text:
Summer 2009 promised to be a bumper year at the box-office, following on from the double whammy last year of The Dark Knight and (ahem) Mamma Mia! Although the numbers have stacked up favourably largely thanks to the success of Michael Bays giant metal balls (more on those later), the quality has been sadly lacking.
The Blockbuster season might not be completely over yet, but weve been left distinctly under whelmed by many of the releases so far. Weve left the animation entries for another time mainly because the real big-hitter (Disneys Up!) isnt out for several months yet.
It's not to say we haven't seen some great films over the summer, it's just that they aren't what you would classify as Blockbusters. We'll look at those films in greater depth later, and i can't wait to get stuck into those turkeys we've endured as well. Quick message for Seth Rogen, you might want to look away soon. But in the meantime heres a brief rundown of the hits and misses, be warned the first category is Very brief.
The Good
What we said then: The grandest graphic novel of them all finally arrives on the big screen and so the supposedly unfilmable has been filmed. The fans can instantly be assured of one thing, very little has been compromised with the violence intact meaning a far from audience friendly 18 certificate (as well as the 2hr 43min runtime). So does the film live up to the hype?
On reflection: Yeah it does. We were initially excited by the film, but thought the rest of the summer would result in this just being a good, solid movie rather than a standout from the year. On reflection this delivered on its promise and was one of the only films to justify the marathon runtime.
Star Trek
What we said then: The cast are superb, with relative unknown Pine taking to the cocksure arrogance of Kirk like a duck to water. He and Quinto as Spock are the core of the film, but the crew would not be complete without the other members. Karl Urban plays the dour Bones McCoy and gives probably the most vivid turn in relation to the first series which is particularly welcome. Perhaps the villain of the piece could have done with a little more development but for a film that clocks in at two hours this might just be wishful thinking, and now that we have a fully functioning Enterprise and crew lets have more of the franchise. Full Review
On reflection: This is how it should be done. Clever plot, acknowledgment of past glories and perfect marketing make this the real big hit of the summer. The fact that it appealed to non-trekkies and females (quiet at the back there no they are NOT the same thing) meant that it was the one film everyone seemed to enjoy.
Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince
What we said then: The film opens with a fantastic sequence combining the 'real' world with the fantasy environment J.K Rowling has elaborately created. This is a short segment, and hopefully has the potential to be expanded in future installments, pity it wasn't used more extensively before. The idea of having these teenage characters actually acting as we know they would is also a great touch… it might go on for far too long in the opening half of the story, but it allows for some genuine drama and laughs as well as a chance to see some proper acting. Full Review
On reflection: It says something when a pretty mediocre film ends up being one of the highlights. This might be a personal choice but the justification (and Im sticking to it) is that I was expecting another big Potter-sized letdown. The fact that it wasnt, and managed to keep me entertained for most of the runtime means that it scrapes into this half of the review. Just. Lets just give it a new category the Good(ish)
The Bad
X-men Origins: Wolverine
What we said then: The story itself is very simplistic and you can understand why some late tweaks were made, however these are only moderately successful. Some of the effects are also well-handled and the big set-pieces look a lot better than the early trailers would suggest. Unfortunately not all the CGI is up to scratch and the retracting claws in particular look rushed and poorly executed. Whereas we get to see many of marvels lesser superheroes (and villains) in this movie, at no point do we feel we know any of them. Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool is great for the brief moments we see him in, but it amounts to nothing more than a fleeting cameo and remember his is the character that was re-shot to feature more prominently in the final film, Imagine what his role would have been like otherwise! Full Review
On Reflection: This was the first signal that not everything was rosy this summer. It limped into cinemas with very little critical buzz (a bad sign) and the ongoing reshoots/rewrites during production were obvious for all to see. Jackman did well in the lead and his performance cant be faulted, but not much else worked.
Angels and Demons
What we said then: It all sounds pretty far fetched, and when you throw into the mix an anti-matter bomb that could blow up most of Rome let alone Vatican City, a sexy CERN scientist called Vittoria, suspicious priests and members of the Swiss Guard you have all the ingredients for either a bloody mess or a hokum-filled couple of hours. Full Review
On reflection: The former. It is a bloody mess, and has almost nothing going for it. The Da Vinci Code wasnt great either, and to call this one better is to imply that a bout of diarrhea is better than leprosy. It is, but is anyone going to boast about it? The moment Ewan McGregor leaps into a helicopter, takes of in the middle of Vatican City and parachutes back down to earth having detonated a bomb is the moment youll be ready to leave. At least the mullet was gone.
Night at the Museum 2
What we said then: The whole movie looks great but comprises one lazy historical caricature after the next. Hey look its Napoleon – ha-ha, hes short, and French. Surely that joke wore thin just after Bill & Teds Excellent Adventure in 1989 – 20 years on, youd expect something a little better. Ricky Gervais shows up for about a nanosecond to reprise his role as a grumpy curator. Its not funny and its toe-curlingly embarrassing to see him in a role like this. There are one or two funny moments; Rodins Thinker turns out to be more of a dumb jock than the intellectual type and there are some imaginative uses of the pictures in the art gallery but these bits of hilarity are few and far between. Full Review
On Reflection: Amy Adams looked nice
Terminator: Salvation
What we said then: The special effects here are functional not spectacular. The dystopian future looks very convincing but this whole setting is one of the problems with the film. Given that we aren't trying to stop what has already happened (unlike the earlier outings) the sense of doom is lacking. The energy therefore is sucked out of scenes where we don't really feel like there is much to play for of all the blockbusters out so far this year, T4 disappoints the most. Full Review
On Reflection: Okay it ended up NOT being the worst, but still it was pretty bad. Bale should have stuck to the role he was originally offered and the film would have made more sense. The real blame is with hack McG, who ruins the franchise with a desperate need to cash-in on an already pretty weak cow.
Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen
What we said then: the main thing that stands out about Revenge of the Fallen is its poor construction. Relatively good CGI robo-battles (and there are some great ones) are interspersed with unnecessary comedy. Sure, cool little Decepticon-gremlins are just about acceptable, maybe even annoying geek sidekick Leon Spitz (who exists purely for light relief, e.g. shooting himself with a taser) is just about manageable. But some boundaries should just not be crossed. Bumblebee is not Herbie a.k.a THE LOVE BUG, Devastator (a massive Decepticon formed of several Constructicons) should not have balls for one moment of comic relief, and Mudflap and Skids shouldn't be reduced to a weird combination of Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dum from Alice in Wonderland and Mike/Marcus from Bad Boys. Full Review
On reflection: Megan Fox looks alright
Public Enemies
What we said then: The plot is not conventional gangster/crime genre fare, with the action taking place at unlikely moments and somewhat out of the blue. This means the bursts of excitement in the otherwise pedestrian story can catch you off guard, a neat trick for the adrenaline pumping scenes but at the expense of the overall experience. Some of the lesser characters barely make an appearance and their involvement then becomes all the more confusing when they are thrust into the middle of scenes without any introduction. Full Review
On Reflection: Controversial choice here I know. Are the performances any good? They sure are. Is it well written? Sure is. Does it look good? It has its moments but did it entertain? Unfortunately no, and I just expected so much more from Mann and co. I hate that Michael Mann made a film starring Johnny Depp and Christian Bale that I am unable to love or even like that much.
Unlike last year, the standout films from 2009 (so far) have not been the blockbusters. Whereas The Dark Knight and Wall-E topped most peoples end of year polls, I doubt any of the films mentioned so far will be in this years list. Next time well take a look at the surprise gems, its worth noting that the best (and worst) films from 09 havent even been mentioned in this article. You have those to look forward to…
Cassam Looch


text:
Pre-tooled Displays
Your brand, your way, our tooling
For programs that require a customized look without the added expense of custom tooling, we are pleased to offer our display program that utilizes one of our many pre-tooled parts. These displays offer a level of personalization, retail proven design, reduced lead-time, and competitive pricing.
All displays can be customized with your brand color and logo. Most displays also offer a visual or header that can be updated as needed.
Please visit the desktop version of our site to review our full product line and get more details

subset: commoncrawl


text:
- English (2) (remove)
- Biochemie und Chemie (1)
- Medizin (1)
- Pharmazie (1)
- SQUIRRELnovo : de novo design of a PPARalpha agonist by bioisosteric replacement (2009)
- Shape complementarity is a compulsory condition for molecular recognition [1]. In our 3D ligand-based virtual screening approach called SQUIRREL, we combine shape-based rigid body alignment [2] with fuzzy pharmacophore scoring [3]. Retrospective validation studies demonstrate the superiority of methods which combine both shape and pharmacophore information on the family of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs). We demonstrate the real-life applicability of SQUIRREL by a prospective virtual screening study, where a potent PPARalpha agonist with an EC50 of 44 nM and 100-fold selectivity against PPARgamma has been identified. SQUIRREL molecular superposition is based on a graph-matching routine [4] and allows partial matching. We used this advantage for searching for bioisosteric replacement suggestions in a database of molecular fragments derived from a collection of drug-like compounds [5]. The bioisosteric groups suggested by our tool SQURRELnovo, can be used for ligand-based de novo design by a human expert. Using the fibrate derivative GW590735 [6] as query, we designed a novel lead structure by substitution of the acidic head group and hydrophobic tail. The synthesis and following testing in a cell-based reporter gene assay [7,8] revealed that the designed structure activates PPARalpha with an EC50 of 510 nM.
- Activation of Rac-1 and RhoA contributes to podocyte injury in chronic kidney disease (2013)
- Rho-family GTPases like RhoA and Rac-1 are potent regulators of cellular signaling that control gene expression, migration and inflammation. Activation of Rho-GTPases has been linked to podocyte dysfunction, a feature of chronic kidney diseases (CKD). We investigated the effect of Rac-1 and Rho kinase (ROCK) inhibition on progressive renal failure in mice and studied the underlying mechanisms in podocytes. SV129 mice were subjected to 5/6-nephrectomy which resulted in arterial hypertension and albuminuria. Subgroups of animals were treated with the Rac-1 inhibitor EHT1846, the ROCK inhibitor SAR407899 and the ACE inhibitor Ramipril. Only Ramipril reduced hypertension. In contrast, all inhibitors markedly attenuated albumin excretion as well as glomerular and tubulo-interstitial damage. The combination of SAR407899 and Ramipril was more effective in preventing albuminuria than Ramipril alone. To study the involved mechanisms, podocytes were cultured from SV129 mice and exposed to static stretch in the Flexcell device. This activated RhoA and Rac-1 and led via TGFβ to apoptosis and a switch of the cells into a more mesenchymal phenotype, as evident from loss of WT-1 and nephrin and induction of α-SMA and fibronectin expression. Rac-1 and ROCK inhibition as well as blockade of TGFβ dramatically attenuated all these responses. This suggests that Rac-1 and RhoA are mediators of podocyte dysfunction in CKD. Inhibition of Rho-GTPases may be a novel approach for the treatment of CKD.


