alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Zachariah Bates et al *v.*John Bates et al.

Gift — Undue Influence — Deed.

A deed by a grantor to three of his children, and to the exclusion of others, executed during the life of the deceased, and at a time when in full control of his mental faculties, and in accordance with an oft expressed desire, will be held binding, though it cover all the property of the grantor.

APPEAL FROM HENRY CIRCUIT COURT.

September 23, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

At the date of the contested instrument, it is certainly true, that John Bates, Senr. was in the habit of indulging in the use of intoxicating liquors to very great excess; but it appears from the evidence of both the attesting witnesses to the instrument, that when he executed and acknowledged the same, he was sober, or sufficiently so to understand thoroughly the business he was engaged in, and to comprehend the effect and consequences of his action when consummated. When he first applied to Thomas to prepare the deed, he was warned by him to reflect about what he contemplated doing, that he would thereby deprive himself of his property, and when done, he could never undo it, to think of it until after dinner; and if he then determined to make the deed, to return and he would prepare it for him; he left and was absent an hour or two, then returned, and told Thomas to prepare the deed, for he would make it, and Thomas wrote it, and Bates executed and acknowledged it before 'him, he then being the clerk of the Henry county court.

But the deed was not the offspring of a day’s reflection and a hasty conclusion. Thomas testifies that on several occasions when he had met the grantor, he told him that he intended to convey his land to his three younger sons, and he wanted him to write the deed, and other witnesses testify that he had at divers times and in their presence expressed his determination to convey his land to his three younger sons. So that the conveyance was the com*236pletion of a fixed and pre-determined purpose of John Bates, Senr., often expressed, and which in view of his dissipated habits and the wasting of his estate consequent thereon, may not have béen an imprudent nor unwise act. At all events, the evidence falls far short of establishing the want of sufficient intellect on the part of the grantor at the time, to make the deed, nor was he incapacitated by drunkenness. And there is no evidence whatever that the deed,.is not precisely as he intended it should be. He expressed no intention of making provision for his other children to the draftsman, at the time, or to any others before.

*Pryor & Barbour, for appellants.*

Drane, *for appellees.*

Upon a careful review of all the evidence in the case, none is found which furnishes the slightest reason for setting aside the deed.

Wherefore, the judgment dismissing the original petition, and the cross-petition with costs, is *affirmed.*
**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 Imagin Molecular Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      Corey N. Conn, as Chief Financial Officer hereby certifies, 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), as
      applicable 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.







Dated:
                August 13, 2007
            
            /s/
                Corey N. ConnCorey
                N. ConnChief
                Financial Officer







A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Imagin Molecular Corporation and will be retained by Imagin Molecular
      Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff
      upon request.
#### EDWARD BROWN v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES.

September 6, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

 

 Before the Court is Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Stay (Doc. 14), in which 

counsel seek this case be stayed pending a ruling on the Motion to Transfer and 

Consolidate by the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation In re Clean 

Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States,” MDL No. 2663 (J.P.M.L.). 

Having considered this request, 

 IT IS ORDERED: 

1. That the Motion to Stay (Doc. 14) is granted; and 

2. That counsel shall file a joint status report no later than October 9, 2015, or 

within 30 days of the date of the United States Judicial Panel’s disposition, whichever is 

earlier. 

 Dated this 11th day of September, 2015.

Honorable Steven P. Logan

United States District Judge

Arizona Mining Association, et al., 

 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

United States Environmental 

Protection Agency, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

No. CV-15-01752-PHX-SPL

ORDER 

Case 2:15-cv-01752-SPL Document 16 Filed 09/11/15 Page 1 of 1
Document

Exhibit 10.1

AMENDMENT OF THE
OLD NATIONAL BANCORP AMENDED AND RESTATED 2008 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN (AMENDED AND RESTATED AS OF MAY 10, 2012, AND FURTHER AMENDED AND RESTATED AS OF APRIL 27, 2017)
WHEREAS, Old National Bancorp, an Indiana corporation (the “Company”), established and sponsors the Old National Bancorp Amended and Restated 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan (Amended and Restated as of May 10, 2012, and Further Amended and Restated as of April 27, 2017) (the “Plan”);
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14.01 of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) reserved the right to amend the Plan at any time; and
WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan to correct an inadvertent error in the Plan’s definition of “Effective Date.”
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the power reserved by Section 14.01 of the Plan, the Board amends the Plan as follows, subject to and effective upon approval by the Company’s shareholders at the Annual Meeting to be held on April 29, 2021 (the “2021 Annual Meeting”).  Defined terms used herein, but not otherwise defined in this 2021 Amendment, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Plan:
1.    Section 2.01(p) containing the definition of “Effective Date” is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows in order to correct an inadvertent error in the Plan when last approved by the shareholders in 2017, which amendment, if approved by the shareholders at the 2021 Annual Meeting, shall be effective retroactively to April 27, 2017: 
“(p) ‘Effective Date’ means April 27, 2017”
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this 2021 Amendment, having been first duly authorized, approved and adopted by the Company’s Board of Directors, and approved by the Company’s shareholders at the 2021 Annual Meeting, is hereby executed below by a duly authorized officer of the Company on this 29th day of April, 2021.
OLD NATIONAL BANCORP
By: /s/ Jeffrey L. Knight
       Jeffrey L. Knight
       Executive Vice President
       Chief Legal Counsel & Corporate Secretary
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Alejandra Ruiz, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Experian Information Solutions 

