text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
October 1, 1984
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,v.ANTHONY MATERIA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
Materia appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Brieant, J.) enjoining him from violating Sections 10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rules 10b-5 and 14e-3, and requiring him to disgorge $99,862.50 in unlawfully obtained profits. Affirmed.
Before: KAUFMAN, MESKILL and PIERCE, Circuit Judges.
KAUFMAN, Circuit Judge:
Our era aptly has been styled, and well may be remembered as, the "age of information." Francis Bacon recognized nearly 400 years ago that "knowledge is power," but only in the last generation has it risen to the equivalent of the coin of the realm. Nowhere is this commodity more valuable or volatile than in the world of high finance, where facts worth fortunes while secret may be rendered worthless once revealed.
At a certain point, amorphous data must be translated into the written word. In the financial field, this transmogrification requires masses of information -- much of it highly sensitive -- to be channeled through the financial printing firms that service our great commercial centers. It was in one such firm the Anthony Materia worked. Materia stole information to which he was privy in his work, and traded on that information to his pecuniary advantage. The Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC" or "Commission") sought -- and the district court granted -- an injunction against Materia, restraining him from such activities in the future and requiring him to disgorge his ill-gotten gains. In light of the broad prophylactic coverage of the antifraud provisions of the securities laws, particularly where they are sought to be enforced by the SEC, we affirm the decision below, and hold that Materia's misappropriation of material nonpublic information, and his subsequent trading on that information, violate Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Recognizing the complexity attendant to an examination of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, we find it necessary to set forth the facts in this dispute.
Anthony Materia was employed by Bowne of New York City, Inc. (Bowne), a firm specializing in the printing of financial documents, including many used by its corporate clients in connection with proposed tender offers. Because even a hint of an upcoming tender offer may send the price of the target company's stock soaring, information regarding the identity of a target is extremely sensitive and zealously guarded. It is customary, therefore, for offerors (or their law firms, which ordinarily draft such documents) to omit information that might tend to identify a target company until the last possible moment. Code names are used, blanks are left to be filled in on the eve of publication, and occasionally misinformation is even included in early drafts. In sum, a quick reading of preliminary versions of these sensitive papers would not reveal the information sought to be guarded.
Anthony Materia did not read such material quickly. In his job as "copyholder," Materia read clients' drafts aloud to a proofreader, who in turn checked to make certain that page proofs conformed to the copy received from the client. If copyholding was Materia's vocation, the stock market appears to have been equally consuming. Notwithstanding scrupulous efforts by Bowne and its clients to keep confidential information confidential,*fn1 Materia was able to divine the identities of at least four tender offer targets in the period between December 1980 and September 1982.*fn2 Within hours of each discovery, he purchased stock, and within days -- after the offer had been made public -- he sold his holdings at substantial gains.
Soon after Materia completed his purchase and sale of securities in the fourth target company, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed an enforcement action, charging that he had violated and was about to violate Sections 10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 48 Stats. 881, as amended, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b), 78n(e) (1982), and Rules 10b-5 and 14e-3, 17 C.F.R. §§ 240.10b-5, 240.14e-3 (1983). The basis of its complaint was Materia's trading in securities on the basis of material nonpublic information he had misappropriated from his employer and its clients.*fn3
Following a fourteen-day nonjury trial, Judge Brieant delivered an opinion and order from the bench. He found that Materia had, in fact, traded on the basis of confidential data stolen from Bowne and the offerors. Moreover he explicitly found that Materia had breached a fiduciary duty to his employer and its clients to maintain their confidences. Finally, he concluded that Materia had actual knowledge of this duty, and thus had acted with scienter. Accordingly, Judge Brieant held that Materia had violated Sections 10(b) and 14(e), and Rules 10b-5 and 14e-3. The court issued a permanent injunction, restraining him from continuing violations. In addition, Materia was ordered to disgorge his illegally obtained profits of $99,862.50. Final judgment was entered on Judge Brieant's order, and Materia timely filed this appeal.
At the outset, the nature and procedural posture of this action bear description, for they delineate the parameters of our inquiry. This suit was brought, not by an investor injured as a result of Materia's connivances, but by the Securities and Exchange Commission -- the governmental body charged by law with the protection of our financial markets.
The sweeping mandate manifest in the securities laws would be all but meaningless were it not for the broad investigatory and enforcement powers created under the statutory scheme. Our inquiry today is directed to Section 21(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d) (1982), which empowers the Commission to seek a "temporary or permanent injunction" against "any person [who] is engaged or is about to engage in acts or practices constituting a violation" of the securities laws. A trial judge is vested with considerable discretion in granting injunctive relief pursuant to this section. There need be only a reasonable likelihood that the activity complained of will be repeated. See SEC v. Manor Nursing Centers, Inc., 458 F.2d 1082, 1102 (2d Cir. 1972). Moreover, once the equity jurisdiction of the district court properly has been invoked, the court has power to order all equitable relief necessary under the circumstances. See Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 480 F.2d 341, 390 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 910, 38 L. Ed. 2d 148, 94 S. Ct. 231, (1973). Such discretion in fashioning appropriate remedies is a necessary (if unspoken) concomitant of the legislative grant of power to enforce the laws. The Supreme Court has written:
When Congress entrusts to an equity court the enforcement of prohibitions contained in a regulatory enactment, it must be taken to have acted cognizant of the historic power of equity to provide complete relief in light of the statutory purposes.
Mitchell v. Robert DeMario Jewelry, Inc., 361 U.S. 288, 291-92, 4 L. Ed. 2d 323, 80 S. Ct. 332 (1960).
Mindful of this principle, we cannot read Section 21(d) as restricting the remedies the SEC may pursue solely to injunctive relief. See SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co., 446 F.2d 1301, 1307-08, cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1005, 30 L. Ed. 2d 558, 92 S. Ct. 561 (1971). On the contrary, any form of ancillary relief may be granted where necessary and proper to effectuate the purposes of the statutory scheme. Id. at 1308; see J.I. Case Co. v. Borak, 377 U.S. 426, 433-34, 12 L. Ed. 2d 423, 84 S. Ct. 1555 (1964). Given the federal courts' broad equitable powers, such noninjunctive relief may take a variety of forms. See Farrand, Ancillary Remedies in SEC Civil Enforcement Actions, 89 Harv. L. Rev. 1779 (1976). In the past, the Commission has sought and obtained the appointment of a receiver for a corporation the affairs of which were in disarray as the result of past violations, see Manor Nursing Centers, supra, impoundment of assets, see International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932, 41 L. Ed. 2d 236, 94 S. Ct. 2644 (1974), and the installation of Commission approved directors on the board of a defendant corporation, see id. Disgorgement of illegally obtained profits is by no means a new addition to this catalogue of permissible equitable remedies. Indeed, in Texas Gulf Sulphur, supra, this court affirmed a district court order requiring individual defendants to pay over the profits realized from trading on insider information. And in Manor Nursing Centers, supra, we upheld an order requiring disgorgement of proceeds from a stock offering found to have violated the securities laws.
Accordingly, the forms of relief granted by Judge Brieant -- a permanent injunction against future violations, and the disgorgement of profits resulting from Materia's past activities -- were appropriate once it was determined that Materia's actions were proscribed by law. It is to that ultimate question we now turn.
Materia does not contest the district court's finding that he misappropriated confidential information and traded on it to his advantage. His sole argument is that such activity does not contravene Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. In light of this court's holding in United States v. Newman, 664 F.2d 12 (2d Cir. 1981), aff'd after remand, No. 82-1273 (2d Cir., Feb. 8, 1983) (unpublished order), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 863, 104 S. Ct. 193, 78 L. Ed. 2d 170 (1983), we hold that such actions do, indeed, lie within the proscriptive purview of the antifraud provisions of the securities laws.
Newman addressed the criminal liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of an individual defendant charged with participating in a scheme to misappropriate confidential information regarding upcoming tender offers. Along with his co-conspirators, employees of two investment banking firms, Newman surreptitiously gathered and traded on this nonpublic data. The court held that Newman's "conduct . . . could be found to constitute a criminal violation of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. . . ." Newman, supra, at 16. The facts in the instant appeal are sufficiently similar to those in Newman for us to affirm on the authority of that precedent alone. To delineate the contours of what may still be perceived as a novel theory of liability under the antifraud provisions, we choose, however, to elucidate the bases for our holding.
Rule 10b-5, promulgated in 1942 pursuant to the Commission's rulemaking power under Section 10(b), makes it "unlawful for any person . . . to engage in any act . . . which operates . . . as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of securities." 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 (1984). As in Newman, "we need spend little time on the issue of fraud and deceit." Newman, supra, at 17. Materia "misappropriated -- stole to put it bluntly -- valuable nonpublic information entrusted to him in the utmost confidence." United States v. Chiarella, 445 U.S. 222, 245, 63 L. Ed. 2d 348, 100 S. Ct. 1108 (1980) (Burger, C.J., dissenting). We hold that such activity falls squarely within the "fraud or deceit" language of the Rule. Legislative history to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 makes clear that the antifraud provision was intended to be broad in scope, encompassing all "manipulative and deceptive practices which have been demonstrated to fulfill no useful function." S. Rep. No. 792, 73d Cong., 2d Sess., 6 (1934). This language negates the suggestion that the provision was aimed solely at the eradication of fraudulent trading by corporate insiders. Against this expansive construction of "fraud or deceit," Materia's theft of information was indeed as fraudulent as if he had converted corporate funds for his personal benefit. See Newman, supra, at 17; cf. Texas Gulf Sulphur, supra, at 1308; Diamond v. Oreamuno, 24 N.Y.2d 494, 499, 301 N.Y.S.2d 78, 248 N.E.2d 910 (1969).
