alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           481,827
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 481,827
<CASH>                                          98,299
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          10,131
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 710,757
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                100,534
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             57,134
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,000<F3>
<COMMON>                                        15,780
<OTHER-SE>                                     405,786
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   710,757<F1>
<PREMIUMS>                                      35,130
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              7,954
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               2,192
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                      30,586
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      5,664
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             2,167
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,859
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,859
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,859
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.25
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0<F2>
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0<F2>
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0<F2>
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0<F2>
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0<F2>
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0<F2>
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0<F2>
<FN>
<F1> Includes minority interest.
<F2> Amounts for Securities Act Industry Guide 6 and Exchange Act Industry Guide
     4 disclosures are not provided because the Company's loss reserves do not
     exceed one-half of the consolidated common shareholders' equity. 
<F3> Represents 3,000,000 Series A preferred shares, par value $1 liquidation 
     preference $25 per share.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
FLIP CHART #1

Issue Paper #1 –

- approach should be monitoring first, then research

Issue Paper #10 –

- metrics in $ value

Issue Paper #11 –

- principle #6 -> concern of “RNV” and how it is defined

- eliminate principle #6 or better define

Issue Paper #2 –

- don’t know yet if we can manage for both trout and native

FLIP CHART #2

Need better definition of target levels in order to approve MO’s (AMWG)

Comment #4 – MO’s should be identified as related to GCD operations or not.

Helpful to have linkages between MO’s

footnote current levels to improve clarity (% dist. at river miles ...)

#24 reach reach shouldn’t discriminate – above/below the Paria

- never mind

ad hoc needs to review “current levels” concern over values -> range preferred

current levels should be referenced (cite literature)

36 – text missing from comment

FLIP CHART #3

64 – should be Issue Paper #2

67 – AMP MO’s should be same as recovery plans

90 – levels should reflect natural aging of reservoir

 water quality targets really benefit other reservoirs

149 – revise/clarify response to say BHBF’s are compatible with SWWF

154 – comment – from tribes due 5/24

MO’s 62-64 may go outside the L&R constraints (concern)

185 – why does NPS limit # of white water trips?
FLIP CHART #4

185 – target should include ecosystem goals (consideration by NPS)

include Hualapai Tribe in determining target level

goal 12 – deletion of “within the river corridor” makes the goal less clear

goal 11 & MO78 acknowledge effects of GCPA conflicts with other goals

243 – changing “other” to “traditional” narrows intent of objective

river runners have resources other than cultural which are of concern

Goal 14 – doesn’t relate to dam operations – note this in MO 89

Revise MO89 (broaden funding sources)

FLIP CHART #5

- KAS expert panel recommendation process

- Dave Speas (Fall) update on trout

- Cultural PEP w/PA response (post-July)

- Power revenue presentation

- USGS -> expected changes

- Response to terrestrial PEP

- AMP Strategic Plan process

- Surplus Criteria EIS

- Update on LSSF – preliminary results

- TWG/AMWG travel reimbursement

- IT update (TWG/AMWG)

FLIP CHART #6 (Meeting Review)

Plus Minus

Cookies rushed on MOs & INs

Agenda format (meeting materials) do your homework

Kept to agenda more lead time on budget

Liked the budget tables more discussion on budget

PEP presentations good Strange budget vote process

Mark agenda for decision items
Water Quality in Lake Pow

and its Influence on the 

Colorado River below 

Glen Canyon Dam 
. 

Romano Narrows 

. 

. .

Llewellyn Alcove

2 
3 
WQ field parameters measur

monthly at forebay and quart

throughout reservoir 

• Depth • Temperature • Dissolved Oxygen • pH • Conductivity / TDS • ORP • Turbidity • Chl a • Secchi Depth • Meteorological Information 

4 
5 
WQ samples sent for lab analys

• Major ions • pH • Conductivity • TDS, roe & soc • TSS • Alkalinity • DOC • OP • TP • NH3-N • NO3+NO2-N • TN • Chl • Phytoplankton / Zooplankton • Metals (once per year, UT) 

6 
7 
3700 

elevation, ft 

Lake Powell Forebay Temperature 1965-Dec 2016 

3650 3600 3550 3250 3300 3350 3400 3450 3500 

Penstock 

River Outlet 

3200 

8 
3650 

Lake Powell Forebay Temperature 2000 - 2016 

elevation, ft 

3600 3550 3450 3500 

Penstock 

3350 3400 

River Outlet 

3300 3250 3200 

9 
elevation, ft Lake Powell Forebay TDS 2000 - 2016 

3650 3600 3550 3250 3300 3350 3400 3450 3500 

Penstock 

River Outlet 

3200 

10 
11
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 

20 
21 
22 
23 
Questions ?
#### STEENBURGH, Appellant, v. MILLER et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

December 16, 1896.)