Incorporated, 

Defendant.

No. CV-15-01996-PHX-JAT

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation for a protective order (Doc. 

27). The parties seek a protective order for anything that contains “confidential 

commercial or financial information or trade secret information to which they in good 

faith believe access should be limited to litigation counsel....” Doc. 27-1 at 3. 

 Global protective orders are not appropriate. See AGA Shareholders, LLC v. CSK 

Auto, Inc., 2007 WL 4225450, at *1 (D. Ariz. Nov. 28, 2007). Rule 26(c) requires a party 

seeking a protective order to show good cause for issuance of such an order. Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 26(c)(1). “For good cause to exist under Rule 26(c), ‘the party seeking protection bears 

the burden of showing specific prejudice or harm will result if no protective order is 

granted.’” AGA Shareholders, 2007 WL 4225450, at *1 (emphasis added) (quoting 

Phillips v. G.M. Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002)). The party seeking 

protection “must make a ‘particularized showing of good cause with respect to [each] 

individual document.’” Id. (emphasis added) (quoting San Jose Mercury News, Inc. v. 

U.S. Dist. Ct., 187 F.3d 1096, 1102 (9th Cir. 1999)). 

Case 2:15-cv-01996-JAT Document 28 Filed 04/08/16 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 Thus, “[t]he burden is on the party to requesting a protective order to demonstrate 

that (1) the material in question is a trade secret or other confidential information within 

the scope of Rule 26(c), and (2) disclosure would cause an identifiable, significant harm.” 

Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir. 2003) (quoting 

Deford v. Schmid Prods. Co., 120 F.R.D. 648, 653 (D. Md. 1987)). 

 In this case, the parties have failed to make a particularized showing justifying a 

protective order. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that the stipulation for a protective order (Doc. 27) is denied, 

without prejudice. 

 Dated this 8th day of April, 2016. 

Case 2:15-cv-01996-JAT Document 28 Filed 04/08/16 Page 2 of 2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

, Justices

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.

_________________________________________ Clerk January 25, 2013

h0122 

# Order

January 25, 2013

145192(38)

EASTBROOK HOMES, INC.,

Petitioner

- Appellant,

v SC: 145192

COA: 299612

Michigan Tax Tribunal:

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, 00

- 359471

Respondent

- Appellee.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s November 7,

2012 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was

entered erroneously.
----

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.333-100329 on Form S-8 of our report (which audit report expresses anunqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph referring to ourconsideration of internal control over financial reporting) dated March 17, 2006on the consolidated financial statements of Zi Corporation appearing in thisAnnual Report on Form 20-F of Zi Corporation for the year ended December 31,2005. 

| */s/ Deloitte & Touche, LLP*                |
|-------------------------------------------------|
|                                            |
| Deloitte & Touche, LLP                      |
|                                            |
| Independent Registered Chartered    Accountants |
| Calgary, Alberta, Canada                        |
| March 31, 2006                                  |

----
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Mark A. Garcia","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/markagarcia\/","title":"Expedition 57 Image Gallery","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"tgljjnYHHK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/expedition-57-image-gallery\/\">Expedition 57 Image Gallery<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/expedition-57-image-gallery\/embed\/#?secret=tgljjnYHHK\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Expedition 57 Image Gallery” — NASA\" data-secret=\"tgljjnYHHK\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/a-security-helicopter-team-surveys-the-train-tracks-45207534921-o.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":437}
Letter of confirmation



 
EXHIBIT 4.11

[P&O Princess Cruises plc Letterhead] 
 
Deutsche Seereederei GmbH 
Am Seehafen 
18147 Rostock 
Germany 
 
12 March 2003 
 
Dear Sirs 
 
Aida Cruises Sale and Purchase Agreement 
 
This letter relates to the agreement entered into on 25 September 2000 between P&O Princess Cruises plc (substituted for The Peninsular and Oriental Steam
Navigation Company on 23 October 2000), P&O Princess Cruises International Limited (substituted for ACL Limited on 31 October 2001) and Arkona Touristik GmbH (which has since been succeeded by Deutsche Seereederei GmbH by operation of law) in
connection with the sale of the 49% shareholding in Aida Cruises Limited (the Agreement). 
 