In an effort to circumvent this conclusion, Materia attempts to argue that he could not have defrauded his employer, since he was unaware of the confidential nature of the information he handled in the course of his work. Judge Brieant explicitly found that Bowne's diligent efforts to communicate the need for secrecy vitiated this claim, and the record contains ample support for such a finding. We find similarly unavailing Materia's argument that Bowne was not injured as a result of his misappropriation of client information. Among a financial printer's most valuable assets is its reputation as a safe repository for client secrets. By purloining and trading on confidences entrusted to Bowne, it cannot be gainsaid that Materia undermined his employer's integrity. See Newman, supra, at 17. Accordingly, we are driven to the conclusion that, by his misappropriation of material nonpublic information, Materia perpetrated a fraud upon Bowne.*fn4
Such a determination, however, merely begins a tripartite inquiry. We turn next to Materia's contention that the only fraud properly giving rise to an action under 10(b) and 10b-5 is one premised upon a duty to disclose.
With the barrage of private civil actions, it is "easy to forget that Section 10(b) was written as both a regulatory and criminal piece of legislation." Newman, supra, at 16; see 15 U.S.C. §§ 78u, 78ff (1982). The private right of action under that section is a judicial, rather than a legislative creation. Nowhere in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 can be found an express private civil remedy for the violation of its terms. Indeed, a perusal of the legislative history surrounding the promulgation of Section 10(b) fails to reveal any indication that Congress contemplated a private right of action. See, S. Rep. No. 792, 73d Cong., 2d Sess., 5-6 (1934); Note, Implied Liability Under the Securities Exchange Act, 61 Harv. L. Rev. 858, 861 (1948). Moreover, in adopting Rule 10b-5 in 1942, the Commission did not address, and in fact did not consider, the question of private civil remedies under the provision. See SEC Securities Exchange Act Release No. 3230 (1942). Only by fashioning the private right with which we are by now so familiar, were courts forced to deal with ancillary issues such as standing, see Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723, 95 S. Ct. 1917, 44 L. Ed. 2d 539 (1975), and whether a defendant has breached a duty to a particular plaintiff, see Moss v. Morgan Stanley, Inc., supra. Indeed, these issues are germane only in the context of private civil litigation. In reviewing an enforcement action such as this, our concern "must be with the scope of the Rule," Newman, supra, at 17, rather than the precise direction in which a duty may have been owed. For this reason Materia's attempted reliance on Chiarella v. United States, 445 U.S. 222, 63 L. Ed. 2d 348, 100 S. Ct. 1108 (1980), is misplaced.
Chiarella, like Materia, was an employee of a financial printing firm. He, too, divined the identities of tender offer targets from confidential documents and traded on that information for his personal gain. Affirming his criminal conviction under Section 10(b), this court held that Chiarella had breached an affirmative duty to disclose material nonpublic information to those from whom he purchased securities. See United States v. Chiarella, 588 F.2d 1358, 1364-69 (2d Cir. 1978). Additionally, we ruled that liability could be premised upon his having misappropriated the information from his employer and its clients. Id. at 1368 n.14. Although the Supreme Court explicitly reversed on the first theory, holding that the mere possession of confidential information is sufficient to create a duty to disclose that information to those on the other side of the market, see Chiarella v. United States, 445 U.S. 222, 63 L. Ed. 2d 348, 100 S. Ct. 1108 (1980), it did not similarly disavow the misappropriation theory. Rather, a majority held that the theory could not support Chiarella's conviction because it had not been submitted to the jury. See id. at 235-37. Accordingly, "resolution of this issue [was left] for another day." Id. at 238 (Stevens, J., concurring).
As Judge Pierce made clear at oral argument, in this circuit that day arrived in October 1981, with the filing of the Newman decision. We announced then, and reiterate now, that one who misappropriates nonpublic information in breach of a fiduciary duty and trades on that information to his own advantage violates Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.*fn5
Moss v. Morgan Stanley Co., supra, relied on by Materia, does not suggest otherwise. That case, arising out of the same facts as Newman, was a private action brought by shareholders who unwittingly sold stock to Newman and his cohorts. This court affirmed the dismissal of the action on the same limited grounds announced by the Supreme Court in Chiarella. The defendants owed no duty to the plaintiffs. At the risk of repetition, we stress that such analysis bears only on the type of question raised in a private suit for damages; it is not relevant to an inquiry into whether the Rule was or was not contravened.
Having decided that Materia's actions were fraudulent within the meaning of the securities laws, and having found that the misappropriation of his employer's property satisfies the "upon any person" language of 10b-5, we are left with Materia's spurious argument that his fraud was not "in connection with" the purchase or sale of securities. Indeed, such a suggestion is inimical to the letter and spirit of the expansive scheme created to combat fraud in the securities markets. The information Materia stole has no value whatsoever except "in connection with" his subsequent purchase securities. The fraud perpetuated on his employer was part and parcel of a larger design, the sole purpose of which was to reap instant no-risk profits in the stock market. Whatever limitations have been read into the "in connection with" language in the past, see generally Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, supra, at 731-33 (in private civil action under Section 10(b), "in connection with" language limits standing to a purchaser or seller of securities), it is clear that the requirement is satisfied by the self-evident nexus presented in this case.
For all intents and purposes, the question of Anthony Materia's liability was settled fifty years ago. Determined to combat fraud in the securities marketplace, Congress chose to enact a comprehensive yet open-ended statutory scheme, capable of ongoing adaptation and refinement. In recent years, developments in capital formation and novel means of effecting corporate combinations have spawned a new genre of confidential information. Courts are increasingly called upon to address a myriad of issues regarding the proprietorship and exploitation of such data. Nevertheless, the lodestar of our analysis must be the meaning gleaned from a thorough inquiry into legislative purpose. We do not believe the drafters of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 -- envisaging as they did an open and honest market -- would have countenanced the activities engaged in by Anthony Materia.
Accordingly, the decision of the district court is affirmed.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
FeeldThrill01View Gallery
Last Online: 30/Jan/2015
"COME AND WORSHIP MY FEET!!!:):):P:Pnails..heels...stockings..pantyhose...:P:P:P:D:D:D"
Details of the individual Chathost who uses this webcam
- Age: 31 yrs
- Sex: Female
- Ethnics: Asian
- Hair: Black
- Eyes: Brown
- Body: Normal
- Breast Size: S
Category: Fetish
Country: Just Ask Me
- Schedule:
- whenever possible
- Optional Activities:
- Legs, feet & shoes, Lingerie & stockings, Nails, Hands, Heels, Lipstick, Tickling
- Turn-Ons
- it turn me ons when you lick and suck my long and sexy nails.Crawl the floor like a maggot and beg me to lick my precious feet.....(don't ask me to lick my feet it won't happen!!!!)
- Turn-Offs
- one min. guy., free chatter..asking me to undress... i'm not here for nudity i'm here to control you to own you like a puppet.....
- What you can expect from my show
- Mistress,,,Once you see my feet you become addicted....
- Why I am here
- to play your body and mind....and of course i want your fat wallet!!!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Parmalee Close Your Eyes
"Close Your Eyes" is a song by American country band Parmalee from the album Feels Like Carolina. The single reached the Billboard Top 100 chart.
Music Video
The official music video for "Close Your Eyes" premiered on YouTube at the beginning of July 2014. Watch Parmalee perform the song.
Close Your Eyes Lyrics
The lyrics to "Close Your Eyes" were written by Adam Craig, Shane Minor and Trent Tomlinson.Parmalee Songs


text:
- Worldwide Rank #101,378,612
- Follower/Following Ratio 0.25
- Daily New Followers 0
Zikri Twitter Stats
@0032am - Tracking Zikri Twitter profile since September 12, 2016
Another Day, Another Blessing!
Zikri Tweets
@0032am has posted 0 tweets in the last 3 days, which translates to an average of 0.0 tweets per day.
Zikri Twitter Followers
@0032am has 17 followers on Twitter.
This account is #101,378,612 in the worldwide rank of the most popular Twitter users.
Zikri Following on Twitter
@0032am is following 68 Twitter accounts.
Last month this account followed no users.
Zikri Predictions & Milestones
@0032am will hit 18 followers in the next 3 months, and 20 in one year.
You are on Zikri's Twitter stats page
We track these Twitter stats since September 12, 2016 . You can see how many followers Zikri lost or gained and what the prediction is for tomorrow or the next 15 days, together with all kinds of other stats like rank compared to all Twitter users, tweets etc.
Why don't you give it a try and compare Zikri to yourself ? Or if you are Zikri get even more feature rich & up-to-date stats with our premium Twitter Stats.
Twitter Counter is the #1 Twitter stats site powered by Twitter. It all started in June 12, 2008 and we grew rather rapidly because of our Twitter Counter badge. The button is a nice small image that shows your visitors how many followers you have on Twitter. Within a year the button was on many many blogs around the world and we displayed more than 100 million buttons in one month. We track follower stats for over 180 million users now.


text:
- When I first saw the term the "unemployables" applied to the mature worker I cringed. But in order to make sure we are not in that category there are some basic skills we need to master. We're all good communicators or we wouldn't have gotten this far, right? But specifically we need to improve or master our communication skills, especially in using social media, but also in demonstrating good grammar and the ability to write complete sentences. Another key for increasing the likelihood of being one of the employed, is to seriously begin some structured learning activities. It will make you feel more motivated and you'll begin to get excited about what you are learning and that's exactly what you want. So, you'll have something to communicate. Right.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
- November 8, 2011 at 4:16 pm
Hadn't heard the term "unemployable" and it made me cringe as well. Will you be writing about "structured learning activities"? It sounds good, but I don't know what exactly that means. Thanks for the help! I always enjoy your posts.
Leave a Comment
Previous post: WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF WORK IN YOUR FIELD?
Next post: WHERE WILL THE NEW WORK BE FOUND?


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
United States District Court, S.D. New York
February 2, 2015
ELENI WOLDESELASSIE, Plaintiff,v.AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES/AMERICAN AIRLINES, et al., Defendants.
LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge.
