text:
Simon West's The Expendables 2 opens this weekend, and the film has Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone) and his gang of mercenaries out for revenge while also having to deal with a baddie (Jean-Claude Van Damme) who wants some weapons-grade plutonium. I was very disappointed with the first film, but the sequel is a blast. I think one of the big problems with the original was the lack of a great antagonist. You can't have all these huge action stars fighting a no-name actor in the middle of nowhere. But by bringing in Van Damme (who is one of the best parts of the sequel), the fight scenes are a lot more fun. The Expendables 2 also stars Jason Statham, Yu Nan, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Chuck Norris, Terry Crews, Randy Couture, Liam Hemsworth, Bruce Willis, and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
At the recent Los Angeles press day I got to speak with Jason Statham. We talked about how he prepared for the sequel, filming in Bulgaria, who would he like to see in The Expendables 3, and what's the status of Crank 3. Hit the jump to watch.
Jason Statham
- Was there anything he wanted to see in the sequel
- How did he prepare for the sequel and is it the same process for all his films
- The pros and cons of filming in Bulgaria
- Who would he like to see in The Expendables 3. Have they already started talking about it
- Crank 3 talk


text:
November 8-10, 2017, Baltimore, Maryland
Two Top Preachers Will Lead Conference Worship
Worship is a vibrant and dynamic part of the Covenant Network conference each year, and this year's conference worship will be led by two accomplished preachers who are leaders in the national church.
The Reverend Nancy Benson-Nicol will preach on Thursday afternoon, November 9, at the opening conference worship service. Rev. Benson-Nicol has served the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) as associate director, Theological Education Funds Development (Presbyterian Foundation), and on behalf of the marginalized as associate for Gender and Racial Justice (Presbyterian Mission Agency).
A nationally recognized preacher, she is also the author of the 2012-2013 Horizons Bible Study Dispatches to God's Household: The General Epistles. From 2006-2013, she served as university chaplain of the University of the Ozarks in Clarksville, Arkansas. Prior to that, Nancy served congregations in Arkansas and Michigan. Nancy currently lives in Houston, Texas, where she serves as a philanthropic consultant in the healthcare industry.
The Reverend Daniel Vigilante will preach on Friday evening, November 10, to close the conference. Rev. Vigilante is co-moderator of the board of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians, on which he has served since 2008. In 2013, he was ordained as Minister of the Word and Sacrament, one of the first openly gay candidates to be ordained after changes to the PCUSA constitution permitting such an ordination in 2012.
He has served as pastor of Grace-Trinity Community Church in Minneapolis since 2012; previously, he served at St. Mark Presbyterian Church in Newport Beach, California. He has preached at national Presbyterian events and also a talented musician, playing piano and singing in the Twin Cities Gay Men's Chorus. He and his husband James live in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Civil Rights Historian TAYLOR BRANCH to Keynote 2017 Covenant Conference
Author and public speaker Taylor Branch will keynote "Our Shared Humanity," the 2017 national gathering of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians in Baltimore, November 8-10, 2017.
Taylor Branch is an American author and public speaker best known for his landmark trilogy on the civil rights era, America in the King Years. The trilogy's first book, Parting the Waters: America in the King Years, 1954-63, won the Pulitzer Prize and numerous other awards in 1989. Two successive volumes also gained critical and popular success: Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years, 1963-65, and At Canaan's Edge: America in the King Years, 1965-1968. Decades later, all three books remain in demand.
Branch has chronicled other significant moments in American history in print, digital media and film, including the Bill Clinton presidency and the role of the NCAA in college athletics.
Branch returned to civil rights history in his latest book, The King Years: Historic Moments in the Civil Rights Movement (2013). He has taught classes at Goucher College, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the University of Baltimore.
Aside from writing, and teaching, Taylor Branch speaks before a wide variety of audiences. He began his career as a magazine journalist for The Washington Monthly in 1970, moving later to Harper's and Esquire. He is a member of Brown Memorial Presbyterian Church in Baltimore, where he also sings in a contemporary men's singing group called Soulful Revue. He lives in Baltimore. His career website is www.taylorbranch.com.
Taylor Branch will speak Thursday night, November 9.
Come consider, challenge and build the church's witness at a critical moment
The Church is the place where our humanity—our creation in the image of God—is a reason for celebration. But the Church's past and present, as well as our nation's civic life, are filled with barriers, trauma, rules concrete or unspoken, that have had the effect of denying and obscuring God's image in one another and leaving people on the outside starving or on the inside hurting.
This conference will illuminate and confront the ongoing exclusion encountered by LGBTQ people, people of color and others in the life of church and society. It will name the privilege in our midst and seek to harness it as a force to seek justice and practice radical hospitality. And it will seek to "make manifest Christ's work of reconciliation" among believers, in congregations and councils and in all the world.
We'll also celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Covenant Network's founding and make some exciting announcements about our future!
Additional Speakers
A Conversation with the General Assembly Co-Moderator
Denise Anderson was elected co-moderator of the 222nd General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in June 2016. It has been an eventful year since then for church and society, during which she has traveled the country and the world representing the denomination—and seeing its ministry and hearing its voices.
We'll talk with Rev. Anderson about what she is seeing and hearing, especially when it comes to its work for inclusion and justice of all God's children. How are we faithfully bearing witness, and where do we have work yet to do? What can your congregation—and you yourself—do to work for the reconciliation of the world?
The Rev. T. Denise Anderson is co-moderator of the 222nd General Assembly (2016) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and since 2014 has served as pastor of Unity Presbyterian Church in Temple Hills, Maryland. Rev. Anderson was born in Oxford, England while both of her parents served in the U.S. Air Force. She graduated from Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia and continued her studies at Howard University School of Divinity in Washington, D.C.
While under care, Anderson served on her presbytery's Committee on Representation and as a Pastoral Assistant at Taiwanese Presbyterian Church of Washington, where she led the English Ministry. She wrote for National Capital Presbytery's monthly newsletter, which later inspired her to start her own blog, SOULa Scriptura: To Be Young, Gifted, and Reformed. She is also on the NEXT Church strategy team, and continues to write, having appeared in a number of publications and contributed to the book, There's a Woman in the Pulpit: Christian Clergywomen Share Their Hard Days, Holy Moments and the Healing Power of Humor (Skylight Paths).
Presbyterians, Inclusion and Justice for All
The story of Presbyterians in America and how we have wrestled issues of inclusion and justice is varied. We have stood for equality in our doctrine and in our practice … sometimes. We have fought for racial justice—and modeled great injustice ourselves. We have led the way in welcoming LGBTQ people while still systematically excluding them from leadership in some places today. We have lifted up the value of diversity, and remain more than 90 percent white.
Our plenary sessions will include presentations by church history professor William Yoo, whose scholarship tracks the history of Presbyterian witness for justice, both at home and in the mission field abroad. He'll lead us in an honest look at our past, asking what it can and should mean for our future.
The Rev. Dr. William Yoo is Assistant Professor of American Religious and Cultural History at Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, Georgia. He is the author of American Missionaries, Korean Protestants, and the Changing Shape of World Christianity, 1884-1965 (Routledge, 2017) and the editor of The Presbyterian Experience in the United States: A Sourcebook (Westminster John Knox Press, 2017). He studied at the University of Pennsylvania (BSE), Westminster Theological Seminary (MDiv), and Emory University (ThM, PhD). As a child of Asian American immigrants, he is attentive in his research and teaching to the experiences of marginalized and racial-ethnic minority Christians throughout U.S. history and their contested pathways to ecclesial leadership. He is a teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and a member of Cherokee Presbytery. One of his current research projects examines the history of race, racism, and reconciliation in American Presbyterianism from the colonial period to the present.
Dr. Yoo will speak at several points during the conference
Pre-Conference Special Events
An Introduction to Systemic Racism
Crossroads Anti-Racism Training's Jessica Vazquez Torres presents highly acclaimed and life-changing training for individuals, church leaders and congregations. This workshop equips people to understand, talk about, and analyze the ways systemic racism operates in U.S. society and within organizations—including the church. This workshop can serve as a starting place for conversations about how to live in—and challenge—the status quo and build a more inclusive, equal, just community.
By participating in this conference, participants will be equipped to:
- Understand racism is not a matter of individual choice or feelings but built into the social systems and institutions in which all of us participate.
- Develop deeper language to articulate and expose the ways cultural dominance and institutionalized racism are contributing factors to the issues of poverty, gender inequity, lack of access to food and housing, et al. they will spend a year seeking to address.
- Begin to discuss ways to challenge the dominant cultural status quo in their institutions and society.
This pre-conference is Wednesday, November 8, 1 p.m. to 8 p.m., and includes dinner. (It is tentatively set for First & Franklin Presbyterian Church, but the location may change to another nearby venue.) Cost is $50. By special arrangement with Baltimore Presbytery, members of local churches may attend for only $25.
Baltimore Mission & Justice Immersion Tour
The Center is a non-profit organization that works closely with the congregations of Baltimore Presbytery. The Center envisions neighborhoods transformed by congregations engaged in the justice-seeking, compassionate, and reconciling work of Jesus Christ. Through education, service, partnership, and advocacy, their mission is to equip congregations in Baltimore and beyond to transform neighborhoods by engaging in the justice and reconciliation of Jesus Christ.
The Center will lead a social justice immersion tour of Baltimore, Thursday, November 9, 9 a.m. to 12 noon. This will be a unique opportunity to learn about the history of boundary creation in the city (redlining, blockbusting, segregation) and how these historical decisions and practices still affect residents today. The tour will feature an overview of Baltimore history, as well as current political and social issues in the city. And we'll hear how congregations in Baltimore are responding to the challenges of their communities. You'll come away with fresh eyes, for Baltimore, but also with a deeper understanding of the boundary issues at play where you live and serve. The tour will depart from First & Franklin Church (where The Center is also located). Cost is $50.
Participants can join BOTH pre-conference events for the discounted price of $75.
Tentative Schedule Information
Wednesday, November 8
1:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Pre-conference event: Anti-Racism Training
Thursday, November 9
9:00 a.m. – 12 noon Pre-conference event: Baltimore Mission Immersion Tour
Conference Begins
2:00 p.m. Opening Worship service: The Rev. Nancy Benson-Nicol, preaching
3:15 p.m. Plenary: Presbyterians, Inclusion and Justice For All, Part 1
4:30 p.m. Community Hour – Sharing fellowship, making connections
5:00 p.m. Dinner break (on your own)
7:00 p.m. Plenary: Keynote address by Taylor Branch
9:00 p.m. Community Hour
Friday, November 10
9:00 a.m. Plenary: A Conversation with the Co-Moderator
11:00 a.m. Plenary: Stories of Action and Hope–Our Shared Humanity
12:00 noon Lunch (provided)
1:30 p.m. Plenary: Presbyterians, Inclusion and Justice For All, Part 2
3:00 p.m. Community Time – Sharing fellowship, making connections
3:30 p.m. Workshops and Conversation Time
5:00 p.m. Dinner (on your own)
7:00 p.m. Closing Worship: The Rev. Daniel Vigilante, Co-Moderator of the Board of Directors of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians, and Pastor, Grace Trinity Community Church, Minneapolis
The conference will be held at First & Franklin Presbyterian Church in Baltimore. Founded in 1761, First & Franklin Presbyterian Church has a long history of seeking justice and welcoming all. Our conference and pre-conference events will take place in the beautiful Gothic Revival sanctuary beneath Baltimore's tallest steeple. Learn more about the congregation: www.firstfranklin.org.
Registration and Cost
In spite of rising costs, we've worked hard to kept the conference registration rate to $225. College and Master of Divinity students can waive the registration fee (with only a $25 reservation charge), thanks to the generosity of scholarship donors. The pre-conference options will incur a modest additional registration fee.
It is our hope that no one who is unable to pay would be excluded from the conference. To discuss special arrangements, please contact Brian Ellison, executive director at [email protected].
Conference Hotel:
We are getting a special conference rate at the Hotel Indigo Baltimore Downtown, which is in easy walking distance of the church. These rates are only guaranteed for a limited time! To book at the conference rate (which is available Tuesday through Sunday the week of the conference):
- Click on this link, and you will be directed to the Hotel Indigo Baltimore website.
- Adjust the booking dates as needed (by clicking on the "Change Search" button).
- Follow the instructions to see the room types displayed. The conference rate for a king or two-queen room is $145/night. This rate includes free wi-fi and all standard room amenities.
- Continue through the reservation process, and use a credit card to guarantee.
- Guests can also call 410-625-6200, ask for reservations, and reference the Covenant Network of Presbyterians or group booking code CHU.
Click here to book online at the special conference rate with the Hotel Indigo.
The 2017 Covenant Conference is made possible through the generosity of our sponsors:
- The Envision Fund of Catonsville Presbyterian Church
- Presbytery of Balitmore
- The Board of Pensions of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
- The Presbyterian Foundation
- Columbia Theological Seminary
- Union Presbyterian Seminary
These and other groups will have display space and opportunities for conversation at the conference. To become a conference sponsor, contact Brian Ellison, executive director, at [email protected].
Feel free to contact Brian Ellison, executive director, with questions any time at [email protected].

