the cause has been certified to this Court.

The record, the report and recommendation of the referee and the Board of Governors of the Florida Bar have been considered and we think it shows that respondent has been guilty of such conduct as disqualifies him to practice law. Every element showing ground for disqualification as pointed out in State of Florida ex rel. Florida Bar v. Murrell, Fla., 74 So.2d 221, is present in the instant case.

*230It is accordingly the' judgment of this Court that respondent, Wilson R. Caffee, was regularly charged, tried and found guilty of unprofessional conduct as an attorney, that he should be and is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in this State.

ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, SE-BRING, HOBSON, MATHEWS and DREW, JJ., concur.
#### Willie FISHER v. R. L. HALL et al.

No. 3791.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Jan. 29, 1954.

Plauche & Plauche, Lake Charles, for appellant.

Stone & Toomer, Lake .Charles, for appellees.

CAVANAUGH, Judge.

For the reasons ássigned in the case of Browne v. Hall, 70 So.2d 199, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed at the cost of appellees.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

# AGENCY:

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

# ACTION:

Notice of Intent To Enter into an Enhanced-Use Lease.

# SUMMARY:

The Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) intends to enter into an enhanced-use lease of approximately 4.273 acres of underutilized land and improvements at the VA Medical Center in Chillicothe, Ohio. The selected lessee will finance, preserve, improve, design, build, operate, manage and maintain the property, which includes the VA Memorial Stadium and its accessory facilities (e.g., bleachers, dressing rooms, concession buildings, playground, and a grassy area adjacent to the stadium). As consideration for the lease, the lessee will be required to make annual capital improvements, pay VA fair market annual rent, and allow VA to use the stadium at no cost for mission-related events at least 5 times annually during the lease term. The value of the consideration meets or exceeds the net present value of the property to be leased.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Edward Bradley, Office of Asset Enterprise Management (044C), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-7778 (this is not a toll-free number).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Title 38 U.S.C. 8161                     *et seq.*                     states that the Secretary may enter into an enhanced-use lease if he determines that implementation of a business plan proposed by the Under Secretary for Health for applying the consideration under such a lease for the provision of medical care and services would result in a demonstrable improvement of services to eligible veterans in the geographic service-delivery area within which the property is located. This project meets this requirement.                

      ( print page 51557)    
Approved: July 17, 2008.

James B. Peake,

Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

[FR Doc. E8-20373 Filed 9-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
Supreme Court of Florida

____________

No. SC17-552

____________

CARL PUIATTI, 

Appellant,

vs.

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee.

[January 23, 2018]

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Carl Puiatti’s appeal of the circuit court’s order denying 

Puiatti’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This 

Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. 

Puiatti’s motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s 

decision in Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and our decision on remand in 

Hurst v. State (Hurst), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 2161 

(2017). This Court stayed Puiatti’s appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v. 

State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017). After this 
- 2 -

Court decided Hitchcock, Puiatti responded to this Court’s order to show cause 

arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Puiatti’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the 

State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Puiatti is not entitled to relief. Puiatti 

was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 

eleven to one. Puiatti v. State, 495 So. 2d 128, 130 (Fla. 1986). Puiatti’s sentence 

of death became final in 1988. Puiatti v. Florida, 488 U.S. 871 (1988). Thus, 

Hurst does not apply retroactively to Puiatti’s sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 

226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Puiatti’s motion.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Puiatti, we 

caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so 

ordered.

LABARGA, C.J., and POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

QUINCE, J., recused.

PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.

I concur in result because I recognize that this Court’s opinion in Hitchcock 

v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), is now 

final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting 

opinion in Hitchcock.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Pasco County, 
- 3 -

Pat Edward Siracusa, Jr., Judge - Case No. 511983CF001383CFBXWS

Ardith Michelle Bronson, DLA Piper, LLP, Miami, Florida, and Adamn B. Banks, 

Miranda S. Schiller, and Steven A. Reiss, Weil, Gotshal, & Manges, New York, 

New York,

for Appellant

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Scott A. Browne, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tampa, Florida,

for Appellee
Exhibit 1051(a)



		

			 

		


		

			 

		


		

			 

		


		

			Exhibit 10.51

		




		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			PERFORMANCE-BASED SHARE UNIT GRANT
		

		
			 
		

		
			February 27, 2014
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Dear:
		

		
			 
		

		
			Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Aqua America Inc. 2009 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan, as amended and restated (the “Plan”), you have been granted performance-based share units as outlined below and in the attached Performance-Based Share Unit Grant Terms and Conditions.
		

		
			 
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						Granted To:

					
					
						Nicholas DeBenedictis

				
	
					
						Grant Date:

					
					
						February 27, 2014

				
	
					
						Target Award:

					
					
						xxxxxxx shares

				
	
					
						Vesting Date:

					
					
						June 30, 2015

				
	
					
						Performance Period:

					
					
						Period beginning on January 1, 2014 and ending on December 31, 2016

				
	
					
						Vesting Schedule and 

					
						Performance Goals:  

					
					
						The Target Award is subject to vesting based on continued service and achievement of performance goals, as set forth in the Performance-Based Share Unit Grant Terms and Conditions, including Schedule A attached thereto.

				



		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			By my signature below, I hereby acknowledge and accept the award of this Performance-Based Share Unit Grant and the Performance-Based Share Unit Grant Terms and Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein, and I agree to be bound by the terms of the Performance-Based Share Unit Grant, the Performance-Based Share Unit Grant Terms and Conditions and the Plan.  I hereby agree that all decisions and determinations of the Committee (as defined in the Plan) with respect to the performance-based share units shall be final and binding.


Signature: ________________________________________    Date: __________________________
		

		 


		

			Note: If there are any discrepancies in the name or address shown above, please make the appropriate corrections on this form.

		


		

			CEO PSU Grant
Exhibit 32.1





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 Focus Gold Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending February 28, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 13, 2011 (the “Report”), I, Grant R. White, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and




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




/s/ Grant R. WhiteGrant R. WhiteChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial OfficerJune 13, 2011




A signed original of this certification 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.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

THE UNKNOWN HEIRS, DEVISES, GRANTEES, ASSIGNEES, 

CREDITORS, LEINORS AND TRUSTEES OF MARILYN ANN MASCOLO 

a/k/a MARILYN A. MASCOLO, DECEASED, AND ANY OTHER 

PERSONS CLAIMING BY, THROUGH, UNDER AND AGAINST THE 

NAMED DEFENDANT, WAYNE A. MASCOLO, AS SUCCESSOR 

TRUSTEE OF THE MARILYN ANN MASCOLO FAMILY TRUST 

AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 13, 2011, and DONNA MARIE MASCOLO,

Appellants,

v.

WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, d/b/a CHRISTIANA 

TRUST, NOT INDIVIDUALLY BUT AS TRUSTEE FOR PRETIUM 

MORTGAGE ACQUISITION TRUST,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-3403

[June 20, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Barry J. Stone, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. 

062013CA019879.

Bruce K. Herman of The Herman Law Group, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellant.

Adam J. Knight and Jacqueline Simms-Petredis of Burr & Forman, LLP, 

Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY and FORST, JJ. and SASSER, MEENU, Associate Judge, concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**THE PENN TRAFFIC COMPANY**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of The Penn Traffic Company (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the fiscal year ending April 29, 2006, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Tod A. Nestor, Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

# (1)     The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

#  

# (2)     The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/  Tod A. Nestor                                 |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Tod  A. Nestor                                     |
| Senior  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|                                               |
| May 14, 2008                             |

 

1

----