Pro se Plaintiff Eleni Woldeselassie brings this action against American Airlines, Inc., American Eagle Airlines, Inc., (together, "AE"), individual AE employees Linda Kunz, Susan Piper, Brandi Araujo, Lisa Snyder and Todd Steffen (together with AE, the "AE Defendants"), the Association of Flight Attendants (the "Union"), and individual Union representatives Jon Orozco, Debbie Lynch, Richard Wrede and Carol Harper (together with the Union, the "Union Defendants") for employment discrimination on the basis of Plaintiff's alleged disability. The Complaint alleges unlawful termination, failure to accommodate Plaintiff's disability, unequal terms and conditions of employment and retaliation, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 290 et seq. ("NYSHRL"), and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-101 et seq. ("NYCHRL"). Plaintiff also asserts that Defendants denied her leave in violation of the Family Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et seq. ("FMLA").
The AE Defendants move for summary judgment. The Union Defendants move to dismiss the claims against them or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. For the following reasons, both motions are granted.
Unless otherwise noted, the following facts are undisputed, taken from Plaintiff's deposition, or taken in the light most favorable to Plaintiff.
A. Plaintiff's Transfer Requests
Plaintiff was employed by AE as a flight attendant from May 2008 to May 2012. In her four years at AE, Plaintiff transferred home bases a total of seven times, alternating between Chicago, New York and Los Angeles. A majority of Plaintiff's transfers were for personal, nonhealth-related reasons. From May 2008 to around the beginning of July 2008, Plaintiff worked from Chicago. In around early July 2008, Plaintiff transferred to New York because she wanted to try living without her family and "do her own thing." Approximately one month later, around late July 2008, Plaintiff transferred back to Chicago because New York "wasn't for [her]." In January 2009, Plaintiff transferred to Los Angeles, to "see what it would be like... to be somewhere else." In July 2009, Plaintiff transferred back to Chicago again, this time because she wanted to be closer to her family and her physician, Dr. Yeo. In August 2010, Plaintiff transferred back to Los Angeles. In February 2011, Plaintiff transferred from Los Angeles to Chicago. In January or February 2012, Plaintiff transferred back to New York.
In August 2012, Plaintiff requested a final transfer, from New York back to Chicago, citing hardship due to health concerns, and submitting a note from Dr. Yeo to that effect. Plaintiff testified at her deposition that she put in the hardship transfer request because she "really felt like working out of New York was not working for [her]... [and] [i]t was inconvenient" because Dr. Yeo was in Chicago. Dr. Yeo worked across the street from where her family lived, and both Plaintiff and Dr. Yeo testified that there was no particular reason Plaintiff needed to see Dr. Yeo, a general practitioner whom Plaintiff saw approximately four times over a two-and-a-half year period for Adderall prescriptions. Dr. Yeo testified that if he had known Plaintiff lived in New York, he would have advised her to see a doctor there.
AE personnel temporarily denied Plaintiff's transfer request, but kept her on the transfer list, and suggested that in the meantime, as an alternative way to get time off, she apply for FMLA leave or "trip-trade" with another flight attendant.
B. Plaintiff's Attendance Record
Throughout her career at AE, Plaintiff was frequently tardy or absent and received multiple warnings for unexcused absences and tardiness. Plaintiff routinely failed to appear for meetings with her supervisors to discuss her attendance record.
On February 5, 2009, Plaintiff's supervisor at the time, Jessica Wilber, met with Plaintiff to discuss her attendance record after Plaintiff missed an assignment, reported late and called in sick twice during her first few months at AE. At the meeting, Wilber gave Plaintiff an advisory "Attendance Letter Review" that recorded issues with her attendance. On June 20, 2010, Plaintiff received a second Attendance Letter Review, after she missed four assignments, was late four times, called in sick five times, and failed to call or report to work for three days in a row. On January 12, 2011, Wilber scheduled another meeting with Plaintiff to discuss her attendance. Plaintiff failed to appear for the meeting. At her deposition, Plaintiff testified that she did not attend the meeting with Wilber because she "didn't want to. And that's that."
On July 7, 2011, Plaintiff's supervisor attempted to meet with her about her attendance record. The following, day, after Plaintiff failed to respond to her supervisor's attempt to contact her, a different AE manager approached Plaintiff at the airport about her attendance record and gave her a third Attendance Letter Review. The Attendance Letter Review recorded that for the period from July 2010 to July 2011, Plaintiff called in sick eight times, missed nine assignments, was late twice and took six personal days. The manager also warned Plaintiff that she was abusing flight attendant privileges by taking complimentary flights on days she called in sick or missed assignments.
On September 12, 2011, another manager met Plaintiff directly at her flight to give her a "First Step Advisory, " which recorded that for the period of September 12, 2010, to September 12, 2011, Plaintiff was absent 24 times, missed 21 assignments and reported late twice. Plaintiff testified that it was "unfair that [she] was forced to have a meeting with [the manager] after work" and that the meeting caused her to lose her laptop. Plaintiff testified that "nothing was done" about her lost laptop.
On April 26, 2012, Plaintiff received a Second Step Advisory, covering the period from April 25, 2011, to April 25, 2012, which recorded that Plaintiff had missed forty-five work assignments, totaling ninety-three days, and had arrived late on seventeen occasions. At her deposition, Plaintiff testified that she has no basis to dispute the accuracy of her attendance records.
In the period leading up to and after the Second Step Advisory, Plaintiff's supervisors unsuccessfully attempted to meet with her on multiple occasions. On March 1, 2012, a supervisor emailed Plaintiff to schedule a meeting; Plaintiff did not respond to the email or attend the meeting. On March 7, 2012, the supervisor emailed again to schedule a meeting and Plaintiff again failed to respond or attend the meeting. On March 22, 2012, two of Plaintiff's supervisors asked to meet with her; Plaintiff responded that she could not meet with them because she was having an allergic reaction. On April 1, 2012, after numerous failed attempts to meet with Plaintiff, a supervisor met Plaintiff directly at the aircraft to discuss Plaintiff's attendance, and issued a final warning, stating that Plaintiff would receive her Second Step Advisory if she did not improve her attendance, and would suffer disciplinary action. A few days later, however, Plaintiff missed another assignment. On April 10, 2012, a supervisor emailed Plaintiff to inquire about the missed assignment; Plaintiff responded four days later, stating that she was in Chicago seeing her doctor but decided not to call in sick because she "didn't need/want to be off of work for 2 days."
On April 17, 2012, a supervisor emailed Plaintiff that she should come to the office for a meeting regarding attendance. Plaintiff did not respond to the email or attend the meeting. On April 25, 2012, Plaintiff was again directed via email to meet with her supervisors; she again failed to meet with them, responding only two days later to say that a family member had passed away. On May 11, 2012, a supervisor scheduled another meeting which Plaintiff failed to attend. On May 12, 2012, the supervisor attempted to schedule yet another meeting, writing that "failure to respond to this directive is considered insubordination and grounds for termination." Yet again, Plaintiff failed to respond to the meeting request or attend the meeting. Plaintiff's supervisors attempted to meet with her a final time on May 23, 2012, and again warned her that failure to appear would result in disciplinary action, including termination; Plaintiff again failed to appear and did not contact her supervisors to alert them that she would not be attending the meeting. Plaintiff testified that she had called in sick to the crew scheduling department, and that her supervisor should have known she had called in sick and would not make the meeting. Plaintiff agreed at her deposition that her supervisor had tried to contact her many times before the May 23, 2012 meeting.
On May 24, 2012, Plaintiff was discharged for insubordination in violation of AE's policies.
C. Additional Leave under the FMLA
During her employment at AE, Plaintiff also took authorized leave under the FMLA, beginning in January 2010. According to the FMLA form Plaintiff initially submitted to AE in or around January 2010, she required FMLA leave for various ailments, including rheumatism, migraine headaches and gastritis. Plaintiff's doctor testified that the conditions he listed on the FMLA leave form were based solely on what Plaintiff told him about her past diagnoses, and were not based on tests he performed. At her deposition, Plaintiff testified that she has suffered for a few years from a few different disabilities, with her main concern being her chest, which sometimes feels like it is being pressed upon and causes shortness of breath. According to Plaintiff, her other disabilities include a cyst on her wrist which makes it "hard for [her] to pick up stuff and do whatever, " cramps, and bad headaches "like migraines."
The initial FMLA form Plaintiff submitted did not state how often Plaintiff required FMLA leave. At AE's request, Dr. Yeo clarified that Plaintiff should be given leave "once a week possibly" for one to two days a week. Dr. Yeo testified that he did not understand the FMLA certification form, and after speaking with a doctor working with AE, he revised the suggested period of leave from one to two days a week to one to two weeks a year, which was consistent with Plaintiff's symptoms. On March 31, 2010, AE authorized Plaintiff to take one to two weeks a year for the period from January 8, 2010 to January 7, 2011.
On June 8, 2010, Dr. Yeo submitted a revised FMLA form at Plaintiff's request, which asserted that Plaintiff should be eligible for leave twice a month for two day periods. Dr. Yeo testified that he made the change based on what "she told [him]." After speaking with a doctor employed by AE, Dr. Yeo changed the form to state that Plaintiff required leave once a month for up to two days, which, according to his testimony, was more consistent with Plaintiff's needs than his previous assessment of two leaves per month. AE granted Plaintiff FMLA leave once a month for up to two days for the period between May 22, 2010, and January 7, 2011.
On October 4, 2011, Plaintiff requested additional FMLA leave for a period starting retroactively in January 2011, and continuing through January 2012. Plaintiff again submitted a form signed by Dr. Yeo, which stated that she required leave four to five times a month. Although Dr. Yeo signed the form, he testified that this amount of leave was "probably not" necessary because it was not common for someone with Plaintiff's conditions to have episodes that frequently. AE denied Plaintiff's FMLA request on grounds that she did not have enough hours to be eligible for FMLA leave.
Plaintiff disputes that she did not have enough hours for FMLA leave. In support of her claim that she was eligible for FMLA leave, she submits an incomplete set of pay stubs, on the basis of which she calculates that she worked 555.31 hours for the relevant time frame. At her deposition, Plaintiff testified that she did not know how hours are calculated under the FMLA. AE, in contrast, asserts that Plaintiff actually worked or was paid either 271.22 hours, or 332.06 hours, depending on the time period.[1] In support of its calculations, AE submits a declaration by its FMLA Coordinator, explaining how AE calculates FMLA leave, and Plaintiff's "Activity Report" for the relevant period, which records the number of FMLA-eligible hours Plaintiff actually worked or was paid for.
