alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.5


 


Amendment No. 1
to


Amended and Restated

Employment Agreement


 


This Amendment No. 1 (the
 "Amendment"), to the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated April 3, 2019, by and among Sterling Bancorp,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), Sterling National Bank, a national banking association organized and existing
under the laws of the United States of America (the "Bank" and, together with the Company, "Sterling"),
and James Blose ("Executive") (the "Agreement") is made and entered into as of December 15, 2021,
to be effective on January 1, 2022 (the "Effective Date").


 


WHEREAS, the Company,
the Bank and Executive desire to amend the Agreement to extend the term of the Executive's employment with the Company and the Bank on
the Effective Date for a period of one year.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and obligations hereinafter set forth, the Company, the Bank and Executive hereby
agree as follows:


 


1.       
Section 2(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended as follows:


 


2.       Employment
Period.


 


(a)       Duration.
Executive's period of employment with Sterling under this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall continue until December
31, 2022 (or, if a Change in Control (as defined below) occurs prior to such anniversary, the second anniversary of the date of the Change
in Control, if later), unless terminated prior thereto by either Sterling or Executive in accordance with Section 6 hereof (such
period of employment being the "Employment Period").


 


2.       Except
as expressly stated herein, this Amendment does not amend or otherwise modify any of the terms or conditions of the Agreement, which shall
remain in full force and effect pursuant to its terms. Any terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Agreement.
To the extent applicable, each Party hereby represents and warrants that its respective signatory has been and is on the date of this
Amendment duly authorized by all necessary corporate action to execute this Amendment.


 


3.       This
Amendment may be executed in a number of identical counterparts, which, taken together, shall constitute collectively one and the same
agreement.


 





[Signature Page Follows]


 




     


     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the Company and the Bank have caused this Agreement to be executed and Executive has hereunto set his hand, all as of the Effective Date
specified above.


 


























	 	STERLING BANCORP
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Jack L. Kopnisky
	 		Name: Jack L. Kopnisky
	 		Title: President and Chief Executive Officer



 


	 	STERLING NATIONAL BANK
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Jack L. Kopnisky
	 		Name: Jack L. Kopnisky
	 		Title:  Chief Executive Officer



 


	 	EXECUTIVE
	 	 
	 	/s/ James Blose
	 	James Blose
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dynacq Healthcare, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended November 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Chiu M. Chan, Chief Executive 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, 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 10, 2008



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Chiu M. Chan       
|Chiu M. Chan           
|Chief Executive Officer

This certification is made solely pursuant to the requirement of Section 1350 of 18 U.S.C., and is not for
any other purpose.
Exhibit 24

POWER OF ATTORNEY

The undersigned directors of Magna Entertainment Corp. (the "Company") hereby appoint Michael A. Neuman, Chief Executive Officer, Blake S. Tohana,
Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer, and William G. Ford, Legal Counsel, as their true and lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power for and on
their behalf to execute, in their names and capacities as directors of the Company, and to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission on behalf of the Company under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, an Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 (including any and all amendments thereto).

This
Power of Attorney automatically ends upon the termination of Mr. Neuman's, Mr. Tohana's and Mr. Ford's service with the Company.

In
witness whereof, the undersigned have executed this Power of Attorney on this 14th day of March, 2007.

|/s/JERRY D. CAMPBELLJerry D. Campbell |  | /s/JOSEPH DE FRANCISJoseph De Francis
|------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|/s/LOUIS E. LATAIFLouis E. Lataif     |  | /s/WILLIAM J. MENEARWilliam J. Menear
|/s/DENNIS MILLSDennis Mills           |  | /s/MICHAEL A. NEUMANMichael A. Neuman
|/s/FRANK STRONACHFrank Stronach       |  | /s/CHARLIE WILLIAMSCharlie Williams  

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 99.5





                                                      Our ref  Exhibit 99.5.doc4

The Directors
Crusade Management Limited
Level 4
4-16 Montgomery Street
Kogarah NSW 2217


24 March, 2004



Dear Sirs

CRUSADE GLOBAL TRUSTS

This consent is given by KPMG concerning the submission of the 20F report to the
SEC for the year ended 30 September 2003 in respect of Crusade Global Trust No.1
of 1999,  Crusade  Global Trust No.1 of 2001,  Crusade Global Trust No.2 of 2001
and Crusade Global Trust No.1 of 2002.

KPMG consents to its custodial  agreed upon  procedures  reports,  dated 8 April
2003, in respect of the Crusade Global Trust No.1 of 1999,  Crusade Global Trust
No.1 of 2001, Crusade Global Trust No.2 of 2001 and Crusade Global Trust No.1 of
2002, being included in the submission of the 20F report.


Yours faithfully

/s/ Andrew Yates


Andrew Yates
Partner
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1942-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of North Carolina (FEMA-1942-DR), dated October 14, 2010, and related determinations.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         October 19, 2010.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of North Carolina is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of October 14, 2010.

Brunswick, Jones, Pender, and Pitt Counties for Individual Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2010-26844 Filed 10-22-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### ANTHONY W. CASTALDO v. UNION COUNTY REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, UNION COUNTY.

November 10, 1986.

Petition for certification denied.
# Sitemap

## December 28, 2012

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2012
- 12
- December 28, 2012

            - Spiral Galaxy NGC 3627
            - Spiral Galaxy NGC 3627
            - Hubble Eyes a Wanderer Dancing the Dance of Stars and Space
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JOHN SANDERS.

April 28, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

DAVID ENGELMAN

, * No. 15

- 89 3V

* Special Master Christian J. Moran

Petitioner, *

*

v. *

* Filed: June 1 3 , 2016

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Stipulation; Influenza (“Flu”) vaccine;

* GBS.

