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

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3736

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to terminate the availability of community development block grant amounts

for States and localities within such States that allow recovery of damages for injuries suffered in the commission of a felony.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 27, 1996

Mr. BLILEY (for himself, Mr. HYDE, Mr. COBURN, Mr. SAXTON, Mr. ZIMMER,

Mr. KLUG, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina, Mr.

WHITFIELD, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr. UPTON, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr.

COBLE, Mrs. SEASTRAND, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. WOLF, Mr. HOKE, Mr.

PICKETT, Mr. CONDIT, Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas, Mr. STOCKMAN, Mr.

BALLENGER, Mr. BURR, Mr. GILMAN, Mr. HORN, Mr. OXLEY, Mr.

GALLEGLY, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. LAUGHLIN, Ms. MOLINARI, Mr.

METCALF, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. COOLEY of Oregon, Mr. BUYER, Mr.

HAYES, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mrs.

CHENOWETH, Mr. BARR of Georgia, Mr. DAVIS, Mr. CALVERT, Mr.

FRANKS of Connecticut, Mr. RIGGS, Mr. ROYCE, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr.

FIELDS of Texas, Mr. SISISKY, Mr. PACKARD, Mr. TANNER, Mr.

GOODLATTE, Mr. BAKER of Louisiana, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. BATEMAN,

Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma, Mr. BUNNING of Kentucky,

Mr. DREIER, and Mr. HAYWORTH) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services

A BILL

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act

of 1974 to terminate the availability of community development block grant amounts for States and localities

within such States that allow recovery of damages for

injuries suffered in the commission of a felony.
2

•HR 3736 IH

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 ‘‘Crime Does Not Pay

5 Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DE7 VELOPMENT ACT OF 1974.

8 Section 104 of the Housing and Community Develop9 ment Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5304) is amended by adding

10 at the end the following new subsection:

11 ‘‘(n) PREVENTION OF RECOVERY FOR INJURIES IN12 CURRED IN COMMISSION OF FELONIES.—Grant amounts

13 may not be provided under this title to a State, or to any

14 unit of general local government in a State, if such State

15 does not have in effect (at the time the grant amounts

16 are made available to State or unit of general local govern17 ment) a law that prohibits any individual who has been

18 convicted of a felony from recovering, in any civil action

19 under the law of such State, any compensatory, actual,

20 or general damages for any physical or mental injury,

21 harm, or suffering to such individual that was caused in

22 the commission of the felony. The Secretary shall have the

23 authority to determine whether a State law complies with

24 the requirements of this subsection.’’.

Æ
The Honorable Russell G. Clark, United States District Judge for the Western 1

District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable James

C. England, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-1404

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Western District of Missouri. 

Chris Prestenbach, *

C [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: November 6, 1998

 Filed: February 16, 1999

___________

Before BOWMAN, Chief Judge, FLOYD R. GIBSON, and MORRIS SHEPPARD

ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Chris Prestenbach, a federal prisoner at the United States Medical Center for

Federal Prisoners at Springfield (MCFP), appeals the district court&s 18 U.S.C.

1

§ 4245 order committing him to the custody of the Attorney General for psychiatric

treatment. Initially, we reject Mr. Prestenbach&s complaint that he should have been
-2-

examined by another mental health expert and been allowed to offer additional witness

testimony at his section 4245 hearing, because he has failed to show how such

examination or evidence would have altered the outcome of this proceeding. Having

carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the district court did not clearly err, as both

the MCFP mental health professionals and a clinical psychologist chosen by Mr.

Prestenbach&s attorney were of the opinion that Mr. Prestenbach suffers from a mental

disease or defect and is in need of custody for care or treatment in a suitable facility.

See 18 U.S.C. § 4245(d); United States v. Watson, 893 F.2d 970, 976 (8th Cir.)

(standard of review) vacated in part as moot and appeal dismissed in part sub nom.

United States v. Holmes, 900 F.2d 1322 (8th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 497 U.S.

1006 (1990).

Insofar as Mr. Prestenbach contends on appeal that he should not be forcibly

medicated, such issue is not now before this court. The government&s petition did not

request, and the district court did not render, a decision whether medication may be

involuntarily administered to Mr. Prestenbach. Cf. Watson, 893 F.2d at 976 (§ 4245

governs transfer to facility for psychiatric treatment but does not define “treatment” or

automatically authorize administration of psychotropic drugs). 

Finally, we reject Mr. Prestenbach&s remaining contentions as being without

merit, and deny his pending motion.

Therefore, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I, Don R. Kania, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the annual report of FEI Company on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such annual report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of FEI Company.



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ DON R. KANIA                     
|    |  | Don R. Kania                         
|    |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

February 20, 2009
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 1st Home
Buy & Sell Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending
September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Samuel J. Alderson, 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/ Samuel
      J. AldersonSamuel  J.
      Alderson
                Principal
      Financial Officer
                February
      19, 2008
#### Robert F. MOELLER, Claimant-Appellant, v. SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, Employer-Respondent.