In April 2012, Plaintiff submitted another request for FMLA leave. Both Plaintiff and Doctor Yeo testified that, while the FMLA form was signed by Dr. Yeo, it was filled out by Plaintiff, who wrote that she had a "heart condition, " although Dr. Yeo had not checked Plaintiff's heart and Plaintiff had no medical documentation of a heart condition. AE denied Plaintiff's request for the period of January 2012 through March 2012, because Plaintiff had not made a timely request for retroactive leave, and granted Plaintiff's request for the period from April 1, 2012, through January 14, 2013.
Plaintiff testified that no one kept her from exercising the FMLA leave she was granted and that each time she returned to work after taking leave, she returned to equal terms and conditions of employment.
D. Union Grievance
After her discharge, Plaintiff contacted her union representatives to contest the discharge. On June 1, 2012, the Union filed a grievance challenging Plaintiff's discharge. On August 29, 2012, a hearing took place, where Plaintiff was represented by Jon Orozco, the Vice President of the Union's Local Executive Counsel. On September 5, 2012, AE denied the grievance, finding that Plaintiff's employment was terminated for just cause.
Between September 2012 and March 2013, union representatives worked with Plaintiff to review her case. On April 4, 2013, the Union Grievance Screening Committee, tasked with evaluating cases for the final level of the grievance process (arbitration before the AFA American Eagle System Board of Adjustment) unanimously determined that Plaintiff's case was not an appropriate candidate for arbitration due to its poor likelihood of success. By letter of the same date, the Union advised Plaintiff that she retained the option of proceeding to arbitration at her own expense. Plaintiff did not pursue this option.
E. Plaintiff's Deposition Testimony
During Plaintiff's deposition, she was asked a series of questions about her allegations of discrimination. When asked what the basis of her unlawful discrimination claim was, she stated: "[T]he company disregarded my disability to go into work on whatever days. They didn't want to give me my FMLA and terminated me while I was out on FMLA, and then found it to be okay to insult me on top of it via email." Plaintiff also testified that she was discriminated against because her final request to transfer to Chicago was denied and because she felt she was "personally being targeted" for her attendance. Plaintiff was also asked to describe the ways in which she felt she was harassed on the basis of her disability. She responded that her manager was "really awkward" and spoke to her "like [she] was a bug in the wall and she was very vicious." Plaintiff also testified that there were emails about how her pants were tight, that she was "tricked into having a meeting, " and that she was "disrespected" and her time was "disregarded." When asked at her deposition whether any individual harassed her because of her disability, she expressly denied that as being the cause of respect by one Defendant; as to another Defendant, she responded "I don't know what her problem was. I'm not sure. It could have been. I don't know."
Summary judgment is appropriate where the record before the court establishes that there is no "genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The moving party bears the initial burden of informing the court of the basis for the summary judgment motion and identifying those portions of the record that demonstrate the absence of a genuine dispute as to any material fact. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); see Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). The court must construe the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and must draw all reasonable inferences in the nonmoving party's favor. See In re "Agent Orange" Prod. Liab. Litig., 517 F.3d 76, 87 (2d Cir. 2008); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986).
If the non-moving party has the burden of proof on a specific issue, the moving party may satisfy its own initial burden by demonstrating the absence of evidence in support of an essential element of the non-moving party's claim. See Celotex, 477 U.S. at 322-23; PepsiCo, Inc. v. Coca-Cola Co., 315 F.3d 101, 105 (2d Cir. 2002). In other words, summary judgment is warranted if a party "fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial." Celotex, 477 U.S. at 322.
If the moving party carries its initial burden, then the non-moving party bears the burden of demonstrating a genuine issue of material fact. See id. In satisfying this burden, the nonmoving party cannot rely merely on allegations or denials of the factual assertions of the moving party. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1)(A); Celotex, 477 U.S. at 324. Moreover, "conclusory statements, conjecture, or speculation by the party resisting the motion will not defeat summary judgment." Kulak v. City of New York, 88 F.3d 63, 71 (2d Cir. 1996). The non-moving party must present specific evidence in support of its contention that there is a genuine dispute as to the material facts. See Celotex, 477 U.S. at 324. Furthermore, to demonstrate a genuine dispute as to the material facts, the non-moving party must come forward with sufficient evidence to permit a reasonable jury to return a verdict in his favor. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 242, 248.
A. Discriminatory Discharge and Unequal Terms and Conditions of Employment by AE
Plaintiff alleges that AE discriminated against her by subjecting her to unequal terms and conditions of employment and firing her due to her disability in violation of the ADA, the NYSHRL and the NYCHRL. AE moves for summary judgment on each of these claims. Because Plaintiff has failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to any of her claims, summary judgment is granted in AE's favor.
1. ADA and NYSHRL
The ADA and NYSHRL prohibit discrimination against a disabled individual on the basis of a disability in the hiring, discharge, and terms, conditions and privileges of employment. 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a); N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(1)(a). At the summary judgment stage, the Court applies the burden-shifting analysis set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-03 (1973), to evaluate Plaintiff's claims. See Heyman v. Queens Village Comm. for Mental Health for Jamaica Cmty. Adolescent Program, Inc., 198 F.3d 68, 72 (2d Cir. 1999). Under the McDonnell Douglas framework, "[the] plaintiff bears the initial burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence a prima facie case of discrimination. The burden of production then shifts to defendants, who must offer through the introduction of admissible evidence a nondiscriminatory reason for their actions that, if believed by the trier of fact, would support a finding that unlawful discrimination was not a cause of the disputed employment action. [The] [p]laintiff then must show that the proffered reason was merely a pretext for discrimination, which may be demonstrated either by the presentation of additional evidence showing that the employer's proffered explanation is unworthy of credence, or by reliance on the evidence comprising the prima facie case, without more.'" Id. (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, the plaintiff must show that: (1) her employer is subject to the applicable statute, (2) she is disabled within the meaning of the statute, (3) she is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of her job, and (4) she suffered an adverse employment action because of her disability. See Jacques v. DiMarzio, Inc., 386 F.3d 192, 198 (2d Cir. 2004).
Assuming for purposes of this motion that Plaintiff suffers from a disability as defined by the relevant statutes and is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of her job, [2] Plaintiff provides no evidence that she was discharged on the basis of her disability. While her memorandum of law in opposition to the motions is rife with generalized assertions of discrimination, Plaintiff identifies not a single remark or incident evidencing discriminatory animus. Similarly, Plaintiff adduces no evidence of disparate treatment of non-disabled individuals in similar situations. In fact, Plaintiff testified that she was not aware of any similarly-situated individuals who missed meetings with management and were not fired.
Even if Plaintiff had satisfied her prima facie burden in respect of her discharge, AE has provided substantial evidence of a non-discriminatory reason for firing Plaintiff, namely, her persistent absenteeism, which included dozens of missed assignments, her general unresponsiveness to communications from her supervisors and her repeated refusal to appear for meetings with supervisors. See Young v. Ltd. Brands, No. 11 Civ. 2927, 2013 WL 5434149, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2013) (finding that defendants "easily met their burden of production to provide a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason, '" where the plaintiff refused to participate in a mandatory meeting and had extensive record of insubordination and poor performance). Even if Plaintiff's absences were the result of her disability, "[t]he ADA does not require employers to tolerate persistent absenteeism even when attendance problems are caused by an employee's disability." Mescall v. Marra, 49 F.Supp.2d 365, 374 n.18 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) (alteration in original). Accordingly, Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiff's claims of unequal terms and conditions of employment and discriminatory discharge under the ADA and NYSHRL.
"[C]ourts must analyze NYCHRL claims separately and independently from any federal and state law claims." Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux N. Am., Inc., 715 F.3d 102, 109 (2d Cir. 2013). To survive a summary judgment motion under the NYCHRL, Plaintiff must adduce evidence that she "has been treated less well at least in part because of '" her alleged disability. Id. at 110 (quoting Williams v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth., 872 N.Y.S.2d 27, 39 (2009)) (emphasis in original). For substantially the same reasons as those described above, Plaintiff has not satisfied her burden, and summary judgment is accordingly granted on her NYCHRL claim as well.
B. Retaliation by AE
Plaintiff asserts that AE retaliated against her in violation of the ADA, the NYSHRL and the NYCHRL by (1) failing to assist her in locating her stolen laptop; (2) failing to compensate her for hours worked; and (3) refusing to give her FMLA leave. AE moves for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claims. Because Plaintiff has not adduced evidence that she engaged in any protected conduct, summary judgment is granted in favor of AE on Plaintiff's retaliation claims.
Section 12203(a) of the ADA provides that "[n]o person shall discriminate against any individual because such individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by this chapter or because such individual made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this chapter." 42 U.S.C. § 12203(a). The NYSHRL contains a similar provision. See N.Y. EXEC. LAW § 296(1)(e), (3-a)(c). To prevail on her retaliation claims under the ADA and NYSHRL at the summary judgment stage, Plaintiff must first make a prima facie showing that: (1) she engaged in a protected activity; (2) AE was aware of this activity; (3) AE took adverse employment action against her; and (4) a causal connection exists between the alleged adverse action and the protected activity. Treglia v. Town of Manlius, 313 F.3d 713, 719 (2d Cir. 2002).
