text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
January 8, 1993
The opinion of the court was delivered by: SWEET
Sweet, D. J.
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("MDL") consolidated and transferred to this Court on October 10, 1991, a number of actions arising out of the demise of partnerships affiliated with Integrated Resources, Inc. ("Integrated"), which filed for relief under chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101, et seq., in 1990. See In re Integrated Resources, Inc., 135 Bankr. 746, 748 (S.D.N.Y. 1992). Since the transfer of the original actions, several others have been filed in the Southern District of New York or transferred by the Multidistrict Panel to this Court and consolidated with these proceedings ("Later Filed Actions").
In general, the Plaintiffs in each of these actions bought limited partnership interests in ventures sponsored by Integrated or an entity associated with Integrated. The ventures were investment vehicles which bought, owned, operated, and leased residential and commercial real estate and equipment. The offer and sale of these interests was conducted in compliance with the requirements of Regulation D ("Reg. D"), Rules 501-08, 17 C.R.F. 230.501-230.508, of the Securities Act of 1933 ("1933 Act"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 77a, et seq., thereby exempting the transactions from the registration requirements of the 1933 Act. Since these transactions are not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the 1933 Act limits purchasers to those who qualify as "accredited investors."
To qualify as a Reg. D accredited investor, a "natural person" must have "an individual net worth, or joint net worth with that person's spouse, at the time of his purchase [in excess of] $ 1,000,000"; or he must have:
had an individual income in excess of $ 200,000 in each of the two most recent years or joint income with the person's spouse in excess of $ 300,000 in each of those years and has a reasonable expectation of reaching the same income level in the current year.
Rule 501(a)(5) & (6). A trust qualifies for accredited-investor status if it has "total assets in excess of $ 5,000,000, not formed for the specific purpose of acquiring the securities offered, whose purchase is directed by a sophisticated person . . .," Rule 501(a)(7), to wit, one who "has such knowledge and experience in financial and business matters that he is capable of evaluating the merits and risks of the prospective investment . . .," Rule 506(b)(2)(ii).
The purpose of these requirements is to facilitate and expedite specially designed offerings, while at the same time offsetting the danger posed by the lack of SEC scrutiny of the offer and sale by precluding those from participating in the offering who are inexperienced purchasers of securities and unable to afford professional advice regarding the merits and risks of purchasing the offered securities. Each of the investors in the Integrated partnerships was required to represent in writing that he qualified for Reg. D accredited-investor status and that he met the additional financial criteria set forth in the "Who May Invest" section of the confidential private placement memorandum ("PPM") issued for each partnership.
The investors were also warned in the respective partnership PPMs of various financial risks involved with each partnership investment. The following statement from the first paragraph of the Clovine Associates Limited Partnership PPM is typical:
The tax consequences of an investment in the Partnership, the absence of Cash Flow from such investment for at least the first four years of the operation of the Partnership and the illiquidity of such investment make the purchase of Interests suitable only for investors who have substantial net worth and substantial taxable income, and an Interest should be purchased only as a long-term investment.
Clovine PPM at 1.
Additionally, each PPM contained a section entitled "Risk Factors," in which the various risk factors of the investment were explicated at length, including, for example, restrictions on transferability and the possible lack of a market for the investment interests; the possible unavailability of tax benefits and changes in the tax law; risks arising from the terms and conditions of purchase money notes, mortgages, and leases; the possible inability to refinance the project; the possible lack of available sources of funds for the operating partnership; risks arising from leveraged financing and the ownership of the specific property; the possible inability to sell the project; and the possible adverse effects of technological developments in competing equipment.
The limited partnerships were highly leveraged, and the Plaintiffs allege they were promised considerable tax savings through debt financing and, after the initial debt was paid off, considerable profits from rental income from the buildings and equipment. The Plaintiffs further allege that the investments had no prospects for success from their inception and served no other economic purpose than to provide the Defendants with millions of dollars of profit in sales proceeds, fees, and other commissions.
On February 3, 1992, this Court signed "Pre-Trial Order No. 1" ("Pre-Trial Order") which, among other things, established an initial motion and discovery schedule for all actions subject to the MDL Order. The Pre-Trial Order created four separate global motion categories: (I) statutes of limitations governing the federal securities claims ("Global Motion I"), (II) the legal sufficiency of the federal securities claims ("Global Motion II"), (III) the legal sufficiency of the federal RICO claims ("Global Motion III"), and (IV) all Global Motion I, II, III motions applicable to the Later Filed Actions ("Global Motion IV"). The Pre-Trial Order also consolidated the briefing and hearing schedules for Global Motions I and II and Global Motions III and IV.
The actions subject to the present motion are:
Byrne v. Research Triangle Associates Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 6966 ("Research Triangle ") (filed January 3, 1991 in the Arizona District, Phoenix Division);
Reagan v. 600 Grant Street Associates Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 5498 ("600 Grant Street/Reagan ") (filed April 12, 1991 in the Central District of California);
Schoonmaker Homes v. 600 Grant Street Associates Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 8528 ("600 Grant Street/Schoonmaker ") (filed December 18, 1991 in the Southern District of New York);
Standefer v. Clovine Associates Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 6968 ("Clovine/Standefer ") (filed April 9, 1991, in the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division);
Ellingson v. Kanzar Associates, 91 Civ. 6967 ("Clovine/Ellingson ") (filed March 14, 1991, in the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division);
Baird v. EVP Fourth Corp., 91 Civ. 1063 ("West Palm/Baird ") (filed February 12, 1991, in the Southern District of New York);
Coleman v EVP Fourth Corp., 91 Civ. 0678 ("West Palm/Coleman ") (filed January 23, 1991, in the Southern District of New York);
Coolspring Dental Clinic v. EVP Seventh Avenue Corp., 91 Civ. 6905 (" Rittenhouse ") (filed October 15, 1991, in the Southern District of New York);
Martin v. EVP Second Corp., 90 Civ. 7074 ("Lenox Towers ") (filed November 2, 1990, in the Southern District of New York; dismissed with leave to replead to add additional plaintiffs by this Court on August 26, 1992);
Gorman v. Sevzar Associates, 90 Civ. 6979 ("Southern Inns ") (filed October 19, 1990 in the Southern District of New York);
Greene's Ready Mixed Concrete Co. v. Fillmore Pacific Associates Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 0978 ("Fillmore/Greene's ") (filed February 8, 1991, in the Southern District of New York);
Enviro Corp. v. Fillmore Pacific Associates Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 1625 ("Fillmore/Enviro ") (filed March 7, 1991, in the Southern District of New York);
White v. Hunter Publishing Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 2232 ("Hunter Publishing ") (filed April 1, 1991, in the Southern District of New York);
Christian v. Integrated MR Limited Partnership, 91 Civ. 6003 ("Intermobile ") (filed September 5, 1991, in the Southern District of New York).
The present motions do not apply to any of the Later Filed Actions or to Barron v. Miami Executive Towers Assocs. Ltd. Partnership, 89 Civ. 8569, (RWS) (filed December 18, 1989, in the Southern District of New York), or to Rabin v. Fivzar Assocs., 90 Civ. 4869 (RWS) (filed July 23, 1990, in the Southern District of New York). Nevertheless, the parties should assume that general principles set forth below will be applied to those actions in accordance with Global Motion IV.
Additionally, the Pre-Trial Order stayed the production of documents to the Plaintiffs by various parties pending the disposition of the Global Motions.
The Pre-Trial Order also stayed the depositions of parties, except as to the Plaintiffs' deposition of Landauer Associates, Inc., in Clovine/Ellingson, pending the disposition of the Global Motions and the completion of document discovery.
Pursuant to the schedule established in the Pre-Trial Order, as amended, the "Anderson Kill" and "Integrated" Defendants ("Moving Defendants")
moved for summary judgment dismissing the federal securities claims in the subject actions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rules 12(b), 12(c), and 56, (Global Motion I), and for an order dismissing those claims under pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rules 12(b), 12(c), and 9(b) (Global Motion II), on February 21, 1992. Most of the Individual Defendants joined in these motions and either adopted the reasoning of the Anderson Kill and Integrated Defendants or submitted their own papers.
Additionally, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P., the Plaintiffs in Lenox Towers moved to dismiss counterclaims made against them by the Anderson Kill and Camhy Karlinsky & Stein Defendants. See supra note 2.
Oral argument on these motions was heard on June 10, 1992. The cross-motion of the Lenox Towers Plaintiffs is considered submitted as of that date. Various supplemental letter briefs were received by the Court through October 30, 1992 and October 2, 1992 on Global Motions I and II, respectively, and the Global Motions are considered submitted as of those dates.
Global Motion I
On Global Motion I, the Moving Defendants seek summary judgment dismissing most of the Plaintiffs' federal securities claims on the ground that the claims are untimely under the applicable statutes of limitations. The individual complaints allege claims under either § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("1934 Act"), 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5, or § 12(2) of the 1933 Act, 15 U.S.C. § 771 (2), or both. For the reasons set forth below, Global Motion I is granted in part and denied in part.
For simplicity's sake, the general legal principles governing the statute of limitations issues will be set forth first. These principles will then be applied to the individual complaints on a case-by-case basis.
I. The Statute of Limitations for the § 12(2) Claims
Section 13 of the 1933 Act provides that:
No action shall be maintained to enforce any liability created under section 77k or 771(2) [12(2)] of this title unless brought within one year after the discovery of the untrue statement or the omission, or after such discovery should have been made by the exercise of reasonable diligence. . . . In no event shall any such action be brought to enforce a liability created . . . under section 771(2) of this title more than three years after the sale.
15 U.S.C. § 77m.
"The three-year time limit in section 13 is an absolute outer limit." Bresson v. Thomson McKinnon Sec., Inc., 641 F. Supp. 338, 343 (S.D.N.Y. 1986). Moreover, because compliance with § 13 is an essential ingredient of a § 12(2) claim, see Morin v. Trupin, 747 F. Supp. 1051, 1063 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) ("Morin I ") (quoting Bresson, 641 F. Supp. at 343), a complaint asserting such a claim must set forth:
(1) the time and circumstances of the discovery of the fraudulent statement;
(2) the reasons why it was not discovered earlier (if more than one year has lapsed since the making of the fraudulent statement); and
(3) the diligent efforts which plaintiff undertook in making or seeking such discovery.
Id. ; see Friedman v. Arizona World Nurseries, Ltd. Partnership, 730 F. Supp. 521, 543-44 (S.D.N.Y. 1990).
Failure to comply with these requirements will subject an individual § 12(2) claim to dismissal. The issues concerning the individual discovery dates are set forth below in the § 10(b) discussion.
II. The Statutes of Limitations for the § 10(b) Claims
Before the Supreme Court's decision in Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson, U.S. , 111 S. Ct. 2773 (1991), on June 20, 1991, Congress had never seen it fit to legislate a uniform statute of limitations for the implied right of action arising out of § 10(b). Once the Court announced such a limitations period in Lampf, see U.S. at & n.9, 111 S. Ct. at 2782 & n.9, and directed that it be applied retroactively, see Welch v. Cadre Capital, 946 F.2d 185, 187 (2d Cir. 1991) ("Welch II "); Ahmed v. Trupin, 781 F. Supp. 1017, 1021 (S.D.N.Y. 1992), Congress responded by amending the 1934 Act and inserting a new § 27A:
(a) EFFECT ON PENDING CAUSES OF ACTION. -- The limitation period for any private civil action implied under section 10(b) of this Act that was commenced on or before June 19, 1991, shall be the limitation period provided by the laws applicable in the jurisdiction, including principles of retroactivity, as such laws existed on June 19, 1991.
(b) EFFECT ON DISMISSED CAUSES OF ACTION. -- Any private civil action implied under section 10(b) of this Act that was commenced on or before June 19, 1991 --
(1) which was dismissed as time barred subsequent to June 19, 1991, and
(2) which would have been timely filed under the limitation period provided by the laws applicable in the jurisdiction, including principles of retroactivity, as such laws existed on June 19, 1991,
shall be reinstated on motion by the plaintiff not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this section.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-242, § 476, 105 Stat. 2236 (codified at Securities Exchange Act of 1934, § 27A, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa-1).
This action includes cases filed after the Supreme Court's decision in Lampf ; cases filed in the Second Circuit before Lampf, but after the November 8, 1990 decision in Ceres Partners v. GEL Assocs., 918 F.2d 349, 364 (2d Cir. 1990) (adopting uniform limitations period § 10(b) actions); cases filed in the Second Circuit before Ceres Partners ; and cased filed in federal district courts outside the Second Circuit.
Such a state of affairs rarely lends itself to simply stated rules, and the present motions are no exception. Rather, myriad issues must be addressed, including the constitutional validity of § 27A; the applicable statute of limitations for each case and, in certain instances, for each plaintiff; whether the limitations period from some other circuit can be applied here; and at what point various Plaintiffs should have discovered the conduct upon which their claims are based.
A. The § 10(b) Statute of Limitations to be Applied to Claims Filed on or after June 20, 1991
In Lampf, the Supreme Court held that private actions under § 10(b) must be commenced within one year after the discovery of the facts constituting the violation and within three years after such violation. See U.S. at , 111 S. Ct. at 2781-82. In adopting this uniform federal statute of limitations, the Court borrowed from § 9(e) of the 1934 Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78i(e), which provides:
No action shall be maintained to enforce any liability created under this section, unless brought within one year after the discovery of the facts constituting the violation and within three years after such violation.
See U.S. at n.9, 111 S. Ct. at 2781-82.
The Court also noted that the language used in § 9(e) of the 1934 Act varies from that used in the 1933 Act. See id. While § 13 of the 1933 Act imposes a strict three-year limit from the date of "sale," § 9(e) of the 1934 Act imposes such a limit "after the cause of action accrued". Compare 15 U.S.C. § 77m with id. § 78i(e). To the extent this difference has any substantive effect in an individual case will be determined in applying the statute of limitations below.
The Supreme Court decided Lampf on June 20, 1991. Section 27A is directed at only those cases commenced on or before June 19, 1991. Therefore, § 9(e) limitations period will be applied to the § 10(b) claims in the cases commenced on or after June 20, 1991.
B. Section 27A is Not Unconstitutional
This Court fully considered the question of § 27A's constitutionality based on briefs filed by counsel to most of the parties to this litigation in Rabin v. Fivzar Assocs., 801 F. Supp. 1045, 1051-56 (S.D.N.Y. 1992). Additional materials submitted in this matter shed no further light on the decision there that the statute does not violate principles of separation of powers and due process. See id. at 1056; cf. Litton Industries, Inc. v. Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb Inc., 967 F.2d 742, 751 n.6 (2d Cir. 1992).
C. The § 10(b) Limitations Period to be Applied to Claims Filed before June 20, 1991, and on or after November 8, 1990
The statute of limitations for § 10(b) in the Second Circuit required that the case be brought within one year of discovery of the fraud and within three years of the fraud some seven months before Lampf was decided. In Ceres, the Second Circuit concluded that the limitations period found in §§ 9 and 18 of the 1934 Act should apply to implied claims brought under § 10(b), the same period selected by the Supreme Court in Lampf. See Ceres, 918 F.2d at 364. Therefore, all those § 10(b) claims filed on or after November 8, 1990, the date Ceres was decided, will be subject to the uniform one-year/three-year period adopted in Ceres and Lampf. See 15 U.S.C. § 78aa-1; Henley v. Slone, 961 F.2d 23, 24 (2d Cir. 1992).
The Integrated lawsuits originally filed in this Court after November 8, 1990 and therefore bound by the statute of limitations laid down in Ceres are West Palm/Baird (filed February 12, 1991), West Palm/Coleman (filed January 23, 1991), Fillmore/Greene's (filed February 8, 1991), Fillmore/Enviro (filed March 7, 1991), Hunter Publishing (filed April 1, 1991).
Two other lawsuits were originally filed in the Southern District of New York just before the Second Circuit handed down the new statute of limitations in Ceres : Lenox Towers (filed November 2, 1990) and Southern Inns (filed October 19, 1990). Claims in these two cases will be governed by the Second Circuit's prior practice of borrowing the most analogous state statute of limitations for the § 10(b) claims. See Ades v. DeLoitte & Touche, Fed Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P 96,469 (S.D.N.Y. 1992). The § 12(2) claims in these cases, of course, continue to be governed by the one-year/three-year statute of limitations prescribed by § 13 of the 1933 Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77m.
D. Determining the Applicable § 10(b) Limitations Periods for Claims Filed in Other Jurisdictions
The other three lawsuits were originally filed elsewhere and then transferred to this Court by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. The complaints were filed in Arizona, Phoenix Division (Research Triangle, filed Jan. 3, 1991), the Central District of California (600 Grant Street/Reagan, filed April 2, 1991), and the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division (Clovine/Standefer, filed April 9, 1991, and Clovine/Ellingson, filed March 14, 1991).
In all three, both the Plaintiffs and the Moving Defendants agree that the fraud occurred more than three years before the Plaintiffs brought suit. Since the alleged fraud occurred when the Plaintiffs were induced to purchase their partnership interests, and since in Research Triangle and Clovine/Standefer the latest Plaintiffs purchased in 1986, claims in all three actions are time-barred under Second Circuit law.
The Clovine/Ellingson Plaintiffs contend that the Court must use the § 10(b) statute of limitations of the district in which the action was filed, on the grounds that the transferor state's jurisdiction is the "jurisdiction" meant by § 27A. The Plaintiffs in the other two partnership actions maintain it would be "inequitable" to apply Second Circuit law to these claims.
The definition of "jurisdiction," however, is not quite as clear cut as the Clovine/Ellingson Plaintiffs make it out to be. Prior to the statute's enactment, the crazy-quilt of statutes of limitations employed in § 10(b) actions was well known. See Ceres, 918 F.2d at 353-60. At the most, § 27A has done nothing more than codify this procedural morass in place.
1. Second Circuit Law Before "Ceres"
Prior to Ceres, courts within the Second Circuit traditionally applied the forum state's most analogous statute of limitations to claims under § 10(b). See Welch v. Cadre Capital, 923 F.2d 989, 993 (2d Cir.) ("Welch I "), vacated and remanded sub nom. Northwest Sav. Bank, PaSa v. Welch, 115 L. Ed. 2d 1048, U.S. , 111 S. Ct. 2882, aff'd, 946 F.2d 185 (2d Cir. 1991); Armstrong v. McAlpin, 699 F.2d 79, 86-87 (2d Cir. 1983). In the Southern District of New York, that statute of limitations is contained in both the State's statute of limitations for common-law fraud actions and its "borrowing statute". See Armstrong, 699 F.2d at 87; Arneil v. Ramsey, 550 F.2d 774, 779 (2d Cir. 1977); Morin v. Trupin, 799 F. Supp. 342, 345 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) ("Morin III ").
In the case of plaintiffs who were residents of New York State at the time of the injury, the former period set forth in N.Y. Civ. Prac. L. &. R. § 213(8) (McKinney 1990 Supp.) applies: The action must be commenced within six years of the commission of the alleged fraud or two years from the time the alleged wrongdoing was, or with reasonable diligence should have been, discovered. See Armstrong, 699 F.2d at 87; Morin III, 799 F. Supp. at 345. In those cases where the plaintiffs were nonresidents at the time the cause of action accrued, N.Y. Civ. Prac. L. & R. § 202 (McKinney 1990) applies.
Under this "borrowing statute," a court is to apply the limitations period "of either [New York] or the place without [New York] where the cause of action accrued," whichever is shorter. See Bresson, 641 F. Supp. at 349; Klock v. Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb, Inc., 584 F. Supp. 210, 214 (S.D.N.Y. 1984). "Thus, if a suit brought in the 'place' of the plaintiff's residence would be time-barred, the suit in a New York federal court is time-barred." Ceres, 918 F.2d at 353 (citations omitted).
As this Court recently noted:
Although federal courts look to state law for the applicable limitations period, they look to federal law for guidance as to the appropriate accrual and equitable tolling principles. See ITT v. Cornfeld, 619 F.2d 909, 929 (2d Cir. 1980) (period commences to run "when the plaintiff has actual knowledge of the alleged fraud or knowledge of facts which the exercise of reasonable diligence should have led to actual knowledge"); Baskin v. Hawley, 807 F.2d 1120, 1130-31 (2d Cir. 1986).
A plaintiff must bring a § 10(b) action in federal court. Thus, in applying the rule of "the place without the state where the cause of action accrued" a federal court sitting in New York does not automatically turn to state law but rather must look to the statute of limitations that would be applied by the federal district court where the nonresident plaintiff resided at the time of the injury. See Ceres, 918 F.2d at 353; Ahmed v. Trupin, 781 F. Supp. 1017, 1022-23 (S.D.N.Y. 1992).
Morin III, 799 F. Supp. at 347. Therefore, the Court must look to the relevant states for statutes of limitations governing the § 10(b) actions filed before Ceres. In the matter at hand, this applies to the actions filed in Lenox Towers and Southern Inns.
2. Retroactivity as Determined by Chevron
Although the Ceres court explicitly refused to address the retroactive effect of its ruling, see Ceres, 918 F.2d at 364, the Second Circuit resolved that question in Welch I, 923 F.2d at 993-95. Welch I established that the retroactive application of Ceres must be determined on a case-by-case basis according to a three-part test laid out in Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson, 404 U.S. 97, 30 L. Ed. 2d 296, 92 S. Ct. 349 (1971). Only then should the court return to the Second Circuit's prior practice of applying the most analogous state statute of limitations. The three parts of the test hinge on 1) whether the new rule was "clearly foreshadowed" at the time the relevant complaint were filed, 2) whether retroactive application of the statute of limitations would serve the purpose of the new rule, and 3) whether the equities weighed in favor of nonretroactivity. See Chevron, 404 U.S. at 106-7; Welch I, 923 F.2d at 993-95; Rabin, 801 F. Supp. at 1049.
The argument offered by the Plaintiffs in Research Triangle and Clovine/Standefer -- that this Court's failure to apply the law of the transferor state would work harsh inequities -- is only one part of the test, not a determination of the whole. Whether retroactive application of the law was foreseeable and whether it serves the purpose of the law is more significant here: "As for the third Chevron factor, the courts have held that the retroactive application of Ceres does not produce substantial inequitable results when the statute of limitations is unchanged by retroactive application," as it is for cases filed after November 8, 1990. In re Chaus Sec. Litig., 801 F. Supp. 1257, 1269 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (applying Ceres statute of limitations to case transferred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407). The law of the jurisdiction is Second Circuit law.
The second prong of the Chevron test -- that retroactive application will further the new rule -- does warrant retrospective application under Ceres. In the context of a transferred class action, the traditional method of looking to the state of each nonresident class plaintiff to determine whether each claim would be time-barred could result in the claims of some plaintiffs being time-barred while the claims of others would not be. This result would be at least as inequitable as the result envisioned by the Plaintiffs if Ceres were applied to their claims in Clovine/Standefer and Research Triangle. See Chaus, 801 F. Supp. at 1269.
The uniform application of Ceres in this context does further the rule because here the rule is not, strictly speaking, retroactive. All four Complaints were filed in their respective jurisdictions after November 8, 1990: Research Triangle on January 3, 1991; Clovine/Ellingson on March 14, 1991, Clovine/Standefer on April 9, 1991; and 600 Grant Street/Reagan on April 12, 1991. If the Plaintiffs could avoid the application of Second Circuit law merely by filing their claim in an inconvenient forum which had a longer statute of limitations, and then take that statute of limitations with them when their case was transferred, they could make an end run around the rule laid down by Ceres. Although this is now impossible for all claims filed after June 19, 1991, due to the Supreme Court's decision in Lampf, the eight-month lag between Ceres and Lampf creates an apparent window of opportunity which the Plaintiffs should not be allowed to exploit.
Finally, the first prong of the Chevron test -- that the rule changes the practice in this Circuit -- is met for cases filed here, and for cases transferred here but not transferred as part of MDL litigation. The precedents for MDL cases are not as clear-cut as for cases filed under other statutes, because the special concerns inherent in MDL litigation have been reflected in the case law.
3. Multidistrict Litigation
The multidistrict transfer statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1407, attempts to provide for the "just and efficient conduct" of related cases scattered throughout the federal courts by consolidating such cases before one court. See 18 U.S.C. § 1407(a). One of the key means by which this goal is achieved is through the establishment of a single body of law for the unified proceedings. See generally In re Korean Air Lines Disaster, 265 U.S. App. D.C. 39, 829 F.2d 1171, 1176-84 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (Ginsburg, J., concurring), aff'd on other grounds sub nom. Chan v. Korean Air Lines, Ltd., 490 U.S. 122, 104 L. Ed. 2d 113, 109 S. Ct. 1676 (1989); see also In re Pan American Corp., 950 F.2d 839, 847 (2d Cir. 1991) (adopting Korean Air Lines). Without such a mechanism, "the conduct of multidistrict litigation, which is invariably time consuming as it is, will grind to a standstill while transferee judges read separate briefs, each based on the case law of a transferor circuit, on a single issue of federal law." Pan Am, 950 F.2d at 847. In most cases such an effort should be futile, since it must be presumed that the Supreme Court will eventually resolve any pertinent split among the circuits and set down a uniform federal law. See, e.g., Chan, 490 U.S. at 124-25, 135 (resolving the split at issue in Korean Airlines).
The Clovine/Ellingson Plaintiffs argue that under Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612, 11 L. Ed. 2d 945, 84 S. Ct. 805 (1964),
Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487, 85 L. Ed. 1477, 61 S. Ct. 1020 (1941), and Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 82 L. Ed. 1188, 58 S. Ct. 817 (1938), this Court must apply the statute of limitations that each transferor court would have applied to these actions. See Berry Petroleum Co. v. Adams & Peck, 518 F.2d 402, 406 (2d Cir. 1975); H.L. Green Co. v. MacMahon, 312 F.2d 650, 653 (2d Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 372 U.S. 928, 83 S. Ct. 876, 9 L. Ed. 2d 736 (1963); In re Plumbing Fixtures Litig., 342 F. Supp. 756, 758 (J.P.M.L. 1972) (per curiam).
Although this argument finds support within Erie's progeny, see Walker v. Armco Steel Corp., 446 U.S. 740, 752-53, 64 L. Ed. 2d 659, 100 S. Ct. 1978 (1980); Guaranty Trust Co. v. York, 326 U.S. 99, 110-12, 89 L. Ed. 2079, 65 S. Ct. 1464 (1945), it ignores the fundamental difference between those cases and the present litigation, just as the Clovine/Ellingson Plaintiffs' reliance on New York law ignores the fact that this cause of action can only be tried in a federal court. Jurisdiction here is based on a federal question. As such, Erie's familiar concerns over state law are inapplicable here. See West v. Conrail, 481 U.S. 35, 39, 95 L. Ed. 2d 32, 107 S. Ct. 1538 n.4 (1987); Isaac v. Life Inv. Ins. Co., 749 F. Supp. 855, 863 (E.D. Tenn. 1990); see also Richard L. Marcus, Conflicts Among the Circuits and Transfers Within the Federal Judicial System, 93 Yale L.J. 677, 679 (1984) ("Erie is simply irrelevant where federal claims are involved").
The reasoning in the cases relied on by the Clovine/Ellingson Plaintiffs in making this argument has been subsequently rejected. The line of authority holding that a transferee court should apply the law of the transferor court in federal claims transferred pursuant to § 1407 finds its genesis in Plumbing Fixtures, 342 F. Supp. at 758 ("It is clear that the substantive law of the transferor forum will apply after transfer," citing Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612, 11 L. Ed. 2d 945, 84 S. Ct. 805 (1964)). This language has, however, been expressly withdrawn by the Multidistrict Panel:
Any suggestion to the contrary in dictum found in Plumbing Fixtures is withdrawn. Indeed, the dictum in Plumbing Fixtures is itself questionable given that Plumbing Fixtures was a litigation arising under the federal courts' federal question jurisdiction and Van Dusen, on which the Panel relied in support of its dictum, was an action arising under the federal courts' diversity jurisdiction.
In re General Motors Class E Stock Buyout Sec. Litig., 696 F. Supp. 1546, 1547 n.1 (J.P.M.L. 1988). The other cases these Plaintiffs have cited in support of this argument principally rely on Plumbing Fixtures. See, e.g., Berry Petroleum, 518 F.2d at 408 n.7; In re Haven Industries, Inc., 462 F. Supp. 172, 179 (S.D.N.Y. 1978). To this extent, then, the reasoning of these cases is now called into question.
In its place, the federal courts have adopted two considerations for cases transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1407: first, that statutes of limitations are either federal or procedural in nature, and second, that the circuits do not need to defer to other circuits' interpretation of federal law if it conflicts with their own.
In the MDL context, the statute of limitations may not be a matter of state law at all, and as such, the limitation period should be decided by a federal transferee court in accordance with its own interpretation of federal law "without deference to any contrary interpretation of a transferor circuit." In re General Dev. Corp. Bond Litig., 800 F. Supp. 1143, 1146 (S.D.N.Y. 1992). Since "the choice of a limitations period for a federal cause of action is itself a question of federal law," Del Costello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 159 n. 13, 76 L. Ed. 2d 476, 103 S. Ct. 2281 (1983), the limitations periods for federal causes of action, from wherever derived, are not matters of state law in any meaningful sense and should not, in the transfer context, implicate Van Dusen principles. As the court in General Development noted:
It seems . . . clear that the best reading of the F.D.I.C.'s Improvement Act's phrase "laws applicable in the jurisdiction," as it applies to a complaint . . . filed before the date of the decision in Lampf and transferred here, is that the jurisdiction referred to must be the one in which the federal transferee court sits . . . i.e., the one- and three- year period set forth in Ceres Partners."
800 F. Supp. at 1148.
Even if the choice of the limitations period is not itself a question of federal law, there is another reason why a federal limitations period should govern. Federal courts have viewed questions pertaining to the statutes of limitations for federal securities claims as procedural, not substantive, matters, and they are therefore, subject to the federal law of the transferee court. See, e.g., Singer v. Olympia Brewing Co., 878 F.2d 596, 599 (2d Cir. 1989); Duke v. Touche Ross & Co., 765 F. Supp. 69, 73 (S.D.N.Y. 1991).
In short, the Plaintiffs have presented no compelling reason to require the rejection of the holdings of Pan Am and Korean Air Lines. The Second Circuit's rules for determining which statute of limitations to apply to the individual § 10(b) claims therefore govern. See Pan Am, 950 F.2d at 847; Korean Air Lines, 1175-76.
Despite the expectation of some supporters of section 27A that it would routinely apply a more generous state or federal common law limitations period to all suits pending on June 19, 1991, we see no escape from the clear statutory language requiring the application of "the laws applicable in the jurisdiction."
Henley v. Slone, 961 F.2d 23, 25 (2d Cir. 1992) (refusing to apply common-law fraud statute of limitations to securities fraud claim brought in Connecticut).
E. New York Law
Finally, the Clovine/Ellingson Plaintiffs contend that a general choice of law clause in their limited partnership materials mandates that New York's six-year statute of limitations for common-law fraud should apply. The clause in question reads:
This Agreement, the Notes, any amendments or replacements hereof and thereof, and the legality, validity and performance of the terms hereof and thereof, shall be governed by and construed in all respects in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York . . . applicable to contracts, transactions and obligations entered into and to be performed in New York.
Pls.' Mem. in Opp. Ex. A at 3.
This contention fails for two reasons. First, the clause is a generic choice of law clause governing the interpretation of contracts. Such clauses generally do not apply to statutes of limitations; indeed, this clause is silent as to the issue. Absent an express term, the clause does not alter the federal law applicable to this federal claim. See Des Brisay v. Goldfield Corp., 637 F.2d 680, 682 (9th Cir. 1981); Gatto v. Meridian Medical Assocs., Inc., No. Civ. A 87-5076 (JCL), 1989 WL 23125 (D.N.J. Feb. 9, 1989).
Second, if the New York choice of law clause does apply, it would have to be read as requiring the application of the law of a federal court sitting in New York. Section 27 of the 1934 Act grants federal courts with exclusive jurisdiction of federal securities claims. See Ceres, 918 F.2d at 353. A plaintiff must begin a § 10(b) action in federal court. A federal court sitting in New York cannot automatically turn to state law but must first look to the statute of limitations that would be applied by the federal district court in the state where the plaintiff brought his § 10(b) action. Therefore, Second Circuit, not New York, law would apply. See id. ; Ahmed, 781 F. Supp. at 1022; Marlow v. Gold, [1991 Transfer Binder]Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P 96,112 (S.D.N.Y. 1991).
F. Determining When Plaintiffs Were Placed on Inquiry Notice
In the Second Circuit, the statute of limitations for securities fraud claims begins to run when the plaintiff has actual knowledge of the alleged fraud or when the plaintiff is placed on inquiry notice, to wit, when the plaintiff has "knowledge of facts which in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have led to actual knowledge." Phillips v. Levie, 593 F.2d 459, 462 (2d Cir. 1979) (quoting Stull v. Bayard, 561 F.2d 429, 432 (2d Cir. 1977), emphasis added).
Thus, the statute is not tolled for a plaintiff's "leisurely discovery of the full details of the alleged scheme." Klein v. Bower, 421 F.2d 338, 343 (2d Cir. 1970). Instead, the period runs from the time at which a plaintiff "should have discovered the general fraudulent scheme." Robertson v. Seidman & Seidman, 609 F.2d 583, 587 (2d Cir. 1979) (quoting Berry Petroleum Co. v. Adams & Peck, 518 F.2d 402, 410 (2d Cir. 1975)).
Kronfeld v. Advest, Inc., 675 F. Supp. 1449, 1458 (S.D.N.Y. 1987); accord Arneil, 550 F.2d at 780.
1. The Objective Test
The Second Circuit has held that the test determining whether a plaintiff was placed on inquiry notice is "objective" in nature.
The means of knowledge are the same thing in effect as knowledge itself. Where the circumstances are such as to suggest to a person of ordinary intelligence the probability that he has been defrauded, a duty of inquiry arises, and if he omits that inquiry when it would have developed the truth, and shuts his eyes to the facts which call for investigation, knowledge of that fraud will be imputed to him. This rule is fully applicable in cases . . . which involve claims of securities fraud.
Armstrong, 699 F.2d at 88 (citations and internal quotations omitted). This objective test mandates a dismissal of or summary judgment on a plaintiff's securities fraud claim when the "pleadings disclose facts sufficient to have placed the plaintiff on inquiry notice of the alleged fraud prior to the one-year cutoff." Bresson, 641 F. Supp. at 345.
To satisfy this test, the knowledge of the alleged fraud imputed to a plaintiff must rise to the level of the probable and not merely of the possible. When inquiry notice is asserted by a defendant as the basis for a summary judgment motion, as is the case here, the defendant has the burden of showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether the plaintiff, exercising reasonable diligence, would have discovered the fraudulent scheme by the dates identified by the defendant. See Kronfeld, 675 F. Supp. at 1458. The defendant also must establish that the circumstances in question suggested to the plaintiff the probability that he allegedly had been defrauded and not the mere possibility of the alleged fraud to trigger inquiry notice and start the running of the statute of limitations period. See Armstrong, 699 F.2d at 88; see also Zola v. Gordon, 685 F. Supp. 354, 367 n.14 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) ("Zola I ") (rejecting as "incorrect" the proposition in Klein, 470 F.2d at 1347, that inquiry notice is triggered when the imputed knowledge is of the possibility of fraud).
2. Deciding Motions for Summary Judgment Based on Inquiry Notice
This Court has noted the care with which a motion for summary judgment based on an assertion of inquiry notice must be decided, because the question of whether a plaintiff exercised reasonable diligence is usually a question of fact for the jury to decide. See Intre Sport, Ltd. v. Kidder, Peabody & Co., 625 F. Supp. 1303, 1310 (S.D.N.Y. 1985), aff'd without opinion, 795 F.2d 1004 (2d Cir. 1986), vacated on other grounds, 482 U.S. 922 (1987). As the Second Circuit stated in Robertson,
issues of due diligence and constructive knowledge depend on inferences drawn from the facts of each particular case -- similar to the type of inferences that must be drawn in determining intent and good faith, [and] when conflicting inferences can be drawn from the facts, . . . summary judgment is inappropriate.
609 F.2d at 591. In light of these considerations, this Court has concluded it is only in "extreme circumstances" that summary judgment is appropriate when the defendants assert that the action was untimely commenced because inquiry notice was triggered more than a year before the action was brought by the plaintiff. Freschi v. Grand Coal Venture, 583 F. Supp. 780, 785 (S.D.N.Y. 1984).
These circumstances do obtain when a court readily can impute knowledge of a probable fraud to the plaintiff from the face of the documents and facts in evidence supporting the motion for summary judgment without having to assume the role of the jury and undertake a detailed deductive analysis of the factual record to justify that imputation of such knowledge to the plaintiff. Thus, in Borden, Inc. v. Spoor Behrins Campbell & Young, Inc., 778 F. Supp. 695, 700 (S.D.N.Y. 1991), Judge Conner stated that,
while defendants spend an inordinate amount of time in their papers trying to prove the essentially factual issue of what plaintiff knew and when plaintiff knew it, this Court is reluctant to engage in the type of fact-finding defendants request on a motion for summary judgment.
Cf. Friedman v. Meyers, 482 F.2d 435, 439 (2d Cir. 1973) (summary judgment is "particularly inappropriate" when inferences which the parties sought to have drawn regarding the discovery of the alleged fraud were questions of motive, intent, and subjective feelings and reactions).
Nonetheless, when these circumstances do obtain, the issues of inquiry notice and the discovery of the alleged fraud may be decided by the court as a matter of law and the court "should not be reluctant to grant summary judgment." Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Federated Dep't Stores, Inc., 723 F. Supp. 976, 981 (S.D.N.Y. 1989); see In re General Dev. Corp. Bond Litig., 800 F. Supp. 1128, 1136 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (because the test of inquiry notice is objective, "a court's determination that the information available to a plaintiff in a given instance should (or should not) have given him reason to consider and investigate the probability of fraud is surely warranted in appropriate cases" in the context of a motion to dismiss); Quantum Overseas, N.V. v. Touche Ross & Co., 663 F. Supp 658, 663-64 (S.D.N.Y. 1987) (quoting Rickel v. Levy, 370 F. Supp. 751, 756 (E.D.N.Y. 1974) and Cook v. Avien, Inc., 573 F.2d 685, 697-98 (1st Cir. 1978), that general suspicions and "storm warnings" in financial data trigger inquiry notice upon which summary judgment may be granted); Kronfeld, 675 F. Supp at 1458 ("the cases are legion in which summary judgment has been granted on the ground that the plaintiff should have discovered his cause of action under the securities law before the statute of limitations had run"); Harner v. Prudential Sec. Inc., 785 F. Supp. 626 (E.D. Mich. 1992) ("where . . . the underlying facts are undisputed, even factually-based issues may be decided as a matter of law").
3. Information Triggering Inquiry Notice
The information that triggers inquiry notice of the probability of an alleged securities fraud is any financial, legal, or other data available to the plaintiffs providing them "with sufficient storm warnings to alert a reasonable person to the [probability] that there were either misleading statements or significant omissions involved in the sale of the [securities].
Quantum Overseas, 663 F. Supp. at 664 (quoting Cook, 573 F.2d at 697-98). Such data may come in the form of the letters and other documents provided to limited partners by the partnership, see Bresson, 641 F. Supp. at 341; Farr, 755 F. Supp. at 1225; Miller v. Grigoli, 712 F. Supp. 1087, 1088 (S.D.N.Y. 1989); Hirschler v. GMD Inv. Ltd. Partnership, [1990-1991 Transfer Binder]Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P 95,919 (E.D. Va. Mar. 28, 1991); the offering materials themselves, see Marlow v. Gold, [1991 Transfer Binder]Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P 96,112, at 90,633-90,635 (S.D.N.Y. June 6, 1991); Landy v. Mitchell Petro. Tech. Corp., 734 F. Supp. 608, 617 (S.D.N.Y. 1990); Kennedy v. Josephthal & Co., 814 F.2d at 798, 802 (1st Cir. 1987); Hirschler, P 95,919, at 99,564; Bender v. Rocky Mountain Drilling Assocs., 648 F. Supp. 330, 334-35 (D.D.C. 1986); and public disclosures in the media about the financial condition of the defendant and other lawsuits alleging fraud committed by the defendant, see Arneil, 550 F.2d at 781; Zola II, 701 F. Supp. at 70; Korwek v. Hunt, 646 F. Supp. 953, 959 (S.D.N.Y. 1986), aff'd, 827 F.2d 874 (2d Cir. 1987); Bresson, 641 F. Supp. at 345; Gluck v. Amicor, Inc., 487 F. Supp. 608, 613-14 & n.6 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).
Furthermore, neither reassurances accompanying the relevant notice nor the continued failure to disclose the facts allegedly misrepresented in the first place, relieves the plaintiff of his duty to undertake reasonable inquiry or tolls the statute of limitations. For example, in Zola I, the plaintiffs contended that the IRS notice did not start the statute of limitations because the defendant allegedly sent the plaintiffs a letter representing that he intended to fight the IRS, and because the defendant had stated earlier that the partnership had obtained its own expert appraisals supporting its valuation of the firm. See 685 F. Supp. at 366-67.
The court rejected this position, stating that "as a matter of law plaintiffs would not be entitled to rely on 'reassuring comments' given them after they received constructive knowledge of the fraud." Id. at 366. The court also rejected the plaintiffs' contention that the defendant's continuing failure to disclose material facts which originally had been misrepresented constituted fraudulent concealment sufficient to further toll the statute of limitations:
The suppression of this information simply is irrelevant to plaintiffs' duty to inquire, which was triggered by receipt of the IRS report. See Hupp v. Gray, 500 F.2d 993,] 997 [(7th Cir. 1974)] ("the fact which would have put a reasonable person on notice of the possibility of fraud . . . was concealed"). . . . Plaintiffs present no facts indicating that they undertook any inquiry whatsoever. The court can only reach one conclusion, that plaintiffs remained narcose.
Zola I, 685 F. Supp. at 368 (footnote omitted). See also Farr, 755 F. Supp. at 1228 ("statements of cautious optimism, reiterations of the goal of providing income to investors, and explanations for past poor performance do not rise to the level of affirmative concealment necessary to excuse a reasonable investor from the duty of inquiry presented by the cold numbers contained in the [reports]"). Thus, once placed on inquiry notice, a limited partner cannot avoid the duty to inquire by relying on reassurances and optimistic statements made by the partnership.
4. Inquiry Notice of Integrated's Demise
This Court has previously noted that sophisticated investors legally may be presumed to know of information in the public domain, such as newspapers and magazine articles. See Hartford Fire Ins., 723 F. Supp. at 976. In Hartford, the plaintiff bondholders claimed that Federated had committed a material omission by failing to disclose the risk that Federated would be the subject of a leveraged buyout and the adverse impact that such a buyout would have on the subject debt instruments. See id. at 981-83, 987.
On the defendants' motion for summary judgment, this Court held that the alleged omissions were not material, and dismissed the plaintiffs' §§ 10(b) and 12(2) claims. See id. at 990. This disposition followed from the fact that the disclosure of the omitted information would not have affected the "total mix" of available information because plaintiffs already should have known of such matters from general publicity accorded Federated in the media. See id. at 988. There, over sixty newspaper articles and financial reports in the general press and financial community had identified Federated as an "attractive" takeover candidate and had outlined the negative effect of takeovers on investment grade securities, such as the notes in which plaintiffs subsequently invested. See id. at 987-88 (citing Business Week and The New York Times articles); see also Seibert v. Sperry Rand Corp., 586 F.2d 949, 952 (2d Cir. 1978) (plaintiff shareholders presumed to know information in public domain); Goldberger v. Baker, 442 F. Supp. 659 (S.D.N.Y. 1977) (allegations of material omissions insufficient where omitted information was a "matter of public knowledge that anyone could acquire by reading a newspaper with an Amex listing").
The Moving Defendants assert that the central allegation raised by the Plaintiffs in their various Complaints, which serves as the unifying thread throughout all of the actions, is the allegation that the Plaintiffs relied on the Defendants' misrepresentations and material omissions regarding the financial stability of Integrated. The Moving Defendants assert further that, in light of the extensive publicity surrounding the collapse of Integrated, the Plaintiffs were placed on inquiry notice of this central aspect of their fraud claim from June 1988.
At oral argument, however, the Plaintiffs denied that reliance on Integrated's financial condition to secure the financial viability of the various limited partnerships is a key unifying feature and one of the common elements of the alleged fraud perpetrated by the Defendants. Rather it was asserted that the only commonality among these cases is that "most of the defendants are Integrated or Integrated-related entities or elements." Tr. at 34. Thus, there are several unique elements of the fraud that relates to Integrated:
It is different for each partnership. . . . Integrated is there because we allege control in some cases, we allege guarantees in some cases, but in each case there is a specific fraud which is unique to that partnership. Or there might be a group of partnerships that have a specific fraud that we are focusing on now.
The Plaintiffs allege "until [they] were advised that the units were not sold out, there was no damage," and contend from this claim that, because only then was each Partnership faced with the need to borrow money to cover the shortfall, "Integrated is not necessarily an integral part of that fraud or the damage." Tr. at 35. The Plaintiffs derive, as a final conclusion from this analysis, the proposition that "until the plaintiffs, the investors, were on notice of the shortfall, they were not on notice of any fraud." Id.
Despite the Plaintiffs' blanket denial of their reliance on Integrated's financial condition in deciding to invest in these Partnerships, the final determination of this issue turns on what the Plaintiffs actually pleaded in their various Complaints regarding the Defendants' allegedly fraudulent scheme. Thus, to the extent that the Plaintiffs allege in their Complaints that the fraud committed by the various limited partnerships was, in whole or in part, tied to misrepresentations or omissions about the financial condition of Integrated, the media reports regarding the financial demise of Integrated placed the Plaintiffs on inquiry notice about the probability the alleged fraud of caused by investing in these Partnerships out of reliance on the financial condition of Integrated and the assumption that Integrated would be in a position to finance any shortfall caused by undersubscription of the offerings.
G. Pleading Compliance with the Statute of Limitations
This Court has directed that plaintiffs asserting securities fraud claims must, inter alia, plead with specificity the date of purchase of the securities at issue. See Morin I, 747 F. Supp. at 1062; Intre Sport, 625 F. Supp. at 1310. "Failure to plead compliance with the statute of limitations requires dismissal without prejudice to replead." Chaus, 801 F. Supp. at 1269; accord Ingenito v. Bermec Corp., 441 F. Supp. 525, 552 (S.D.N.Y. 1977).
In the numerous complaints at issue here, the Plaintiffs have consistently failed to specify their dates of purchase, in some cases simply alleging that Plaintiffs' investments occurred "after" a certain date. Thus, each is defective insofar as it ...
Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
"My plan for 2017 is to introduce Lordskillz to the world."
After working and honing his craft for seven years, rising rapper Lordskillz is ready to make his mark in the music industry. "I'm not like these other pop-up wannabe artists who just blew up overnight. I want the people to know I'm really organic with this shit, no help and no favors. I want them to know that this is the sound that all the artists looking to for influence. I bring creativity and punchlines mixed w/ melodic vocals that actually have value," he says. "And I produce now, it's over."
Today we are here with "Nawty," a fun summer record with touches of clever lines and metaphors. This song is also the first release where Skillz is responsible for both the vocals and production. Speaking on the process, he stated, "It took me one hour to make the beat, not knowing it was going to sound this hard. I wrote the lyrics in a day and recorded the day after. In about two hours I was finished." Being able to produce your own records unlocks a whole new realm of creativity and gives you complete control of your sound so it shall be interesting to see what Skillz does with his new found ability in 2017.
Check out "Nawty" below.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Top10MedAlertSystem.com "Senior Care" Scholarship
At Top10MedAlertSystems.com, we focus on the most recent and unbiased information about products and services in the sphere of medical alert systems for seniors. We provide reviews based on research and real customer feedback and we do our best by making our efforts useful to a senior community.
Our "Senior Care" scholarship is designed to raise awareness to the issue of aging and senior care. It is also primarily aimed at the students who either have an adult member of a family, or have got caregiving experience with seniors.
Scholarship Amount:
two awards for the 1st and the 2d places:
- $1,000
- $500
Scholarships from Top10MedAlertSystems.com can cover either tuition and/or books.
Duration of Fund: One-time gift
Deadline: March 30th, 2018
Winner Announced: April 30th, 2018
Students Eligibility Requirements:
- Current undergraduate or a graduate student attending a college/university in the U.S.
- Proof of enrollment or acceptance to an accredited institution is required.
Submission Guidelines:
In order to participate students are to write an essay on the following topic:
"The effect of medical and technological progress on the lives of seniors – has it allowed them to live better and more independently?"
An essay should be at least 800 words long and is supposed to contain a comparison example from a student's own family, or from their caregiving experience. The comparison can be made between the living and caregiving conditions of great-grandparents and grandparents. Answers the following questions are expected: how much more aging is now taken into consideration and paid attention to (than before)? How much advances in medicine and technology affected the change? Have seniors become happier? More independent? Or not?
Make sure the essay is original (not copied or rewritten), concise, and follows the rules logic and structure. Try to provide your own critical approach while giving your answers, prove your statements and provide your experience.
- Email your signed essays with your full name, university name, address and phone number to firstname.lastname@example.com by March 30th, 2018.
- Submit your essay in a Word document document.
- One person can send only one entry.
- Once submitted, your entry will become property of Top10MedAlertSystems and can be used by us for any purpose.
- We do not accept entries that contain any plagiarized material or are off-topic. Submissions of the sort will result in disqualification.
- Please note there is no cost or charge to apply for this scholarship.
For inquiries, email firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
I remember eating many, many meals from here especially when the "Happy Meal" surfaced.
A "Happy Meal" was marketed for children. A toy is typically included with the food, both of which are usually contained in a small box or paper bag with the McDonald's logo.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
McDonalds Part 2
Posted by spillingmysoul at 8:01 AM 1 comment:
McDonalds Part 1
I remember back how small Apopka used to be and how the only real places for fun back then was the park or McDonalds Playground.McDonald's playground was awesome, it had the whole cast of characters from McDonald. The cast was Grimace, Hamburglar, Fry Guys, Mayor McCheese, Officer Big Mac and good ole Ronald McDonald.
Grimace was a bounce and bend.
Officer Big Mac was a climb in jail.
Mayor McCheese was a round-a-bout.
The Fry Guys were bouncers.
The Hamburglar was a swing, I think.
This was called McDonald Land and was behind the McDonalds in Apopka.
Posted by spillingmysoul at 7:34 AM 2 comments:
Fisher Price Movie Viewer
The Fisher-Price Movie Viewer was introduced in 1973 as the Movie Viewer & Cartridge. The Movie Viewer was very popular both because it does not require batteries, bulbs, nor any other replacement requirements and because Fisher-Price manufactured several popular movie cartridges that appeal to children.
I remember having two or three of these from garage sales. I loved them and they were so easy to operate. No batteries needed, just slide in the cartridge and turn the crank.
I remember having two or three of these from garage sales. I loved them and they were so easy to operate. No batteries needed, just slide in the cartridge and turn the crank.
Posted by spillingmysoul at 6:53 AM No comments:
Toys, Toys, Toys Part 2
Posted by spillingmysoul at 6:34 AM No comments:
Toys, Toys, Toys Part 1
Posted by spillingmysoul at 6:29 AM No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)