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I keep seeing these pots online about people who "live their life to the fullest" …and I just sit there, dumbfounded.
Living life to the fullest doesn't mean partying every night, getting shit faced drunk, sleeping with random dudes and getting your hair done when you feel like it. It's not eating whatever you want and blowing off class because you're hung over.
Living life to the fullest means taking advantage of every single opportunity to better yourself.
It means working your ass off to have a healthy and fit body.
It means continuing to educate yourself in areas of interest or in areas relevant to your career.
It means traveling, seeing the world, and jumping on opportunities.
Living life to the fullest is about getting the hell out of your comfort zone and making your dreams come true.
It's about being kind, doing for others, and helping others pursue THEIR dreams.
If you don't have goals and aspirations, you're not living life at all. If you're not betting yourself in some way, every day, you're not living life at all. If you're not kind, driven, and happy…you're not doing it right.
So, why don't you get out there and start ACTUALLY living. See the world, experience things…make some memories.


text:
Slow-Braised Bolognese Sauce
Recipe courtesy of Louisiana Kitchen & Culture magazine
Serves a crowd
Makes a scant half cup.
Slow-Braised Bolognese
Click image to enlarge
Pat oxtail pieces and chuck roast dry; season all over with salt and pepper, cover, and set aside for an hour.
Preheat oven to 300ºF with a rack in the lower third of the oven.
Dredge oxtail pieces in flour, shaking off excess.
Melt butter with olive oil in a large oven-proof Dutch oven. When foaming subsides, working in batches if necessary (don't overcrowd the pan or the oxtails will steam rather than brown,) brown oxtails on all sides. Remove to a platter as oxtails are browned and reserve.
Meanwhile, peel onion and coarsely chop; peel carrot and halve lengthwise (quarter the fattest ends) and cut into ¼ slices; slice celery into ¼-inch slices.
When all oxtails are browned and removed to platter, reduce heat to medium and deglaze pan with a little water if necessary; add the onion, carrot, and celery and cook, stirring often, until vegetables are softened, about 10 minutes; do not brown. Coarsely chop the garlic and add to pan; cook until very fragrant, 2 to 3 minutes. Increase the heat a bit and add the wine; bring to a boil and cook, stirring occasionally, until reduced by half. Add the stock and hand shred the tomatoes into the pot, discarding any skin and hard cores; add any tomato juice with tomatoes. Bring to a simmer and cook, stirring occasionally, about 10 minutes.
Cut the chuck roast into 3 to 4 large pieces and add to the pot in a single layer. Nestle browned ox tails among the chuck along with any accumulated juices on the platter, and tuck in rosemary, thyme, and bay leaves. Bring to a simmer, cover, and transfer to the oven. Quickly peek after 25 minutes; if the pot is bubbling vigorously, lower the heat a bit; if it isn't simmering, raise the heat a bit. Each oven varies in temperature. Continue to braise until meat is very tender and shreds easily, 3 to 4 hours. Carefully remove the meat to a platter and set aside to cool; remove and discard the rosemary and thyme sprigs and bay leaves. Place the Dutch oven over medium heat; skim off and discard any excess fat. Taste and decide if sauce needs to be reduced to intensify flavor and add salt and pepper if needed. Stir about 2 tablespoons of the Gremolata into the mixture and simmer for 5 minutes; taste and adjust again.
When meat is cool enough to handle, shred it finely, discarding fat, bones, and gristle and return to pot, add top quality marinara sauce as desired, and simmer for 45 minutes.
Stir in a tablespoon or two of half & half and Parmesan; serve over hot pasta or polenta and pass additional cheese and remaining Gremolata at the table
Louisiana Recipes Weekly
Every Thursday you'll receive new recipes, events & festivals and more. See archive


text:
Frame lamp. Black/white. Dimension: Vpl175. Led magnifier with light. Mpl206. D70cm/d100cm/d140cm. E27xl1. Kitchen light. Bar pendant lights chrome. Retro light. Wholesale floating. Jiakmj. Ads029. E14*4/6/8/10/8+4. Red,yellow,blue,transparentCity logistics delivery and service. America princess-0181.
As description. Surface ceiling mounted. Leliten head light. C02 pendant light. Electroplating. Birdcage pendant foyers. Arm iron. Body material: Glass, iron, stainless steel,plastic. Stainless steel: Dinning room foyer,cafe ,restaurant, bar,etc.. Aluminum,chrome,plastic. Chengyilt. Irradiation area:Om9876. Lava x81. Color : Silver lampshade.
Duct tape: Place: Aluminum, painted. Lustre led: Pipe erected. Silver,gold,red. W-d1278-6c. Function2: 1 meter (adjustable). Gy-new-031. Modern europe neoclassic. Loft railsDining room, living room,bedroom, bar. Stainless steel, crystal. Applcation: An-141.
Lamps lanterns. Acrylic material. Led rectangular. 12118. Lt8854. Wholesale tea china. Ll-1091. Ul,ce,fcc,gs,rohs,emc,pse,vde,ccc. 2097 chandelier. Silver,brown,gold,gray,black,yellow. 12 months warranty. Light main material: Loft lamp.
Full Confession:
One of the biggest reasons I loved RF4 was Doug. For a little background info as to why, I'll admit that I also loved a game called Tales of the Abyss. The protagonist of that game has a personality almost identical to Doug's, as well as being voiced by Yuri Lowenthall. At the end of that game, it's heavily implied that he dies, and I was pretty much heartbroken. When I started playing RF4, seeing Doug almost made me feel like I could see him again.
Full Confession:
After learning that Eda would die later on in SoS it scared me away and I started a new game on the second save slot. I'm too scared of letting people go without putting up a fight. But after thinking about it I decided to play anyway and learn to let her go. Even if she doesn't have a huge meaning to me, she is the farmer who lives next to me and cheers me on and calls me dearie. Her loss will create a hole in my heart.
I love the dating mechanics in RF4, I love how you can date more than one person until you decide who you want to marry–but I hate the actual marriage mechanics, especially if you're a girl. I've been waiting months in-game for Leon or Arthur to propose. At this point I don't even care which one it is, I just want to get married so I can finally have a kid!
I am going to buy SoS soon, and although I am really excited and looking forward to playing it, part of me does not want to play. I'm afraid that if I play too much the game might become boring, and I want to enjoy it for a very long time.
In the last year of my cat's life, he became blind, thin, and his mind started to slip. However, he still loved laps. When I sat down to play RF:F on my gaming chair, I would smother myself in blankets and then sit him on my lap and cover him up to keep him warm. I would play that game with him snuggled on my lap for hours. Rune Factory Frontier will always remind me of him.
I struggle with an eating disorder. One day Volkanon made a comment encouraging me to eat every day, and even gave my character some food just during everyday conversation. It was the first time a video game has made me cry. It's one of the reasons RF4 is so dear to my heart.
Whenever I play an Bokumono game, I always choose who I'm gonna romance before I start playing. I didn't do this when started playing RF4 and now I'm stuck with an engagement ring I crafted myself and 6 boyfriends who have already proposed to me that I had to turn down out of indecision. It's time like this where I unrealistically wish for a harem option…
I absolutely love the art style that Story of Seasons has. Everyone looks so beautiful, romantic, and detailed!
I played Animal Parade again for the first time in probably four years and I literally started crying because of the nostalgia. None of the games since have gotten to me the way AP did- even just playing it made me feel so much lighter and happier. I still haven't found another game that has moved me in the same way.
I can never choose between the bachelors/bachelorettes in each game. They're all just so nice and charming! So in most of the games I've played, I never end up marrying anyone.
My first HM game was IoH, and I have grown rather fond of the characters. It saddens me to think that there will not be any more games starring them, and I would love to see them in a new game.
I recently got into a relationship with Julius and it really makes me happy. He sorta makes me feel better about myself, he's just too handsome to be with someone who can't compare to his beauty, so I have to look at least decent, right? So yeah, this really makes me feel better.
In SoS, I'd rather have the player character adopt Witchie and Dessie than have kids of their own.
I just started play RF3. I decided that the one who'll become my wife is Sakuya or Carmen. But later, I found myself becoming attached to Karina as I become a loyal customer to her shop. I think that she's actually really sweet and her laziness just makes her more adorable.
Even though I really liked Forte and Meg, I wanted to play as a girl first and marry Doug. I couldn't regret it more. Now, I don't have that urge to play again and in the end I didn't marry neither of the girls I actually wanted to. It also happens in HM sometimes but this time it hurt for real, so I'll just play as a boy and marry the girls from now on.


