alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
139177997.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

WILLIAM AMOR, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JOHN REID & ASSOCIATES, et al., 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 20-cv-01444 

Judge: Honorable Jorge L. Alonso 

Magistrate Judge: Honorable 

Jeannice W. Appenteng 

NOTICE OF UNOPPOSED MOTION 

To: Jonathan I. Loevy 

Gayle M. Horn 

Locke E. Bowman 

Loevy & Loevy 

311 N. Aberdeen, 3rd FL 

Chicago, IL 60607 

jon@loevy.com; gayle@loevy.com 

locke@loevy.com

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on April 23, 2024 at 9:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as 

counsel may be heard, I shall appear before the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso or any judge sitting in his 

stead, in Courtroom 1903 of the Dirksen Federal Building, 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, 

Illinois, and then and there present Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Defendants’ 

Reply Brief, a copy of which is attached and herewith served upon you. 

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP 

By: /s/ F. Michael Pasqualino__________________ 

 One of the Attorneys for Defendants 

Jonathan W. Goken, ARDC No. 6278837 

F. Michael Pasqualino, ARDC No. 6311292 

Alexandra W. Sternberg ARDC No. 6310249 

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

550 West Adams Street, Suite 300 

Chicago, Illinois 60661 

(312) 345-1718/Fax: (312) 345-1778 

Jonathan.Goken@lewisbrisbois.com 

F.Pasqualino@lewisbribois.com 

Alexandra.sternberg@lewisbrisbois.com 

Case: 1:20-cv-01444 Document #: 158 Filed: 04/17/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:8852
139177997.1 2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on April 17, 2024, I electronically filed the foregoing with the U.S. 

District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, using the ECF system which will send notification 

and a copy of such filing to all parties of record. 

/s/ F. Michael Pasqualino

Case: 1:20-cv-01444 Document #: 158 Filed: 04/17/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:8853
[785 NYS2d 270]

#### King’s Medical Supply, Inc., as Assignee of Azniz Kegeyan, Appellant, v Hereford Insurance Company, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

September 20, 2004

*56APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Amos*Weinberg, Great Neck, for appellant. *Eric H. West,*Long Island City, for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover first-party no-fault benefits for medical supplies provided to its assignor. Thereafter, plaintiff moved for summary judgment in the amount of $980, which motion was denied by order entered September 10, 2003.

Contrary to the determination of the court below, plaintiffs billing manager did not have to allege in his supporting affidavit that he had personal knowledge that the equipment was furnished to plaintiffs assignor. Said affidavit set forth the billing manager’s duties so as to support the conclusion that the attached exhibits were sufficiently accurate and trustworthy to merit their admission into evidence pursuant to the business record exception to the hearsay rule *(see*CPLR 4518 [a]; *People v Kennedy,*68 NY2d 569 [1986]), and said exhibits established that the supplies were furnished to the assignor.

A review of the record indicates that plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by showing that it submitted a properly completed claim form to defendant for $980 *(see*Insurance Law § 5106 [a]; *Mary Immaculate Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co.,*5 AD3d 742 [2004]; *Damadian MRI in Elmhurst v Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2*Misc 3d 128[A], 2003 NY Slip *57Op 51700[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2003]). It is uncontroverted that defendant had until July 17, 2003 to pay or deny plaintiffs claim. The plaintiffs billing manager asserted that the defendant’s denial was untimely and he submitted a photocopy of an envelope, postmarked August 29, 2003, which allegedly contained the denial form. Defendant, however, submitted the affidavit of its claims adjuster who attested to the routine procedure and practice of her office, in the regular course of its business, which indicates that the denial had been duly addressed and mailed to plaintiff on July 17, 2003. In view of the foregoing, we find that the court below properly determined that a triable issue of fact existed *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Accordingly, plaintiffs motion for summary judgment was properly denied.

