text:
Hi everyone. I'm glad to be a part of this forum. I've been a big Jim fan since the In Living Color days, and have been aware of him since Once Bitten. My favorite Jim Carrey films are The Majestic, Dumb & Dumber, and Me, Myself & Irene. I collect movie memorabilia and I recently became the proud owner of one of the costumes Jim wore in The Majestic and later this summer I plan on driving through Northern California with a friend to find the filming locations.
Looking forward to getting to know other Jim fans.


text:
I typically use LaTeX to write chemistry & physics documents with a lot of equations. I often will reference terms and variables and such in the text of my document. Typically I just do this by writing
$\gamma$, but someone just pointed out to me that this prevents such characters from being copied out of the resulting PDF. I could go lookup a greek alphabet and past the character into the text file, then italicize it, but this seems painfully slow to say the least. Is there a better way of putting such characters into my document quickly other then using math-mode?
I am already using
Which is the advise I've seen for making non-math mode text copy correctly.
I'm using PDF(la)TeX if it makes a difference. As the discussion in the comments has shown, I have to specify: I'm on Windows 7, using Adobe Reader X v10.1.1.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
GOP's George Allen says no more political races
Republican George Allen has decided his unsuccessful bid for the U.S. Senate will be his last political campaign.
"I have no intention of running for office again," Allen said in interviews with The Virginian-Pilot, Richmond Times-Dispatch and other Virginia newspapers.
Allen's decision would seem to be the end of the road for a onetime state legislator, congressman, governor and U.S. senator who was once touted as a possible presidential candidate.That kind of talk died down when Allen lost his Senate seat in 2006.
Democrat Tim Kaine, also a former governor, defeated Allen last week in one of the nation's most expensive and bitter Senate contests. Allen wasn't the only well-known politician who was thwarted in his comeback attempt: Democrat Bob Kerrey in Nebraska and Republican Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin also lost their Senate bids.
"The whole Republican crew that got thrown out in 2006, they got thrown out for a reason and kind of recycling them I don't think was helpful," Joseph Nowlin, chairman of the Ashland district of the Hanover County (Va.) Republican Committee, said on election night about Allen.
(Contributing: Peter Eisler)


text:
2180 South Constitution Blvd., Salt Lake City, UT 84119
Phone: 801-328-8788 | Toll Free: 800-326-4403 | Fax: 801-886-2530
You have not viewed any products recently.
Mighty Line® patented floor tape is the most durable floor tape available. Spend more time on value added actions - producing, receiving, and shipping materials and less time on non-value added activities such as painting floor lines. Mighty Line floor tape is available in many colors and patterns in four different widths. FOB Shipping Point.
Solid Colored Floor Tapes - The most popular tapes we offer.
Diagonal Striped Floor Tapes - By contrasting two standard colors in a diagonal fashion, Mighty Line has constructed a floor tape that allows employees to be made aware of possible danger zones within the work area.
Specialty Floor Tapes - Mighty Glow® H4RYLUMCTR and H4FY tapes are unique floor tapes developed for emergency purposes. Mighty Glow's 1/2" luminescent center line highlights exit paths during power outages. Frigid Tape is a durable, permanent cold storage floor tape. Apply to cold, clean and dry floors. Maintains adherence in -20° Fahrenheit temperatures.
SORT: Leave in place only the items necessary to obtain optimal production.
SET IN ORDER: Use colors of Mighty Line floor tapes and floor markers to show work flow patterns, delineate work areas, and mark proper placement of tools, inventories, and machinery.
SHINE: When you keep things scrubbed, swept and sanitized, your environment can actually life morale.
STANDARDIZES: Ensure everyone knows what they're supposed to do, how best to do it, and when to do it, until it all becomes routine. Our floor tapes, floor signs and placement markets can play a big role here.
SUSTAIN: These practices are more than rules - they must become an integral part of your company culture. Over time you'll adjust signs, markings, etc. as necessary.
See Related Items tab for Mighty Line Specialty Products - label protectors and tape applicators.


text:
Thursday, January 18 2007
"The Head And The Hair"
LIZ (TINA FEY) FALLS FOR AN ATTRACTIVE GUY AND JACK (ALEC BALDWIN) WALKS IN KENNETH'S SHOES --- Intrigued by two MSNBC guys - the cerebral nerd "The Head" and the gorgeous hunk "The Hair" - they keep running into inside 30 Rock, Liz (Tina Fey) and Jenna (Jane Krakowski) decide to get serious about their dating lives, but find themselves unexpectedly switching their typical roles when Liz admits she's clicking with - and falling for - The Hair (guest star Peter Hermann). Jack (Alec Baldwin) and Kenneth the Page (Jack McBrayer) also switch office roles for "Bottoms Up" day, with Jack donning the page jacket and Kenneth spending a day as a corporate big wig. Tracy Morgan, Scott Adsit, Judah Friedlander, Lonny Ross, Keith Powell and Rachel Dratch also star.


text:
Mplus Home
Last Day
Last 3 Days
Last Week
Tree View
Edit Profile
Nonpositive definite psi matrix
Mplus Discussion
Growth Modeling of Longitudinal Data
daniel adkins
posted on Tuesday, November 28, 2006 - 10:39 am
output indicates the psi matrix is nonpos def. tech4 output indicates that the issue is that the standardized corr between the intercept and linear slope component factors is greater than one. however, the raw, unstandardized corr is not problematic. is this an issue? can these parameter estimates be considered accurate? the estimates are consistent with earlier model runs using a very similar measure which estimated cleanly.
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Tuesday, November 28, 2006 - 1:38 pm
I suspect that you have covariates in your model and that what you are looking at in the results section of the output is a residual covaraince and a standardized residual covariance. TECH4 provides a correlation. If this is greater than one, then the model has a problem.
daniel adkins
posted on Tuesday, November 28, 2006 - 2:04 pm
there are no covariates in the model, it is an unconditional quadratic LCM w/ 6 repeated measures. the corr btwn the growth factors is given at 2 places in the output--in the standard output (under the growth factor cfa's) and in the tech4 output. the numbers in the tech4 growth factor corr matrix correspond to the corrs given in the standardized columns (ie- columns 4 and 5) of the regular output. does that make sense? if so, does the model have a problem? if so, any remedial advice?
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Tuesday, November 28, 2006 - 2:35 pm
I thought you said that the correlations in TECH4 and the standardized values were different. If they are the same, that makes sense, and if they are one or greater that is a problem. I would need you to send the input, data, output, and your license number to
to see if I can suggest any model modifications.
posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2011 - 2:22 am
Dear Mr and Mrs Muthen,
I�m new to Mplus and GMM and have some questions.
I�m analyzing a GMM with 4 timepoints without covariates. I have a negative variance of the intercept, that is not significant (I get the warning PSI Matrix is not positive definite).
1) How can this happen, what does this mean?
Then, I tried to fix i@0, with this I don�t get the warning message anymore.
2) Can I do this? This means, that I don�t allow the intercepts to vary around the mean, right? Do you have other suggestions to solve the problem with the negative variance?
3) Can I still put covariates in my model with this restraint because there is no variance to explain when I fix it to zero.
Thanks a lot for your help!
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2011 - 6:03 am
If you have a negative variance for the intercept growth factor, the model is inadmissible. If it is small and not significant, you can fix it at zero. This means that the intercept is a fixed rather than a random effect. It is still possible to use covariates.
posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2011 - 6:21 am
Thanks a lot for your answer! I have two further questions:
Can you imagine different reasons how it can happen that a model is inadmissable?
Will the covariates that I use still be able to have influence when the intercept is fixed,is there still variance?
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2011 - 1:48 pm
If you have a significant negative variance or residual variance, it means the model is not correct for the data.
You can still regress the intercept growth factor on covariates even if you fix the variance of the intercept growth factor to zero. Bringing the covariates into the model can increase the power to detect that the variance is significant.
posted on Thursday, June 09, 2011 - 5:53 am
Thanks a lot again, you are sp helpful!!!
You wrote the model is not correct for the data with "significant negative variance" - is this the same for non significant negative variance?
I assume that I still fix the variance in the model with covariates (as in that one without covariates), right?
When I write a paper I think I have to tell the fact that I fixed the variance. Do you have any experiences if that would be a problem?
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Thursday, June 09, 2011 - 6:53 am
If the negative variance is small and not significant, you can fix it at zero. I think this is commonly done. I would try letting the variance be free when I added to covariates to see if that changes things and fix it only if needed.
Anna Radkovsky
posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - 3:46 am
I am currently running a bivariate linear latent growth curve analysis with four time points, and I am getting some convergence problems due to nonpositive definite PSI matrix. Considering the TECH4 Output, the correlation of slopes is greater than one. Because I am interested in the slope-slope relationship, setting the variance of the slope to one is not satisfactory to me. Therefore, I have two questions:
1) Why is the correlation of slopes greater than one?
2) Is there anything I can do to modify the model in a way it still involves the slope-slope correlation?
You can find the input model Output below.
Thanks a lot for your help!
iD sD |
iER sER |
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - 6:13 am
You may need to add residual covariances of the two outcomes at each time point, for example,
bdi_mt1 WITH s27_9_t1;
If you have not already done so, I would fit each process separately before I put them together.
Anna Radkovsky
posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - 9:03 am
Thank you very much for your quick reply.
I have already done the analyses for the univariate LGCs, and both models fit very well.
I added residual covariances, as you proposed, but this didn't change anything. So in addition I tried setting the residuals equal within each process. Luckily this solved the problem and now the model fits well.
But I still wonder how correlations greater than one could occur in growth curve modeling. Do you have any hints for me?
Thanks again,
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - 3:56 pm
The needs for residual covariances across processes is the main reason I have seen.
Aurelie Lange
posted on Friday, September 07, 2018 - 4:34 am
Dear Dr Muthen,
I have a growth model with an i and s. I use type=complex to account for non-independence in the data.
i s |
After getting a warning regarding PSI being not positive definite I fixed the variance of conf1 to 0, as this variance was negative and only very small.
However, I still receive the message regarding PSI being not positive definite. I don't see any other negative variances in my model and the correlation between i and s in TeCH4 is (only) -.84, so not near or above 1.
The model seems to fit very well. What else could I do?
Linda K. Muthen
posted on Friday, September 07, 2018 - 1:37 pm
Please send the output and your license number to
Back to top
Add Your Message Here
Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Tree View
Program Credits


text:
Rogue chemist's defense team wants some charges dismissed
Annie Dookhan accused of faking results, tampering with evidence
The chemist at the center of the scandal that shut down the state drug lab was back in court Friday.
Annie Dookhan is charged with falsifying and mishandling evidence. She handled about 34,000 cases.
Dookhan's defense team wants two Suffolk County witness intimidation charges to be dismissed. The judge took the matter under advisement.
The charges stem from allegations she lied on the stand about having a master's degree. Defense attorney Nicolas Gordon told the Boston Herald the charges are not in the spirit of the law.
A spokesman for the attorney general's office defended the charges, saying they "are supported by the evidence."
The Attorney General's motion to consolidate the cases has been continued to May 7.
Rumors had also been circulating that Dookhan's lawyer he has had "cursory" talks about a possible plea deal, but those rumors appear to be false.


