alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.5.3

                The Third Amendment to the Employment Agreement


This Third Amendment dated October 16, 1997 is made between Madison River
Telephone Company, LLC ("Holdings") and J. Stephen Vanderwoude, ("Executive")
pursuant to paragraph 11 of the Employment Agreement between Holdings and
Executive dated April 17, 1996 ("Employment Agreement").

1.   Section 3.1 of the Employment Agreement shall be amended by inserting the
     following after the first full sentence:

         "Notwithstanding the foregoing, the closing of MebCom Communications,
         Inc. shall not be considered the first acquisition and its closing date
         shall not be considered the First Acquisition Closing Date for purposes
         of paragraph 2 (Term of Employment), this paragraph 3 (Compensation)
         and paragraph 6 (Termination of Employment)."

2.   Section 8, third sentence shall be amended by replacing the place of
     arbitration submission from "Chicago, Illinois" to "Raleigh-Durham
     metropolitan area of North Carolina" and by replacing the language "in
     accordance with Illinois law" with "in accordance with Delaware law".

All other provisions of the Employment Agreement remain in full force and
effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Executive and Holdings have caused this Second Amendment to
the Employment Agreement to be executed as of the date first written above.


                         Madison River Telephone Company, LLC


                         by: PAUL H. SUNU
                            --------------------------


                             J. STHEPHEN VANDERWOUDE
                         -----------------------------
                         Executive
#### In the Matter of Eric Enriquez, Petitioner, v Donald Selsky, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

[744 NYS2d 910]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services *752which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting participation in unauthorized organizational activities. The determination has now been administratively reversed and all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional records. Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and is no longer aggrieved, the matter is dismissed as moot *(see, Matter of Curtis v Goord,*274 AD2d 808; *Matter of Maldonado v Miller,*259 AD2d 912).

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
Order entered June 21, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-01011-CR

JACOLBY MARQUAN HILL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F17-75383-I

ORDER

Before the Court is the State’s June 20, 2019 second motion to extend the time to file its 

brief. The State has tendered its brief with the motion. We GRANT the motion and ORDER 

the State’s brief filed as of the date of this order.

/s/ CORY L. CARLYLE 

JUSTICE
#### Stephen Patti et al., Respondents, v New York City Transit Authority, Appellant.

[745 NYS2d 558]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bruno, J.), dated May 1, 2001, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

This case involves a head-on collision between the plaintiffs automobile, which was traveling southbound on Coney Island Avenue in Brooklyn, and a bus owned by the defendant, New York City Transit Authority, which was facing northbound on Coney Island Avenue, waiting to make a left turn onto Avenue I. According to the bus driver’s deposition testimony, the plaintiffs vehicle suddenly crossed over into the northbound left-turn lane, striking the bus head-on. The plaintiff had no recollection of how the accident occurred, claiming that he suffered from amnesia as a result of the injuries he sustained. However, during his deposition, the plaintiff testified that he was in the southbound lane immediately before the collision. The Supreme Court denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment because of the conflicting accounts of the circumstances immediately before the accident. We reverse.

The defendant made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law based upon the bus driver’s unrefuted deposition testimony that the plaintiffs vehicle crossed over into the wrong direction of traffic *(see Browne v Castillo,*288 AD2d 415; *Mehring v Cahill,*271 AD2d 415). Since the plaintiff did not recall how the accident occurred, his deposition testimony was insufficient to refute the bus driver’s account of the incident or to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Bentley v Moore,*251 AD2d 612, 613; *Williams v Econ,*221 AD2d 429). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the defendant’s motion. Smith, J.P., O’Brien, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Markem-Imaje Corporation 

v. Civil No. 09-cv-99-JL 

Does 1-100 

O R D E R 

On July 13, 2009, the plaintiff was granted an extension of time to November 15, 2009 to file 

proof of service on defendants. To date, no return of service has been filed. 

It is herewith ordered, that either a return of service or motion to extend time be filed by 

November 24, 2009 or the case will be dismissed without prejudice. 

SO ORDERED. 

(/K- /^Y/<££&~ 

November 18, 2009 

Joseph N. Laplante 

United States District Judge 

cc: Christopher Kaczmarek, Esq. 

Case 1:09-cv-00099-JL Document 5 Filed 11/18/09 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit32.1**

 

CertificatePursuant to

18U.S.C. Section 1350

asAdopted Pursuant to

Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with the Report of AccessAnytime Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period endedSeptember 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof  (the “Report”), I, Norman R.Corzine, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1. The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange 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.

 
| Date: November 10,  2005 | /s/ Norman R. Corzine                     |
|-------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|                          | Norman R. Corzine, Chairman of the Board, |
|                          | Chief Executive Officer                   |
|                          | *(Principal Executive Officer)*           |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01948-BNB-CBS

KATHRYN KIPLING,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, d/b/a Minnesota

Division of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,

Defendant.