text: « BackMeryl Alappattu, PT, DPT, PhDResearch Assistant ProfessorDepartment of Physical TherapyUniversity of FloridaContactPhone: 352-273-6085Email: email@example.com MentorM. Robinson, PhDResearch AreasMechanisms underlying female chronic pelvic pain and the efficacy of conservative interventions for pelvic painEducation2005 BS, Exercise Science, Indiana University2008 DPT, Physical Therapy, University of Florida2014 PhD, Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Florida Research Funding Current Grant# K12 HD055929 (Ottenbacher) 09/25/07 - 08/31/17 National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research (NICHD), NIH Rehabilitation Research Career Development Program Goal: Recruit and train physical and occupational therapy faculty scholars in rehabilitation research to prepare them for successful independent research careers. Role: Scholar (2015-present) Completed (past 3 years) Grant# T32NS045551 (Yezierski) National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Pain Research and Intervention Center of Excellence Role: Postdoctoral Research Fellow Grant# 5 T32 HD043730 Neuromuscular Plasticity Training Program (Vandenborne) Eunice Shriver National Institute of Child and Human Health Development Interdisciplinary Training Program in Rehabilitation and Neuromuscular Plasticity Role: Predoctoral Fellow Grant Promotion of Doctoral Studies II Foundation for Physical Therapy Role: Doctoral CandidatePublications (past 5 years)Bishop MD, Hill A, Coronado RA, Alappattu MJ. Content and bibliometric analysis of articles published in the J Women's Health Phys Ther. Accepted. Hill A, Alappattu MJ. Quality of Life Outcomes Following Surface Electromyography Biofeedback as an Adjunct to Pelvic Floor Muscle Training for Urinary Incontinence: A Case Report. J Women's Health Phys Ther. Accepted. Neville C, Beneciuk J, Bishop M, Alappattu MJ. Analysis of Physical Therapy Intervention Outcomes for Urinary Incontinence in Women Over Age 65 in Outpatient Clinical Settings. Topics in Ger Rehab.(2016) 32:4. Harrington SH, Lee J, G Colon, Alappattu MJ. APTA Oncology Section EDGE Task Force on Prostate Cancer A Systematic Review of Outcome Measures for Health Related Quality of Life. Rehab Oncology (2016) 34(1): 27-35. PMCID: PMC4851243 Alappattu MJ, Neville C, Beneciuk JB, Bishop MD. The prevalence of urinary incontinence among patients reporting to outpatient physical therapy. Physiother Theory Pract. (2016) Feb 11:1-6. PMID: 26863987 Neville C, Alappattu MJ, Beneciuk J, Bishop M. Outcomes of physical therapy treatment for urinary Incontinence in the real world - bridging clinical practice and research. Physiotherapy (2015);101(Supplement 1): May 2015, Pages e1081 doi:10.1016/j.physio.2015.03.1970 McKey KP, Alappattu MJ. Physical Therapy Intervention to Augment Lymph Node Transfer Surgery for a Breast Cancer Survivor with Secondary Upper Extremity Lymphedema: A Case Report. Inter J StudentSchol Phys Ther.(2015). 1: 30-44. PMCID: PMC5034944 Alappattu MJ, George SZ, Robinson ME, Fillingim RB, Moawad N, LeBrun, EW, Bishop MD. Painful intercourse is significantly associated with evoked pain perception and cognitive aspects of pain in women with pelvic pain. Sexual Medicine. (2015) 3(1): 14-23). PMCID: PMC4380910 Alappattu MJ, Coronado RA, Lee D*, Bour BJ, George SZ. A Clinical Profile of Patients With Cancer Undergoing Outpatient Physical Therapy. Phys Ther. (2015) 95(4): 526-538. Horn ME, Alappattu MJ, Gay CW, Bishop MD. Fear of severe pain mediates sex differences in pain sensitivity responses to thermal stimuli. Pain Research and Treatment. (2014). PMCID: PMC3913346 Alappattu, MJ. Pain and psychological outcomes after rehabilitative treatment for a female with chronic pelvic pain with stage III cervical cancer: a case report. J Women's Health Phys Ther. (2013) 37(3): 97-102. PMCID: PMC4851247 Gay CW, Alappattu MJ, Coronado RC, Horn ME, Bishop MD. Effect of a single session of muscle-bias therapy on pain sensitivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Pain Research. (2013) 6: 7-22. PMCID: PMC3569047 Alappattu MJ, Bishop MD. Psychological factors in female chronic pelvic pain: relevance and application of the Fear Avoidance Model of Pain. Phys Ther. (2011) 91(10): 1542-50. PMCID: PMC3185223 Alappattu MJ, Bishop MD, Bialosky JE, George SZ, Robinson ME. Stability of Behavioral Estimates of Activity- Dependent Modulation of Pain. J Pain Res. (2011) 4 151-157. PMCID: PMC3141831 Coronado RA, Alappattu MJ, Hart DL, George SZ. Total Number and Severity of Comorbidities Do Not Differ Based on Anatomical Location of Musculoskeletal Pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. (2011) Jul;41(7):477- 85.Complete List of Published Work in MyBibliography