text:
By Jim GaramoneAmerican Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Oct. 31, 2000 Pay provisions in the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 emphasize the importance of quality of life to DoD, starting with an across-the-board 3.7 percent raise for service members beginning Jan. 1, 2001.
"The 3.7 percent is a great deal for service members in that it is a percent higher than it otherwise would be by law," said Navy Capt. Elliott Bloxom, DoD director of military compensation. President Clinton signed the authorization bill into law Oct. 30.
The raise is set half a percentage point higher than the Employment Cost Index, a measure of private sector wage increases. The law previously sets military pay raises at a half percent below the index, but Congress voted to override that law.
"Last year Congress passed ECI plus a half for pay raises through fiscal 2006," Bloxom said. This will help close the perceived "pay gap" between the military and civilian counterparts.
Another pay action affects NCOs in grades E-5 to E-7 with eight to 24 years of service. The targeted July raise will increase their pay $30 to $60, Bloxom said.
DoD favored postponing further weighted raises pending the findings of the ongoing Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation. The review panel is specifically looking at enlisted pay issues. "We feel the July raise is a move in the right direction, but thought it was premature to enact that pay raise prior to the completion of the study," Bloxom said. "But Congress enacted it and it will go into effect July 1."
The review panel will finish its work by the end of the year, Bloxom said. Based on the results of the study, future levels of pay could be subject to further action.
Related Articles:AFPS News Service: Cohen Housing Allowance Initiative Takes WingAFPS News Service: Act Paves Way for Military Participation in Thrift PlanAFPS News Service: Troops on Food Stamps May Get Special AllowanceAFPS News Service: Clinton Signs Authorization Act, Pay, TRICARE Affected


text:
YAWL (Yet Another Workflow Language), an open source workflow language/management system, is based on a rigorous analysis of existing workflow management systems and workflow languages. Unlike traditional systems it provides direct support for all of the workflow patterns (http://www.workflowpatterns.com). YAWL supports the control-flow perspective, the data perspective, and is able to interact with web services declared in WSDL. It is based on a distributed, web-friendly infrastructure.
- Category: Workflow Engines
- License: Other
- HomePage: http://www.citi.qut.edu.au/yawl


text:
Resource Guide for Cervical Cancer
Phone: 1-866-228-4327
Internet address: http://www.cancer.org
Description of services provided: The American Cancer Society has created a robust web site with detailed information for patients, families, and professionals. The information is provided in both English and Spanish. They provide numerous ways to get involved in your community and message boards where you can share your feelings, ideas, or questions about cervical cancer.
Address: 409 12th Street, SW PO Box 96920 Washington, DC 20090-6920
Phone: 1-202-638-5577
Internet Address http://www.acog.org
Address: NCI Public Inquiries Office 6116 Executive Blvd., Room 3036A Bethesda, MD 20892-2580
Phone: 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237)
Internet address: http://www.cancer.gov
Description of services provided: The National Cancer Institute's web site provides comprehensive information and in an easy-to-understand format. In addition, because the NCI is the government's principal agency for cancer research and training, you can find a lot of information about clinical trails, research programs, and research funding.
Address: 7247 Hayvenhurst Ave., Suite A-7 Van Nuys, CA 91406
Phone: 1-800-685-5531 (for patients and families) 1-818-909-3849 (office)
Internet address: http://www.nccc-online.org
Description of services provided: This site provides plenty of information, but its main focus is providing support to women facing cervical cancer and their families. The organization states on its website, "The NCCC places a very special and personal focus on providing outreach support to women and family members going through the battle against cancer."
Revision Information
- Reviewer: Michael Woods, MD
- Review Date: 12/2014 -
- Update Date: 12/20/2014 -
This content is reviewed regularly and is updated when new and relevant evidence is made available. This information is neither intended nor implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider prior to starting any new treatment or with questions regarding a medical condition.
Copyright © EBSCO Publishing
All rights reserved.
Quick Links
Find a Physician
Use our online search physicians by specialty, name, city, or zip code. find now
Call 972-566-7111 if you need help with a Physicians referral
Schedule an Appointment
Request a new patient appointment online
Join Our Team
Find job opportunities at Medical City
Medical City Children's Hospital
Built by Specialists, Loved by Kids


text:
Posted at: 12/27/2012 3:36 PM
Updated at: 12/27/2012 6:20 PM
By: Anna Didio
SCHENECTADY - The city of Schenectady is about to lose its Police Chief.
Mark Chaires is retiring on Sunday.
On Monday, he starts his new position as Executive Director of the Hamilton Hill Arts Center.
Mayor Gary McCarthy is expected to name a replacement for Chaires, and he wants that person to live in the city.
Three assistant police chiefs are in the running for the job, but none live in Schenectady.


text:
Toilet Paper. Usually the cheap crap that they give you at work.
I had an awful case of Green Apple Quickstep but ran outta Shit Tickets.
από its426 22 Οκτώβριος 2003
11 more definitions
Top Definition
Toilet Tissue/Toilet Paper... plain and simple.
I'm going to be in here for a while, we're outta godamn shit tickets
από Dingle Boy 14 Αύγουστος 2003
euphemism for toilet paper
Hey man, you're outta shit tickets. How's about runnin' to the store real quick? I can't get up.
από osbo 4 Νοέμβριος 2002
one uses to wipe with after going to the bathroom
Did you get the shit tickets because i got to go to the show
από Paula Esquivel 21 Νοέμβριος 2007
a piece of toilet paper
"I need to wipe my ass, but I'm all out of shit tickets!"
από Luke Swiderski 7 Οκτώβριος 2003
Toilet paper, usually single ply but sometimes multi-ply.
I have to go to the store and buy some shit tickets
από Simon Callahan 24 Σεπτέμβριος 2010
square of soft paper used to remove feces from one's anus.
The men's restroom did not have enough shit tickets to clean my ass!.
από dronp 30 Οκτώβριος 2010


text:
Support us
Visit us
Contact us
Professor Sir Martin Taylor is Warden of Merton College, Oxford University and a Professor of Pure Mathematics. He is Past Vice-President and Physical Secretary of the Royal Society. In 1982 he was awarded the London Mathematical Society's Whitehead Prize and the Adams prize (shared) in 1983.
Professor Taylor was Professor of Pure Mathematics at the School of Mathematics, University of Manchester and, prior to its formation and merger, UMIST where he was appointed to a chair after moving from Trinity College, Cambridge in 1986. Most recently his research has led him to study various aspects of arithmetic geometry: in particular, he and his collaborators have demonstrated how geometric properties of zeros of integral polynomials in many variables can be determined by the behaviour associated L-functions. Professor Taylor read Mathematics at Pembroke College, Oxford, before gaining a PhD at Kings College London. He became President of the London Mathematical Society in 1998, and in the same year was given an EPSRC Senior Fellowship. In 2003 he received a Royal Society Wolfson Merit award and became Chairman of the International Review of Mathematics (Steering group). Professor Sir Martin Taylor was knighted in the 2009 New Year Honours.
Sir Martin Taylor FRS is Chair of the Vision for science and mathematics education 5-19 project committee.
Read about our President, Sir Paul Nurse
The annual Trustees' Report shows our financial statements.
To recognise, promote, and support excellence in science and to encourage the development and use of science for the benefit of humanity.
Learn about our mission to expand the frontiers of knowledge.
There are about 1,600 Fellows and Foreign Members.
The Council and Board manage the Society's activities.
We have had 350 years at the heart of scientific progress.
Annual publications about our finances and activities.
Information about jobs and internships at the Royal Society.


text:
Jakarta Globe
Holding a slight advantage as it goes into its final group stage match of the 2012 AFF Suzuki Cup, Indonesia knows it cannot afford to make even the smallest mistake when it plays Malaysia at Kuala Lumpur's Bukit Jalil Stadium on Saturday night.
Indonesia leads Group B with four points and needs to at least hold reigning champion Malaysia to a draw in order to advance to the semifinal round.
A loss will most likely end its regional championship hopes. Indonesia could lose and still advance, provided Singapore loses to Laos, but that scenario looks unlikely based on both teams' records so far.
With a decisive match to play, coach Nil Maizar urged his players to keep calm and focus on the opponent.
"We must stay positive and work hard on the pitch. We have to think positive and be patient when playing against Malaysia," he said on Friday.
The Merah Putih started its AFF Cup campaign in unimpressive fashion, being held to a 2-2 draw by Laos in last Sunday's opener. But it rebounded with a 1-0 win over Singapore on Wednesday, which rocketed Indonesia to the top of the group.
Nil looks at his team's a fighting spirit as a key to the match, since it has already carried Indonesia this far.
"We need to have the fighting spirit against a strong and experienced Malaysian team. We are hopeful that we can overcome them," he said.
There will be few changes for the Merah Putih. Central defender Wahyu Wijiastanto will miss the match after picking up two yellow cards. Fortunately, Handi Ramdhan and Tonny Cussel have recovered from their injuries.
The squad will also welcome back goalkeeper Endra Prasetya, who sat out the Singapore game after getting a red card against Laos.
With more options available to him, Nil is expected to finalize his lineup just before the game starts.
Malaysia is coming off a 4-1 win over Laos on Wednesday but finds itself in a must-win position in order to advance.
The team is tied with on points with Singapore, but trails on goal difference.
"At this stage, the players must know the importance of this game," said Malaysia coach Rajagobal Krishnasamy.
"They must have the confidence to play much better. The mind-set [in the team] is to beat Indonesia."
The game is scheduled for kickoff at 7:45 p.m. Jakarta time.


