alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 99.27**

 

**CONSENT OFClifford Lusby**

** **

March 15, 2012

 

Brigus Gold Corp.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

 

**Re: Brigus Gold Corp.**

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

I hereby consent to (i) the use of my name in connection withthe following documents and reports, which are either referenced in or filed as exhibits with the Annual Report on Form 40-F forthe year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Form 40-F”) of Brigus Gold Corp. (the “Company”) to which this consentrelates: (A) the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report, Pre-feasibility Study, Brigus Gold Corp., GoldfieldsProject, Saskatchewan, Canada” dated effective October 6, 2011 (the “Report”), (B) the Company’s AnnualInformation Form for the year ended December 31, 2011 and (C) the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis forthe year ended December 31, 2011, (ii) the inclusion or incorporation by reference of information derived from the Report in theRegistration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-113889, 333-162558 and 333-167757), as amended, and Form F-10 (File No. 333-174604),as amended, or any related abbreviated registration statement filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commissionpursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in any amendment to any of the foregoing, or to any prospectusesor amendments or supplements thereto and (iii) all other references to the undersigned included or incorporated by reference inthe above-referenced Registration Statements and in any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto.

 

Sincerely,
#### Home Boys Shopping Network Inc., Respondent, v Lloyds New York Insurance Company, Appellant.

[655 NYS2d 365]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), entered on or about April 10, 1995, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, defendant’s motion granted, and the complaint is dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint in this action.

Inasmuch as defendant submitted unrefuted evidence demonstrating that the alleged damage to plaintiff’s property did not exceed the $2,500 policy deductible, defendant’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted. That evidence included the adjuster’s personal inspection of the property, and his assertion that plaintiff’s manager at the premises told him that he was unaware of any damage. Plaintiffs assertion that the repairs cost in excess of $130,000 was wholly conclusory, and unsupported by any repair receipts *(see, Capelin Assocs. v Globe Mfg. Corp.,*34 NY2d 338, 342). Thus, plaintiff has failed to raise any triable issue with regard to damages. Concur— Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [B-16-2018]

On February 27, 2018, Janssen Ortho LLC submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within Subzone 61N, in Gurabo, Puerto Rico.

                    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     inviting public comment (83 FR 10838-10839, March 13, 2018). On June 27, 2018, the applicant was notified of the FTZ Board's decision that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification was authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including Section 400.14.                

Dated: June 27, 2018.

Elizabeth Whiteman,

Acting Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2018-14182 Filed 6-29-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
This memorandum opinion was not selected for pub lication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, 2 Plaintiff-Appellant, 3
v. NO. 33,909 4 OSCAR OROPEZA, 5 Defendant-Appellee. 6 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF DOÑA ANA COUNTY 7 Marci Beyer, District Judge 8 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General 9 Santa Fe, NM 10 for Appellant 11 Jose Coronado 12 Las Cruces, NM 13 for Appellee 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION 15 VANZI, Judge. 162 {1} Summary reversal was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of proposed 1 summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary reversal has been filed and 2 the time for doing so has expired. 3 {2} REVERSED. 4 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 5

__________________________________ 6 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge 7 WE CONCUR: 8

_________________________________ 9 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Judge 10

_________________________________ 11 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge 12
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Pate CAUSEY.

No. 61885.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 5, 1978.

In re: Pate Causey applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus, prohibition and stay order. Parish of Orleans.

Writ granted.

The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a Writ of Certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable Salvador Mule, Judge of the Juvenile Court for the Parish of Orleans, to transmit to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on or before the 19th day of May, 1978, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on a date to be fixed by this Court, why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 208 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 208

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         June 28, 1993.
    Resolved, That during consideration of the bill (H.R. 2491) making 
appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
Development, and for sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, 
corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for 
other purposes, all points of order against provisions in the bill for failure 
to comply with clause 2 or 6 of rule XXI are waived except as follows: beginning 
with ``; $50,000,000 shall'' on page 43, line 7, through ``State cost share'' on 
line 25. Where points of order are waived against only part of a paragraph, a 
point of order against matter in the balance of the paragraph may be applied 
only within the balance of the paragraph and not against the entire paragraph. 
Debate on the amendment specified in the report of the Committee on Rules 
accompanying this resolution to be offered by Representative Roemer of Indiana 
or a designee, and on any amendments thereto, may not exceed two hours equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent of the amendment and an opponent. The 
amendments en bloc specified in the report to be offered by Representative 
Bereuter of Nebraska or a designee and by Representative Solomon of New York or 
a designee may amend portions of the bill not yet read for amendment, shall be 
considered as read, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the financial
statements for Independence Tax Credit Plus L.P. IV and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         17,927,060 
<SECURITIES>                                   16,200,000 
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0          
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0          
<INVENTORY>                                    0          
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               262,530    
<PP&E>                                         21,163,279 
<DEPRECIATION>                                 351,046    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 57,381,058 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,008,943  
<BONDS>                                        13,016,292 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0          
<PREFERRED>                                    0          
<COMMON>                                       0          
<OTHER-SE>                                     40,355,823 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   57,381,058 
<SALES>                                        0          
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,820,050  
<CGS>                                          0          
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0          
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,385,137  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0          
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             376,338    
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                60,119     
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0          
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0          
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0          
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0          
<CHANGES>                                      0          
<NET-INCOME>                                   60,119     
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.46       
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0          
                                               


</TABLE>
[No. 463-3.

