text:
Ask Search Post
Motorcycles > USA > IL > Chicagoland > Vehicles
Searches Related to
Motorcycles for Sale in 60646Used Motorcycles on Oodle Used Motorcycles Used Road Bikes Used Sport Bikes Used Touring Motorcycles Used Dirt Bikes Used MX Bikes Used Supercross Bikes Used Scooters & Mopeds Motorcycle Trailers Classic Motorcycles Competition Motorcycles Custom Motorcycles Mini & Pocket Bikes
Motorcycles for Sale in 60646(1 - 15 of 4,869)
$4,300 2009 Harley-Davidson TouringHarley-Davidson · Chicago, IL2009 Harley Davidson Touring machine. All pieces were custom coated in matte black (engine cases, tranny covers, bars and hand controls) ...Richardson R. · 2 hours ago
$4,700 1986 Ducati SuperbikeDucati · Chicago, ILMileage:950.The Ducati 750cc Pantah based engine emerged in the 1980s to much acclaim regarding performance and modern design. As soon as...Ronny F. · 4 hours ago
$2,602 2010 Aprilia RSV4 RAREAprilia · Chicago, IL- DMP Racing Rear Sets..Please text (731) 325-7703 for more pics and info if interested.Herman R. · 3 days ago
$3,995 1975 Honda Cb 750Honda · Westchester, ILA beautiful original. fantastic paint and chrome . Runs like a new bike. Everything works.Marshall S. · 4 days ago
$3,014 2007 Custom Built Motorcycles Chopper Excellent BikeSps · Melrose Park, ILWEST COAST CHOPPER CFL..... WITH NO EXPENSE SPARED.... THE CFL FRAME, VILLIAN TANK, OIL BAG, BATTERY TRAY, HELL BENT PIPES ,AND REAR FEND...Michael C. · 14 hours ago
$2,502 2009 Harley-Davidson Touring RAREHarley-Davidson · Chicago, ILAlways garaged in climate controlled environment.Please text (573) 727-8873for more pics and info if interested.Helene T. · 3 days ago
$12,000 Suzuki Skoal Bandit GammaSuzuki · Franklin Park, IL1986 Suzuki Rick Lance RG500 Gamma Up for sale a 17 Digit VIN clear titled Rick Lance full performance built Skoal Bandit RG 500Bob R. · 23 hours ago
$3,001 Suzuki Hayabusa RARESuzuki · Chicago, ILFor more questions and answers sms at (260) 407-8637Marketplace User · 12 hours ago
$2,000 2002 Harley-Davidson FLSTF-Softail Fat Boy CruiserHarley-Davidson · Chicago, IL2002 Harley-Davidson FLSTF-Softail Fat Boy ,Hazel G. · 18 hours ago
$2,650 2008 Honda Vt750c2 Shadow Spirit 750Honda · Chicago, IL2008 HONDA VT750C2 SHADOW SPIRIT 750 A classic 45-degree V-twin liquid-cooled engine loaded with low-end and mid-range power makes the s...Adriano R. · 14 hours ago
$2,202 Suzuki GSX-R 750 RARESuzuki · Chicago, ILFOR A QUICK ANSWER TEXT ME AT:(414) 376-1630Marketplace User · 1 day ago
$5,700 2013 Harley-Davidson TouringHarley-Davidson · Chicago, ILTime to sell this one. I have added almost all the chrome I can. There is 5344 miles. Stage 1 tuner, Vance and Hines high output exhaust....Ronny R. · 1 day ago
$5,200 1965 Triumph T120 BonnevilleTriumph · Chicago, ILThis Triumph was built by a famous restorer and is maintained in pristine condition. The bike is ridden occasionally on weekends during n...Tressa Z. A. · 1 day ago
$5,040 1996 Honda Gold WingHonda · Chicago, ILZ Steer raked front end CB Radio Chrome valve covers Fog lights Highway pegs Tall windshield AM/FM Cassette Rear trunk spoiler Tr...Taylor A. · 1 day ago
$2,350 BUY 2001 Honda Gold WingHonda · Chicago, ILPINK and SWEETMarketplace Pro User .. ·2 listings · 1 day ago
Find Listings on Oodle Marketplace Baltimore Motorcycles | Cincinnati Motorcycles | Colorado Springs Motorcycles | Dallas Motorcycles | Denver Motorcycles | Detroit Motorcycles | Fort Myers Motorcycles | Fresno Motorcycles | Grand Rapids Motorcycles | Indianapolis Motorcycles | Orlando Motorcycles | Phoenix Motorcycles | Sarasota Motorcycles | Winter Haven Motorcycles | Woodbridge Motorcycles. Oodle Marketplace is a great place to find used cars, used motorcycles, used RVs, used boats, apartments for rent, homes for sale, job listings, and local businesses.
Safety Tips
Safety Tips
- Meet the seller and test drive before you buy.
- Be cautious of underpriced items.
- Don't wire money or take advance payments.
- Only pay for shipping if you know the seller.
To learn more, visit the Safety Center. Report suspicious listings by clicking on .


text:
Music Gear News
Gary Barlow gigs coming up
As well as singing lead on songs such as Greatest Day, A Million Love Songs and How Deep Is Your Love alongside his band, Take That, the songwriter has had solo hits such as Open Road and Forever Love.
More recently, he enjoyed a number one hit with Jubilee song Sing, alongside The Commonwealth Band and the Military Wives.
He is going to be performing at a long list of locations between November and January, including Sheffield, Manchester, Bournemouth and Liverpool, he has revealed.
Music instruments players will likely have seen Barlow on The X Factor recently, where he is a judge alongside the likes of Louis Walsh and Nicole Scherzinger.
Details of his tour, the first date of which is on November 13th in Bournemouth, can be found online.
Published by AW.Posted on 17 Oct 2012 10:24 to category : Band / Celebrity News
Related Music News
At the 29th Annual Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Induction Ceremony which took place at Brooklyn's Barclays Center last night, Joan Jett, Kim Gordon, St. Vincent and Lorde took turns fronting Nirvana.
Damon Albarn has spoken to NME about the future of Blur, dismissing rumours that they won't play together again.
Ableton have released a new short documentary exploring the production of Hendrik Weber, aka Pantha du Prince's collaborative album with The Bell Laboratory.
Dynamic electronic duo, Daft Punk and Grammy award winning sound engineer, Mick Guzauski, have disclosed the secrets of the unique sound of Daft Punk's latest album, Random Access Memories.
Marcus Mumford, lead singer in Mumford & Sons, has been hired as Associate Producer for the soundtrack to the new Coen Brothers movie, Inside Llewyn Davis.
The record for the longest drum session in a retail store was set in New York yesterday by musician and party-devotee Andrew W.K.
Recent Music News
The H9 Max may be the last stompbox you'll ever need.
Could Behringer be planning their first ever polyphonic synth?
Casio are offering £100 to spend across the Casio Online website when you purchase and register a Celviano AP-460 or Privia PX-860 digital piano.
Exclusive to Gear4music, the Limited Edition Marshall Custom Offset has arrived!
Audiofly 's range of in-ear monitors are designed for professional and personal use. Now available online at Gear4music.
Receive your free Dr Green Tune Up pedal when you purchase any Ashdown Access All Areas amplifier.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Already a Bloomberg.com user?
Sign in with the same account.
Don't have an account?
Sign up.
Help! I can't access my account.
Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) -- The relief effort underway in the Philippines is being hampered by severely damaged transport links. An estimated nine million people require assistance five days after Super Typhoon Haiyan hit the islands. The death toll is still unknown, but is expected to be in the thousands. Bloomberg's Paul Allen reports. (Source: Bloomberg)
On Air Now
Money Clip
Watch Now
Bloomberg West
©2014 Bloomberg L.P. All Rights Reserved. Made in NYC
Ad Choices


text:
- Home
- News
- Sports
- Classifieds
- Special Sections
- Shopper/Review
- Obituaries
MIDDLEBURY — Ike Kastner is back, and the Rockies are happy to have him.
The third-year senior signal caller returned from a three-game suspension Friday, and he ran Plymouth's offense like a player with something to prove, rattling off three rushing touchdowns and a two-point conversion en route to a game-high 220 rushing yards and guiding the Rockies to a 34-0 Northern Lakes Conference rout of the Raiders on the road at Northridge.
"It was great to have Ike back. What can you say about the kid?" said Plymouth football coach John Barron. "He has a command, he has a presence, and I think everybody else kind of felt that tonight.
"Tonight's just a culmination of a young man who has dealt with a lot of his own personal adversity, and I think he's handled it like a champion. Just to have him back and doing the things that he did tonight, I'm proud of him. I know the other coaches are, and I know his teammates are happy for him."
Kastner already owned 194 yards and a hat trick with three scores in the first half as the Rockies quickly put the outcome beyond doubt.
He went 64 yards in two consecutive carries on the Rockies' second possession of the game, and his first score of the night — a 30-yard ramble up the Northridge sideline — put Plymouth up 14-0 at the 7:37 mark of the first quarter with Jacob Frantz's second and final extra-point kick of the night.
A little over three minutes later, he struck again on another breakaway run, this time from 54 yards out to give the Rockies a 20-0 cushion with 4:02 still left to play in the first period.
