alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Hensle, Plaintiff, vs. Carter, Defendant: Langdon, Garnishee Defendant. [Two appeals.]

*June 5*

July *3, 1953.*

*538For the plaintiff there were briefs and oral argument by *John T. Porter pi*Madison, and *H. J. Cook*of Beloit. ...

For the defendants there were briefs by *Muriel Prazak*of Clinton, and *Geffs, Geffs, Block & Geffs*of Janesville, and oral argument by *Miss Prazak*and *Mr. Jacob Geffs.*

Gehl, J.

Notice of entry of judgment was served upon plaintiff’s attorney on September 2, 1952. In the absence of an order enlarging the time, service of a proposed bill of exceptions is required within ninety days after service of notice of entry, of judgment, sec. 270.47, Stats. By stipulation the time was extended to December 22, 1952. On February 6, 1953, upon notice, the court entered an order further extending the time to February 15, 1953.

The affidavit of plaintiff’s counsel, filed in support of the motion for the order entered on February 6th, recites as the reason for requesting the extension the fact that because of the illness of the clerk of the court, who was also the official *539reporter, and the congested condition of his office the transcript of the testimony was not then completed and available to plaintiff. The affidavit does not state the date upon which the transcript was ordered. The counteraffidavit of defendant’s counsel recites, without denial, that' the order for a transcript was not given until November 26, 1952, only a week before the time limited by the statute for serving a bill of exceptions, and that if the order had been given reasonably promptly the reporter in the usual course of his business could have furnished the transcript within approximately six weeks from the date it was ordered.

Sufficient cause for the enlargement order was not shown. The essential facts in this case are strikingly similar to those which appeared in *O’Hare v. Fink,*254 Wis. 65, 35 N. W. (2d) 320. In that case, as here, the appellant relied in part upon the fact that the reporter had been unable to prepare the transcript in time for due service. He offered the additional fact that negotiations for settlement accounted for the delay in ordering the transcript which was not given within a reasonable time after notice of entry of judgment. The court held the facts insufficient to establish cause for an extension. The rule requires the same conclusion in this case.

We are, therefore, without a bill of exceptions and cannot review the findings. *Wiesmann v. Donald,*125 Wis. 600, 104 N. W. 916. Since it is not contended that the findings do not support the judgment, as they obviously do, we must affirm.

We might add that we have examined the record and that, if we were permitted to consider whether the-evidence supports the findings, we should be required to hold that they are not against the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence as is claimed by plaintiff.

*By the Court.*— Order extending the time for settling bill of exceptions reversed. Judgment affirmed.
# C_2012234EN.01000401.xml

| 4.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/4

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 24 July 2012

adopting the Council position on the draft budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013

2012/C 234/06

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 314(3) thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic and Energy Community and in particular Article 106a thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 25 May 2012, the Commission submitted a proposal containing the draft budget for the financial year 2013 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 25 May 2012, the Commission submitted a proposal containing the draft budget for the financial year 2013 (1).

1

| (2) | The Council examined the Commission proposal with a view to defining a position consistent, on the revenue side, with Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities' own resources (2), and on the expenditure side, with Part I of Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (3), which, in the absence of any multiannual financial framework established pursuant to Article 312 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, constitutes the currently applicable instrument of budgetary discipline, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Council examined the Commission proposal with a view to defining a position consistent, on the revenue side, with Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities' own resources (2), and on the expenditure side, with Part I of Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (3), which, in the absence of any multiannual financial framework established pursuant to Article 312 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, constitutes the currently applicable instrument of budgetary discipline,

2

3

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The Council's position on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013 was adopted by the Council on 24 July 2012.

The full text can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the Council's website: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/

Done at Brussels, 24 July 2012.

For the Council

The President

A. D. MAVROYIANNIS

---

(1)  COM(2012) 300.

1

(2)  OJ L 163, 23.6.2007, p. 17.

2

(3)  OJ L 347, 24.12.2009, p. 26.

3

---
MITT ROMNEY 

Governor 

KERRY HEALEY 

Lieutenant Governor 

Hand Delivered 

January 4, 2007 

Regulations Division 

Office of the Secretary of State 

One Ashburton Place 

Boston, MA 02108 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

ARLEEN O'DONNELL 

Commissioner 

Enclosed is a legal notice of the public hearings and public comment period to be offered by the 

Department of Environmental Protection. The amendments address revisions to 310 CMR 7.00 

Air Pollution Regulations. It is proposed to amend regulations 310 CMR 7.00 to address a 

number of issues : update list of Massachusetts cities and towns to reflect changes in regional 

boundaries ; clarify the particulate emissions limits to which engines and turbines are subject; add 

a new organic material emissions cap (<10 tons per year) to several sections of 7.03 to streamline 

the process for owners/operators of "small" facilities to limit potential emissions below the 

Source Registration and annual compliance fee thresholds; and modify the Boiler - ERP 

requirements, 310 CMR 7.26(30) - (37). 