text:
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Did you catch a criminal, officer?
24 April 2010, 11:34
By Tanya Waterworth
A Durban security company's guards are frustrated after they stopped their vehicles on the side of the M7 freeway as they tried to head off fleeing suspects, but were forced to move on by traffic officers - and the criminals escaped.
Protea Coin security officers said they regularly chased criminals breaking into houses on a Highland Hills street in Pinetown which runs parallel to the M7.
Coin's manager, Kuben Pillay, said the firm had dispatched two security vehicles to the freeway, when Road Traffic Inspectorate officers pulled up next to them.
"Our officers were responding to a call-out, but the traffic officers said they must immediately move. They did not want to get a fine, so they had to leave and the suspects got away."
The provincial Department of Transport, which is responsible for motorways and verges such as the M7, said they were unaware of the problem, but spokeswoman Lungile Ndlovu said the department would investigate urgently.
The thick bush has not been cut for many years and, according to security officers, is the perfect cover for burglars.
Both Protea Coin Security and Blue Security, who patrol the area, said a lot of housebreaking takes place during the day, when houses are empty.
A common ploy is for the criminals to be dropped off in a taxi on the M7 and move into the bush. They throw stones on to the roof of a targeted house and wait to see if anyone comes out.
Once they have looted the house, they move quickly back through the bush and up the bank to catch a waiting taxi.
This article was originally published on page 3 of The Independent on Saturday on April 24, 2010
Saturday Star
Comments by Sonny
Criminal assistance on the M7 Freeway in KZN.
On whose side are these Metro Cops?
Labels: Crime pays in SA
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
Silly Silly Friday - Help Caption My Photo for Cheezeburgers!Posted by Figaro the Therapy Cat at 7:58 AM
Yesterday I was sitting by Mombean's foot and giving her licks. Her foot is always dirty.
I made the most hi-larious face and then Mommy took my picture.
I wants to caption this for I Can Has Cheezeburger but I have no good ideas.
Anyone wants to help?
4 comments:
- Daisy said... August 1, 2008 at 10:59 AM
- Max said... August 1, 2008 at 9:20 PM
- neverfull said... August 1, 2008 at 10:04 PM
- Derby said... August 4, 2008 at 5:56 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
From 8:00pm on 2nd November through to 6:00am on 3rd November, Bishop Paul Ferguson will be joining CEOs (Chief Executive Officers - big bosses) from around the region to spend the evening sleeping out on the Victorian Street at Preston Park Museum.
The Sleepout event aims to raise awareness and funds to support the work of a new restaurant in Middlesbrough, Fork In The Road, which is a not-for-profit project which will be providing work experience opportunities to Teessiders who want to make a fresh start.
This is a fantastic project that demonstrates servant-hearted leadership and raising up the poor in spirit.
- Click here to find out more about Fork In The Road and to find out more information about the CEO Sleepout organisation click here. Andy Preston, CEO of CEO Sleepout UK has written a blog about the coming sleepout challenge which you can find here.
If you would like to join with Bishop Paul and show support for this cause, you can donate through his JustGiving page which can be found here.
- Donating through JustGiving is simple, fast and totally secure. Your details are safe with JustGiving - they'll never sell them on or send unwanted emails. Once you donate, they'll send your money directly to the charity. So it's the most efficient way to donate - saving time and cutting costs for the charity.