text:
|Sen. Kerry Commends AIA Call on State Department to Integrate Security and Design Excellence
|Thursday, 09 July 2009 10:22
Task Force proposes recommendations to help design and build embassies that are secure, sustainable, and represent the best in American civic architecture and design
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) commended the American Institute of Architects (AIA) for releasing a new report today to help the State Department design and build 21st Century embassies.
The report, "Design for Diplomacy: New Embassies for the 21st Century," calls on the State Department to integrate embassy security with design excellence. It includes 59 recommendations made by the AIA's 21st Century Embassy Task Force, an unprecedented collaboration of more than 50 leading architects, engineers, landscape architects, ambassadors, diplomats, Foreign Service personnel, public art experts and art and architectural historians.
Sen. Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said, "We're all well aware of the changed world we live in and the need to have security. But I believe we can build embassies that are not only safe and secure, but embassies that also reflect America's values of openness, creativity and innovation. It's also important our embassies are environmentally sustainable. The late Patrick Moynihan was outspoken in his belief that our public buildings should reflect the highest aspirations of our society. And the AIA report is an important first step towards reestablishing principles of design excellence in our embassies and consulates abroad."
The report recommends evaluating the current embassy design program, which was implemented after the 1998 attacks on U.S. embassies in East Africa to improve security and expedite the construction of new facilities with a standard design that could be replicated anywhere in the world. The report calls on the State Department to "develop an approach that would enable architects and engineers to design embassies that reflect the unique needs of a site at a foreign post." The report also calls for an analysis to review the effectiveness of the standard embassy design program in meeting current and future goals for building performance and cost-effectiveness.
Other recommendations include:
· Developing a program that integrates security and design excellence for new embassies
· Integrating sustainable best practices in all new facilities
· Establishing a multi-disciplinary peer review process that includes diplomatic and Foreign Service stakeholders, design and construction professionals, art advisors, senior Diplomatic Security officers and those familiar with the foreign post as peers
· Widening the pool of firms to include women and minority owned businesses, and emerging firms
· Allocating resources for public art in all embassies
Barbara A. Nadel, FAIA, chair of the 21st Century Embassy Task Force, and principal of Barbara Nadel Architect noted, "Protecting the dedicated men and women who conduct American diplomacy around the world is of primary concern to the State Department in a changing geopolitical landscape. Design excellence demonstrates that the U.S. can provide diplomatic facilities that are secure, sustainable, and symbolize America's vitality, enduring strength, decency, and innovation. These essential qualities contribute to the conduct of American diplomacy, encourage international commerce, and enhance cultural exchange. This is an important challenge and opportunity for America's architects and engineers."
Related Articles:
|Last Updated on Thursday, 09 July 2009 10:25


text:
Contact The Summit Lighthouse®
Need to contact the Summit Lighthouse? Please use one of our mail, phone or email options below to get your questions or concerns handled as expeditiously as possible. Thank you for your input!
Postal Mail:
63 Summit Way
Gardiner, Montana USA 59030-9314
Support – Customer Service:
Phone: 1-800-245-5445 or 1-406-848-9500.
En español: 1-406-848-9501.
Fax United States: 1-800-221-8307, International: 1-406-848-9555
Customer Service Hours
Call our Customer Service representative:
Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday: 9:30 AM – 12:30 PM and 1:30 – 5:00 PM
Thursday: 10:30 AM – 12:30 PM and 1:30 – 5:00 PM
If you miss us, please leave a message and we will get back with you!
All times are USA Mountain Time. To compare with your local time, visit www.TimeZoneConverter.com.
Email Support:
General questions:
For Internet Broadcast technical issues, email:
TSL Now or TSL Ahora subscription:
ePearl subscription issues:
TSL online bookstore issues:
Ascended Master Library problems?
Remove obstacles to the flow of abundance:
Book study groups:
Translation Rights
For specific information regarding available translation rights for The Summit Lighthouse® titles, please contact:
Phyllis G. Blain, Rights Director
Tel: 406-848-9676
Summit University Press
63 Summit Way
Gardiner, Montana 59030-9314 U.S.A.
Fax: 406-848-9744
Request Your Free Information Packet
The Summit Lighthouse Location
We are located just off Highway 89, Park County, Montana on the banks of the Yellowstone River just 10 miles north of Yellowstone National Park.
Larger Map
Latitude 45.113N, longitude -110.79W
Elevation: 5,134 feet
Mountain time zone (GMT -7), and observes Daylight Savings Time.
Nearest airport: Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport (BZN) at Gallatin Field (79 miles)
Driving directions from Gallatin Airport at Bing.com maps
Nearest bus station: Livingston (45 miles)
Nearest town: Gardiner (10 miles), population (July 2007): 871
Public transportation: None
Private transportation: Taxi or rental car
Driving Distances:
Old Faithful, Yellowstone National Park, ~65 miles (about 2 hours)
Bozeman, MT: ~70 miles (about 1.5 hours)
Billings, MT: ~165 miles (about 3 hours)
Salt Lake City, UT, ~380 miles (about 7.5 hours, via Yellowstone)
Spokane, WA, ~475 miles (about 7.75 hours)
Calgary, AB, Canada: ~600 miles (about 10.5 hours)
Denver, CO, ~700 miles (about 11.5 hours)
Seattle, WA, ~750 miles (about 12 hours)
Minneapolis, MN, ~1,000 miles (about 16 hours)
San Francisco, CA, ~1,000 miles (about 18.5 hours, via Yellowstone)
New York City, NY ~1900 miles