The claims for retaliation under the ADA and the NYSHRL fail because Plaintiff presents no evidence establishing that she engaged in a protected activity. She asserts that she engaged in two separate acts that constitute protected activities - reporting harassment by management and approaching a union member. But Plaintiff does not allege that she reported harassment or approached a union member in connection with her disability. Indeed, she expressly denied that she was harassed on account of a disability. See supra § I.E. In other words, Plaintiff has made no showing that she opposed an act made unlawful by the ADA or the NYSHRL. Insofar as Plaintiff may have made other, general complaints, it is well established that a complaint of generalized harassment unrelated to disability does not constitute protected conduct under the discrimination statutes.[3] See, e.g., Ochei v. Coler/Goldwater Mem'l Hosp., 450 F.Supp.2d 275, 287 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) ("[plaintiff] has claimed that she was retaliated against for complaining about observations of her work, and other allegedly adverse actions. However, because she does not allege that she ever complained to her supervisors that she was the victim of discrimination, these complaints are not protected activity as a matter of law."). Accordingly, summary judgment is granted on Plaintiff's retaliation claims under the ADA and NYSHRL.
Like the ADA and NYSHRL, the NYCHRL prohibits retaliation by an employer on account of the plaintiff's engagement in protected conduct. N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(7). To survive a summary judgment motion under the NYCHRL, Plaintiff must show that she took an action opposing her employer's discrimination and "as a result, the employer engaged in conduct that was reasonably likely to deter a person from engaging in such action." Mihalik, 715 F.3d at 112 (internal citation omitted). "Retaliation claims under the NYCHRL cover a broader range of conduct than their state and federal counterparts." Krasner v. City of New York, 580 F.Appx. 1, 3 (2d Cir. 2014); accord Mihalik, 715 F.3d at 113. Even under the more liberal standard provided by the NYCHRL, however, Plaintiff has not established that she took some action opposing her employer's alleged discrimination. Accordingly, summary judgment is granted in Defendant's favor on Plaintiff's retaliation claims.
C. Failure to Accommodate by AE
Plaintiff contends that AE failed to accommodate her disability in violation of the ADA, the NYSHRL and the NYCHRL by refusing her final request to transfer from New York to Chicago and by failing to excuse her absence from the meeting scheduled with her supervisor on May 23, 2012. AE moves for summary judgment on Plaintiff's failure to accommodate claims. Because Plaintiff has failed to raise a triable issue of fact with regard to her failure to accommodate claims, summary judgment is granted in AE's favor.
The ADA prohibits "not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability." 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(5)(A). The NYSHRL contains a similar provision. N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(15)(a). To prevail on a failure to accommodate claim at the summary judgment stage, a plaintiff must make a prima facie showing that: (1) the plaintiff is a person with a disability within the meaning of the ADA; (2) an employer covered by the statute had notice of the disability; (3) with reasonable accommodation, plaintiff could perform the essential functions of the job at issue; and (4) the employer has refused to make such accommodations. Graves v. Finch Pruyn & Co., 457 F.3d 181, 184 (2d Cir. 2006) (citation omitted).
Plaintiff's argument that the failure to transfer her to Chicago constitutes a violation of the ADA fails because Plaintiff has adduced no evidence establishing that a transfer to Chicago was medically necessary in order for her to perform the essential functions of her job. See Callistro v. Cabo, No. 11 Civ. 2897, 2013 WL 322497, at *10 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 25, 2013) ("[T]o support her failure-to-accommodate claim, [the plaintiff] must do more than simply declare that her osteoarthritis interferes with her mobility or accessibility to the Nursery or that her diabetes requires frequent trips to the restroom. [The plaintiff] must provide expert medical evidence to that effect and she has provided no such evidence."). At her deposition, Plaintiff made several statements indicating that a transfer to Chicago was a matter of preference rather than necessity, and Dr. Yeo testified that there was no reason Plaintiff needed to see him specifically, and suggested that Plaintiff should have seen a doctor in New York if she lived there. In any event, AE did not refuse the accommodation Plaintiff requested - time off to see her doctor - as her transfer request was only temporarily denied pending an opening in Chicago, and Plaintiff was expressly counseled about alternative means for taking time off, including by obtaining additional FMLA leave or trip-trading with other flight attendants.
Plaintiff's assertion that the failure to excuse her absence from the May 23 meeting constitutes a failure to accommodate likewise fails for several reasons. First, an accommodation must be requested, and it is undisputed that Plaintiff did not request that her supervisor accommodate her disability by moving the May 23 meeting or even notify her supervisor directly that she would not be attending the meeting. Second, the purpose of a reasonable accommodation is to enable an individual to perform the essential functions of her job - such as attending meetings with supervisors, not to excuse her from performing those essential functions. Finally, to the extent Plaintiff can be understood to argue that the failure to excuse her absence from the May 23 meeting caused her termination, such an argument overlooks Plaintiff's dismal attendance record, her multiple failures to attend meetings and her complete disregard for her supervisors, all of which cumulatively contributed to her discharge. Accordingly, summary judgment is granted in Defendant's favor on Plaintiff's failure to accommodate claims.
D. Disability Discrimination by the Union
Plaintiff asserts that the Union discriminated and retaliated against her in violation of the ADA because, inter alia, it was "fully aware" of AE's actions, "cater[ed] to airlines [sic] needs" and "cover[ed] up for the Airline." The Union moves to dismiss, or in the alternative, moves for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claims of discrimination on account of her disability in violation of the ADA.[4] Because Plaintiff has failed to raise a triable issue of fact in regard to her claims, and because Plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies for claims against the Union, summary judgment is granted in the Union's favor on all claims.
Plaintiff's claims against the Union fail first and foremost because Plaintiff adduces no evidence supporting her claim of discrimination or retaliation by the Union. A plaintiff claiming that a union discriminated or retaliated against her based on her disability is required to show that (1) the union breached its duty of fair representation, and (2) that the union's actions were motivated by a discriminatory or retaliatory animus. Mahinda v. Org. of Staff Analysts, No. 11 Civ. 2652, 2012 WL 1999691, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. June 1, 2012) (citation omitted). "[B]reach [of the duty of fair representation] occurs only when a union's conduct toward a member... is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith, " United Steelworkers of Am., AFL-CIO-CLC v. Rawson, 495 U.S. 362, 372 (1990) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), or "when it causes an employer to discriminate against employees on arbitrary, hostile, or bad faith grounds." Ramey v. Dist. 141, Int'l Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, 378 F.3d 269, 277 (2d Cir. 2004) (citation omitted). "[T]he duty of fair representation is not breached where the union fails to process a meritless grievance, engages in mere negligent conduct, or fails to process a grievance due to error in evaluating the merits of the grievance." Cruz v. Local Union No. 3 of Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 34 F.3d 1148, 1153-54 (2d Cir. 1994) (citation omitted).
Plaintiff has not proffered evidence that the Union behaved in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner or in bad faith. Plaintiff asserts that the Union did not "protect" her and that the Union was aware that AE terminated Plaintiff while she was out sick, appearing to argue that the Union was somehow complicit in the decision to discharge Plaintiff. Plaintiff does not adduce evidence to support her allegations, and her assertions are contradicted by evidence submitted by Defendants, establishing that the Union grieved her termination, represented Plaintiff at the grievance hearing and met with Plaintiff multiple times to address the merits of her case. Further, the Union's decision not to arbitrate Plaintiff's discharge is not in and of itself suggestive of arbitrary or bad faith conduct. "A union member does not have an absolute right to have a grievance arbitrated.'" Jones v. SEIU Local 1199, No. 08 Civ. 6179, 2009 WL 5171882, at *8 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2009) (citing Vaughn v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 92 F.Appx. 21, 23 (2d Cir. 2004)). "Absent a showing that the union's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith, the court should not second-guess the union's decision not to pursue arbitration." Vaughn, 92 F.Appx. at 23 (citing Smith v. Drug, Chemical, Cosmetic, Plastics and Affiliated Indus. Warehouse Emps. Local 815, 943 F.Supp. 224, 242 (E.D.N.Y. 1996); accord Pinkney v. Progressive Home Health Servs., No. 06 Civ. 5023, 2008 WL 2811816, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. July 21, 2008). In light of Plaintiff's poor attendance record and general unresponsiveness to management, no reasonable trier of fact could find that the Union's decision not to proceed to arbitration was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith.
Second, Plaintiff's claim against the Union also fails on the independent ground that she failed to exhaust her administrative remedies in respect of that claim. A plaintiff asserting claims under the ADA in federal district court must first file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") or a related state agency such as the New York State Division of Human Rights. Failure to do so constitutes a failure to exhaust administrative remedies and deprives the federal court of jurisdiction over the claim. See Curto v. Edmundson, 392 F.3d 502, 503 (2d Cir. 2004). Here, Plaintiff filed an EEOC charge only against AE, and did not name as a respondent or even mention the Union. Accordingly, summary judgment is granted in the Union's favor on Plaintiff's claims.
E. FMLA Claims[5]
1. Interference with FMLA
Plaintiff asserts that AE unlawfully interfered with her right to FMLA leave when it denied her October 2011 request for leave. To succeed on her claim for FMLA interference, Plaintiff must demonstrate that AE denied or otherwise interfered with a benefit to which she was entitled under the FMLA. See 29 U.S.C. § 2615(a)(1). For a flight attendant to be eligible for FMLA leave, she must have (1) been employed for at least twelve months by the employer from whom she is requesting leave and (2) either worked or been paid for 504 hours of service with that employer in the twelve months prior to the beginning of her leave. 29 U.S.C. § 2611(2)(D); 29 C.F.R. § 825.801(b)(2). The 504 hours do not include commute time, vacation or sick leave. 29 C.F.R. § 825.801(b)(2).
The parties' sole dispute in respect of Plaintiff's FMLA interference claim is whether she accrued 504 FMLA-eligible hours during the relevant period. Plaintiff has failed to show that she worked or was paid for 504 FMLA-eligible hours during the relevant time period. The incomplete set of pay stubs she provides does not show the number of hours Plaintiff worked, but rather shows all of the hours for which she was paid, and the FMLA-implementing regulations clearly state that vacation time and sick time are not counted for FMLA purposes. In contrast, Defendants have submitted evidence conclusively establishing that Plaintiff did not work the requisite number of hours to be eligible for FMLA leave. Because Plaintiff was not entitled to FMLA leave for the period in question, her claim for FMLA interference fails.