text:
Bonsai Logo Trend Predictions For 2016
It's the beginning of another year, and we've been thinking about the ways the design world has continued to adapt and change over the last 12...Read more >
Logo trends for 2015
With 2015 well underway, the team here at Bonsai Media thought it was about time to share with you all what we believe the next 12 months...Read more >
how much does an ecommerce site cost?
With online sales tipped to hit $370 billion by 2017, it's not surprising that these days, everyone wants...Read more >
So what's all this about responsive websites?
Unsurprisingly, responsive design is exactly what it sounds like: a branch of web design that recognises...Read more >
Consumers & the E-commerce Checkout
Consumer Psychology and the eCommerce Checkouts - the statistics and habits behind the shoppers click...Read more >
Colour Trends 2014
Every season brings with it a swag of new colour schemes that capture the imagination of both the design world and their consumers. This year will...Read more >
Design Trends 2014
Following up from our previous article on last year's trends in logo design, the team here at Bonsai Media have peered into their crystal balls and...Read more >
Design Trends 2013
Here's a look back at trends that have influenced logo design over the last twelve months...Read more >
Logo design goes for gold (but finishes last).
When the Port Macquarie News did an article on local hero James Magnussen, one of their graphic designers wanted to use the distinctive London 2012...Read more >
eCommerce website trends
In the ever-changing world of ecommerce, it's important to continually evaluate your online offering so you remain relevant to your customers. Part...Read more >
NAB's Online Retail Sales Index has been released
The NAB's Online Retail Sales Index was released last week and had some very interesting points for anyone with an interest...Read more >
IT logos that need some change
If there's an industry that lays claim to some of the most boring and badly designed logos around, it's got to be IT. For some reason, they all seem...Read more >
mCommerce – mobile friendly ecommerce site
It's no secret that mobile phones are becoming a more and more important way for businesses to interact with their customers...Read more >
How much should good logo design cost?
Tricky question to answer, but there's an obvious sweet spot between too cheap (there's heaps of companies who've tried to get...Read more >


text:
Insurance is an important element of any sound financial plan. Different types of insurance protect you and your loved ones in different ways against the cost of accidents, illness, disability, and death.
What Are Your Insurance Needs?
The insurance decisions you make should be based on your family, age, and economic situation. There are many forms of insurance and, unfortunately, no one-size-fits-all policy. Life insurance, for example, is a virtual necessity if you have a spouse and children, but perhaps is less important for a single person. Disability insurance, which provides an income stream if you are unable to work, is important for everyone.
Following is a list of the forms of insurance most people require.
Auto insurance protects you from damage to the often considerable investment in a car and/or from liability for damage or injury caused by you or someone driving your vehicle. It can also help cover expenses you or anyone in your car may incur as a result of an accident with an uninsured motorist.
Auto liability coverage is necessary for anyone who owns a car. Many states require you to have liability insurance before a vehicle can be registered. However, state-required minimum coverage often does not provide adequate protection. Suggested minimums are $100,000 for medical expenses per injured person, $300,000 for the total per accident, and $50,000 for property damage. Collision, fire, and theft coverage is also advisable for a vehicle having more than minimal value. You can cut costs, however, by choosing a higher deductible — the amount of loss that must be exceeded before you are compensated.
The cost of auto insurance varies greatly, depending on the company and agent offering it, your choice of coverage and deductible, where you live, the kind of vehicle, and the ages of drivers in the family. Substantial discounts are often available for safe drivers, nonsmokers, and those who commute to work via public transportation
Homeowner's insurance should allow you to rebuild and refurnish your home after a catastrophe and insulate you from lawsuits if someone is injured on your property. Coverage of at least 80% of your home's replacement value, minus the value of land and foundation, is necessary for you to be covered for the cost of repairs. There are several grades of policies, ranging from HO-1 to HO-8, with increasingly comprehensive coverage and cost. Unless you increase coverage, most homeowner's policies cover the contents of the house for 50% to 75% of the amount for which the house is insured. The liability coverage in many homeowner's policies is $300,000.
How Much Coverage Do you Need?
|Suggested minimum amounts are:
|80%-100% of the full replacement value of your home and its contents in Property Insurance; $300,000 in Liability
|$4,000 in Property Insurance to protect against loss or damage; $100,000 in Liability
Often called umbrella liability coverage, this takes effect when the personal liability and lawsuit coverage in other policies is exhausted. The cost for $1 million worth of protection — especially necessary for high-income individuals and those with considerable assets — may be only a few hundred dollars a year.
Life insurance, payable when you die, can provide a surviving spouse, children, and other dependents with the funds necessary to maintain their standards of living, can help repay debt, and can fund education tuition costs. The amount you need depends on your situation. If you make $100,000 a year, have a sizable mortgage, and have two kids headed to an expensive college, you could need $1 million in coverage.
Talk with an insurance agent who offers policies from companies whose financial strength is ranked high by rating agencies. And remember that you can shop around.
Helpful Resources
This group can refer you to an insurance advisor who can help you determine how much insurance you need and refer you to an agent.
These agencies rank and rate insurance companies and can give you information about an insurance company's financial strength. A small fee will be charged for these services.
A long-term disability policy is activated, replacing a portion of your lost income, when you are unable to work for an extended period. Some, but certainly not all, employers cover their employees with some form of company-paid disability income insurance. Typically, such coverage is only partial and/or short-term in nature. Thus, many people seek to purchase an individual disability income insurance policy. If you're buying, try to get a noncancelable policy with benefits for life, or at least to age 65, and as much salary coverage as you can afford. However, keep in mind that the duration of coverage may be limited because of your occupation.
Insurers will usually cover up to 65% of your salary. Generally, you should have total coverage equal to two thirds of your current pretax income.
If your company provides disability insurance, check to see whether it's enough for your needs. Group disability insurance policies may be capped at six months and provide benefits that won't cover your expenses.
Most people enjoy medical insurance as an employee benefit, often with their employers paying whole or part of the premiums. Many employers offer a choice between HMOs (health maintenance organizations) and traditional fee-for-service care. Rates for HMOs are usually cheaper but have more constraints. Privately purchased health insurance is much more expensive — often by several hundred dollars a month — depending on such things as deductibles, coverage choices, and location.
With an aging population and uncertainty about the future of Social Security, insurance to cover the high cost of nursing home or at-home health care is becoming more widespread. Medicare pays very little of the cost of long-term care in the United States. Medicaid will pay for the care, but only for patients whose assets are almost completely depleted.1
With Congress always debating the future funding of these programs, financial planning for long-term care is more crucial than ever.
Medigap insurance can help pay medical expenses of the elderly not covered by Medicare. However, it doesn't cover custodial nursing home costs. In fact, about half of all nursing home residents pay for the care with personal savings.1
Contact a qualified insurance professional or AARP for more information on long-term care insurance.
- Your insurance needs will vary based on your family, age, and economic situation.
- Anyone who owns a car should have auto liability insurance. Collision, fire, and theft coverage can protect your investment in a valuable car.
- Homeowner's insurance should provide coverage up to 80% of the cost of replacing your home, minus land and foundation. Homeowners should also have liability coverage, and those with considerable assets may want to purchase liability up to $1 million.
- Life insurance is important for those who have families to cover living and other expenses in the event of death.
- Long-term care insurance can be expensive and complex, but may be a necessity for older people as the long-term coverage of Medicare is often inadequate.
1Source: www.Medicare.gov.
© 2011 McGraw-Hill Financial Communications. All rights reserved.
May 2011 — This column is provided through the Financial Planning Association, the membership organization for the financial planning community, and is brought to you by D3 Financial Counselors, a local member of FPA.


text:
Representative foods of Belize
Belizean food would suite your palate. Belize wouldn't be the same without its diverse ethnic groups and their many varieties of dishes. Belizean food is tasty and delicious.
Rice & Beans
With the race and beans cooked together in coconuts oil and flavored with recado (a mild ground pepper). It's usually served with stewed pork or chicken, or beef and backed up by some kind of sauce. On the side of plate you will often get a portion of potato salad or coleslaw.
Escabeche is a type of chicken soup made with onions as the main part of the body. The one ingredient that makes this soup so special is distilled white vinegar added to the soup to make it tart. Allowing the onions to steep for just the right amount of time gives the soup a sweet and sour taste.
Chimole, also known as "Black Dinner" is a tasty black colored soup with roots in Mayan and Mestizo cultures but enjoyed by all in Belize.
Fish Sere
Prepare vegetables. (Cover and set aside) Put milk in sauce pan. Stir constantly until milk reaches boiling point. Add salt meat, onion, plantain or bananas. Cook until tender. Add carrots and fish. Simmer until fish is tender. Taste for seasoning. Serve hot with white rice.
The Caribbean cuisine dessert from batata, cornmeal (optional), coconut, spices and brown sugar, all tied up in a banana leaf. It is cooked in boiling.
A burrito consists of a wheat flour tortilla wrapped or folded cylindrical shape to completely enclose the filling (in contrast to a taco, which is generally formed by simply folding a tortilla in half around a filling, leaving the semicircular perimeter open).
It is commonly referring to any grilled meat usually a flour or corn tortilla. The term originally referred to the cut of beef used in the dish which is known as skirt steak. Popular meats today also include chicken, pork and shrimp.
A taco is a traditional Mexican dish. It can be made with a variety of filling, including beef, pork, chicken, seafood, vegetable and cheese, allowing for great versatility and variety.
Belizean BBQ chicken
A popular and simple way to make a whole chicken, this Belizean dish is found at street vendors, restaurants, parties, and at family.
Fried Chicken
Fried chicken is a hugely popular dish here in Belize. And in almost all communities, the busiest place to buy it is your "local Chiney" or the local Chinese restaurant.