Action by George W. Steenburgh against John H. • Miller and John H. Miller and others.

No opinion. "Motion for substitution of Loren C. Steenburgh, as administrator, etc., of George W. Steenburgh, as plaintiff in the above-entitled action, granted.
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-50083 Conference Calendar

__________________ THOMAS TINER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus TOMMY JONES, Etc., ET AL., Defendants, TOMMY JONES, Sheriff of Crane County, Texas, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 94-CV-95

- - - - - - - - - - June 28, 1995 Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Thomas Tiner appeals the district court's denial of his request for injunctive relief against Crane County, Texas, Jail (Jail) officials. Tiner is no longer an inmate at the Jail by his own admission and, therefore, his request for injunctive relief is moot. See Hooten v. Jenne , 786 F.2d 692, 697 n.6 (5th Cir. 1986). "Simply stated, a case is moot when the issues presented are no longer `live' or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome." Powell v. McCormack , 395No. 95-50083 -2- U.S. 486, 496 (1969). The "mere possibility of future consequences is too speculative to give rise to a case or controversy." Bailey v. Southerland , 821 F.2d 277, 279 (5th Cir. 1987). Tiner's contention that he will be returned to the Jail at some future date and the same allegedly unconstitutional conditions will occur then is speculative. The case is moot. Thus, IT IS ORDERED that his appeal is DISMISSED. APPEAL DISMISSED.
# C ou r t

of A p p e al s

of t h e S t at e of

G e or gi a

A

T L A N T A

,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

T h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l s h e r e b y p a s s e s t h e f o l l o w i n g o r d e r :

A 1 8 A 0 9 2 4

. D A R

I O N C H R

I S B A R K E R v

. T H E S T A T E

.

I n 1 9 9 4

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t e n t e r e d i t s j u d g m e n t o f c o n v i c t i o n a n d s e n t e n c e a f

t e r

D a r i o n C h r i s B a r k e r p l e d g u i l t y t o p o s s e s s i

o n o f c o c a i n e w i

t h i n t e n t t o d i s t r i b u t e a n d

p o s s e s s i o n o f m a r i j u a n a

. I n 2 0 1 3

, B a

r k e r f i l e d a m o t i o n f o r a n o u t

- o f

- t i m e a p p e a l

,

w h i c h t h e t r i a l c o u r t d e n i e d o n A p r i l 1 6

, 2 0 1 3

. O n F r i

d a y

, M a y 1 7

, 2 0 1 3

, B a

r k e r f i l e d

a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l t o t h i s C o u r t

. W e l a c k j u r i s d i c t i o n

.

A n o t i c e o f a p p e a l m u s t b e f i l e d w i t h i n 3 0 d a y s o f e n t r y o f t h e o r d e r s o u g

h t t o

b e a p p e a l e d

. O C G A § 5

- 6

- 3 8 ( a )

. T h e p r o p e r a n d t i m e l y f i l i n g o f a n o t i

c e o f a p p e a l

i s a n a b s o l u t e r e q u i r e m e n t t o c o n f e r j u r i s d i c t i o n o n t h i s C o u r t

. R o w l a n d v

. S t a t e

, 2 6 4

G a

. 8 7 2

, 8 7 2 ( 1 ) ( 4 5 2 S E 2 d 7 5 6 ) ( 1 9 9 5 )

. January 29, 2018B a

r k e r ’ s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i s u n t i m e l y

, a s i t w a s f i l e d 3 1 d a y s a f t e r e n t r y o f t h e

o r d e r d e n

y i n g h i s m o t i

o n f o r a n o u t

- o f

- t i m e a p p e a l

. C o n s e q

u e n t l y

, t h i s a p p e a l i s

h e r e b y D I S M I S S E D f

o r l a c k o f j u r i s d i c t i o n

. 1

C o u r t o f Ap p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g i a

C l e r k ’s O f f i c e

, At l a n t a

,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i

s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o f t h e C o u r t o f Ap p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i t n e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a i d c o u r

t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w

r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

.

1 W h i l e i t h a s n o b e a

r i n g o n t h e t i m e l i n e s s o f B a

r k e r ’ s a p p e a l

, w e n o t e t

h e

s i g n i f i c a n t d e l a y b e t w e e n t h e f i l i n g o f t h e n o t i c e o f a p p e a l a n d t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f t h e

c a s e f r o m t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o t h i s C o u r t i

n N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 7

, a

n d e m p h a s i z e t h e

i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t c l e r k ’ s d u t y t o e x p e d i t i o u s l y p r e p a r e a n d t r a n s m i t t h e

r e c o r d t o t

h i s C o u r t

. S e e O C G

A § 5

- 6

- 4 3 ( a )

. 01/29/2018
Page 1 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL 

David H. Madden 

Mersenne Law LLP

9600 S.W. Oak Street 

Suite 500 

Tigard, Oregon 97223 

(503) 679-1671 

dhm@mersenne.com 

Attorney for Certain Defendant DOES 1-50 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF OREGON

EUGENE DIVISION

VOLTAGE PICTURES, LLC, 

a California limited-liability company; 

Plaintiffs, 

v.

