text:
Check in from 9h / Check out prior to 14h
Saj Earth Resort: Find photos, reviews, information, amenities and compare prices for 5 stars hotels in Nedumbassery, India.
Offering 5-star modern accommodation, Saj Earth Resort is ideally situated in Nedumbassery. It offers a sauna, a swimming pool and a kids club.
Hotel description
This luxury resort provides a beauty centre, an express check-in and check-out feature and valet parking. It includes family-friendly amenities, with room designs and services for families of any size, plus a playground and a kids pool.
The rooms provide a ceiling fan and ironing facilities, and have views of the pool. Each provides a private bathroom with bathrobes. They are also air conditioned.
Hotel features
Room Service, Air Conditioned, Connecting Rooms, Billiards, En suite, Private Bathroom
Business Center, Concierge, 24 Hour Reception, Dry Cleaning, Conference Room(s), Currency Exchange, Safe-Deposit Box, Meeting Rooms, Laundry service, Shops, Photocopier, Luggage Storage, Express Check-In/Check-Out, Self Laundry
Swimming pool, Tour Desk, Massage / Beauty Centre, Sauna, Garden, Playground, Massage
Internet Connection (wireless)
Airport shuttle, Valet Parking
Salon, Bathrobes, Child Pool, Kids Club, Games Available, Picnic Area/Tables, Packed Lunches, Souvenirs/Gift Shop, Smoking Room, Shoe Shine
Availability and Prices
Booking Site
Room Type
Per room
Per night
Per night
Users who viewed Saj Earth Resort also viewed these 5 stars Nedumbassery hotels:
Diana Heights
Near to Kochi International Airport, Athani Jn, Nedumbasserry, Ernakulam Dist, Nedumbassery
Near to Kochi International Airport, Athani Jn, Nedumbasserry, Ernakulam Dist, Nedumbassery
Search hotels
based on
450 reviews
Nearest hotels
- Krish Airport Hotel
74 m
- Airport Mansion
114 m
- Abad Airport Hotel Kochi
340 m


text:
Brain Bowl
Tuesday night: I was drinking white wine in a white-walled art gallery and
standing over a plastic bowl containing crumbled sheep brains. "So," I said,
turning to the woman next to me, a tall, fresh-faced woman named Saskia
Jorda. "How many brains have you washed?"
Upcoming Events
After Hours
TicketsFri., Dec. 9, 11:00pm
Que Pasa Improv?
TicketsSat., Dec. 10, 7:00pm
Hasan Minhaj: Homecoming King
TicketsSat., Dec. 10, 8:00pm
Just the Funny Mainstage Show
TicketsSat., Dec. 10, 9:00pm
Just the Funny - After Hours
TicketsSat., Dec. 10, 11:00pm
She paused. "Three," she replied, then added helpfully, "I'm going to wash two more on Saturday."
I nodded thoughtfully and considered asking if the brains felt squishy between her fingers, a very un-artistic question. But before I could ask, Jorda explained in great detail how, as the grey matter crumbles in her hands, it makes a statement about everything from "washing out" human perceptions to the
Venezuelan political scene to the American media. Jorda is one of the legions of New York artists that have descended on our fair city during this Art Basel week. Instead of hyper-real photographs or jumbled collages or intricate oil paintings, Jorda brainwashes. Literally. She takes an animal's brain (this week it's a sheep), submerges it in a bucket of water, and scrubs it with orange dish soap, a toothbrush and her fingers.
I asked her how she felt after she washed her first brain, (a cow, freshly killed, in Mexico).
"Very intense," she said. "I cried afterwards."
Jorda will wash two more brains Saturday at the Hardcore Art Gallery (3326 N. Miami Ave.) on Saturday night, around 9 p.m. "I'm thinking about doing something with a heart next," Jorda added.
Tamara Lush
Get the Arts & Culture Newsletter
Find out about arts and culture events in Miami and offers you won't hear about anywhere else.
In Case You Missed It
Upcoming Events
The Nutcracker
TicketsFri., Dec. 9, 7:00pm
JTF's Friday Night Live
TicketsFri., Dec. 9, 9:00pm
The Spotlight
TicketsFri., Dec. 9, 10:00pm
"Sister Act"
TicketsThu., Dec. 8, 2:00pmpowered by goldstar
Sponsor Content

subset: commoncrawl


text:
N. prodotti: 0
Totale ordine: € 0,00
FASCICOLI E ARTICOLI I PIÙ LETTI eTOC
Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,632
Bruno FREITAS, Sabine STEINER, Yvonne BAUSBACK, Holger STAAB, Daniela BRANZAN, Ursula BANNING-EICHENSEER, Andrej SCHMIDT, Dierk SCHEINERT
Division of Interventional Angiology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vascular closure devices(VCDs) in non-cardiac endovascular interventions.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients submitted to endovascular interventions, with deployment of 2327 vascular closure devices. Demographic, clinical/periprocedural, post-operative, complication and reintervention data were reviewed.
RESULTS: 2107 patients (1409(66.9%) men) were included. Perclose ProGlide®(Abbott Vascular, CA,USA) was employed 1683 times(72.3%), Angio- SealTM(St. Jude Medical Inc.,MN,USA) 463(19.9%) and 181(7.8%) Exoseal®(Cordis,NJ,USA). Patients were 70.4±11 years old. Vascular approaches were 1794 retrograde(77.1%) and 533 antegrade(22.9%), with sheath size ranging from 5- to 8-French. Overall success rate was 95.2% and did not significantly vary according to the device. Overall failure rate was 4.8%, with high puncture site, morbid obesity, previous total anticoagultion and severe calcification being related to worse efficiency results. Major complications occurred in 15 patients(0.6%). All patients were evaluated before discharge from the hospital, and were scheduled to return for ambulatory follow-up visits at 30 days postoperatively. Control duplex ultrasonography was performed on a regular basis, or within this period in case of clinical complain/signs.
CONCLUSIONS: Vascular closure devices proved to be safe and effective in this study. Additional prospective randomized studies are recommended.
lingua: Inglese


text:
Skip to Navigation
Skip to Content
Navigation Toggle
About the Coral Coast
Subscribe to our News
Blog News
Wildlife on the Coral Coast
History and culture
Award winning operators
Weddings and corporate functions
Contact us
Travel Information
Useful information
Weather and climate
Plan your journey
Caravan & Camping the region
Dog Friendly accommodation
Drive itineraries
Fly itineraries
Family friendly
Ultimate Bucket List
Wildflower trails
Unique Accomodation
Accommodation by location
Hotel & motel
Self contained
Wilderness retreat
Station stay
Caravan & camping
Bed & breakfast
Backpacker & hostel
Ningaloo Reef region
Carnarvon region
Shark Bay region
Kalbarri region
Geraldton region
Indian Ocean Drive region
Tours & activities
Must do
Swim with Whale Sharks
Swim with Manta Rays in Coral Bay
Monkey Mia dolphins
Diving the Coral Coast
Other marine life encounters
Indigenous experiences
Water sports
Wildflowers on the Coral Coast
Bird watching
Attractions & events
75th anniversary HMAS Sydney
Priest turned Architect - Monsignor Hawes Heritage Centre
Celebrate UNESCO World Heritage in 2016
Interact with Humpback Whales in 2016
Dirk Hartog Island 400 year celebration in 2016
Must see
Coral Coast events
Marine parks
Attractions by location
History and heritage
National parks and passes info
Natural wonders of the Coral Coast
Beaches of the Coral Coast
Food and drink
Media centre
Contact Local Visitor Centre
Ningaloo Reef region
Carnarvon region
Carnarvon's TropiCOOL festival
Gascoyne food and produce
Mount Augustus National Park
Kennedy Range National Park
Shark Bay region
Kalbarri region
Geraldton region
Indian Ocean Drive region
Carnarvon region
Kennedy Range National Park
Kennedy Range National Park
Kennedy Range National Park, Western Australia is located 150 kilometres east of
and extends for roughly 195 kilometres in a northerly direction from near Gascoyne Junction.
If hiking or camping interest you then Kennedy Range National Park is not to be missed. A semi-developed park, it offers a wilderness-style experience and the opportunity to get back to nature while camping beneath the stars and the stark sandstone cliffs of the Kennedy Range.
One of the best times to visit the Kennedy Range is in the months after good winter rains. At such times, the usually dusty red landscape bursts into bloom with a wide variety of delicate flowers and plants blanketing the National Park's ancient valleys.
Sightseeing, photography, picnicking, bush camping, hiking and a trek to the top of the ranges can easily fill your time at Kennedy Range National Park.
There is no entry fee for the National Park. There is a bush camping area that has a single bush toilet. Water is not available in the park so be sure to bring sufficient supplies. For more information on visiting Kennedy Range National Park contact the
Carnarvon Visitor Centre
Driving the Kennedy Range National Park
Kennedy Range National Park
Also in this section


text:
Italian translation of nominee
Example Sentences Including 'nominee'
`Of course, one could always short Eurotunnel stock through offshore accounts held in nominee names.Cormorant
At the height of its mediocrity, this place---Palomo Grove---had been a nominee for the perfect California haven.EVERVILLE (2001)
A lot of short selling by anonymous nominee shareholders, as if someone knew that the price of the stock was headed for a tumble.Cormorant
Trends of 'nominee'
View usage over:
'nominee' in Other Languages
Translation of nominee from the Collins English to Italian Dictionary
Log in to comment on this word.
Join the Collins Community
All the latest wordy news, linguistic insights, offers and competitions every month.
Read more
|Latest Word Submissions