text:
English Meaning
Containing the total amount, number, etc.; comprising all the parts; free from deficiency; all; total; entire; as, the whole earth; the whole solar system; the whole army; the whole nation.
- Containing all components; complete: a whole wardrobe for the tropics.
- Not divided or disjoined; in one unit: a whole loaf.
- Constituting the full amount, extent, or duration: The baby cried the whole trip home.
- Not wounded, injured, or impaired; sound or unhurt: Many escaped the fire frightened but whole.
- Having been restored; healed: After the treatment he felt whole.
- Having the same parents: a whole sister.
- A number, group, set, or thing lacking no part or element; a complete thing.
- An entity or system made up of interrelated parts: The value of the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
- Informal Entirely; wholly: a whole new idea.
- as a whole All parts or aspects considered; altogether: disliked the acting but enjoyed the play as a whole.
- on the whole Considering everything: on the whole, a happy marriage.
- on the whole In most instances or cases; as a rule: can expect sunny weather, on the whole.


text:
$ 6.99
+ free shipping on orders over $35
Mixing Street Smarts With School Smarts.
Curated by Usher and featuring exclusive designs by artist Jonni Cheatwood, this 72 lined page journal awaits your facts, figures, and fictions. An elastic band keeps it closed (i.e. private) and a handy ribbon bookmark holds your place. Not to mention the cool pink splatter design on the front for style. You buy, Yoobi gives - For every Yoobi item you purchase, a Yoobi item will be donated to a classroom in need, right here in the U.S.
Product Details
Type: Journals
© 2018 Yoobi. POS and Ecommerce by Shopify
exclusive deals
new product & trend updates
amazing stories from our Give team