Please publish this legal notice in the Massachusetts Re lg'ster on January 26, 2007. If you have 

any questions, please call me at (617) 292-5624. Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

aren L. Regas 

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

ONE WINTER STREET, BOSTON, MA 02108 617-292-5500 

ROBERT W. GOLLEDGE, Jr. 

Secretary 

Business Compliance Division 

This information is available in alternate format. Call Donald D9 . Comes, ADA Coordinator at 617-556-1057. TDD Setviee =_1-800-298-22071 

MassDEP on the World Wide Web: http:/%www.mass.gov/dep ~ ~~. 

0 Printed on Recycled Paper 

(" LNZ
EXHIBIT 32.01

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer 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 on Form 10-Q of
LaPorte Bancorp, Inc. (the Registrant) for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the undersigned hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | Such Form 10-Q 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 such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |                                           
|----------------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|November 14, 2007 |  | /s/ Lee A. Brady                          
|Date              |  | Lee A. Brady                              
|                  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer     
|                  |  | LaPorte Bancorp, Inc.                     
|                  |  | (registrant information)                  
|                  | 
|November 14, 2007 |  | /s/ Michele M. Thompson                   
|Date              |  | Michele M. Thompson                       
|                  |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                  |  | LaPorte Bancorp, Inc.                     
|                  |  | (registrant information)                  

This certification accompanies each report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



31
Exhibit 31.2
  Chief
    Financial Officer Certification
    Form 10-K
      Rules 13a-15(e) 15d-15(e)) Rules 13a-15(f) 15d-15(f))
  a)
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
    disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
    supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
    Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
    known to us by others within those entities, particularly during
    the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or
    caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
    designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
    regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
    preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
    accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;c)
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure
    controls and procedures and presented in this report our
    conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
    and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
    annual report based on such evaluation; andd)
    Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrants
    internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
    the Registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
    materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
    affect, the Registrants internal control over financial
    reporting; and    a)
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
    design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
    which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
    Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
    report financial information; andb)
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
    other employees who have a significant role in the
    Registrants internal control over financial reporting.  Robert
    Giambrone
Exhibit
99.15














CONSENT OF
GEOLOGIST








Ladies and
Gentlemen:





The undersigned hereby
consents to (1) the references to the undersigned’s name
included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form
40-F of Denison Mines Corp. in connection with the report entitled
“Technical Report with an Updated Mineral Resource Estimate
for the Waterbury Lake Property, Northern Saskatchewan” dated
December 21, 2018, and (2) all other references to the undersigned
included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form
40-F of Denison Mines Corp.











Dated: March 13,
2019








(Signed) “Allan
Armitage”


___________________________


Allan Armitage, Ph.D.,
P.Geo.
EX-10.21



 EXHIBIT 10.21 

EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PRACTICE 
 Colleagues
who are terminated without cause and for reasons unrelated to poor performance will receive 2 weeks of severance for each year of service, subject to minimum and maximum severance amounts based on current salary level, and in exchange for a signed
severance agreement and release. Colleagues with a base salary of $300,000 or above will receive a minimum severance payment of 26 weeks’ salary and a maximum severance payment of 52 weeks’ salary. Severance will be paid in a lump sum,
less applicable withholdings. 
 Colleague benefits will continue for a month after the month in which termination occurs. If the colleague elects
continuation coverage under COBRA, the first month of coverage will be at active employee rates and will not count toward the COBRA continuation period. Outplacement will be offered in accordance with our outplacement policy. 

For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein will be a guarantee or entitlement of a particular level of severance payments or benefits and any determinations
made hereunder will be on a case-by-case basis. CFG may terminate or amend this practice at any time.
II

Calendar No. 96

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 322

To amend title 4, United States Code, to add the Martin Luther King

Jr. holiday to the list of days on which the flag should especially be displayed.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 28, 1999

Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. BROWNBACK, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. GRAMS,

Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Mr. KERREY, Mr.

ROCKEFELLER, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. REID, Mr. HOLLINGS, Mr. ALLARD,

Mr. ASHCROFT, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. EDWARDS, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. CLELAND, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr.

SARBANES, Mr. ROBB, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. HATCH, Mr. VOINOVICH, Mr.

TORRICELLI, and Mr. DEWINE) introduced the following bill; which was

read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

APRIL 29, 1999

Reported by Mr. HATCH, without amendment

A BILL

To amend title 4, United States Code, to add the Martin

Luther King Jr. holiday to the list of days on which

the flag should especially be displayed.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 322 RS

1 SECTION 1. ADDITION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. HOLI2 DAY TO LIST OF DAYS.

3 Section 6(d) of title 4, United States Code, is amend4 ed by inserting ‘‘Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday, third

5 Monday in January;’’ after ‘‘January 20;’’.

Calendar No. 96

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 322

A BILL

To amend title 4, United States Code, to add the

played.days on which the flag should especially be disMartin Luther King Jr. holiday to the list of

APRIL 29, 1999

Reported without amendment
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IVAN RENE MOORE,

Appellant,

v.