DOES 1-50, 

Defendants. 

Civil Action No.: ........... 6:14-cv-00812-___

[Removed from Marion County Circuit 

Court No. 14C13823] 

NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF 

REMOVAL 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on May 16th, 2014 certain anonymous John Doe defendant 

ISP subscribers electronically filed a Notice of Removal of Circuit Court of Marion 

County Case Number 14C13823 with the United States District Court of Oregon and 

served Notice on Plaintiff. On Monday May 19, 2014, my co-counsel, Morgan Pietz of 

The Pietz Law Firm, will cause the Notice of Removal to be served by mail on all 

defendants we are aware of who have appeared so far in the state court action, as per 

Case 6:14-cv-00812-MC Document 1 Filed 05/16/14 Page 1 of 4
Page 2 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL 

the service list below. 

May 16, 2014 

Date David H. Madden, SBN OR080396

Attorney for Certain Defendant DOES 1-50 

Mersenne Law LLP

9600 S.W. Oak Street 

Suite 500 

Tigard, Oregon 97223 

dhm@mersenne.com 

(503)679-1671

Case 6:14-cv-00812-MC Document 1 Filed 05/16/14 Page 2 of 4
Certificate of Service 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the document entitled: 

NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL 

was served upon the parties listed below on the date indicated, 

 by handing it to the person; 

 by leaving it at the leaving it at the person’s office with a clerk or other person in 

charge or, if no one is in charge, in a conspicuous place in the office; or if the 

person has no office or the office is closed, at the person’s dwelling or usual 

place of abode with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there; 

 by mailing it to the address indicated; 

 by leaving it with the court clerk; 

 by electronic filing notification (PACER); or 

  other: by electronic mail

The Notice of Filing Notice of Removal was served via electronic filing notification and 

by electronic mail on May 16th, 2014: 

Carl D. Crowell, Esq. 

Crowell Law 

943 Liberty Street S.E. 

P.O. Box 923 

Salem, Oregon 97308-0923 

crowell@kite.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff VOLTAGE PICTURES, LLC 

The Notice of Filing Notice of Removal will be mailed to the following addresses via U.S. 

Mail on May 19th, 2014: 

John Doe 11 

1841 Montreal Road, Suite #103 

Tucker, GA 30084 

Pro Se Litigant 

John Doe 18 

c/o Portland State Student Legal Services 

PO Box 791 

Portland, OR 97207 

(Cont’d) 

Case 6:14-cv-00812-MC Document 1 Filed 05/16/14 Page 3 of 4
Certificate of Service 

Mikelle L. Rupp 

RUPP LAW LLC 

29030 SW Town Center Loop E, Suite 202-280 

Wilsonville, OR 97070 

Attorney for Defendant DOE 

May 16, 2014 

Date David H. Madden

Case 6:14-cv-00812-MC Document 1 Filed 05/16/14 Page 4 of 4
UTAH LAKELatitude: 40.359Longitude: -111.894Elevation: 4485

UTAH LAKE

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Cascade Mountain Site Page...



Cascade Mountain

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Wolf Creek Peak Site Page...



Wolf Creek Peak

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Bevans Cabin Site Page...



Bevans Cabin

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Hobble Creek Site Page...



Hobble Creek

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Santaquin Meadows Site Page...



Santaquin Meadows

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Atwater Site Page...



Atwater

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Nephi Site Page...



Nephi

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Beaver Divide Site Page...



Beaver Divide

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Brighton Site Page...



Brighton

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Clear Creek #1 Site Page...



Clear Creek #1

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Clear Creek #2 Site Page...



Clear Creek #2

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Daniels-Strawberry Site Page...



Daniels-Strawberry

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Payson R.S. Site Page...



Payson R.S.

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Rocky Basin-Settleme Site Page...



Rocky Basin-Settleme

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Snowbird Site Page...



Snowbird

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Strawberry Divide Site Page...



Strawberry Divide

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Thaynes Canyon Site Page...



Thaynes Canyon

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Timpanogos Divide Site Page...



Timpanogos Divide

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Trial Lake Site Page...