ORDER

______________________________________________________________________________

The parties appeared this morning for a status conference. Consistent with matters

discussed there:

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) The case schedule is modified to the following extent:

Discovery Cut-Off: February 28, 2013.

(All discovery must be completed by the discovery cut-off. All

written discovery must be served so that responses are due on or

before the discovery cut-off.)

Remaining Discovery is limited to the following: 

5 depositions per side;

10 interrogatories per side; and

15 requests for production per side.

 

Expert Disclosures:

The defendant shall designate all rebuttal experts

and provide opposing counsel with all information

specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) on or before

Case 1:11-cv-01948-BNB-CBS Document 57 Filed 11/29/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

January 31, 2013.

(2) A final pretrial conference will be held in this case on March 25, 2013, at 8:30

a.m., in Courtroom 401, 4th floor, Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street,

Denver, Colorado. A Final Pretrial Order shall be prepared by the parties and submitted to the

court no later than March 18, 2013.

(3) A four day jury trial is set for May 13-16, 2013, in Courtroom 401, 4th floor,

Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado. Trial days

commence at 8:30 a.m., and run until 5:00 p.m.

Dated November 29, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Boyd N. Boland 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-01948-BNB-CBS Document 57 Filed 11/29/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 24(b)


                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



As independent accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our report
included in this Form 10-K into the Company's previously filed Registration
Statements on Form S-8 for the Anuhco, Inc. 1992 Incentive Stock Plan, File No.
33-51494, the American Carriers, Inc. 1983 Incentive Stock Option Plan, File No.
2-86915 and the Stock Option Agreement by and between Anuhco, Inc. and C. Ted
McCarter, effective May 31, 1995, File No. 33-62553.





                                    /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

                                    ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



Kansas City, Missouri

March 11, 1997
Case 1:11-cr-00360-WJM Document 73 Filed 04/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7
Case 1:11-cr-00360-WJM Document 73 Filed 04/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 7
Case 1:11-cr-00360-WJM Document 73 Filed 04/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 7
Case 1:11-cr-00360-WJM Document 73 Filed 04/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 7
Case 1:11-cr-00360-WJM Document 73 Filed 04/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 7
Case 1:11-cr-00360-WJM Document 73 Filed 04/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 7
Case 1:11-cr-00360-WJM Document 73 Filed 04/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02370-CMA-MJW

K-BEECH, INC.,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

JOHN DOE,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant John Doe’s Motion to Quash or Modify

Subpoena (docket no 21) is DENIED. In the subject motion (docket no. 21), Defendant

John Doe is simply denying any infringement which is not a basis for quashing a

subpoena. See Voltage Pictures, LLC v. Does 1-5,00, 2011 WL 1807438, 79 Fed. R.

Serv. 3d 891 (D.D.C. 2011). 

Date: February 22, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02370-CMA-MJW Document 25 Filed 02/22/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Robert Crisafi, Defendant.

County Court, Niagara County,

February 18, 1957.

*John V. Simon*for defendant.

*William H. Earl*for plaintiff.

Frank J. Kronenberg, J.

Defendant applies for resentence, having previously been sentenced as a second felony offender.

The first felony was committed in the State of Ohio and sentence thereon was suspended by the Ohio court.

Under these circumstances, it was held in *People*v. *Hunter*(3 Misc 2d 1032) that the prior felony may not be charged by way of information under section 1943 of the Penal Law but must be charged by indictment pursuant to section 470-b of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the instant case, the procedure was pursuant to the Penal Law.

Defendant further correctly contends that the conviction in Ohio was for the crime of grand larceny which as defined by the statutes of that State, would not necessarily constitute a felony as defined by the statutes in New York. The records from Ohio appear somewhat confused and the court is not convinced that the conviction was for anything other than grand larceny.

Accordingly the sentence must be vacated and defendant resentenced as a first offender.
FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EDWARD HAROLD SCHAD,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

CHARLES L. RYAN, Director,

Arizona Department of Corrections,

Respondent-Appellee.

No. 13-16895

D.C. No.

2:97-cv-02577-

ROS

ORDER

Filed October 7, 2013

Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Stephen Reinhardt,

and Susan P. Graber, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

Judge Schroeder and Judge Graber have voted to deny the

petition for panel rehearing and to deny the motion for a stay

of execution. Judge Reinhardt voted to grant the petition for

panel rehearing and to grant the motion for a stay of

execution. Accordingly, the petition for panel rehearing and

the motion for a stay of execution are denied.
#### In the Matter of Deborah R. Kenneally, an Attorney, Respondent. Committee on Professional Standards, Petitioner.

[744 NYS2d 724]

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice as an attorney by this Court in 1987 and maintained a law office in the City of Albany.