text:
Meet the Boss: David Sacks, CEO of Yammer
Genealogy and business networking sites are latest from David Sacks
After producing the Golden Globe-nominated satirical comedy "Thank You for Smoking" in 2005, David Sacks was content to return to his job as a tech entrepreneur.
"We created PayPal in three years, and we created a movie in three years," said Sacks, who was chief operating officer when the online payment service was sold to eBay for $1.5 billion in 2002. "They're both great experiences, but PayPal is a billion-dollar outcome that today has over 100 million users and changes the world.
"You can achieve things in technology on a scale you can't in movies."
These days Sacks, a member of the so-called PayPal Mafia who went on to shape the Internet landscape with sites like Yelp and LinkedIn, is busy scaling two ventures of his own: Yammer, a social network for companies, and Geni, a genealogy website.
Last year was good to both: 5-year-old Geni became profitable. Meanwhile, Yammer, introduced in late 2008, reported 4 million users at 200,000 companies in 160 countries.
MBA BY THE BAY: Find out how an MBA could change your life with SFGATE's interactive directory of Bay Area MBA programs.
"It was a year of growth," said Sacks, 39. "We tripled sales. The user base grew from 1.6 to 4 million. We went from 80 to 250 employees."
Sacks expects San Francisco's Yammer to continue to thrive this year, buoyed by a trend of enterprise software becoming more user friendly. That's because it needs to appeal to the end user - employees - now that the rise in cloud-based services allows such software to bypass IT departments, which traditionally made all software purchasing decisions.
"Because the software is available through the Web and doesn't need to be installed means employees can make decisions for themselves about what tools make them more productive," Sacks said. "We have finally figured out the model for getting inside the enterprise that a startup can execute."
Both Yammer and Geni, which he no longer runs directly, operate on a "freemium" model, offering some services at no charge and others requiring a paid subscription.
Yammer's goal is to make employees more productive.
"One of the ways of looking at what we're doing is we're solving a lot of Dilbert problems," he said. "Most employees in a company don't know very basic things like: Who are my co-workers? What are they working on? How do I make a contribution?"
It's not just employees from tech companies who are adopting Yammer. Corporate customers include Chevron, 7-Eleven, Tyco and Supervalu. Four out of the world's top 10 companies by revenue are using the service, Sacks said.
"It shows social is becoming much more mainstream in the enterprise," Sacks said.
Born in Cape Town, South Africa, Sacks didn't grow up dreaming of being an entrepreneur. He just knew he wouldn't care for a professional occupation like his father, who was an endocrinologist.
Looking back, Sacks said, the best entrepreneurial role model was his paternal grandfather, who immigrated to southern Africa from Lithuania in the 1920s and started a candy factory.
"When I was a kid, I thought it was really cool," said Sacks, who grew up with a younger sister who did follow in their dad's footsteps and became an endocrinologist in Los Angeles.
When Sacks was 5, his family moved to Tennessee, and later to Silicon Valley, where Sacks earned a bachelor's degree in economics from Stanford.
The link between his two newest ventures - a social-networking site for the enterprise and a crowd-sourced, digital family tree - might not seem obvious. But for Sacks, it makes perfect sense.
"One of the things that makes me interested in a product is it has to be a product that the whole world can use," he said. "I tend to get excited about products that are self-distributing in some way. ... If you're dependent on a traditional sales model, to me it's just too slow."
David Sacks
Work: Founder, CEO of Yammer
Age: 39
Family: Wife, Jacqueline; two daughters, ages 4 and 2
Residence: San Francisco
Can't live without: Kids, Internet connection
You might not know: He was born in Cape Town, South Africa
Quote: "We're solving a lot of Dilbert problems."
Suzanne Herel is San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. email@example.com


text:
Arizona ended South Carolina's streak of College World Series championships with a 4-1 win last night in a game interrupted yet again by Idiots On The Field. It's the third time this CWS that there's been such a field invasion, and a team effort: an alleged seven fans ran out of the seats at once.
The best chronicler of the seven stooges is Minda Haas, whose Flickr gallery contains a number of outstanding photos and we really do encourage you to go look at them. But there are, too, some scratchy-looking videos:
We bid a kind farewell to the college baseball season, and hope Omaha residents show up next year even more drunk than they were this year.


text:
DII women's hockey team reloaded for next year
February 19, 2013 | Lynchburg, Va.
Sara Niemi's first season as head coach of Liberty University's Division II women's hockey team didn't offer much highlight reel material compared with the Lady Flames' DI program, ranked No. 1 in the nation for the past two months.
Liberty (0-12) finished eighth in the final ACHA Division II East Division poll, with only the top three teams advancing to the national tournament. The Lady Flames were shut out in eight of their losses.
But Niemi, a former Liberty DI defender who got her undergraduate degree in sport management in 2009 (the same year the DII program started), said this rebuilding season helped establish the foundation for the future of the Lady Flames' DII squad.
"This semester, we actually added six girls to our team, which is usually not heard of in a January semester," she said. "We lost some players in December, but ended up gaining more. That was not common (but) it was good. It's going to help our team for next year."
After losing its last two games by 6-0, 6-0 to Cal-Penn — the second-ranked team in the East — on Feb. 2 and Maryland on Feb. 10, Niemi already has her team focused on next fall.
"Now, we're pretty much practicing with all of these new girls and we're looking forward to next season," she said. "Next year, we're going to probably have around 16 to 18 players. It's the first time since the team started three years ago that we've had that many players (so) we're building pretty quickly."
She has enjoyed working with the newcomers and is excited to see how much they can pick up in the offseason.
"Some had never played before, some had played but not in an organized sense,"Niemi said. "They'd just do it for fun, not on a travel team. My team is used as a developmental team. My job is to take what I have and try to make them better."
One player she will have a hard time replacing is goalkeeper Leanne Niemi, her younger sister who will be graduating this spring after playing in her second straight Delaware Valley Collegiate Hockey Conference all-star game in Hershey, Pa., in April.
Leanne averaged more than 56 saves per game (686 in 12 games), leading all of ACHA Division I in total saves. She also finished tied for eighth by saving 91 percent of opponents' shots on goal in league games. A few teams, including the Terrapins, pelleted her with more than 100 shots on goal.
"We definitely went with a more defensive-minded strategy this year," Sara Niemi said. "Our strategy this year was to teach these girls how to play defensively before we played offensively."
This semester, she converted senior forwards Rena Leone and Kelsey Flanders into defenders and they helped provide a hedge ofprotection for Leanne around the net.
The defensive focus prevented foes from scoring more goals, but also kept Liberty from putting many shots on opposing cages.
"It was just hard because in hockey you want to have your stronger girls on defense," Niemi said. "So many had never played hockey before, it was hard for us to be competitive."
Unlike the Lady Flames, most of the teams they faced offered only a DII program, meaning they were their respective schools' elite squads.
Next year, with the bolstered lineup, Liberty may ramp up its schedule with a few more road trips. The University of Virginia is the closest school that offers a women's hockey program and there are few others in the state.


text:
Thank you for sharing and participating in this important part of our ministry!
To post a new request, simply scroll down this page and enter your prayer request where it says "Share a Comment" (or "Leave a Reply" on mobile devices). This page is moderated continually, so your request will be posted on this page as soon as our moderator sees it. For confidentiality, please use first names only when mentioning other people in your requests, and also for yourself.
To pray for others, simply scroll through the requests below and pray as you feel led, or post a reply to the prayer requests of others by simply clicking "Reply" beneath each prayer request. Please use this forum for prayer, rather than advice, as we simply and humbly do not have enough information about the people or their situations to offer advice.
To be notified by email of each new prayer request that is posted on this page (about 10-20 per day), just click the link below the comment form that says "subscribe without commenting." You'll be asked for your email address on the next screen and get every prayer request (and reply) posted on this page. You can turn off these notifications at any time.
Thanks for lifting up your brothers and sisters in prayer!


text:
Worthless-Online wrote:Must be illegal to think independently around here...
Worthless-Online wrote:Let's assume that it's possible he didn't know a thing about Grim Fandango before he started (which I find so hard to believe that my balls hurt)--
Worthless-Online wrote:Whomever gets first dibs on the subject matter is considered the original dealer.
Worthless-Online wrote:I'm not saying he's a bad person
Worthless-Online wrote:On a side not, Grim Fandango is much better. Possibly 400 times better. Not to say your comic is bad, but Grim Fandango is just that good.
Worthless-Online wrote:And the "independent thinking" comment was more directed towards everyone coming in and saying the same thing, and then you saying, "yeah, way to go dude." (<<---paraphrasing.)
indybuda wrote:and call Keda.
Worthless wrote:What?! Her opinion ISN'T valid, you moron! This whole thing is about whether or not your comic is similar to GRIM FANDANGO! If she's never even HEARD of it, she can not offer anything valid to the conversation for either side....because she doesn't know both sides!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