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.
March 1, 2010
AMY ADAMS, PLAINTIFF,v.MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, DEFENDANT.
Before the Court is Plaintiff's appeal of a decision by Defendant Social Security Administration ("the Agency"), denying her applications for Disability Insurance benefits ("DIB") and Supplemental Security Income ("SSI"). Plaintiff claims that the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") erred in failing to: 1) properly consider the state agency psychiatrist's opinion; 2) pose a complete hypothetical question to the vocational expert; 3) properly consider lay witness testimony; and 4) develop the record. (Joint Stip. at 3-5, 7-9, 10-13, 15-19.) Because the Agency's decision that Plaintiff was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act is supported by substantial evidence, it is affirmed.
Plaintiff applied for DIB and SSI on November 2, 2006, alleging that she had been unable to work since July 1, 2006, because of Asperger's Syndrome and agoraphobia. (Administrative Record ("AR") 118, 137, 169.) The Agency denied the application initially and on reconsideration. (AR 54-58, 62-66.) Plaintiff then requested and was granted a hearing before an ALJ. (AR 68, 108-115.) Plaintiff appeared with counsel and testified at a hearing on June 6, 2008. (AR 20-49.) On August 7, 2008, the ALJ issued a decision denying benefits. (AR 5-15.) Plaintiff appealed to the Appeals Council, which denied review. (AR 1-4.) Plaintiff then commenced the instant action.
1. The State Agency Reviewing Psychiatrist's Opinion
In her first claim of error, Plaintiff contends that the ALJ erred in failing to properly consider an opinion of Dr. H.C. Amado, a state agency reviewing physician. (Joint Stip. at 3-5.) Plaintiff argues that the ALJ was required to consider Dr. Amado's findings and to give those findings some weight, unless the ALJ specifically chose to reject them. (Joint Stip. at 3, 5.) For the following reasons, this claim is rejected.
ALJ's are required to consider the opinions of non-examining, consulting doctors. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(f)(1), (2); 416.927(f)(1), (2); Social Security Ruling 96-6p; see also Andrews v. Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th Cir. 1995) (suggesting that a non-examining doctor's opinion is entitled to at least some weight). Dr Amado was a consulting doctor. He never examined or treated Plaintiff. Instead, he reviewed the records of the doctors who had examined or treated Plaintiff and offered his opinion based on those reports.
Dr. Amado's opinion was contained in two check-the-box forms. The first was a Psychiatric Review Technique form in which he opined that Plaintiff had a medically-determinable anxiety disorder, not otherwise specified, and Asperger Syndrome. (AR 241-53.) He rated Plaintiff's degree of limitation as "moderate" for social functioning, concentration, persistence, and pace, and "mild" for activities of daily living. (AR 249.) He found that there was no evidence of repeated episodes of decompensation. (AR 249.)
In the "Consultant's Notes" section of the form, Dr. Amado reported that Plaintiff had been previously diagnosed with "developmental autism variant as well as agoraphobia," but had never received treatment. (AR 251.) He noted that the consultative psychiatric examiner had made "fairly benign" findings, including a Global Assessment Functioning ("GAF") score of 70, and concluded:
It appears overall that available [evidence of record] supports the presence of a psych[iatric medically determinable impairment] which would not preclude the ability to sustain at least unskilled work activity, in a low-stress environment away from the general public. A less restricted determination could result if claimant were to avail herself of psychotherapy and/or medications for depression/anxiety, which could likely improve her quality of life. Mental allegations are seen to be partially supported within the available [medical evidence of record] at this time. (AR 251.)
The second from he completed was a Mental Residual Functional Capacity Assessment form. (AR 238-40.) In the "Summary Conclusions" portion of that form, Dr. Amado opined that Plaintiff would be "moderately" limited in her ability to carry out detailed instructions, maintain attention and concentration for extended periods, interact appropriately with the general public, accept instructions and respond appropriately to criticism from supervisors, get along with co-workers and peers, respond appropriately to changes in the work setting, travel to unfamiliar places or use public transportation, set realistic goals, and make plans independently of others. (AR 238-39.) In the "Functional Capacity Assessment" portion of the form, Dr. Amado explained the bases for these opinions, directing the reader to "Please see CNN and 2506 IV." (AR 240.) "CNN" apparently refers to the "Case Analysis" prepared by the state agency, which concluded that Plaintiff would be restricted to simple, repetitive, non-public work. (AR 253.) The term "2506 IV" appears to refer to the Psychiatric Review Technique form, designated form 2506, discussed above. (AR 241-52.)
In his decision, the ALJ found at step two that Plaintiff's mental impairment resulted in mild restrictions in activities of daily living and moderate difficulties in social functioning, concentration, persistence, and pace. (AR 11.) Clearly, these findings were taken from Dr. Amado. (AR 249.) The ALJ then found that Plaintiff's residual functional capacity would restrict her to "simple repetitive tasks with preclusion from public contact and assembly line work." (AR 11.)
Though Dr. Amado reported Plaintiff's limitations in slightly different language in the "Summary Conclusions" portion of the check- the-box form, it is clear from the forms that he filled out that he believed that Plaintiff's mental limitations would not preclude her from unskilled, low-stress work away from the general public.*fn1 (AR 240, 251.) Because the ALJ not only took into account Dr. Amado's opinion but, in fact, adopted it in most respects, he was not required to set forth why he was rejecting the opinion. Plaintiff's argument that the ALJ erred because he failed to specifically address each of the limitations found by Dr. Amado in the check-the-box forms is rejected. That was not required. See Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1217 (9th Cir. 2005) (affirming ALJ's residual functional capacity determination where he "applied the proper legal standard and his decision [wa]s supported by substantial evidence."); see also Howard ex rel. Wolff v. Barnhart, 341 F.3d 1006, 1012 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding ALJ is not required to discuss every piece of evidence so long as the decision is supported by substantial evidence). For these reasons, the Court concludes that the ALJ did not err with respect to Dr. Amado's opinion.
2. The Hypothetical Question to the Vocational Expert
In her second claim of error, Plaintiff contends that the ALJ erred when he failed to incorporate Dr. Amado's limitations in the hypothetical question to the vocational expert. (Joint Stip. at 7-9.) Again, the Court disagrees.
A hypothetical question that does not include all of a claimant's restrictions is legally inadequate. Robbins v. Soc. Security Admin., 466 F.3d 880, 886 (9th Cir. 2006). An ALJ may, however, limit a hypothetical to only those restrictions that are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Bayliss, 427 F.3d at 1217-18.
The ALJ asked the vocational expert to assume a hypothetical person with Plaintiff's background and education, who could do light work, but was restricted in the use of her right arm, and who could do simple work, not fast-paced production-type work, with no public interaction. (AR 45.) The ALJ asked the vocational expert to also assume that the person would work best alone, but would not be precluded from working around others. (AR 45.) The vocational expert testified that the hypothetical person could not perform any of Plaintiff's past work, or any other work. (AR 46.)
The ALJ then expanded the hypothetical question to include someone who could perform "production work," such as "light janitorial work, office work or something like that," but could not perform "assembly line work." (AR 46.) With that revision, the vocational expert found that such a hypothetical person could work as a data entry clerk or housekeeper/cleaner. (AR 47.)
Contrary to Plaintiff's arguments, this hypothetical question properly reflected Dr. Amado's conclusion that Plaintiff could perform unskilled work in a low-stress environment away from the general public. (AR 251.) Because these limitations were consistent with Dr. Amado's ultimate residual functional capacity assessment, as opposed to Dr. Amado's summary conclusions in his check-the-box form which the ALJ did not accept, the ALJ did not err in declining to include in the hypothetical question other limitations. See Bayliss, 427 F.3d at 1217 (upholding ALJ's hypothetical question that contained all the limitations found credible and supported by substantial evidence in the record). Thus, this claim does not warrant remand or reversal.
3. Lay Witness Testimony
In her third claim of error, Plaintiff contends that the ALJ erred by failing to properly discuss the written "testimony" of her mother, Gina Rider. (Joint Stip. at 10-13.) Plaintiff argues that her mother offered detail on Plaintiff's inability to function, but that the ALJ stated only that the mother's statements were "somewhat consistent" with his residual functional capacity determination, without specifying which parts of her statements were not consistent and why he concluded that they were not. (Joint Stip. at 11-12.) This claim has no merit.
An ALJ must consider lay witness testimony concerning a claimant's ability to work. Stout v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050, 1053 (9th Cir. 2006); Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1288 (9th Cir. 1996); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1513(d)(4),(e). Nevertheless, an ALJ need only give reasons that are "germane" to the testimony in order to reject it. Bayliss, 427 F.3d at 1218. Here, the ALJ did so.
Plaintiff's mother filled out and submitted two forms in support of Plaintiff's applications. (AR 151-59; 188-96.) In a November 16, 2006 form, she reported that Plaintiff helped with chores and played with a dog during the day. (AR 151-52.) She offered that Plaintiff needed reminders to take medication and had difficulty with "comprehension," but could do her own laundry and load and unload the dishwasher. (AR 153.) According to Plaintiff's mother, Plaintiff was "very nervous about going anywhere alone," but would accompany her shopping. (AR 154.) She also reported that Plaintiff "has found a 'social life' 'somewhat' on her computer," and reported that she "'finally' has a few friends." (AR 155.) Plaintiff's mother also observed that Plaintiff had a very low tolerance for being teased, seemed angry a lot of the time, and had always been quite anti-social. (AR 156.) In addition, Plaintiff's mother believed that Plaintiff had some difficulty with concentration, and sometimes could not follow written instructions, "depend[ing] on complexity[.]" (AR 156.) According to Plaintiff's mother, Plaintiff did not know what to say in social situations, but had always gotten along very well with authority figures. (AR 157, 158.) She believed that Plaintiff did not handle stress or changes in routine well at all. (AR 158.)
In a February 15, 2007 statement, she provided a very similar description of Plaintiff's activities and limitations. She added that Plaintiff had trouble counting and telling time, unless a clock was digital. (AR 191.) The mother reported that Plaintiff went out once a week to church and had no problem paying attention. (AR 193, 194.) She believed that Plaintiff had become "more and more unwilling to go out around people," but noted that Lexapro seemed "to be helping her relax more and not get so angry and irritated easily." (AR 196.)
In his decision, the ALJ stated that he had considered the mother's statements and that he accepted them to the extent that they were consistent with his residual functional capacity determination. (AR 12.) The residual functional capacity determination he referred to was based on the objective medical evidence and the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff was not as functionally limited as she claimed. (AR 11-12.) This justification for rejecting the mother's testimony, though terse, is germane to the testimony. See Bayliss, 427 F.3d at 1218 (affirming ALJ's rejection of lay witness testimony because it was inconsistent with medical evidence). As such, the ALJ's finding is affirmed. Plaintiff's argument that the ALJ was required to specify which parts of the mother's testimony he accepted and which parts he rejected is overruled. The ALJ was not required to discuss each point made by the mother and explain why he did not accept it. Rather, it was enough for him to merely set forth a germane reason for discounting the mother's testimony as a whole.*fn2
4. Failure To Develop The Record
In her fourth claim of error, Plaintiff contends that the ALJ failed to properly develop the record when he rejected a medical report, in part, because it was unclear who had completed the form and what relationship that person had to Plaintiff, and, further, because it might represent a vocational opinion beyond the scope of that person's expertise. (Joint Stip. at 15-19.) Plaintiff argues that, if the ALJ believed that there was insufficient information to determine who completed the form, he was obligated to recontact the facility to find out. (Joint Stip. at 16-17.) Plaintiff also argues that the ALJ's other basis for rejecting the form---that it was inconsistent with treatment notes from the same facility---is not supported by substantial evidence. (Joint Stip. at 17-18.) For the following reasons, this claim is rejected.
Plaintiff's objections here center on a Riverside County Mental Health form, entitled "Narrative Report (Adult)," dated March 15, 2007. (AR 265.) The form includes a diagnosis of Asperger's Disorder and chronic social phobia. (AR 265.) In response to Yes/No questions contained on the form, the health care provider indicated that Plaintiff is unable to maintain a sustained level of concentration, sustain repetitive tasks for an extended period of time, adapt to new or stressful situations, and interact appropriately with strangers, co-workers, or supervisors. (AR 265.) The form also states that Plaintiff cannot complete a 40-hour work week without decompensating and that her prognosis is "chronic." (AR 265.)
The ALJ stated that he gave "little weight" to the questionnaire's conclusion that Plaintiff was incapable of completing a 40-hour work week without decompensation:
First, it is unclear who is completing this form, what their relationship is to claimant and whether they represent an appropriate medical source. Second, this opinion represents a vocational opinion that, as far as I know, may or may not be within the individual's expertise. Third, this opinion appears inconsistent with other [Riverside County Mental Health] treatment notes indicating "good" response to medications and "appropriate" behavior in all respects with few, if any episodes, of low functioning. (AR 13.)
The ALJ did not err in failing to develop the record with respect to this report. His duty to fully develop the record is only triggered when there is ambiguous evidence or an inadequacy in the record prevents a proper evaluation of the disability claim. Tonapetyan v. Halter, 242 F.3d 1144, 1150 (9th Cir. 2001); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1512(e), 416.912(e). Here, the ALJ's finding that it was unclear who completed the form did not prevent him from evaluating the opinion contained therein, and Plaintiff's disability claim in general. Thus, he was not obligated to recontact Plaintiff's doctors for further clarification. See Bayliss, 427 F.3d at 1217.
Moreover, even assuming that the form represented a treating physician's opinion that Plaintiff was impaired, the ALJ was not required to accept it. As he noted, the March 2007 opinion was contradicted by the chart notes that preceded and followed it. (AR 310-33.) An ALJ can reject a treating doctor's opinion for specific and legitimate reason, see Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625, 632 (9th Cir. 2007) (stating that ALJ must provide specific and legitimate reasons, supported by substantial evidence in the record, for rejecting treating doctor's opinion that is contradicted by a non-treating doctor's opinion) (citation omitted), and this is a specific and legitimate reason for rejecting an opinion. See, e.g., Morgan v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595, 603 (9th Cir. 1999) (holding inconsistencies within and between treating physicians' reports support rejection of the treating opinion). Thus, this claim does not warrant remand.*fn3
For these reasons, the Agency's decision is affirmed and the case is dismissed with prejudice.
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:
ACT members include the most innovative nonprofit tree conservation organization in the country.
Ultimately, conservation is about empowering citizens to improve the communities where they live and work. The Alliance for Community Trees is the only national organization working to improve the urban forests where 80% of Americans live- our cities, towns, and villages. ACT's national office assembles coalitions that drive broad environmental success for our more than 180 organizations in 41 states in the pursuit of Clean Air, Green Streets, and Healthy Neighborhoods.
Urban forestry is simply about trees in places where people live.
Every day across the country the public is learning the benefits of planting and protecting trees. For example, did you know that more trees correlates with:
Do you plant, preserve, train, or educate? Join our national coalition to:
"We have been getting so much great information and resources from ACT. We are really thrilled with our membership and the benefits we've gotten from it."
– Sharon DiLorenzo, Program Manager, Capital District Community Gardens
"Alliance for Community Trees – invigorating, rewarding – a place to share ideas and resources and a collective voice."
– Janette Monear, Executive Director, Texas Trees Foundation
"We are really pleased with the amazing amount of support we receive from ACT."
– Andrew Hart, Director of Urban Forestry, Keep Indianapolis Beautiful
Join the most innovative nonprofit tree conservation organization in the country to influence how healthy urban forests are part of the solution to seeding great communities.
Find Out More:
ACT Membership Brochure
Urban Forestry Research
Nonprofit Network and Urban Forestry News
ACT Trainings and Events
National Tree Policies
The Alliance for Community Trees is a 501(c)3 tax exempt organization (EIN # 68-0319301), and also participates in the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC # 12402). To discuss planned giving opportunities, call us at 301-277-0040.