	(a)	 	We confirm that if our proposed DLC combination with Carnival Corporation (Carnival) completes and closes in accordance with the terms of the Implementation Agreement entered
into between Carnival and P&O Princess Cruises plc on 8 January 2003 (Completion) then you have the right to give us Accelerated Notice (as defined under the Agreement) in relation to Option Payment II (as defined in the Agreement);


 

	(b)	 	You confirm that, subject to Completion occurring, you wish to and hereby give Accelerated Notice (as defined in the Agreement) to exercise the Option (as defined in the
Agreement), and you agree that (in consideration of the confirmation below) you shall not be able to revoke such Accelerated Notice; 

 

	(c)	 	Accordingly, we confirm that, within 14 days of Completion, we shall pay to you €58,798,566 (being the equivalent of DM115 million) in respect of Option Payment II; and


 

	(d)	 	Upon such payment being made, our obligation to pay the Consideration under the Agreement will be satisfied, and, subject to clause 21 of the Agreement, the Agreement shall
terminate. 

 
If Completion has not occurred by 30 September
2003 then this letter shall be null and void and have no legal effect. 
This letter shall be governed by English law. Apart from the signatories below
(including ourselves), no parties shall have any rights under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 to enforce any of the terms of this letter. 
 
Yours faithfully 
 
For and on behalf of P&O Princess Cruises plc 
and P&O Princess Cruises International Limited

 
Signed as acknowledgement of, and agreement with, the terms of this letter

 

	
	 /s/    HORST
RAHE        


	 For and on behalf of Deutsche Seereederei GmbH


 
Dated: 12 March 2003
EX-10.3





 Exhibit 10.3 

FISCAL 20__ EXECUTIVE SHORT-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN 

 
  

 
  

			
	Date:	  	mm/dd/yyyy
		
	To:	  	<Name>
		
	From:	  	<Name>

  
  

As a participant in the Executive Performance Program (EPP), the executive short-term incentive plan (STIP) component of the program is intended to
encourage performance that achieves the very best in segment and enterprise level results. As with all components of the EPP, decisions related to your compensation are recommended by me, and subject to the review and approval of the Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors. 
 For Fiscal 20xx, your Target Incentive is equal to     % 

The performance metrics and established performance ranges for your role are summarized in the table below. 

Fiscal 20__ Performance Metrics. 
  

											
	 
	
Fiscal 20xx Performance Metrics

 

	 	 		 		 
	Plan Payout Ranges	 	  Weighting  	 	  < Threshold  	 	  Threshold  	 	    Target    	 	    Maximum    
	 		 		 
	
Payout Level
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 		 		 
	
    
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 		 		 
	
    
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 		 		 
	
    
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 

 At the end of the year, I will access your performance versus plan and where you stand with regards to driving the right long-term
initiatives as established in your Fiscal 20__ goals. 
 Based on my assessment, I will submit an incentive recommendation to the Compensation Committee taking all
factors into account. While the Committee considers and is guided by your performance on the established metrics above, it is not bound by these results and does exercise its discretion to pay different amounts. 

This Executive Short-Term Incentive Plan is subject to the attached Terms and Conditions.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR DELCO REMY
INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                          11,738
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  187,901
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,226
<INVENTORY>                                    239,236
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               470,165
<PP&E>                                         270,352
<DEPRECIATION>                                  67,036
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 830,026
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          206,824
<BONDS>                                        451,235
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           245
<OTHER-SE>                                     116,816
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   830,026
<SALES>                                        277,189
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               277,189
<CGS>                                          216,764
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  216,764
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,510
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   450
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,124
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,791
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,974
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,974
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .31


</TABLE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Heather Deiss","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/heather-s-deissnasa-gov\/","title":"Apollo 9","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"3EPNQLlwEh\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/apollo-9\/\">Apollo 9<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/apollo-9\/embed\/#?secret=3EPNQLlwEh\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Apollo 9” — NASA\" data-secret=\"3EPNQLlwEh\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/images-assets.nasa.gov\/image\/S66-30237\/S66-30237~large.jpg?w=600&h=1535&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":1535}