A would-be 50-yard touchdown run by Kastner at the 9:03 mark of the second was called back for an illegal shift — the first of many at the game for Plymouth as the visitors' only trouble spot came in the form of 54 penalty yards — but he kept the drive alive with a 15-yard run on a fourth and 4 at the Northridge 47 and eventually punched it in from three yards out, giving Plymouth a 28-0 halftime advantage with a quarterback sneak for a two-point conversion with 4:23 remaining in the half.
Plymouth wasted little time jumping on the Raiders at the game — 13 seconds to be exact — as Justin Drudge returned the opening kickoff 89 yards for a touchdown at the 11:47 stop of the first quarter. From there it was all Rockies all the way.
"We have our starting offensive line on kickoff return. We put an emphasis on that, and to start the game with that kind of a burst, it just sparked us and set the tone," said Barron. "(Drudge) is a kid that's good in open space. He can make people miss, but we had some really nice blocks up front, and we had guys that were committed to one another."
About the only real suspense at the contest was whether or not Plymouth's defense would be able to pitch a shutout.
The Rockies held Northridge to 168 net offensive yards compared to 414 by the Plymouth offense and a 2-of-11 third down conversion rate. The Raiders finally mounted a credible threat on their final possession — with a little help from a passing interference penalty on a third-and-long at their own 37 — marching the ball 71 yards in 13 plays to the Plymouth 9, but the Rockies defense held, and Plymouth shut out Northridge for the first time in Barron's nine years at the helm of the program.
"It was important. It's something we've really tried to stress all season to play a complete game on both sides of the ball," said Barron. "We played with 11 guys on offense and 12 guys on defense; we played with a lot of guys tonight. I think our kids enjoyed our new look on defense. I think it lets some kids use their natural running ability. It gives some of our older guys like Keyser (McCrammer) the ability to get us in the right position."
While Drudge's kick-off return started the Rockies off on the right foot and Kastner's heroics were good for 220 yards and three scores, senior running back Sam Stevens continued to give his team steady production with 134 yards in 23 carries — including a 5-yard touchdown run with 6:21 on the game clock to bring the score to its final margin.
Northridge remains winless at 0-4 with an 0-2 NLC mark. Plymouth moves to an even 2-2 and 1-0 in the conference with its first Northern Lakes win.
The Rockies hope to keep the momentum rolling as they return home for another conference match-up with Elkhart Memorial next Friday.
"This is a really good win for us. These guys are good — I don't care what their record says," Barron said. "They're well-coached, the teams they had played were 7-2 combined. They honestly did worry us, and I was worried about us, to be honest with you. I didn't know how we were going to react to changing the defense and getting Ike back, but, boy, we just saw some really nice things out of a lot of kids."
• PLYMOUTH 34,
At Middlebury
Score by Quarters
Plymouth: 20 8 0 6 — 34
Northridge: 0 0 0 0 — 0
Scoring summary
First quarter
Justin Drudge 89-yd kickoff return (Jacob Frantz kick) 11:47
Ike Kastner 30-yd run (Frantz kick) 7:37
Kastner 54-yd run (kick fail) 4:02
Second quarter
Kastner 3-yd run (Kastner rush) 4:23
Fourth quarter
Sam Stevens 5-yd run (kick fail) 6:21
Plymouth Northridge
First downs: 20 12
Rushing (att-yars): 49-405 36-75
Passing: 5-2-0 16-8-1
Passing yardage: 9 93
Fumbles-lost: 1-1 3-0
Penalties-yds lost: 8-54 0-0
Plymouth leaders
Rushing: Kastner 15-220, Stevens 23-134
Passing: Kastner 5-2-0 for 9
Receiving: Drudge 2-9
Records: Plymouth 2-2 (1-1 NLC), Northridge 0-4 (0-2 NLC)


text:
The official mythology is that between 1945 (or 1946) and 1989 (or 1991), the United States and the Soviet Union (USSR) confronted each other continuously – politically, militarily, and above all ideologically. This was called the "cold war." If it was a war, the word to underline is "cold" since the two powers never engaged in any direct military action against each other throughout the entire period.
There were however several institutional reflections of this cold war, in each of which it was the United States, and not the USSR, that took the first step. In 1949, the three western countries occupying Germany combined their zones to create the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) as a state. The Soviet Union responded by restyling its zone as the German Democratic Republic (GDR).
In 1949, NATO was established by twelve nations. On May 5, 1955, the three western powers officially ended their occupation of the FRG, recognizing it as an independent state. Four days later, the FRG was admitted to membership in NATO. In response to this, the USSR established the Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO) and included the GDR as one of its members.
The treaty establishing NATO was supposed to apply only within Europe. One reason was that the western European countries still had colonies outside of Europe and did not wish to allow any agency to have the authority to interfere directly in their political decisions concerning these colonies. The moments of seemingly tense confrontation between the two sides – the Berlin blockade, the Cuban missile crisis – all ended with a status quo ante outcome. The most important invocation of the treaties to engage in military action was that of the USSR to act within its own zone against developments they deemed dangerous to the USSR – Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, Poland in 1981. The United States intervened politically under similar circumstances, such as the potential entry of the Italian Communist Party into the Italian government.
This brief account points to the real objective of the cold war. The cold war was not meant to transform the political realities of the other side (except in some moment very far into the future). The cold war was a mechanism for each side to keep its satellites under control, while maintaining the de facto agreement of the two powers for their long-term partition of the globe into two spheres, one-third to the USSR and two-thirds to the United States. Priority was given by each side to the guarantee on the non-utilization of military force (especially nuclear weapons) against each other. This came to be known as the guarantee against "mutually assured destruction."
The collapse of the USSR in two stages – the withdrawal from eastern Europe in 1989 and the formal dissolution of the USSR in 1991 – should have meant in theory the end of any function for NATO. Indeed, it is well known that, when President Mikhail Gorbachev of the USSR agreed to the incorporation of the GDR into the FRG, he was given the promise that there would be no inclusion of the WTO states into NATO. This promise was violated. Instead, NATO took on a new role entirely.
After 1991, NATO bestowed on itself a role of world policeman for whatever it considered appropriate political solutions to world problems. The first major effort of this type occurred in the Kosovo/Serbia conflict, in which the U.S. government threw its weight behind the establishment of a Kosovo state and a change in regime in Serbia. This was followed by other such efforts – in Afghanistan in 2001 to oust the Taliban, in Iraq in 2003 to change regime in Baghdad, in 2014 to fight the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq and Syria, and in 2013-2014 to support so-called pro-Western forces in Ukraine.
In point of fact, using NATO itself turned out to be difficult for the U.S. For one thing, there were various kinds of reluctances of NATO member states about the actions undertaken. For another thing, when NATO was formally involved, as in Kosovo, the U.S. military felt constrained by the slow political decision-making about military action.
So, why then the expansion of NATO instead of its dissolution? This had once again to do with intra-European politics, and the desire of the U.S. to control its presumed allies. It was in the Bush regime that the then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld talked of an "old" and a "new" Europe. By old Europe, he was referring especially to the French and German reluctance to agree with U.S. strategies. He saw the western European countries as moving away from their ties to the United States. His perception was in fact correct. In response, the U.S. hoped to clip the wings of the western Europeans by introducing eastern European states into NATO, which the U.S. considered more reliable allies.
The conflict over Ukraine illuminates the danger of NATO. The U.S. has sought to create new military structures, obviously aimed at Russia, under the guise that these were meant to counter a hypothetical Iranian threat. As the Ukrainian conflict played on, the language of the cold war was revived. The U.S. uses NATO to press western European countries to agree with anti-Russian actions. And within the U.S., President Barack Obama is under heavy pressure to move "forcefully" against the Russian so-called threat to the Ukraine. This combines with the large hostility in the U.S. Congress to any accord with the Iranians over nuclear development.
The forces in the United States and in western Europe who are seeking to avoid military folly risk being overtaken by what can only be called a war party. NATO and what it symbolizes today represents a severe danger because it represents the claim of western countries to interfere everywhere in the name of western interpretations of geopolitical realities. This can only lead to further, highly dangerous, conflict. Renouncing NATO as a structure would be a first step towards sanity and the world's survival.
On Oct. 26, Pres. Dilma Rousseff of Brazil of the Partido dos Trabalhadores (Workers Party, PT) won re-election in the second round of voting by a narrow margin against Aécio Neves of the Partido da Social Democracia Brasileira (Brazilian Social Democratic Party, PSDB). Despite the name of the PSDB, this was a clear left-right struggle, in which voters generally voted their class position, even though the programs of the two parties were on many fronts more centrist than left or right.
To understand what this means, we must analyze the somewhat special politics of Brazil. Brazil's politics are in many ways closer to those of western Europe and North America than almost any other country in the global South. Like countries in the global North, the electoral struggles in the end come down to a struggle between a left-of-center and a right-of-center party. Elections are regular and the voters tend to vote their class interests despite the centrist policies of the two main parties, who usually rotate in power. The result is constant dissatisfaction by the voters with "their" party, and constant attempts by the real left and the real right to push policies in their direction.
How these left and right groups pursue their efforts depends a little on the formal structure of elections. Many countries have a de facto two-round system. This permits the left and the right to run their own candidates in the first round and then rejoin the main party vote in the second round. The major exception to this two-round system is the United States, which forces left and right forces to enter into the main parties and struggle from within.
