alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WOOD MATERIALS, LLC and Wood Resources, LLC v. CITY OF HARAHAN

NO. 2019-C-0018

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 25, 2019

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI, TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, FIFTH CIRCUIT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON

PER CURIAM*

Granted. The City of Harahan is not an instrumentality of the Parish of Jefferson for purposes of the three-year prescriptive period in La. R.S. 9:5625(C). *See generally**Slowinski v. England Economic and Industrial Develop. Dist.* , 02-0189 (La. 10/15/02), 828 So.2d 520 ; *Polk v. Edwards* , 626 So.2d 1128 (La. 1993). Rather, the City of Harahan is properly classified as a municipality, which is governed by the five-year prescriptive period set forth in La. R.S. 9:5625(A)(3). Applying this statute, the reconventional demand filed by the City of Harahan is timely.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal, which affirmed the district court's judgment granting the exception of prescription, is reversed. The exception of prescription is denied, and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings.

GUIDRY, J., recused

HUGHES, J., would deny the writ.

GENOVESE, J., would deny.

*

Guidry, J. recused.
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 1 of 13 PageID 42
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 2 of 13 PageID 43
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 3 of 13 PageID 44
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 4 of 13 PageID 45
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 5 of 13 PageID 46
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 6 of 13 PageID 47
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 7 of 13 PageID 48
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 8 of 13 PageID 49
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 9 of 13 PageID 50
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 10 of 13 PageID 51
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 11 of 13 PageID 52
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 12 of 13 PageID 53
Case 3:03-cv-01660-BD Document 13 Filed 10/23/03 Page 13 of 13 PageID 54
Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 9 Filed 06/02/04 Page 1 of 4 PageID 38
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 9 Filed 06/02/04 Page 2 of 4 PageID 39
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 9 Filed 06/02/04 Page 3 of 4 PageID 40
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 9 Filed 06/02/04 Page 4 of 4 PageID 41
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF 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 Annual Report of Flag Intermediate Holdings Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2007 (the Periodic Report), I, Robert C. McPherson, III, Chief Financial 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:



| | 1. | To my knowledge, the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |  |  |                                                  
|------------------------ |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 20, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Robert C. McPherson, III                     
|                         |  |  |  | Robert C. McPherson, III                         
|                         |  |  |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Act and
is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure statement.

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.
The GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM and the Florida Department of Children and Families, Appellants, v. S.G. and E.G., Appellees.

No. 1D18-5003

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 12, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# C_2021431EN.01003002.xml

| 25.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — IZ v Parliament

(Case T-155/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Political group - Dismissal - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of powers - Right to be heard - Equal treatment - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Principle of sound administration - Liability)

(2021/C 431/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: IZ (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: C. González Argüelles and I. Lázaro Betancor, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for, first, annulment of the Parliament’s decision of 4 July 2019 to terminate the applicant’s contract as a member of the temporary staff and, second, compensation for the non-material harm which the applicant allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders IZ to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders IZ to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.

---
EX-4.9



 Exhibit 4.9

AMENDMENT TO THE 

INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC. 401(K) PLAN 

WHEREAS, International Specialty Products Inc. (the “Corporation”) maintains the International Specialty Products Inc.

401(k) Plan (the “Plan”) for the benefit of eligible employees; and 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Article X of the Plan, the
Corporation, as sponsor of the Plan, has retained the authority to amend the Plan at any time in whole or in part; and 
 WHEREAS,
the Supreme Court of the United States invalidated section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act for federal tax law purposes; consequently, the Internal Revenue Service issued Revenue Ruling 2013-17 and Notice 2014-19 detailing the rules for identifying
same-sex spouses in a qualified retirement plan (collectively, the “Guidance”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Corporation desires to
amend the Plan to conform to the Guidance; and 
 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan is amended retroactively to be
effective as of June 26, 2013 as follows: 
  

	I.	The following definition of Spouse shall be added to Article II of the Plan: 


“Spouse” shall mean the spouse of a Participant determined by Federal law applicable to Code
§401(a) as announced in Revenue Ruling 2013-17 and Notice 2014-19; provided that to the extent required by a qualified domestic relations order pursuant to the terms of this Plan, a former Spouse of the Participant shall be treated as the
Spouse of the Participant. 
  

	II.	The term “spouse” wherever found in the Plan shall be amended to be a capitalized word and carry with it the definition of Spouse as provided herein. 


 

	III.	In all other respects, the Plan shall remain unchanged. 

 [signature page immediately
follows] 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this amendment to the Plan to be executed this 26 day of Sept., 2014

  

					
	ATTEST:	 		 	INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC.
			
	/s/ Issa O. Yesufu	 	By:	 	/s/ Robin Swanson
	Secretary	 	Title:	 	Director, Global Opns. & Benefits
# C_2021310EN.01002701.xml

| 2.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/27

---

Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — Shindler and Others v Council

(Case T-198/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Area of freedom, security and justice - Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and from Euratom - Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement on withdrawal - United Kingdom nationals - Loss of EU citizenship - Act not of individual concern - Non-regulatory act - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 310/35)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Harry Shindler (Porto d’Ascoli, Italy) and the nine other applicants, whose names are included in the annex to the order (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, R. Meyer and J. Ciantar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment, in whole or in part, of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 7) and of Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the European Commission and by British in Europe. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the European Commission and by British in Europe.

| 3. | Mr Harry Shindler and the other applicants whose names are included in the annex are ordered to pay, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union, with the exception of those relating to the applications for leave to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Mr Harry Shindler and the other applicants whose names are included in the annex are ordered to pay, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union, with the exception of those relating to the applications for leave to intervene.

| 4. | Mr Shindler and the other applicants whose names are included in the annex, the Council, the Commission and British in Europe shall bear their own costs relating to the applications to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Mr Shindler and the other applicants whose names are included in the annex, the Council, the Commission and British in Europe shall bear their own costs relating to the applications to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.