text:
Did You Know?
The EU is the largest market in the world, with 500 million consumers.
With 28 member states (as of July 1, 2013), 500 million people and annual economic activity of almost $17 trillion, the EU is the world's largest economy.
The EU is the second-largest foreign investor in Canada.
The EU services economy, worth approximately $12.1 trillion in GDP terms in 2012, is among the largest in the world.
Nearly 100 percent of all EU tariff lines on non-agricultural products will be duty-free on the first day CETA comes into force.
CETA gives Canadian companies access to the world's largest procurement market—the EU—which was worth $2.7 trillion in 2012.
Breaking down the Canada/EU trade deal
The Bottom Line panel looks at the details of CETA, and how it will affect Canada and its consumers.
Opposing CETA and the Canada-European Union
Out of Equilibrium: The Impact of Canada-European Union Free Trade in the Real World
Out of Equilibrium
The Impact of EU-Canada Free Trade on the Real Economy
Canada already has a large bilateral trade deficit with the EU—$15 billion in goods and close to $4 billion in services, and loses some 70,000 jobs as a result. This study finds a free trade agreement would make that imbalance worse. –
Canada-EU Free Trade Deal: What You Need To Know
It's Not A Done Deal Yet
The trade pact needs the consent of Canada's provinces and EU member states to become law. So far, it's looking good on the provincial front: Quebec, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Saskatchewan's leaders have all praised the deal, and Ontario seems open to it assuming it can get compensation for some of its industries that will be harmed by the deal.
Drug Patents
Canada will partially extend patent protection for brand-name drugs, which would delay the introduction of cheaper generics by up to two years. Officials say it will be eight years before any impact of these changes show up as higher costs for provincial drug plans.
Earlier reports have suggested the cost to the health care system of extended drug patents could run between $1 billion and $3 billion annually.
Jim Keon, president of the Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association: The EU trade deal will "delay market entry of cost-saving generic prescription medicines in Canada in the future, increasing health-care costs for provinces, employers that sponsor drug plans for their employees and Canadians who pay for their prescription medicines out-of-pocket."
The federal government has suggested it will compensate provinces for higher costs as a result of the agreement.
Domestic car producers will be able to increase sales into Europe to 100,000 units from about 10,000 today under relaxed rules. The EU will phase out its 10-per-cent tariff on imports, and Canada will phase out a 6-per-cent tariff on European car imports.
That could be good news for Canadian fans of European luxury cars, as those vehicles will be cheaper. But that, in turn, could be bad news for Canadian auto manufacturers.
Dennis DesRosiers of DesRosiers Auto Analysts: "I don't think anyone can definitively know what the impact of the current EU Agreement will be on the automotive sector. … The [Canadian] industry peaked in the year 2000 and has been struggling since and, indeed, just finished one of its worse decades in history and continues to deteriorate. Was this the long term result of FTA and NAFTA? We don't know but it could be."
Canadian beef farmers increase their quota by 50,000 tonnes, in addition to 15,000 tonnes for high-quality beef. Pork farmers will see their quota rise to 80,000 tonnes from the current 6,000. But producers will have to convert to hormone-free product for the European market, which experts say can add about 15 per cent to costs.
Martin Unrau, president of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association: "The removal of long-standing barriers in this agreement, such as high tariffs, finally enables Canadian beef producers to benefit from the high value that the European beef market represents."
Dairy Farmers of Ontario: "It will take income from Canadian dairy farmers and their communities and give it to the European industry."
Government Contracts
Companies will be allowed to bid on major government procurement contracts right down to the municipal level. A joint study showed the new access will give European companies leeway to bid on federal contracts worth between $15 billion and $19 billion an year, and municipal contracts worth $112 billion a year.
Critics say that, because of the common practice of "hiring Canadian" in government contracts, EU access to them could mean job losses in Canada.
Trade Justice Network: "Canadian governments would lose a powerful tool for spurring job creation and economic development."
Foreign Investment
Foreign takeovers of Canadian firms now require a formal federal government review if the deal is worth $1 billion or more, but this agreement will raise that to $1.5 billion.
Water For Profit?
Labour and consumer groups fear CETA could lead to the privatization of Canada's water supply and infrastructure. According to early leaks from the negotiations, Canada did not try to protect water resources as part of the trade deal.
The Council of Canadians writes: "This deal will give French companies Suez and Veolia, the two biggest private water operations in the world, access to run our water services for profit. Under a recent edict, the Harper government has tied federal funding of municipal water infrastructure construction or upgrading to privatization of water services. Private water operators charge far higher rates than public operators and cut corners when it comes to source protection."