Division Three.

April 5, 1972.]

#### Edwin Woodiwiss *et al., Appellants,*v. Karen L. Rise, *Respondent.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000040834
<NAME> GENERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           82800
<SECURITIES>                                        90
<RECEIVABLES>                                   297500
<ALLOWANCES>                                     15300
<INVENTORY>                                     160200
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                602800
<PP&E>                                          597600
<DEPRECIATION>                                  357100
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1429700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           403800
<BONDS>                                          89800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         78500
<OTHER-SE>                                      673600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1429700
<SALES>                                        1520900
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1520900
<CGS>                                          1079700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1319800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  1900
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               11300
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 189800
<INCOME-TAX>                                     95000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              94800
<DISCONTINUED>                                    2300
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     97100
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.91
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# Official Journal C 245/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 245 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4912 October 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 245

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4912 October 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Council |
| 2006/C 245/1 | List of appointments made by the Council — July, August and September 2006 (social field) | 1 |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 245/2 | Euro exchange rates | 4 |
| 2006/C 245/3 | Joint Harmonised EU Programme of Business and Consumer Surveys | 5 |
| 2006/C 245/4 | Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid (1) | 9 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Council

2006/C 245/1

List of appointments made by the Council — July, August and September 2006 (social field)

1

Commission

2006/C 245/2

Euro exchange rates

4

2006/C 245/3

Joint Harmonised EU Programme of Business and Consumer Surveys

5

2006/C 245/4

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid (1)

9

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### Willie B. TILLIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-292.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 8, 1970.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Palm Beach County; Vaughn J. Rudnick, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 99.16




CONSENT OF MARVIN SILVA




March 31, 2011





Brigus Gold Corp.


United States Securities and Exchange Commission





Re: Brigus Gold Corp.





Ladies and Gentlemen:





I hereby consent to (i) the use of my name in connection with the following documents and reports, which are either referenced in or filed as exhibits with the Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Form 40-F”) of Brigus Gold Corp. (the “Company”) to which this consent relates: (A) the technical report entitled “Black Fox Project National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report” dated January 6, 2011 (the “Report”), (B) the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2010 and (C) the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2010, (ii) the inclusion or incorporation by reference of information derived from the Report in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-113889 and 333-162558), as amended, or any related abbreviated registration statement filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in any amendment to any of the foregoing, or to any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto and (iii) all other references to the undersigned included or incorporated by reference in the above-referenced Registration Statements and in any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto.





Sincerely,




/s/ Marvin SilvaName: Marvin Silva
#### Lucius Bonner McLEOD, Jr., and Lucius Bonner McLeod, III, Appellants, v. Mildred S. YOUNG, as mother of Ringgold Taylor Young, IV, a minor, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 70-8.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 26, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Orange County; George E. Adams, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### B. B. LARSON v. K. O. SLETTE AND OTHERS.1

February 4, 1916.

Nos. 19,577—(180).

Exchange of bank stock — evidence of value.

An award of arbitrators that the difference in value between the bank stock owned by plaintiff and that owned by defendants was $8,455, was supported by the evidence. [Reporter.]

Plaintiff moved the district court for Clay county to confirm an award of arbitrators and enter judgment upon the award. Defendants moved to vacate the award and for a new trial, in case the motion was denied to amend the award in specified particulars. The motions were heard before Parsons, X, who ordered amendments to two paragraphs and as modified confirmed the award. From the judgment entered pursuant to the order, defendants appealed.

Affirmed.

*Christian*G. *Dosland*and *Victor Oleson,*for appellants.

*A. O. TJelancl*and *F. H. Peterson,*for respondent.

1

 Reported in 156 N. W. 1086.

Per Curiam.

On October 20, 1910, B. B. Larson, K. O. .Slette, I. O. Slette and Clara B. Slette were owners of stock of the First National Bank of Culbertson, Montana, and of stock of state banks at Climax, Halstad and Neilsville, Minnesota. They made an agreement whereby Larson w;as to become the owner of the stock of the Minnesota banks and the Slettes the owners of the stock of the Montana bank. The difference in value was to be paid by Larson or by the Slettes, depending upon whose stock should be of the greater value. Later they entered into a statutory arbitration of the value. The arbitrators fixed the value of Larson’s Montana bank stock at $19,375 and the value of the Minnesota bank stock of the Slettes at $10,920, leaving a balance due Larson of $8,455. The court approved the findings of the abitrators and judgment was entered in favor of Larson against the Slettes. The Slettes appealed from the judgment.