text:
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. v. DARDEN
- 1990-1999
Legal provision: Employee Retirement Income Security
Argument of George R. Ragsdale
Chief Justice Rehnquist: We'll hear argument next in No. 90-1802, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. Robert Darden.
Mr. Ragsdale, you may proceed.
Mr. Ragsdale: Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court:
The issue here is whether an insurance agent, Mr. Darden, initially found by District Judge Boyle to be an independent contractor, was instead and employee of Nationwide for purposes of ERISA.
If Mr. Darden was not an employee, the provisions of ERISA did not apply to him.
Thus, the case turns upon the proper definition of employee.
We have been here before.
This is a revisitation in an ERISA--
Unknown Speaker: xxx.
Mr. Ragsdale: --Pardon me?
Unknown Speaker: So have we.
Mr. Ragsdale: Justice White, I know you have been here, because you were a member of the Court which decided United Insurance Company.
This is a revisitation in an ERISA context of identical issues which have already been decided in favor of the position which both Nationwide and the Government assert today.
The background of history is that Congress enacted both the National Labor Relations Act and the Social Security Act by making them applicable to employees.
And by using that word, standing alone, without more, as here.
And in the forties, this Court, in Hearst and Silk and Bartels, decided that it would conceive a definition of the word employee different from that which Congress intended.
And Congress repudiated those three decisions and asserted what the Senate committee called the unbroken intention of Congress to insist upon the application of the common law of agency in determining who was and who was not a member of the class of employees.
After the confrontation between Congress and the Court was resolved, the litigation began anew.
In 1962, the Court decided a Social Security case in Enochs, applied the principles of the common law of agency.
And then in 1968, when Justice White was here, it decided United Insurance.
And the writer of that decision, Justice Black, said these word, which I thought were profound, and I want to repeat the Court this morning.
He said, in trying to determine who was a member of the class of employees in a Labor Act case, there is no doubt, he said, there is no doubt that we should apply the common law agency test here in distinguishing an employee from an independent contractor.
Unknown Speaker: Justice Black was sort of a literalist.
He hung on the literal meaning of words a lot.
Nobody here that does that.
Nobody does that anymore.
Mr. Ragsdale: Two terms ago, Justice Scalia, Justice Marshall, writing for a unanimous Court in Reid, and citing decisions of this Court going back to 1915, said: In the past, when Congress has used the term employee without defining it, as it did here in ERISA, we have concluded that Congress intends to describe the conventional master-servant relationship as understood by common law agency doctrine.
Unknown Speaker: Mr. Ragsdale, the Solicitor General, whose representative will be speaking, I guess, this morning, suggests that the common law test should be applied with an eye to the remedial goals of the legislation.
And in what ways do you agree with that and in what ways would the remedial goals of ERISA apply, do you think, to affect the common law test?
Mr. Ragsdale: Justice O'Connor, he discusses it, but he does not propose it.
Mr. Darden wishes it, but he cannot demonstrate that he is entitled to it.
There is no case that I know of... and I've looked hard because I thought somebody would ask me... there is no case that I know of which has ever turned and been made distinct by applying the common law principles of agency, and then twisting it one ratchet to make it by considering the remedial goals of ERISA, or the Labor Act, or the Social Security Act, to make it come out different.
Only one court that I know of has gone through the exercise of considering it, and that was the district court in Harlow, cited in our brief.
Judge Kobrines went through the exercise, and when he got through he decided that it made no difference to the outcome of the case.
My answer is that it cannot be demonstrated that a consideration of the remedial goals of the legislation will give a different result than that which is obtained by the application of the principles of the common law, and anyway--
Unknown Speaker: I assume that the remedial goals of the legislation include the use of the word employee, don't they?
Mr. Ragsdale: --That was what was coming after anyway.
And anyway, that was the word Congress chose to achieve the remedial goals of the legislation, to extend valuable, enormously important benefits to a segmented group of the work force, employees, who are the same focus as in the Labor Act, who are the same focus as in the Social Security Act.
But there is a line, and the line ends with employees, and it does not extend to every person in the United States who works.
Unknown Speaker: Mr. Ragsdale, you assert in your brief that one reason we should agree with you is that the... is that the test proposed by the Fourth Circuit will be very confusing and difficult to apply.
Do you really think it's going to be any more difficult to apply than the common law employee test?
Mr. Ragsdale: I do.
I do, Justice Scalia.
It would seem to me that the--
Unknown Speaker: I mean, the latter is venerable confusion, but it's still confusion, nonetheless, isn't it?
Mr. Ragsdale: --It would seem to me that what I call the Darden test, the test articulated and decided by the Fourth Circuit, is dependent in every case upon the personal desires of the individual.
Did he or did he not rely upon the affirmations or whatever were made to him?
What does he expect, if anything?
Does his investment behavior change as he goes through his life span?
Does he forego the means of making other investments to provide for his retirement?
How can anyone possibly know that unless every year a plan administrator sends out a questionnaire to everybody in the United States who is covered by a plan?
It is a subjective, unprincipled test which cannot be determined by... objectively in advance.
And as far as I can tell, it will cause great confusion, and I think that is one of the reasons that Mr. Wright is here this morning to argue for the Department of Labor and the Department of Treasury, and urge the Court not to adopt the Darden test, but indeed to reverse the decision of the Fourth Circuit.
Unknown Speaker: Do employers need to know on an ongoing basis which persons are covered by ERISA and which are not?
Mr. Ragsdale: They do, Justice Kennedy, because if they do not, an employer... let's take a big employer, any big employer.
General Motors needs to know whose in their plan because they need to know if they've got enough money in their plan to take care of whoever is in it.
Unknown Speaker: Well, of course they need to know who's in the plan.
Do they need to know how many of those who are in the plan are covered by ERISA?
Do they need to know that for any ongoing management purposes?
Mr. Ragsdale: If I understand Your Honor, they do need to know who is covered by ERISA and who is not because their plan must be funded to provide for those who are.
And it need not be funded for those who are not.
Two years... two terms ago, in Reid, the Court unanimously applied the common law of agency, declaring that the correct test is the right of the hiring party to control the manner and means of rendering service.
Judge Boyle, the district court judge who granted summary judgment... unlike Mr. Finley, I lost, but I should have won... Judge Boyle granted summary judgment in favor of Nationwide in the first place.
And he applied the decisions of this Court in United Insurance, quoting from it, assessing the total factual context in light of what that court called the pertinent common law agency principles.
He applied 14 detailed and undisputed common law factors, and decided that Mr. Darden was an independent contractor.
Those pertinent common law factors are essentially the same as those identified and applied 4 years later and two terms ago by this Court in Reid.
Mr. Darden appears to suggest that the common law of agency is the natural enemy of ERISA.
Quite the contrary.
Federal courts, particularly the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, have twice applied the common law of agency in ERISA cases, in ERISA cases, and found in favor of the employee, not against the employee.
It is a fallacy to presume that the common law of agency always works a bad result.
Mr. Chief Justice, I have not much time because my argument is bifurcated.
Such time as I do have left, I respectfully reserve it for rebuttal.
Unknown Speaker: Very well, Mr. Ragsdale.
Mr. Wright, we'll hear now from you.
Argument of Christopher J. Wright
Mr. Wright: Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court:
If I could first turn to Justice Kennedy's question, I would like to add a few more comments.
Employee is a very basic term in ERISA and it's used in a variety of contexts, and I can think of three where an employer would very much need to know from the start whether he's dealing with employees or independent contractors.
First, the basic tax qualification rule provides that a plan may only obtain the tax benefits available under ERISA if it exists for the exclusive benefits of employees.
Second, ERISA's nondiscrimination rules allow tax benefits for plans only if the plans do not discriminate against low-compensation employees.
Again, you need to know what... who is an employee, and who is an independent contractor in figuring out whether there's discrimination.
Third, whether or not a plan qualifies for tax benefits which are available under title II of ERISA, if the plan affects employees, then the employer must comply with the reporting and disclosure provisions in title I of ERISA.
So it's critical from the start for an employer to know whether he's dealing with people covered by the statute or not.
And that is why both Labor and the IRS provide for employers to get opinion... opinion letters from them, revenue rulings, as they are called in the case of the Internal Revenue Service.
And I think it's obvious, for the reasons Mr. Ragsdale stated, that the Fourth Circuit's test, which turns on the subjective reliance factors of individuals, is simply not a practical test to use here.
On the remand after the Fourth Circuit's first decision, the district court determined that Darden is an employee largely because, although he had opened an individual retirement account and had taken out an annuity, he had only put about $18,000 in those accounts.
If he had put more money in the account, the district court would have found that he wasn't relying on Nationwide's plan, and would have found him to be an independent contractor.
We don't think that the qualification of plans can turn on such subjective criteria.
Excuse me, Justice Scalia.
Unknown Speaker: May I... I thought you'd finished that thought.
As I understand it, although Mr. Ragsdale doesn't seem to think so, I took your brief to differ a little bit from... and the Government's position to differ a bit from his in that he would rely upon the common law test and the Government apparently would rely primarily on the common law test but not exclusively.
Mr. Wright: That's right, Your Honor.
Unknown Speaker: What do you add to the common law test?
Mr. Wright: We do, as Justice O'Connor put it, think that it has to be applied in terms of the remedial purposes of ERISA, and let me try to tell you what I mean by that.
Unknown Speaker: Try.
Mr. Wright: First, let me say that we... this isn't our test.
This is this Court's test set forth in Rutherford Food, which I think is the most relevant case for this Court to consider.
Rutherford Food was the 1946 case involving the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The definition of employee in the Fair Labor Standards Act is identical to the definition of employee in section 36 of ERISA.
That is, it says an employee is any individual employed by an employer.
Now this Court looked primarily to the common law factors in determining whether the butchers involved in that case were employees or independent contractors.
But it also said that Congress' choice of such broad language, any individual employed by an employer, indicated that in some cases the test might depart from the common law.
This Court said that, page 728 of the opinion.
It also added that it was most appropriate to look at industry practice to see whether a label was being attached simply to circumvent the purposes of the act.
In the Rutherford Food case, for instance, these boners were clearly a part of the whole process of turning cattle into retail products.
And the--
Unknown Speaker: Well, Mr. Wright, is the Rutherford Food case, is that from the same era and vintage as the Hearst case, which was overruled by Congress?
Mr. Wright: --It is.
But let me say that Congress has not--
Unknown Speaker: Overruled Rutherford?
Mr. Wright: --No.
And Congress' adoption of the exact language used in the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1974, in light of that language in the FLSA and this Court's decision seems to us to be a powerful evidence that Congress intends ERISA to be similarly interpreted.
Unknown Speaker: But for the fact that nobody knows how it makes any difference, I guess that would be a strong argument.
But if Congress, like Mr. Ragsdale, has never been able to find any instance in which it made a dime's worth of difference, why would they go to the trouble of amending the statute?
Mr. Wright: --Well, let me turn to that.
As you said earlier, there's some venerable confusion involving the common law test.
The common law test has led to clear answers in some... in many cases.
And indeed, we think it's led to a very clear answer with respect to insurance agents like Darden.
They are independent contractors.
But debit agents, for instance, the sort of collection agent involved in the United Insurance case, the courts, the State courts are all over the lot in the auto accident cases as to whether debit agents are independent contractors or whether they're employees.
We think in a situation where the common law test does not clearly lead to one result or another, it would be proper to consider the remedial purposes of ERISA and conclude, just as this Court concluded in applying the common law test, that debit agents might properly be considered the employees.
Unknown Speaker: But why is that?
I mean, the remedial purposes of ERISA include limiting ERISA to employees.
It seems to me real bootstrapping to say, well, since you consult the remedial purposes of ERISA, and those remedial purposes are limited to employees.
And therefore, for some reason we should expand the meaning of employees?
Mr. Wright: I think that there are certain close cases where it's not so much an expansion as a rule of how to determine whether someone like debit agents are on one side or another.
Let me turn to a second difference.
Under the common law--
Unknown Speaker: So this is what the rule means: in a close case they are employees and are covered.
Is that what the broad remedial purposes thing means?
Mr. Wright: --Well, unfortunately, it's not always that easy.
Sometimes the remedial purposes of ERISA would point, as in the Professional and Executive Leasing case, to a finding that the people in question were not employees.
That is the case that involves the second difference.
One of the common law factors is the label attached to the employees.
And there is... there have been many cases involving what seemed to be clear attempts to circumvent ERISA.
For instance, in that case, that was the case where the professionals, in order to avoid the nondiscrimination rules and not cover their nurses and secretaries, made an agreement that they would be employees of a leasing company which purported to lease them back to their professional corporations to provide services.