2. FMLA Retaliation
Plaintiff alleges that AE retaliated against her for taking FMLA leave by terminating her, "writ[ing] [her] up" and refusing her FMLA leave in 2011. Plaintiff's claim lacks merit, and accordingly, summary judgment is also granted on this claim.
Claims for retaliation under the FMLA are also analyzed under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework. Potenza v. City of New York, 365 F.3d 165, 167-68 (2d Cir. 2004) (per curiam). Plaintiff must first make a prima facie showing that "1) [s]he exercised rights protected under the FMLA; 2) [s]he was qualified for h[er] position; 3) [s]he suffered an adverse employment action; and 4) the adverse employment action occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of retaliatory intent." Id. at 168.
Plaintiff is unable to satisfy the fourth prong of her prima facie case. She has adduced no evidence giving rise to an inference that she was "written up, " fired or denied FMLA leave because she exercised her rights under the FMLA. As an initial matter, the record establishes that Plaintiff was first counseled about her performance-related issues in February 2009, nearly a year before she made her first FMLA request in or around January 2010. Cf Young v. Ltd. Brands, No. 11 Civ. 2927, 2013 WL 5434149, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2013) (finding that the "factual record... leads inexorably to an inference of performance-based dismissal, not disability-based discrimination" where "Defendants were concerned about Plaintiff's performance long before Defendants knew of any medical condition."). Further, Plaintiff was repeatedly granted, and encouraged to take, FMLA leave, and was granted FMLA leave in 2012, after the denial of her October 4, 2011, application for FMLA leave, negating any inference that the 2011 denial was retaliatory. In addition, Plaintiff expressly testified that no one kept her from exercising the FMLA leave she was granted and that each time she returned to work after taking leave, she returned to equal terms and conditions of employment. Even if Plaintiff were able to make a prima facie showing of FMLA retaliation, Plaintiff's extensive disciplinary history, as detailed above, amply establishes legitimate cause for "writing Plaintiff up" and for her discharge.
F. Liability of the Individual Defendants
Plaintiff's claims against the individual AE Defendants and the individual Union Defendants fail for several reasons. First, there is no individual liability under the ADA. See Sherman v. Cnty. of Suffolk, No. 11 Civ. 2528, 2014 WL 7370033, at *7 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2014) (citing cases). Second, while the NYSHRL and NYCHRL do establish supervisory liability for discriminatory conduct, Plaintiff has failed to show any discriminatory conduct in the first place. Feingold v. New York, 366 F.3d 138, 157 (2d Cir. 2004) (construing NYSHRL); Encarnacion v. Isabella Geriatric Ctr., Inc., No. 11 Civ. 3757, 2014 WL 7008946, at *12 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2014) (construing NYCHRL). Finally, "it is well established that union officers and employees are not individually liable to third parties for acts performed as representatives of the union." Ifill v. New York State Court Officers Ass'n, 655 F.Supp.2d 382, 394 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
For the above reasons, summary judgment is granted in Defendants' favor on all claims. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff, close the motions at Docket Nos. 84 and 95 and close the case.
The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of any appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
If you don't know that title, it's a song by the great musician George Ezra.
I'm assuming his little ditty has inspired many people like me to venture to this beautiful part of the world that would usually be reserved to only showing up in bond films (which it did in Goldeneye if I remember correctly)
Now I am just back from a weekend break in this beautiful part of the world and believe me I would've stayed much longer had I known just how incredible Budapest is. I'll be adding some more ratings over the week but I had to start with my visit to the state opera house. It was a stunning building with ornate features all around and a great sense of history. I'm not the biggest fan of opera but on a guided tour our host was lovely enough to highlights how incredible the acoustics in the building are, why the history of the building is so important to Budapest and what little quirky details in hidden in the decoration.
For museums heads, this is an ideal afternoon as the walk and surrounding area are very easy going. And I would highly recommend going to a bar just up the street on the Andrássy út called 360. It has a rooftop terrace bar (a rare sight in the city) with incredible views all round. For anyone who loves their panorama shots on Instagram, this is the place to go. And the cocktails aren't bad either.
I had hoped to see the interior of the Opera House, but on asking about times of tours, I found there were only two, and that was at 3 & 4pm - This didn't suit.
Well, at least I could see the opulent foyer, with its marble columns, gilded vaulted ceiling, beautiful murals that depict the 9 Muses and the chandeliers.
As going to the opera was a great social occasion in the 19th century, a sweeping staircase was a must in an Opera House as this allowed ladies to show off their new gowns.
The mail hall is decorated with a bronze chandelier that weighs 3050 kg, I hope it never drops on anybody! It illuminates a magnificent fresco of the Greek gods on Olympus.
I didn't see the Royal Box because you need to be on a tour. It's located centrally in the three-storey circle and decorated with sculptures symbolizing the four operatic voices - soprano, alto, tenor and bass.
TOURS ARE DAILY at 3 pm and at 4 pm .
If rehearsal is on, then most probably there will be no tour.
Tickets can be bought at the Opera Shop on the right hand side of the building.
The Hungarian State Opera House is a richly-decorated building and is considered one of the architect's masterpieces.
It was built in neo-Renaissance style, with elements of Baroque. On either side of the main entrance are niches with figures of two of Hungary's composers, Ferenc Erkel and Franz Liszt.
Liszt is the best known Hungarian composer and Erkel composed the Hungarian national anthem, and was the first music director of the Opera House and the founder of the Budapest Philharmonic Orchestra. The Budapest Opera House is considered to be amongst the finest opera houses in the world.
Each year the season lasts from September to the end of June and, in addition to opera performances, the House is home to the Hungarian National Ballet and the Budapest Opera Ball, a society event dating back to 1886.
One of the stand out buildings in Budapest and Andrassy Ut is the Opera. Not only is it an impressive looking building, it also sounds impressive too. According to some recent studies it still has some of the best acoustics of any opera house in Europe, and ranked third after Milan's La Scala, and the Paris Opera House.
So you get top class productions, in one of the best sounding opera houses in the world, and what do you pay for this? Well even for some of the most expensive productions, you can get tickets for as little as 600 forints (about 2-3 euros). Better seats cost anything up to around 50 euros a ticket, but even at those prices it's a bargain. With value like that, you'll have to book a long way ahead to get into some of the most popular shows.
If you can't catch a show, you can always take a guided tour. They are available in several languages (my Hungarian teacher takes tours around in English) and can be taken most days of the week. My teacher is currently there on Monday's straight after my lesson!
If you do go to the opera on an evening, you might want to dress up for the occasion. You won't be turned away if you turn up in rags, but you'll feel out of place.
Admire the the neo-Renaissance exterior of the building if you like opera try to book your tickets for an evening performance. To see the rest of the building, you have to join a guided tour or attend an opera performance. English guided tours take place daily at 3pm and 4 pm for 2800 HUF
In my 28 years i have never been to the opera, mostly because i had an idea that it was an expensive thing to go see but i have been pleasantly surprised. I was in Budapest this time with my childhood friend Caroline and we had only allocated a weekend to visit Budapest and had left visiting the opera house to the last minute. Rushing to meet the 4pm tour on Saturday night, we missed it by only 5 minutes. Out of curiosity i asked the ticket seller how much the Opera would be for the 11 am show on the Sunday (we had to leave by 3pm for the airport). She told me the price for the best seats in the hosue (around 12 euros) and i thought why not, first time for everything. After checking with my friend quickly if she wanted to sit through a hungarian opera (all in hungarian by the way) we quickly bought tickets for a box with a front facing view and i can honestly say i loved it. Did not understand a word of what was being spoken but the actions of the actors and dancers, added to knowing the storyline a little helped me understand what was happening.. and honestly... has inspired a new love of opera for me.
The Hungarian State Opera House in Budapest is the largest opera house in the country. It was designed in a Neo-Renaissance style by Miklos Ybl and built between 1875 and 1884. Its horse-shoe shaped auditorium seats 1,261 people; it is therefore not the biggest opera house in Europe, but its beauty and accousitics have contributed to its reputation as one of its best: when accoustics measurements were conducted in 1970s in opera houses throughout Europe, it ranked third after La Scala (Milan) and Palais Garnier (Paris).Tours are offered in different languages evey day (see Website for more info).
The Hungarian Opera House can be found on Andrassy ut, one of Budapest's main streets. The Opera House was finally done being built in 1884. It's not an extremely large building, but it is very beautiful. It is widely thought to be one of the best opera houses in all of Europe and the world. Here you can see either an opera or ballet performance. Although the best program is to buy tickets to a performance and see the interior, you can also just take a guided tour. The whole inside of the building is very beautiful and elegant especially the main staircase, foyer, and chandelier. If you don't have a lot of time, then take a guided tour, but the best way to experience the Hungarian Opera House is to see a performance. :)
My mother and I decided to go to the Opera, I thought it would be ok as I was convinced that I knew the story of Macbeth.
We decided to walk to the Opera house from our Hotel, which in hindsight was probably too far.
We bought tickets and then waited for the doors to open. We were sent out to the side entrance and then we began or ascent. There was about 10 flights of stairs to the very top! We both survived that and when we got to our seats they were in the front row at the top balcony. When we bought our tickets earlier in the day the woman had pointed out where our seats would be on the seating arrangement guide but the seats we had were not those. This is a very common occurrence and it doesn't make for a good first impression. As this was our first night in Budapest we weren't impressed by this as we had only been polite and courteous.
We took our seats and I felt nauseous - I am not a fan of heights - and this was so steep. Anyway, I sat very far back in my seat and the lights went down and the curtain went up. Oddly the Opera was sang in Hungarian and there was a screen with subtitles (in Hungarian) - that at least made us laugh, the singing was not that great but definitely better than I could do. About 5 minutes into it I got the giggles when I realised that it wasn't Macbeth that I knew but Hamlet - so my mum had to subtly give me a running commentary.