Brazil has one exceptional feature. While in all these countries politicians change parties from time to time, in most countries this is a tiny group. In Brazil, such party-switching is virtually an everyday occurrence in the national legislature, where neither main party normally has more than a small plurality of votes. This forces the main parties to spend enormous energy on constantly reconstructing alliances, and accounts for somewhat more visible corruption, although probably no greater actual corruption than elsewhere.
In this election, the PT was suffering from the growing disillusionment of its voters. A third-party candidate, Marina Silva, tried to offer a via media. She was known for three qualities: as environmentalist, evangelical, and a non-White of very poor origins. At first she seemed to take off. But as she began to propose a very neoliberal program, her popularity collapsed and voters turned back to Neves, a more traditional rightist.
The disillusionments with the PT centered around its failure to break structurally with economic orthodoxy, plus a failure to carry out its promises concerning agrarian reform, environmental concerns, and the defense of the rights of indigenous peoples. It also repressed popular demonstrations of left movements, most notably in June 2013. Despite this, the social movements of the left joined forces, and very strongly, with the PT in the second round.
Why? Because of the strong positives of the 12 years of PT government. First of all, there was the greatly expanded Bolsa familial, which paid a monthly allowance to the poorest fourth of Brazil's population and significantly improved their daily life. Secondly, and scarcely mentioned in the western press, there was Brazil's highly successful foreign policy – its major role in the construction of South American and Latin American institutions that held at bay the power of the United States in the region. The left was sure that Neves would reduce the social welfare thrust of the PT and ally Brazil once again globally with the United States. The Brazilian left voted for these two positives despite all the negatives.
That same weekend, there were three other major elections – Uruguay, Ukraine, and Tunisia. The election in Uruguay was rather similar to Brazil's. It was the first round of the presidential elections. The governing party since 2004 had been the Frente Amplio (Broad Front) and its candidate was Tabaré Vázquez. The Frente Amplio was truly broad – from center-left to Communists and ex-guerillas. Vázquez faced a classically right candidate, Luis Lacalle Pou of the Partido Nacional, but also a candidate, Pedro Bordaberry, of one of two parties – Partido Colorado (Red Party) – that had ruled Uruguay repressively for over a half-century.
On the first round, Vázquez got 46.5% of the vote over circa 31% for Lacalle, not enough to avoid a second round. Bordaberry, with about 13%, has now thrown his support to Lacalle, but it seems likely that Vázquez will win, and more or less for the same reasons as Rousseff has won. In addition, unlike Brazil, his party will control the legislature. So, Uruguay too will reaffirm the effort to build an autonomous geopolitical structure in Latin America.
Ukraine was totally different. Far from being constructed around a left-right class struggle with two centrist parties trying to secure votes, Ukraine's politics are now constructed around a regional ethno-linguistic divide. In these elections, the west-oriented government held elections in which the dice were loaded in favor of excluding any real role for the so-called separatist movements in eastern Ukraine. The latter therefore boycotted the elections and announced they would hold their own for regional offices. In the Kiev-ordained elections, it seems that those who now govern – President Petro Poroshenko in alliance with his rival, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk of another party – will maintain themselves in tandem in power, excluding the truly ultra-nationalist Pravy Sektor (Right Sector) party from any role.
Finally, Tunisia is also quite different. Tunisia has been seen as the launcher of the so-called Arab Spring, and today seems to be its only survivor. Ennahda, the Islamic party that won the first elections, lost considerable strength by pursuing a too rapid program of Islamization of Tunisian politics. It was forced some months ago to yield place to a technocratic interim government, and lost large number of votes (even of Islamists) in this second election.
The winner was Nadaa Tunis (Tunisia's Call). Its politics are in one sense clear. It is a secular party. Its leader is a venerable 88-year-old politician, Beji Caid Essebsi, who served in the so-called Destourian governments that had led the country after independence until he became a major dissident. His problem is to hold together a very split coalition of many secularist forces – primarily both the young people who led the uprising against President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali in 2011 and various leading members of that very government who have now re-entered the political arena.
In any case, though Nadaa Tunis had a plurality of 85 seats out of 217 and Ennahda reduced to 69, the others are scattered among several smaller parties. There will have to be a coalition government, possibly even an all-party coalition. So, while the Tunisian young revolutionaries of 2011 are celebrating their victory against Ennahda, no one is sure where this will lead.
I say, hurrah for Brazil, where the most important of these four elections was held. But there as elsewhere, the game is not over. Not at all!
Amid the many and ever-evolving shifts of policies and geopolitical alliances in the various countries of the Middle East, one used to be at least sure what are the prime objectives of the major actors, both in the region and in the outside world.
This is not true of Syria today. Syrian politics today are formed by a triad: supporters of the Bashar al-Assad regime; supporters of the caliphate that calls itself the Islamic State (IS); and so-called moderate Islamic groups that claim to be fighting both of the other two groups. Triadic struggles are notoriously difficult both to analyze and to predict because triads have an almost fatal way of reducing themselves in the relatively short run to a clearer two-sided struggle. However, in this case many of the main actors in the region and beyond are highly ambivalent about what it is they want. Many of them prefer to maintain the triad if they can, and are afraid of being forced to choose to which dyad they give priority. This ambivalence is particularly true of Turkey, although also of Saudi Arabia and the United States.
Turkey shares a large border with Syria. It has been governed for some time now by the AKP (Justice and Development Party), an Islamic party that seeks to project itself as oriented to Islamic values and practices but nonetheless tolerant of other perspectives and commitments. It started its rule with an announced foreign policy of maintaining its links with the western world as a member of NATO and a country seeking to join the European Union while at the same time attempting to restore Turkey's role as a major power in the Middle East, one that would maintain good relations with all other Middle Eastern countries.
When the civil war began in Syria, Turkey offered its services as a mediator. In the process, at some point, Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan thought that Syria's President Bashar al-Assad had lied to him. Deeply affronted, he turned from being a mediator to being a leading proponent of a change in Syrian regime.
Turkey has a very large Kurdish minority to which the successive governments have always denied recognition, devolution, and linguistic rights. Ever since the establishment of a Turkish republic over ninety years ago, Turkish governments have reacted to Kurdish demands with total suppression, some even denying that there was such a group as the Kurds. Some thirty years ago, a Kurdish militant Marxist-Leninist movement, the PKK (Kurdish Workers' Party), sought to achieve Kurdish objectives with armed revolt. The leader of this movement, Abdullah Ocalan, was captured and sentenced to life imprisonment.
A few years ago, the present Turkish regime changed course and surprised the world by entering into negotiations with the PKK to see if a compromise could be realized. For its part, the PKK indicated that they no longer were a Marxist-Leninist movement and were ready to contemplate devolution as an objective instead of independence for the Kurdish region. These discussions have been difficult but ongoing and seemingly promising.
The Syrian civil war upended the internal situation in Turkey. The caliphate forces (so-called IS) expanded considerably in northern Syria and have been seeking to control the Syrian side of the border with Turkey. This is actually a region peopled largely by Syrian Kurds. Their main movement, the PYD (Party of Unity and Democracy) has been the principal target of IS attack as well as the principal force in the zone that is resisting the advance of the IS. The IS is presently attacking Kobani, the de facto capital of the Syrian Kurdish region.
The movement of Syrian Kurds is also in close relation with Turkey's Kurdish movement, the PKK. When the United States announced its policy of creating a "coalition" of forces to fight the IS forces and using its airplanes to try to stem their advance, Turkey found itself immediately under considerable US pressure to join the struggle. In particular, the Kurds on both sides of the border, and the United States, have called for Turkey's opening its borders in both directions: to permit Syrian Kurds who are under threat in Kobani and elsewhere from the IS forces to enter Turkey for safe haven and to allow Turkish Kurds to enter Syria to assist militarily the Syrian Kurds.
Turkey has been most reluctant to accede to any of these requests. President Erdogan declared that, from Turkey's point of view, both the IS and the Turkish Kurdish movement, the PKK, are equally terrorist movements, and Turkey saw no reason to open its frontier in this way. This is a strange position to take since the Turkish government has been negotiating for some time with the PKK despite the fact that they label it as a terrorist movement. The Kurdish movements, the PKK and the DYP, cannot in any sense be equated with the IS which is pursuing a very aggressive military campaign against all and sundry.
So what is Turkey saying to the world? The government has argued that fighting the IS will strengthen Bashar al-Assad. This is probably true. But therein lies Turkey's choice and its ambivalence. The Turkish government is demanding a promise from the United States that it will not be diverted from pursuing a struggle against the al-Assad regime, and in particular that it establish now a no-fly zone on the frontier. The United States argues this is impossible to do without troops on the ground, which they will not send.
And here is the choice: which dyad? If one gives priority to the struggle against the IS, it does reduce the support given to the ever smaller so-called moderate Islamists in Syria. If one gives priority to fighting al-Assad, it does strengthen the IS and will undoubtedly lead to a widespread massacre of Syrian Kurds by the IS, as the United Nations Syria envoy has just warned.
The other Turkish ambivalence concerns their negotiations with the PKK. If Turkey turns its back on the dilemmas of the Syrian Kurds, it will probably lead to a rupture in the negotiations with the PKK in Turkey. They have been so warned publicly by the PKK. But if the Turkish government turns more actively against the IS, the result could be that the PKK would have a stronger position in the continuing negotiations.