text:
Reviews - Sherwood Bay Resort & Aqua Sports Inc.4
Riverside, Songculan, Dauis, Panglao, Bohol, 6339
Price From £64.93View Rooms
Customer Reviews
Our reviews are from genuine LateRooms.com customers. We verify that the customer has stayed before leaving a review.
No reviews yet
- < previous
- page 1 of 0
- > next


text:
Next to Palace Schönbrunn - Apt. 4
From $64 / night
Description from the owner
Description from the owner
Bedrooms: 1/
Bathrooms: 1/
Sleeps: 4/
Type: Apt. / Condo
Book this 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom apt. / condo in Vienna today! A total of 4 people can sleep here comfortably.
Guests can enjoy a internet access, DVD, and dishwasher among other amenities offered by this rental.
No travelers have shared a review of this property yet.
Costs vary, with the average weekly rate as low as $425.00, depending on travel dates.
The owner responds to 55% of inquiries, which is lower than average, and last updated the property's calendar 4 days ago.
Proximity to TripAdvisor's Top Vienna Attractions
Proximity to TripAdvisor's Top Vienna Attractions
Reviews (0)
Also consider
- FlipKey has rentals in over 11,000 destinations around the world:
- Florida vacation rentals- 43,692 rentals from $89/night
- Colorado vacation rentals- 10,287 rentals from $119/night
- Santa Clarita vacation rentals- 10 rentals from $140/night
- Secaucus vacation rentals- 2,713 rentals from $1,500/night
- Villefranche-sur-Mer vacation rentals- 2,742 rentals from $69/night


text:
Former NFL Wide Out Andre Johnson Brings Big Christmas Smile to Kids
The Seahawks Are Down Earl Thomas; Could This Be Newest Member of the L.O.B??
Total Recap Kansas City: Week 14 - Chiefs Shut Down Oakland Offense to Assume Control of AFC West
Preview: Monday Night, Patriots Face Toughest Match-Up Against Ravens
Week 14 Draftkings Tips: NFL Over/Under Shootouts and Blunders
Chiefs' Travis Kelce Joins Elite Group of Tight Ends on TNF
New York Giants: Game 13 Preview: Giants Host Cowboys with NFC Playoff Implications Looming
The "Lions and Tigers and Bears Oh My" Classic
Jump On It! Chiefs Kelce Mocks Raiders King on Thursday Night Football
Cleveland Browns vs Alabama Crimson Tide - We Finally Know Who'd Win!
Get the craziest and best NFL stories, cutting edge Analysis, and Daily Fantasy Guidance hand picked by our expert team right into your inbox.
by Justin HenryCold Hard Football Facts' Meme Machine (@jrhwriting)The 2008 Detroit Lions can pop the tops on their expired cans of Sam's American Choice cola, for it's celebration time.
Jacksonville and Tampa Bay both won squeakers in Week 10 to finally take residence in the win column. It'd be more surprising if this admittedly-arrogant author didn't call Tampa's win, as well as Minnesota's eke-out over Washington, two weeks ago.
It's good to recognize these largely-meaningless victories, because chances are, they'll be the only ones that the Jaguars and Buccaneers enjoy this season. Now that the focus is off of the "will they go 0-16?" narrative, we can focus on the other end of the spectrum: which teams are on their way to the 2013 playoffs?To see who has the best chances of improving their odds this week, read on.
Start Slideshow
Enter the text you see in the image.
Get the latest from the Nation
What's Hot
Top Videos
Top Community