We have examined the evidence. Necessarily the question of the value of the different bank stocks was very much a matter of estimate and judgment. In our opinion the evidence amply sustains the findings of the arbitrators. The evidence is voluminous and no useful purpose is served by reviewing it.

Judgment affirmed.
#### SOUTHERN INSURANCE CO., Petitioner, v. CHARLOTTE STORAGE & WAREHOUSE, INC., Respondent.

No. 41665.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 17, 1971.

Certiorari denied.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### Claude W. WELLS, Petitioner, v. Carl E. VAN ARNAM, M.D., and Aetna Casualty and Surety Company a/k/a Aetna Life and Casualty Company, etc., Respondents.

No. 43360.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 15, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 271 So.2d 186.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
#### JAMES B. JESTER *vs.*CHRISTOPHER S. LEKITE.

The appearance of a party after the grant of a new trial by a magistrate, cures the want of notice of the application for such new trial.

Kent,

April term, 1848.

Certiorari.

The record showed a summons and judgment for plaintiff by default, for want of the defendant’s appearance, for $20; the subsequent appearance of the defendant and application to have the judgment by default taken off, and a new trial granted, which the justice, without any notice to the plaintiff granted; and appointed another day for trial; at which time both the parties appeared and went into trial by freeholders, on the demand of the plaintiff, and there waS' a report and judgment of nonsuit.

Whereupon the plaintiff sued out this certiorari, and assigned for error the want of notice to the plaintiff of the application for a new trial.

Bates, for plaintiff in error.

*Layton,*for defendant.

*Mr. Bates*

insisted that the opening of the judgment, without notice to the plaintiff, was error, not cured by subsequent appearance.

*Mr. Layton*

insisted that the subsequent appearance cured all previous defects.

*Mr. Bates*replied, that the appearance at the second trial cured the want of notice of such trial, but did not cure the want of no*t*ice of hearing on the application to take off the judgment by default.

*The Court*

considering that the appearance of both parties after the error of granting a new trial without notice, cured this and all prior defects of proceeding, affirmed the judgment. They considered that it fell within the principle of Lewis *vs.*Hazel, 4 *Harr. Bep.*470.
House Calendar No. 130

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 321

[Report No. 103–405]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference reand for other purposes. gram, to establish a system of worker profiling, the emergency unemployment compensation pro- port to accompany the bill (H.R. 3167) to extend

NOVEMBER 21, 1993

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 130

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 321

[Report No. 103–405]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 3167) to extend the emergency unemployment compensation

program, to establish a system of worker profiling, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 21, 1993

Mr. MOAKLEY, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the bill (H.R. 3167) to extend the emergency

unemployment compensation program, to establish a system of worker profiling, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 3167) to extend the emergency un4 employment compensation program, to establish a system

5 of worker profiling, and for other purposes. All points of
2

HRES 321 RH

1 order against the conference report and against its consid2 eration are waived. The conference report shall be consid3 ered as read.
No. 10.

#### Charlotte Anita Whitney *v.*The People of the State of California.

Error to the District Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division One, of the State of California.

Argued October 6, 1925.

Decided October 19, 1925.

*Mr. Walter II. Poliak,*with whom *Messrs. Walter Nelles*and *John Francis Neylan*were on the brief, for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John H. Riordan,*with whom *Mr. U. S. Webb*was on the brief, for defendant in error..

*Per Curiam.*

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of section 237 of the Judicial Code as amended by the act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, sec. 2, 39 Stat. 726. See *post,*p. 538.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

DISTRIBUTE THESE COPIES LAST

DO NOT OPEN UNTIL READY FOR USE 

FROM 

FOR USPS 

DELIVERY 

APPLY POSTAGE 

DEPT. DEPARTMENTAL RANDOM COPIES (BLUE LABEL) 

STOCK/PROPERTY NO. 

DEPT. REQUISITION NO. 

CONTROL NO. 

GPO JACKET NO. 

SUB. ID NO. GPO PURCHASE ORDER NO.

PROGRAM/PRINT ORDER NO. TITLE 

FORM OR PUBLICATION NO./DATE TO: (DEPARTMENT ADDRESS) 

QUANTITY PER CONTAINER 

PACKAGES PER CONTAINER 

PKGS. OF 

DISTRIBUTE THESE COPIES LAST

DO NOT OPEN UNTIL READY FOR USE GPO Form 2678 R 12/15 P. 51558-2