text:
Expensive duo Roberto Soldado and Erik Lamela had debut seasons to forget at White Hart Lane, but ex-Tottenham Hotspur forward Clive Allen believes they deserve a second chance.
With a massive transfer fee comes massive expectation, a lesson learnt by by Roberto Soldado and Erik Lamela in North London last season.
The Spaniard became Tottenham's record signing at the beginning of last August to the tune of £26 million, only to be surpassed by the £30 million doled out for the Argentine later that month.
With £56 million spent between them, the pair were looked upon with great anticipation by those in the Spurs camp.
However, what followed wasn't a campaign of triumph for either. Soldado laboured to find his form in front of goal, and Lamela barely played amid injury issues and trouble adapting to a new country.
Now, each has been linked with a quick exit from White Hart Lane. Soldado is said to be considering a return to La Liga with Atletico Madrid, whilst Spurs are reportedly willing to see off Lamela for £25 million.
But Clive Allen, Tottenham's record holder for most league goals in a single season, thinks the two men deserve another shot at justifying their price-tags.
On Soldado, the 53-year-old told talkSPORT: "I would stick with Soldado because I think he has a good track record in terms of scoring goals, but obviously not in the Premier League as he found it difficult to adapt to the different style of play and the types of opportunity which were created for him."
Allen similarly advocated for Lamela, but said Spurs should sell him if they're not prepared to let him play through poor form.
"Erik Lamela has got to play too. Mentally, whether he's strong enough [is up for debate] but you've got to see whether he's capable of performing over a period of time.
"It might mean leaving him in games when perhaps his form isn't what you expect, otherwise Tottenham will have to cut their losses on what looks to be a horrendous purchase."
Both forwards missed out on World Cup selection due to their struggles last term in North London, so are assured a full pre-season to ready themselves for their sophomore year should they remain at the Lane.