In that case, looking at the whole transaction, the IRS, and then later the tax court, agreed that the professionals were not employees of this leasing company, but were in fact employees of the professional corporation.
So that if the professionals wanted to set up a tax-qualified pension plan, they would have to cover some of their employees as well.
There's a third difference between the way the IRS and Labor approach these cases and the way it often works in the common law test.
And the common law test is often applied as in the auto accident cases in an intensely fact-specific way.
With the debit agents, for instance, there have been cases from the same State where a debit agent who's on his way to make a collection, their primary job is found to be an employee.
But if a debit agent happens to be on the way to sell insurance to someone, he is found to be an independent contractor.
Now for the reasons I started out with in speaking to Justice Kennedy, it seems clear to us that a more categorical approach has to be taken under ERISA, and persons... there has to be a treatment of insurance agents employed... for instance in this case, all insurance agents covered by the same agency agreement with Nationwide have to be placed on one side of the line or the other.
Unknown Speaker: Even if the terms of their employment are different?
I don't understand.
All debit agents have to be--
Mr. Wright: If they're all covered by the same agency agreement.
Everyone covered by the same agreement should be treated the same.
Thank you.
Unknown Speaker: --Thank you, Mr. Wright.
Mr. Follin, we'll hear from you.
Argument of Marion G. Follin, III
Mr. Follin: Thank you.
Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court:
I represent the respondent Robert Darden.
I ask the Court to affirm the judgment in Mr. Darden's favor, allowing him to receive his retirement benefits.
I'd like to discuss for just a second the history of these events of the statutes... the way one could look at them.
The three cases that held that a broad remedial social legislation, such as the Fair Labor Standards Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the Social Security Act, should be construed in a manner to reflect the broad remedial purposes of the statute, not just use the common law test, all took place in the 1940's.
Three... two of those decisions are the ones, Hearst and U.S. v. Silk.
Hearst case affected the National Labor Relations Act.
U.S. v. Silk interpreted the Social Security Act.
Congress, in about 1947 or '48 came back and amended the Social Security Act, and also amended the National Labor Relations Act to specify that the term employee in those acts was to be construed using the common law interpretation, the common law agency interpretation.
Now the Fair Labor Standards Act, which is interpreted in the Rutherford Food Corporation case in about 1947, '46, has never been amended as far as I know.
That definition, statutory definition, is exactly the same as the statutory definition of employee which is contained in ERISA.
So that if you look at the state of the law in 1974, and that Congress had before it when they adopted ERISA, they knew that if they wanted to restrict the term employee to a common law meaning, they could write it in there like they had done before in the National Labor Relations Act and the Social Security Act.
They could do it if they wanted.
Maybe they never thought about it, but they didn't do that.
They adopted the same interpretation as the Fair Labor Standards Act.
And they knew when they did that that the Rutherford Food Corporation was still the law of the land, and is somewhat vague and difficult to understand as it was.
One could reasonably assume they knew they were adopting the statute, like the Department of Labor says, was a broad, remedial social statute.
And they also must have known the same time that under the Rutherford Food Corporation, the courts... the courts would look to the purposes of ERISA in interpreting the term employee and they wouldn't be bound solely by the common law.
So that our argument is that you are writing a slightly more open book.
And I add one other... one other fact to it.
That in 1961, this Court, in Goldberg v. Whitaker, held in a case involving the Fair Labor Standards Act, that some people who did some work at home in the crocheting field were employees.
And in that case, the Court repeated the ruling of the prior holdings that they'd done in Rutherford Food and the Hearst case by saying that the Court was not bound by the technical concepts of the common law, but would look to the purposes of the statute and use a definition based on the economic realities of the situation.
That was in 1961.
So the Court did that in '61.
Congress would have had that opinion before then, in 1974, when they enacted ERISA.
It was not clear... I mean, I'm not contending that one can say exactly what Congress intended, but you've got to assume Congress... or recently--
Unknown Speaker: Well, Mr. Follin, if I understand what you're saying, you're saying we should look to the same definition and test as the Court did in Rutherford Food under a statute, a different statute with similar language.
Is that what you're saying?
Mr. Follin: --Well, that would be one way to look at it.
Let me be more specific exactly--
Unknown Speaker: I thought that was the position taken by the Solicitor General.
And in his view, then that leads to a reversal here, because it wouldn't include an independent contractor such as your client.
Mr. Follin: --Well, what I'm asking the Court to do is to focus on the purposes of ERISA.
And whether you phrase it as using the Darden test standing by itself, or whether you take the Darden test or some of the factors that arise from ERISA and combine it in some fashion with the common law test, like it looked like the Court did in Rutherford Food.
There's a series of cases where courts have done different things.
I just... each statute's somewhat different.
Fair Labor Standards Act, some of the circuit courts have--
Unknown Speaker: I just want to be clear as to what your argument is.
Mr. Follin: --Yes.
Unknown Speaker: If I'm hearing you as I think I am, you are saying exactly what the Solicitor General is saying is the test, but you come out differently.
Mr. Follin: No, I don't say exactly the same as the Solicitor General.
I agree with the Solicitor General that you have to take into account the broad remedial purpose of the statute.
That is, that these common law factors are not sufficient alone.
Where I disagree with the Solicitor General is how I do it.
That is, how you go about doing this.
There is a way to do it.
The Fourth Circuit has provided a guideline and a method to do it.
If I could just give an example to the way I come out differently than he would on his test.
For example, one of the common law indicia that's listed in those lists of things you see in the restatement of agency, is whether the person involved owns his own tools or instruments of trade.
That's a throwback, obviously to something a long time ago when people... when this thing first came up.
In this case, Mr. Darden owned the building.
He also owned his car.
He owned the typewriters and desk inside his office.
So in a way, he looks like an independent contractor under the common law test.
However, if you look at the business he was in, which was selling insurance, he did not own the only real asset the business had, which was the expirations, that is the policies.
An independent insurance agent has one asset.
That is, his business, his good will, his policies.
Unknown Speaker: Well, why are not these other physical properties that he owns also assets?
Perhaps not as important or not as... worth as much, but they're certainly assets.
Mr. Follin: They are assets.
That is correct, Your Honor, but it seemed to me that when you're considering the case, they're incidental to the result or where you ought to be focusing on ERISA.
That the focus should be on the ownership of assets that are meaningful with respect to retirement.
Unknown Speaker: Do you think the Fourth Circuit opinion is consistent with Rutherford Food?
They only cite, as I read their opinion, the two cases that Congress overruled.
They never cited Rutherford Foods.
Mr. Follin: Well, there is an inconsistency there, Your Honor, because Rutherford Food considered some typical common law factors as well as the purposes of the statute.
It looked like the Fourth Circuit just focused on the purposes of the statute.
Unknown Speaker: Yes, and Rutherford Food is much closer to endorsing the common law test than Hearst or Silk were, I think.
Don't you agree with that?
Mr. Follin: Well, I'm not so sure I do.
I think the Court looked more at the economic realities in reaching its result.
Unknown Speaker: In Rutherford Food?
Mr. Follin: Yes.
In the way these people were... they said, well, they were getting paid, you know, so much, how much for each piece of item that passed on, each piece of meat, or whatever they're doing.
But the Court concluded they were (a) dependent on this company for their livelihood, and they were really part of the business.
Now in this case, in Mr. Darden's case, about who owned the business.
He... anybody that goes into business... I mean, the reason you go into business for yourself is to build up some equity, something you can use when you get old.
You can sell it.
You can retire.
You can give it to your children.
You don't do it to get a salary now because it's a lot of work.
So Mr. Darden built... he couldn't build up his own equity, his own business because Nationwide owned it.
They owned the whole thing.
He couldn't sell it.
So were he to retire... he couldn't give it to his children were he to retire.
He couldn't sell it.
It's not like people... it's... typical independent agent can sell his business and retire on it.
That's why when you focus on that factor, that's the main one, the main contentions I have, is the Court should focus on retirement benefits itself, not necessarily the furniture.
The furniture, it doesn't make any difference who owns the furniture, to me.
I don't think that amounts to a hill of beans.
Unknown Speaker: So the taking into account the broad remedial purposes of the statute means finding to be employees those who need the money.
Is that what it comes to?
Mr. Follin: No, Your Honor, that's not true.
It focuses on people who have... their assets are not oriented toward... necessarily toward their retirement because they're depending in a way, they are relying and depending on the representations that the employer or whoever gave them the retirement made.
The case is that... here is that Nationwide told them it was their retirement.
They gave them a film and slide show that are in the evidence.
This is your retirement.
You can depend on this.
He said okay, and he stayed there 20 years.
And then they terminated him and he didn't get it.
But the relationship--
Unknown Speaker: Well, I thought the agreement also provided that if the agency were terminated and the agent then went into competition within a 25-mile radius, that the benefits would be lost.
Mr. Follin: --That's correct.
That's what it provided.
And that was what it was that we're contending that those provisions are not enforceable because of ERISA, because of Congress' policy to see... to give people a nonforfeitable right.
That's why they enacted the statute.
I mean, if you've got a nonforfeited right, I guess you can steal money and still get your pension.
That's my understanding of the rule.
And that's why we filed the claim.
Another factor in... that relates to the remedial purposes of the statute and what the Fourth Circuit... one of the things they discussed was control.
And it's in both... both in the common law definition you have control and in the other one, in the Darden thing, about who controls the details of the business.
In this case, the court found that Nationwide controlled the terms of the agreement itself, that is that they were able to dictate to their agents what went in it.
They were given the agreement, said you can sign it or leave.
Now, that reflects the type of person who's... who needs or would be covered by ERISA.
It's not... and also.
if you think about an independent contractor, you think about the common law definition.
You can say, well, under the agreement they couldn't do this and they couldn't do that.
But if you can dictate the terms of the agreement itself, it seems to me you have total control.
It's irrelevant.
What... they let him do it.
I would compare the relationship between Nationwide and Darden to more of a parent-child relationship than a brother-sister relationship.
Unknown Speaker: Does the definition section of ERISA include the provision in the Fair Labor Standards Act that says an employee includes any individual employed by an employer?
But it also goes on to say employ includes to suffer or permit to work.
Mr. Follin: That's not in ERISA, Your Honor.
Unknown Speaker: It is not?
Mr. Follin: No, sir.
Unknown Speaker: Well, that is the... that seems to have been very important under Rutherford, because that definition was taken from the Child Labor Act.
Mr. Follin: Well, I'm not aware of the origin of it, but I agree it had bearing on the court's decision.
But I don't think the fact that the word employ--
Unknown Speaker: But that certainly doesn't sound like a... the common law definition, does it?
Mr. Follin: --Well, I don't know.
I looked it up in the dictionary and put it my brief, the word employ.
And employ means... it's a fairly broad term.
It means to... I don't recall, but one of the examples it had was you employ a lawyer to straighten out a legal tangle, which would imply that the word employee includes independent contractors.
It's a word you use someone to do something for you.
I might employ someone to fix my house.
That doesn't mean that that person's my employee.
It only means I'm using him.
I was looking at the--
Unknown Speaker: Well, then would you still feel that Rutherford was controlling in the interpretation of the ERISA definition of employee?
Mr. Follin: --I would think it would be, yes, Your Honor.
Unknown Speaker: Well, why if the ERISA did not carry over the full definition of employee from the FLSA and the Court in Rutherford relied in part in its determination on the part that was not carried over into ERISA?
Mr. Follin: Well, I think that the statement in Rutherford that the definitions of the law employed should look to the purposes of the legislation in a broad remedial statute.
To me, that policy out--
Unknown Speaker: Well, what statute isn't remedial, Mr. Follin?
All statutes are presumably passed to remedy something.
Mr. Follin: --Well, I'm sure they are, but I don't... I wouldn't consider the Internal Revenue Service Act a broad remedial statute.
Unknown Speaker: Why not?
Supposing there's a sweeping overhaul to the Government.
The Congress says too many people have been avoiding their taxes and we're going to do something to remedy this.
We're going to really clamp down.
Why wouldn't that be a broad remedial statute?
Mr. Follin: Well, I just... the ones they said are broad remedial statutes dealt with problems that people had facing some kind of economic difficulty.
Unknown Speaker: You think only statutes designed to help people in economic difficulty should be broadly construed?
Mr. Follin: I was just trying to compare ones that the courts have said are that way.
I don't know.
There was the National Labor Relations Act, the Social Security Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and this... and ERISA are the ones, the only four I'm aware of that where people have used that tag.
There may be many others, but I'm not aware of them.
I don't know.
I have not tried to go find them all.
Those are the only four that we've really talked about here.
This one is.
And it appears to me it would be, and if that's the case, then it seems to me you're going to look to Rutherford, U.S. v. Silk, and these other cases and not use just the common law definition of employee.
Unknown Speaker: Well, certainly you wouldn't look to Silk or to Hearst where Congress overruled the holdings?