text:
Huntington National Bank Reduces Position in Baxter International Inc. (BAX)
Huntington National Bank cut its position in shares of Baxter International Inc. (NYSE:BAX) by 23.0% during the second quarter, according to its most recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The firm owned 245,846 shares of the company's stock after selling 73,609 shares during the period. Huntington National Bank's holdings in Baxter International were worth $11,118,000 as of its most recent filing with the SEC.
A number of other hedge funds and other institutional investors have also recently modified their holdings of BAX. Jensen Investment Management Inc. bought a new stake in Baxter International during the second quarter worth $409,000. Smith Asset Management Group LP bought a new stake in Baxter International during the second quarter worth $32,281,000. HL Financial Services LLC increased its stake in Baxter International by 224.4% in the second quarter. HL Financial Services LLC now owns 31,705 shares of the company's stock worth $1,434,000 after buying an additional 21,933 shares during the last quarter. Trust Co. of Toledo NA OH increased its stake in Baxter International by 5.5% in the second quarter. Trust Co. of Toledo NA OH now owns 40,696 shares of the company's stock worth $1,840,000 after buying an additional 2,107 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Meeder Asset Management Inc. increased its stake in Baxter International by 28.0% in the second quarter. Meeder Asset Management Inc. now owns 35,832 shares of the company's stock worth $1,620,000 after buying an additional 7,836 shares during the last quarter. 84.81% of the stock is currently owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors.
Baxter International Inc. (NYSE:BAX) traded up 0.06% during midday trading on Wednesday, reaching $47.04. The company had a trading volume of 2,222,520 shares. Baxter International Inc. has a one year low of $32.92 and a one year high of $49.49. The stock has a market capitalization of $25.58 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 5.40 and a beta of 0.71. The company has a 50-day moving average price of $47.05 and a 200-day moving average price of $45.50.
Baxter International (NYSE:BAX) last issued its quarterly earnings results on Tuesday, July 26th. The company reported $0.46 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, topping the Thomson Reuters' consensus estimate of $0.40 by $0.06. Baxter International had a return on equity of 10.70% and a net margin of 47.74%. The firm earned $2.60 billion during the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $2.51 billion. During the same quarter in the previous year, the company posted $1.00 earnings per share. The company's revenue was up 4.4% compared to the same quarter last year. On average, equities analysts expect that Baxter International Inc. will post $1.73 earnings per share for the current year.
The company also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Monday, October 3rd. Shareholders of record on Friday, September 2nd were paid a dividend of $0.13 per share. This represents a $0.52 annualized dividend and a yield of 1.11%. The ex-dividend date of this dividend was Wednesday, August 31st. Baxter International's dividend payout ratio (DPR) is currently 5.99%.
A number of analysts have recently weighed in on the company. Barclays PLC assumed coverage on Baxter International in a research report on Thursday, September 15th. They set an "overweight" rating and a $52.00 target price for the company. JPMorgan Chase & Co. reiterated a "hold" rating and set a $45.00 target price on shares of Baxter International in a research report on Friday, July 8th. RBC Capital Markets reiterated a "hold" rating and set a $50.00 target price (up from $47.00) on shares of Baxter International in a research report on Wednesday, July 27th. Royal Bank Of Canada upped their target price on Baxter International from $47.00 to $50.00 and gave the company a "sector perform" rating in a research report on Wednesday, July 27th. Finally, Zacks Investment Research upgraded Baxter International from a "sell" rating to a "hold" rating and set a $54.00 target price for the company in a research report on Wednesday, July 27th. One equities research analyst has rated the stock with a sell rating, seven have given a hold rating and five have assigned a buy rating to the stock. The company currently has an average rating of "Hold" and a consensus price target of $48.25.
Baxter International Company Profile
Baxter International Inc, through its subsidiaries, provides a portfolio of essential renal and hospital products, including home, acute and in-center dialysis; sterile intravenous (IV) solutions; infusion systems and devices; parenteral nutrition; biosurgery products and anesthetics, and pharmacy automation, software and services.
Receive News & Stock Ratings for Baxter International Inc. Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Baxter International Inc. and related stocks with our FREE daily email newsletter.


text:
Check in from 2:00 PM / Check out prior to 12:00 AM
Maharta Beach Resort Legian Bali: Find photos, reviews, information, amenities and compare prices for 3 stars hotels in Legian, Indonesia.
Maharta Beach Resort Legian Bali offers 3-star accommodation in Legian. It is moments from Legian Beach, restaurants and nightlife options.
Hotel description
There are a range of facilities at Maharta Bali that guests can enjoy, including 24-hour reception, room service and a day spa. Additional services include a laundry service.
Guests of at Maharta Bali Hotel can enjoy a satisfying breakfast each morning.
Legian's popular attractions are within close proximity to the resort, with Melasti Beach Resort Spa just a five-minute walk away. Seminyak and Kuta are situated a short drive away.
Hotel features
Room Service
24 Hour Reception, Laundry service
Spa & Wellness Centre
Availability and Prices
Booking Site
Room Type
Per room
Per night
Per night
Users who viewed Maharta Beach Resort Legian Bali also viewed these 3 stars Legian hotels:
Adika Sari Bungalows Bali
Jalan Padma Utara, Legian
Jalan Padma Utara, Legian
Bali Hotel Pearl
Jalan Double Six, Legian
Jalan Double Six, Legian
Arca Bungalow
Three Brother Street, Legian Tengah, Legian
Three Brother Street, Legian Tengah, Legian
Search hotels
based on
147 reviews
Nearest hotels
- Maharta Hotel & Spa
0 miles
- Sari Beach Hotel
0 miles
- Bali Niksoma Boutique Beach Resort
0 miles


text:
On Christmas Eve big brother and little sister are trying to fall asleep when something magical happens, an old antique camera takes them away to Story-land were they meet the elf Slap-Dash and experience an thrilling Christmas adventure.
Stunning illustrations by artist Eva Stålsjö, accompanied with voice-over recordings by Björn Clarin makes this Christmas story a must have for the holidays.
This is a saga about a saga. A saga with paintings and words, that we originally created in 1961. In 1992, the official, non-commercial TV company of Sweden, SVT produced a short series based on the saga for their Christmas broadcasts. Two years later, the saga was printed and published, with the following words from its creators: "More than 30 years ago, we started working with this saga. At that point, we couldn´t realize that we were actually creating it for the grand children, that we would have so many years later...
The saga has been sleeping its deep slumber, on the bottom of an old wooden chest; as if an unvisible hand has been held over it, keeping it well protected in silence and oblivion.
Now, when it has once more come to life - as a book - we sincerely hope that it can bring about a few of the beautiful dreams of our childhoods, in which we so firmly believed.
But above all, we hope that our grandchildren, that we love so much, and their little friends all over our world will believe in their own dreams and never doubt that they one day will come true.
Because Tomorrow belongs to them all and it will flourish with everything that we give them of Love, Hope and Belief in the future.
- Complete book with texts and stunning illustrations
- Voice-over in both English and Swedish
- Text in both English and Swedish
- Easy to use interaction
- Christmas carols with lyrics
- Auto page shift
Age recommendation: 4-8 years.
Supported Devices:
- iPad
- iPhone
- iPod Touch


text:
2 - 0 Final
No one has shouted yet.
Be the first!
Be the first!
Who You Got?
Manchester City
Related News
- Man City and Chelsea charged over melee 12:19p
- Everton hold United thanks to late penalty Sun
- Valencia determined to make Everton impact Nov 30
- Aguero brace puts City top of the league Nov 26
- Man City progress in Champions League Nov 23
- Man City lose Kompany yet again Nov 22
- Koeman encourages Lukaku to leave Everton Nov 9
- Everton cashed up for transfer window Nov 7
- Yaya Toure apologises to Man City fans Nov 4
- City's win over Barca sweet for Guardiola Nov 1
- City must be close to perfect: Guardiola Oct 31
- Aguero back for Barcelona rematch Oct 30


text:
Jenna Mourey (born September 15, 1987), more commonly known by her pseudonym Jenna Marbles, is an American entertainer and YouTube personality. Mourey came to prominence as a blogger for stoollala.com, a now-defunct brother site of barstoolsports.com. Through stoollala.com and eventually social media networks, Marbles gained fame with her video "How To Trick People Into Thinking You're Good Looking", which had over 5.3 million views in its first week (over 41 million views as of June 2012. The video was well-received by women. Her video "How To Avoid Talking To ppl You Don't Want To Talk To" was featured in an August article in the New York Times and ABC News, in which she was quoted as saying, "I'm sick and tired of guys thinking that just because I showed up at a club or a dance or a bar, that I want to have their genitalia touching my backside." The video has over 23 million views as of June 2012. She uploads a new video to her YouTube channel every Wednesday.
Contributions by ClueBot NG, 220.127.116.11, and 126.96.36.199.


text:
About Merci Skirts Singapore
..,merci Skirts Singapore
Get great discounts of up to 78% off on ..,merci Skirts, only at iprice! 3/4 length skirts and Knee length skirts are popular ..,merci Skirts which you can purchase online. Moschino, ASOS and Romantica are also available if you are thinking twice about having an ..,merci Skirts. You can get ..,merci Skirts for S$ 43.00 - S$ 207.00 on iprice! If you are looking for ..,merci Skirts, you can choose between Mini Skirts and Maxi Skirts. Basic colors like Yellow, White and Red are the most popular colors for ..,merci Skirts today.