text:
deed recites, and of a subsequent reconveyance by the donee which is denounced a forgery. Mr. High in his work on Receivers, as do the other authors cited, states that the insolvency of a defendant in possession does not of itself warrant the court in appointing a receiver, but, in addition, it must appear that the plaintiff has a probable right to recover in the end. High, Rec. § 18, citing Gregory v. Gregory, 33 :N. Y. Super. Ct :W; Lawrence Iron-Works Co. v. Rockbridge Co., 47 Fed. 755. Recurring now to the quotation from Mr. Justice Nelson's exposi. tion of the principles governing the application for a receiver in a ease like this, in Wiswall v. Sampson, supra, it is apparent that the defendant has not the legal title, strictly and technically considered, perhaps, but she has the "legal interest," to use his words,-chosen, no doubt, to accurately express the fact, running through the authorities, that the protection of the defendant in possession does not depend on the bare technical legal title, but on the right to enjoy the income or profits of the estate as the owner thereof; and, united with her trustee, the defendant has that, if her deed is good, both as to the legal and equitable interest. She may be separated from the bare legal title, but otherwise she has the entire interest, under the terms of her deed. .It is not necessary to inquire whether the trustee under that deed had anything more than "a dry trust," or whether the effect was to give her a legal title. Certainly he has no active duties imposed by the terms of the truet. She has, in my opinion, the same standing in a court of equity, on an application like this, and under the peculiar circumstances of this case, as if she stood here with the legal title, or as if she and her trustee were both standing here, in possession. It is not to be overlooked that one of the plaintiffs is the substituted trustee of the deed of settlement and gift, but, as already pointed out, Elhe is a hostile trustee, denying her own title as trustee, and the defendants' interest under the trust, by denying the validity of the deed, and seeking to set it aside. She cannot claim under it and against it, and if she were in possession, making such claims of adverse ownership as she makes here, a court of equity would remove her as trustee, or appoint a receiver against her, on the application of the defendant or her next friend. Therefore she can claim nothing as to a receiver on that score, but her application must stand on the merits of the hostile claims of adverse title she sets up by this bill. The application for a receiver must be denied. Ordered accordingly.
RYDER et aI. v. BATEMAN et ux. (Circuit Court, W. D. Tennessee. 1. October 3, 1898.)
EQUITY PRACTICE-REQ,UIRING PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS-RuLES m ERAL COURTS OF EQ,UITY.
Rev. St. § 724, Is designed merely to give courts of law of the United States the power to require the production of documents to obviate the necessity of parties going into equity with a bill of discovery for that purpose in aid of an action at law, and in no way affects the practice of federal courts of equity, which is governed by the general equity rules prescribed by the supreme court, and where they do not apply by the
practice of the high court of chancery of England at the time those, !:Ules were promulga.ted in 1842. ",
A federal court of equity will not compel a plaintiff to produce for inspection a deed on which rights In real property alleged in the bill are founded, and a copy of which is attached to the bill as an exhibit on a petition of defendant before answer alleging that such deed Is a forgery, but, if genuine', was obtained by fraud; nor will the court enlarge the time for answering until the deed has been filed with the cIel·k. No litigant can be c;ompelled, as a matter of general right, to produce his evidence for the inspection of his adversary in advance of the hearing, and the defendant is not entitled to an inspection of the deed to enable him to form an', opinion as to its genuineness, and thus determine which of the two inconsistent defenses he will make, but he is required to answer the bill in accordance with his knowledge and the facts.
On Motion to Require the Production of an Exhibit for Inspection. L. T. M. Canada, for plaintiffs. Edgington & Edgington, for defendants. HAMMOND, ,J. This is an application by the defendants, upon a sworn petition, to have the plaintiffs produce and file with the clerk for their inspection a certain deed mentioned by plaintiffs in their bill as "Exhibit D" thereto, or else have an order enlarging the time of the defendants to file their answer until a given time after the plaintiffs shall have filed the original of the said deed with the clerk for that purpose. The bill makes a copy of the original deed an exhibit to the bill, but it is stated in this petition that the plaintiff Iris C. Ryder has repeatedly refused to permit the defendants to see the original. The defendants say, in their sworn petition, "that the said deed is a forgery, and that no such deed was ever made by the said defendant Marie." Again, they say, "Respondent Marie has no recollection or knowledge of the execution, signing, or acknowledgment of the document sued on, and, if the signature to the same should prove to be her genuine signature, then it was obtained by fraud." The defendants further say in their petition that the deed purports to have' been acknowledged in Los Angeles county, Cal., before a notary public, and they believe that this is also a forgery, ,and do not believe thatit is the genuine signature and seal of the notary public attached to said deed; and, if it be so attached, that it isa forgery. The defendants ,say, also, in the peti· tion, that they will not be enabled to answer the bill intelligently without an inspection of this paper, to the end "that they shall have proper facilities to prepare the evidence for the-defense of this case." And they ask to have all further proceedings stayed until they have secured an inspection of the original document. It also appears by the statements of couDseland by the record that ,the plaintiffs have moved for the appointment of a receiver for the considerable quantity of real estate involved in the controversy; ,and the defendants, before the headng of the motion for a receiver,:desire to file their answer to the bill, and this they cannot do until they have inspected the plaintiffs' exhibit. For this reason there has been considerable urgency abou.t'thisapplication. , The plaintiff Iris C. Ryder has .filed an answer to this petition of the also sworn to, denying that the deed is a forgery,
and stating that on or before the hearing of this cause slH' will produce the paper, and establish its genuineness; that she has made a copy of the paper an exhibit to her bill; and states in the bill that on or before the hearing she will produce the paper, or a certified copy thereof, as legal evidence. She states that the petition is filed only for delay; that the defendants are totally insolvent, and are squandering the rents of the property; and that the defendant Louis Bateman is an unscrupulous man, not to be trusted with papers; and asks to have the motion for the receiver heard without further delay. This application must be denied. It is a great mistake to suppose that parties to a litigation have a promiscuous right to the production and inspection of the papers and documents in the possession of their adversary. A loose practice has grown up on this subject, and there is generally a good deal of complaisance on the part of counsel and the parties to the suit in the production of papers; but whenever the practice has been challenged it has been found that there are limitations to the right, which it is necessary that the courts should safely guard" in order to secure the citizen against an invasion of his right to hold and keep his papers from unlawful or impertinent inspection. Even litigants who expect to use their papers in evidence are not required to produce them for the information of the other side, except under strictly guarded rules of practice that are intended to secure the protection of this right. Mr. Justice Bradley, in the case of Boyd v. U. S., 116 U. S. 616, 6 Sup. Ct. 524, denounces the practice of invading this right under the forms of law by judicial process, and shows how it is guarded in criminal procedure by a constitutional provision; which was also enforced in the case of Potter v. Beal, 2 C. C. A. 60, 50 Fed. 860, by annulling an order that had been granted for the inspection of papers in a criminal case. There is, perhaps, no constitutional provision to protect the citizen against seizures and searches in civil suits, as in criminal. cases, but it will be found, nevertheless, that the courts carefully avoid any unlawful violation of the citizen's right in respect of this protection. Railroad Co. v. Botsford, 141 U. S. 250, 254, 11 Sup. Ct. 1000. Lord Chancellor Selborne remarks, in Minet v. Morgan, 8 Gh. App. 361, 364, that "there might, perhaps, be great reason for holding that, if a man comes into court as plaintiff, attacking somebody else, he ought to be bound to disclose everything on which he relies for the purpose of his attack. But undoubtedly that is not the present rule of the court"; wherefore it is required that we shall determine under just what circumstances the parties have the right to compel each other to produce documents for the inspection or use of the adversary in the litigation. Counsel, in their brief, refer to the judiciary act of 1789 (1 Stat. 82, c. 20. § 15), which is now Rev. St. § 724. as furnishing authority on the part of the court to make this order. But it will be seen that this act is confined to actions at law, and does not at all apply to courts of equity. The only purpose and effect of that act is to give courts of law the power to do what courts of equity may do in the matter of producing documents withon-t the formality of going into a court of equity
with a bill of discovery in aid of an action at law. Story, Eq. PI. p. 106, § 555, note; Railway Co. v. Botsford, supra. Mr. Justice Bradley, in Boyd v. U. 8., supra, refers to this statute, and praises the' wisdom of ·congress in strictly limiting the right of production to "cases and under circumstances where the parties might be compelled to produce books and writings by the ordinary rules of proceeding in chancery." He'says: "The court of chancery had for generations been weighing and balancing the rules to be observed in granting discovery on billa filed for that purpose, in the endeavor to fix upon such as would best secure the ends of justice. To go beyond the point to which that court had gone may well have been hazardous." 116 U. S. 631, l) Sup. ct. 533. It will thus be seen i that the supreme court of the United States, by tWs interpretation, limits the power of courts of law, under this act of congress" to' precisely the power that courts of equity have to compel the production ofdocumllnts. And it becomes, therefore, all the more hnportant to determine how courts of equity proceed in the exercise of their power to ,subserve the ends of justice/and at the same time pro.tool:the.litigant against unlawful compulsion in the matter of the'production of his evidence to the inspectton of his adversary. . , ' .;. There h.asbeen in recent years;: by legislation in parliament in England and in the legislaturesofi'he states, a vevy decided reform in the matter of procedure, the purpose being to:avoidthe cost and expense of bills of to compel the production. of documents which, under the rules courts cif should be pro. duced, by'authorizing,aU courts to compel the production upon motionmadeby the parties, without,the:formality of bills of discovery. An example oUhis legislation will be found in St. 15. & 16 Vict.c. 18, § 20, wMch allowed the parties after answer,under certain circum, stances, to securtdhe prodoction of'documents by petition; and by . more recent legislation 'in England, and by orders of court, the practice has been entirely changed, and the production is enforced upon a proceeding by 'affidavit. Another example. is found in the New Jersey equity rule 31, that being a state where equity practice is still preserved in its original form and purity to a great extent. That rule allows the inspection to be had'without a bill of discovery, and upon motion. Bick. Eq. Prec. 151,208; But it is to be observed that in all this legislation ihecourts are careful, while changing the methods of procedure, not to change the fundamental principles which govern the exercise of the right of compelling the production of documents; DO doubt actuated by the same wisdom which Mr. Justice Bradley attributes to congress in conferring this enlarged power upon the federal courts in actions at law. Congress has not yet chosen to change the method of procedure in the federal courts of equity, and the very fact that Rev, St. § 724, is confined to courts of law, is conclusive that the courts·. of equity must proceed as they did and do without the aid of that statute. We are governed by the general equity rules prescribed by the supreme court of the United States, and, where they do' not apply, by the practice of the high court of chancery in England at the time of the promulgation of those rules, in 1842. Equity rule 90; Bein v. Heath, 12 How. 163,
178; Betts v.Lewis, 19 How. 72. It will be: found that that elaborate system of rules was largely intended to settle many disputed questions of chancery practice, but unfortunately they did not take up this question of the. production of documents, and there is no rule governing the practice. We must find the correct practice from other sources, as also the particular circumstances entitling the parties to the production of .documents as against each other. Mr. Justice Bradley, in the Boyd Case, cites Pollock on the Production of Documents, an old English work, which I have been unable to procure. And there is another work, Wigram on Discovery, which also I have been unable to consult. It appears that there has been a good deal of conflict of authority on this subject. However, before we examine the authorities which govern the right and the practice, it will be well enough to understand precisely what is wanted in this case. The petition discloses the fact that the defendant is uncertain whether she actually signed the deed of which inspection is wanted or not, and says that, if the signature should prove to be genuine, then it was obtained by fraud. Evidently what is wanted is an aid to the defendant's memory to determine whether she signed. the document or not. She certainly knows, or ought to know, whether, as a fact, she signed any deed transferring the property in controversy; and it is not unreasonable to require her to answer according to her knOWledge and her memory, and not to give her the choice of determining whether the deed is a forgery, or a genuine document signed by her, according as she shall determine whether the signature to the document is genuine or not by looking at it. It. is not her opinion whether the actual signature to the document is in her own handwriting which the plaintiffs want by her answer and demand by their bilL It is her knowledge of the fact whether sbe transferred her property according to the purport of that document that the plaintiffs demand by their bill. And they have a right to her answer to that demand from her own knowledge of the fact. Again, the defendant knows, or ought to know, now, and should be able to state without an inspection of the document, whether or not there be in existence facts and circumstances or events which constitute a fraud in procuring her genuine signature to that document; and it would seem that justice would require that she should select which of the two alternative defenses she suggests by this petition she will make, without any aid from an inspection of the plaintiffs' document and muniment of title. The two defenses are obviously inconsistent with each other. The deed cannot be at the same time a forgery and a genuine signature obtained under circumstances which invalidate it for some fraud committed against the defendant; and it is plain .from the face of the petition that What she really wants is to see the paper before she chooses any defense. If she and those she may calL upon to pass their judgment upon the genuineness of the signature should say that it is a forgery, then she will declare by her answer that it is a forgery; but, if she recognizes it as a genuine signature, then she will set up other facts and other circumstances in defense of the bill, which will avoid the deed upon some ground of "fraud."
93' FEDERaL .REPORTER.
, Is' it no't entirely obvious that there is no principle Of justice which any circumstances, that a defendant should have this advantage .in determining what defense she will make, but that real justice .requires that she shall answer according to her ·knowledgeand according to'thefacts, without any alternative choice about the matter? Rence it would seem that under any method of procedure or under any rule of right upon this subject, which leaves open, to be determined in any way, a question of inspection, it should be denied, under circumstances like these, until after the defendant has madehel"choice of defenses, if she supposes she has a choice under such a state of facts. No cause could better illustrate than this the wisdom of the rule declared in the cases that every litigant has the right to reserve the proofs that establish his case until the hearing thereof, and is not bound to advise his adversary of the strength of his case in order to enable him most sl1ccessfully to defend against it; in ordel' to enable him to do what is proposed in this case,choose whether the defendant shall set up one of two antagonistic and incongruous defenses. She ought to be able to defend according to the facts, without such choice, if the defense be honest. The celebrated case of Princess of Wales v. Earl of Liverpool, 1 Swanst. 114,1 Wils. Oh.113, and 2 Wils. Oh. 29, is the leading case in favor of this 'application by the defendants for an inspection of the plaintiffs' document. It was there held that the proper order is not one to produce the document for inspection, but to enlarge the time of the defendant for answering the bill until such time as the plaintiffs shall deposit the document with the clerk of the court for the inspection of: the defendant; aoothat order wa's made in that case. It was a. bill 'against executors seeking an account and payment of two promissory notes made by the testator. The defendants did not charge forgeiy in the plain terms of this petition we have before us, but in the polite language of social diplomacy applicable to instruments set up ,by a princess of Wales they did say that when they seen the promissory notes some time before they "appeared not equal in handwriting, construction, and spelling to the late duke's, and the form of the signature seemed unusuaL" A motion was made to have these documents produced and inspected by defendants before making answer to the bill. It was at first refused by Lord Eldon until the affidavit was made more specific and in the language above quoted. He afterwards, however, allowed the order, and gave, in an elaborate opinion, 'his reasons for doing so. The solicitor general, in his argument in favor of the motion, called attention to the exceptional circumstance that it was a bill against a dead man, and his executors could not know whether the signatures were genuine until they had seen them; whereas, if the defendant had been living, he would be able to make answer from his own knowledge n of the fact of signing the paper, and therefore the order th might not be appropriate. There were other "specialties," as some of the judges in subsequent cases remark, about this case, growing out of the relationship of the plaintiff to the deceased duke, her brother; but it is not necessary to call particular attention to them here. The lord chancellor's opinion is very· instructive, but requires full and
careful reading to understand the reason for his deeision; and it is evident from the face of it that he was struggling against the. common rule to find an exception in that case. He said that, if the defendant wants the production of deeds from the plaintiff, who has not said what, by his bill, he may saY,-that he has left the instruments in the hands of the clerk that the defendant may inspect them in order to answer the interrogatories that are propounded thereon,-then he must file a cross bill, but the defendant cannot have an answer to his cross bill for the discovery until he has answered the original bill. Therefore, if the peculiar require that he must see the paper before answering the bill, necessarily there must be some relaxation and exception to the general rule, or there would be worked an injustice to the defendant. He then quotes from the Practical Register, the great authority on chancery practice in that day, that under such circumstances the plaintiff shall give the defendant a copy of the instrument. Mark, the Practical Register says only a copy; but the lord proceeded to find the special circumstances in this case which constituted an exception to the general rule, and made the oreter that the defendants should not be required to answer until a fortnight after the plaintiff had deposited the notes with the clerk in court. The princess never did deposit the notes, and after some 18 months' delay the bill was dismissed for noncompliance with the order. This case of the Princess of Wales was stigmatized 1'1 Chancellor Walworth in Kelly v. Eckford, 5 Paige, 548, as "a political decision," and he says it had always been so considered. Certalllly, judges who have subsequently considered it in England have from it as not being founded on any sound reasoning, and it 1S there regarded as having been overruled. In Penfold v. Nunn, 5 Sim. 409, Vice Chancellor Shadwell ruled that: "The- court will not, on motion of defendant, compel a plaintiff tf) produce documents in his possession, although the defendant swears that an inspection of them is necessary to enable him to answer the bill. He must file a bill of discovery." The opinion denies the autllOrity of the Princess of Wales Case, and directly refuses to follow it. In 1'Ifilligan v. Mitchell, 6 Sim. 186, Vice Chancellor Shadwell again rules that: "It is contrary to the general tenor of the practice of this court to order a plaintiff, on the application of the defendant, to produce a document in his custody; and I do not think I am bound to follow the decision in Princess' of Wales v. Earl of Liverpool except in a case precisely similar to it. There were specialties in that case that do not occur in this." In Pickering v. Rigby, 18 Ves. 484, Lord Eldon himself refused the motion even in a partnership ease, which has generally been consid· ered to be an exception to the general.rule, because partners have an equal interest and ownership in the documents belonging to the firm. The lord chancellor required a cross bill in that case. And again, in Maund v. Allies, 4 Mylne & C. 503, the lord chancellor again refused an order for the inspection of the plaintiff's document where there was a partnership, and one of the partners was receiver, except so far as