Mr. Follin: Well, they overruled it only with respect to those particular acts.
They didn't overrule the concept that was put forward.
They said we don't want that in the National Labor Relations Act.
The said... they didn't say anything about the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Unknown Speaker: No.
I agree with that.
But certainly you would not look to the Hearst case after Congress said we don't want that in the National Labor Relations Act, would you?
Mr. Follin: No, absolutely.
You wouldn't look at it in interpreting the National Labor Relations Act, true.
But if you were trying to use that concept in it with respect to the broad remedial purpose of the statutes and how you apply it, you might look at it.
Courts have.
Unknown Speaker: Well, why would you do that if Congress later overruled it?
Mr. Follin: Well, because just... in that... let me just give you an example.
In the case, that Reid case, CCN v. Reid, in the opinion of this Court where they said, well, you know, typically you look at the common law to look at common terms.
You would look at the common law.
And they put... compare NLRB v. Hearst where the Court took a broader view based on the... text... context of the statute.
I mean, this Court, that was just a few years ago, cited NLRB v. Hearst Publications, the proposition that in a... for this type of statute... I'm not saying this particular statute, but this type of statute, you would take a different view.
You would not just do it.
So it's still alive and well.
Unknown Speaker: Do--
Mr. Follin: I took that to mean, excuse me, that it was alive and well.
Unknown Speaker: --Do you think the word compare in a subsequent case is necessarily an approving citation?
Mr. Follin: Well, I don't know whether you consider that approving citation, Your Honor.
I would say it was in the opinion.
I read it.
And I took it to mean that Hearst was not overruled.
If you say compare, and I... compare to me means well go look it up.
It's different.
So that's what we did.
I think that it does... the question is whether it makes a difference.
It does make a difference.
It makes a difference to Mr. Darden and it makes a difference to other... I'm sure other people, even though in Mr. Darden's case, as far as the difference between a... the common law definition, I guess he would be considered in sort of a gray area.
There are factors--
Unknown Speaker: The Fourth Circuit in its opinion said he didn't meet the common law definition, didn't it?
Mr. Follin: --They said he probably did not.
Unknown Speaker: Yeah.
Mr. Follin: Yes, that's correct.
That's what they said.
Now, the problem with the status of the case now on that... looking from that aspect is that we never tried that issue out.
The only thing we ever tried out was whether Mr. Darden passed the test in the Darden opinion.
We never tried out the question of whether he was actually the common law employee or a common law independent contractor.
Unknown Speaker: If we happen to disagree with you, it would go back I suppose, for further proceedings.
Mr. Follin: That's possible.
Yes, Your Honor.
Unknown Speaker: To see whether under the right standard Darden's an employee.
Mr. Follin: Correct.
Because we never... I just... it's a mistake to say... to jump to conclusion that he is an independent contractor based on what's before you now because the trial court just didn't want to hear about that.
They didn't want to spend the time figuring out all these different things, the minutia of detail about control that was exercised over him.
But what I am asking the Court to do is to put into the standard the important relevant considerations arising out of the purposes of ERISA and to avoid simply adopting a common law standard that (a) doesn't have any relationship to the purposes of that statute, and (b) has been proven, at least to my satisfaction that did not work in cases where it's been tried.
And I cited in my brief Professor Larson's book on workers' compensation.
He was very critical of taking this... the common law standard, transposing... just putting it over into workers' comp... extremely critical of it, and said it'd not worked and terrible problem.
And they've had to go back.
Now they're changing it.
They're changing it to a slightly different rule because workers' comp is entirely different from vicarious liability.
If you adopt the standard like that, and just stick it in here, I think if you... if the results are the same as what is done is workers' comp, you'll end up coming back... somebody will come back in 30 or 40 years and have to face a quagmire.
I don't know.
If you got... there was a case I read that you cited last year about seamen and longshoremen.
I don't know.
It seemed like in 1940 or so, the Court issued an opinion, and this created a lot of confusion and then you had come back 50 years later and kind of tidy it up.
It seems to me you're better off in my view looking straight at the statute and Mr. Darden's particular facts, the particular things about Mr. Darden, and writing about that and citing on that basis.
The narrow, the very narrow basis, as narrow as possible, you leave open other considerations out of the circuit courts or other courts to follow, other people to follow, to interpret the ERISA and not close it off by saying you just can use these 10 or 11 factors out of the restatement of agency.
And then you go home and you've listed them.
It's like, you know, it doesn't have any relationship to what the purposes of the statute are, and I think that if you relate the purposes of the statute and the common law factors, you can tie them together.
And it's perfectly legitimate.
I understand the Rutherford case.
I understand you want to be aware of precedent.
I understand that the Court wants to go back and look at the common law when they see statutory terms.
But I also ask you and urge you to look at the purposes of this statute that... the statute takes life out of its... and breath out of what its purposes are.
Congress can't anticipate every act, every single person that comes along.
Mr. Darden's case is different.
There may be... never be another Mr. Darden or anyone like him.
All I'm asking you to do is look at Mr. Darden's case with great attention to his particular set of facts.
If there are no further questions, Your Honors, I will conclude my remarks.
Thank you very much.
Unknown Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Follin.
Mr. Ragsdale, you have 9 minutes remaining.
Rebuttal of George R. Ragsdale
Mr. Ragsdale: Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.
In further responding to Justice O'Connor, let me say this.
I said that the Solicitor General discussed this other kind of test, but that he did not propose it.
I have to stand by that.
And here is what he said.
And I stand by this is what he said.
He said the district court's initial decision applied the proper test and reached the correct result.
That is indistinguishable from the position now taken by Nationwide and by me.
He said, in our view, the district court approached this case properly and reached the correct result in its initial decision.
I stand shoulder to shoulder with the Solicitor General on that statement.
He said, the construction of employee, also this construction... that is the common law construction... also conforms to congressional use of that term in other context.
And he said: The result reached by Judge Boyle is also consistent with the purposes of ERISA.
Whatever else he may have discussed, that is what he proposes.
It is identical to that which Nationwide now proposes.
Justice White has held up--
Unknown Speaker: He also said in his brief, and he said here, that while those courts have avoided the erroneous path taken by the court below, it is unclear whether they are giving appropriate weight to this Court's decisions involving remedial social legislation, such as Rutherford Food, et cetera.
Mr. Ragsdale: --I concede that he discussed it, as he should, but he does not propose it here.
Justice White has held up to the true light the problem created by this Rutherford Foods case.
And that is, he has gone over an looked at the verb, not the noun employee, but he found the right answer.
And he found congressional history in the verb to employ.
Because in that act, that verb had a different meaning than it does here.
And it was to suffer or permit to work.
And he is correct.
That was born of the Child Labor Laws, where in this country at that time, apparently many little children were either being made to work or permitted to work, and Congress wanted to see that (a) they weren't allowed to if they weren't supposed to, and (b) if they were, they had to be paid a fair wage.
And so there is congressional history wrapped in another word in the Fair Labor Standards Act cases and that is in part a justification for perhaps a different view and a different treatment.
In addition, and I'm not defending this, and I don't want to get into certain quagmires, but in addition to that, there is more congressional history, which is that Senator Black is quoted of the floor of the Senate as having said that the word employee in the Fair Labor Standards Act should be, was meant to be, and would be accorded the broadest possible use of that term.
Now, if that's legislative history, and I don't want to argue about it, it is not in ERISA.
There is nothing similar to that in ERISA.
There is no reason for the Court, finding itself here in ERISA, between the Labor Act and Social Security Act cases, which Congress has declared itself on, and the Fair Labor Standards Act cases over here, there is no reason for the Court to veer from its path and go with the Fair Labor Standards Act definition.
Now, Mr. Follin, my good friend Mr. Follin... he and I have labored in this case for 10 wonderful years.
He's a fine, wonderful lawyer and a good friend.
But he urges this Court to do exactly what the plaintiff's lawyers in the Hearst case must have urged the Court to do.
Unknown Speaker: Mr. Ragsdale, I notice in your opening... in your brief, you managed to find the Hearst case, which dealt with the NLRB, and the Silk case, which dealt with Social Security, but you didn't manage to find the Rutherford Food case, which dealt with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Is there any reason for that?
Mr. Ragsdale: I didn't find it?
Unknown Speaker: Well, it isn't listed in your table of authorities.
Mr. Ragsdale: We don't believe it is authoritative for these circumstances, and should not be followed in this case.
And we do not cite it to the Court as the true path to take.
Others do, but we do not.
Unknown Speaker: How about the... how about your reply brief?
The United States filed with this case before you filed your reply brief, didn't it?
Mr. Ragsdale: Yes.
Unknown Speaker: And it certainly used Rutherford Food.
Mr. Ragsdale: Yes.
Unknown Speaker: Did you ever discuss it--
--The reply brief does discuss it.
Well, you did discuss it?
Mr. Ragsdale: We discussed it.
We know it exists.
We do not deny that it has been decided.
We say that it is not applicable to the circumstances before the Court this morning.
They are different.
Now, Mr. Follin is doing what the plaintiff's lawyers probably did in the Hearst case, which is, Mr. Chief Justice, please focus your gaze upon the history, terms, and purposes of the National Labor Relations Act.
And that is exactly what Mr. Follin is saying this morning.
Focus on the purposes of ERISA.
When the Hearst Court focused on the history, terms, and purposes of the National Labor Relations Act and threw the common law test of agency over the side, Congress repudiated the decision, amended the act, and said, don't do that any more.
That is why I say we are revisiting here this morning that which has already occurred in the past, just in another context.
Unknown Speaker: We like to view that as Congress just amending the law, Mr. Ragsdale.
I don't know that it proves the Court was wrong.
Mr. Ragsdale: No, I didn't say the Court was wrong.
Unknown Speaker: I think the Court properly interpreted the previous National Labor Relations Act and Congress enacted a new one.
Mr. Ragsdale: I don't think it's a matter of--
Unknown Speaker: Maybe even a different Congress from the one that passed the original act.
Mr. Ragsdale: --I take that point, and I concede it.
I don't think it is a matter of right and wrong, I think it is a matter of discerning the congressional intent and focusing on it.
Unknown Speaker: Well, they might have said, why you were quite right, Mr. Court, in construing the old act, but we just don't like it anymore.
So we're going to amend it.
Mr. Ragsdale: Maybe.
Unknown Speaker: Which doesn't affect how you should construe the old act.
Mr. Ragsdale: Well, Your Honor, the decisions of the United... the decision of United Insurance was 7 years on the books before ERISA was enacted.
We have a long history of congressional purpose and intent in my two favorite colors.
And Congress could read those.
And they knew United Insurance was there where the Court said there is no doubt that we must apply these common law principles.
And they enacted ERISA in the face of that--
And Congress must have known that this Court now felt that way about it and would apply and insist upon the application of those principles in ERISA.
Otherwise they would have corrected a forthcoming misapprehension by the courts, this Court and the lower Federal courts, and fixed it before it was broken.
But they did not do that.
And they have not done that.
And it must be the intention and desire of Congress for the common law test of agency to be used in this case.
Mr. Chief Justice, thank you very much.
Chief Justice Rehnquist: Thank you, Mr. Ragsdale.
The case is submitted.
Argument of Justice Souter
Mr. Souter: The third and blessedly shortest case is Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and Darden, No. 90-1802.
In this case, we issued writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to determine the test of status as an employee under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act or ERISA.
Robert Darden operated an insurance agency according to the terms of several contracts with petitioner, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company.
Under the contracts, Darden agreed to forfeit his right to retirement plan benefits if within a year of his termination as a Nationwide agent in 25 miles of his prior business location, he sold insurance in competition with Nationwide.
When Nationwide relied on that condition, to deny him retirement benefits to which would otherwise have been entitled.
Darden sued for them claiming that they were non-forfeitable because already vested under the terms of ERISA.
Darden has an action under ERISA only if he qualifies as an employee as that term is used in the statute.
The District Court held that under traditional common law principles, Darden had worked for Nationwide as an independent contractor and not as an employee.
The Court of Appeals reversed finding the common law test inapplicable in this context and holding instead that an ERISA plaintiff can qualify as an employee simply by showing that he had reasonable expectation of receiving pension benefits, that he relied on the expectation, and that he lacked the economic bargaining power to contract out of benefit plan forfeiture provisions.
In an opinion filed with the Clerk today, we unanimously reverse.
Under ERISA, an employee is any individual employed by an employer, a completely circular definition that explains nothing.
In the past, when Congress has used the term employee without defining it in any helpful way, we have construed the term to incorporate common law or agency principles for identifying master-servant relationships, and we adapt that rule here as well since nothing in ERISA suggest that construing the statute to incorporate the common law criteria would tort the congressional design will lead to absurd results.
We remand the case to the Fourth Circuit to determine whether Darden does in fact qualify as an employee under traditional common law principles.


