alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.5



                      LAMAR ADVERTISING OF GREENVILLE, INC.

                             SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE


         THIS SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE dated as of October 23, 1998, is delivered
pursuant to Section 10.04 of the Indenture dated as of September 25, 1997 (as
heretofore or hereafter modified and supplemented and in effect from time to
time, the "Indenture") among LAMAR ADVERTISING COMPANY, a Delaware corporation,
certain of its subsidiaries ("Guarantors") and STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST
COMPANY, a Massachusetts banking corporation, as Trustee ("Trustee") (all terms
used herein without definition having the meanings ascribed to them in the
Indenture).

         The undersigned hereby agrees that:

         1. The undersigned is a Guarantor under the Indenture with all of the
rights and obligations of a Guarantor thereunder.

         2. The undersigned hereby grants, ratifies and confirms the guarantee
provided for by Article Ten of the Indenture to guarantee unconditionally,
jointly and severally with the other Guarantors, to each Holder of a Note
authenticated and delivered by the Trustee, and to the Trustee on behalf of such
Holder, the due and punctual payment of the principal of (and premium, if any)
and interest on such Note when and as the same shall become due and payable.

         3. The undersigned hereby represents and warrants that the
representations and warranties set forth in the Indenture, to the extent
relating to the undersigned as Guarantor, are correct on and as of the date
hereof.

         4. All notices, requests and other communications provided for in the
Indenture should be delivered to the undersigned at the address specified in
Section 12.02 of the Indenture.

         5. A counterpart of this Supplemental Indenture may be attached to any
counterpart of the Indenture.

         6. This Supplemental Indenture shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of New York.




<PAGE>   2




         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this Supplemental
Indenture to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written.

                                   Guarantor:

                                   LAMAR ADVERTISING OF GREENVILLE, INC.


                                   By: /s/ Kevin P. Reilly, Jr.
                                      -----------------------------------------
                                      Kevin P. Reilly, Jr., President and
                                      Chief Executive Officer

Attest:


By: /s/ Charles W. Lamar, III
   ---------------------------------
    Charles W. Lamar, III, Secretary


Accepted:

STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST
    COMPANY, as Trustee


By: /s/ Andrew M. Sinasky
   ---------------------------------
Title:  Assistant Vice President




                                       2


<PAGE>   3



                  SCHEDULE OF ADDITIONAL SUBSIDIARY GUARANTORS


LAMAR OCI SOUTH CORPORATION
LAMAR OCI NORTH CORPORATION


                                       3
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 2-72124, 2-85698, 2-97280, 33-37319, 33-37323,
33-59005, 33-55613, 33-10801, 33-11-790, 333-79227, 333-90127, and 333-30918),
on Form S-3 (File Nos. 2-84252, 33-9706, 33-22196, 33-47213, 333-23025, and
333-80781) and on Form S-4 (File No. 33-58117 and 33-48960) of Millipore
Corporation of our report dated January 22, 2002, except for Note 10 for which
the date is February 13, 2002 and Notes 2 and 12 for which the date is February
27, 2002, relating to the financial statements, which appears in this Form 10-K.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 8, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,760,144
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  141,348
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,950
<INVENTORY>                                    202,672
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,149,759
<PP&E>                                       6,613,210
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,345,822
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,885,860
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,133,643
<BONDS>                                      5,603,843
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     9,495,173
<OTHER-SE>                                 (8,195,140)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,885,860
<SALES>                                     10,937,567
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,937,567
<CGS>                                          937,310
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,007,103
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,097,946
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             458,801
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,319,553
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,319,553
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,319,553
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .62


</TABLE>
#### Hugh Dockery *v.*H. H. Bernard.

Vendor and Purchaser — Rescission of Sale — Interest on Purchase Price.

On rescission of a .sale of land, interest on the purchase price should he set off against the use of the land by the purchaser.

APPEAL PROM ADAIR CIRCUIT COURT.’

December 2, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Peters:

Appellee, it seems, took possession of the land on the 14th of November, 1871, the date of the contract of purchase, and has retained possession ever since. Appellant should not, therefore, be made to pay interest on the one hundred fifty dollars, the first payment, as appellee was not entitled to the use of the land and interest on the money paid; but on the rescission, the interest of thé whole *391purchase price should be set off against the use of the land. As the judgment must be reversed for the error in fixing the time at which interest should begin, it will be proper, on the return of the cause, to give appellant time from the date of entering the mandaté of this court until the first day of the next succeeding term- of the court below, in which to secure the lien of his vendor, Dehoney; and if he fails to do so, the contract should be rescinded on equitable, terms. For the reason indicated, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions for further proceedings consistent herewith.