No. 70765.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 24, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 5, 1997.

Application to Transfer Denied March 25, 1997.

*478Frank J. Niesen, Jr., St. Louis, for claimant-appellant.

John J. Johnson, Jr., Louise Rose Ryter-ski, St. Louis, for employer-respondent.

Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robert F. Moeller appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission which reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s award of benefits and denied all compensation. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, CASE NO: 09-20402-02

v. DISTRICT JUDGE THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES E. BINDER

PHILIP JOSEPH LAFATA,

Defendant.

/

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT, FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

I. REPORT AND FINDINGS

This case was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§

636(b)(1)(B) and 636(b)(3) for purposes of receiving, on consent of the parties, Defendant’s offer

of a plea of guilty. (Doc. 28.) Defendant and his counsel appeared before me on February 25,

2010. In open court, I examined Defendant under oath, confirmed Defendant’s consent, and then

advised and questioned Defendant regarding each of the inquiries prescribed by Rule 11(b) of the

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Based upon Defendant’s answers and demeanor, I HEREBY FIND: (1) that Defendant

is competent to tender a plea; (2) that Defendant’s plea was knowingly, intelligently made; and (3)

that the offense to which Defendant pleaded guilty is supported by an independent basis in fact

containing each of the essential elements of the offense. Therefore, I have ordered the preparation

of a presentence investigation report.
2

II. RECOMMENDATION

For the reasons set forth above, IT IS RECOMMENDED that, subject to the Court’s

consideration of the plea agreement pursuant to Rule 11(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal

Procedure, Defendant’s plea be accepted, Defendant be adjudged guilty and the Court impose

sentence.

III. REVIEW

Pursuant to Rule 72(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[w]ithin 14 days after

being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific

written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. A party may respond to another

party’s objections within 14 days after being served with a copy.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2). See

also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further

right of appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S. Ct. 466, 88 L. Ed.2d 435 (1985); Howard

v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638

F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). The parties are advised that making some objections, but failing to raise

others, will not preserve all the objections a party may have to this Report and Recommendation.

Willis v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 931 F.2d 390, 401 (6th Cir. 1991); Smith v. Detroit

Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Pursuant to E.D. Mich. LR

72.1(d)(2), a copy of any objections is to be served upon this Magistrate Judge.

 s/ Charles` E Binder 

CHARLES E. BINDER 

Dated: February 25, 2010 United States Magistrate Judge
3

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that this Report and Recommendation was electronically filed this date,

electronically served on Raymond Sakis, Roy Kranz, and Philip Ross, and served on U.S. District

Judge Thomas Ludington in the traditional manner.

Date: February 25, 2010 By s/Jean L. Broucek 

Case Manager to Magistrate Judge Binder
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. §1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of NovaBay Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas J. Paulson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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; 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 11, 2010


/s/ Thomas J. PaulsonThomas J. PaulsonChief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.60

                               AMENDING AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by Rotary Power International, Inc. ("Rotary")
and Londonderry Capital Structuring Ltd. ("Londonderry") for the purpose of
clarifying the original intent of paragraph a) of a LETTER AGREEMENT RE:
FACILITATION FEE dated November 6, 1999 (the "Agreement"). Said paragraph a) of
the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:

a)    Londonderry Capital Structuring Ltd. ("Londonderry") or its nominee will
      be paid by Rotary Power International, Inc. ("Rotary") a 10% facilitation
      fee on any financing proposal funded through Londonderry or through
      Londonderry's efforts in arranging other investors to provide funding to
      Rotary that has been approved by Rotary excepting that Rotary will not be
      obligated to pay more than 10%, in the aggregate, to Londonderry and other
      parties acting in common.

      Additionally, Londonderry will be paid by Rotary a 10% facilitation fee of
      the amount of any debt of Rotary that Londonderry arranges to restructure
      to some form other than debt including any satisfaction of debt by the
      issuance of Rotary common and/or preferred shares.

All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged.

Dated as of the 30th day of April, 2000.


Rotary Power International, Inc.            Londonderry Capital Structuring Ltd.


per:  /s/ Douglas M. Drew                   per: /s/ Ronald G. McKeown
      -------------------------                  -------------------------------
      Douglas M. Drew                            Ronald G. McKeown
Case 2:09-mc-50908-GER Document 2 Filed 08/11/2009 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:09-mc-50908-GER Document 2 Filed 08/11/2009 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:09-mc-50908-GER Document 2 Filed 08/11/2009 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:09-mc-50908-GER Document 2 Filed 08/11/2009 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit 23

Independent Auditors' Consent

The
Board of Directors
Samsonite Corporation:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 333-05467, 333-19281, 333-20775, 333-28663,
333-52185, 333-53935, and 333-57014) on Form S-8 of Samsonite Corporation of our report dated March 22, 2004 with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of Samsonite Corporation and subsidiaries as of January 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity (deficit) and
comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended January 31, 2004, and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears
in the January 31, 2004, annual report on Form 10-K of Samsonite Corporation.

