Replies to post #1286 on Francisco Industries, Inc. (FRAZ)

[deet49]

`check out Exhibit A<< XOM v. CORPORACIÓN CIMEX S.A. (Cuba); CORPORACIÓN CIMEX S.A. (Panama); and UNIÓN CUBA-PETRÓLEO
Case No. 19-cv-1277-APM

- EXHIBIT A

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit A to this declaration is a true and correct copy of a portion of the file of the Foreign Claims Settlement commission in Claims CU-500 decision No. 6066, Francisco Sugar Company, that was obtained by my law firm in 1988-89 under Freedom of Information Act. It is part of the Appraisal of the claimants property done by Luis Parajon and submitted by the Francisco Sugar Company in support of it's claim.

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/563a4585e4b00d0211e8dd7e/t/5eec2dbfbb782e7540c18502/1592536515129/show_temp+%287%29.pdf

~ If the courts Agree with Exxon claim than same should be true for all referenced claims as well IMO

“We agree with the court’s decision to allow this claim to proceed,” Exxon spokesman Todd Spitler said in an email. “The decision continues to support our claim that ExxonMobil receive compensation for its expropriated assets.” https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-21/exxon-s-280-million-claim-over-seized-cuba-assets-can-proceed

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28055647/EXXON_MOBIL_CORPORATION_v_CORPORACION_CIMEX_SA_et_al

AAL, AMZN, BUD, CCL, FRAZ, SHERF, TRVG, XOM