4is receiver's.: Qooks wereconcerne<!.,· In this case the court quoted ofMord Langdale in Wedderburn ". Wedderburn, 2 ;I3eav. 212,thatthe.' courts have certainly sOij1etimesshowR, in Counsel had ,!'laid that the court wOAld, sometimes labOrinQJrectly to make orders, but always repudiated jurisdiction to do so when broughtface to face with it; and 'then it was that Lord Langdale made t!).e appve remark, and to Shepherd v. 175, 4 Eeav.:.252, which was a the court refused the order for inspectlon,but again, as in the Princess of Wales the time, to make the answer until after the plaintiff lladftled the documents with the clerk. . In WileY v. Ves. 411, Lord Eldon again refused the motion to inspect the plaintiff's. docUJ;neuts, although they had been made exhibHs. to a deposition, in the case. In Mickletll'wait v. Moore, .3 Mer. 292, I.ord, Eldon much discussed the questlQp., apd again ,refused the motion for the production of documents,3;ud held that a , croi$s bill must be filed; an,d he; Silid in that case that. even a plaintiff,although he, has the right to inspect deeds <!efep.dant's ,answer ,to be in his possession, on which his cannot compel the production of those relating only to tbe defendant's own title. Andit willbe seen from the:,4uthorities that the plaip.tiff has a Il,Iuch larger right to inspect the docllments of thedefe:q.d,ant which. the defendant has filed in his than the d(-.fendant '.Cl,lP ever have as against ,the plaintiff,for the reason that the plaintiff's»iU, even where it is not strictly or technically a bill for discovery, calls lipon. the defendant to answer specifically as to the allegationlil.9f the bill; and so, when the defendant, in his answer, refers in'hie possessio!! in such a way as to make them a part of his answer, the plaintiff may, without a bill of discovery, boY motion compel the defendant to produce the documents for his inspection. Bpt this righto,f tb,e plaintiff to inspect the .defendant's documents is' limited t() particular Cl).ses, and is carefully guarded by the courts"so as notto intrude upon the right of a litigant to keep possession of pis own proof until he chooses in the usu!!l way to produce it at the. hearing. Atkyns v. Wr'yght, 14 Ves. 211. In Brown v. Newall, 2l\1ylne & C. 558, at page 573, Lord Chancellor Cottenhall:/rather contemptuously to the Princess of Wales Case,aud decides i;hat the right of inspection does not exist; quoting approvingly Lord Thurlow in Anon., 2 Dickens, 778, as foliows: "Did yqu ever know an instance of a defeJ1.Qant's applying against a plaintiff even to produce deeds? There capnot be any. It been dep.ied. If you want' it, you must file a cross bill for the purpose." , In Burton v. Neville,2.: Cox, Ch. 242, Lord ChaD,cellor Thurlow refused ;upon the d,efendant to produce papers ,which had not been by him to be produced,saying the couds have, never gone beyonQ. the. case ,Where the parties had a common interest in the paper. In Spragg 2 Cox, Ch. 109, the defendant moved to have thp plaintiff leave with the clerk a deed, it .l)eing stated by the bill that it was in the "plaintiff's custody, and ready to be produced as the
i, , . . ' .. ' ., "
court should direct." Here Lord Chancellor Thurlow said that, "As the motion is not consented to, it was totally impossible, for it is a universal principle that, if the defendant wants discovery of any dped in the hands of the plaintiff, he must file a cross bill for tbe purpose." In the case of Jackson v. Sedgwick, 2 Wils. Ch. 167, tbe application was refused and the Princess of Wales Case was explained. In Da'Vers v. Davers, 2 P. "Vms. 410, the master of tbe rolls had granted an order on the defendant's petition to inspect a deed which had been referred to in a deposition taken by the plaintiff; and that order the lord chancellor discharged, "for that the other side had no right to see the strength of the plaintiff's cause or evidence of title before the hearing, and no such order was ever yet made. If so, motions would be made every day from curiosity to pick holes in the deed," etc. And the same ruling was made in Hodson v. Earl of Warrington, 3 P. Wms. 35, only there it was the case of a defendant's deed proved by a deposition taken by the defendant. It was there stated that the parties have no right to see each other's exhibits, but must file a bill, since it remained at the election of the defendant whether he would make use of the deed at the hearing or not. It was also there said in argument that the master of the rolls constantly made these orders, but that, as often as he made them, the lord chancellor set them aside. In Attorney General v. Brooksbank, 1 Younge & J. 439, the motion by the defendant for a production and inspection of the plaintifl"s papers was granted under peculiar circumstances, the chief of which was that the transactions involved the settlement of an army agent with the war department, which was challenged after 25 years; and the court said that under peculiar circumstances they would sometimes deviate from the common practice, which will bend to particular cases in order to prevent injustice. In Jones v. Lewis, 2 Sim. & So 242, there was a case of a written agreement by a testator to convey his estate to his daughter, which afterwards he devised to another. '1'he defendants asked for an inspection of this agreement to enable them to answer. The production was ordered upon motion supported by affidavit that the defendant believed the instrument to be forged, and that he could not fully answer the bill before be inspected it. Vice Chancellor Leach acted ill this case upon the authority of the Princess of Wales Case. but this order was afterwards vacated by Lord Eldon himself, who had granted the order in the Princess of Wales Case, as appears by the following memorandum in the original edition of 4 Sim. 324, which, by the way, is generally left out of the reprints and decisions of the English chancery reports. The memorandum is as follows: "The order made by Sir J. Leach, vice chancellor, in Jones v. Lewis, 2 Sim. & S. 242. was discharged by Lord Eldon. but without costs." This has genemIly bet'n regarded as an indirect overruling of the Case of the Princess of vVales, and has been so treated by the most of the judges who have subsequently considered the question; but some of them have adhered to the Princess of Wales Case, strictly limiting it, however, to the peculiar circumstances of that case, the most important
of 'which was that both in that case and in Jones v. I.ewis the' person whosesignatutewas said to be forged was dead, wherefore there was more reason or justice in departing from the ordinary rule, and allowing the executors an inspection of the document in order to determine whether or not there had been a forgery committed. Lord Langdale somewhat defends the Princess of Wales Case in Taylor v. Heming, 4 Beav. 235, and explains the practice. In that case the plaintiff had offered to produce and deposit the letters referred to in his bill, but afterwards refUSed. He was compelled, by the usual order authorizing the answer to be delayed until he did deposit, to produce and file them for inspection. Lord Langdale said in that and other cases that the Princess of Wales Case was not amenable to the animadversions that had been made upon it, for that it could be defended upon its particular circumstances, both upon prindple and authority; and he referred to the previous case of Shepherd v. Morris, 1 Beav. 175, where he had granted the same order for enlarging the time to answer until the plaintiff had filed his documents,-again under peculiar circumstances. There the plaintiff's original bill had called for an account, and the correction of errors made by the defendant in rendering reports to the plaintiff, and by an amended bill charged false entries in the defendant's accounts. The plaintiff having called upon the defendant to correct his accounts as they had been rendered to the plaintiff himself by the defendant, who was his agent, the .master of the rolls said that this he could not do until the identical documents which he had been caIled upon to correct were produced. It was not a case of correcting his accounts as he kept them, but· of correcting the accounts as he had rendered them to the plaintiff. This was a close but clear distinction, and the lord chancellor compelled the production of the documents. Evidently affiicted with the criticisms upon this adherence to the discredited Case of the Princess of Wales, Lord Langdale, in Bate v. Bate, 7 Beav. 528, 537, again takes occasion to explain the distinction between that class of cases and the cases in which he had followed it. He ruled in Bate v. Bate that "a plaintiff, unless he specifically offers. to do so by the bill, or is required to do so by the cross bill, is not bound to prOduce, previous to defendant being COlIlpelled to put in his answer, documents admitted to be in the plaintiff's possession, and alleged as proving his caSe." It was the case of a bill for the settlement of disputed partnership matters against three defendants, which charged that certain indentures mentioned in the bill were in fact prepared from instructions given by the defendants without any communication with the plaintiff, and were caused to be prepared in such a way as they thought best for their own views and purposes, and they always refused to produce or show the conveyances of the said premises, or the draft thereof, to the plaintiff, although the plaintiff had frequently applied by letter and otherwise for an inspection of the said documents, "as by reference to the correspondencein the plaintiff's possession, when produced, will appear." It was moved in behalf of the defendants that they might have a month's time to answer after the plaintiff had produced and deposited with the Clerk for the inspection of the defendants the correspondence in
the said bill stated to be in the plaintiff's poseession, more particularly l;1et out in the motion. The defendant made affidavit that he had kept no copy of the letters that had been written by him to the plaintiff tespecting the matters stated in the bill, and that he could not properly put in his answer to plaintiff's bill and amended bill until he had opportunity of inspecting the letters which he had writ· ten to the plaintiff, and which the bill admitted to be in the posses· sion of the plaintiff. It was this motion which Lord Langdale, the master of the rolls, refused. He says, in explanation of his judgment:
"There have been several cases upon thifl sullject; and 1 think they may be divided into hvo dasses: First. cases like that of the Princess of "Wales v. Earl of Liverpool; and, secondly. two several cases which came before me, and have been refeITed to, namely, Taylor v. Hemming and Shepherd v. xlorrifl. These were cases in which the plaintiff, hy his bilL not only stated that he had possession of the documents, intending to use those documents in support of his case. but he called upon the defendant to look at them, and offered to produce them for the purpose. The plaintiff, in substance amI effect, stated by his bill that the defendant could not give the answer which the plaintiff desired to have for his own use unless the defendant would look at those documents; and, the plaintiff having done that, then refused to produce the documents. 1 think 1 may assume, after the investigation which this case has undergone, that there is no case whatever to be produced in which the plaintiff, charging a particular fact to be within the knowledge of the defendant, and stating further that he had evidence of the fact in letters which are in his possession, has been held bound to produee those doeuments before the defendant could be called upon to put in his answer. The strong impression upon my mind is that there is no sueh ease. None so eontrary to the ordinary prineiple has been produced, and 1 believe that if you were to lay it down as a proposition that the plaintiff shall not proceed until the defendant knows the evidenee which the plaintiff has. you would state a proposition mueh at varianee with the ordinary opinion of mankind as well as of lawyers. No doubt you have a right, in this eourt, to look at the evidenee which the plaintiff states to be in his possession; but that right is only to be obtained upon a cross bill. Every party has, in this court, that advantage, which is not to be had so effectually in any other jurisdiction. He may discover that which is in the knowledge and breast of the plaintiff before he proceeds to a hearing of the cause, but he must do it in such a way as to give the plaintiff an opportunity of !'tating all the circumstances connected with the matter. It is undoubtedly extremely important, when the plaintiff is ealled upon to furnish any discover)', that he should do it in the proper form, and be at liberty to state all the circumstanees relating to the matter, and that he should have all the guard and protection which he derives from being able to give a full statement of all the circumstances belonging to the case."
This was in 1844,-but a little while after our equity rules had been promulgated,-and may be taken to fairly represent the English practice of that time, which is-binding upon us. Lord Eldon, in the Princess of 'Vales Case, remarked that "there is a mighty difference between simply producing an instrument and producing it in answer to a bill of discovery, where the defendant has an opportunity of accompanying the produetion with a statement of everything necessary to protect him from its consequences." This, taken in conneetion with the principle already adverted to, that nv litigant can be compelled, as a matter of general right, to produce his evidence for the inspection of his adversary until he does so under the formalities that take place at the time of giving testimony for the hearing, furnishes the foundation for the general rule of prac-
tice that motions like thilil will not be granted; and never unless the case falls within the pecUiliar circumstances make it an exception to the general rule. It is the reason why a court of equity requires either the pl.aintiff or the defendant to file a bill of discovery to compel the, production of such documents, and all are familiar with the restrictions that are thrown around the right of discovery. The case of Elder v. Carter, 25 Q. B. Div. 194, explains the modern English practice under legislative authority to make rules of practice upon this,"ubject for both courts of law and equity that have superseded the. old practice; but this, of course, is not binding on us. It will be found, however, even under the modern practice, which has done away with the necessity for bills of discovery, and substituted therefor a system of. production upon motion, sustained and defended by the affidavits of the parties,that the courts follow substantially the same principles that governed the old practice; and parties now are required to produce only under the same circumstances where they have been compelled to produce before,-either upon a bill of discovery or upon amotion to produce. Thus, in Wilson v. Thornbury (1874) L. R. 17 Eq. 517, an order on the defendant to produce alleged forged checks for the comparison of handWf1ting was refused under the modern practice; and in Boyd v. Petrie, L. R.. 5 Eq. 290, the master of the rolls had on motion ordered the plaintiffs to produce mortgages after an answer saying that the defendants did not know whether or not they had executed them, bllt, if they had, it was in ignorance of their contents, and they asked for an inspection of the documents py expert witnesses to enable them to determine whether or not it wll8 their handwriting; but on appeal this order of the master of the rolls was vacated by the court of appeals. Boyd v. Petrie, 3 Oh. App. 818. That was a case where the motion, like the-case' we have iIi hand, 'was refused after answer filed. What would it have been if the .m.otion had 1;>een made before the answer was filed? . . . Mr. Daniel, in his work on Ohancery Practice, devotes a chapter this subject of the production of documents, and cites the foregoi:(lg and many other cases for the text, in which he displays the pracmore tice that is binding upon us, as well as tb:e modern recent English legislation. 2 Daniel, Ch.Prac. (6th Ed.) 1817 et seq. Instructive reading will also be found in Dick. Eq. Prac. pp. 151, 208, where. the English caseljl are somewhat cited. The American authorities are to the .same effect, except where con§ 522, as to trolled by modern legislatiOJl · Beach,l\:[od. Eq. the production by defendants, and Id. § 524, as to the production by rthe plaintiff,-citing 3 GreenI. Ev. Ed.) 302, 3Q3, and many A;merican·cases. Story,Eq. PI. (10th Ed.) § 211b: "Rthe bill refers to documents in the plaintiff's ,possession, the defen,dant caimot compel their production by affidavit before the answers to the petition, and only by cross bill." Id. §§ 858-860; Id., § 390; Id.p. 762, and note; ld. § 852b, and note. '.Kelly v. Eckford, 5 Paige, 548, holds that partnership books constih1te an to the general rule, as they .belong to both parties alike. It was in this case that· Chancellor Wll1worth denounces the. Princess of Wales Case as a political deoision.
In Eager v. Wiswall, 2 Paige, 369, it is to be a matter of course to compel the inspection of defendant's books or papers made a part of the answer; but Chancellor Kent, in Watson v. Renwick, 4 Johns. Ch. 381, clearly shows that this is rather a loose statement of the practice. In the last case Chancellor Kent to order the production of documents by defendants, and states the rule more accurately than Chancellor Walworth has done. Chancellor Kent .especially approves Lord Eldon's reasons for the caution of courts in compelling the production of documents by motion, because produthe party a cing papers in answer to a bill of discovery safeguard by enabling him to state explanatory circumstances accompanying the production, which cannot be done where the prOOuc" tion is compelled by summary motion. In Denning v. Smith, 3 Johns. Ch. 409, an order was refused as vexntious, and in Lupton v. Johnson, 2 Johns. Ch. 429, an order requiring the plaintiff to produce bonds in his was vacated, and it was held that a cross bill was necessary, although the proceeding by motion was less expensive. In Commercial Bank v. Bank of New York, 4 Hill, 516, a party was compelll>d to produce an exhibit to a deposition, confessedly contrary to the English practice, and reasons are given for the difference between the practice there and in this country. In Evans v. Staples, 42 N. J. Eq. 584, 8 Atl. 528, an order for the production of documents upon a co-defendant was refused, and it was held that a bill of discovery was required. The case especially approves Kelly v. Eckford, supra. Our equity rule 72 declares that, "where a defendant in equity files a cross bill for discovery only, against the plaintiff· in the original bill, the defendant to the original bill shall first answer thereto before the original plaintiff shall be compelled to answer the crossbill." This was evidently intended to settle a somewhat disputed question of practice, then existing in England, which had relation to the subject we have in hand, as well as to other situations in equity practice. It shows that,if the defendant in this case had filed a cross bill asking for a discovery of the plaintiff's exhibit on the same grounds that are stated in this petition, the plaintiff would not be compelled to answer that cross bill until the defendant had answered the original bill. And it will be found that the reason for this rule is the very reason that is given in the foregoing cases for the refusal of this motion, namely, that the defendnnt must answer the bill upon his own knowledge and information before he can require the discovery of evidence in the hands of the plaintiff. After he has answered the original bill upon his own knowledge and information and belief as then existing, he may procure discovery from the plaintiff in aid of the case he has made by his answer, or, after that discovery, he may amend his answer, and take advantage of the circumstances shown by the discovery; but, unless there are peculiar circumstances, as in the Case of the Princess of Wales, which form an exception to the rule requiring a bill of discovery, the plaintiffs will not be required, upon a mere motion, to produce documents to aid the defend· ants in making their answer. Motion denied.
93 FEDERAL REPORTER. BERRY et ux. v'; NORTHWESTERN & P. HYPOTHEEK BANK (NORTHWESTERN & P. MORTG. CO.). (Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. October 5, 1898.) No. 440. 1.
a mortgagor owned both the S. E. 14 and S. W. 14 or a quarter section 9f land, and the former was Inserted, by mistake of the scrivener. instead of the latter, and after the mistake was discovered the owner . mortgaged theS. W. 14 to another, and took no steps to have the prior mortgage reformed, he cannot object to a foreclosure decree directing a sale of the S. E. 14 thereunder. .
The decision of the highest court of a state construing a state statute. and declaring that an acknowledgment by a married woman precisely similar,- except names and dates, to the one in question, was in substantial compliance therewith, and valid, is binding on the federal courts sitting in such state.
Appeal from the Oircuit Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the District of Idaho. Edgar 0 .. Steele, ·for appellants. J. H. Forney, for appellee. Before GILBERT, ROSS, and MORROW, Oircuit Judges. ROSS, Oircuit Judge. The appellants, Franklin M. Berry and M. A. Berry, his wife. were defendants in the court below to a suit for the foreclosure of a mortgage. A decree of foreclosure and sale having been rendered against them (89 Fed. 408), they bring the case here by appeal, The mortgaged property is described as lot No.2, and the S. E.! of the N. E. 1 and the N. W. 1 of the S. E. i of section 6, in township 41 N., of range 5 W. of Boise meridiall' situated in the county of Latah, state .of Idaho, and containing 120.19 acres. The evidence in the case shows that, by mistake of the scrivener, the S. E. instead of the 8. W. i of the X Eo 1 of the section of land mentioned was described in the mortgage. Both' the 8. E. and the 8. W. 1 of the N. E. 1 of section 6 were, however, at the time of the execution of the mortgage, the common property of the appellants. One of the two points made on their behalf in support of the appeal is that it was error in the court below to decree a foreclosure and sale of the 40 acres of land inserted in the mortgage by mistake. The evidence shows that long prior to the commencement of this suit the mistake was discovered by the appellants, and that subsequent to such discovery they mortgaged to another party the 40-acre tract which it was intended by the respective parties to include in the present mortgage, and' in lieu of which the 8. E. t of the N. E. t of section 6 was inserted. This fact probably accounts for the fact that at no time-not even in the present suit-has there been any effort on the part of the appellants to reform the mortgage. This latter fact is a conclusive answer to the first point made on their behalf. . The only other point made on behalf of the appellants is that the mortgage is ineffectual, as against Mrs. Berry, because of the eel'-