text:
Elizabeth Vargas hasn't been on ABC's newsmagazine "20/20" for a while, and now we know why: The veteran newswoman is being treated for alcohol abuse, the network confirmed.
The Daily News broke the story Wednesday that Vargas, 51, checked herself into a "well-respected rehab facility" a few weeks ago and has at least a few more weeks left in her treatment.
In a statement, Vargas wrote: "Like so many people, I am dealing with addiction. I realized I was becoming increasingly dependent on alcohol. And feel fortunate to have recognized it for the problem it was becoming. I am in treatment and am so thankful for the love and support of my family, friends and colleagues at ABC News. Like so many others, I will deal with this challenge one day at a time. If coming forward today gives one other person the courage to seek help, I'm grateful."
ABC News wrote in a statement: "We are proud of the steps Elizabeth has taken and are pulling for her recovery." Vargas -- who was seen on "Good Morning America" a few weeks back -- is expected to return to "20/20" when she recovers. The show airs 10 p.m. Fridays.
Vargas has seen her star rise and fall at ABC News, where she has worked since 1996. After the death of Peter Jennings in 2005, she was in the running to be his permanent successor on "World News Tonight," but ultimately lost the anchor chair to Charles Gibson (the program is now anchored by Diane Sawyer). Vargas has two children with "Walking in Memphis" songwriter Marc Cohn.
What do you think of Vargas?
Latest Celebrity News


text:
Liberty News
School of Law celebrates its first alumnus to become a judge
|Will Roach II ('07) is the first Liberty University School of Law graduate to be elected as a judge.
Will Roach II, a member of Liberty University School of Law's inaugural graduating class in 2007, was elected General Sessions Judge for Jefferson County, Tenn., in the May 6 Republican Primary. He edged four other candidates to fill the seat vacated by retiring Judge Ben Strand.
"He won by 27 votes (out of more than 8,000 cast) and was announced the winner by the Commissioner," said Mat Staver, dean of the School of Law, noting the election was certified on Wednesday with no runoff required.
"He becomes the first of what will be many judges to graduate from Liberty University's School of Law as they seek to restore the rule of law in every aspect of the profession," added Rena Lindevaldsen, a School of Law professor and associate dean for academic affairs, and associate director of the Liberty Center for Law & Policy.
Roach will handle cases in the juvenile court, criminal court, and probate court, ruling on civil disputes under $25,000 for the county of 56,000 residents located 30 miles northeast of Knoxville.
"It will be a much larger responsibility and a much larger field of ministry," Roach said. "I have mountains of learning to accomplish between now and Sept. 2," when he takes the judge's seat.
He will step down from his managing partner role with Roach, Robinson & Miller, relinquishing his legal duties to David Robinson. Like Roach, Robinson was in the School of Law's 48-student graduating class of 2007 that also includes Matt Krause, a state representative for Texas elected in October 2012.
Roach originally arrived at Liberty on a full basketball scholarship in 1990, the year the Vines Center opened. He returned to Jefferson City in 1992 to complete his undergraduate degree at Carson-Newman University before enrolling in the School of Law at the age of 32 in 2004, after he and his wife, Heather, had their three children, Destiny (now 16), Isaiah (13), and Eliana (10).
|Will Roach II with his wife, Heather, and children (from left) Destiny, Eliana, and Isaiah.
"I had a very clear calling from God to go to Liberty University's School of Law," said Roach, who received a full scholarship as a member of the first incoming class. "Liberty has been very good to me."
Roach decided to run for the judge's seat late last summer after receiving encouragement from family members, friends, clients, and co-workers.
"So many people approached me that I began to think, 'Maybe the Lord is trying to say something to me,'" Roach said. "I prayed about it for two weeks, sought counsel, and at the end of the two-week period, I prayed the Prayer of Jabez (I Chronicles 4:10). It became very apparent to me that I could not pray that prayer with sincerity if I was not willing to run for the general session judge of my home county."
He had a few factors working in his favor, first and foremost that his father, Dennis Roach, has served as a Tennessee representative for the past 20 years.
"People knew my father's name," Will Roach said. "That was a good start."
Furthermore, Jefferson County is predominantly Republican territory.
"It's very conservative, in the Bible Belt, with a very small Democratic population," Roach said.
He compared his calling to that of Gideon in the Bible and challenged others to respond to the voice of God, even if they feel unqualified.
"Don't be afraid to be ambitious for the glory of God," Roach said. "As His children, we must go when called. We don't choose our direction. Christ does. We choose whether to obey or disobey."
Roach, who was congratulated by Liberty President Jerry Falwell in his May 10 address at the 41st Commencement, is carrying out the commission of Dr. Jerry Falwell, who died days before his graduation in 2007.
"It's an honor to be a part of the legacy of the ministry of (Founder) Jerry Falwell and Liberty University," Roach said. "His dream is being fulfilled. He started Liberty University School of Law for many purposes. One was to equip lawyers to fight against the ACLU. I don't know if he thought about students being judges. Maybe he did. I hope to be the first of many."


text: The range of countries and institutions represented here is a universal recognition that what happens in Afghanistan matters to us all, Clinton said. Our failure to bring peace and progress would be a setback not only to the people of Afghanistan, but to the entire enterprise of collective action in the interest of collective security. Clinton joined representatives from more than 80 countries and international groups at the conference in The Hague, Netherlands, aimed at jump-starting political support for Afghanistan. Clinton said a new strategy must integrate military and civilian efforts. But, she acknowledged, security in the region is an essential first step. In the wake of President Barack Obama`s announced plans to deploy 17,000 more U.S. soldiers and 4,000 additional military trainers, Clinton called on the international community to step up with more military resources. She specifically asked that each army and police unit in Afghanistan be partnered with an international mentoring force. Clinton said the goal should be to stand up an Afghan army of at least 134,000 soldiers and a police force of at least 82,000 officers by 2011. The secretary also pushed for more help in rebuilding the country`s critical infrastructure such as roads, public buildings, schools and hospitals, and she called for an emphasis on redeveloping Afghan`s once-thriving agricultural-based economy. The United States is focusing its efforts on rural development in provinces near the Afghan-Pakistan border, and we hope that others gathered here will heed the call for help throughout the country with job creation, technical expertise, vocational training, and investments in roads, electrical transmission lines, education, health care, and so much else, Clinton said. The secretary of state also announced a U.S. commitment for $40 million to help fund Afghanistan`s upcoming elections. Clinton added that reconciliation should be offered to enemy fighters who no longer want to side against the Afghan government. We must also support efforts by the government of Afghanistan to separate the extremists of al-Qaida and the Taliban from those who joined their ranks not out of conviction, but out of desperation, Clinton said. They should be offered an honorable form of reconciliation and reintegration into a peaceful society if they are willing to abandon violence, break with al-Qaida, and support the constitution. Clinton said the challenges facing Afghanistan are regional, and she called on its neighbors to support efforts there. The secretary said success in the country will provide a blueprint for a new diplomacy powered by partnership and premised on shared interests.


text:
I have come to the end of a year with mixed feelings. On one hand this year has been overflowing with unexpected adventures, creative growth, and memories I will keep close to my heart. On the other hand, 2013 is bursting with possibilities waiting to be explored. As much as every year holds the promise of goodness there is also the lurking shadow of pain. I can't help clinging to the current year and all its goodness just in case the unknown holds more discomfort than I want to deal with.
In the same moment Monday becomes Tuesday 2012 will become 2013. I have greeted previous new years in the midst of boisterous celebrations surrounded by music and fireworks. I have also greeted the new year with a gentle snore already tucked into my cozy bed. This year I plan to watch the ball drop with a fluted glass of bubbles and friends all around.
Before the chorus of Auld Lang Syne begins I am going to enjoy a glance back at Our Lady of Second Helpings in 2012.
Posts about Netflix's removal of workout content from their streaming library were extremely popular ranking #1, #4, and #9 in the top 10 most viewed posts of the year.
The sweet potato edged out all other ingredients as the star of the 2 most viewed recipe posts!
Better (Baked) Sweet Potato Fries (2nd year in a row!)
Southwestern Sweet Potato Bites
These two recipes were also among the most pinned and repinned of the year. Thank you loyal Pinners!
Chocolate Espresso Birthday Cake topped the dessert category with Sinless Dark Chocolate Flourless Cake and S'more Pie! coming close behind.
Readers in the mood for soup loved Seafood Chowder on Galway Bay and Three Bean Stew.
While breakfast browsers spent their time drooling over Good Morning Muffins and Banana Bread Pancakes.
Coconut Oatmeal Cookies ruled among those looking for a tasty snack that happened to be vegan and gluten free.
Blog readers and Pinners unanimously agreed on the year's most popular recipe suggestion. The Boring-Lunch Cure featured leftover taco fixins' stuffed into a bell pepper and topped with melted cheese. Pretty tasty if I do say so myself.
I can't pick a personal favorite. I like each post for different reasons. Simple Toasted Coconut Meringues were addictive, Cauliflower Fried Rice was delightfully out-of-the-box, Jet Lag and a Full Irish Breakfast was a beautiful trip down memory lane, and Tomato & Sweet Onion Pie was one of the year's best experiments-gone-right.
I have a soft spot for Lazy Baker Pancake Muffins. These sweet little guys became the first of my photos to be published on Foodgawker and Tastespotting.
Sesame-Crusted-Tofu proved to be tempting enough for television. I had a marvelous time sharing it on KCTS 9 Cooks in April.
Beyond the plate I really cherish the posts that do not have recipes. They are not as popular and their visually appealing counterparts but those posts are the heart of this blog. Here are my top non-recipe picks for 2012:
It's a Spanx-Wearing Bikini-less Life!
The Mower, The Grill, and The Man who Loved Them
So… My Toddler's Eating in the Closet
Come what may in 2013 I feel good about committing to a few statements. There will be a lot of food. All of the food will be conducive to weight loss and weight maintenance. There will be stories. The stories will come from my heart and be inspired by my family, friends, the media, and my continuing journey to live a balanced and healthy life. I will continue to put one stumbling foot in front of the other, take each day of the year as it comes, and keep looking ahead with wonder at what is yet to come.