In addition, Turkey has been trying to improve its relations with Iran. The two countries share strong common interests in Afghanistan and Iraq, and even support the same forces in Palestine. But not fighting actively against the IS will interfere with this attempt to increase ties. On the other hand, active opposition to the IS will interfere with Turkey's attempt to present itself as a champion of Sunni Islamists.
One way or the other, Turkey will have to come to a more coherent policy in the very near future. Otherwise, its claim to be a major actor in the region will fall flat. And its internal struggle with the Kurds will probably explode into violence again. Ambivalence is not admired in a zone of such hot struggles.
When does this story begin? It is difficult to decide. The modern story began in the nineteenth century, when the British and the Russians fought the "great game" competing to influence and control Afghanistan. They struggled directly and via Afghan proxies. The British thought they did better, but it was largely an illusion. I would call the contest a draw.
In the 1960s, the game was resumed with the coming to power of a ruler who sought to institute a new "liberal" constitution. He failed but opened the way for the emergence of parties of the left and right. His successor, Mohamed Daoud, was overthrown in 1978 by the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), actually a Communist party. The PDPA established a totally secular regime, with full equality for women. The great game had resumed. The Soviet Union supported the PDPA regime and the United States (successor to Great Britain), supported the mujahidin who struggled against it and in favor of an Islamist regime.
President Barack Obama has told the United States, and in particular its Congress, that it must do something very major in the Middle East to stop disaster. The analysis of the presumed problem is extremely murky, but the patriotic drums are being turned to high pitch and almost everyone is for the moment going along. A cooler head might say that they are all flailing around in desperation about a situation that the United States has the major responsibility for creating. They don't know what to do, so they act in panic.
The explanation is simple. The United States is in serious decline. Everything is going wrong. And in the panic, they are like a driver of a powerful automobile who has lost control of it, and doesn't know how to slow it down. So instead it is speeding it up and heading towards a major crash. The car is turning in all directions and skidding. It is self-destructive for the driver but the crash can bring disaster to the rest of the world as well.
There is an immense amount of diplomacy going on these days concerning the quasi-civil war in Ukraine. But the only actors who really matter are Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel and Russia's President Vladimir Putin. They are also the only two actors who are really trying to tamp down the conflict and come to some political settlement.
They are both very powerful, both very clearly focused on the real issues, and both working very hard at this difficult task. They are powerful, but not all-powerful. Each has to deal with other actors in Germany, Russia, Ukraine, and elsewhere who do not want a political settlement but rather are seeking to intensify and expand the conflict, and are therefore trying to sabotage any negotiations between Merkel and Putin.
In the endless geopolitical realignments of the Middle East, the Caliphate of the Islamic State (formerly ISIS or ISIL) seems to have frightened just about everyone else involved in Middle Eastern politics into a de facto geopolitical alliance. All of a sudden, we find Iran and the United States, the Kurds (both in Syria and Iraq) and Israel, Turkey and Bashar al-Assad's Syrian government, western Europe (Great Britain, France, and Germany) and Russia all pursuing in different ways the same objective: stop the Caliphate from expanding and consolidating itself.
This hasn't yet altered significantly other loci of geopolitical conflicts such as Israel/Palestine and Ukraine, but it is sure to have an impact on them. Of course, all these actors are pursuing middle-term objectives that are quite different. Nonetheless, look at what has happened in just the first half of August.
There has been a great deal of violence for about a century in the geographic zone we may today call Israel/Palestine. This zone has seen a more or less continuous struggle between Palestinian Arabs and Jewish settlers concerning the rights to occupy land. Both groups have sought juridical affirmation of their rights. Both groups have sought legitimation in competing historical narratives. Both groups have sought to solidify levels of support from their "peoples" throughout the world community. And both groups have sought to get world public opinion on their side.
The way the game has been played has evolved because of shifting geopolitical realities. In 1917, British military occupied this area, ousting the Ottoman Empire, a shift that was thereafter consecrated by obtaining a Mandate from the League of Nations for a country called Palestine. Also in 1917, the British occupying government issued what is known as the Balfour Declaration, which asserted the objective of establishing a Jewish National Home in Palestine. The term "home" is unclear and its meaning has been a subject of controversy ever since. A series of decisions in the 1920s separated the Mandate into two parts. One was Transjordan (what is now Jordan) defined as an Arab state to become eventually independent. The other was Palestine west of the Jordan, to be governed differently.


text:
- Home
- Features
- Special Features
Blogs & Columns
- Contests
- Cafepedia
- Fun & Games
- More
Don't have a login?
Create an account here.
Formerly married to supermodel Heidi Klum, British singer Seal seems to have found himself a new woman, who happens to have been a Power Ranger.
According to omg!, Seal has been seen out lately with 33-year-old Erin Cahill, who started out on Power Rangers Time Force as the pink Power Ranger and will guest star in ABC's Red Widow, which is set to air March 3.
On Wednesday, the couple went out for a bite to eat in Los Angeles, looking quite happy and hugging each other before parting.
The previous day, the two attended a charity event together at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills, Calif., smiling and posing for photographs.
Seal and Klum divorced in January of last year after seven years of marriage. Klum has been rumored to be seeing her long-time bodyguard, Martin Kristen.
Photos courtesy of INFDaily


text:
I am searching for the ancestors of Francis Balie or Baylie, born abt 1590 in England. He had a daughter named Martha, born in 1609 in Framlingham, Suffolk, England, who married Edward COLLINS. Any help would be appreciated.
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate
|© 2007 The Generations Network


text:
Tiny tracks- auburn, in 46706, Tiny tracks offers many variety of colors and animals to choose from please click on the animal page you wish to see.. Fox - tiny tracks exotic animals, We have a large selection of fox types to choose from: red fox , artic fox , and gray fox available.. Animal incidents database, - welcome to born free usa, Born free usa gives you the tools to learn, act. easy-to-use databases track exotic animal, non-target trapping incidents. year by year, state by state, species by.
Exotic animal breeders - exotic animals for sale, Texas exotic animals contact: pam robertson email: firstname.lastname@example.com phone: 903-975-1913 website: http://www.texasexoticanimals.com address: p.o. box 293. Raccoon for sale - exotic animals, Raccoons for sale here at exotic animals learn about raccoons as exotic pets.. Feats :: d20srd.org - d20 system, Track [general] benefit. to find tracks or to follow them for 1 mile requires a successful survival check. you must make another survival check every time the tracks.
Animal collective - wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Animal collective is an experimental band originally from baltimore, maryland, currently based in new york city, washington, los angeles and lisbon.. Biological pest control - wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Biological control is a bioeffector -method of controlling pests (including insects, mites, weeds and plant diseases) using other living organisms. it relies on. Free cat sounds and dog sounds, download cats and dogs, The cats and dogs sounds in this column are collected from the web and are generally available to everyone for personal use..


text:
- eLessons Learned
- Press and Publicity
- About Our Team
- Contact eLL Blog
Welcome to the new eLessons Learned
eLessons Learned features insightful content authored primarily by law students from throughout the country. The posts are written to appeal to a broad spectrum of readers, including those with little eDiscovery knowledge.
Each blog post: (a) identifies cases that address technology mishaps; (b) exposes the specific conduct that caused a problem; (c) explains how and why the conduct was improper; and (d) offers suggestions on how to learn from these mistakes and prevent similar ones from reoccurring.
Visit our signature feature, e-Discovery Origins: Zubulake, designed to give readers a primer on the e-discovery movement through blog posts about the Zubulake series of court opinions which helped form the foundation for e-discovery. Go There
Interested students may apply for the opportunity to write for e-Lessons Learned by filling out the simple application. Go There
A growing trend in insurance disputes is a demand for insurers to have access to the claimant's social media content. In January 2013, the District of Montana had to consider whether to compel a woman to produce all of her social media photos. The court did not grant this request and the decision serves as a good example of what is, or is not, an effective way to request this information. One plaintiff claimed she injured her head, neck, and back in an automobile accident when the vehicle she was driving was struck from behind. Her mother also suffered injuries in the accident. At the time of the accident, they were insured under an automobile liability policy issued by the defendant. The plaintiffs made a claim for uninsured motorist benefits under the policy. The defendant moved under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37 for an order compelling the plaintiffs to respond to discovery requests for the production of their social network site content. The defendant's rationale for the request was the plaintiffs alleged a "host of physical and emotional injuries." In respect to the mother, Defendant argued "there is no good reason for her to shield information that might shed light on her or her daughter's injuries." The request stated as follows: Request for Production No. 18: Please produce a full printout of all of Plaintiff [driver]'s social media website pages and all photographs posted thereon including, but not limited to, Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, LinkedIn, LiveJournal, Tagged, Meetup, myLife, Instagram and MeetMe from August 26, 2008 to the present. Request for Production No. 19: Please produce a full printout of all of Plaintiff's [mother's] so-cial media website pages and all photographs posted thereon including, but not limited to, Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, LinkedIn, LiveJournal, Tagged, Meetup, myLife, Instagram and Meet-Me from August 26, 2008 to the present. As you can imagine, the court felt these requests were overbroad. It is well settled that social media content is discoverable, but the requestor must make a threshold showing that publicly available information on those sites undermines the plaintiff's claims. The defendant did not come forward with any evidence that the content of either of the plaintiffs' public postings in any way undermined their claims in this case. Absent such a showing, the defendant was not entitled to delve carte blanche into any of the nonpublic sections of plaintiffs' social networking accounts, let alone all of them. This case should serve as a lesson to other insurance litigants. You should only request access to social media accounts if you can make a threshold showing that the social media content will be relevant and hold admissible evidence. Otherwise you will rightly be admonished for undergoing a "fishing expedition" and your requests will be promptly denied.