The seats were hard and my knees were rammed into the balcony and during the interval I was nudging my mum and saying lets go, lets go! I think I have had enough. So eventually my mum gives in and we try to get out.. the lights go down and we are trapped again, but I cant take any more and beg her to ask the two people next to her (before the end of the row) to move so we can get out. She does this and the woman tells the man, he goes to stand up and as he does so (this is how close to the edge we were) his glasses fall off of his face, over the balcony and onto whatever is 50ft beneath us! Me and mum stifle our laughter and head to the door - we reach the top of the steps when a woman usher appears - where are you going? she demands in a very old eastern European manner, my mum mumbles some excuse about her knees and leg room and the woman barks at us to "SIT THERE!", so we do....and we are laughing so hard but without sound, my stomach is killing me, tears are streaming down my mums face and the row of seats is shaking. The man who lost his glasses goes to find them and the woman with him waits in her seat...he didn't return in the 30 minutes that it was till the opera ended and she never went to find him. I wonder what happened to his glasses?
It was definitely an experience, and even remembering the glasses makes me laugh so much still. I am even laughing now!
I apologise that this doesn't tell you much about the Opera House, other than to make sure your tickets are the ones you want for the seats you want, that you make sure its an Opera you understand and that you have very short legs and good eyesight. Oh, and don't wear glasses if you are seated in the front row of the top tier!
The HUNGARIAN state opéra is a néo-renaissance building located on ANDRASSY Avenue and it opened to the public on september 27 1884.
This opéra house is considered to be amongst the first few opéra house in the world.
We have seen a perfomance of "FIDELIO'" the unique opéra of BEETHOVEN.
We weren't passionates by the show, perhaps due to a very simple staging.
Those of you who don't plan to attend an opera or ballet at the opera house, please join a guided tour of the building. The magnificent opera house, opened in 1884, is the main work of architect Miklos Ybl. The lobby, grand staircase and auditorium are decorated with marble, stucco, frescos all over. Really an impressive sight.
Not only the architecture, the history is also interesting. Famous musicians worked here: Ferenc Erkel, Gustav Mahler, Otto Klemperer e.g.
Tours are offered daily at 3 and 4 pm in several languages if no rehearsals or performances are scheduled, of course. Cost is HUF 2,800 (which is quite steep, some tickets for performances are cheaper). That does not even include photo permission which costs additional HUF 500. LOL!
The Hungarian State Opera House was built in the late 1800s and combines the best of neo-Renaissance and Baroque styles of architecture and interior design. Today, visitors can tour the interior of the opera house in six languages, twice a day, with tours lasting approximately an hour. The price is about twelve euros, and tours will not operate if they conflict with a rehearsal or performance. Expect to see paintings of the nine muses, a frescoed cupola, expansive entryways and maybe even a diva or two! Information about upcoming performances is also available on their website, of course.


text:
Manchester City are reportedly looking to sign Toni Kroos from Real Madrid despite the German insisting he isn't interested in a move.
Luka Modric scored one of the goals of the tournament so far to give Croatia a 1-0 win over Turkey while his Real Madrid teammate Toni Kroos starred in Germany's 2-0 triumph over Ukraine.
Germany began their Euro 2016 campaign in the best possible way after they overcame a stern Ukraine side to prevail 2-0. Shkodran Mustafi and Bastian Schweinsteiger were the scorers on the day for Die Mannschaft.
Real Madrid, who are said to be chasing the signature of Juventus midfielder Paul Pogba, may have to let their German star Toni Kroos go in order to bring the Frenchman to the Santiago Bernabeu, according to reports from Spain.
Real Madrid have a huge task ahead of them in the second leg of their Champions League quarter-final against Wolfsburg at the Santiago Bernabeu, but will be boosted by the return of several key players who were rested in the weekend win over Eibar.
Real Madrid will be without the services of Raphael Varane who has reportedly suffered a soleus calf muscle problem while travelling with French international team. Reports also reveal that Toni Kroos suffered an injury scare during a training session with no official word out on his injury.
Mario Goetze brushed off a frustrating season on Bayern Munich's bench to net in Germany's 4-1 thumping of Italy on Tuesday as the world champions redeemed their England defeat.
Today's transfer gossip revolves around the two Spanish giants Barcelona and Real Madrid. While one of Barca's goalkeepers thinks his time at Camp Nou is coming to an end, Real Madrid are looking to pull off a stunning exchange of star players with Chelsea.
Today's transfer gossip involves one of Leicester City's world beaters, two big clubs chasing Dortmund's midfield maestro and a Manchester United-Real Madrid deal that isn't about David de Gea.
The Manchester United squad has been shown to be lacking in depth and quality over the past season as summer signings have failed to make an impact and injury has ravaged the side. We take a look at 3 possible January signings that could improve the lot of the Red Devils.


text:
Reading mode: Light Dark
B&W Film Grain
Challenge #9 in the Pari's Series series. Hosted by Parinita Salian.
Challenge has finished
Nothing can beat the effect of film grain on a Black and White image. It coverts the photograph into a timeless piece of art. Film had a distinct advantage over digital when it came to grain, as digital noise didnt give the same effect. But with advanced image-editing softwares and plug-ins its possible to replicate the effect.
Show full rules
Monday, 9th February, 2009 (GMT)
Monday, 16th February, 2009 – Sunday, 22nd February, 2009 (GMT)
Monday, 23rd February, 2009 – Sunday, 1st March, 2009 (GMT)
Processing rules:
Capture date rules:
Additional rules:
Maximum number of entries per user:
Maximum number of entries in challenge:
phase has
441 entries
phase has
11499 votes
Keyboard shortcuts:
p previous n next c challenge f full size r retract vote # vote
Back to: Challenges homepage Challenge
Entry comments
All (0)
Most popular (0)
Editors' picks (0)
DPR staff (0)
Oldest first
No comments have been written yet. Be the first to write one!
Latest reviews
Finished challenges
Most popular cameras
in time for the holidaysCamera Roundups Updatedshop aroundHoliday Gift Guides for Every Budget69i wanna fly awayBest Camera Drones Under $1500In-depth testingLatest Camera ReviewsBeyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videosreal world performanceField Test Videossee how we seeSample Galleries204wide-angle wonderSigma 12-24mm F4 Art Lens Review70instant gratification2016 Instax mini roundup172VideoDog Portraits with the Sony a6300What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise557action-packedSony a6500 First Impressions2325FeatureWhat is equivalence?1246ultimate om-dOlympus E-M1 Mark II Review710new kid on the blockYI M1 review
Top threads


text:
scroll to top
Stuck on your essay?
Get ideas from this essay and see how your work stacks up
2 Pages
Overview of the Progressive Era in America
Already a member? Login here
Pages: 2
Word Count: 746
Category: World History and Cultures
Word Count: 746
Pages: 2
The Progressive era marked a time of transition to better lives for Americans It was a time when people initiated movements to try to improve their working conditions as well as their living standards for themselves and others However in an attempt to expand their economic and political rights they restricted some of the freedoms that had already been established One of the major complaints citizens had during the Progressive era was that the big businesses had too much power and they were very corrupt with their power Many felt that it was unjust for business to be overworking their workers without increasing their pay especially with the deteriorating working conditions that led to many injuries and deaths on the job This was partly due to the rapidly increasing population numbers as people poured into America looking for better opportunities The areas of Americas that saw the greatest influx of people were the cities The United States counted twenty-one cities whose population exceeded one hundred thousand in 1910 the largest being New York with 47 million residents Also Manhattan Island was home to over two million people more than lived in thirty-three of the other states Foner 675 The massive amounts of people moving into the area made jobs harder to find especially good paying jobs This increased the poor class as there was no way for the poor to make money and become successful Some families were so desperate for money that they sent their children in to work for wages In fact more than two million children under the age of fifteen worked for wages Foner 676 With the amounts of people fighting for jobs and with jobs becoming more and more scarce economic freedoms were severely limited In attempts to better their economic freedoms workers tried to start strikes against the big business arguing that they were not treated or paid properly They attempted to create labor unions where they could rally
@Kibin is a lifesaver for my essay right now!!
- Sandra Slivka, student @ UC Berkeley
Wow, this is the best essay help I've ever received!
- Camvu Pham, student @ U of M
If I'd known about @Kibin in college, I would have gotten much more sleep
- Jen Soust, alumni @ UCLA


text:
Swedish Kroppkakor
Total Time
Prep 30 mins
Cook 10 mins
Kroppkakor is eaten all over Sweden and is really old-fashioned cooking. The recipe is varying in different parts of Sweden. It is made with only raw potatoes or raw and boiled or just boiled as in this recipe. The allspice is not something that everybody likes, for me it's a must though. If there are any leftovers I love to slice them in halves the next day and fry them in butter--mmm!! A friend of mine from the north of Sweden does just that but he makes a sauce by pouring milk into the frying pan and boiling it with the halved kroppkakor, he does not want any allspice in his and makes them with both raw and cooked potatoes. This is one of the few dishes that I drink milk with. Lingonsylt is a must all over Sweden; I believe it is called cowberry or red whortleberry. I hope you enjoy!!
Ingredients Nutrition
- 10 -12 medium potatoes, boiled and cold
- 1 egg
- 1 1⁄4 cups all-purpose flour
- 8 ounces bacon, the smoked and slightly salted one, cut into small pieces
- 1 onion, finely chopped
- 1 teaspoon whole allspice, coarlsey crushed
- Mash the potatoes.
- Stir in egg and flour making a smooth dough.
- Fry onion and bacon in some butter.
- Add allspice or white pepper to taste, set aside.
- Shape the dough into a log with floured hands cut into 12 pieces.
- Make a little pocket and fill with about 1 tablespoon of filling.
- Close and shape into a ball.
- Put about 4-5 at a time in simmering salted water, big pot, and let simmer for 5 minutes.
- kakorna will sink and when they have floated to the top they are ready.
- Serve with a thin béchamel sauce or melted butter.
- A must is lingonsylt.
Most Helpful
This has long been a favorite. My recipe uses salt pork in place of bacon. We make a gravy similar to that used in biscuits and gravy in the USA.