*Winfrey & Winfrey, for appellant.*

-■ — , *for appellee.*
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 233 (Thursday, December 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 72054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28520]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8963]


 Determination by the Secretary of State Relating to Iran 
Sanctions

SUMMARY: This notice is to inform the public that the Secretary of 
State determined on November 20, 2014, pursuant to Section 
1245(d)(4)(D) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2012 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 112-81), as amended, that as of November 20, 2014, 
each of the following purchasers of oil from Iran has qualified for the 
180-day exception outlined in section 1245(d)(4)(D): Malaysia, 
Singapore, and South Africa. The Secretary of State last made exception 
determinations under Section 1245(d)(4)(D) of the NDAA regarding these 
purchasers on May 27, 2014.

    Dated: November 28, 2014.
Robert F. Ichord,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Energy Resources, U.S. Department 
of State.
[FR Doc. 2014-28520 Filed 12-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-09-P
Clerk

 CATHY S. LUSK

1/23/2015 1:56:46 PM

 TYLER, TEXAS

12th COURT OF APPEALS

 RECEIVED IN
NIST PSCR RESEARCH INVESTMENTS BOLSTER 

WASHINGTON’S ECONOMY 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Public Safety 

Communications Research (PSCR) Division is the primary federal laboratory 

focused on conducting research, development, testing, and evaluation for 

public safety communications technologies. Their mission is to accelerate 

communications innovation in support of public safety communities and the 

citizens they serve. 

The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 allocated $300 Million 

from the Public Safety Trust fund to NIST PSCR to perform critical public safety 

communications R&D during a 10-year period. PSCR implemented numerous 

research mechanisms to support the development and deployment of the 

Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network: grants, Small Business Innovation 

Research (SBIR) contracts, prize challenge competitions, and internal research. 

These research mechanisms were housed within six research portfolios and crosscutting initiatives to maximize their impact: 

•	 User Interface/User Experience •	 Public Safety Analytics 

•	 Location-Based Services •	 Security 

•	 Mission Critical Voice •	 Resilient Systems 

While the ultimate impact of these research mechanisms is the increased safety 

of first responders and their communities through improved communications

technologies, PSCR was interested in better understanding how their R&D 

investments to date result in economic impacts that ripple outward to state 

economies. An independent analysis was conducted to demonstrate how PSCR’s 

deployment of the $300 Million from the Public Safety Trust Fund translated into 

broader impacts to the United States, including jobs, earnings, value added, and 

total economic output. PSCR’s R&D investments resulted in economic output 

in 33 of the 50 states. Results of the analysis are presented here. 

For more information, see NIST PSCR’s Economic Impact Study. 

7 Prize Challenge 

Participants 

Awards Totaling 

$0.1 Million 

(2 awards) 

2 Grant Awards 

Totaling $1.8 Million 

University of Washington 

For additional information of PSCR’s research programs, visit https://www.nist.gov/ctl/pscr. 

amount.

WASHINGTON BY THE NUMBERS 

NIST INVESTMENT 

$1.9 Million 

OUTPUT 

$5.5 Million 

VALUE-ADDED 

$4.6 Million 

EARNINGS 

$2.9 Million 

JOBS 

35 

Output: the total value of economic 

activity circulating through the U.S. 

economy generated by PSCR’s R&D 

investments 

Value-Added: how much the 

combined U.S. state economies 

grew over a period of time due to 

PSCR’s R&D investments 

Earnings: the change in household 

earnings in the U.S. economy 

generated by PSCR’s R&D 

investments 

Jobs: the change in the number of 

full- and part-time jobs generated 

by each one million dollar change 

in U.S. economic activity due to 

PSCR’s R&D investments 

*All dollar amounts presented 

in 2022 and reflect data as of 

October 2022.

**All values are rounded; thus, the 

sum of the components may not 

sum exactly to the NIST Investment
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the use in the Prospectus constituting part of this
Registration Statement on Form S-1 of our report dated February 1, 1998,
relating to the financial statements of broadcast.com, which appears in such
Prospectus. We also consent to the application of such report to the Financial
Statement Schedule for the period from May 19, 1995 (inception) to December 31,
1995 and the two years ended December 31, 1997 listed under Item 16 (b) of this
Registration Statement when such schedule is read in conjunction with the
financial statements referred to in our report. The audits referred to in such
report also included this schedule. We also consent to the references to us
under the headings "Experts" and "Selected Financial Data" in such Prospectus.
However, it should be noted that Price Waterhouse LLP has not prepared or
certified such "Selected Financial Data."




PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP

Dallas, Texas
June 23, 1998
**Exhibit 11.1**

 

**MESTEK, INC.**

**Schedule of Computation of Earnings Per Common Share**

 

 

 
|                                        | **Years Ended December 31,**                          |
|---------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                                        | **2005**                                              | **2004** | **2003** |
|                                        | (dollars in thousands, except earnings per share**)** |
|                                        |                                                  |   |   |
| Net Income (Loss)                           | $7,452                                           | $21,534  | ($43,165) |
|                                        |                                                  |   |   |
| Basic Earnings (Loss) Per Common Share:     |                                                  |   |   |
| Continuing Operations                       | $0.43                                            | $1.77  | ($5.43) |
| Discontinued Operations                     | 0.43                                             | 0.72  | 0.48  |
| Net Income (Loss)                           | $0.86                                            | $2.49  | ($4.95) |
|                                        |                                                  |   |   |
| Basic Weighted Average Shares Outstanding   | 8,673                                            | 8,658  | 8,722  |
|                                        |                                                  |   |   |
| Diluted Earnings  (Loss)Per Common Share:   |                                                  |   |   |
| Continuing Operations                       | $0.43                                            | $1.76  | ($5.43) |
| Discontinued Operations                     | 0.43                                             | 0.72  | 0.48  |
| Net Income (Loss)                           | $0.86                                            | $2.48  | ($4.95) |
|                                        |                                                  |   |   |
| Diluted Weighted Average Shares Outstanding | 8,686                                            | 8,678  | 8,722  |
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Income  Partners  1988-A,  Ltd.'s  balance  sheet and  statement  of  operations
contained in its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1999 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         225,502
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  101,466
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               326,968
<PP&E>                                         9,655,984
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (8,967,381)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,024,280
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          47,645
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     941,286
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,024,280
<SALES>                                        45,682
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               49,077
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  43,242<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (22,938)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (22,938)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (22,938)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
Sealed Exhibits 1-4

Concurrent with the Complaint, Plaintiff seeks leave to

file Exhibit 1-4 under seal. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05009 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 08/25/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:15
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 AS INCLUDED IN FORM 10-QSB FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,300
<OTHER-SE>                                      (1,300)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (6,536)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,536)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.001)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Kendall Bell v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 15

- 00510

- CR

Trial court case number: 1394740

Trial court: 263rd District Court of Harris County

On June 29, 2018, appellant filed in this court a motion for bail . We deny this motion.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ J e n nifer Caughey

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Caughey

Date: July 1 2 , 2018
#### Musselman *v.*Pierce et al.

*Practice.—Change of Venue.—Second*Application.—After one change of venue has been taken on affidavit against the county and the judge, another change cannot be taken by the same party. '

*121APPEAL from the Pulaski Circuit Court.

*D. C. Justice,*for appellant. ,

*N. O. Ross*and *R. Magee,*for appellees.

Pettit, C. J.

The facts in the case are these: The appellant obtained judgment before a justice of the peace, in Cass county, for twenty-six dollars and fifty cents, in 1870. The appellant moved for a new trial, which was granted. The jury failed to agree. After a third trial, there was judgment for the defendants. Appellant appealed to the Cass Circuit Court, and there filed his affidavit for a change of venue, and the case was sent to Pulaski county. There the • appellant filed his affidavit for a change from the judge, as follows:

“The plaintiff in the above-entitled cause, upon his oath, says that he cannot have a fair and impartial trial of said cause before the Hon. Thos. S. Stanfield, for the reason of the bias and prejudice of the judge before whom said cause is pending; plaintiff therefore respectfully prays that the venue of said cause be changed, and that another competent judge be called to try said cause.”

This application was refused, and exception taken. The appellant refused further to prosecute his suit, and the court dismissed the case. Two errors are assigned; first, the refusal to change the venue; second, the dismissal of the case.

Sec. 208, 2 G. & H. 155, says, “only one change of venue shall be granted to the same party.” As one change had been granted and taken by the appellant on his affidavit, both against the .county and the judge, as we learn from the record, another change could not be taken, under the statute above cited, by him.

The second error assigned is the dismissal of the case. The appellant having refused to further prosecute the case, the court could do nothing less than to dismiss it; but there was no exception taken to the dismissal, and we cannot say that this action of the court was erroneous.

The judgment is affirmed, at the costs of the appellant.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Section 1350
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Merck & Co., Inc. (the
Company), hereby certifies that the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2004 (the 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. Dated: March 11, 2005
    
    
    
    /s/ Raymond V. GilmartinName:
    
    Raymond V. GilmartinTitle:
    
    Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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.
 Date: March 1, 2007
    
    /s/ DAVID E. MEADOR

David E. Meador 

Executive Vice President and

Chief Financial Officer of

Michigan Consolidated Gas Company
  61