alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### W. W. Jones, *Plaintiff in*Error, v. C. D. Logan, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.

Decision Filed October 14, 1927.

Petition for Rehearing Denied November 7, 1927.

*Hampton, Bull & Penche,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Macfarlane, Pettingill, Macfarlane & Fowler,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

—

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Exhibit 31.1  Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002   I, Joseph Skeehan certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of JMG Exploration, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in the report: 4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 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. 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 report based on such evaluation; and c. 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors: 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; and b. 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. Date: November 30, 2007 /s/   Joseph Skeehan Joseph Skeehan Chief Executive Officer
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

NEW IMAGE GLOBAL, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee

______________________ 

2019-2444

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of International 

Trade in No. 1:15-cv-00175-JAR, Senior Judge Jane A. Restani.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

ELON ABRAM POLLACK, Stein Shostak Shostak Pollack 

& O'Hara, Los Angeles, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. 

Also represented by KAYLA REGINA OWENS. 

 HARDEEP KAUR JOSAN, Commercial Litigation Branch, 

Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, New 

York, NY, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented 

by BRIAN M. BOYNTON, PATRICIA M. MCCARTHY, JUSTIN 

REINHART MILLER; YELENA SLEPAK, Office of the Assistant 

Case: 19-2444 Document: 53 Page: 1 Filed: 05/06/2022
Chief Counsel, International Trade Litigation, United 

States Customs and Border Protection, New York, NY. 

 ______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (DYK, REYNA, and HUGHES, Circuit 

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

 

May 6, 2022 

Date

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

Case: 19-2444 Document: 53 Page: 2 Filed: 05/06/2022
STATE of Louisiana v. Demetric Lawaderick WHITLOCK

No. 2018-KH-0418

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 18, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF OUACHITA**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Applicant fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2.

Applicant has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
Exhibit 10.42
 
 
 April 20, 2010
 EXTENSION N2 TO THE
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT OF AUGUST 1, 2004
 
 By and between Siberian Energy Group Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), and David Zaikin (“Employee”) entered into this 20th day of April, 2010, and made effective as of January 1, 2010.
 
 WHEREASthe Company and the Employee previously signed the Employment Agreement, which stated the term of employment to start on August 1, 2004 and to end on December 31, 2008 (the “Agreement”, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A), and the One year term extension agreement for 2009 services;
 
 AND WHEREAS the Company and the Employee wish to further extend the term of the employment agreement;
 
 NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH, that the Company and the Employee agree as follows:
 
 Point 4 “Term” of the employment Agreement to be revised and the term of the Agreement to be extended until June 30, 2010 (the “Extended Term”).
 
 Point 5.1 “Compensation” of the employment Agreement to be revised and annual salary of the Employee to be stated as US$180,000.
 
 Point 6 “Stock Option” of the employment Agreement is to be removed. A new Stock Option agreement will be entered into between the Company and the Employee upon the resolution of the Board of directors of the Company.
 
 All other provisions of the Employment Agreement dated August 1, 2004 shall remain in full force and effect until the expiration of the Extended Term.
 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.
 
 EMPLOYEE
COMPANY/s/ David Zaikin
/s/ Elena PochapskiDavid Zaikin
Elena PochapskiCFOSiberian Energy Group Inc.
IIA 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 12 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection 

Agency relating to ‘‘Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural 

Gas Systems: Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including Netting 

and Exemptions’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 4, 2025 

Mr. HOEVEN (for himself, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. LEE, Mr. LANKFORD, Mrs. 

BRITT, Mr. DAINES, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. CRAMER, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. 

RISCH, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, Mr. CRUZ, Mr. PAUL, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. 

JUSTICE, Mr. TUBERVILLE, Mr. KENNEDY, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mr. 

ROUNDS, Mr. SHEEHY, Mr. TILLIS, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. WICKER, Mr. 

RICKETTS, and Mr. BARRASSO) introduced the following joint resolution; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘Waste 

Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems: Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including 

Netting and Exemptions’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the EnVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:00 Feb 05, 2025 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SJ12.IS SJ12

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 12 IS 

1 vironmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘Waste Emis2 sions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems: 

3 Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including Netting 

4 and Exemptions’’ (89 Fed. Reg. 91094 (November 18, 

5 2024)), and such rule shall have no force or effect. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
IIB 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 375 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 24, 2025 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 

and Forestry 

AN ACT 

To require the Secretary of the Interior to partner and 

collaborate with the Secretary of Agriculture and the 

State of Hawaii to address Rapid Ohia Death, and for 

other purposes. 