text:
Doctors believe a man accused of decapitating his disabled 7-year-old son nearly a year ago is competent to stand trial, which may move the case forward, court documents show.
Doctors believe a man accused of decapitating his disabled 7-year-old son nearly a year ago is competent to stand trial, which may move the case forward, court documents show.
Jeremiah Wright's defense team and the state will now try to prove or disprove his competency to a Lafourche judge, who has the final say if he is competent.
Doctors have been treating Wright, 31, at the Feliciana Forensic Facility in Jackson for the past nine months. They have been attempting to improve his mental health to the point where he can understand the proceedings against him and assist in his defense, and those doctors claim they have been successful, the prosecution and defense said.
A competency hearing is scheduled for Sept. 21, during which the prosecution and defense will call on expert witnesses to testify about Wright's mental state.
Doctors' results show that while he was being treated, Wright was exaggerating illness to avoid trial, according to court documents filed by prosecutors.
"They're talking about his current state of mind, and it has nothing to do with his state of mind during the alleged offense," said Kerry Cuccia, Wright's attorney. He will address those findings further in court.
Wright's lawyers have not entered a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. So far, they have only questioned his competency to stand trial.
Only a jury can decide if a person is guilty �— and should be sent to jail — or not guilty by reason of insanity — and should be sent to a hospital until he or she is determined not to be a threat — District Attorney Cam Morvant II has said.
After spending nine months at the mental health facility, Wright was returned to the Lafourche Parish jail about two weeks ago.
Wright was present at a Lafourche hearing Tuesday, held to confirm dates and deadlines with Judge John LeBlanc, Cuccia and Morvant before the Sept. 21 hearing.
Wright did not speak at the hearing, and police brought him in and out of the courtroom in a red prison uniform, shackles and a bullet-proof vest.
The September hearing will be the first major development in the proceedings leading up to Wright's possible trial since October 2011, when LeBlanc first found him not mentally fit to stand trial and sent him to the Jackson facility. The court documents filed in this case over this week and last week are the first filed since March.
"I'm pleased now that the case is moving forward," Morvant said.
Cuccia said an appropriate amount of time has passed in the case where Wright's competency is in question.
Wright is accused of the Aug. 14 first-degree murder of 7-year-old Jori Lirette, who had cerebral palsy. Jori used a wheelchair and had to be fed through a tube.
If convicted, he faces mandatory life in prison and is eligible for the death penalty.
Wright is accused of decapitating and dismembering the boy. Jori's head was found in front of Wright's West Seventh Street home in Thibodaux by a passing driver, with the rest of his body in a white trash bag nearby, police said.
Wright confessed to Thibodaux Police later that day, telling them he killed his son out of anger at Jesslyn Lirette, his girlfriend and the boy's mother, records show. She has said she planned to end their 10-year relationship the day their son died.
Jori's family will host a public remembrance at 7 p.m. Aug. 14 in the parking lot of St. Genevieve Catholic Church, said the boy's grandmother Delene Himel. Balloons will be released, and people may be led in prayer.
"We would appreciate it if people would come," Himel said.
Staff Writer Katie Urbaszewski can be reached at 448-7617 or email@example.com.


text: NEWS Sandy Benefit Concert Aims for 2 Billion Viewers Worldwide 12/12/2012 by Glenn Peoples FACEBOOK TWITTER EMAIL ME Hurricane Sandy Concert: Kanye West, Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel Performing Tonight's (Dec. 12) commercial-free benefit concert at Madison Square Garden in New York will be seen both around the world and around the World Wide Web. The Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen & the E Street Band, Paul McCartney, Bon Jovi, The Who, Roger Waters, Billy Joel, Eric Clapton, Kanye West and many other artists will perform at the benefit to the Robin Hood Relief Fund and victims of Hurricane Sandy. The broadcast will be accessible by an estimated 2 billion people worldwide, according to the concert's website http://www.121212concert.org. U.S. television viewers will have a difficult time missing the event. The broadcast will be carried on 34 channels, from AMC to VH1 Classic. Even pay channels HBO and Showtime 2 and the newsy Bloomberg will carry the broadcast. But not all networks will carry the event. Fox will air a two-hour semi-final of "The X-Factor." NBC, CBS and ABC will carry on with their normal Wednesday evening schedules. The benefit concert will air on the CBS station WLNY in-TV in New York and the CW station in Philadelphia, however. A handful of local PBS stations in New York and New Jersey will also carry the broadcast. The live webcast will be carried by 30 different websites, including YouTube, MTV.com, MySpace, Yahoo, Yahoo, Vevo, AOL, Hulu, People.com and BMI.com. The webcast will also be carried at the event's homepage, 121212concert.org. In the U.S., free tickets to view the simulcast in movie theaters will be given away at select theaters in storm-affected areas. Simulcasts can be viewed around the country at Cinemark Theaters for the price of a regular Child admission. All of the proceeds will go toward the Robin Hood Relief Fund. A full list of broadcasters and participating theaters can be found at the concert's broadcast page http://www.121212concert.org/broadcast. The broadcast will also be seen in countries around the world. MTV and VH1 will carry the telecast in Canada, Latin America, the U.K., France, Australia and dozens of other countries. Numerous channels will carry the concert in Japan, Korea, Tawain, India and Africa. Social media will also play a role in raising support for relief efforts. Foursquare has created a "Be Robin Hood #121212concert" badge for users who check in using the #121212concert hashtag. Samsung Galaxy will donate $10 to the Robin Hood Relief Fund on behalf of each of the first 25,000 unlocked badges. The Twitter hashtag #121212concert is sure to be a trending topic throughout the day. Sponsored by Chase, the hashtag on Twitter's trend section in the U.S. as well as the U.K., Mexico, Japan, Canada, Italy and many other countries. Shazam will make it easy for its 250 million users to help. Proceeds from music purchased through the music identification app during the concert will be donated to the Robin Hood Foundation Relief Fund. Shazam users can also use the app to donate directly to the charity during the broadcast. FACEBOOK TWITTER EMAIL ME


text:
To stop spammers: After registering for the forum you need to contact me (giving your username) before being approved. You can find my contact info here. http://www.thebayougardener.com
The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you.
Please login below or register an account with The Bayou Gardener.
Forgot your password?


text:
Happy 95th, Alex
Want to wish a special Happy Birthday today to Alex Pitko, 95 years young.
OK, OK, who is Alex Pitko? He was an outfielder who played for the Phillies in 1938.
OK, OK, what is special about being 95? First of all, a number that high has to be special. Secondly, he is now the second-oldest living Phillie, trailing first baseman Art Mahan who turned 96 back in June. Well, Alex is actually tied with Stan Benjamin for the second oldest. Among all major leaguers, he's in the top 10 as far as age.
Pitko, born across the Delaware River in Burlington, NJ, now resides in Mesa, AZ.
His career with the Phillies was brief, .326 in 7 games (19 AB) as a right fielder. Next year (1939) was his last in the majors, four games with the Washington Senators (.125).
Pitko originally signed with the Philadelphia A's in 1936. "Went to spring training with the A's in Williamsport (PA) and was assigned to Portsmouth (OH)," said Pikto, whose memory is as sharp as a tack. "Only trouble, the roster was filled and I was left behind when the team went on the road. I thought the heck with this so I went back home to New Jersey.
"Played semi-pro ball for the Florence (NJ) Pipe Foundry. After a game there in 1937, a Phillies scout named Patsy O'Rourke, signed me. I reported to Centreville (MD) in the old Eastern Shore League." Pitko was selected to the league's All-Star team after hitting .328 in 92 games. He led the league with 103 runs scored and 20 homers.
The following spring, the Phillies sent him to Montgomery, AL, and brought him to the majors for the final month of the 1938 season. He made his debut on September 11, replacing Hall of Famer Chuck Klein in right field during an 11-2 rout over the Boston Braves, the first game of a Sunday doubleheader.
"Although brief, I really enjoyed playing with Klein, Pinky Whitney, the third baseman, and Hugh Mulcahy, a pitcher," Pitko said. The following spring the Phillies assigned him to Pensacola (FL). "Same story. Roster was full and I hardly played during two-three weeks and they finally let me go."
Back to Burlington and more semi pro ball. The Washington Senators approached him and after saying no twice, he finally signed a minor league contract with them. His American League career included four games with the Senators in 1939.
Pitko enlisted in the Army in 1941 and spent six years in uniform. While in the military in Kansas, he met his wife, Anita, a secretary to the commanding officer of the base.
Once his military career was behind him, he moved to Kansas and took over a print shop. Anita wound up with a doctor's degree in business and was a professor at Emporia (KS) State College.
When retirement rolled around in 1983, they settled in Mesa. He and Anita have been married 66 years, have two sons, three grandchildren and six great grandchildren. The oldest son, Michael, spent a couple of years in the Los Angeles Dodgers system as a pitcher.
His hobbies are golf and dancing. "Play golf once a week, but only nine holes. A group of us play and then eat afterward. We have fun. Anita and I still enjoy dancing. We've slowed up a bit, everybody passes us now."
His birthday will be spent in Mesa. "We and two other couples celebrate each other's birthdays by going out to dinner. I still drive, you know." Cards and phone calls will come from his family that are scattered around the country.
One final note: as indicated, his major league debut came on 9/11/38, the day I was born. Sorry, Alex, but I don't remember you. "I certainly understand," he chuckled.
Oldest Living Phillies
96 1B Art Mahan (1940 with Phillies)
95 OF Stan Benjamin (1939-42)
OF Alex Pitko (1938)
94 RHP Nick Strincevich (1948)
93 RHP Freddie Schmidt (1947)
OF Danny Litwhiler (1940-43)
Phillies Insider is on twitter as barons63
1 Comment
My mom's b-day was 9/11 too…that will be hard to forget then! Hope Mr. Pitko has a great b-day! 95 years…wow. :O)


text:
Understanding Wine Labels
Every bottle of wine must have a label, and that label must provide certain information about the wine. Some of the information on a wine label is required by the country where the wine is made. Other items of information are required by the country where the wine is sold. When the requirements are different in the two places, life can get very, very complicated for label writers!
The forward and backward of wine labels
Many wine bottles have two labels. The front label names the wine and grabs your eye as you walk down the aisle, and the back label gives you a little more information, ranging from reallyhelpful suggestions like "this wine tastes delicious with food" to oh-so-useful data such as "this wine has a total acidity of 6.02 and a pH of 3.34."
The U.S. requires certain information to appear on the front label of all wine bottles — basic stuff, such as the alcohol content, the type of wine (usually red table wine or white table wine), and the country of origin — but they don't define front label. So sometimes producers put all that information on the smaller of two labels and call that one the front label. Then the producers place another larger, colorful, dramatically eye-catching label — with little more than the name of the wine on it — on the back of the bottle. Guess which way the back label ends up facing when the bottle is placed on the shelf?
The mandatory sentence
The federal government mandates that certain items of information appear on labels of wines sold in the U.S. (see Figure 1). Such items are generally referred to as the mandatory. These include
- A brand name
- Indication of class or type (table wine, dessert wine, or sparkling wine)
- The percentage of alcohol by volume (unless it is implicit in the class; for example, the statement "table wine" implies an alcohol content of less than 14 percent)
- Name and address of the bottler
- Net contents (expressed in milliliters; the standard wine bottle is 750 ml, which is 25.6 ounces)
- The phrase Contains Sulfites (with very, very few exceptions)
- The government warning
Label definitions
Here's some other terms you may find on the label of your favorite bottle of wine.
- Vintage year: The year in which the grapes for a particular wine were harvested.
- Reserve: Indicates that a wine has received extra aging at the winery before release.
- Estate-bottled: States that the company the bottled the wine also grew the grapes.