In this case, the plaintiff, an inmate at Rikers Island, brought a motion for spoliation of evidence and alleged the defendants breached their duty to preserve evidence. The evidence in question is video footage relevant to the litigation regarding the assault on the plaintiff which occurred on May 24, 2011, by other prison inmates in a holding cell at the Bronx Criminal Courthouse. The defendants claim that they do not have a duty to preserve the surveillance footage because by the time they were given notice, the footage had been deleted. The defense states that even if they had a duty to preserve, they met this obligation by saving eight minutes of surveillance that they deemed to be relevant. On the day of the assault, the holding cell in which the plaintiff was placed in with approximately sixteen to seventeen other inmates was under twenty-four hour video surveillance. That same day, Jacqueline Brantley, the former Assistant Deputy Warden Executive Officer at the Bronx Criminal Courthouse, reviewed the video footage to determine the course of events specifically for a period of three hours. Brantley was the only person to view the three hours of footage and therefore she was the only one who could testify in court regarding this evidence. The three hours of video footage is extremely relevant to the case. The footage included evidence of not only the plaintiff's injuries, but also how the Department of Corrections protected the inmates and how they responded to the incident. The tapes also show the presence and identity of possible witnesses to the assault and help create a visual timeline of events in the holding cell. The Southern District of New York stated that the defendants should have known within a week of the assault that the surveillance footage would be relevant to a future lawsuit. While the Department of Corrections destroyed the footage pursuant to the Department's automatic video recycling procedures, prior to the filing of the claim by Taylor, the Department did manage to save eight minutes of footage. This begs the following question to be asked: Why did the department not preserve the entire three hours of footage? As a result, the plaintiff in this case sought sanctions for spoliation of evidence with the deletion of the footage. A party seeking sanctions for the spoliation of evidence must establish the following three elements: The party having control over the evidence had an obligation to preserve it at the time it was destroyed; The records were destroyed with a culpable state of mind; and The destroyed evidence was relevant to the party's claim… such that a reasonable trier of fact could find that it would support that claim. Residential Funding Corp. v. DeGeorge Fin. Corp., 306 F.3d 99, 107 (2d. Cir. 2002). If the moving party can establish these three elements, then the court has the ability to impose sanctions under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendants here should have anticipated that the plaintiff would file a lawsuit against the Department for its failure for protect the plaintiff in the holding cell. Therefore, the defendants should have reasonably known that any evidence depicting the plaintiff's treatment in the holding cell would be relevant to the litigation. The obligation to preserve the video footage in this case attached at the time of the assault due to its relevance. The defendants should have known that the entire three hours of footage would be relevant and that two four minute video clips would be insufficient. Since the entire footage has been destroyed, the defendants breached their preservation duty. The destruction of evidence by the defendants was done in a culpable state of mind and destroyed knowingly. Therefore, the defendants were negligent in allowing the footage to be deleted. However, the defendants were not grossly negligent in their failure to preserve, as no relevant evidence here has been claimed to have been destroyed after the plaintiff filed his Notice of Claim, approximately sixty-five days after the assault occurred. Additionally, the destroyed evidence would have been favorable and relevant to the plaintiff's claims and defenses in this case. This evidence would have shown the three hour period of time the plaintiff was left injured in the holding cell as well as the failure of the Corrections Officers to protect him and remove him from the cell when he was covered in blood after the assault. The Court found that for these reasons the destruction of evidence prejudiced the plaintiff. Therefore, the following sanctions were ordered by the court: 1) the preclusion of Brantley from testifying about what she saw when she reviewed the deleted footage; 2) the use of an adverse inference jury instruction; and 3) the award of attorney's fees and costs to the plaintiff. To avoid having a similar outcome, potential defendants should immediately preserve any relevant evidence in matters that they know or should reasonably know will give rise to litigation. Jennifer Whritenour received her B.S. in Political Science and History in 2011 from the University of Scranton. She is received her J.D. from Seton Hall University School of Law in May 2014.
A common problem in e-Discovery is what to do when your adversary is withholding relevant information. An even worse problem is when you know your adversary is withholding relevant information, but you are not precisely certain what that information is. This was the problem for the defendant in NOLA Spice Designs, LLC v. Haydel Enterprises, Inc. who sought—but was ultimately denied—a forensic examination of the plaintiff's computers. In NOLA Spice Designs, a trademark infringement case, the defendant filed a motion to compel the plaintiff to submit its computers to forensic examinations.[1] The plaintiff challenged the motion by arguing that the forensic examinations failed the proportionality requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(2). This rule prevents a party from requesting discovery when "the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit." In the context of forensic computer examinations, the court explained such an examination will not be permitted when the request is overly broad and the connection between the computer and claims are "unduly vague or unsubstantiated in nature." Although the court noted that forensic computer examinations are not uncommon in civil discovery, the court clarified that a mere suspicion that your adversary is dishonestly withholding information is an insufficient basis to order a forensic computer examination. The defendant in NOLA Spice Designs requested the forensic computer examination on the basis that it "has good reasons to believe that something in Plaintiff's statements is not true" and "that is has suspected all along that its opponents have records that they refuse to produce." The court characterized the defendant's reasons as the precise type of skepticism and unwarranted suspicion of dishonesty that are insufficient to warrant an invasive computer forensic examination. Moving forward, litigants should be mindful that courts may be sensitive to confidentiality and privacy concerns when overly broad discovery is requested. Although electronic discovery permits litigants to exchange massive amount of information, that exchange is still subject to the traditional rules of discovery, such as proportionality. In order to combat the hurdle of proportionality, a party who is suspicious that an opponent is withholding information should limit its discovery requests to the specific information that is suspected of being withheld.[2] If the requesting party obtains some information, then it will at least have a reasonable basis to proceed with broader discovery requests because the party can prove to the court that the opposing party has not been forthright. This puts the requesting party in a far greater position than merely seeking an intrusive computer forensic examination with no basis other than mere suspicion of dishonest activity. Helvidius Priscus, a Seton Hall University School of Law graduate (class of 2014), served on the executive board of the Seton Hall Law Review and was a member of the Interscholastic Moot Court Board. Helvidius now clerks for a Justice on the Supreme Court of New Jersey. [1] "Computer forensics is the practice of collecting, analyzing and reporting on digital information in a way that is legally admissible." Forensic ctrl, Introduction to Computer Forensics, http://forensiccontrol.com/resources/beginners-guide-computer-forensics/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2014). [2] Of course, it is difficult to ask for something if you are not sure what exactly you are missing. Nonetheless, the court in NOLA Spice Designs made clear that asking for everything is not the way to go. Starting with small and specific discovery requests (even if they are shots in the dark) may be the better choice because a court is unlikely to find that such requests fail the proportionality requirement.
Although this case does not deal directly with e-discovery, the ruling can have major e-discovery ramifications. Skipping to the end of this very long and complicated decision in Flinthill, the Judge's conclusion was that the plaintiff in this case was trying to exact revenge on those she felt had wronged her in a messy divorce proceeding. For our purposes, however, the plaintiff and her counsel should have reviewed the discovery they got before bringing a lawsuit and claiming they never got that same discovery. A condensed version of this soap-opera case is as follows: Plaintiff filed for divorce from her husband (Wagner) in 2005, in aMarylandcourt. He was a minority interest stockholder in the company "Spacelink International LLC." In 1998, "Flinthill Trust" was established to receive the payments for the disbursements of this stock interest. Spacelink was sold in 2005, which left Wagner with around $13 million. $10 million of these funds were evenly divided between Plaintiff and her husband on September 1, 2005. The Plaintiff then filed to freeze Wagner's interests. TheFairfaxCountycourt issued three orders: 1) prohibiting the trustee of the Flinthill trust from transferring trust assets for at least 60 days; 2) to provide an accounting of all the trust's assets; and 3) prohibiting any further distribution of funds unless otherwise agreed upon. A stipulation was agreed upon and signed by both parties agreeing to Wagner's providing two separate accountings of the trust's comings and goings. Both of those accountings were dutifully made. In addition, a large amount of financial material was exchanged during discovery leading up to a hearing in May of 2006. During that time, Plaintiff did not make any requests to compel discovery, nor did she claim that any of theFairfaxcourt orders were not complied with. The record showed that Wagner and his lawyers repeatedly invited the plaintiff and her lawyers to meet with the trustee to go over the finances of the trust to make sure everything was kosher. Instead of taking them up on their invitation, she brought sixteen months-worth of litigation, which was ultimately deemed by the court to be frivolous and sanction-worthy. The four claims that the plaintiff brought were: 1) Breach of Contract (against Wagner and his people); 2) Breach of Fiduciary Duty (against the trustee); 3) Conspiracy (against various individuals); and 4) Conversion (also against various people). The claim that we are going to focus on, as it deals directly with discovery, is Count 1. In it, she alleged that Wagner breached the stipulation by "frustrating the accounting of trust assets . . . ." Defendants argued that there were four volumes that were transferred to Plaintiff that fully included all of the proper accounting information. The plaintiff's lawyer claimed that they needed to get a report that was "based on generally accepted accounting principles, and not a compilation of documents," and the failure to condense those documents constituted a breach of contract. The problem was that the plaintiff's attorney clearly admitted to not reading the accounting documents that were provided to him, and to not bothering to read any of the ten to thirty boxes of materials relating to the trust that were in the plaintiff's home. The court took particular offense to this, admonishing "how do you know you are missing something if you do not bother to look at what you have?" Curiously, Plaintiff's attorney was unable to specifically identify, even two years later, any gaps in the documents that he was litigating about. The court made it clear that the plaintiff and her lawyer were responsible to review the documents already in their possession. If they lack the particular expertise required to do such a review, they were to hire an expert who was capable of the job. The defendants then went on to request for sanctions to be levied against both the plaintiff and her attorney for either willfully or negligently conducting a reasonable inquiry. Additionally, they could not have reasonably believed that this breach of contract suit was grounded in either fact or law. The court then carefully went through the other 3 claims by the plaintiff, and found that they were equal in their egregiousness for either outright lying to the court or failing to reasonably base their case in law. In the end, the court sanctioned the plaintiff and her attorney to the tune of $884,627.26 to cover the defendant's attorney costs and witness fees. This ruling can have some serious ramifications for plaintiffs in cases with e-discovery. Much discovery material these days is in the form of Electronically Stored Information (ESI). ESI can be particularly volume-heavy, and, therefore, costly to thoroughly review. The information that can be stored on one memory stick is vastly larger than the 10-30 boxes of papers discussed in this case. Still, the court held that it was the responsibility of the requesting party to review the information they receive. If they can't, they need to hire someone who can. By no means should that party bring a law suit claiming they didn't get that information. It could end up being very costly for them. Akiva Shepard received his J.D. from Seton Hall University School of Law in 2014. Akiva has worked for a New York State Supreme Court Judge in Kings County and for a NJ real estate firm.
