alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

127,&(3$57,(6

3*	(&RUSRUDWLRQ

FR3DFLILF*DV	(OHFWULF&RPSDQ\

$WWQ -DQHW/RGXFD(VT

%HDOH6WUHHW

6DQ)UDQFLVFR&$

.HOOHU	%HQYHQXWWL//3

$WWQ 7RELDV6.HOOHU(VT

-DQH.LP(VT

&DOLIRUQLD6WUHHW6XLWH

6DQ)UDQFLVFR&$

7KH2IILFHRIWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV7UXVWHHIRU5HJLRQ

$WWQ -DPHV/6Q\GHU(VT

7LPRWK\/DIIUHGL(VT

*ROGHQ*DWH$YHQXHWK)ORRU6XLWH

6DQ)UDQFLVFR&$

0LOEDQN//3

$WWQ 'HQQLV)'XQQH(VT

6DP$.KDOLO(VT

+XGVRQ<DUGV

1HZ<RUN1<

0LOEDQN//3

$WWQ 3DXO6$URQ]RQ(VT

*UHJRU\$%UD\(VT

7KRPDV5.UHOOHU(VT

&HQWXU\3DUN(DVWUG)ORRU

/RV$QJHOHV&$

:HLO*RWVKDO	0DQJHV//3

$WWQ6WHSKHQ.DURWNLQ(VT

-HVVLFD/LRX(VT

0DWWKHZ*RUHQ(VT

)LIWK$YHQXH

1HZ<RUN1<

%UXFH$0DUNHOO

)HH([DPLQHU

1)DLUEDQNV&RXUW

6XLWH

&KLFDJR,/

6FRWW+0F1XWW

$WWRUQH\IRUWKH)HH([DPLQHU

:DUUHQ5RDG

6DQ0DWHR&DOLIRUQLD

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4513-6 Filed: 10/30/19 Entered: 10/30/19 06:30:55 Page 1

of 1
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

Robert A. Julian (SBN 88469)

Cecily A. Dumas (SBN 111449)

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

1160 Battery Street, Suite 100

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: 628.208.6434

Facsimile: 310.820.8869

Email: rjulian@bakerlaw.com

Email: cdumas@bakerlaw.com

Eric E. Sagerman (SBN 155496)

Lauren T. Attard (SBN 320898)

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

11601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1400

Los Angeles, CA 90025-0509

Telephone: 310.442.8875

Facsimile: 310.820.8869

Email: esagerman@bakerlaw.com

Email: lattard@bakerlaw.com

Counsel to the Official Committee of Tort Claimants

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

Debtors.

□ Affects PG& E Corporation

□ Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company

■ Affects both Debtors

*All papers shall be filed in the Lead Case, 

No. 19-30088 (DM)

Bankruptcy Case 

No. 19-30088 (DM)

Chapter 11

(Lead Case)

(Jointly Administered)

ORDER AUTHORIZING OVERSIZE 

BRIEFING FOR THE OPPOSITION OF 

THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF 

TORT CLAIMANTS TO THE 

DEBTORS’ MOTION PURSUANT TO 11 

U.S.C. §§ 105(a) AND 502(c) FOR THE 

ESTABLISHMENT OF WILDFIRE 

CLAIMS ESTIMATION PROCEDURES 

[Dkt. No. 3091]

The Court, having reviewed the Ex Parte Application of the Official Committee of Tort 

Claimants Pursuant to B.L.R. 9013-1(c) for Entry of an Order Authorizing Oversize Briefing for 

the Opposition to the Debtors’ Motion Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 105(a) and 502(c) for the 

Signed and Filed: August 8, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

August 08, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3476 Filed: 08/08/19 Entered: 08/08/19 16:40:29 Page 1 of

2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

- 2 -

Establishment of Wildfire Claims Estimation Procedures [Dkt. No. 3091] (the “Application”) 

filed on August 7, 2019, and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Application is granted, as provided herein.

2. The TCC is authorized to file and serve an opposition to the Debtor’s Estimation 

Motion, as defined in the Application, in excess of 25 pages.

**END OF ORDER**

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3476 Filed: 08/08/19 Entered: 08/08/19 16:40:29 Page 2 of

2
- :.., 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 
Under thlr statute the torn ab the l3i8triot Attomkey-elaet f'ar l&a 8tb JtdoitiDlatriotd Texas oasarloes en tha ilwt 48y or January, loci, at *iah tias 

mnh e3.aot.d carfloor my quality~,an& amae She butLea 

0f th0 alii00. 