text:
The fuller coverage, high neckline, and built-in shelf bra keep everything in place even as you jump, flip, bend or invert. The crop top design balances out the bottom half keeping you cool as you bring in the heat.
Med-High Impact
Nylon and spandex composite
Cool to the touch
Moisture wicking (dries quickly)
Anti-microbial (odor control)
Back charm
Built-in shelf bra
High neckline
Racerback cut
Removable padding
Customized padding design for a flattering bust line and added support: define, rather than just confine
Use the chart below to select a fit based on the bra size you currently wear. Intersect the under bust measurement (top) with your cup size (left) to find your fit.
A diagonally divided box indicates an in-between size. For example, if you are a 32D, we would recommend choosing both a S and a M to try on and decide which size is more suitable for you.
Bodies come in all beautiful shapes and sizes, and our above sizing chart is for reference only. Please select a fit that you're most comfortable with or email firstname.lastname@example.com with questions.
Flat rate shipping USD$20
Free shipping worldwide on orders over USD$100
For more details, please visit here or email firstname.lastname@example.com questions.
All our fabrics are treated with moisture management (quick dry), breathable, and odor restistant (anti-microbial) technology
We love bright colors and we're constantly inspiring ways to bring you the biggest, boldest colors out there. Before any of our products hit the market, we always perform a series of tests on the fabric to ensure that the colors won't run or fade with washes. We recommend washing your bright colors alone in cold water before wearing to remove any excess dye that can occur as part of the dyeing process and to follow our care tags for instructions on how to love your activewear.
When washing your activewear, any clothing detergent is fine, however please do not use fabric softener as it damages the color and stretching of the fabric as well as the quick dry technology used to draw sweat away from the skin. Do not dry in direct sunlight as it will affect the color saturation of the activewear. It is not necessary to remove the padding, however it is recommended to wash and dry padding separately for a more thorough clean.
For any questions, feel free to email us at firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
Watch These Dogs Running Away From Cats — Daily Distraction
The eternal war between felines and canines continues.
The eternal war between felines and canines continues.
Airports may be a frequent source of massive frustration—just ask anyone who had to travel cross-country this past week—but sometimes they provide us with moments that just melt your heart.
Realistically speaking, turkeys don't stand a chance this Thanksgiving. But that hasn't stopped these fowl-tempered (sorry) beasts from fighting back against their would-be devourers, us humans.
As our stomachs prepare for Thursday's massive caloric intake, let's take a look at how a few of our animal pals do it.
Just in case you need another warning: deep-frying turkeys can be dangerous. And here's proof.
Baby animals and baby bottles—that pretty much sums it up.
The edge of the bed just kinda sneaks up on you sometimes, doesn't it?
It's getting colder and colder out there, which means more ice to slip around on and play on and, inevitably, fall on.
It's harder to successfully karate-chop something than the movies make it look.
As if kids don't already have enough trouble staying on their feet.
Yesterday we took a look at pop superstars taking tumbles during live performances. Today, the tumbles come with a twang.
PopCrush found 10 videos of big-time pop stars who took unfortunate spills onstage while performing. We thought we'd package them together for you in a sort-of lowlight reel.