Trial Lake
Exhibit 10.2


 


OFFICE PROPERTIES INCOME TRUST


 


Summary of Trustee Compensation


 


The following is a summary of the currently effective compensation
of the Trustees of Office Properties Income Trust (the “Company”) for services as Trustees, which is subject to modification
at any time by the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) or the Compensation Committee of the Board, as applicable:


 


		·	Each Independent Trustee receives an annual fee of $75,000 for services as a Trustee. The annual fee for any new Independent
Trustee is prorated for the initial year.



 


		·	Each Independent Trustee who serves as a committee chair of the Board’s Audit Committee, Compensation Committee or Nominating
and Governance Committee receives an additional annual fee of $17,500, $12,500 and $12,500, respectively. The committee chair fee
for any new committee chair is prorated for the initial year.



 


		·	The Lead Independent Trustee receives an additional annual cash retainer fee of $15,000 for serving in this role.



 


		·	Each Trustee receives a grant of 3,500 of the Company’s common shares of beneficial interest on the date of the first
Board meeting following each annual meeting of shareholders (or, for Trustees who are first elected or appointed at other times,
on the day of the first Board meeting attended).



 


		·	The Company generally reimburses all Trustees for travel expenses incurred in connection with their duties as Trustees and
for out of pocket costs incurred in connection with their attending certain continuing education programs.
# C_2021183EN.01000101.xml

| 11.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 183/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10215 — CVC/Carlyle/MedRisk)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 183/01)

On 5 May 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10215. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10215. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
#### Dominic Ervolina et al., Individually and as Parents and Natural Guardians of Thomas A. Ervolina, et al., Appellants, v City of Buffalo et al., Defendants, and Suicide Prevention and Crises Services, Inc., Respondent.

Memorandum: Special Term properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendant because the prior order of preclusion for failure to serve a bill of particulars made it impossible for plaintiffs to prove their cause of action. Although plaintiffs have attempted, on this appeal, to bring up for review the prior order of preclusion, no grounds for reversal of that order appear in the record. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
134.2 kHz Review

Feb. 26, 2003
• 134.2 KHz – 4 year old technolo

• Columbia research 400kHz to 13

conversion in 2000

• 400 + readers in use, 300 in Colu• Recent model designed to read 4

134.2 kHz
• 134.2 can display code in Decim

• 16 digit code with manufacturer 

country code

• Internal 6,400 tag code memory • Date and Timer Stamp option• 134.2 tags available in 12mm, 20

23mm length
• FS2001F-ISO

• Weir/Trap/Pipe Antenna• Snorkel/ Dive Canister• Submersible Triangle 

Antenna

• Carry Belt System• Custom Antenna

• New FS2• 12 Volt Re

Application

• 4’ x 12’ An• Self-contai• Backpack S

developme
Portable Reader

• New FS2001F-ISO

– Increased Antenna Power– Larger Antenna Available– 400, 125 & 134.2kHz 

Frequencies

• Custom Antenna Designs 

– Submersible Models– Weir, Trap and Pipe Apps.– Custom Sizes
FS2001F-ISO

• More Power-More Read 

Distance-Larger Antenna

• Date & Time Stamp• External 12 volt Battery 

Operation for Unattended Operation
Weir, Trap & Pipe 

Applications

• Multiple Sizes & Shapes• Sizes up to 30 Inches• Cable lengths to 30 feet


Pipe Applications

• Remote Solar Power• Self-contained System• 20” Diameter capability• Acclimation Site Monitoring• Irrigation Bypass Monitoring

Dive/Snorkel Canister

• Shallow dive applications • 2-meter long Cable• Designed to read 134.2 tags• Racket can be mounted to 

extension pole 
Submersible Antenna

• Triangle Design for Best 

Orientation

• Extends to 17’ with Pole Mount• Designed to read “Super Tag” 

and other 134.2 Tags
FS2001 Belt System

• View Display While in Use• Attach Tuning Box and Spare 

Batteries

• Shoulder Strap 

Adult Trough Antenna

FS1001

• Automatically Reads 134.2 

Tags w/integral antenna

• Length Measurements• Portable DC or AC power
FS1001 DC Culvert 

System

• 12 Volt Battery system• Self-contained electronics• Reads 23mm and 12mm tags

FS1001-DC Pack 

System

• Prototype completed and in the 

field

• Evaluate Battery Life and 

Tuning Requirements

• Reduce Weight and Maintain 

Optimized Read Distance
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION 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 of LaSalle Re Holdings Limited (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alan L.
Hunte, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2) The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.


Date: August 27, 2003                              /s/ Alan L. Hunte
                                                   -----------------
                                                   Alan L. Hunte
                                                   President and
                                                   Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to LaSalle Re Holdings Limited and will be retained by LaSalle Re
Holdings Limited and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.


                                       44