Yours vary truly 

,ATTOIWBX GEM2.U OF TEXAS
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 2390-2    Filed: 06/05/19    Entered: 06/05/19 10:39:42    Page 1of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRADLEY DANE HACKENBERGER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 280 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 18th day of September, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 SEPTEMBER 10, 2009

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-16707

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 08-20319-CR-DLG

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM ORTEGA,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

_________________________

(September 10, 2009)

Before BLACK, WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
William Ortega appeals his convictions for possession of and conspiracy to

possess with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana, in violation

of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846, 851. He argues the district court erred in failing to grant

a mistrial or inquire into the jury’s deliberations when comments made during

polling of the verdict suggested one of the jurors had difficulty understanding

English.

“It is well established in this Circuit that to invite error is to preclude review

of that error on appeal.” United States v. Campa, 529 F.3d 980, 1000 (11th Cir.

2008), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 2790 (2009). “[A] criminal defendant may not

make an affirmative, apparently strategic decision at trial and then complain on

appeal that the result of that decision constitutes reversible error.” United States v.

Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273, 1290 (11th Cir. 2003).

Ortega successfully objected to the government’s attempt to strike the juror

in question for cause due to its concerns about her English-language

comprehension. When confusion arose during polling, the district court spoke with

the juror individually and she satisfied him that the verdict was her true verdict.

Ortega suggested that the court also ask other jurors about her understanding of the

deliberations, but when the court offered instead to ask the juror herself whether

she had understood the trial testimony, Ortega said he “like[d] that better” and that

2
her understanding of the testimony was “the ultimate issue.” He did not raise any

further objections or move for a mistrial. Because Ortega affirmatively sought or

expressly consented to each of the district court’s decisions, he invited any error

the court might have made and thereby waived appellate review. See id. at 1290;

Campa, 529 F.3d at 1000.

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Ortega’s convictions.

AFFIRMED.

3
#### Edward J. Davis, Respondent, v. Warren G. Willis, Appellant.

— Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Hardin, P. J.
EXHIBIT
32.1






CERTIFICATION
ACCOMPANYING ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K


OF


GREENLIGHT
CAPITAL RE, LTD.


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(CHAPTER
63, TITLE 18 U.S.C. SS.SS. 1350)






I,
Leonard Goldberg, hereby certify that the annual report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2008 of Greenlight Capital Re, Ltd., fully complies with
the applicable reporting requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and that the information contained
in such annual report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Greenlight Capital Re,
Ltd.




Date:
      February 23,
      2009
            /s/
      Leonard GoldbergName:
      Leonard Goldberg
              Title:
      Chief Executive Officer
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3915 Filed: 09/17/19 Entered: 09/17/19 15:05:56 Page 1 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3915 Filed: 09/17/19 Entered: 09/17/19 15:05:56 Page 2 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3915 Filed: 09/17/19 Entered: 09/17/19 15:05:56 Page 3 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3915 Filed: 09/17/19 Entered: 09/17/19 15:05:56 Page 4 of

4
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                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 Unizan Financial Corp.'s (the "Company") Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
J. Pennetti, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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, as
                  amended; 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:  November 13, 2002            /s/ James J. Pennetti
                ------------------------     -------------------------------
                                             James J. Pennetti
                                             Executive Vice President and Chief
                                             Financial Officer
Signed and Filed: October 23, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

October 24, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4458 Filed: 10/23/19 Entered: 10/24/19 08:18:27 Page 1 of

2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

SCHEDULE 1 

Anchorage Capital Group, L.L.C., 

on behalf of certain funds and accounts 

610 Broadway, 6th Floor 

New York, NY 10012 

Centerbridge Partners, L.P., 

on behalf of certain funds and accounts 

375 Park Avenue, 11th Floor 

New York, NY 10152 

Fidelity Management & Research Company, 

on behalf of certain funds and accounts 

245 Summer Street 

Boston, MA 02210 

Silver Point Capital, L.P., 

on behalf of certain funds and accounts 

Two Greenwich Plaza 

Greenwich, CT 06830 

SteelMill Master Fund LP 

c/o PointState Capital LP 

40 West 57th Street, 25th Floor 

New York, NY 10019 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4458 Filed: 10/23/19 Entered: 10/24/19 08:18:27 Page 2 of

2
Exhibit
32.2







Certification of Principal
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
Vision Acquisition II, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Berger, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to my knowledge:





(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.