---
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED BY


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the report on Form 10-Q of PetroHunter Energy Corporation (the
“Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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:
      May 15, 2008
            /s/ Charles B.
      Crowell


Charles B. Crowell


Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive
Officer)
Exhibit 23

CONSENTS OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-58298 and the related Prospectus (2000 Stock Option Plan) of
Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. on Form S-8 of our report dated March 12, 2004 (which report on the consolidated financial statements expresses an unqualified opinion and
includes an explanatory paragraph referring to the adoption by Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets",
effective January 1, 2002) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Orient-Express Hotel Ltd. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2003.

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-102576 and the related Prospectus (Common Share Shelf Offering) of Orient-Express
Hotels Ltd. on Form S-3 of our report dated March 12, 2004 (which report on the consolidated financial statements expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an
explanatory paragraph referring to the adoption by Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets", effective
January 1, 2002) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Orient-Express Hotel Ltd. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2003.

/s/
Deloitte & Touche LLP

New
York, New York
March 12, 2004

85

---

QuickLinks
# C_2022002EN.01003501.xml

| 3.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 October 2021 — Egis Bâtiments International and InCA v Parliament

(Case T-610/20) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Project to extend and modernise the Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg - Settlement agreement - Confidentiality clause - Principle of good faith - Contractual liability)

(2022/C 2/47)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Egis Bâtiments International (Montreuil, France) and InCA — Ingénieurs Conseils Associés Sàrl (Niederanven, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. Rodesch and R. Jazbinsek, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: A. Caiola and L. Chrétien, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 272 TFEU seeking (i) a declaration that the Parliament has infringed Article VIII of the settlement agreement of 9 April 2019 and has breached the duty of good faith in the performance of agreements enshrined in Article 1134 of the Luxembourg Civil Code and (ii) an order that that institution is to pay a sum of EUR 100 000 under that same agreement or, in the alternative, that it is to pay any other sum to be fixed ex aequo et bono.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Egis Bâtiments International and InCA — Ingénieurs Conseils Associés Sàrl to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Egis Bâtiments International and InCA — Ingénieurs Conseils Associés Sàrl to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 390, 16.11.2020.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Petitioner

v.

KEITH ROSARIO,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 298 WAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Petitioner

v.

KEITH ROSARIO,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 299 WAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Petitioner

v.

KEITH ROSARIO, RESONDENT :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 300 WAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 25 th day of January , 202 2

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED

. The issues, as stated by petitioner , are :[ 298 WAL 2021, 299 WAL 2021 and 300 WAL 2021 ]

- 2 (1) Did the Superior Court err and abuse its discretion and misapprehend and ignore or misapply the doctrine of stare decisis in its Simmons decision by overturning over 40 years of case law permitting the revocation of consecutive probation sentences not yet commenced where there has been a substantive violation and

conviction in a new case?

(2) Did the Superior Court abuse its discretion and mis apprehend and misapply the statutory authority it cited in Simmons , which statutes do not clearly and unambiguously speak to or demand the result of prohibiting violation of probation sentences that have not yet commenced when a substantive violation has

o ccurred?
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 6, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 19, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1144 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-929, K2025-930.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-31707 Filed 1-3-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# C_2016145EN.01003302.xml

| 25.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 145/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 145/33

---

Action brought on 29 February 2016 — Kasztantowicz v EUIPO — Gbb Group (GEOTEK)

(Case T-97/16)

(2016/C 145/41)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Martin Kasztantowicz (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: R. Ronneburger, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gbb Group Ltd (Letchworth, United Kingdom)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: The applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘GEOTEK’ — Application for registration No 5 772 975

Trade mark at issue:

Proceedings before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Proceedings before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 December 2015 in Case R 3025/2014-5

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and the decision of the Cancellation Division of EUIPO of 26 September 2014 (Cancellation Decision No 9014 C); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and the decision of the Cancellation Division of EUIPO of 26 September 2014 (Cancellation Decision No 9014 C);

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Rules 57 and 65 of Regulation No 2868/95; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Rules 57 and 65 of Regulation No 2868/95;

| — | Infringement of Decision No EX-11-3 of the President of the Office. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Decision No EX-11-3 of the President of the Office.

---
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Kevin Bales, Chief Financial Officer of Radius Gold Inc. (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:  1. This Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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:    May 14, 2012   /s/ Kevin Bales ____________________ Kevin Bales, Chief Financial Officer
# C_2016175EN.01003101.xml

| 17.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/31

---

Action brought on 29 March 2016 — Caisse régionale de crédit agricole mutuel Nord Midi-Pyrénées v ECB

(Case T-134/16)

(2016/C 175/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Caisse régionale de crédit agricole mutuel Nord Midi-Pyrénées (Albi, France) (represented by: H. Savoie, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Central Bank

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the European Central Bank decision of 29 January 2016 (ECB/SSM/2016 — 969500TJ5KRTCJQWXH05/100) adopted under Article 4(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 of the European Central Bank and under Articles L. 511-13, L. 511-52, L. 511-58, L. 612-23-1 and R. 612-29-3 of the French monetary and financial code (code monétaire et financier français). |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the European Central Bank decision of 29 January 2016 (ECB/SSM/2016 — 969500TJ5KRTCJQWXH05/100) adopted under Article 4(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 of the European Central Bank and under Articles L. 511-13, L. 511-52, L. 511-58, L. 612-23-1 and R. 612-29-3 of the French monetary and financial code (code monétaire et financier français).

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-133/16, Caisse régionale de crédit agricole mutuel Alpes Provence v ECB.

Caisse régionale de crédit agricole mutuel Alpes Provence

ECB

---