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.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
June 28, 2001
BARI MUHAMMAD, PETITIONER,v.DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, RESPONDENT,AND VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, FORMERLY D/B/A/ BELL ATLANTIC, WASHINGTON, D.C., INC., INTERVENOR.
Before Schwelb and Reid, Associate Judges, and Mack, Senior Judge.
Petition for Review of a Decision of the District of Columbia Department of Employment Services
Argued June 7, 2001
Bari Muhammad has asked this court to review a decision by the Director of the District of Columbia Department of Employment Services (DOES or the agency) denying him a "schedule award" *fn1 for a 25% permanent disability of the "right upper extremity" *fn2 pursuant to D.C. Code § 36-308 (3) (1997). Mr. Muhammad contends that the Director erroneously affirmed a compensation order previously issued by a DOES hearing examiner. We agree with Mr. Muhammad that certain findings by the hearing examiner that led to the denial of the schedule award were not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. Accordingly, we vacate the agency's decision to the extent that it denies Mr. Muhammad a schedule award, and we remand the case to the agency for further proceedings.
Mr. Muhammad has been employed by Verizon Communications and its predecessors, Bell Atlantic and C & P Telephone Company, since 1982. After having served as a security guard for a short period, Mr. Muhammad worked as a telephone service technician from 1982 until 1992. While employed in that capacity, he sustained two job-related injuries to his lower back, one in 1989 and one in 1990. As a result of these injuries, Mr. Muhammad was placed on permanent medical restrictions that made it impossible for him to continue to work as a service technician. *fn3 In 1992, he was reassigned to a position as a computer/keyboard operator. In that capacity, Mr. Muhammad spends a large portion of his workday responding, through the use of a computer keyboard and mouse, to telephonic complaints from customers.
In the early 1990s, Mr. Muhammad began experiencing problems in both hands, including stiffness, numbness, tingling, reduced coordination, and dull, shooting pain. He did not seek treatment for this condition until April 1996, when his condition deteriorated, especially in his right hand. On April 12, 1996, Mr. Muhammad was diagnosed with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Later in the same month, he informed his immediate supervisor of this diagnosis, and he explained its impact on his ability to perform his job. On May 28, 1996, Mr. Muhammad filed an Employee's Claim Application pursuant to the District of Columbia Workers' Compensation Act of 1979, D.C. Code §§ 36-301 et seq. (1997 & Supp. 2000), and he provided written notice to his employer on July 26 of the same year. *fn4
On December 12, 1996, following consultations with various doctors, both through his medical care providers at Kaiser Permanente and as requested by Verizon in connection with his compensation claim, Mr. Muhammad underwent carpal tunnel surgery on his right hand. He was released to return to work on January 20, 1997, although he continued thereafter to receive physical therapy. However, even following the surgery and physical therapy, Mr. Muhammad continued to experience problems and pain in his right hand. At the time of the hearing, on February 23, 1999, Mr. Muhammad was taking Motrin and using a wrist brace to control the symptoms on an as-needed basis. From time to time, he had to stop working, and he sometimes missed work altogether.
At the February 23, 1999 hearing, Mr. Muhammad requested temporary total disability benefits from December 11, 1996 through January 23, 1997; wage loss benefits for approximately ten days intermittently between July and September 1998; a schedule award for a 25% permanent disability of the "right upper extremity" pursuant to D.C. Code § 36-308 (3); and related medical costs. See also note 3, supra. In her compensation order, which was issued on June 30, 1999, the hearing examiner granted the requested relief in part. She awarded Mr. Muhammad temporary total disability benefits and intermittent wage loss benefits, offset against any wage loss benefits that Verizon had previously paid to Mr. Muhammad for the periods in question. The examiner also ordered Verizon to pay the related medical costs. The hearing examiner found, however, that Mr. Muhammad had not carried his burden of proving a "rateable impairment" *fn5 of his right hand and arm. Consequently, she denied Mr. Muhammad's request for a schedule award. *fn6
Mr. Muhammad filed an internal appeal to the Director in connection with the hearing examiner's ruling that he had not sustained a rateable impairment and was not entitled to a schedule award. On February 29, 2000, in a brief written opinion, the Director affirmed the compensation order. Mr. Muhammad now asks this court to review the Director's decision.
Mr. Muhammad contends that the findings by the hearing examiner presently at issue were not supported by substantial evidence, and that the Director erred in adopting them. *fn7 We have held that the "Director is limited to substantial evidence review of a hearing examiner's decision." WMATA, supra note 5, 683 A.2d at 476. Substantial evidence review "presents an issue of law which this court is in a position to address without need for deference to the agency's decision." Id. (internal alteration, quotation marks, and citation omitted).
To meet the substantial evidence standard,
(1) the [hearing examiner's underlying] decision must state findings of fact on each material, contested factual issue;
(2) those findings must be based on substantial evidence; and
(3) the conclusions of law must follow rationally from the findings. Stewart v. District of Columbia Dep't of Employment Servs., 606 A.2d 1350, 1351 (D.C. 1992) (citation omitted).
"Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Id. (quotation marks and citations omitted). However, in making her factual findings, the "trier of fact" - in this case, the hearing examiner - "is entitled to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence presented." Dell v. District of Columbia Dep't of Employment Servs., 499 A.2d 102, 108 (D.C. 1985).
The gravamen of Mr. Muhammad's argument to this court is that the hearing examiner's finding of no rateable impairment, and her resulting denial of the schedule award, were unsupported by substantial evidence. In reaching her conclusion, the hearing examiner "relied upon the findings, diagnosis[,] and conclusions in the medical reports of [Mr. Muhammad's] treating physicians at Kaiser Permanente." The examiner "rejected the opinion of William Launder, M.D., an orthopedic specialist who examined [Mr. Muhammad] . . . at the request of [Mr. Muhammad's] counsel," and who found that Mr. Muhammad suffered a 25% permanent disability to this right hand and arm. *fn8 The hearing examiner declined to adopt Dr. Launder's views because the doctor had based "his opinion regarding the percentage of permanent impairment largely upon [Mr. Muhammad's] reduced grip strength in his right hand." The examiner found the "reduced grip strength" analysis unconvincing because "the Kaiser physical therapy reports reflect [Mr. Muhammad's] lack of concern about grip weakness in April of 1997" and because Mr. Muhammad "also testified [that] he works out weekly at a gym, doing ten to fifteen push-ups at a session."
As an initial matter, we discern no substantial evidence supporting the hearing examiner's implicit finding that Mr. Muhammad's grip weakness did not contribute to any part of his permanent disability. The hearing examiner did not find - nor could she have found, see infra - that Mr. Muhammad did not suffer from grip weakness. Rather, she based her decision on her impression that "the Kaiser physical therapy reports reflect [Mr. Muhammad's] lack of concern about grip weakness in April of 1997."
It is true that, in April 1997, Mr. Muhammad was less concerned about grip weakness than about the pain he continued to experience in his right hand. His greater concern with the pain that he was suffering did not, however, take the issue of grip weakness out of the case. The fact that pain caused even more distress than loss of strength is not "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support [the hearing examiner's] conclusion" that grip weakness could not form the basis for any permanent partial disability suffered by Mr. Muhammad. Stewart, supra, 606 A.2d at 1351. Although the April 1997 Kaiser Permanente report reveals that Mr. Muhammad understandably wanted to have his pain treated first, the same report identifies the achievement of increased strength in the patient's right grip as a goal of the continuing physical therapy. This report thus demonstrates that, at that very time, grip weakness problems were an ongoing medical concern. The Kaiser Permanente report is therefore consistent with, rather than contradictory to, Dr. Launder's finding that Mr. Muhammad suffered a significant permanent partial impairment as a result of continued grip weakness in his right hand.
Under these circumstances, we conclude that the hearing examiner's determination that Mr. Muhammad did not suffer a rateable impairment based on grip weakness is not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. The hearing examiner also based her partial denial of Mr. Muhammad's claim on his testimony that "he works out weekly at a gym, doing ten to fifteen push-ups at a session." The evidence regarding push-ups does not, however, likewise fails to provide the requisite support for the hearing examiner's findings. Even if we were to assume that the ability to do push-ups negates the existence of grip weakness - and the record contains no substantiation of this not-at-all obvious proposition - Mr. Muhammad testified that although he exercises when he is feeling well enough, he does not go to the gym when he experiences substantial pain in his right hand. The compensation order contains no explanation of the examiner's apparent assumption that Mr. Muhammad's ability to do push-ups on days when his hand is not hurting is irreconcilable with the presence of a rateable impairment. We therefore conclude that the Director erred in affirming that aspect of the compensation order. *fn9
Even if Mr. Muhammad's grip weakness did not warrant a schedule award - and, as explained in the preceding discussion, we do not believe that the finding to that effect is supported by substantial evidence -there remains the question whether Mr. Muhammad's other symptoms, including the pain, tingling, reduced coordination, and general dysfunction of his right hand and arm, constitute a partial permanent disability entitling him to such an award. In Murrell v. District of Columbia Dep't of Employment Servs., 697 A.2d 40, 42 & n.3 (D.C. 1997), we declined to decide whether pain alone could support a schedule award, but we did not exclude such a possibility. Dr. Launder found Mr. Muhammad's loss of grip strength to constitute a 15% disability, but he also specifically stated that Mr. Muhammad suffered from a "5% impairment of the hand" due to "loss of [finger] motion" and that Mr. Muhammad's "pain, dysfunction, and loss of endurance" constituted another 5% permanent disability. Thus, quite apart from the weakness in Mr. Muhammad's grip, there was evidence that Mr. Muhammad suffered from an additional 10% permanent impairment.
In her compensation order, the hearing examiner did not address the relevance of these additional symptoms, nor did she determine whether Mr. Muhammad has suffered a rateable impairment through them. The hearing examiner concluded that Mr. Muhammad had suffered "no rateable impairment of the right upper extremity," but she did not focus her inquiry on whether he had suffered an impairment, but a lesser one than he had argued for. (Emphasis added.) The hearing examiner's failure to address the other symptoms is particularly significant because the Kaiser Permanente reports on which she relied, and particularly the April 30, 1997 report emphasized in her order, are replete with documentation of Mr. Muhammad's complaints about the pain, numbness, reduced coordination, and general dysfunction in his right hand. *fn10 Mr. Muhammad testified to the same effect. In our view, the evidence on which the hearing examiner professed to rely in reaching her conclusion on the rateable impairment issue supports, rather than contradicts, Dr. Launder's report with respect to Mr. Muhammad's symptoms.
In sum, the hearing examiner also failed to address Mr. Muhammad's claim that he suffered from conditions, other than the loss of grip strength, that entitled him to a schedule award based on a rateable impairment. The record therefore compels us to conclude that the hearing examiner's order did not "state findings of fact on each material, contested factual issue," Stewart, supra, 606 A.2d at 1351, by failing to address Mr. Muhammad's other symptoms, such as pain, dysfunction, and loss of mobility, as a possible basis for a schedule award. For that reason, as well, the challenged portions of the compensation order are not supported by substantial evidence.
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the Director erred in affirming the hearing examiner's order, in which the examiner found that Mr. Muhammad did not suffer from a rateable impairment, and in which the examiner denied Mr. Muhammad's request for a schedule award. We therefore vacate the agency's decision and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
So ordered.
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:
DevOps Scrum Framework
Imagine this hypothetical conversation I didn't have with someone last week…
THEM: "Is there a DevOps framework?"
ME: "Noooooo, it doesn't work like that"
THEM: "Why?"
ME: "Well DevOps is more like a philosophy, or a set of values and principles. The way you apply those principles and values varies from one organisation to the next, so a framework wouldn't really work, especially if it was quite prescriptive, like Scrum"
THEM: "But I really want one"
ME: "Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll hack an existing framework to make it more devopsy, does that work for you?"
THEM: "Take my money"
So, as you can see, in a hypothetical world, there is real demand for a DevOps framework. The trouble with a DevOps framework, as is always the problem with anything to do with DevOps, nobody can actually agree what the hell DevOps means, so any framework is bound to upset a whole bunch of people who simply disagree with my assumption of what DevOps means.
So, with that massive elephant in the room, I'm just going to blindly ignore it and crash on with this experimental little framework I'm calling DevOpScrum.
Look, I know I don't have a talent for coming up with cool names for frameworks (that's why I'd never make it in the JavaScript world), but just accept DevOpScrum into your lives for 10 minutes, and try not to worry about how crap the name is.
In my view (which is obviously the correct view) DevOps is a lot more than just automation. It's not about Infrastructure as Code and Containers and all that stuff. All that stuff is awesome and allows us to do things in better and faster ways than we ever could before, but it's not the be-all-and-end-all of DevOps. DevOps for me is about the way teams work together to extract greater business value, and produce a better quality solution by collaborating, working as an empowered team, and not blaming others (and also playing with cool tools, obvs). And if DevOps is about "the way teams work together" then why the hell shouldn't there be a framework?
The best DevOps framework is the one a team builds itself, tailored specifically for that organisation's demands, and sympathetic to its constraints. Incidentally, that's one reason why I like Kanban so much, it's so adaptable that you have the freedom to turn it into whatever you want, whereas scrum is more prescriptive, and if you meddle with it you not only confuse people, you anger the Scrum gods. However, if you don't have time to come up with your own DevOps framework, and your familiar with Scrum already, then why not just hack the Scrum framework and turn it into a more DevOps-friendly solution?
Which brings us nicely to DevOpScrum, a DevOps Framework with all the home comforts of Scrum, but with a different name so as not to offend Scrum purists.
The idea with DevOpScrum is to basically extend an existing framework and insert some good practices that encourage a more operational perspective, and encourage greater collaboration between Dev and Ops.
How does it work?
Start by taking your common-or-garden Scrum framework, and then add the following:
Infrastructure/Ops personnel
Operability features on the backlog
A definition of Done that includes "deployable, monitored, scalable" and so on (i.e doesn't just focus on "has the product feature been coded?")
Continuous Delivery as a mandatory practice!
And there you have it. A scrum-based DevOps Framework.
Let's look into some of the details…
We'll start with The Team…
A product owner (who appreciates operability – what we once called "Non-Functional Requirements in the olden days. That term is so not cool anymore. It's less cool than bumbags).
Devs, Testers, BAs, DBAs and all the usual suspects.
Infrastructure/Ops people. Some call them DevOps people these days. These are people who know infrastructure, networking, the cloud, systems administration, deployments, scalability, monitoring and alerting – that sort of stuff. You know, the stuff Scrum forgot about.
Roles & Responsibilities
Pretty similar to scrum, to be fair. The Product Owner has ultimate responsibility for deciding priorities and is the person you need to lobby if you think your concerns need to be prioritised higher. For this reason, the Product Owner needs to understand the importance of Operability (i.e the ability to deploy, scale, monitor, maintain and so on), which is why I recommend Product Owners in a DevOps environment get some good DevOps training (by pure coincidence we run a course called "The DevOps Product Owner" which does exactly what I just described! Can you believe that?!).
There's no scrum master in this framework, because it isn't scrum. There's a DevOpScrum coach instead, who basically does the scrum master coach and is responsible for evangelising and improving the application of the DevOps values and principles.
DevOps Engineers – One key difference in this framework is that the team must contain the relevant infrastructure and Ops skills to get stuff done without relying on an external team (such as the Ops team or Infrastructure team). This role will have the skills to provide Continuous Delivery solutions, including deployment automation, environment provisioning and cloud expertise.
Yep, there's sprints. 2 weeks is the recommended length. Anything longer than that and it's hardly a sprint, it's a jog. Whenever I've worked in 3 week sprints in the past, I've usually seen people take it really easy in the first couple of weeks, because the end of the sprint seemed so far away, and then work their asses off in the final week to hit their commitments. It's neither efficient nor sustainable.
Another big difference with scrum is that the Product Backlog MUST contain operability features. The backlog is no longer just about product functionality, it's about every aspect of building, delivering, hosting, maintaining and monitoring your product. So the backlog will contain stories about the infrastructure that the application(s) run on, their availability rates, disaster recovery objectives, deployability and security requirements (to name just a few). These things are no longer assumed, or lie outside of the team – they are considered "first class citizens" so to speak.
I recommend twice-weekly backlog grooming sessions of about an hour, to make sure the backlog is up-to-date and that the stories are in good shape prior to Sprint Planning.
Sprint Planning
Because the backlog is different, sprint planning will be subtly different as well. Obviously we've got a broader scope of stories to cover now that we've got operational stories in the backlog, but it's important that everyone understands these "features", because without them, you won't be able to deliver your product in the best way possible.
I encourage the whole team to be involved, as per scrum, and treat each story on merit. Ask questions and understand the story before sizing it.
I recommend INVEST as a guiding principle for stories. Don't be tempted to put too much detail in a story if it's not necessary. If you can get the information through conversation with people, and they're always available, then don't bother writing that stuff up in detail, it's just wasting time and effort.
The difference between Scrum and DevOpScrum in respect to stories is that in DevOpScrum we expect to see a large number of stories not written from an end-user's perspective. Instead, we expect to see stories written from an operation engineers perspective, or an auditor's perspective, or a security and compliance perspective. This is why I often depart from the As a… I want… So that… template for non "user" stories, and go with a "What:… Why:…" approach, but it doesn't matter all that much.
Same as Scrum but if I catch anyone doing that tired old "what I did yesterday, what I'm doing today, blockers…" nonsense I'll personally come and find you and make a really, really annoying noise.