In this case, Plaintiff AMEC Environment and Infrastructure, Inc. ("AMEC") sued six former employees and Geosyntec Consultants Inc. ("Geosyntec") after AMEC employees went to work for Geosyntec. AMEC alleges that defendants took confidential and/or trade secret information and competed unfairly with AMEC's existing and prospective business relationships. The claims include unauthorized access of computer information, misappropriations of trade secrets, breach of contract, and interference with AMEC's contractual relations with its employees and clients, breach of fiduciary duties, interference with prospective economic advantage, and unfair business practices. In this particular dispute, the parties each complained about the sufficiency of discovery responses made to each other. Geosyntec disputed to the sufficiency of AMEC's responses to interrogatory questions designed to shine light on why AMEC's trademark designations are trade secrets that deserve protection. AMEC's disputed over whether Geosyntec should have provided information about its solicitation of AMEC employees it did not hire, whether it should provide oral, as well as written solicitations of employees it did hire, and whether its search terms for e-discovery were sufficient. To resolve these issue, the Court ordered the parties to each designate five trade secrets for AMEC to answer before mediation. Furthermore, the Court ordered answers to interrogatories to be provided on a schedule pegged to the end of fact discovery, as well as mediation. Finally, the Court ordered that parties memorialize their agreement on the record to confer about other e-discovery issues. In regards to the e-discovery issues, Plaintiffs contended that defendant Geosyntec left out obvious custodians and search terms in their discovery. Defendant counters that its searches were too broad in that they resulted a hit rate of 8%. Even at that rate, Geosyntec stated it already produced 200,000 documents and therefore needed to narrow the search terms. Ultimately, Judge Beeler reserved a decision. The judge refused to intervene in the dispute, believing that the parties know their discovery better and are better suited to manage it on their own. She noted that the parties agreed to meet and confer on their own to resolve and dispute. Judge Beeler also noted in regards to the breadth of email searches, that overly broad searches are just "useless ways of getting at the smoking gun emails." Salim received his B.A. in Applied Communications, with a minor in Legal Studies, from Monmouth University. He received his J.D. from Seton Hall University School of Law in 2014. Salim's past experiences include interning for a personal injury law firm prior to attending law school, as well as judicial internships in the Civil and Family Divisions. Currently, Salim is taking part in the Immigrants' Rights/International Human Rights Clinic at Seton Hall Law.
How involved does a district court have to be in discovery issues? This is the main issue that the Colorado Supreme Court tackled in this case. The Court drew a firm line and interpretation on one of the state's discovery rules and remanded to the district dourt so they could follow it. The plaintiff, DCP Midstream, LP brought a case for eleven breach of contract (among other claims) against the defendant, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. The two companies transport, gather, and process natural gas in Northeastern Colorado. DCP Midstream transported the gas from wells and took them to be processed and sold. DCP Midstream had contractual relationships, known as "gas purchase, gathering, and processing agreements" with a number of companies to carry this out. One of the companies that DCP Midstream did regular business with was Kerr-McGee Oil, which was acquired by Anadarko Petroleum. It was then, according to the plaintiff, when the relationship soured. DCP claims that Anadarko told Kerr-McGee to "transport and process natural gas in violation of DCP's contractual rights" and brought suit accordingly. DCP's claims regarded eleven contracts specifically which covered about 900 wells. DCP asked for document production using 58 requests. These requests asked for Anadarko's "complete contract file" for the thousands of wells that it operates as well as the title opinions for them. Anadarko objected to many of these requests claiming that they were not relevant to the claims contained in the complaint and as such, outside the scope of discovery under Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1). Further, Anadarko claimed that the opinions asked for were privileged attorney-client communications but that claim won't be addressed here. The trial court did not hear argument regarding Anadarko's objections and merely granted DCP's motion to compel. Their written order read, "DCP was entitled to discovery that is or may become relevant and, because DCP's "breach [of contract] claim may expand and may ultimately encompass thousands of wells," DCP was entitled to discovery that may lead to more specific allegations…"" Anadarko petitioned the Supreme Court of Colorado for review. The Supreme Court found jurisdiction to take the case and discussed extensively the state rules, how the scope of discovery should be determined, and the role of the Court in all of it. Specifically, the Court talked about the above-cited 26(b)(1) which granted parties as a matter of right, the ability to ask for discovery for anything that is not privileged that is "relevant to the claim or defense of any party." For good cause, the rule allows the court to permit a party more expansive discovery rights into "any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action." The distinction between the discovery allowed as a matter of right and that to be allowed for good cause was troubling to the Court. The Court said that there was no easily explainable difference between what a "claim or defense" is versus what is "subject matter." Instead, the Court pointed to the advisory committee notes on the rule which advocated looking at the rule more practically. The notes suggested that the Courts, when there is a discovery objection, determine the scope of discovery and tailor it to the "reasonable needs of the action." It is this approach that the Court adopted for the state of Colorado. The Court (and the state rules that it pointed to) also made it inescapably clear how vital the role of the trial court is in the discovery process. Active judicial management is needed to decide scope of discovery questions in light of the action calls for and what is reasonable. The trial court, in this case, did not make any findings on that question and instead just put through an order without any tailoring at all. The Supreme Court remanded the case to the trial court so they may make findings pursuant to their approach to the rule. Trial court judges of Colorado beware! If you don't take an active role in deciding discovery objections, the Supreme Court will just remand and you will have to look at it again, anyway. Isn't it just easier to manage your responsibility the first time? Julie will receive her J.D. from Seton Hall University School of Law, where she is serving as President of the Family Law Society and was a Student Attorney for the Center for Social Justice's Family Law Clinic, in 2014. Prior to law school, she was a 2008 magna cum laude graduate of Syracuse University, where she earned a B.A. in History and a minor in Religion and Society. After law school, Julie will serve as a law clerk to a judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey.