McCabe, EJ., Covello and Tanenbaum, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS 
INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1998, AND IS 
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         153,517
<SECURITIES>                                     4,343
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               163,440 
<PP&E>                                          13,588
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,819
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 186,078
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           52,994
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       197,695
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (94,213)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   186,078
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               126,552
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   63,058
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,713
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 59,140
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,433
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             38,707
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    38,707
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .76
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.1****Written Statement Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**The undersigned, the President of Webster Preferred Capital Corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:(a) the Form 10-Q Report of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 filed on thedate hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(b) information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.           /s/ William T. Bromage             William T. Bromage      President      Principal Executive Officer      November 09, 2006  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toWebster Preferred Capital Corporation and will be retained by Webster Preferred Capital Corporationand furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
20
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Anna C. Heiney","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/aheiney\/","title":"Dr. Jeffrey Smith","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"pjWukpskVo\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/kennedy-biographies-smith-jeffrey\/\">Dr. Jeffrey Smith<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/kennedy-biographies-smith-jeffrey\/embed\/#?secret=pjWukpskVo\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Dr. Jeffrey Smith” — NASA\" data-secret=\"pjWukpskVo\" 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\/2020\/04\/jeff_smith2.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":726}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Monika Luabeya","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/mluabeya\/","title":"120th Anniversary of the First Powered, Controlled Flight","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"vQpRolBxHC\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/pia24434orig\/\">120th Anniversary of the First Powered, Controlled Flight<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/pia24434orig\/embed\/#?secret=vQpRolBxHC\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“120th Anniversary of the First Powered, Controlled Flight” — NASA\" data-secret=\"vQpRolBxHC\" 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\/2023\/12\/pia24434orig.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":339}
9619.

#### SHIELDS *v.*THE STATE.

1. When read and considered in connection with the notes appended by the court and the facts in the case, the excerpts from the charge of the court, complained of, were not erroneous for any reason assigned.

2. It is not cause for a new trial that the court ruled out the testimony on cross-examination set out in the 6th special ground of the motion for a new trial, testimony to the same effect having already been admitted on the direct examination.

3. There is no merit in the ground that the .court erred in admitting in evidence the statement of the deceased, made a short time after he was cut and a few minutes before he died, that he was cut, and that the defendant cut him. If not admissible as a part of -the res gestas, it was harmless error, inasmuch as the defendant in his statement at the trial admitted that he cut the deceased.

4. The evidence authorized the verdict, no error of law appears, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Decided October 8, 1918.

Conviction of manslaughter; from Jasper superior court—Judge Park. February 33, 1918.

*Eugene M. Baynes,*for plaintiff in error.

*Doyle Campbell, solicitor-general, W. S. Florence,*contra.

Harwell, J.

The accused was indicted for the murder of one 'Jordan, and was found guilty of voluntary manslaughter. He made a motion for a new trial, which the court overruled, and he excepted. It is not necessary to discuss any of the grounds of the motion, except perhaps the 5th, which complains of an excerpt from the charge of the court, in which the judge instructed the jury as to the circumstances under which a man would have.a right to kill another to prevent an act of adultery with his wife. It will be noted that, as the judge says in the note appended to this ground, he was presenting to the jury one of the theories of the State as to the motive of the killing. He was not presenting a contention of the defendant, and in this respect the instant case is differentiated from the case of *Key*v. *State,*21 *Ga. App.*300 (94 S. E. 383), cited and relied on by counsel for the plaintiff in error. In that case the court was presenting to the jury a contention of the defendant, and, in doing so, incorrectly stated the defendant’s contention, and this court held that it was such harmful error as required the grant of a new trial. In the instant ease the charge of the court was full and fair, and correctly stated the defendant’s theory of self-defense. The State insisted, however, that the defendant invited Jordan, the deceased, to his house, and killed him *619out of revenge, because the defendant had discovered improper relations between Jordan and the defendant’s wife. The evidence, together with the defendant’s statement, we think, authorized the charge complained of, and there was.no error in overruling this ground of the motion. -The headnotes do not need further elaboration.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., and Blood-worth,, J.,-concur.*
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 89

To require preemployment drug testing with respect to applicants for Federal

employment.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 7, 1997

Mr. SOLOMON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

A BILL

To require preemployment drug testing with respect to

applicants for Federal employment.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Employment

5 Applicant Drug Testing Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. PREEMPLOYMENT DRUG TESTING.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—All applicants for employment

8 with the Federal Government shall be subject to

9 preemployment drug testing in accordance with require10 ments which shall be prescribed by—
2

HR 89 IH

1 (1) the President, with respect to applicants for

2 employment within the executive branch;

3 (2) the Administrative Office of the United

4 States Courts, with respect to applicants for employ5 ment within the judicial branch; and

6 (3)(A) each House of Congress, with respect to

7 applicants for employment within such House; or

8 (B) the appointing authority, with respect to

9 applicants for employment in any other office or

10 agency within the legislative branch.

11 (b) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this Act, the term

12 ‘‘drug’’ means a controlled substance, as defined by sec13 tion 102(6) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.