Please come up with something better, like "here's what I commit to doing today and if I don't achieve it I'll eat this whole family pack of Jelly Babies" or something. Maybe something more sensible than that. Maybe.
At the end of your sprint, get together and work out what you've learned about the way you work, the technology and tools you've used, the product you're working on and the general agile health of your team. Also take a look at how the overall delivery of your product is looking. Most importantly, ask yourself if you're collaborating effectively, in a way that's helping to produce a well-rounded product, that's not only feature-rich but operationally polished as well.
Learn whatever you can and keep a record of what you've learnt. If any of these lessons can be turned into stories and put on the backlog as improvements, then go for it. Just make sure you don't park all of your lessons somewhere and never visit them again!
Deliver Working Software
As with Scrum, in DevOpScrum we aim to deliver something every 2 weeks. But it doesn't have to just be a shiny front-end to demo to your customers, you could instead deliver your roll-back, patching or Disaster Recovery process and demo that instead. Believe it or not, customers are concerned with that stuff too these days.
Continuous Delivery
I personally believe this should be the guiding practice behind DevOpScrum. If you're not familiar with Continuous Delivery (CD) then Dave Farley and Jez Humble's book (entitled Continuous Delivery, for reasons that become very obvious when you read it) is still just about the best material on the subject (apart from my blog, of course).
As with Continuous Integration, CD is more than just a tool, it's a set of practices and behaviours that encourage good working practices. For example, CD requires high degrees of automation around testing, deployment, and more recently around server provisioning and configuration.
So there it is in some of its glory, the DevOpScrum framework (ok, it's just a blog about a framework, there's enough material here to write an entire book if any reasonable level of detail was required). It's nothing more than Scrum with a few adjustments to make it more DevOps aligned.
As with Scrum, this framework has the usual challenges – it doesn't cater for interruptions (such as production incidents) unless you add in a triage function to manage them.
There's also a whole bunch of stuff I've not covered, such as release planning, burn-ups, burn-downs and Minimum Viable Products. I've decided to leave these alone as they're simply the same as you'd find in scrum.
Does this framework actually work? Yes. The truth is that I've actually been working in this way for several years, and I know other teams are also adapting their scrum framework in very similar ways, so there's plenty of evidence to suggest it's a winner. Is it perfect? No, and I'm hoping that by blogging about it, other people will give it a try, make some adjustments and help it evolve and improve.
The last thing I ever wanted to do was create a DevOps framework, but so many people are asking for a set of guidelines or a suggestion for how they should do DevOps, that I thought I'd actually write down how I've been using Scrum and DevOps for some time, in a way that has worked for me. However, I totally appreciate that this worked specifically for me and my teams. I don't expect it to work perfectly for everyone.
As a DevOps consultant, I spend much of my time explaining how DevOps is a set of principles rather than a set of practices, and the way in which you apply those principles depends very much upon who you are, the ways in which you like to work, your culture and your technologies. A prescriptive framework simply cannot transcend all of these things and still be effective. This is why I always start any DevOps implementation with a blank canvas. However, if you need a kick-start, and want to try DevOpScrum then please go about it with an open mind and be prepared to make adjustments wherever necessary.
DevOps in 5 Easy(ish) Steps
I've said before that I'm a big believer that there's no "one size fits all" solution for DevOps, and nothing in my experience as a DevOps Consultant has led me to change my mind on that one. Each organisation is subtly different enough to warrant their own approach to adopting, and then succeeding with DevOps.
However, I do think there are some good patterns for successful DevOps adoption. "The right ingredients" you might say. But as with cookery and chemistry experiments, it's the quantity of, and order in which you introduce these ingredients that makes all the difference (I discovered this first-hand as a chemistry undergraduate J ).
Below is a list of 5 steps for starting out on a successful DevOps journey ("DevOps journey" = 100 cliché points btw). It's not a solution for scaling DevOps – that's step 6! But if you're looking for somewhere to start, these 5 steps are essentially the blueprint I like to follow.
- Agree what your goals are, what problems you're trying to solve, and what DevOps means to you (is it just automation or is it a mindset?). You all need to be on the same page before you start, otherwise you'll misunderstand each other, and without knowing your goals, you won't know why you're doing what you're doing.
- Build the platform. DevOps relies heavily on fast feedback loops, so you need to enable them before you go any further. This means putting in place the foundations of a highly automated Continuous Delivery platform – from requirements management though to branching strategy, CI, test automation and environment automation. Don't try to create an enterprise-scale solution, just start small and do what you need to do to support 1 team, or this thing will never get off the ground. You'll probably need to pull together a bunch of DevOps engineers to set this platform up – this is often how "DevOps teams" come about, but try to remember that this team should be a transitional phase, or at least vastly scaled down later on.
- Assemble the team. We're talking about a cross-functional delivery team here. This team will include all the skills to design, build, test, deliver and support the product, so we're looking at a Product Owner, Business Analyst, Developers, Testers, and Infrastructure Engineers among others (it largely depends on your product – it may need to be extended to include UX designers, Security and so on).
- Be agile, not waterfall. Waterfall's just not going to work here I'm afraid. We're going to need a framework that supports much faster feedback and encourages far greater collaboration at all times. So with that in mind, adopt a suitable agile framework like scrum or Kanban, but tailor it appropriately so that the "Ops" perspective isn't left out. For example – your "definition of done" should stretch to include operability features. "Done" can no longer simply mean "passed UAT", it now needs to mean "Deployable, monitorable and working in Pre-Live" at the very minimum. Another example: Your product backlog doesn't just contain product functionality, it needs to include operability features too, such as scalability, maintainability, monitoring and alerting.
- Work together to achieve great things. Let the delivery team form a strong identity, and empower them to take full ownership of the product. The team needs autonomy, mastery and purpose to fully unlock its potential.
Once you've achieved step 5, you're well on your way to DevOps, but it doesn't end there. You need to embrace a culture of continuous improvement and innovation, or things will begin to stagnate.
As I mentioned earlier, you still need to scale this out once you've got it working in one team, and that's something that a lot of people struggle with. For some reason, there's a huge temptation to try and get every team on-board at the same time, and make sure that they all evolve at the same rate. There's no reason to do this, and it's not the right approach.
If you have 20 teams all going through a brand new experience at the same time, there's going to be a great deal of turmoil, and they're probably going to make some of the same mistakes – which is totally unnecessary. Also, teams evolve and change at different rates, and what works for one team might not work for another, so there's no use in treating them the same!
A much better solution is to start with one or two teams, learn from your experience, and move on to a couple more teams. The lessons learnt won't always be transferrable from one team to the next, but the likelihood is that you'll learn enough to give yourself a huge advantage when you start the next teams on their journey.
Sure, this approach takes time, but it's more pragmatic and in my experience, successful.
One final comment on the steps above concerns step 2 – building the Continuous Delivery platform. It's easy to get carried away with this step, but try to focus on building out a Minimum Viable Product here. There's no getting away from the need for a high degree of automation, especially around testing. The types of testing you might need to focus on will depend on your product, its maturity, complexity and the amount of technical debt you're carrying.
Other aspects you'll need to cover in your Continuous Delivery MVP are deployment and environment automation (of course). Thankfully there are external resources available to give you a kick-start here if you don't have sufficient skills in-house (there are plenty of contractors who specialise in DevOps engineering, not to mention dedicated DevOps consultancies such as DevOpsGuys J). Don't spend months and months assessing different cloud providers or automation tools. Speak to someone with experience and get some advice, and crack on with it. Picking the wrong tool can be painful, but no more painful than deferring the decision indefinitely. Anyway, it's relatively easy to move from Chef to Ansible, or from AWS to Azure (just examples) these days.
Many years ago I worked for a company that spent over a year assessing TFS, while continuing to use VS etc in the meantime. I worked with another company more recently who spent a year assessing various cloud providers, all the while struggling along with creaking infrastructure that ended up consuming everyone's time. My point is simply that it's better to make a start and then switch than it is to spend forever assessing your options. It's even better to take some expert advice first.
DevOps KPIs
I was at DevOps World last week (nothing like Disney World, by the way) and happened to be paying attention to a talk by a chap called Jonathan who worked at Barclays Bank. He briefly mentioned a couple of KPIs that they measure to track the success of their DevOps initiative. He mentioned these:
- Lead Times
- Quality
- Happiness
- Outcomes
This list looked quite good to me, I thought "They sound pretty sensible, I'll remember those for the next time someone asks me about DevOps KPIs". The reason I thought this, you see, is because I get asked "What are good DevOps KPIs?" almost every week. Colleagues, clients, friends & family, random strangers, the dog… Everyone asks me. It's like I'm wearing a T-Shirt that says "Ask me about DevOps KPIs" or something.
So, the time has come to formulate a decent answer. Or, more specifically, write a blog on it, so I can then tell people to read my blog! Hurrah!
A couple of months ago, while discussing a DevOps transformation with a global telecomms company, the subject of metrics and KPIs came up. We'd spent the previous hour or so hearing about how one particular part of the business was so unique and different to all the others, and that any DevOps transformation would need to be specifically tailored to accommodate this business's unique demands. I totally agree with this approach. However, when the subject of KPIs came up, the "one-size-fits-all" approach was favoured.
It's common for organisations to want KPIs that span the whole organisation. It's convenient and allows management to compare and contrast (for whatever good that'll bring). But does this "one-size-fits-all" approach work? Or does it encourage the wrong behaviours?
You can't manage what you can't measure
Personally, I think you need to be very careful about selecting your KPIs and metrics. Peter Drucker once observed that "you can't manage what you can't measure", which sounds sensible enough, but this leads us towards trying to measure everything (because we want to manage as much as we can, right?). But that's where things get a bit tricky. As soon as we start measuring things, they change – this is known as Goodhart's Law. But what I'm talking about specifically is people changing their behaviours because they're being measured.
Once you measure something, it changes
If we're being measured on utilisation level, we try to expand our work to fill the time we have available, in order to look fully utilised. It's what people do! By doing this, people lose the "downtime" they used to have, the time when people are most creative, and as a result, innovation suffers.So what should we measure?
It depends on what you're trying to achieve, and what side-effects you're able to tolerate. Think very carefully about how your metrics and KPIs could be interpreted by both subordinates and management.
For example, I'm currently working with a team who until recently measured the age of stories in the backlog. The thought was, the larger the number, the longer it's taking to get stuff done. The reality was different. In reality, there was an increasing number of low priority stories, which were often (and quite legitimately) overlooked in favour of higher priority stories. So what did the metric really prove? That the team were slow or that the team were effective at prioritising?
I think generally speaking that most stats need to be accompanied by a narrative, otherwise they're open for misinterpretation. But we know that there's often very little room for narrative, and that the fear of misinterpretation drives people to try to "game" the stats (that is to say, legitimately manipulate the results). And this is another reason why we have to be very careful when we're planning KPIs and reporting metrics.Data Driven Metrics
In 2014 Gartner produced a report entitled "Data Driven DevOps: Use Metrics to Help Guide Your Journey" in which they listed a range of typical DevOps metrics, categorised by type, such as "Business Performance", "Operational Efficiency" and so on. I've picked out a few of the metrics in the table below. I've also added some others which I've been using in one form or another. This is by no means an exhaustive list of DevOps KPIs, but it might be somewhere to start if you're looking for inspiration.
Measuring tangibles and intangibles
One thing to be conscious of is that you can't really measure things like "culture" and "collaboration" directly. Culture, for example, is an intangible asset, and you can only really measure the result of Culture, rather than the culture itself. The same goes for collaboration.
In the table above, be conscious of things like "happiness", "value" and "sharing" as these can sometimes be hard to measure directly, not to mention being somewhat subjective.
DevOps in an ITIL environment
At IPExpo in London a couple of weeks ago, I was asked if it was possible to "Do DevOps in an ITIL environment".
My simple answer is "yes".
ITIL and DevOps are two different things, they both attempt to provide a set of "best practices"; ITIL for Service Delivery and Maintenance, DevOps for Software Delivery and Support.
DevOps is mostly concerned with a couple of things:
- The mechanics of building and delivering software changes (we're talking about Continuous Delivery, deployment automation, Configuration automation and so on).
- The behaviours, interactions and collaboration between the different functions involved in delivering software (Business, Dev, Test, Ops etc)
ITIL largely stays away from anything to do with the mechanics, and doesn't touch on culture and collaboration – preferring instead to focus more on the tangible concepts of IT service support. It's essentially a collection of procedures and processes for delivering and supporting IT services. Most of those procedures and practices are just common sense good ideas.
DevOps isn't a prescriptive framework, it's more like a philosophy (in the same way as Agile isn't a framework). Because it's not prescriptive, it can work with any framework (such as scrum) provided that framework isn't at odds with the DevOps philosophy (such as waterfall).
ITIL provides a set of concepts which you then implement in your own way. For example, ITIL promotes the concepts of Incident and Problem Management. It doesn't tell you exactly HOW you should do them, it simply suggests that these are good processes to have. There are recommendations around actions such as trend analysis and root-cause analysis, but it doesn't prescribe how you should implement these.Change Control
Probably the area with the greatest amount of cross-over is change management. ITIL explicitly mentions it as a procedure for the efficient handling of all changes, and goes on to talk about Change Advisory Boards, Types of Change, Change Scheduling and a bunch of other "things to do with deploying changes to an environment".
DevOps also advocates smooth and efficient processes for deploying changes through environments – so there's no conflict here. The only slight misalignment is that in ITIL, change management is seen as an activity that happens during the Service Transition phase, while in DevOps we tend to advocate the identification and promotion of pre-authorised changes (standard change), which means the change management process effectively starts prior to service transition. But that's about it really.
Some people get a bit carried away with the role of the Change Advisory Board in ITIL, and insist that every change must pass through some sort of CAB process (usually involving a monthly CAB meeting, where a bunch of stakeholders review all changes queued up for a production deployment, which usually only serves to cause a delay in your software delivery process and add very little value). ITIL doesn't explicitly say it has to happen this way – it's not that prescriptive!
Similarly, DevOps doesn't say you can't have a CAB process. If you've got a highly complex and unstable environment that's receiving some sporadic high-risk changes, then CAB review is probably a good idea. The only difference here is that DevOps would encourage these Change Advisory Board reviews to happen earlier in the process to ensure risk is mitigated right from the start, rather than right at the end.
So, in summary, ITIL and DevOps are not having a fight in the schoolyard at home time, there's nothing to see here, go about your business.
When Scrum and DevOps go Bad
We all know a good agile organisation, or at least we've all heard about them, where everyone just *gets it*, they're agile through-and-through, from the top down, bottom up, agile in the middle, and everyone's a mini Martin Fowler. Yay for them.
We've also heard about these DevOps companies, who are leveraging automation in every step of their delivery pipeline. And they're deploying to production 8,000 times a day with zero downtime and they rebuild their live VMs every 12 seconds. Great work.
Unfortunately the rest of the world sits outside those two extremes (recall Rogers Diffusion of Innovation Curve, principally the early and late majority). A lot of organisations simply don't know what Agile and DevOps are, where they've come from, what the point is, and most importantly, how to do it.
So here's what happens:
- To become agile they "go scrum" and hire a scrum master or ten
- To be "DevOps" they automate their environments and deployments
Why do they do this? I suspect it's a number of reasons, but largely it's because there's a shit tonne of material out there that supports the view that Scrum is the best agile framework and DevOps means automating stuff.
The results are fairly predictable:
If you "do scrum" instead of understanding agile, you get what's called Agile Cargo Cult. That basically ends up with people doing all these great scrum practices and ceremonies, but things don't actually improve, and eventually they start to get worse, so to rectify the situation, teams apply the scrum ceremonies and practices with even greater rigour. Obviously this gets them nowhere, and eventually people within the organisation start to believe "Agile doesn't work here", blissfully unaware that they were never actually "agile" in the first place.
Organisations who think DevOps is about automating the Ops tasks just end up "slinging shit quicker". If you don't sort out the real problems in your system, you're basically just making localised optimisations. There's just no point. If your problem is that your software is hard to run, scale, operate and maintain – don't try to automate your deployments.
Also, many DevOps initiatives, in my experience, are either driven by Dev, or Ops, but not usually both. And that says it all really.
So, for a lot of organisations who are new to this whole Agile and DevOps thing, there's clearly an easy path sucking a lot of people in. And that's a shame, because it results in a lot of frustration. It would be easy to laugh at these organisations, but it's not their fault. Scrum has become a self-serving framework, seemingly more interested in its own popularity than its effectiveness, and DevOps is anything to anyone.
So, in summary, don't do scrum, be agile. And don't confuse DevOps with automating the Ops work.