U.S. TRUSTEE, for Region 16 ; WELLS

FARGO BANK, N.A.,

Appellees. No. 18

- 55165

D.C. No. 2:16

- cv

- 09540

- AB

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Andre Birotte, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 15, 2019 **

Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Debtor Ivan Rene Moore appeals pro se from the district court’s order

affirming the bankruptcy court’ s order dismissing his C hapter 11 bankruptcy case.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review for an abuse o f

discretion a bankruptcy court ’ s decision to dismiss a case for cause. Marsch v.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The pan el unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JAN 23 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 55165

Marsch (In re Marsch) , 36 F.3d 825, 828 (9th Cir. 1994)

. We review for clear

error a bankruptcy court’s findings of fact. Dominguez v. Miller ( In re

Dominguez

) , 51 F.3d 1502, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995). We a ffirm.

The bankruptcy court did not clearly err in concluding that Moore failed to

comply with certain reporting requirements in a timely manner and failed to

complete accurately his schedules

, and

, on the record before it, the bankruptcy

court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Moore’s bankruptcy case “for

cause. ” See 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) ( permitting a bankruptcy court to dismiss a case

“for cause ” “on request of a party in interest” ) , (b)(4)(F) ( explaining that an

“ unexcused failure to satisfy timely any filing or reporting requirement established

by this title

. . . ” provides cause to dismiss a C hapter 11 bankruptcy petition) ;

Toibb v. Radloff

, 501 U.S. 157, 165 (1991) (bankruptcy court has “substantial

discretion to dismiss a C hapter 11 case i n which the debtor files an untenable plan

of reorganization ” ).

We reject as without merit Moore’ s contention that his due process and

equal protection rights were violated

.

Moore’s requests for oral argument, set forth in his opening and reply briefs,3 18

- 55165

are denied.

AFFIRMED.
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
LOG OF MEETING
DIRECTORATE FOR ENGINEERING SCIENCES

SUBJECT: ASTM Bassinet/Cradle Task Group Meeting
DATE OF MEETING: April 18 , 2013
PLACE OF MEETING: Via Conference Call
LOG ENTRY SOURCE: Patricia Edwards
COMMISSION ATTENDEES: Patricia Edwards

, Mark Kumagai
NON

- COMMISSION ATTENDEES: Contact ASTM for attendee list

SUMMARY OF MEETING:

The removable bassinet bed stability requirement, as last worked on by the task group in the summer of 2012 and as proposed in the NPR published in October 2012 w as discussed. Both versions (the task group latest version and the NPR version) was circulated prior to the call.

Many different issues were raised, including:

1) The visual indicator requirement

– why only visual. The task group decided to

allow for the f alse lock/latch requirement to be an audible indicator as well as a

visual one. 2) T he auto

- lock provision

- ensure that this type of design must still be tested if the bassinet can be set up in an y unlocked position. The task group felt that re

organizing t he requirements and tweaking the wording would be the way to

handle this issue. 3) Stands/bases that require the bassinet bed to be properly attached, otherwise they collapse to the floor

– how to allow for this design. The task group brought up examples of stands that are designed to only work when properly set up. This would eliminate the hazard being addressed, yet there is nothing in the requirement to allow for this design. The suggestion was made to add a sentence in the procedure to account for this si tuation. 4) Fall hazards

– is one being created by some of the requirements? The task group

discussed if a change to the existing wording is needed to eliminate a fall hazard, if a caregiver places the bassinet bed on the stand in an unlocked position. Dave Campbell had some suggested wording. The task group discusse d whether it was

needed or not. 5) The definition of conspicuous

– does it need to be changed, since it refers to the manufacturers recommended use position, and that is not what is being tested ?

The task group felt that the requirement for the false lock/latch indicator should

be edited , rather than the definition, to ensure an indicator is evaluated correctly. 6) Is the 20 degree angle requirement sufficient to distinguish a non

- use condition

from an inclined sleeper? The task group referred to the incident data in that all of those bassinets were flat products, not combination products or inclined sleepers.And that in one incident where the bassinet was found to be in a non

- use, tilted position (appr x. 17 degrees) the caregiver noticed there was something wrong due to the angle.

Bob Crowley agreed to revise the requirement taking into account the task groups recommendations and will circulate it for review. The task group will meet again via conference call at 10:00am April 25 th

.

CPSC staff discussed the timeline for the final rule and that we will be finalizing our recommendation language in the month of May.
Certification of Chief Executive Officer 
Pursuant to 18U.S.C.1350 
(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) In connection with the Quarterly Report of Star Gold Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended January 31, 2011,  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lindsay Gorrill, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U,S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that: (I) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section l3(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /s/Lindsay Gorrill ________________________________________ Lindsay Gorrill Chief Executive Officer March 22, 2011   This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of  2002 and shall not be deemed to beincorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except tothe extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.    Certification of Principal Accounting Officer 
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 
(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) In connection with the Quarterly Report of Star Gold Corp. (the "Company'') on Form 10-Q for nine months ended January 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report''), I, Kelly J. Stopher, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of  2002, that: (I) 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.   /s/Kelly Stopher _________________________________________ Kelly J. Stopher Principal Accounting Officer March 22, 2011 This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference. Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.