text:
Goods with a "made in Japan" pedigree have always been highly
sought-after in many industries for being of superior quality, but golf
club maker Honma takes it to the next level.
Favoured by professional players and serious amateur golfers with a
penchant for perfection, each club emerges from the brand's Northern
Japan factory with a decidedly artisanal quality because it has been
hand crafted by a highly-skilled craftsman.
The result, regardless of whether it is an exquisite driver or set of
irons, is achingly expensive, but has the quality – and high-end cachet
– to match.
Swing king
Goods with a "made in Japan" pedigree have always been highly


text:
Sylviana Hamdani
Batik euphoria has washed over Indonesia since the United Nations' cultural body acknowledged the textile as part of the world's intangible heritage in October 2009.
Batik has been resurrected. It has gone from antiquated garments worn only for formal ceremonies to stylish and trendy. The government has designated Oct. 2 as National Batik Day, with the event this year celebrated in Jakarta with festivities and fashion shows.
Eight Indonesian and three international fashion designers presented their batik collections during a gala dinner and fashion show at the World Batik Summit, which was held at the Jakarta Convention Center in late September, ahead of National Batik Day.
"We've invited these international designers to create a special batik collection for the evening," said Ika B. S. Wahyudi, chairwoman of the gala dinner and fashion show committee. "We wanted to see their perception of our traditional textile."
Japanese designer Kaoru showcased effortlessly chic summer dresses made of vibrant batik pieces from Madura, Cirebon and Pekalongan, with Djawa Hokokai (Japanese-influenced) motifs. The more elegant Sogan (brownish-colored) pieces of Yogyakarta and Solo batik were made into tasteful formal jackets and long skirts.
Kaoru and her husband, Masakatsu Tozu, are avid batik lovers. The couple researched batik for 42 years and currently run a batik shop in Tokyo.
Milan-based Malaysian designer Datin Noor Fatimah also took part in the event, presenting light resort wear made of batik Tanjung Bumi from Madura and Batik Parang Kencana, a batik brand that sponsored the event.
"It's an 'East Meets West' combination," she said. "Resort wear at the moment is very in in Europe. That's why I incorporated resort wear into my designs by using batik."
Indonesian designer Chossy Latu presented exquisite batik evening wear made of silk. The made-to-order batik featured ornate floral and butterfly motifs, which suited the theme of the collection, "Twilight Garden." Presented in classic black-and-white hues, his evening dresses exude a timeless elegance.
"With this collection, I want to show to the world that batik is just as beautiful as any other fabric and can be made into haute-couture collections," he said.
Indonesian designer Sebastian Gunawan presented his new collection, "The Nyonya Glam."
"Batik is undeniably a result of acculturations over many decades," the designer said.
"For this collection, I was inspired by the Nyonya Ware porcelain sets made by Chinese Peranakan [Chinese descendents] in Indonesia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The porcelain sets are adorned with unique floral patterns, which are named the Familie Rose."
Sebastian's collection featured well-structured cocktail dresses made of china-blue silk batik. The motif, "Familie Rose," reigned throughout the collection in red and yellow tints.
"But batik is not all about formal wear and evening dresses," fashion designer Eddy Betty said. "The textile can also be made into something fun and exciting."
Eddy presented his new ready-to-wear collection for his edbe label in a fashion show held at the grand ballroom of Hotel Mulia Senayan. Themed "Love Is in the Air," the show featured 90 men's and women's looks for 2012.
Frivolous patterns were etched in shocking bright colors on the clothes showcased on the runway, while traditional batik motifs of lereng (slopes) and parang (knives) collided with fun, playful patterns of yellow rubber ducks, Russian matryoshka dolls and bouncing balls.
"They're all memorable items from my childhood,'' said Eddy, who also introduced a concept that he called "Mix Don't Match."
"Batik doesn't have to be old, traditional and rigid,'' he said. "You can play around with cuts, colors and styles to make it more fun and stylish.''
Skirts and blouses with asymmetrical cuts and shredded hemlines defied convention. Mismatched colors and patterns were seemingly cut and pasted together in an absent-minded fashion. Yet, Eddy still managed to weave a harmonious feel throughout.
"The batik was all done by women living in villages on the slopes of Mount Merapi," the 41-year-old designer said.
After last year's deadly eruption that destroyed most of their crops and livestock, many of the villages around the volcano in Central and Yogyakarta had no means of income.
Some of the wives and daughters in the villages have taken on batik-making to earn a living for their families, while a nongovernmental organization has been teaching women to draw on batik.
"I just gave them my sketches and asked them to replicate them on the fabric," Eddy said. "They're not perfect. Yet, it's exactly what makes batik so enchanting."
The neon bright colors of the batik bring an electric thrill to the collection.
"They're a piece of art," he said. "It takes collaboration between man and nature to produce an excellent piece of batik."
Eddy explained that to produce a certain color in batik required expert craftsmanship by the artisans, the right level of acidity in the water (for dyeing) and the right level of brightness from the sun when drying the textiles.
"Tak kenal maka tak sayang [If you don't know it, you won't love it],'' he said. "The more you know about batik, the more you'll fall in love with it.''