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.
August 1, 2006
ABEL ORTIZ, PETITIONER,v.N.Y.S. PAROLE IN BRONX, N.Y., RESPONDENT.
Petitioner Abel Ortiz has petitioned this Court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 23, 2006, Ortiz filed an application for appointment of counsel. For the reasons which follow, Ortiz's request for counsel is DENIED.
Civil litigants, unlike criminal defendants, do not have a constitutional right to the appointment of counsel. However, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), "[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel." In determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent civil litigant, the Court considers numerous factors, and "excercises substantial discretion, subject to the requirement that it be guided by sound legal principles." Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1989) (citations omitted). The Court's first inquiry is whether plaintiff can afford to obtain counsel. See Terminate Control Corp. v. Horowitz, 28 F.3d 1335, 1341 (2d Cir. 1994). If the Court finds that a plaintiff cannot afford counsel, it must then examine the merits of the case and "determine whether the indigent's position seems likely to be of substance." Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 61 (2d Cir. 1986). Once an initial determination has been made as to indigence and merit, the Court has discretion to consider the following factors: 1) the indigent's ability to investigate the crucial facts; 2) whether conflicting evidence implicating the need for cross-examination will be the major proof presented to the factfinder; 3) the indigent's ability to present the case; 4) the complexity of the legal issues; and 5) any special reason why appointment of counsel would be more likely to lead to a just determination. Id. at 61-62.
Ortiz satisfies the threshold requirement of indigence insofar as he is incarcerated and is unable to afford counsel. Ortiz maintains that he lacks the ability to litigate his case. However, Ortiz has demonstrated the ability to properly file a habeas corpus petition setting forth relevant facts. Ortiz's habeas petition does not present novel or complex legal issues. After careful review of Ortiz's application, the Court finds that appointment of counsel is not warranted. Accordingly, Ortiz's application for counsel is DENIED.
For the foregoing reasons, Ortiz's application for appointment of counsel is hereby DENIED.
SO ORDERED this 1st day of August 2006.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.
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:
Excerpt from Pictures of Travel But when Tyndall said that if an object should disobey the law of gravitation, we were not to go forth and proclaim a miracle, but quietly to seek to ascertain the cause of the phenomenon, he uttered a truth which may be applied to literary criticism as well as to physics. The conflicting traits of Heine's character present a difficulty, but they do not warrant a pedantic denial of the beauty and sincerity of the poet's best work, or of the genuineness of his inspiration. The pearls, to paraphrase his own figure, are not less fair and pure because the ocean in wh1000ose calm depths they lie has its heaving tides and tempests. Carlyle, writing at a time when Heine's importance in literature had not yet become clear, disregarded his advent and laid all stress upon the elder Romantic poets as continuators of Goethe. Matthew Arnold, while fully recognizing that the wreath with which posterity has crowned Heine is of laurel, not of oak, seeks a solution of the character problem by laying emphasis upon Heine's function as a brave soldier fighting in the vanguard for the liberation of humanity. But that is only half a solution- it would still leave unexplained how the poet could turn the tenderest emotions to ridicule and the loftiest conceptions to caricature. Moreover, to have been a brave soldier in such a fight would seem to demand a tougher moral fiber than Heine had. George Eliot saw his faults, but, although her essay was written just before the poet died, and in the midst of the conflict that was waged around him, she proclaimed him the first great wit, the second great lyricist, and the greatest prose writer of German literature. And in this view of him, with various modifications, the opinions of men are now united. Robert Louis Stevenson has called him the "most perfect of poets." Hans Christian Andersen, who in his youth had felt the influence of Heine and had known him personally in later life, wrote his mature opinion of him in 1865: "Heine is a glittering firework- it goes out, and dark night surrounds us. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully- any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
About Heinrich HeineHowever, at this time we simply cannot present you with information about the actual Manager Heinrich Heine. But this doesn't mean that individuals do not work on her behalf assortment. We all consult that you just help us on this matter. Should you have spare time and need will profoundly appreciate if you tell us your details. While getting such feedback and details coming from people regarding the Pictures of Travel Writer Heinrich Heine, we all first her examine. When we make sure that all genuine, simply just submit the idea. Most of us can see this support and also thank you upfront.
Details Book
|Heinrich Heine
|Forgotten Books
|Data Published
|27 September 2015
|Format Book
|PDF, Epub, DOCx, TXT
|Number of Pages
|478 pages
|Age +
|15 years
Reviews Pictures of Travel
Margo Anderson Get eBook Pictures of Travel
Finally I get this ebook, thanks for all these I can get now!
Fitzgerald Great website online books
Words cannot express how amazing this book was!
Lisa Doran Best website free download ebook
I was suspicious at first when i got redirected to the membership site. Now I'm really excited i found this online library....many thanks Kisses
Markus Jensen How to download Pictures of Travel eBook?
I did not think that this would work, my best friend showed me this website, and it does! I get my most wanted eBook
Sandy Griffon to Heinrich Heine - thanks
wtf this great ebook for free?!
Roddy Murray
My friends are so mad that they do not know how I have all the high quality ebook which they do not!
Tina Milan
It's very easy to get quality ebooks ;)
Lindsay Brown
Lukasz Czaru
so many fake sites. this is the first one which worked! Many thanks
Caroline Smith
wtffff i do not understand this!
Andrew Smith
Just select your click then download link, and complete an offer to start downloading the ebook. If there is a survey it only takes 5 minutes, try any survey which works for you.
Kevin Mason
lol it did not even take me 5 minutes at all! XD