text:
Also in the media
Publisher Katherine Weymouth is considering Newsweek's Jon Meacham, Washington Post columnist David
Ignatius, and Brauchli, among others, to replace Len Downie when he does resign
as Post executive editor.
The New York Times'
Frank Rich signs
on as an HBO creative consultant.
Former ABC correspondent Linda Douglass joins
Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) campaign.
People magazine bumps
up its deadline by 12 hours.
Judge ejects the Chicago Tribune's sketch artist from the R. Kelly child pornography trial.


text:
"Since its beginning, jazz was defined as a diverse & multicultural musical genre, even before these concepts existed, a continuum mix of people, feelings and music. Starting from this idea, organizing a major jazz festival in Timisoara comes natural and symbolic.
A festival creates a symbol for the city that hosts it and strengthens its identity. JAZZ™ comes to celebrate the vibrant cultural energy of Timisoara.
Why a festival co-financed with public funds? First of all, because it´s extremely important to define culture as a common good, accessible to everyone and not as a commercial product available based on financial rules and it´s the City Hall´s duty to undertake the role as a guarantor of this principle. The cultural policy can define tomorrow´s society, one in which we don´t ask ourselves only from what are we living but also for what and how we live together. It is in Timisoara's interest to stimulate the cultural life of the stronghold in all its forms.
In 2013 we laid the foundation for what could be one of the most important cultural events in this part of Europe, as the joint effort to achieve the title of European Capital of Culture 2021. Since the first edition we succeeded in attracting artists such as: Richard Bona, Kurt Elling, David Murray & Macy Gray,Terri Lyne Carrington, Lizz Wright, Al Jarreau, Anoushka Shankar, The Cat Empire, Dianne Reeves, Marcus Miller, Liv Warfield w/ The NPG Hornz, The Chick Corea Elektric Band, Monty Alexander, Miles Mosley & The West Coast Get Down, Christian Scott, John Beasley presents Monk'ESTRA, The Cinematic Orchestra, R+R=NOW and Gregory Porter.
JAZZ™ 2019 promises to deliver the same high quality artistic performances it accustomed it's audiences with. We are looking forward to host you between the 5th – 7th of July in our exceptional city."
(Dan Diaconu, Viceprimar al Municipiului Timișoara)