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


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

HR 375 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Continued Rapid Ohia 

3 Death Response Act of 2025’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

5 In this Act: 

6 (1) RAPID OHIA DEATH.—The term ‘‘Rapid 

7 Ohia Death’’ means the disease caused by the fungal 

8 pathogen known as Ceratocystis fimbriata that af9 fects the tree of the species Metrosideros 

10 polymorpha. 

11 (2) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State 

12 of Hawaii. 

13 SEC. 3. COLLABORATION. 

14 The Secretary of the Interior shall partner and col15 laborate with the Secretary of Agriculture and the State 

16 to address Rapid Ohia Death. 

17 SEC. 4. SUSTAINED EFFORTS. 

18 (a) TRANSMISSION.—The Secretary of the Interior, 

19 acting through the Director of the United States Geologi20 cal Survey, and the Chief of the Forest Service, acting 

21 through the Forest Service Institute of Pacific Islands 

22 Forestry, shall continue to conduct research on Rapid 

23 Ohia Death vectors and transmission. 

24 (b) UNGULATE MANAGEMENT.—The Secretary of the 

25 Interior, acting through the Director of the United States 

26 Fish and Wildlife Service, shall continue to partner with 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

HR 375 RFS

1 the Secretary of Agriculture, the State, and with local 

2 stakeholders to manage ungulates in Rapid Ohia Death 

3 control areas on Federal, State, and private land, with the 

4 consent of private landowners. 

5 (c) RESTORATION AND RESEARCH.—The Secretary 

6 of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest 

7 Service, shall continue to provide— 

8 (1) financial assistance, including through 

9 agreements with the Secretary of the Interior— 

10 (A) to prevent the spread of Rapid Ohia 

11 Death; and 

12 (B) to restore the native forests of the 

13 State; and 

14 (2) staff and necessary infrastructure funding 

15 to the Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry to con16 duct research on Rapid Ohia Death. 

Passed the House of Representatives January 23, 

2025. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 79 

To nullify certain Executive orders regarding COVID–19 vaccine mandates 

and to prohibit the Secretary of Labor from issuing a rule mandating 

vaccination against COVID–19, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. BIGGS of Arizona (for himself and Mr. CLOUD) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Education and Workforce, 

Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 

provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To nullify certain Executive orders regarding COVID–19 

vaccine mandates and to prohibit the Secretary of Labor 

from issuing a rule mandating vaccination against 

COVID–19, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Freedom from Man5 dates Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 79 IH

1 SEC. 2. NULLIFICATION OF CERTAIN EXECUTIVE ORDERS. 

2 (a) SAFETY PROTOCOLS FOR FEDERAL CONTRAC3 TORS.—Executive Order 14042 (86 Fed. Reg. 50985, re4 lating to ensuring adequate COVID–19 safety protocols 

5 for Federal contractors) shall have no force or effect. 

6 (b) COVID–19 VACCINE REQUIREMENT.—Executive 

7 Order 14043 (86 Fed. Reg. 50989, relating to requiring 

8 COVID–19 vaccination for Federal employees) shall have 

9 no force or effect. 

10 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION OF RULES MANDATING VACCINA11 TION. 

12 The Secretary of Labor may not issue any rule re13 quiring employers to mandate vaccination of employees 

14 against COVID–19 or requiring testing of employees who 

15 are unvaccinated against COVID–19. 

16 SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON MEDICARE AND MEDICAID 

17 COVID–19 VACCINATION MANDATES. 

18 Notwithstanding any provision of title XI, XVIII, or 

19 XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1301 et seq., 

20 1395 et seq., 1396 et seq.), the Secretary of Health and 

21 Human Services may not require a health care provider, 

22 as a condition of participation in the Medicare or Medicaid 

23 program, to mandate vaccination of employees against 

24 COVID–19 or require testing of employees who are 

25 unvaccinated against COVID–19, and may not otherwise 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 79 IH

1 penalize such a provider for such provider’s failure to so 

2 mandate such vaccination or so require such testing. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 15.2









| | Hill
House



1
Little New Street



London
EC4A 3TR



United
Kingdom





Tel:
+44 (0) 20 7936 3000



Fax:
+44 (0) 20 7583 1198
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









29 April 2016



Securities and Exchange Commission



100 F Street, N.E.



Washington, D.C. 20549-7561



Dear Sir/Madam



We have read the statements made
pursuant to Item 16F (a) of Form 20-F in the 10th paragraph under the section entitled “Activities of the Supervisory
Board” on page 75 and “Changes in Registrant’s Certifying Accountant” on page 193 of RBS Holdings N.V.
Annual Report on Form 20-F dated 29 April 2016, and we agree with the statements made therein.