text:
Featured Speakers
Convention: City of peace
Though Atlanta has seen its share of violence and inequity over time, today it brims with reminders that there is another way. Get inspired while you're visiting for the 2017 Rotary International Convention from 10 to 14 June. Take a short walk from the convention center to the Center for Civil and Human Rights. There, you can see the handwritten notes, speeches, and sermons of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., experience an interactive 1960s-era lunch counter "sit-in," and learn more about persecuted groups all over the world. A streetcar will take you to the Martin Luther King Jr...
The Rotary Foundation ranked in list of top charities
CNBC has ranked The Rotary Foundation No. 3 in its annual list of Top 10 Charities Changing the World in 2016. The list includes some of the largest and highest-rated charities that help women, children, the poor, and the environment throughout the world, according to Charity Navigator, and that maintain high standards of financial health, accountability, and transparency of reporting. The Foundation was noted for connecting 1.2 million members from more than 200 geographic areas to tackle the world's most pressing humanitarian challenges, including projects that focus on disease prevention,...
Parts of Rotary.org unavailable from Saturday to Monday, 3-5 December
Parts of Rotary.org will be unavailable 3-5 December, beginning at 05:00 Chicago time (UTC-6), while we upgrade our membership database. During this time, areas that require sign-in (convention registration, club and district administration, grant application, giving, Rotary Club Central, etc.) and Club Finder will be unavailable. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Club Meeting Information
Serving Our Local and International Communties
Service Above Self
We meet Thursdays at 12:00 PM
Paso Robles Inn Grand Ballroom
Paso Robles Inn Grand Ballroom
1103 Spring Street - PO Box 3641
Paso Robles, CA 93447
United States
Paso Robles, CA 93447
United States
District Site
Venue Map
What's Happening Now!
Posted by Brenda Cressey on Nov 24, 2016
Holiday fun and cheer to be had by the North County Rotary Clubs on December 15th.
Please join us in celebration of Rotary Fellowship!
Posted by Brenda Cressey on Aug 16, 2016
It was truly a spectacular evening! Hats off to all for such a smooth-running event!
Congratulations and special thanks to all the wineries and staff and especially to everyone who joined us!
1. BarrelHouse Brewing
2. Derby
3. Stillwaters
HM Diablo Paso
1. Broken Earth
2. BarrelHouse
3. On Your Left
HM Calcareous
1. Diablo Paso
2. Villa San Juliette
3. Sextant
HM CaliPaso
1. First Crush
2. Derby
3. Broken Earth
HM Clavo
As a side note, the judges were totally impressed with the food that was produced. They felt that the event has been stepped up to a new level!
David Lundy, Event Chair
Vicki Silva, Winery Chair
Vicki Silva, Winery Chair
Posted by Tony Wallace on Jul 22, 2016
2016-17 Club President Tony Wallace
Welcome Address
As we launch into the 2016-2017 year we will be challenged by many unsettling local, state, federal and international events and cultural/sociopolitical concerns. In the midst of all this, Rotary can be a bright light, a shining beacon of good will, humanitarian effort and just plain fun. Lord knows we all need some of all of that! That is why I am looking forward to this next year where we can spend time, money and effort reaching out to one another and the world around us.
Thanks to all of you ahead of time for your willingness to give. I am forever impressed by this club and the individuals in it who collectively walk forward hand in hand to eat together, laugh together and work together to accomplish much in little old Paso Robles. More money for scholarships, youth projects, community projects, food for the needy and international projects to address polio, hunger, education, clean water. Wow! You guys are awesome. So hold on to your horses as we start, run, and finish a great year. I hope I can keep up!
The Paso Oak Leaf Newsletter
Club Executives & Directors
Photo Albums