text:
Ulduz (Star) Training Center's audience called at UNEC with the initiative of UNEC Department of "Finance and Financial Institutions". Teaching staff of UNEC Department of Marketing, Assistant to the Rector Ramil Jabbarov became a guide of the info tour organized in the territory of UNEC for schoolchildren. They were informed about the education opportunities, majors and Dual Diploma Programs provided by UNEC in detail.
Pupils also got acquainted with the progress of the Winter Exam Session of UNEC. Observing the process of written and testing examination methods, schoolchildren appreciated the objectivity and transparency of the assessment of students' knowledge positively and expressed the desire for becoming UNEC student in the future. They especially emphasized that they want to major in Finance.
Student of the International School of Economics Faig Khasayev who completed his one- term- studies at the joint education institution of France and the US CEFAM (International School of Business and Management) within the Erasmus+ Exchange Program and returned to UNEC spoke about the advantages of becoming UNEC student: "We have passed a three- stage contest together with my group mates and studies in the city of Leon of France for one semester. I invented the France for myself within the term; became familiar with history and culture. UNEC gave me this chance. Therefore I am grateful to my native university".


text:
Screams 'n' Murmurs
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Life, a Sports Car
Reality, a maze tough,
soul in deep slumber,
driving a leaking life
mind a hopeless driver.
Past, a coach cruel,
follies he does remind,
memories, the racers rough,
impossible to leave behind.
Dream, a destination far,
distant on track lonesome,
love, the fuel scarce,
desperation to find some.
Heart, a map hazy,
perception of direction rare,
Oh, the path ahead,
hand, unsure with gear.
Amongst emotions: enemies great,
Faith, the friend consoles,
gives hope, courage and,
life, the car rolls.
Posted by
ashish goel
4 comments:
Newer Posts
Older Posts
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


text:
Congratulations to Champions Chelsea! The atmosphere was electric in and around the Chelsea dressing room when their victory against West Bromwich Albion finally heralded them as champions. The players sang, shouted, danced and a huge drum of water was thrown over manager Antonio Conte who, despite being soaking wet, was then drenched again with champagne as players all took turns to hold him down and pour the bubbly nectar over his head. I suspect Antonio will get his own back on the training field however for this night he just laughed and laughed and laughed. Other managers were quick to respond and messages of congratulations came in from Man City's Pep Guardiola, United's Jose Mourhino and Liverpool's Jurgen Klopp. Arsene Wenger also added his congratulations while thinking about moving Arsenal into the top four to join Chelsea in the Champions League next season.
Who's in and who's out this summer
With the close of the season looming, I will keep you informed of all the important transfer movements as I am contacted by the clubs. Sunderland handed their star player, Germain Defoe a new contract last June which said that the striker could walk away from the club on a "free transfer" if they were relegated. So Germain will be on his way soon as many clubs are circling the 33 year-old. Meanwhile Stoke have called time on their £15million signing Gianellis Imbula. The 24-year-old Frenchman was signed only 18 months ago but manager Mark Hughes says it has not worked out and he will listen to offers for the midfielder who was once considered one of Europe's most promising prospects.
As I mentioned last week, Manchester City players Ya Ya Toure, Pablo Zabaleta, Bacary Sagna, Gael Clichy and Tosin Adarabioyo are all out of contract at the end of the season. Manager Pep Guardiola said this week that only Navas is certain to get a new contract and decisions on the other players will be made once City's Champion's League spot is confirmed. One player who is not going anywhere, despite rumours, is Daniel Sturridge at Liverpool. Manager Jurgen Klopp confirmed this week that Daniel will definitely be part of his plans for next season. Arsenal are preparing to battle Manchester United and Chelsea to sign Alvaro Morata. The Real Madrid striker wants to leave the Bernabeu where he feels he is not playing to his true potential with Ronaldo, Bale and Benzema all in front of him on the team selection sheet. Chelsea are leading the way with a £50million bid being discussed however if Alexis Sanchez leaves Arsenal then they will also enter the race for Morata's signature.
Travel Sickness
Hull have some of the most passionate supporters and attract huge crowds to the KC Stadium for every home game. However, it is the away games which let the club down and caused their relegation. If travel sickness had not inflicted Marco Silva's side and they had got half the wins away that they have achieved at home they would be mid-table now instead of playing in the Championship next season. Hull lost nine of their ten recent away games and conceded 19 goals during that time. The Tigers were toothless away from home and now it is too late.
It's that plane again...
Once again the little airplane flew over the Emirates stadium last weekend trailing the message "WENGER - OUT MEANS OUT! Some fans never give up and Tuesday's home match against Sunderland saw 15,000 fans staying away in protest against Wenger being in charge of the club next season. However, if Arsenal draw 1-1 with Everton on Sunday and Liverpool lose 0-2 to Middlesborough, the two clubs would tie on everything in the race for a top four finish: points, goal difference, goals conceded etc. That would mean a play off. The situation is unlikely given that Middlesborough have been pretty terrible all season but you never know. However, it looks like Chelsea, Tottenham Hotspur, Liverpool and Manchester City for the Champions League next season with Manchester United joining them if they win the Europa League Cup final.
Pogba's special task
Manchester United manager Jose Mourhino has given his most expensive player, Paul Pogba, the task of persuading his French national team compatriot Antoine Griezmann to come to Old Trafford during the summer Premier League break. Former Red Devils captain Ray Wilkins said this week that Griezmann would fit perfectly into United's set up and can be compared with previous sharp goal poachers Dwight Yorke and Andy Cole. Wilkins also said that unless United qualify for Champions League football next season then Pogba's task will be even harder because all the top players want to play in the European competition.
Fellaini walking tall
Marouane Fellaini will never be talked about in the same breath as Roy Keane, Bryan Robson and even Wayne Rooney. The fans at United didn't like him when he arrived and even those who had any sympathy regard him more as a nuisance than an asset. Poor Marouane has had a tough time this season and I know because I have heard some of the comments from the United stands - using language which I could not print in this column! He did not do himself any favours when he head butted Sergio Aguero in the Manchester derby at a time when Jose Mourhino was struggling to field a strong team because of injuries and Maroune received a three match ban. However, that ban did not apply to Europe and against Celta Vigo in the Europa League he stepped up and his tremendous physical presence stole the show and helped United to a win situation. Suddenly the fans were chanting his name in approval. The big-hair Belgian has become a big deal for Jose Mourhino who has relied on him more than once. As a tough physical enforcer Fellaini is up there with Europe's best and his 29 years has given him invaluable experience.
If you are happy to be contacted by a Daily Trust journalist please leave a telephone
number that we can contact you on. In some cases a selection of your comments will
be published, displaying your name as you provide it and location, unless you state
otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. When sending us pictures,
video or eyewitness accounts at no time should you endanger yourself or others,
take any unnecessary risks or infringe any laws. Please ensure you have read the
terms and conditions.