/s/ David BergerDavid
      Berger
                  Principal
      Financial Officer
                  December
      29, 2008
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5094 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs to recoup certain bonuses or awards paid to employees of the 

Department of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2014 

Mr. MILLER of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, and in addition to the Committee 

on Oversight and Government Reform, 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 amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs to recoup certain bonuses 

or awards paid to employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

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


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5094 IH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY TO RECOUP BONUSES OR AWARDS 

2 PAID TO EMPLOYEES OF DEPARTMENT OF 

3 VETERANS AFFAIRS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 7 of title 38, United 

5 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing new section: 

7 ‘‘§ 712. Recoupment of bonuses or awards paid to em8 ployees of Department. 

9 ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Sec10 retary may issue an order directing an employee of the 

11 Department to repay the amount of any award or bonus 

12 paid to the employee under title 5, including under chap13 ters 45 or 53 of such title, or this title if— 

14 ‘‘(1) the Secretary determines such repayment 

15 appropriate pursuant to regulations prescribed by 

16 the Secretary to carry out this section; and 

17 ‘‘(2) the employee is afforded notice and an op18 portunity for a hearing.’’. 

19 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

20 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding 

21 at the end the following new item: 

‘‘712. Recoupment of bonuses or awards paid to employees of Department.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5174 

To allow additional appointing authorities to select individuals from 

competitive service certificates. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 23, 2014 

Mr. CONNOLLY (for himself and Mr. WITTMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To allow additional appointing authorities to select 

individuals from competitive service certificates. 

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 ‘‘Competitive Service 

5 Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL APPOINTING AUTHORITIES FOR COM7 PETITIVE SERVICE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3317 of title 5, United 

9 States Code, is amended by adding at end the following: 

10 ‘‘(c) OTHER APPOINTING AUTHORITIES.— 


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5174 IH

1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—During the 240-day period 

2 beginning on the date of issuance of a certificate of 

3 eligibles under subsection (a), an appointing author4 ity other than the appointing authority requesting 

5 the certificate (in this subsection referred to as the 

6 ‘other appointing authority’) may select an indi7 vidual from that certificate in accordance with para8 graph (2) for an appointment to a position that is— 

9 ‘‘(A) in the same occupational series as the 

10 position for which the certification of eligibles 

11 was issued (in this subsection referred to as the 

12 ‘original position’); and 

13 ‘‘(B) at a similar grade level as the origi14 nal position. 

15 ‘‘(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The selection of an in16 dividual under paragraph (1)— 

17 ‘‘(A) shall be made in accordance with this 

18 subchapter; and 

19 ‘‘(B) may be made without any additional 

20 posting under section 3327, except that before 

21 selecting an individual in accordance with para22 graph (1) of this section, the other appointing 

23 authority shall provide notice of the available 

24 position to employees of such authority. 


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5174 IH

1 ‘‘(3) APPLICABILITY.—An appointing authority 

2 requesting a certificate of eligibles may share the 

3 certificate with another appointing authority only if 

4 the announcement of the original position provided 

5 notice that the resulting list of eligible candidates 

6 may be used by another appointing authority. 

7 ‘‘(4) COLLECTIVE BARGAINING OBLIGATIONS.— 

8 Nothing in this subsection limits any collective bar9 gaining obligation of an agency under chapter 71.’’. 

10 (b) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 120 days after 

11 the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Of12 fice of Personnel Management shall issue an interim final 

13 rule with comment to carry out the amendment made by 

14 subsection (a). 

Æ 


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997               
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1997               
<CASH>                          804444
<SECURITIES>                    0      
<RECEIVABLES>                   12385
<ALLOWANCES>                    8697           
<INVENTORY>                     0              
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0              
<PP&E>                          31890178       
<DEPRECIATION>                  11662706       
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  22816968       
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           0              
<BONDS>                         20737314       
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0              
<PREFERRED>                     0              
<COMMON>                        0              
<OTHER-SE>                      0              
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    22816968       
<SALES>                         0              
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1213687        
<CGS>                           0              
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   512614         
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                280691         
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0              
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              366991         
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 0              
<INCOME-TAX>                    0              
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             53391          
<DISCONTINUED>                  0              
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0              
<CHANGES>                       0              
<NET-INCOME>                    53391          
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   0              
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0              
        