Yours faithfully



/s/ Deloitte LLP



Deloitte LLP









Deloitte LLP is
a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC303675 and its registered office at 2
New Street Square, London EC4A 3BZ, United Kingdom.



Deloitte LLP is
the United Kingdom member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (“DTTL”), a UK private company limited by guarantee,
whose member firms are legally separate and independent entities. Please seewww.deloitte.co.uk/about
for a detailed description of the legal structure of DTTL and its member firms.
Travis C. EAST, Jr. v. STATE

CR-16-0927

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 99 

To require a particular jury instruction in Federal civil actions that include 

a claim for damages based on negligence arising from the transmission 

of COVID19. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. BIGGS of Arizona introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To require a particular jury instruction in Federal civil actions that include a claim for damages based on negligence arising from the transmission of COVID19. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Businesses 

5 From Frivolous COVID Lawsuits Act of 2025’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 99 IH

1 SEC. 2. JURY INSTRUCTION IN FEDERAL CIVIL ACTIONS 

2 THAT INCLUDE A CLAIM ALLEGING NEG3 LIGENCE ARISING FROM THE TRANSMISSION 

4 OF COVID–19. 

5 In a Federal civil action that includes a claim alleging 

6 negligence arising from the transmission of COVID–19 

7 and a request for damages, the court shall instruct a jury 

8 that— 

9 (1) the liability standard is the reasonable per10 son standard, 

11 (2) a person is negligent if the person either 

12 does something that a reasonably careful person 

13 would not do in the same situation, or fails to do 

14 something that a reasonably careful person would 

15 do, in the same situation, 

16 (3) the act of opening a business, by itself, shall 

17 be considered to be reasonable as a matter of law, 

18 and 

19 (4) the negligence may not be found solely on 

20 the basis of holding oneself open for business. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 1 of 42 PageID 78
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 2 of 42 PageID 79
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 3 of 42 PageID 80
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 4 of 42 PageID 81
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 5 of 42 PageID 82
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 6 of 42 PageID 83
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 7 of 42 PageID 84
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 8 of 42 PageID 85
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 9 of 42 PageID 86
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 10 of 42 PageID 87
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 11 of 42 PageID 88
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 12 of 42 PageID 89
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 13 of 42 PageID 90
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 14 of 42 PageID 91
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 15 of 42 PageID 92
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 16 of 42 PageID 93
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 17 of 42 PageID 94
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 18 of 42 PageID 95
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 19 of 42 PageID 96
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 20 of 42 PageID 97
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 21 of 42 PageID 98
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 22 of 42 PageID 99
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 23 of 42 PageID 100
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 24 of 42 PageID 101
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 25 of 42 PageID 102
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 26 of 42 PageID 103
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 27 of 42 PageID 104
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 28 of 42 PageID 105
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 29 of 42 PageID 106
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 30 of 42 PageID 107
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 31 of 42 PageID 108
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 32 of 42 PageID 109
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 33 of 42 PageID 110
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 34 of 42 PageID 111
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 35 of 42 PageID 112
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 36 of 42 PageID 113
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 37 of 42 PageID 114
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 38 of 42 PageID 115
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 39 of 42 PageID 116
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 40 of 42 PageID 117
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 41 of 42 PageID 118
Case 3:04-cv-00495-B Document 22 Filed 03/24/05 Page 42 of 42 PageID 119
Harry ZEA and Alison Zea, a/k/a Allison Zea, Appellants, v. NATIONAL COLLECTIONS, LLC, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-212

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 3, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in (i) the Registration statements on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-7070, 333-62708, 333-73878, 333-112670 and
333-111448) of GlobalSantaFe Corporation, (ii) the Post Effective Amendment No. 1 on Form S-8 to Registration Statement on Form S-4 (Registration No. 333-70268) of GlobalSantaFe Corporation and (iii) the Registration Statement on Form S-3
(Registration No. 333-108643) of GlobalSantaFe Corporation of our report dated March 2, 2005 relating to the financial statements, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10 K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated March 2, 2005 relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears in this
Form 10 K.



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas

March 2, 2005