text:
Texas, popularly known as the Lone Star Sate, has had a long and fascinating history as the second-largest state in America. Much of the US's romantic tradition of western and cowboy-centric movies, novels and music have strong associations with the state. The people of Texas, are fiercely loyal to the concept of Texas having its own unique identity, despite its membership as part of the United States. This largely stems from the fact that Texas actually was its own republic for almost ten years after it seceded from Mexico in 1836.
Texas also seceded from the United States in 1860 as the American Civil War began. This means that it was only in the Union for about fifteen years before separating once again. While the end of the Civil War brought unification, the state has been wary of being too closely tied to what it considers "northern" values ever since. Despite the strong sense of independence and old-time values that Texans cherish, recent decades have seen a surge of drug abuse in several areas that no one in the state is proud of. Here are several other facts about the state of drug addiction and drug rehab in Texas.
Texas Drug Abuse Facts & Statistics
The main drug facts and statistics regarding substance abuse issues are as follows:
- Texas is one of the top ten states for past-year cocaine use among teenagers 12 to 17.
- 7.32 percent of Texas residents admit to using illegal drugs in the past month, which is lower than the national average of 8.82 percent of Americans in general.
- The number of Texas residents that die as a direct result of their drug use is lower than the national average. In Texas, 10.1 out of every 100,000 people die as a direct result of using drugs, whereas the national average is 12.8 people per 100,000.
Texas Drugs of Abuse
No two drugs have the exact same rates of abuse in Texas. Here is information on how each one is being abused in recent years.
- Heroin use has been higher in Texas than in many other American states. It has ranged between being responsible for 15 to 20 percent of all drug treatment admissions for the past twenty years, and today it sits right at 20 percent of all admissions.
- Marijuana is responsible for the majority of drug treatment admissions in the state, at about 33 percent of all admissions.
- Cocaine and crack have been declining in usage and the number of drug treatment admissions since their height of being responsible for 60 percent of all admissions in 1993. This mirrors the drug's decline across the rest of the United States over the last two decades.
- Meth has grown in its abuse rates in the state. Stimulants such as meth are now responsible for about 12 percent of all treatment admissions.
Recent Drug Use News in Texas
A recent shooting spree in the small town of Terrell, Texas has potentially been linked to drug use. On October 29th, suspect Charles Everett Brownlow Jr. killed five people in the town before fleeing from police. Helicopter and K9 units were later able to locate Brownlow after he tried to hide in a wild area near a creek. Now the suspect's brother has come forward and said that Brownlow dealt with ongoing drug addiction. The chief of police also stated that Brownlow appeared to be intoxicated on some sort of drug while committing the crimes. These events have underscored the potential danger of violence committed by drug addicts in any community.
Information about Texas Drug Treatment
Drug addiction is a problem that needs fast action. Contact us today to get the information you need in order to handle drug abuse in your community or with yourself or someone you love.
Texas Sources & Resources for Drug Treatment
WhiteHouse.gov – Texas Drug Control Update: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/state_profile_-_texas_0.pdf
Inquisitr.com: Terrell Texas Killing Spree – Drugs Blamed For Shooting: http://www.inquisitr.com/1014653/terrell-texas-killing-spree-drugs-blamed-for-shooting-update/


text:
+ Locations, Office Hours & Directions
Specializing in cardiology, Dr. Mark Trimble offers specialized treatment plans for patients with heart & cardiovascular conditions near Tulsa, OK.
We invite you to write a review about your experience with Dr. Trimble.
Yes, Dr. Mark A. Trimble is accepting new patients at this office.
(918) 293-3197
1705 E 19th Street, Tulsa, OK 74104-5410
|Doctor Specialty
|Accepting New Patients?
|Practice Specialty
|Multi Specialty
|Languages Spoken
|218 See them all
|Doctor's Specialty
|Doctor's Title
|Accepting New Patients?
|Practice Specialty
|Multi Specialty
Don't have an account? Sign up now to continue booking your visit:
Don't have an account? Sign up now to continue booking your visit:
NOTE: Please contact the doctor's office to confirm your coverage before making an appointment.
Dr. Mark Trimble graduated from University of Oklahoma College of Medicine in 2001.
Dr. Trimble has one office in Oklahoma where he specializes in Cardiology.
Dr. Trimble works with two hundred and seventeen doctors including Dr. Steven Smith and Dr. Jacob Greuel.
Dr. Trimble, a cardiologist in Tulsa, is trained to provide comprehensive care for your heart and cardiovascular system. Dr. Trimble may see patients for indicators like shortness of breath, chest pains or dizziness, to name a few. Heart conditions that may be diagnosed and cared for by a cardiologist may include congenital heart defects, angina, arrhythmia, heart failure, rheumatic heart disease, heart aneurysms and coronary artery disease, among others.
Please Note: The information displayed below is sourced from the 2014 Medicare Physician and Other Supplier National Provider Identifier (NPI) Aggregate Report. It's important to remember that the statistics below are not inclusive of all patients treated by Dr. Trimble, but only those who participate in Medicare.
Read the most recent articles about Cardiology
See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.


text:
It can be hard when you want to join a Bible study group and they aren't on on the nights that you're available. The answer? Create your own.
Right now I can't do night Bible studies and the women's group that met on Wednesday mornings has folded. So I got together with two of the other ladies from the farm and we formed our own small small group.
I love our group. We try to meet each Friday morning, but unfortunately I can count the number of times we've got together on one hand. Sickness (either ourselves or the kids), annual leave, and visitors have made it difficult but we've created a private Facebook group to keep in touch and share what we've been learning from the studies when we aren't able to meet.
We're doing a series on 'hope' and looking at Job. With the year I've had, one of the other ladies thought it looked great and she was right. When we do manage to meet it's a great morning of encouragement, morning tea, study and prayer. We are joined by a total of five children and it's often chaos. There's no-one to babysit or do a crèche out here. There are frequent interruptions - babies needing to be breastfed, toddlers needing discipline....but it's lovely. In the midst of the mess and noise God has always taught us something. I always leave feeling encouraged and refreshed.
The advantages of our small small group is that there are only three of us so we can be flexible with the times and locations. We already know each other so there's no awkwardness, and we can be honest with each other about personal things.
The downside is that if two people aren't available the group doesn't happen (which has happened quite a bit).
If you can't join an established Bible study, consider starting your own small small group.


text:
For the City Times
The Humane Society of Portage County will be hosting the HSPC Golf Open, Tuesday, July 14th, 2015 at the newly re-designed SentryWorld Golf Course, 601 N. Michigan Avenue.
Golf outing is an effort to raise money to benefit the Humane Society of Portage County in everyday operations, animal care, programs and community assistance.
Registration opens at 9am with practice tee available to warm up. Eighteen hole four person scramble with a shotgun start promptly at 11am followed by dinner and awards. Cost is $125 per person which includes golf with cart, buffet dinner, two drinks on golf course, hole challenges and prizes. Golfers may participate in several different raffles during the day. Dinner only can be purchased for $30 for non-golfers. Preregistration is required to participate.
This year's event is sponsored by Associated Bank. The top hole in one prize will be a 2015 Chevy Cruze sponsored by Len Dudas. Hole Sponsorship is still available for $200 per hole or $650 for a "Leader of the Pack" sponsor which includes four registered golfers & hole sponsor.
Golfers can register by visiting http://www.hspcwi.org/Golf2015 or by downloading and mailing the form with a payment by check or credit card.
Golfers may also visit the Humane Society of Portage County at 3200 Iber Lane, Plover, WI to sign up.
About Humane Society of Portage County
The Humane Society of Portage County is a non-profit 501(c)3 established in 1969. Our mission is to build a better community by preventing cruelty, abuse, neglect and overpopulation of companion animals while seeking adoption of these animals into compatible homes, and teaching humane awareness and respect for all life.
For more information or about HSPC visit www.hspcwi.org or call 715.344.6012


text:
1002 40 foot Round Roof Kit
This injection molded styrene roof is the same part used for the #1001 Stock Car Kit. Each package includes three (3) complete sprues of roof and "roof walk" parts.
Ask your local hobby supplier to order some "CV Round Car Roofs" (#1002) for you today!


text:
The REAL WINNER of Celebrity Apprentice.
Annie Duke should have won!
I can't belive Trump would choose a bully to win. Joan Rivers was nasty, rude and just plain aweful. Her daughter Melissa was "just as lovely". Must have been one of those "a favor for a friend" things that Trump chose Joan Rivers. Annie was million times better than Joan. And I'm so proud of her behavior as she kept her calm no matter how nasty Joan Rivers got. Way better charity would have won too if Annie won.
Then, I know I've said in the past that Adam Lambert should win the American Idol. Well, I still think he is the most fun to watch. And if I like the song he's singing, I really like it. But the problem is that in the end I didn't really like most of the songs he sang. He does have the celebrity "it" factor that the others lack. But after I watched their last performances, I must say that I don't really care that much who wins. I don't feel passionately about any of them. They all had one or two performances that I liked but that's about it.
Last year I liked the finale better as I was rooting for my cutie angel David Archuleta so passionately. I love that kiddo. He's such a sweetie. I'm still hoping fame won't change him. I would go and see him if he ever came to Edmonton.
But this year's finalists - just can't get excited about the finale. Bummer.
I do still love Simon though. Most of the time he says exactly what I'm thinking. :)


text:
Manchester United were once linked with Axel Witsel, should they renew that interest considering his desire to leave Russia?
If you think Manchester United's midfield transfer woes began this summer, then you are certainly mistaken, for fans have been crying out to for new additions for several seasons.
Last summer they didn't sign any, and watched one player they were linked with signing secure a mega deal to Russia.
His name is Axel Witsel, a rock star name for a no nonsense midfielder once handed a long ban for stamping on an opponent and breaking his anjkle.
The Belgian midfielder is an international colleague of Marouane Fellaini, but is said to be keen on a January switch away from Zenit St Petersberg.
He signed there in September 2012 in a double deal with Hulk, himself switching from Benfica where he had caught the eye of United.
Witsel is more of a defensively minded midfielder than Fellaini, a no nonsense enforcer who at 24-years-old has a lot to give. More of a Nigel de Jong to Fellaini's Yaya Toure to borrow a comparison from City's title winning side of 2011/12.
He still scored four goals in 19 matches in the Russian Premier League last season, although is without any in eight games so far this campaign.
Witsel is claimed to be keen on a move away from Russia, expressing a desire to move to a stronger European League.
Russian newspaper Izvestia reports: "The transfer of the Belgian midfielder from Benfica in the summer of 2012 cost Zenit the amount of approximately € 40 million. Given the desire of the player to leave the team and move to a more classy and strong European championship, the management of the St. Petersburg club is ready to let go of Witsel for less money, but not for less than €30 million".
Rafa Benitez' Napoli are credited with an interest, but are said to be preparing an offer of €20 million, below Anzhi's asking price. A lot would depend on how far the player is prepared to go to force a move. In a World Cup year it is a dangerous balancing act.
So should Manchester United re-visit their interest in the player? The asking price is still a lot of money, but cash that the club clearly have to spend given their recent financial results.
Much depends on where David Moyes intends to strengthen next, but expecting Marouane Fellaini to solve their midfield problems alone is a big ask.
With Anderson contributing very little, replacing him with a solid defensive midfielder in Witsel could work, despite Fellaini's desire to blossom in the position. It would give Fellaini more license to move forward, and with defensive midfielder Darren Fletcher unlikely of being a reliable contributor, further supplementing their options with a top class player like Witsel can hardly go wrong.
It would provide United with a solid base from which their attacking players can flourish, although Moyes clearly sees left-back as a priority in terms of investment and there are still whispers about another striker too. Heading into January, if United are prepared to spend big on another midfielder, Witsel could be an attractive option.
Where do United need to strengthen? A midfielder still needed?
image: © mikehamm