text:
No. 100,157
1. Kansas appellate courts may exercise jurisdiction only under the circumstances allowed by statute. As a result, appellate courts do not have discretionary power to entertain appeals from all trial court orders.
2. Time limits prescribed by statute are jurisdictional and cannot be waived or forfeited.
3. Because a 30-day period for filing an appeal is statutory, it is a jurisdictional requirement that must be met.
4. A trial court lacks authority to extend the 10-day period for filing a posttrial motion under K.S.A. 60-259(f).
5. A motion filed late under K.S.A. 60-259(f) does not toll the 30-day period in which to file a notice of appeal from the entry of the judgment.
6. Because the 30-day period for filing a notice of appeal was jurisdictional, the unique circumstances doctrine could not be applied to extend the appeal period for a party which erroneously believed that a trial court's unauthorized extension of the 10-day period for filing a posttrial motion under K.S.A. 60-259(f) had the effect of tolling the appeal period while the posttrial motion was judicially determined.
Appeal from Sedgwick District Court; JOHN J. KISNER, JR., judge. Opinion filed April 3, 2009. Affirmed in part and dismissed in part.
Timothy J. Finnerty and Ryan D. Weltz, of Wallace, Saunders, Austin, Brown & Enochs, Chartered, of Wichita, for appellant.
Robert W. Parnacott, assistant county counselor, for appellee.
Before BUSER, P.J., ELLIOTT and GREEN, JJ.
GREEN, J.: After summary judgment was granted in favor of the Board of County Commissioners of Sedgwick County (Board), Park City received an extension to file a posttrial motion under K.S.A. 60-259(f). In addition, Park City moved for relief under K.S.A. 60-260(b), arguing that the trial court had improperly granted summary judgment in favor of the Board. The Board responded, arguing that the trial court had lacked the authority to extend the period to file the K.S.A. 60-259(f) motion. The trial court agreed and denied the motion. Moreover, the trial court denied the K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion. We dismiss in part for lack of appellate jurisdiction and affirm in part.
Greatly summarized, on December 21, 2006, the Board brought a lawsuit in Sedgwick County District Court challenging Park City's annexation of property. On June 8, 2007, the Board moved for summary judgment. The sole issue the Board raised in its motion was whether K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 12-520a(d)(6) and K.S.A. 12-530 required Park City to give notice to the Park City Planning Commission (PCPC) that Park City intended to annex the property. The fact that Park City failed to provide the PCPC notice was not in dispute. In its summary judgment motion, the Board argued that because Park City had failed to give notice to the PCPC, Park City's annexation of the property was invalid under K.S.A. 12-530(b) and K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 12-538.
Park City responded to the summary judgment motion, arguing that the only planning commission that was entitled to notice under the applicable statutes was the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission (MAPC). The trial court ruled from the bench that K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 12-520a(d)(6) and K.S.A. 12-530 required Park City to notify, not only the MAPC, but also the PCPC that it intended to annex the land. Therefore, the trial court ruled that the annexation was nullified.
After the hearing on the summary judgment motion, the City retained new counsel. Park City's new attorney entered his appearance on August 3, 2007.
On August 15, 2007, the trial court filed its journal entry granting the Board's motion for summary judgment. On August 20, 2007, Park City (with the Board's approval) made an oral motion to the trial court asking it to grant an extension of time to file a posttrial motion. The court granted the motion and extended the deadline to August 31, 2007. On August 30, 2007, Park City again (with the Board's approval) made an oral motion to the trial court asking for another extension. The court granted the motion and moved the deadline to September 4, 2007. Finally, on September 4, 2007, Park City (again with the Board's approval) made another oral motion for an extension. The trial court granted the motion and extended the deadline to September 5, 2007.
On September 5, 2007, Park City moved for relief under K.S.A. 60-259(f) and K.S.A. 60-260(b). In its motion, Park City argued that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the applicable statutes and, therefore, Park City was not required to give the PCPC notice that Park City intended to annex the property at issue. In regards to the 60-260(b) motion, Park City argued that the summary judgment order should be set aside because its previous counsel did not adequately oppose the summary judgment motion. Park City then submitted additional legal arguments and facts which it believed supported the conclusion that it was not required to give notice to the PCPC.
The Board responded on September 24, 2007, arguing that Park City's K.S.A. 60-259(f) motion was untimely filed because such a motion had to be filed within 10 days after the entry of judgment and K.S.A. 60-206(b) prohibited a trial court from extending this time period. In regards to Park City's motion being treated entirely like a K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion, the Board argued that Park City's previous attorney sufficiently argued against the summary judgment motion and that the additional facts Park City wished to now introduce had no relevance to the issue of whether the applicable statutes required Park City to notify the PCPC. Therefore, the Board argued that Park City did not make a showing of "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect" that would relieve it from the summary judgment order.
The trial court denied the motions from the bench. A journal entry memorializing the trial court's ruling was filed on February 1, 2008. In its journal entry, the trial court found that based on K.S.A. 60-206(b), Park City's 60-259(f) motion was filed out of time and, as a result, had to be denied. In regards to Park City's 60-260(b) motion, the trial court stated that none of the additional legal arguments or facts changed its conclusion that K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 12-520a(d)(6) and K.S.A. 12-530 required Park City to give notice to the PCPC. As a result, the trial court determined that Park City was not entitled to relief under K.S.A. 60-260(b).
On February 12, 2008, a hearing was conducted to determine whether the unique circumstances doctrine should be applied to allow Park City to file a late 60-259(f) motion. The trial court denied the motion from the bench.
Park City filed its notice of appeal on February 15, 2008.
I. Does this court have jurisdiction to review the trial court's order granting the Board's summary judgment motion?
A. Jurisdiction
Our Supreme Court in Flores Rentals v. Flores, 283 Kan. 476, 480-481, 153 P.3d 523 (2007), stated:
"Appellate jurisdiction is defined by statute; the right to appeal is neither a vested nor constitutional right. The only reference in the Kansas Constitution to appellate jurisdiction iterates this principle, stating the Kansas Supreme Court shall have 'such appellate jurisdiction as may be provided by law.' Kansas Constitution, Article 3, § 3. The Constitution is silent regarding the Court of Appeals, which is not a constitutional court but rather was statutorily created. In creating the Court of Appeals, the legislature limited its jurisdiction, defining the circumstances under which there is jurisdiction to hear an appeal. As a result, Kansas appellate courts may exercise jurisdiction only under circumstances allowed by statute; the appellate courts do not have discretionary power to entertain appeals from all district court orders. [Citations omitted.]"
Furthermore, the court stated in Bruch v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 282 Kan. 764, 773-74, 148 P.3d 538 (2006), that "[p]arties cannot confer subject matter jurisdiction by consent, waiver, or estoppel, nor can parties convey jurisdiction on a court by failing to object to its lack of jurisdiction. . . . Whether subject matter jurisdiction exists is a question of law over which [an appellate court's] scope of review is unlimited."
Because the right to appeal is entirely statutory, appeals must be taken in the manner prescribed by statute to invoke an appellate court's jurisdiction. Butler County R.W.D. No. 8 v. Yates, 275 Kan. 291, 299, 64 P.3d 357 (2003). A timely notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days from the "entry of the judgment." K.S.A. 60-2103(a). Nevertheless, this time period can be tolled by filing (among other motions) a timely motion to alter or amend the judgment under K.S.A. 60-259(f). K.S.A. 60-2103(a). In order to be considered timely, a 60-259(f) motion must be in writing and be served and filed not later than 10 days after the entry of judgment. K.S.A. 60-207(b); K.S.A. 60-259(f); see Thomas v. Davis-Moore Datsun, Inc., 11 Kan. App. 2d 622, 624, 731 P.2d 1283 (1987). K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 60-206(b) clearly states that a trial court cannot extend the 10-day time period for filing a 60-259(f) motion. Once the trial court enters its order ruling on a posttrial motion, the 30-day time period for filing a notice of appeal starts running again in its entirety. K.S.A. 60-2103(a).
The trial court in this case filed its journal entry granting summary judgment on August 15, 2007. Therefore, Park City had until August 29, 2007, to serve and file a written 60-259(f) motion that would toll the 30-day time period for filing a notice of appeal. See K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 60-206(a); K.S.A. 60-207(b); K.S.A. 60-259(f); K.S.A. 60-2103(a). If Park City chose not to file a timely 60-259(f) motion, then it had until September 14, 2007, to file its notice of appeal. K.S.A. 60-2103(a). Neither of those things happened in this case.
As mentioned earlier, Park City asked (with the Board's approval) for three extensions to file a 60-259(f) motion. The trial court, initially unaware that K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 60-206(b) prohibited extending the time period for filing a 60-259(f) motion, granted Park City's request. Park City finally filed its 60-259(f) motion on September 5, 2007, 5 days after the deadline for filing such a motion had passed. Based on statutory rules mentioned earlier, the time period for filing a notice of appeal was never tolled; September 14, 2007, remained the deadline for filing a timely notice of appeal. As a result, we lack jurisdiction over Park City's appeal of the underlying case because it was filed more than 30 days after the trial court's entry of judgment, which is a jurisdictional requirement that cannot be waived or forfeited.
B. Unique Circumstances
Despite this conclusion, Park City argues in its brief that this court should apply the "unique circumstances doctrine" and find that it does have jurisdiction to determine the merits of the summary judgment order. Simply stated, this doctrine, which the United States Supreme Court recently disapproved in Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 168 L. Ed. 2d 96, 127 S. Ct. 2360 (2007), allows an appellate court to exercise jurisdiction over a late appeal if the appellant can show that he or she reasonably relied on some judicial action–taking place before the deadline for filing a notice of appeal–which purportedly extended the time period for bringing an appeal. See Schroeder v. Urban, 242 Kan. 710, 712-14, 750 P.2d 405 (1988); Underhill v. Thompson, 37 Kan. App. 2d 870, 880-81, 158 P.3d 987, rev. denied 285 Kan. 1177 (2007).
The doctrine was first developed in Harris Truck Lines, Inc. v. Cherry Meat Packers, Inc., 371 U.S. 215, 217, 9 L. Ed. 2d 261, 83 S. Ct. 283 (1962). In that case, after the trial court dismissed the petitioner's complaint and entered judgment for the respondent on its counterclaim, petitioner asked for and received an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. Rule 73(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allowed a trial court to extend the time period for filing a notice of appeal an additional 30 days only if the movant could show excusable neglect based on his or her failure to learn of the entry of the judgment. In Harris, the petitioner clearly knew about the entry of judgment but asked for the extension based on other reasons. The trial court, believing it had the authority to grant the petitioner an extension under Rule 73(a), did so, and the petitioner filed its notice appeal within the extended time period.
On appeal, a panel of the Seventh Circuit dismissed the case due to a lack of jurisdiction, stating that the petitioner did not make a showing of excusable neglect based on its failure to learn of the entry of judgment. Therefore, according to the panel, the trial court did not have the authority to grant the extension of time under Rule 73(a). The Supreme Court reversed this holding, ignoring Rule 73(a)'s explicit language and stating:
"In view of the obvious great hardship to a party who relies upon the trial judge's finding of 'excusable neglect' prior to the expiration of the 30-day period and then suffers reversal of the finding, it should be given great deference by the reviewing court. Whatever the proper result as an initial matter on the facts here, the record contains a showing of unique circumstances sufficient that the Court of Appeals ought not to have disturbed the motion judge's ruling." (Emphasis added.) 371 U.S. at 217.
The Supreme Court concluded that because the petitioner relied on the trial court's erroneous finding that Rule 73(a) allowed for the extension, the petitioner's appeal should not be dismissed. 371 U.S. at 217.
The unique circumstances doctrine was again applied by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. I.N.S., 375 U.S. 384, 11 L. Ed. 2d 404, 84 S. Ct. 397 (1964), a case with facts very similar to the ones here. In Thompson, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois entered a final order denying Thompson's petition for naturalization. The then applicable Rule 73(a) stated that Thompson had 60 days to file his notice of appeal and that the time period could be tolled by (among others) a timely motion under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 52(b) (amend or make additional findings of fact), Rule 59(b) (new trial), or Rule 59(e) (alter or amend judgment). In order for these motions to be considered timely, they had to be served within 10 days after the entry of judgment. Rule 6(b) specifically stated that a trial court could not extend the 10-day time period for filing motions under Rules 52(b), 59(b), and 59(e). See 375 U.S. at 387-89.
Twelve days after the entry of judgment (2 days late), Thompson served notice on the government that he would appear before the trial judge with posttrial motions under Rules 52(b), 59(b), and 59(e). The government made no objection concerning the motions' timeliness, and the trial court specifically declared that the motion for a new trial was made in ample time. A few days later, the trial court denied Thompson's posttrial motions. Within 60 days of the denial of the posttrial motions but not within 60 days of the original entry of judgment by the trial court, Thompson filed his notice of appeal.
On appeal to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the government moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the notice of appeal had not been filed within the 60-day period prescribed by Rule 73(a) because Thompson's posttrial motions were not timely and, therefore, did not toll the period for filing a notice of appeal. The Seventh Circuit granted the government's motion to dismiss.
The Supreme Court applied its holding in Harris and reversed the Seventh Circuit, writing:
"The instant cause fits squarely within the letter and spirit of Harris. Here, as there, petitioner did an act which, if properly done, postponed the deadline for the filing of his appeal. Here, as there, the District Court concluded that the act had been properly done. Here, as there, the petitioner relied on the statement of the District Court and filed the appeal within the assumedly new deadline but beyond the old deadline. And here, as there, the Court of Appeals concluded that the District Court had erred and dismissed the appeal. Accordingly, in view of these 'unique circumstances,' [citation omitted], we grant the writ of certiorari, vacate the judgment, and remand the case to the Court of Appeals so that petitioner's appeal may be heard on the merits." 375 U.S. at 387.
In his dissent, Justice Clark noted that Rule 6(b) explicitly prevented the trial court from extending the time period for filing posttrial motions. 375 U.S. at 388. Therefore, regardless of the actions taken by the trial court and the government, Thompson's late posttrial motions simply did not toll the 60-day time period for filing a notice of appeal. Justice Clark wrote:
"We have said that untimely motions to amend the findings and for new trial are of no legal significance whatsoever because the limiting language of Rule 6(b) is 'mandatory and jurisdictional and [can] not be extended regardless of excuse.' [Citation omitted.] In my view we should abide by [the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] or amend them, rather than emasculate them.
"Rules of procedure are a necessary part of an orderly system of justice. Their efficacy, however, depends upon the willingness of the courts to enforce them according to their terms. Changes in rules whose inflexibility has turned out to work hardship should be effected by the process of amendment, not by ad hoc relaxations by this Court in particular cases. Such dispensations in the long run actually produce mischievous results, undermining the certainty of the rules and causing confusion among the lower courts and the bar. [Citation omitted.]" 375 U.S. at 389-90. (Clark, J., dissenting.)
Accordingly, the dissent would have found that Thompson's appeal was out-of-time, thus affirming the Seventh Circuit's conclusion that it did not have jurisdiction over his appeal.
In finding that the Seventh Circuit erred in concluding that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeals, the Harris and Thompson Courts clearly focused on the predicament appellants found themselves in when they relied on a district court's action which purportedly tolled or extended the time period for filing a notice of appeal and, then, based on this reliance, the appellants refrained from filing a notice of appeal until the correct deadline had passed. Nevertheless, as Justice Clark alluded to in his dissent in Thompson, if the rules of civil and appellate procedure explicitly forbid a trial court from granting an extension of time, how can that extension have any sort of legal significance–such as, toll the time period for filing a notice of appeal? See 375 U.S. at 389-390 (Clark, J., dissenting.). Cf. Waterview Resolution Corp. v. Allen, 274 Kan. 1016, 1024, 58 P.3d 1284 (2002) ("A judgment is void if the court that rendered it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process."). Furthermore, if the rules of civil and appellate procedure explicitly forbid the extension of time that the appellant requested from the trial court, how can the appellant reasonably rely on that extension if it is granted? Cf. State ex rel. Murray v. Palmgren, 231 Kan. 524, 536, 646 P.2d 1091 (1982) ("'Ignorance of the law is no excuse.'"); Flott v. Wenger Mixer Manufacturing Co., 189 Kan. 80, 88, 367 P.2d 44 (1961) (Parties in litigation are presumed to know the law.); Knight v. Myers, 12 Kan. App. 2d 469, 475, 748 P.2d 896 (1988) ("Everyone is presumed to know the law . . . including relevant statutes of limitation."); see also Miller v. Murdock, 788 P.2d 614, 616 n.2 (Wyo. 1990) ("It is difficult to understand how a party may reasonably rely on a court's error in applying rules [of civil procedure] counsel is charged with knowing. . . . [I]gnorance of the rules is neither reasonable nor excusable.").