text:
Billionaire Boys Club "Vault" Collection
Billionaire Boys Club digs into the crate to bring us The Vault Collection — a line of classic gear over familiar designs created by Japanese streetwear designer Sk8thing. From the varsity jackets to the hoodies, each piece comes from the original Japanese factories and constructed based on the quality of the original drop. Check out the brand's European online store to purchase all the pieces in the B.B.C. Vault Collection.


text:
If you need help knowing how to create a Monthly Budget Template Excel that works, my friend Lauren is guest posting today about her successful monthly budget, how she created it, and even included a free excel spreadsheet template for an entire year. Feel free to Companies usually make budgets as a plan to earn and spend money for the coming years. For a family or a person, we can also make budgets for saving money or decreasing family deficit. In this article, I will show you how to download a budget template from Dave Ramsey's template Dave Ramsey's Excel budget template is one of the most popular templates when it comes to monthly budgeting.
Mr. Ramsey originally created these templates in PDF format but then Chris Hoffman converted in an Excel based budget Although a simple home budget worksheet can be scribbled out with plain pencil, paper, and a calculator, today's technology means you have access to many easy-to-use budget This basic Monthly Budget Template Excel worksheet comes from My Excel Templates and Free Monthly Budget Spreadsheet for Microsoft Excel® and Google Sheets This spreadsheet helps you compare your monthly budget to your actual expenditures, and can be printed on a single page in portrait orientation. The difference between your budget and If you don't have Excel, you should be able to find a version of the particular template in Google Docs or Open Office. Editor's Note: While labeled a "yearly" budget planner, this template really allows you to make monthly plans and then track .
Money management is different for everyone, so remember that you'll most likely have to make changes to whatever template you pick. And you want to be able to make those changes easily. Templates built in Excel s Monthly Budget Tracker template You probably know how much money you make in an average month, but do you also know how much you spend? If you frequently find yourself at the end of your money with a whole lot of month left, it's time to create a budget. Even careful spenders can benefit Managing a budget handy and free budget spreadsheet templates. I've rounded up four of the best free budget spreadsheets available on the internet. Choose from online spreadsheets or downloadable templates that can be used with Microsoft Excel or UPDATE: When I started this blog in March 2008 the Household Monthly Budget Template Excel was the very first template I put It was simply converted from an excel file. Many of us here have been using it for a while now. We are experimenting with new budget .
Monthly Budget Spreadsheet for Excel monthly budget template excel
Personal monthly budget, word http://office.microsoft.com/en us monthly budget template excel
Monthly Budget Planner | Free Budget Spreadsheet for Excel monthly budget template excel
Free Personal Monthly Budget Template For Excel monthly budget template excel
Monthly Budget Spreadsheet for Excel monthly budget template excel
Free Personal Monthly Budget Template For Excel monthly budget template excel
Budgets Office.com monthly budget template excel
Simple Monthly Budget Template for Excel 2013 monthly budget template excel
GREAT budgeting website | House Things | Pinterest | Colleges monthly budget template excel


text:
Wednesday Night Racing Series
The TWC Wednesday Night Racing Series
Beginner racers are welcome to the start line, the atmosphere is fun and friendly and you're guaranteed to get free advice from the experienced veterans out on the water.
Races run every Wednesday night from May through September. The first flag of the start sequence goes up at 6:00pm. Most racers arrive at the clubhouse around 5:00pm in order to give themselves time to rig up. Ideally you should aim to be at the starting line at 5:45pm so as to give yourself time to evaluate the course. Usually there are three to four races taking about half an hour each. Turnouts usually range from 15 to 30 racers depending on the time of year and the wind conditions.
For the 2019 season we are introducing a new class: Buddy Racing. New racers (less than two seasons racing experience) can participate as a team with an experienced racer who will act as an advisor, first helping new racers learn the basics and then giving tips on the finer points as the season progresses. If you want to race but aren't really sure where to start then Buddy Racing is for you - contact Keli Schmidt for more information email@example.com.
A beach BBQ at the club usually concludes every evening.


text:
Path of the Puma
Arcilio Sepulveda used to hunt pumas for a living. Today he's a key member of the Tompkins Conservation wildlife recovery program, helping to protect an expanding population of mountain lions in Patagonia National Park in Chile. Formerly a "leonero," a lion killer who lived on a huge estancia that raised… Read More


text:
And yes its absolutely jarring to read anything classic to whats current. its like they're not even trying . it like they hired a bunch of screen writers to just keep pushing out issues.
I don't know how any current X writer can claim to be a fan But write the way they do. I guess in reality they are just fans of their favorite and write the fanboynism around them.
Hire me MARVEL Ill Ghost write for you . you dont even have to pay me. My payment is the Xworld is in order again


text:
Zucchini and Tomato Pasta Sauce
Makes 4 servings.
Ideal slow-cooker size: 3-quart
Cooking time: 6-8 hours
2 cups shredded zucchini
4 oz. chopped mushrooms
5 medium tomatoes, diced
1 bay leaf
1/4 cup fresh parsley, chopped
4 garlic cloves, minced
1/4 teaspoon pepper
1 teaspoon garlic salt
1 teaspoon oregano
1 teaspoon basil
2 8-oz. cans tomato sauce
1/2 medium onion, chopped
2 tablespoons quick-cooking tapioca
1 lb. ground turkey sausage, browned and drained (optional: you can also use any other meat you prefer.
Hot, cooked pasta
1. Combine all ingredients except meat in slow-cooker. Stir to combine.
2. Cover and cook on LOW for 6-8 hours or on HIGH for 3-4 hours.
3. If desired, use an immersion blender to puree. If desired, add cooked meat. Season to taste and serve over spaghetti noodles or other pasta of your choice.
This recipe came from Slow Cooking Fast by Karen Bellessa Petersen.