Using the measurements here, and making 12 dumplings, I was astounded that the size of the dumplings were about like a baseball! The recipe says the dumplings float when they are done, but when I cut into my sample one, the consistency was like school paste. Not very appetizing. I cooked all the remaining ones for an additional 5 minutes. Still, the texture and visual appeal was not there. After reading a recipe for these from another source, I browned all of mine in butter, which gave them a nice crisp outside (though I was still not impressed with the inside.) I also used lots of salt and pepper on the final product. I think I'll stay with good old German potato pancakes and avoid the extra work.
I tried this as my boyfriend is swedish and i wanted to surprise him. Later i found out he never had accually tried it but it stilltasted authentic and we felt a little like "home". This is feel-good food! Thank you so much for brightening up pur day :-)


text:
Lowwapaneu Lodge
Order of the Arrow, Boy Scouts of America
Brothers, I hope everyone is doing well as we enter the Fall, and Winter seasons! The 2016 year has been an incredible year in Lowwapaneu Lodge. The year is starting to come to a close, however we are still very busy, and are ready to finish off the year strong. I am so pleased with the participation we have had throughout the many events our lodge has hosted this year. I'm not sure about you all, but I would say that Lowwapaneu's 25th anniversary year was a huge success. I want to thank all of the leadership in the lodge, as well as all of the general members for making this year such a success. It has been an honor serving as your Lodge Chief this year. Remember our principals, and stay active as we finish our final activities of the year.
Matt Wheeland
Lodge Chief
It's that time of year when we should start thinking about next year and future years in our great organization. Lodge elections are right around the corner in late November and Vigil and Founders nominations will be due in early November for Founders and early December for Vigil.
We also have elections training set for the first Sunday in December where we will be talking about changes in the election process. Without trained Youth and Adult members we can not hold elections.
Remember the Order of the Arrow is a program designed for youth. Officers and Chairmen must be under the age of twenty-one for their entire term of office. The officers plan and conduct all meetings and events. Adults serve in advisory capacities only.
Hope to see you at one of our remaining activities in 2016.
Mr. Croom
Lodge Advisor
Click here for a complete list of the Lodge Officers and Advisors
Wednesday, December 28, 2016 at Al Mia Amore Restaurant
All members of Lowwapaneu Lodge are invited to attend the Annual Holiday Banquet. Brothers are also encouraged to invite family members and friends to this evening of cheerful fellowship. Highlights of this year's banquet include: recognition of the new Ordeal, Brotherhood, and Vigil members; entertainment; lodge plans for the upcoming year; slide show; fellowship; James West, Centurion Award and Founder's Award presentations... and a great time to be had by all.
Registration forms are available for download.
Online Registration is available! Holiday Banquet Registration
We look forward to seeing you!
Do you have feedback for our website? Have a question, comment, or concern? Give us Feedback!


text:
Disney Clothes
Disney Castle and Minnie Head Hoodie Is Perfect For Chilly Nights
disney sweatshirt More
Fashion Cartoon Monster Sweatshirt
Disney Park Exclusive Christmas Merchandise Was Created With Disney Fashionistas In Mind
This Disney inspired tank top knows all of my favorite things!
Shop High Quality Gray/Black Thicken Mickey Leggings At Dressve.Com, And The Price Is Low Only At US$29.99 http://www.dressve.com/shop-11151897.html
Trendy online geek boutique Black Milk is about to release its second Disney collection in its signature sleek and sexy style. The collection is heavy on shiny nylon, short skirts and skin-tight design, from leggings to swim suits.
t-shirt disney clothes stitch lilo and stitch animal youtuber brandy melville disney tumblr outfit blue shirt
Mickey Mouse Printed Leggings - I'm not brave enough to wear these. Are you?
Image of Neverland Beanie


text:
Results 1-14 of 54 for trigonometry tutor royse city
Trigonometry Tutors in Royse City, TX
Find Private & Affordable Trigonometry Tutoring in the Royse City Area!
Salman A. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
I chose the University of Texas at Dallas to complete this requirement for medical school.I have been tutoring and teaching elementary, high school, and college students for approximately three years . Specializing in math and science, I am adept not only in teaching, but in...
Simon Fraser University - BS, Cell and Molecular Biology , University of British Columbia - MS, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Max S. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
Since I have been back stateside, I have been a private tutor for students in all age groups to assist them in reaching the No Child Left Behind standards . I have also served as a substitute teacher and middle school math instructor while I was in Minnesota . Right now I am...
University of Minnesota - BS, Math, Physics
Ethan E. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
I attended the University of Oklahoma, where I acquired my bachelor's degree in electrical engineering . Upon graduating, I entered the world of being a cadet . Following this new endeavor, I began commissioning as a second lieutenant in the Army . While serving in the...
University of Oklahoma - B.S., Electrical Engineering
Ashley K. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
I like to adapt my teaching methods to fit each individual student so that they can understand the concepts in a way that makes sense to them . I like to incorporate math whenever I can, and once had the chance to teach a Math class for summer school . I understand that this...
Texas A&M University - BS, Mechanical Engineering
Ifad N. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
My plans for the future include possibly medical school and maybe earning a PHD/MBA. Helping you understand the vast aspects of this field, and giving you the knowledge that I have learned is the reason that I tutor . Algebra, Algebra 2, History, Anatomy, Arithmetic, Biology,...
University of Illinois - BS, Chemistry
Jessica O. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
As a teacher, I have gained the experience needed to help students grow and learn within mathematics . I enjoy helping students understand the concepts of Math, from elementary and middle school-level skills to those in more advanced courses, like pre-algebra, algebra, and...
West Texas A&M University - BS, Mathematics
Nicholas C. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
Through the NROTC, I have tutored high school students in many of the subjects listed above . I enjoy tutoring not only because I enjoy the subjects themselves, but because I believe in the ability of every person to achieve their goals . With a little hard work and some...
Duke University - BS, Statistics
Aleksandar H. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
This is the best method of figuring out how to be of help, and something I have always respected in the mentors and teachers who helped me get where I am . It's something I continue to try carrying forward when I work with students . I tutor in algebra, geometry, and...
Washington University in St. Louis - BS, Philosophy-Neuroscience-Psychology
John M. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
Some of the subjects I have taught include algebra 1, algebra 2, algebra 3/4, pre-calculus, calculus 1, calculus 2, calculus 3, trigonometry, competition math, multivariable calculus, and AP calculus AB . A big believer in encouraging students, I love watching students build...
Tricia G. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
It is hard for me to imagine being in any other profession.I have positive experiences in having studied with teachers who knew how to make Math fun, interesting, and interactive . Now, I am on a mission to make sure my students experience the same . I always try to keep...
Wichita State University - BBA, Finance
Joshua E. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
I have taught integrated science labs, electronics labs, astronomy labs, and physics labs . I have also tutored algebra-calculus 3 in the local Mathlab . I do not like to waste anyone's time, if I feel that I honestly do not know enough about the specific subject matter to...
Graduate Physics Student at Texas A&M-Commerce. GPA: 3.21
Michael S. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
College Algebra, Intermediate Algebra, Algebra 1, Algebra 2, Algebra 3/4, Arithmetic, Intermediate Algebra, Math, Pre-Algebra, Trigonometry, Pre-Calculus, Geometry, College Algebra, Calculus 1, Calculus 3, Calculus 2, Math Tutored in Calculus, C, C++, and data structures for...
Colorado Technical University, Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science. 1994
Michelle G. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
Over 20 years tutoring experience-began in high school 10 year career as a Mathematics Educator Algebra 1 and 2 Trigonometry, Math Over 20 years tutoring experience-began in high school 10 year career as a Mathematics Educator Algebra 1 and 2 Trigonometry, Math
BA Mathematics Chatham College
Michael S. Private Trigonometry tutor in Royse City, TX
2 years experience private piano lessons Algebra, Geometry, Math, Pre-Calculus, Calculus, Trigonometry, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Science, C/C++, Java, Computer Skills, Kindergarten - 8th Grade, Music, Social Studies 2 years experience private piano lessons Algebra,...
University of North Texas, B.A. Major in Music
Royse City ACT Tutors, Royse City Algebra Tutors, Royse City Biology Tutors, Royse City Calculus Tutors, Royse City Chemistry Tutors, Royse City English Tutors, Royse City French Tutors, Royse City Geometry Tutors, Royse City GRE Tutors, Royse City ISEE Tutors, Royse City LSAT Tutors, Royse City Mandarin Chinese Tutors, Royse City Math Tutors, Royse City MCAT Tutors, Royse City Physics Tutors, Royse City Precalculus Tutors, Royse City Reading Tutors, Royse City SAT Tutors, Royse City Spanish Tutors, Royse City SSAT Tutors, Royse City Statistics Tutors, Royse City Writing Tutors


text:
Airistech Nokiva
The Nokiva by Airistech is a compact dry herb vapouriser that is perfect for your aromatherapy needs.
The ceramic heating chamber heats up in 20 seconds and holds about .4g of your chosen herb. The Nokiva comes with a short mouth piece or an extendable glass piece that allows a cooler vapour.
The Nokiva comes with a charger, and cleaning tools.


text:
Excellent Trans. Quality Domain Knldg & Exp. in a Large Intl. BPO With a very large Qlty team. Res. for establishing the Qualityfunc. & driving in line with Quality Objc. & ensuring that all func. deliverables to internal & external customers are met.
Min. 12+ yrs of total work exp. in a BPO / ITES Inds. with an Intl. BPO in a client facing area. Must have led Transactional/process Imp. Prog with significant savings. Should be an AVP now or a tenured Sr. Mgr.
Bpo Quality Transaction Service Quality Client Facing Transactional


text:
Solar Power 0 Down Free Installation from Solar City
Solar Power 0 Down Free Installation
100% performance guaranteed. Backed by Solar City
You only need a good roof and at least 635 Fico score
to qualify save 30% on Electric Rates 1st year, Solar City rates
stays the same for life of use no increases in rates like utilities will.
Get information no obligation, backed by Elon Musk owner of Solar City