Respondent has failed to comply with a subpoena duces tecum issued by this Court which directed her to appear on May 28, 2002 for an examination under oath by petitioner and produce relevant files with respect to 23 client inquiries. Re*653spondent has further failed to reply to petitioner’s instant motion to indefinitely suspend respondent from practice pending her compliance with the subpoena *(see,*22 NYCRR 806.4 [b]). Under such circumstances, we exercise our discretion and grant petitioner’s motion *(see, e.g., Matter of Farrington,*257 AD2d 914).

Crew III, J.P., Spain, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is suspended from practice pending her full compliance with the subpoena duces tecum dated May 14, 2002, effective 20 days from the date of this decision and order, and until further order of this Court; and it is further ordered that for the period of her suspension respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; she is forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority or to give to another any opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provision of this Court’s rules *(see,*22 NYCRR 806.9) regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of New generation Holdings, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
Scherne, interim 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, to my
knowledge 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/ Robert Scherne
                                       -------------------------------
                                       Robert Scherne
                                       Chief Financial Officer

                                       January 5, 2007
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00363-WYD

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. AXIS LABS, LLC.,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER

ORDER ENTERED BY CHIEF JUDGE WILEY Y. DANIEL

Due to the parties’ indication that they will be filing a Notice of Disposition in this

case, a Change of Plea Hearing is SET for Thursday, October 13, 2011, at 4:00 p.m.

in Courtroom A-1002.

Counsel for the parties shall deliver all change of plea documents

separately to Judge Daniel’s chambers AND to the Probation Department not later

than 72 HOURS before the hearing date. If the documents are not timely submitted,

the hearing will be vacated. There will be no exceptions to this policy.

Dated: September 7, 2011.

Case 1:11-cr-00363-WYD Document 5 Filed 09/07/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 11.1



                     INTEGRAL SYSTEMS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                Three Months Ended                           Twelve Months Ended
                                                   September 30,                                September 30,
Basic:                                      1999                  1998                    1999                 1998
                                     -----------------     -----------------       -----------------     ---------------
<S>                                    <C>                   <C>                     <C>                   <C>
Weighted average number of
 common shares                               7,152,991             5,834,184               6,319,090           5,793,433

Net income                                  $1,356,145            $  312,968              $3,715,847          $1,909,026
Earnings per share                          $     0.19            $     0.05              $      .59          $      .33

Diluted:
Weighted average number of
 common shares                               7,681,158             6,330,166               6,772,601           6,232,933
Net income                                  $1,356,145            $  312,968              $3,715,847          $1,909,026
Earnings per share                          $     0.18            $     0.05              $      .55          $      .31
</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 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 TBC Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period
ended December 31, 2004, as amended, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas W. Garvey, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
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 results of operations of the Company. April 28, 2005
    By       /s/ Thomas W. GarveyThomas W. GarveyExecutive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer  (principal
financial and accounting officer) 54
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)




In
connection with the Annual Report of Shuffle Master, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-K for the period ended October 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Mark L. Yoseloff, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
section 1350), that to the best of my 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 the
      Company.







January
      14, 2009/s/ MARK L. YOSELOFFMark
      L. YoseloffChief
      Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In re Keith Chamnaene Case No . 08-mc-020-GZS

ORDE R

On Tuesday, April 1, 2008, Keith Champagne was subpoenaed to appear and testify in

the case ofUnited States v. Daniel Riley, et al. , 07-cr-189-GZS . After the court conducted an

initial colloquy regarding the potential of incriminating himself should he testify, Mr .

Champagne invoked his fifth amendment right to counsel . Based on the information known, it

was presumed that Mr. Champagne was a financially eligible person entitled to court appointed

counsel pursuant to 18 U .S .C. § 3006A. Thus, based on this presumption of indigency, and

finding that the interests of justice so require, the court appointed Douglas J . Miller to represent

and advise Mr. Champagne during the course of the trial .

SO ORDERED.

Date: April 9, 200 8

cc : Counsel of Record

Douglas J. Miller, Esq.

Keith Champagne

Case 1:08-mc-00020-GZS Document 1 Filed 04/10/08 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 23.1


                         CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP


 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statements
 (Forms S-8 Nos.  33-64403, 33-64405, and  33-55920) pertaining  to the  1995
 Management Compensation  Plan of  Carrington  Laboratories, Inc.,  the  1995
 Stock Option  Plan (as  amended May  16, 2002)  of Carrington  Laboratories,
 Inc., and the Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Carrington Laboratories, Inc.,
 respectively, of our report dated February 28, 2003, except for Note Fifteen
 as to which the  date is March  10, 2003, with  respect to the  consolidated
 financial statements  and  schedule  of Carrington  Laboratories,  Inc.  and
 subsidiaries included in their Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year  ended
 December 31, 2002 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.




 Dallas, Texas                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
 March 28, 2003