</TABLE>
**IN THE SUPREME COUR T OF**  **THE ST AT**  **E OF MONT**  **ANA No. DA**  **20 -**  **0 613** 

**____________________________________________________________** JASON D. FR ANKS, Petitioner and Appellant, v. ST AT E OF MONT

ANA, Respondent and Appellee . **ORDER** Upon consideration of Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Brief of Appellee, and good cause appearing; **IT IS HEREBY**

**ORDERED** that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including March 24, 2022 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Reply to Brief of Appellee. No further extension will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 24 2022

02/24/2022

Case Number: DA 20-0613
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-2351

In Re: TAMOJIRA, INCORPORATED,

Debtor.

_________________________

B. VANDENBURG HALL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SHERMAN B. LUBMAN, Trustee,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.

(CA-98-124-3, BK-94-34438-T)

Submitted: November 5, 1998 Decided: November 18, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

B. Vandenburg Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Allen Condyles,

MALONEY, HUENNEKENS, PARKS, GECKER & PARSONS, Richmond, Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

B. Vandenburg Hall filed an untimely notice of appeal. We

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for

filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These

periods are “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director,

Dep’t of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United

States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil

actions have thirty days within which to file in the district court

notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P.

4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the

district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P.

4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).

The district court entered its order on August 10, 1998;

Hall’s notice of appeal was filed on September 10, 1998. Hall’s

failure to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain either an

extension or a reopening of the appeal period leaves this court

without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Hall’s appeal. We

therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

EXHIBIT A

[Proposed] Order Concerning the Applicability of Inverse Condemnation

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4485-1 Filed: 10/25/19 Entered: 10/25/19 20:16:29 Page 1

of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

Stephen Karotkin (pro hac vice)

(stephen.karotkin@weil.com)

Ray C. Schrock, P.C. (pro hac vice)

(ray.schrock@weil.com)

Jessica Liou (pro hac vice)

(jessica.liou@weil.com) 

Matthew Goren (pro hac vice)

(matthew.goren@weil.com)

767 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10153-0119

Tel: 212 310 8000

Fax: 212 310 8007

KELLER & BENVENUTTI LLP

Tobias S. Keller (#151445)

(tkeller@kellerbenvenutti.com)

Jane Kim (#298192)

(jkim@kellerbenvenutti.com)

650 California Street, Suite 1900

San Francisco, CA 94108

Tel: 415 496 6723

Fax: 650 636 9251

Attorneys for Debtors and Debtors in Possession

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP

Paul H. Zumbro (pro hac vice)

(pzumbro@cravath.com)

Kevin J. Orsini (pro hac vice)

(korsini@cravath.com)

Omid H. Nasab (pro hac vice)

(onasab@cravath.com)

825 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10019

Tel: 212 474 1000

Fax: 212 474 3700

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION,

 - and -

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

Bankruptcy Case No.

19-30088 (DM)

Chapter 11

(Lead Case) 

(Jointly Administered)

[PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING 

THE APPLICABILITY OF INVERSE 

Debtors. CONDEMNATION

 Affects PG&E Corporation 

 Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

Affects both Debtors

* All papers shall be filed in the Lead Case, 

No. 19-30088 (DM). 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4485-1 Filed: 10/25/19 Entered: 10/25/19 20:16:29 Page 2

of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

On October 25, 2019, PG&E Corporation (“PG&E Corp.”) and Pacific Gas and Electric 

Company (the “Utility”), as debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, “PG&E” or the 

“Debtors”) in the above-captioned chapter 11 cases (the “Chapter 11 Cases”), the Official 

Committee of Unsecured Creditors and certain PG&E Shareholders filed the Joint Brief of Debtors 

and the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and Supplemental Statement of the PG&E 

Shareholders Concerning the Applicability of Inverse Condemnation. After full consideration of all 

of the parties’ submissions on this issue, the Court’s record and file in this matter, and the arguments 

of counsel, and good cause appearing the Court finds and IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. Inverse condemnation does not apply to investor-owned utilities such as PG&E under 

applicable California Supreme Court precedent;

2. The application of inverse condemnation to investor-owned utilities such as PG&E 

would violate the Takings and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution.

 

** END OF ORDER **

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4485-1 Filed: 10/25/19 Entered: 10/25/19 20:16:29 Page 3

of 3