Our
report refers to changes in accounting related to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142,Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets, in 2002 and Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 145, in 2003.



Denver,
Colorado
April 21, 2004

---



QuickLinks
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.

47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 1, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________

No. 05-30536

____________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RICHARD ROWAN, II,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 6:04-CR-60010

Before JOLLY, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

We VACATE Rowan’s sentence and REMAND to the district court for re-sentencing

pursuant to United States v. Duhon, No. 05-30387 (5th Cir. Feb. 17, 2006).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT GINEMAN, 

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09-CV-11955

v.

HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN 

AFFAIRS),

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

JUDGMENT

The above entitled matter has come before the court on defendant’s motion for

summary judgment, and in accordance with the court's order granting defendant’s motion

entered this date,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment hereby is GRANTED in favor of

defendant on plaintiff’s claims.

DAVID J. WEAVER

CLERK OF THE COURT

BY: s/Josephine Chaffee 

 DEPUTY COURT CLERK

Dated: April 27, 2011

2:09-cv-11955-GCS-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 04/27/11 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 232
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-2334

_____________________________

JEROME WALKER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Robert R. Wheeler, Judge.

July 17, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jerome Walker, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Anne C. Conley, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
V

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 412

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade for the vessel FINESSE.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. GOSS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel

FINESSE.

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

3 That notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

4 Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the Act of June 19, 1886

5 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and section 12106 of title 46,

6 United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may

7 issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate en8 dorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the
2

•HR 412 IH

1 vessel FINESSE (State of Florida official number 7148

2 HA).

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

ANTHONY GORDON,

Plaintiff,

Case Number 09-13655

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

SAGINAW PUBLIC SCHOOLS,

Defendant.

______________________________________ /

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment

[Dkt. # 20] entered on this date,

It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment [Dkt.

# 9] is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff’s wrongful termination based on

age discrimination claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act is DISMISSED WITH

PREJUDICE.

It further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff’s discrimination based on national

origin claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1965 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

It is further ORDERED ADJUDGED that jurisdiction is DECLINED over Plaintiff’s

remaining state law claim.

1:09-cv-13655-TLL-CEB Doc # 21 Filed 02/10/11 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 422
It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s motion in limine [Dkt. #16]

is DENIED AS MOOT.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: February 10, 2011

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on February 10, 2011.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS

1:09-cv-13655-TLL-CEB Doc # 21 Filed 02/10/11 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 423
EXHIBIT A

Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 1 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 2 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 3 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 4 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 5 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 6 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 7 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 8 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 9 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 10 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 11 of 15
Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 12 of 15
EXHIBIT B

Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 13 of 15
17722-17722-00052\MCP\SLD\2953178.1

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

Jaburg & Wilk, P.C.

3200 N. Central Avenue, 20th Floor

Phoenix, AZ 85012

602.248.1000

Nathan D. Meyer (020583)

ndm@jaburgwilk.com

Micalann C. Pepe (029053)

mcp@jaburgwilk.com

Attorney for Defendant USAA GIC

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA

COUNTY OF MARICOPA

HEATHER HOUSE and WILLIAM 

HOUSE, wife and husband,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE 

ASSOCIATION GENERAL 

INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Texas 

corporation, JOHN and JANE DOES I- X; BLACK and WHITE 

CORPORATIONS/PARTNERSHIPS I- X;

Defendants.

Case No. CV2017-014627

NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF 

REMOVAL

(Assigned to Honorable David Gass)

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441, et seq., Defendant USAA General Indemnity 

Company (“USAA GIC”), incorrectly named as United Services Automobile 

Association General Indemnity Company, notifies the Superior Court that it has filed a 

Notice of Removal of this action to the United States District Court for the District of 

Arizona. See Exh. A, Notice of Removal (exhibits omitted).

Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 14 of 15
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

DATED this 11th day of January, 2018.

Jaburg & Wilk, P.C.

s/ Micalann C. Pepe

Nathan D. Meyer

Micalann C. Pepe

Attorneys for Defendant USAA GIC

ORIGINAL E-FILED and COPY

of the foregoing mailed this 

11th day of January, 2018 to:

Drew M. Gully

Ryan J. Linder

LINDER & GULLY PLC

60 East Rio Salado Parkway, Suite 900

Tempe, AZ 85281

dgully@lindergully.com

rlinder@lindergully.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

/s/ Stephanie Dolfini

Case 2:18-cv-00112-DGC Document 1-1 Filed 01/11/18 Page 15 of 15
EXHIBIT 23.1




                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statements of
Everest Reinsurance Holdings,  Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-1972 and File No.
333-05771) of our report dated February 17, 1999 except for Note 14, as to which
the  date  is  March  11,  1999,  on our  audit  of the  consolidated  financial
statements and financial statement  schedules of Everest  Reinsurance  Holdings,
Inc.  as of  December  31,  1998 and 1997 and for each of the three years in the
period ended  December 31, 1998,  which report is included in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K.





PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
New York, New York
March 23, 1999