Once bitten, twice shy. The classic idiom stands for the general proposition that when an individual is hurt by someone or something, they tend to avoid that person or situation in the future. Well, it looks like the defendant in Hart v. Dillon Companies did not learn its lesson as it will face spoliation sanctions for the second time in two years. In 2011, the defendant's bad faith destruction of company videotapes led to an adverse inference ruling. E.E.O.C. v. Dillon Companies, Inc., F. Supp. 2d 1141 (D.Colo. 2011). Now the company faces additional spoliation sanctions, once again for accidentally erasing pertinent recorded evidence. The plaintiff's 21 years of employment at the defendant's grocery store came to an end when it was alleged that she had been abusing her power as the store's bookkeeper by paying herself at a marked-up rate. The decision to terminate the plaintiff was partially based on a secretly recorded conversation that occurred between the plaintiff and the defendant's loss prevention specialist. On November 1, 2011, the former employee filed an E.E.O.C. charge of discrimination against her former employer, believing that her termination was the result of age discrimination. Knowing that the plaintiff had hired an attorney, the defendant denied her request for arbitration, and the plaintiff filed its complaint on March 1, 2012. At some point between the arbitration denial on November 7, 2011, and the filing of the complaint, the recording of the plaintiff's interview was accidentally erased. On March 1, 2012, the defendant employer initiated a litigation hold, but this was too little too late. The damage had already been done, and the plaintiff filed a motion for sanctions for the spoliation of the recorded evidence. Adding insult to injury, the Colorado District Court actually cited to the defendant's previous spoliation case when laying out the issues of spoliation. According to that decision, the issues of spoliation are: (1) is the evidence relevant to an issue at trial; (2) did the party have a duty to preserve the evidence because it knew or should have known, that litigation was imminent; and (3) was the other party prejudiced by the destruction of the evidence. With regards to the first issue, the court found that the recorded interview was obviously relevant to the case because it played a role in the defendant's decision to terminate the plaintiff's employment. Discussing the second element, the court found that the duty to preserve the evidence began on November 7, 2011, because at the time of the arbitration denial the defendant was well-aware litigation was likely. This was the trigger event that marked the defendant's duty to institute a litigation hold. In fact, evidence existed that the defendant's labor relations manager was well aware that the plaintiff's attorney and arbitration request signified an intent to litigate the issue.In terms of prejudice, the court found that the plaintiff was prejudiced by the destruction because several factual disputes existed as to what occurred during the secretly recorded interview. Finding the defendant "highly culpable" for the four month delay, the court also determined that the failure to collect the tape recording from "a key player" was an example of grossly negligent or willful behavior. Even though the defendant may not have shown an intent to destroy the evidence, the company had control over the tape and the responsibility to preserve it. Therefore, the plaintiff's motion for sanctions was granted. Sanctions have not yet been determined, though, as the court set a future hearing to determine the precise amount of sanctions to impose. While E.E.O.C. charges, like those brought by the plaintiff here, do not always lead to litigation, companies should get in the habit of instituting litigation holds whenever they face charges like these. Even if the chances of litigation appear remote, if possible the company should seek to preserve all pertinent evidence to avoid this type of scenario. In this matter, if the company had issued a litigation hold when it received the E.E.O.C. charge or even upon receiving the arbitration request, it could have avoided the sanctions it will now receive. Companies are risking too much by not immediately preserving all the evidence relevant to the potential case. Here, if the defendant had learned from its previous bad experience with evidence spoliation, it could have instituted better preservation procedures that would have avoided the significant penalties it now confronts. Jeffrey, a Seton Hall University School of Law Student (Class of 2014), focuses his studies primarily in the area of civil practice but has also completed significant coursework concerning the interplay between technology and the legal profession. He was a cum laude graduate of the University of Connecticut in 2011, where he received a B.S. in Business Administration with a concentration in Entrepreneurial Management. Presently, Jeff serves as a legal clerk at a personal injury law firm in Rochelle Park, New Jersey.
In Sekisui Am. Corp. v. Hart, District Court Judge Shira Sheindlin reversed a decision of the lower court and imposed sanctions against a plaintiff for its willful spoliation of electronically stored information (ESI). The critical point on which Judge Scheindlin and the magistrate judge opposed was whether a showing of bad faith is necessary to impose spoliation sanctions or whether a showing that the ESI was willfully destroyed is enough. For Judge Scheindlin, where the spoliation is willful the non-spoliating party need not prove malevolent purpose: It is well-settled in the Second Circuit that: [A] party seeking an adverse inference instruction based on the destruction of evidence must establish (1) that the party having control over the evidence had an obligation to preserve it at the time it was destroyed; (2) that the records were destroyed with a culpable state of mind; and (3) that the destroyed evidence was relevant to the party's claim or defense such that a reasonable trier of fact could find that it would support that claim or defense. It is the third prong of the test that was squarely tackled in this case—whether the destroyed evidence was relevant and whose burden is it to prove or disprove this factor. Sekisui American Corporation (Sekisui) brought a breach of contract suit against Richard Hart and Marie Louise Trudel-Hart relating to the Sekisui's purchase of America Diagnostica, Inc. ("ADI"), a medical diagnostic products manufacturer of which Mr. Hart was president. During discovery, Sekisui revealed that ESI in the form of e-mail belonging to certain ADI employees (including Mr. Hart) had been deleted or were missing. It later became clear that Sekisui did not institute a litigation hold until more than fifteen months after sending a Notice of Claim to the Harts and in the interim, Sekisui permanently deleted the Hart's documents and data. By way of explanation, Sekisui maintained that the destruction of Hart's ESI was largely due to the actions of ADI's former Head of Human Resources (Taylor), who had acted without direction from Sekisui. Sekisui further asserted that Taylor made the unilateral decision to delete Hart's e-mail for the purpose of freeing up space on the ADI server after determining that Hart was no longer receiving work-related e-mail. Before directing Northeast Computer Services ("NCS")—the vendor in charge of managing Sekisui's information technology systems—to permanently delete Hart's ESI, Taylor apparently "identified and printed any e-mails that she deemed pertinent to the company," which e-mails, totaling approximately 36,000, were produced to the Harts. Notwithstanding these measures, there was no way for the parties or the court to determine how many e-mails were permanently deleted and lost. In light of these developments, the Harts requested that the court impose sanctions on Sekisui for the spoliation of evidence. Specifically, the Harts requested: 1) an adverse inference jury instruction based on the destruction of Hart's ESI; and 2) sanctions for spoliation based on the alleged or actual loss of the e-mail folders of several other ADI employees. The Magistrate declined to issue any sanctions, finding that the Harts failed to show any prejudice resulting from the destruction of the ESI (i.e., failed to show that the deleted e-mails were relevant to its defenses). The Magistrate Judge concluded that the destruction of Hart's ESI "may well rise to the level of gross negligence," but decided that such destruction was not willful because "there has been no showing that Taylor directed [the e-mails'] erasure for any malevolent purpose." The magistrate judge declined to presume either relevance or prejudice despite his finding that Sekisui "may" have acted in a grossly negligent manner. Judge Sheindlin, however, took a starkly opposite position. Judge Sheindlin expressly rejected the premise that the law requires a showing of malice in order to establish intentionality with respect to the spoliation of evidence. In the context of an adverse inference analysis, Judge Sheindlin found no "analytical distinction" between destroying evidence in bad faith, i.e., with a malevolent purpose, and destroying it willfully. Accordingly, Sekisui's good faith explanation for the destruction of Hart's ESI (suggesting that Taylor's directive was given in order to save space on the server) did not change the fact that the ESI was willfully destroyed. And when evidence is destroyed willfully, the destruction alone "is sufficient circumstantial evidence from which a reasonable fact finder could conclude that the missing evidence was unfavorable to that party." On the above rationale, Judge Sheindlin found the Magistrate Judge's decision to be clearly erroneous and contrary to law, and directed that an adverse inference instruction would be provided to the jury. This case underscores the importance of timely and prudently implementing a litigation hold, when such duty attaches. Adam L. Peterson is a student at Seton Hall University School of Law, Class of 2014. Adam is a member of the Seton Hall Law Review and prior to law school Adam was an Environmental Analyst with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
Throughout the oft-covered Apple v. Samsung patent litigation there has been a multitude of pretrial motions. Last August, United States Magistrate Judge Grewal ruled on Samsung's motion to compel additional financial documents from Apple. Samsung sought to discover documents from Apple regarding: (1) units sold, gross and net revenue, gross and net margin, and gross and net profits for each Apple product… (2) reports and projections ofU.S.sales, profitability margins, and financial performance for each version of the iPhone and iPad…and (3) all costs comprising costs of goods sold and all costs other than standard costs for each of the accused products. In response to this request, Apple produced documents that Samsung believed to be deficient, which was the basis of Samsung's instant motion. Samsung believed that Apple's production of worldwide sales figures (as opposed to the requested U.S. figures) were not sufficiently responsive to their request of US-specific data. Furthermore, to aid in their damages calculation, Samsung requested model level sales figures (e.g., iPhone 4, iPhone 5, etc.) but Apple only produced of sales figures at the product line level (e.g., iPad, iPhone, etc.). Samsung contended that these productions were not detailed enough to enable Samsung to accurately calculate damages. In response, Apple argued that producing the figures Samsung requested would be unduly burdensome because it would require the coordination of "multiple financial groups" that could take "several months" of effort. While the court was admittedly "dubious" of Apple's claims, Judge Grewal found another, more persuasive reason to limit Apple's production, writing, "the court is required to limit discovery if 'the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. This is the essence of proportionality – an all-to-often [sic] ignored discovery principle." Highlighting that each parties' damages experts had already submitted their reports, the Court held that requiring Apple to produce additional financial documents would be of little benefit.' Thus, the court denied Samsung's motion to compel. However, the court also noted that because the instant motion was struck down, Apple was precluded from challenging Samsung's damages experts for failing to "allocate geographically or by product model in any way that could have been supported by the reports disputed here." Judge Grewal concluded that "[t]his is enough to protect Samsung from any undue prejudice arising from Apple's reporting limitations." If you make a burdensome request for documents that would have little benefit, your motion is going to be denied. Matthew Miller, a Seton Hall University School of Law student (Class of 2014), focuses his studies in the area of Intellectual Property. Matt holds his degree in Chemistry from the University of Chicago. Currently, Matt works as a legal intern at Myers Wolin, LLC.