Our Supreme Court adopted the unique circumstances doctrine in Schroeder, 242 Kan. 710, a case substantially similar to Harris. In Schroeder, the trial court, before the deadline for filing a notice of appeal, granted the appellants a 30-day extension to file their notice. Because the appellants knew of the entry of judgment, the trial court did not have the authority under K.S.A. 60-2103(a) to grant the extension. The appellants, relying on validity of the extension, refrained from filing their notice of appeal until after the original deadline had passed. On appeal, this court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. Our Supreme Court, however, held that the reasoning found in Harris and in Stauber v. Kieser, 810 F.2d 1 (10th Cir. 1982) (applying the unique circumstances doctrine to save an appeal where the trial court improperly granted an extension of time to file a posttrial motion), should be applied to save the appellants' appeal and, therefore, remanded the case to this court for a determination on the merits. 242 Kan. at 712-14.
During the same term that Schroeder was decided, our Supreme Court applied the unique circumstances doctrine to Johnson v. American Cyanamid Co., 243 Kan. 291, 758 P.2d 206 (1988), a case factually similar to Thompson, Stauber, and the present case. The trial court in Johnson granted Cyanamid a 10-day extension to file their posttrial motions which, like now, was not allowed under then applicable K.S.A. 60-206(b) (Ensley 1983). As a result, when Cyanamid filed its late posttrial motions, the 30-day time period under K.S.A. 60-2103(a) (Ensley 1983) was not tolled, making Cyanamid's notice of appeal out-of-time. After quoting extensively from Schroeder (which included the citation to and quote from Stauber), our Supreme Court again found that the unique circumstances doctrine was applicable to save Cyanamid's appeal. Our Supreme Court stated:
"In the case before us, the extension did not come into being to extend, directly, the time for filing an appeal, but rather the ten-day period for filing post-trial motions. Had the court denied the motion, Cyanamid would still have had several days to appeal from the judgment by anyone's calculation of precisely when the 30-day period commenced to run. Counsel for plaintiff not only did not object to the extension, he approved of it. The district court was presented with an order extending the time which was approved by the plaintiff, who now argues it was an invalid order of no force and effect. Yet, clearly, Cyanamid reasonably and in good faith relied upon the order extending the time for the filing of the post-trial motions. Within the time frame of the extension, Cyanamid filed its post-trial motions (June 21, 1984). The original 30-day appeal time from the entry of judgment had not yet expired when these motions were filed, but Cyanamid, in reliance on the extension, did not appeal until after its post-trial motions had been denied. The unique circumstances doctrine is particularly applicable to the facts herein." Johnson, 243 Kan. at 301.
Over time, the legal foundation upon which Schroeder and Johnson was built has slowly eroded away, making the precedential value of those two cases questionable at best. First, Stauber, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals case that both the Schroeder and the Johnson courts had cited as support for applying the unique circumstances doctrine, was explicitly overruled by Weitz v. Lovelace Health Systems, Inc., 214 F.3d 1175, 1179-80 (10th Cir. 2000). Like the question presented here, the Weitz court had to determine whether the unique circumstances doctrine could be applied when the appellant asked for and received an extension to file a late Rule 59(e) motion (an extension which was and still is prohibited under Rule 6[b]), which had the effect of making his notice of appeal also late. Though the Weitz court did not question the validity of the unique circumstances doctrine, the court did drastically limit its future applicability by stating that the doctrine would apply only if it was reasonable for the appellant to rely on the action taken by the trial court. 214 F.3d at 1178-80. The court then went on to hold that it was never reasonable for a party to rely on an act which is explicitly forbidden by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 214 F.3d at 1180 ("In the present case, the rules expressly forbid any extensions for Rule 59[e] motions, and even a passing reference to the rules will reveal this fact. Consequently, the mere fact that a court has granted such an extension does not justify reliance that is clearly at odds with the text of the rules."). As a result, the court found that the unique circumstances doctrine would not be applied to Weitz' appeal. 214 F.3d at 1181.
Harris, the other case that the Schroeder and Johnson courts cited as support for applying the unique circumstances doctrine, was (along with Thompson) overruled recently by the United States Supreme Court in Bowles, 551 U.S. at ___ (127 S. Ct. at 2366). In Bowles, a trial court judge incorrectly told Bowles that he had 17 days to file his notice appeal when, in reality, the applicable statute only allowed for 14 days. On the 16th day, Bowles filed his notice of appeal. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Bowles' appeal, and the Supreme Court affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court reasoned that because the legislature, within constitutional bounds, limited the jurisdiction of appellate courts to hear only cases brought within the prescribed statutory period, appellate courts were not free "to create equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements" in order to exercise jurisdiction over untimely appeals. 551 U.S. at ___ (127 S. Ct. at 2365-66). As a result, the Court concluded that the unique circumstances doctrine was no longer valid. 551 U.S. at ___ (127 S. Ct. at 2366).
Numerous pronouncements from our Supreme Court concerning jurisdiction are consistent with the view taken by the Bowles Court. See, e.g., Flores, 283 Kan. at 480-81 ("Kansas appellate courts may exercise jurisdiction only under circumstances allowed by statute; the appellate courts do not have discretionary power to entertain appeals from all district court orders."); Bruch, 282 Kan. at 764 ("Parties cannot confer subject matter jurisdiction by consent, waiver, or estoppel, nor can parties convey jurisdiction on a court by failing to object to its lack of jurisdiction."); State v. McCoin, 278 Kan. 465, 468, 101 P.3d 1204 (2004) (If the trial court lacks jurisdiction to enter an order, an appellate court does not acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter on appeal.); Labette Community College v. Board of Crawford County Comm'rs, 258 Kan. 622, 626, 907 P.2d 127 (1995) (An agreement between the parties that the right to appeal is not waived cannot invest an appellate court with jurisdiction when it is otherwise lacking.).
Recently, our Supreme Court had a chance to consider Bowles and the effect it had on the continued viability of the unique circumstances doctrine in Kansas. See Finley v. Estate of DeGrazio, 285 Kan. 202, 170 P.3d 407 (2007). In Finley, the trial court initially granted the plaintiff's motion for an extension of time under K.S.A. 60-203(a)(1), which gives the trial court authority to extend the time to perfect service of process for an additional 30 days "upon showing of good cause." Nevertheless, upon reconsideration, the trial court found that the plaintiff had failed to establish good cause, found the unique circumstance doctrine inapplicable, and dismissed the petition as time barred under the statute of limitations in K.S.A. 60-513(a)(7). This court reversed, applying the unique circumstances doctrine in Finley v. Estate of DeGrazio, 36 Kan. App. 2d 844, 148 P.3d 1284 (2006).
In reversing this court's decision, our Supreme Court specifically recognized Bowles' conclusion that an appellate court lacks authority to create equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements and, therefore, the "'use of the unique circumstances doctrine is illegitimate.'" 285 Kan. at 210 (citing Bowles, 551 U.S. at ___ [127 S. Ct. at 2366]). Despite its explicit recognition of Bowles' holding, the Finley court, surprisingly, proceeded to consider the application of the unique circumstances doctrine, ultimately concluding that the doctrine did not apply because it "depends upon such concepts as equity, the interest of justice, good faith, estoppel, or nonparty error"–concepts the court concluded could not be applied to the facts before it. (Emphasis added.) 285 Kan. at 209, 213.
As noted by this court in Rowland v. Barb, 40 Kan. App. 2d 493, 501, 193 P.3d 499 (2008):
"It appears the Finley court interpreted Bowles to permit application of the unique circumstances doctrine only if equitable exceptions justify its application–when in fact, Bowles ruled that courts have no authority to apply the doctrine 'to create equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements.' [Citation omitted.] Further, while our Supreme Court recognized that the unique circumstances doctrine had its roots in Harris Truck Lines, Inc., it failed to recognize that the United States Supreme Court explicitly overruled Harris Truck Lines to the extent it authorized an exception to a jurisdictional rule. [Citation omitted.] This overruling is significant in that, as discussed, our Supreme Court relied upon Harris Truck Lines in adopting the unique circumstances doctrine in Schroeder, 242 Kan. at 712-13."
Even if the Finley decision can be interpreted to preserve the viability of the unique circumstances doctrine in Kansas, the case arguably narrowed the scope of the doctrine, making it inapplicable to this case. Our Supreme Court noted that the doctrine had only been applied in Kansas to cases involving "nonparty error," citing, among other cases as support, Nguyen v. IBP, Inc., 266 Kan. 580, 587, 972 P.2d 747 (1999), and Slayden v. Sixta, 250 Kan. 23, 30, 825 P.2d 119 (1992). Finley, 285 Kan. at 210-11. Nguyen was a workers compensation case where the administrative law judge mailed the notice of award to the wrong address, thereby causing Nguyen to receive the award after the deadline for filing an application for review had passed. Our Supreme Court, believing Nguyen should not be punished for a mistake that the ALJ had solely made, applied the unique circumstances doctrine and held that the time period for filing the application for review was tolled. As a result, Nguyen's appeal was remanded to the Workers Compensation Board for a decision on the merits. 266 Kan. at 587, 590. In Slayden, our Supreme Court applied the unique circumstances doctrine in order to save a case from being barred by the statute of limitations because a clerk of the trial court issued a summons to the wrong address, contributing to the defendant being served out of time. 250 Kan. at 27-31.
Our Supreme Court's statement in Finley, that the unique circumstances doctrine has been applied to situations involving only nonparty error (as depicted in Nguyen and Slayden), is not entirely correct. As pointed out earlier, our Supreme Court applied the doctrine in Schroeder and Johnson, cases clearly involving party error. Schroeder, 242 Kan. at 712-14 (appellants moved for an extension to file a notice of appeal which, based on a simple reading of K.S.A. 60-2103[a], was not allowed); Johnson, 243 Kan. at 293-94, 301 (appellants moved for an extension to file posttrial motions which, based on a simple reading of then applicable K.S.A. 60-206[b], was not allowed). Nevertheless, regardless of the previous statement's accuracy in Finley, the Finley court obviously intended for the unique circumstances doctrine (assuming the doctrine would still be viable) to be applied in future situations involving only nonparty error (i.e., situations where the trial court is not lulled into erring by a party). Hence, we doubt whether Schroeder and Johnson are still good law.
Although this may seem a harsh result for Park City, because it relied on the extensions consented to by the Board and granted by the trial court, Park City is not without blame in this situation. For example, a careful reading of K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 60-206(b) would have given Park City notice that the trial court lacked authority to grant an extension of time to file a K.S.A. 60-259(f) motion. See Panhorst v. United States, 241 F.3d 367, 373 (4th Cir. 2001) ("Because a litigant 'has a duty to familiarize himself with the [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure]', which clearly prohibit an extension of time in which to file a Rule 59 motion, we cannot say that appellants' reliance on the trial court's acceptance of the submitted order was reasonable."); Pinion v. Dow Chemical, U.S.A., 928 F.2d 1522, 1534 (11th Cir. 1991) (holding that an appellant's reliance upon the trial court's unauthorized extension of time to file a posttrial motion was not reasonable because "[s]imply scanning [Rule 6(b)] would have provided notice that there was an inconsistency between the Rule's text and the court's [extension] order"). For the reasons discussed earlier, we lack authority to invoke jurisdiction over this appeal under the unique circumstances doctrine. As a result, Park City's argument fails.
II. Did the trial court err when it denied Park City's K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion?
Turning our attention to the next issue, we must consider if we have jurisdiction to address whether the trial court erred in denying Park City's K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion. Park City filed a notice of appeal on February 15, 2008, from the trial court's judgment denying its K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion. The notice of appeal concerning that issue was timely filed. See K.S.A. 60-260(b) (allowing a party to file a 60-260[b] motion within "a reasonable time," or within 1 year, depending on the grounds for relief alleged). Because the notice of appeal on the 60-260(b) motion was filed within 30 days of the trial court's entry of judgment (February 1, 2008) on the motion, we have jurisdiction to consider this issue.
As mentioned earlier, the Board's motion for summary judgment centered on one issue: Does K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 12-520a(d)(6) and K.S.A. 12-530 require Park City to give notice to the PCPC that Park City intended to annex the property? The Board argued that the statutes required that, along with the MAPC, the PCPC be notified; Park City argued that the only planning commission that was entitled to receive notice was the MAPC.
Ultimately, the trial court agreed with the Board's argument and concluded that the statutes required Park City to also provide notice to the PCPC. As a result, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the Board, invalidating Park City's annexation of the property.
Apparently, Park City was not aware of the summary judgment motion until after the July 12 hearing. At that point, the attorney representing Park City in the case informed Park City that the trial court had granted summary judgment in favor of the Board. After retaining new counsel, Park City filed (along with its untimely 60-259[f] motion) a K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion. In the 60-260(b) motion, Park City argued that its previous attorney had failed to adequately raise legal and factual arguments in opposing the Board's summary judgment motion. Though Park City did not come right out and say it, Park City implied in its motion that previous counsel's performance (in his written response and oral argument against the motion for summary judgment) caused the trial court to grant the Board's summary judgment motion. The trial court rejected Park City's argument, stating that Park City's previous attorney did an adequate job in opposing the summary judgment motion. Furthermore, the trial court considered the legal and factual arguments that Park City believed its previous attorney should have included in his response and concluded that the new arguments did not change its opinion that K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 12-520a(d)(6) and K.S.A. 12-530 required Park City to give notice to the PCPC before annexing the property at issue.
In its brief, Park City repeats the same arguments it made before the trial court, arguing that its previous counsel's performance in opposing the summary judgment was lacking; therefore, it was entitled to be relieved of the summary judgment order under K.S.A. 60-260(b)(1) based on excusable neglect. Again, Park City does not explicitly state that its previous counsel's performance actually caused the trial court to enter summary judgment against it. Park City merely complains that previous counsel should have performed better.
This court reviews a trial court's decision on a K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion for abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Laine, 34 Kan. App. 2d 519, 522, 120 P.3d 802 (2005). Judicial discretion is abused when judicial action is arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable. If reasonable persons could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the district court, then it cannot be said that the district court abused its discretion. In re Marriage of Bradley, 282 Kan. 1, 7, 137 P.3d 1030 (2006).
K.S.A. 60-260(b)(1) states: "On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or said party's legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect."
As support for its argument that the trial court should have granted its 60-260(b) motion, Park City cites Montez v. Tonkawa Village Apartments, 215 Kan. 59, 523 P.2d 351 (1974). In Montez, the resident manager for the defendant apartment complex was served with summons and a copy of a personal injury petition. According to his affidavit in support of setting aside the default judgment against the complex, the manager placed the papers on his desk and neither he nor any one else ever saw them again; he simply forgot about them. He failed to tell the complex's owners of the suit, and default judgment was taken. Our Supreme Court set aside the default judgment, holding that this was simple neglect, not inexcusable neglect or "reckless indifference." 215 Kan. at 64-66.
This case is easily distinguishable from the facts in Montez. First, and most importantly, the facts here did not involve conduct that directly resulted in an adverse judgment. Park City's previous attorney responded to the Board's summary judgment motion, arguing why the statutes in question did not require Park City to give notice to the PCPC. Furthermore, the previous attorney made an appearance at the hearing on the summary judgment motion and presented arguments against the Board's motion. Despite the previous attorney's efforts, the trial court agreed with the Board's argument and granted its summary judgment motion.
In its 60-260(b) motion for relief, Park City presented the arguments it believed its previous attorney should have raised in opposing the summary judgment motion. The trial court considered these arguments but was not swayed in its belief that the statutes required notice be given to the PCPC. As a result, it cannot be said that Park City's previous attorney was directly responsible for the trial court granting summary judgment against Park City. Cf. Canaan v. Bartee, 272 Kan. 720, 723-26, 738-39, 35 P.3d 841 (2001) (setting aside a default judgment that was the direct result of actions taken by defense counsel). Park City is not entitled to relief based on the supposed deficiencies in its previous counsel's legal argument opposing the summary judgment motion.
If anything, Park City, by filing a K.S.A. 60-260(b) motion, wanted to relitigate the merits of the Board's summary judgment motion. Nevertheless, our Supreme Court stated in Vogeler v. Owen, 243 Kan. 682, 685, 763 P.2d 600 (1988):
"K.S.A. 60-260(b) was not intended as an alternative method of appellate review nor as a means of circumventing time limits on appeal, except where required by compelling considerations of justice. It does not provide a procedure to challenge a supposed legal error of the court, nor to obtain relief from errors which are readily correctable on appeal. [Citation omitted.]"
Based on our earlier discussion, it cannot be said that the trial court abused its discretion. In short, Park City failed to show that there was excusable neglect to warrant setting aside the summary judgment order. As a result, Park City's argument fails.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part.