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Diana S

. Sedar

, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA

, Sarasota, FL

, for Petitioner;

Douglas Ross , U.S. Dep ’ t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION 1

On June 9, 2016 , the parties filed a joint stipulation concerning the petition

for compensation filed by David Engelman on August 18, 2015 . In h is petition,

petitioner alleged that the influenza (“flu”) vaccine, which is contained in the

Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 2 42 C .F.R. §100.3(a), and which David

Engelman received on or about September 24 , 201 3 , caused him to suffer injuries,

Guilla in

- Barre Syndrome (GBS), with residual effects lasting more than six

months. Petitioner represents that there has been no prior award or settlement of a

civil action for damages on his b ehalf as a result of his condition.

1 T he E

- Government Act

, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and

Promotion of Electronic Government Services) , requires that the Court post this decision on its

website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing

redaction of medical informati on or other information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 12(d)(4).

Any redactions ordered by the special master will appear in the document posted on the website.

2 Except the typhoid vaccine, which is not covered by the Vaccine Injury Table.2

Respondent denies that the flu v accine that petitioner received caused

petitioner’s GBS

, any other injury

, or his condition

.

Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as

Appendix A. The undersigned finds said stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the

decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

Damages award ed in that stipulation include:

A lump sum payment of $ 7 5,000.00 in the form of a check p aya ble to

petitioner, David Engelma n . This amount represents compensation for

all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(a).

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC, Appendix B,

the clerk is directed to enter judgment in cas e 15

- 89 3 V according to this decision

and the attached stipulation. 3

Any questions may be directed to my law clerk

, Dan Hoffman , at (202) 357

-

6 360

.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master

3 Pursuant t o Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each

party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal

Claims judge.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6029

JAMES CECIL MITCHELL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

FRANKLIN E. FREEMAN, JR.; PHYLLIS ELLIOT;

SAMUEL MCCABE; MOHAMMAD BALOCH, Medical

Director,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District

Judge. (CA-94-658-5-BO)

Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 2, 1996

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Cecil Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se. David L. Woodard, NORTH

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Mitchell v. Freeman, No. CA-94-658-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Nov. 29,

1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Tipton *v.*Barron.—In error.

*Tuesday, June*4.

IN a suit against *A.*and B., the plaintiff, pursuant to the statute, entered a suggestion of “not found” as to *B.*After-wards both the defendants appeared and filed a general demurrer to the declaration. • *Held,*that the Court, on overruling'the demurrer in such case, should render judgment against both the defendants.
EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF ATLAS PIPELINE PARTNERS, L.P.



|                                           |  |             
|------------------------------------------ |  | ------------
|Name                                       |  | Jurisdiction
|Atlas Pipeline Operating Partnership, L.P. |  | Delaware    
|APL Laurel Mountain, LLC                   |  | Delaware    
|APC Acquisition, LLC                       |  | Delaware    
|Atlas Pipeline Tennessee, LLC              |  | Pennsylvania
|Setting Sun Pipeline Corporation           |  | Delaware    
|Atlas Pipeline Mid-Continent LLC           |  | Delaware    
|Saddleback Pipeline, LLC                   |  | Delaware    
|Slider WestOk Gathering, LLC               |  | Delaware    
|Atlas Pipeline Finance Corp.               |  | Delaware    
|NOARK Energy Services, LLC                 |  | Oklahoma    
|Atlas Pipeline Mid-Continent WestOk, LLC   |  | Delaware    
|Atlas Pipeline Mid-Continent WestTex, LLC  |  | Delaware    
|Atlas Chaney Dell, LLC                     |  | Delaware    
|Atlas Midkiff, LLC                         |  | Delaware
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.
 Federal Maritime Commission
 Notice is hereby given that the following Ocean Transportation Intermediary licenses have been reissued by the Federal Maritime Commission pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. chapter 409) and the regulations of the 
                    ( print page 65017)
                    Commission pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR part 515. License No.
Name/Address
Date reissued016727NF
Cargo Express (Saipan), Inc., Chalan Kiya Industrial Center, P.O. Box 7447 SVRB, Saipan, MP 96950
August 25, 2010.019428N
Delta Trans Logistics, Inc.,  15522 Broadway Center Street, Gardena, CA 90248
August 20, 2010.020883NF
Masters Shipping Inc., 12520 Lombard Lane, Alsip, IL 60803
August 22, 2010.020634NF
Sofilink Continental, Inc., 6313 NW 99th Avenue, Miami, FL 33178
September 23, 2010021503F
Global Cargo Group, Inc., dba GCI Logistics,  9300 NW 25th Street, Suite 104, Miami, FL 33172
August 30, 2010.021953F
Express Shipping Company of Illinois, 670 E. Northwest Hwy, 2nd FL., Arlington Heights, IL 60004
September 2, 2010.022260N
EJ Logistic Inc., 2500 NW 79th Avenue, Suite 200, Miami, FL 33122
August 26, 2010.
 Sandra L. Kusumoto, Director, Bureau of Certification and Licensing.


[FR Doc. 2010-26431 Filed 10-20-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7684** 

MATTHEW L. SINGLETARY , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. ANTHONY J. PADULA, Warden , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence
. Richard M
. Gergel , District Judge. ( 4:11

- cv - 00512

- RMG )

Submitted : January 9, 2013 Decided: January 31, 2013

Before WYNN, DIAZ , and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Matthew L. Singletary, Appellant Pro Se. Brendan McDonald, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent i n this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Matthew L. Singletary seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit ju stice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (A) (2006) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the distri ct court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (200 0); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Singletary has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Singletary’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
Exhibit 31.3
I, John A. Betts, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Centrue FinancialCorporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  b) [intentionally omitted]  c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.   Date: May 12, 2004 /s/ John A. Betts   John A. Betts Corporate Controller