Whoever thinks that the legal world does not involve math is proven wrong through the Special Master's analysis in Dornoch Holdings Int'l, LLC v. Conagra Foods, Lamb Weston, Inc. The heart of the opinion involves a percentage breakdown of search terms and their correlation of precision in regard to privileged documents. In Dornoch, the defendants objected to the privilege log of documents for three reasons: 1) the documents on the privilege log, except for communications between the plaintiffs and their outside litigation counsel dated after March 22, 2010, have not been established by the plaintiffs to be privileged; 2) The privilege log was created using overly broad search terms and has not been substantively reviewed, thus, the log contains numerous non-privileged documents; and 3) Non-correspondence documents listed on the privilege log are not privileged. In response to this objection, the court allowed the Special Master to make a recommendation on these objections, specifically allowing the Special Master to review "a statistically significant number of randomly selected documents to confirm the accuracy of the screening method." The privilege documents log was assembled using search terms created and limited by plaintiff's counsels and an eDiscovery technology consulting firm. And so, the Special Master did as the Court requested and took a sampling from the log to determine the effectiveness of the screen's search terms. The consulting firm determined that "1,740 documents would need to be human reviewed" to determine whether the log was effectively precise. The Special Master decided to review 1,813 documents just to ensure it was an effective review. After explaining that Idaho law regarding attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine apply, the Special Master reviewed the documents and determined that 1,249 were not privileged documents and 564 were privileged. The Special Master also went into much detail about the effectiveness of the specific search terms that were used. Specifically, the Special Master determined that 73 percent of the search terms were highly correlated to actual privileged documents. Additionally, the Special Master determined that "those terms which identified a correlation with actual privilege of 59 percent or greater, showed a strong correlation with privilege." Once the Special Master completed this analysis, the Special Master recommended that the documents that fall below that 59 percent correlation should be released and not kept private. Then, the plaintiffs could also decide to conduct another review of the remaining privileged documents to figure out if more should be released. Finally, the Special Master noted that it does not matter whether documents are listed as "correspondence" or "non-correspondence" for them to be determined to be privilege or not. These documents should be reviewed just as the others. Overall, the Special Master recommended that the court sustain the first objection, and overrule the third objection. As to the second objection, the court recommended the following: "(1) Concur with the selection of a 59% or greater correlation of search term precision for a document to remain withheld as privileged; (2) Allow Defendants the opportunity to further challenge the assertion of privilege above that 59% threshold, if they so choose, by requesting that the Special Master conduct a further targeted review for privilege and release any non-privileged documents discovered. The Defendants will be responsible for cost of this further analysis, if requested; (3) Release the documents associated with the less precise terms that fall beneath the 59% correlation threshold and remove them from the privilege log; (4) Prior to that release, allow Plaintiffs the opportunity to conduct a privilege review of all or a portion of the population to be released and create a supplemental privilege log. The Plaintiffs will be responsible for cost of this further analysis, if Plaintiffs chose to conduct it."


text:
Cockerill confirms Twelvetrees exit
ESPNscrum Staff
January 21, 2012
Billy Twelvetrees is on his way to Gloucester © Getty Images
Leicester boss Richard Cockerill has confirmed that centre Billy Twelvetrees will leave the club for Gloucester at the end of the season.
The England Saxons international will make the switch in order to garner more first-team action at his preferred position of inside-centre.
So far this season he has flitted between numbers 10 and 12 due to injuries and the form of Anthony Allen, the two-cap England centre. At Gloucester he will likely fill a hole left by Mike Tindall or Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu, with both players' futures uncertain.
Twelvetrees' contract with the Tigers is up at the end of the season and Cockerill has admitted that the prized youngster is on his way out of Welford Road - for greater riches as well as game-time.
"On Monday he told me he was staying, on Wednesday I was told by his agent that he was signing for Gloucester, who have assured him of being first choice No.12 for them and his salary has been much improved," the coach said.
"I did not want to lose him and he will be fully involved until the end of the season."
© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.
|Live Scores
The greatest fly-half of them all
Following the passing of Jack Kyle, Huw Richards pays tribute to arguably the finest player Ireland has produced
The Battle of Ballymore revisited
"When Mike Burton was sent off I thought the world had gone crazy - just Pommy bashing, hitting anyone." Behind the Rose heads back to 1975
The time for tinkering is over - England must nail their colours to the mast in key positions, writes Phil Vickery
Gatland should learn from Joe Schmidt
"New Zealand-born Joe Schmidt has forged the Irish into a street-smart, well- prepared side," John Mitchell on the Irish renaissance


text:
Wild mushroom, chicken & bacon risotto
By Barney Desmazery
Cooking timePrep: 20 mins Cook: 30 mins Ready in 50 minutes plus soaking
Skill levelEasy
ServingsServes 4
A risotto oozing with rich winter flavours, perfect for a curl-up-on-the-couch meal
Nutrition and extra info
Nutrition info
Nutrition per serving
- kcalories
- 785
- protein
- 56g
- carbs
- 68g
- fat
- 33g
- saturates
- 14g
- fibre
- 5g
- sugar
- 5g
- salt
- 3.69g
- 50g dried porcini mushrooms
- 1.3l chicken stock
- 250g pack dessert chestnut mushrooms, sliced
- 8 rashers smoked streaky bacon, chopped
- 50g butter
- 1 onion, finely chopped
- 300g risotto rice (we used arborio)
- 1 small glass white wine
- 50g parmesan, finely grated
- leftover roast chicken, skinned and chopped
- handful parsley leaves, chopped
Buy Ingredients
Buy the ingredients for this recipe now via:
Want to know how this works? Read all about it here.
- Soak the dried mushrooms in 500ml boiling water for 20 mins, then drain the liquid into the stock. The mushrooms will have absorbed a lot of the liquid; you should have 1.5l in total. Chop the soaked mushrooms and add to the chestnut mushrooms.
- Make the risotto: start by frying the bacon in half the butter, then add the onion. When they are soft, add the mushrooms and continue to cook for a few mins until soft. Stir through the rice and continue as in the basic recipe. When you add the final ladle of stock, stir through the chicken to reheat. Add the chopped parsley with the Parmesan and remaining butter, leave to rest for a few mins, then stir through and serve.
Recipe from Good Food magazine, September 2008
Ads by Google
Comments, questions and tips
Sign in or create your My Good Food account to join the discussion.
Show comments
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2


text:
Shop at Kroger? You can help Fresh Start Sheltie Rescue every time you shop! This applies to those of you living in the Kroger Delta region – west Tennessee (Memphis, Jackson, Paris); Missouri (Poplar Bluff); Kentucky (Paducah); Mississippi; Arkansas.
Register your Kroger Plus Card in the Kroger Community Rewards Program & Fresh Start will earn rewards for every eligible purchase. You can register Fresh Start Sheltie Rescue (organization # 81204) via the Kroger website. It's simple and it's FREE!
Go to www.krogercommunityrewards.com. Scroll down and choose the (green) ENROLL NOW by the Delta section.
If you don't have a Kroger.com account with a login and password, you will need to do this now. After getting that set up, you can start helping us by entering our organization # 81204 or part of our name.
If you use your phone number at the register, you can call the HELP desk at 1-866-221- 4141 for more information.
Don't have a Kroger card? You can get one for free at the customer service counter and then register it online.
(To verify that you have selected us, you can sign in via www.kroger.com with your email address and password. Scroll down and select Community Rewards. It should then list Fresh Start Sheltie Rescue, our organization # 81204 and the date you enrolled in this rewards program).
Please ask your family and friends to participate, also! (NOTE - solicitation to the general population is prohibited).
Thanks for helping Fresh Start Sheltie Rescue!
If you have any questions, you can call Kim @ (901) 734-5414.
Pepper is a small tri female that is 6 years old; she weighs only 13 pounds. As far as we know, she lived ALL her life before coming into rescue INSIDE a building (commercial type building, not a home setting). She is still getting used to 'the big outdoors.' In the meantime, she has learned to 'do her business' on puppy pads inside and is very reliable. We are in the process of working on getting her doing her business in the backyard. She is a sweet girl and loves to be held. She is still learning the sights and sounds of the real world, so her adopter needs to be patient and know that this transition doesn't happen overnight. With time, love, and patience, "Peppermint Patty" will bloom into a great companion for a lucky person or family. In her prior life, she did not have the best of care and her teeth were in bad condition. She lost quite a few when she had a dental cleaning, but now she is UTD on vaccinations, is heartworm negative and on prevention, is microchipped, and has been spayed. Pepper is currently being fostered in the Little Rock, AR area. For more information, email us at
See the full photo gallery below...
On Hold
Shannon is an 8 year old female. She came from a situation where she lived all her life outside until we got her. She is doing very well on crate and house training! She needs additional socialization and work on her leash skills. Adopter must have fenced yard and be willing to drive to the Memphis, Tennessee area. She has had a dental and has been spayed. She is around 15 ½ to 16 inches tall and weighs 21 pounds (was 29 pounds). For more information, email us at
Mia is an approximately five year old sable female. She is on the small side of average, weighing in at only 13 pounds. She is a little shy until she gets to know you. She is on medical hold due to being treated for heartworms. She is a sweet girl that LOVES to get petted!
Adoption Pending
Meet Kenny. He is about a year old, a little oversized, UTD on vaccinations, microchipped and neutered. He did not have adequate socialization when he was a young puppy, so he is a little cautious but not overly shy. He gets along well with other dogs, is crate trained, and is working on housetraining (and doing VERY well!). This sweet boy needs a home that will help him bloom into a more confident companion. He is being fostered in the Memphis, TN area. For more information, email us at
Click to make a general donation.
These sleek 22oz aluminum bottles are BPA free and come in a beautiful blue color. They also have a carabiner and key ring and say I *heart* my Sheltie on one side.
$8 + $2 shipping & handling