text:
Yes! You can have a successful Salesforce.com implementation that leads to user adoption and buckets of benefits for your company. It takes a combination of leadership, planning, and communication.
I originally posted this preso a few years ago and just updated it. Have a look see and learn what you need to know before you begin.


text:
Facebook goes down across multiple countries
SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook suffered its longest and largest outage in years on Thursday, disconnecting millions of users around the globe.
Due to a technical failure, users were unable to access their accounts for about a half-hour starting at 4 a.m. ET.
Facebook says it restored service in less than 30 minutes, but not before triggering widespread panic among Facebook users.
Users attempting to log into Facebook in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, Israel and India received the following message: "Sorry, something went wrong. We're working on getting this fixed as soon as we can."
Problems were also reported across multiple nations in Asia and the Middle East. Shortly after the outage, #Facebookdown started trending all over the world on Twitter.
The outage — the longest since 2010 — affected the home page as well as mobile and Messenger services.
TOP 10: Twitter reactions to #facebookdown
"Late last night, we ran into an issue while updating the configuration of one of our software systems," Facebook spokesman Jay Nancarrow said. "Not long after we made the change, some people started to have trouble accessing Facebook. We quickly spotted and fixed the problem."
Facebook said it learned from the global outage.
"This doesn't happen often, but when it does we make sure we learn from the experience so we can make Facebook that much more reliable," the company spokesman said.
For Facebook to suffer such a widespread and lengthy outage was unusual. Facebook does not frequently experience outages, but it has had several over the last few years.
In 2010, the company took the unusual step of explaining an outage in a blog post from its engineering team. The blog post at the time attributed the cause to an "unfortunate handling of an error condition."
Scott Kessler, head of technology sector equity research at S&P Capital IQ, said the outpouring of frustration on Twitter and other social media speaks to Facebook's new status as a "critical social utility."
Individuals and businesses use the service throughout the day, and even a minor interruption brings shock and dismay, he said.
"This just reminds us how central and critical Facebook is now to many people's lives, not just on a day-to-day, basis but on an hour-to-hour basis," Kessler said.
Facebook said it understands how many people rely on the service being up and running.
"Nothing is more important to us than making sure Facebook is there when people need it, and we apologize to anyone who may have had trouble connecting last night," Nancarrow said.
Thursday's outage came as the world's most popular social network is trying to boost advertising revenue overseas.
Eighty percent of its nearly 1.3 billion users are outside North America. In April, Facebook reported that first-quarter revenue rose 72% to $2.5 billion.
Kessler said the outage may make a slight dent in advertising revenue and could even concern some marketers.
"It just reminds folks who are looking at Facebook as an outlet to deploy advertising that as much as this might be a 99.99% uptime kind of platform, it's perhaps appropriate at times to account for the possibility of down time," he said.
FACEBOOK'S SHERYL SANDBERG: Lack of diversity in firms 'pretty depressing'


text:
coremarketing necesitaba un nuevo diseño de papelería y lanzó un concurso de diseño en 99designs.
Un ganador ha sido elegido entre 72 diseños de 22 diseñadores freelance.
Gowerstone / The Gowerstone Group
Gowerstone works with small businesses to help them achieve their goals. We help people and companies explore extraordinary opportunities, manage and sustain growth, and maximize the bottom line. Small business owners look to us for honest, objective, thoughtful, and experienced advice when they find themselves under pressure to deliver results, in uncertain times, or when they need to make decisions that will have major consequences.
Small business owners in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada. Gowerstone is highly focused on the people aspect of this business and provides a personal level of customer service. While projecting a professional image, Gowerstone is not another corporate consulting firm. We don't want to appear too corporate, but rather friendly and approachable, while professional and capable.
The business card should reflect the above but remain understated and traditional. It should feel personal not corporate. The name "Gowerstone" was inspired by the part of Wales where there really is a "Gower Stone". Our logo reflects tradition, nature, approachability and dependability. We are open to colours that fit the logo, keeping in mind colours inspired by the Welsh countryside and us being "a rock of foundation" for small businesses to rely on.