text:
- ‹
- 12 of 22
- ›
- Start Over
Masculine Den
This upstairs sitting area doubles as a guest room.
Toronto interior designer Mazen El-Abdallah of Mazen Studio wanted to create a room that was meaningful, useful and beautiful. Wall-to-wall sisal carpet throughout the second floor is a cosy option that also dulls the sound of footsteps. A narrow daybed — a housewarming gift from friend Suzanne Dimma — is the perfect option for an overnight guest. Details such as the large mirror and credenza are practical pieces for a guest room, yet do not look out of place when the space functions as a den.
Watch a video tour of this house.
Comment Guidelines
We welcome your feedback on Houseandhome.com. H&H reserves the right to remove any unsuitable personal remarks made about the bloggers, hosts, homeowners and/or guests we feature. Please keep your comments focused on decorating, design, cooking and other lifestyle topics. Adopt a tone you would be willing to use in person and do not make slanderous remarks or use denigrating language. If you see a comment that you believe violates any of the guidelines outlined above, please click "Flag as inappropriate." Thank you.


text:
Results 11 to 20 of 41
solves problems with violence
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Posts
- 4,554
Posted On:
3/15/2014 9:44pm
Style: Judo, Hung Family Boxing4"Face punches are an essential character building part of a martial art. You don't truly love your children unless you allow them to get punched in the face." - chi-conspiricy
"When I was a little boy, I had a sailor suit, but it didn't mean I was in the Navy." - Mtripp on the subject of a 5 year old karate black belt
"Without actual qualifications to be a Zen teacher, your instructor is just another roundeye raping Asian culture for a buck." - Errant108
"Seriously, who gives a **** what you or Errant think? You're Asian males, everyone just ignores you, unless you're in a krotty movie." - new2bjj
Light Heavyweight
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Location
- London,Ontario Canada
- Posts
- 3,332
Posted On:
3/17/2014 2:23am1
That Bond VS. Peter Franks fight in the elevator is a classic.
I dunno...I've never been in a fight in a phone booth, but I have been in a fight in an 8 x 9 'space'.
It was a frenzied free-for-all and I was dealing with a guy who outweighed me by a good 30 lbs (fat). I ended up on top, after absorbing a few blows, because I managed to kick his legs out from under him.
Luckily for me his head slammed off the toilet and he was so stunned I pummeled him pretty easily after that.
Mind you this was many, many years ago..before I had really done any serious training.
I think my immediate reaction would be to use close-quarter elbow shots, the same as you would in the cage when you have your opponent up against the fence.
There are a lot of elbows in bak mei and our short fist sets." If one wants to have a friend one must also want to wage war for him: and to wage war one must be capable of being an enemy." - Fr. Nietzsche 'On The Friend' Thus Spake Zarathustra
The only funny bit in dumb and dumber was a phone box fight.
And I have never heard that expression before.Whitsunday Martial Arts Airlie Beach North Queensland.
Registered Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2013
- Location
- Canada
- Posts
- 84
Posted On:
3/17/2014 8:16am
Style: Judo4
My friend references phone booths a lot. For example "That chick was uglier than a knife fight in a phone booth." Great image.
I'm really not sure how I'd use my shitty judo for a phone booth fight. Standing chokes? Foot-sweeps and hip throws that bash the guys head against the inside walls? Out-grip the guy to tie up his arms and head-butt like a woodpecker?
Sounds like a bad day, all around.
pro nonsense self defense
- Join Date
- Nov 2012
- Location
- San Diego
- Posts
- 13,050
Posted On:
3/17/2014 11:23am


text:
Focusing on the interaction betweenmarketing research decisionsandmarketing management decisions, Malhotra offers a highlycontemporaryreview that enables readers to increase their SPSS and Excel skills. The Early Phases of Marketing Research, Research Design Formulation, Data Collection, Analysis, and Reporting nbsp;A useful reference for marketing professionals who need to increase their market research skills.Edition/Copyright: 3RD 09
13 more offers below.
Filter by: All (13) | New (3) | Like New (1) | Very Good (1) | Good (4) | Acceptable (4)


text:
No longer available
8 in x 25 in | unframed | Oil on Canvas
price is fixed. share with friends
The Drummer
list price: $165 | Discount: 0% | Views: 1211
This traditional Kpalogo drummer sings along as he drums to the beat of the music. In Kpalogo traditional wear, the drummer plays for the victory of a fruitful harvest, to call all of his tribesmen together to come celebrate in congregation. As he plays, people listen, and quickly approach him from the back of the painting to listen to his tune.
Artist: Samuel Bongo
Samuel Bongo in a Ghanaian artist who has been painting for the last fifteen years. Though he never received any formal artistic training, Samuel's work has been shown throughout many regions in Ghana. Sam is married and is a proud father of a three-month old son. Sam loves his home country of Ghana, and his sincere hope is to spread the message of unity and oneness through his artwork.


text:
Pastries of Demark's Petit Fours
By Mabel Suen
Miss Leon's Serves Some of St. Louis' Best Comfort Food
By Cheryl Baehr
Fort Taco Is Your Newest Addiction
By Cheryl Baehr
Planter's House Debuts New Spring Cocktail Menu
By Patrick Hurley
Gooseberries Pleases Herbivores and Omnivores Alike
By Cheryl Baehr
By Patrick Hurley
Cabana on the Loop Struggles with Basics
By Cheryl Baehr
Sugar High: Strudel at Feasting Fox
By Mabel Suen
Even the basics at Soda Fountain Square are screwy. The flip-pad menus are confoundingly laid out so that the top sheets face upside-down. This necessitates repeatedly turning the menu 180 degrees in order to take it all in. That's frustrating, though evidently not as frustrating as it must be to wait on customers there. Two servers (one working the floor, the other at the counter) took it upon themselves to complain to me about how busy and/or tired they were. Perhaps it's no coincidence that, during those two visits, I waited an interminably long time for service.
1801 Park Ave.
St. Louis, MO 63104-2534
Category: Restaurant > American
Region: St. Louis - Soulard
1415 S 18th St
St. Louis, MO 63104
Category: Bars and Clubs
Region: St. Louis - Lafayette Square
1801 Park Avenue; 314-241-0099. Hours: 6:30 a.m.-midnight Tue.-Thu., 6:30 a.m.-1 a.m. Fri.-Sat., 7:30 a.m. -9 p.m. Sun.
Yet, even as I recall the tableau at the counter, me and my fellow customers hunched dejectedly, our countenances glazed-over masks of defeat, I sense a glimmer of hope. Maybe it's because the woman behind Soda Fountain Square, Bethany Budde, put Lafayette Square back on the dining-destination map when she opened the wonderful SqWires in the former Western Wire Products factory a few years ago. Maybe it's the gleaming rows of milkshake-mixing chalices lined up behind Soda Fountain Square's soda fountain, standing proud and optimistic. Or maybe it's just me, irretrievably in love with diners and possibly, even "diners."
Sponsor Content


text:
Well met on Audiko.net! You can easily download a free The Fixx ringtones for your iPhone or mobile. Cut your favorite measures from your favorite tune - Red Skies, Saved By Zero, Stand Or Fall (Extended Mix), or any other track. Then download the prepared The Fixx ringtones to your phone, and enjoy New Wave music by The Fixx every time your phone rings. If you wig New Wave or maybe Alternative and Pop music, then you will probably like Animotion - Obsession, abc, or The Psychedelic Furs as well. For all who want a free The Fixx ringtone, we also recommend listening to 80s, Synth Pop, and Rock. Depending on a phone model, you can have your tune both in the MP3 and m4a formats, compatible with both mobile phones and iPhones. Just select a track, and choose free The Fixx ringtones download option.
Download The Fixx Ringtones
Similar Artists
Top artists
Top ringtones
- omi - Cheerleader
- Meek Mill - All Eyes On You (feat. Chris Brown & Nicki Minaj)
- One Direction - Drag Me Down
- Taylor Swift - Bad Blood (feat. Kendrick Lamar)
- Rihanna - Bitch Better Have My Money
- Rachel Platten - Fight Song
- Future - March Madness
- Meek Mill - Bad For You (feat. Nicki Minaj)
- Future - Stick Talk
- Meek Mill - R.I.C.O. (feat. Drake)


text:
Privacy and Cookies
Safran is to acquire US firm Goodrich's electrical power systems division GEPS for €310 million ($400 million), to complement its own activities in the sector.
GEPS has systems installed on a variety of civil types including the Airbus A320, A380 and Embraer regional jets.
The acquisition will enable Safran to continue developing technology focused on aircraft systems which are increasingly electrically-based.
Safran says GEPS, which has facilities at Pitstone Green, UK, and Twinsburg, Ohio, will generate $200 million in revenues this year. It employs some 560 personnel, primarily in the UK.
"The trend towards more electrical aircraft is a long-term irreversible industry evolution which opens up new opportunities for our industry," says Safran chief Jean-Paul Herteman.
"It will provide research and development savings versus internal development, and key customer access based on recognised expertise and excellence."
This will be achieved by forming close links between GEPS and related Safran divisions, such as Labinal, Messier-Bugatti-Dowty and Aircelle.
Safran expects the transaction to close late this year or in early 2013. It adds that GEPS has a 60% share of Thales joint venture Aerolec - a supplier of power generation systems to Airbus - which is included in the deal.
Aircraft | Aerospace | Aviation | Military | Business aviation | MRO | General aviation | Space | Airports | Engines and propulsion | Flight tests | Accidents and incidents | Flightglobal blogs | E-newsletters |
Flightglobal dashboard | ACAS | MiliCAS | Ascend Fleets | Flightglobal Insight | ICAO | CapStats | Airport charges | Ascend Values | Aviation Exchange | Aircraft Ratings | Helicopter Fleets | Market Commentaries | FlightMaps Analytics | Industry resources
Browse by job role | Career advice | Jobs by email | Jobs search | Recruiter services
Airline Strategy Awards | Air shows | Conferences | Exhibitions | Flightglobal events
… part of Reed Business Information Copyright © 2015