14 802(6)).

15 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

16 Any rules or regulations necessary to carry out this

17 Act shall be issued in time so that they may be imple18 mented beginning not later than the 90th day after the

19 date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Pennsylvania Students to Speak with NASA Astronaut on International Space Station","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"fbPMjfRoEt\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/pennsylvania-students-to-speak-with-nasa-astronaut-on-international-space-station\/\">Pennsylvania Students to Speak with NASA Astronaut on International Space Station<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/pennsylvania-students-to-speak-with-nasa-astronaut-on-international-space-station\/embed\/#?secret=fbPMjfRoEt\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Pennsylvania Students to Speak with NASA Astronaut on International Space Station” — NASA\" data-secret=\"fbPMjfRoEt\" 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\/2019\/05\/iss059e013244_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 - Certification pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

In connection with this quarterly
report on Form 10-QSB of Tarpon Coast Bancorp, Inc., the undersigned
hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that this report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in
the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                     |  |                                                           
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 5, 2003 |  | /s/ Lewis S. AlbertLewis S. Albert
Chief Executive Officer
#### Marvin *v.*Slaughter.

On appeal.

Monday, *June*4.

IN assumpsit by the assignee of a promissory note against the maker, the declaration set out the indorsement as follows: “ And the said *A.*(the payee) then and there, under his own proper hand, indorsed and delivered the said promissory note to the plaintiff. By means whereof,” áre. Special demurrer to the declaration, because it does not state that the note was *assigned*by indorsement thereon under the hand of the payee. *Held,*that there was no ground for the demurrer.
EXHIBIT
15.2
  CONSENT
OF AUTHOR
 
 To:
              Crosshair
      Exploration & Mining Corp.British
      Columbia Securities CommissionAlberta
      Securities CommissionSaskatchewan
      Financial Services Commission (Securities Division)Manitoba
      Securities CommissionOntario
      Securities CommissionNew
      Brunswick Securities CommissionNova
      Scotia Securities CommissionNewfoundland
      and Labrador, Securities DivisionRegistrar
      of Securities, Prince Edward IslandUnited
      States Securities and Exchange CommissionAND
      TO:
              Toronto
      Stock ExchangeNYSE
      Amex EquitiesRE:
              Crosshair
      Exploration & Mining Corp. (“Crosshair”) -Consent
      under National Instrument 43-101
 
  Reference
is made to the technical report entitled “Form 43-101 Technical Report on
the Central Mineral Belt (CMB) Uranium Project, Labrador, Canada” dated
July 31, 2008 (the “Technical Report which the undersigned has prepared for
Crosshair.
 
 I have
reviewed and approved the summaries of and extracts from the Technical Report
prepared to be filed with the Annual Report on Form 20-F (Annual Information
Form) of Crosshair (fiscal year ended April 30, 2009) and confirm that such
summaries and extracts fairly and accurately represent the information in the
Technical Report.  I hereby consent to the written disclosure of my
name, and reference to and incorporation by reference of, the Technical Report
in the public filing of the Annual Report on Form 20-F (Annual Information Form)
of Crosshair with the regulatory authorities referred to above.
 
 I certify
that I have reviewed the Annual Report on Form 20-F (Annual Information Form)
being filed and I do not have any reason to believe that there are any
misrepresentations in the information contained therein that are derived from
the Technical Report or that are within my knowledge as a result of the services
performed by me in connection with the Technical
Report.
 Dated:  June
25, 2009.
 
 
 
 “G.H.
      Giroux”Gary
      H. Giroux, P.Eng. MASc.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10(j)



          Description of the terms of employment between Myers Industries, Inc.
          and Kevin C. O'Neil dated June 10, 2003.


         On June 10, 2002, Mr. O'Neil was employed by the Company as its General
Counsel. Mr. O'Neil has a three year employment arrangement whereby his annual
base and bonus compensation through June 2005 was set at $225,000 per annum. The
amount was prorated for 2003. As part of this compensation Mr. O'Neil was paid a
bonus of $27,500 for the year ended December 31, 2002, and for the years ended
2003 and 2004, he is to be paid a bonus of $55,000. Bonus payments are made over
a three year period, with 50% paid the first year, and 25% over the next two
years. Mr. O'Neil is entitled to participate in benefits provided to executive
officers of the Company. During the term, Mr. O'Neil can be terminated only if
he fails to materially perform the requirements of the position.