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.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon.
Reginald J. Holzer, Judge, presiding.
Rehearing denied April 28, 1983.
This action arises from the demolition of the Henry W. Rincker House, a two-story frame residence on Chicago's far northwest side, which had been declared a landmark by the Commission on Chicago Historic and Architectural Landmarks (Landmark Commission).
Plaintiffs, the city of Chicago and a class comprised of all its citizens, brought this action for the imposition of a constructive trust on the property on which the house stood and for damages. The constructive trust was to be measured by the extent of the savings in restoration costs to Anthony Roppolo, the property owner, generated by the house's demolition. In addition to Roppolo, the suit named as defendants the Northwest National Bank of Chicago, as trustee under trust agreement dated March 1, 1978, and known as Trust 4525, Cirro Wrecking Company (Cirro), the wrecking company which performed the demolition, and Lela Cirrincione, the owner of Cirro. After a bench trial, the trial court held that plaintiffs failed to prove any of the defendants guilty of a fraud or that any defendant had breached a fiduciary duty, and that plaintiffs had not proved damages or established their right to a constructive trust. The pertinent evidence, some of which was stipulated to, may be summarized as follows.
In March 1978, defendant Anthony Roppolo and a business partner purchased over five acres of land located at the intersection of Devon, Milwaukee and Nagle avenues in Chicago. The property was improved with seven structures: two grocery stores, a drug store, a laundromat, a hamburger stand, the Rincker House and the tool shed adjacent to the house. The Rincker House was occupied at the time of purchase, but thereafter vacated and the windows boarded. Roppolo was a 50% owner and agent of the land trust which paid $1,600,000 for the property. In early April of 1978, Roppolo entered into a contract with Joseph Romono to demolish the Rincker House. The application for a demolition permit showed the address of the house at 6366 North Milwaukee Avenue. The application was processed through the various city departments which must approve any demolition permit. On May 1, 1978, the commissioner of the Department of Buildings notified Romono that the permit would not be issued. The owners' complaint for a writ of mandamus against the commissioner was dismissed by the trial court. An appeal from the trial court's action was dismissed by this court for want of prosecution. In July 1978, the city, with the consent of Roppolo, demolished the shed on said property.
On June 5, 1978, the Landmark Commission voted to begin proceedings to have the property, including the Rincker House, declared an official Chicago landmark. Roppolo was represented during these proceedings by an attorney. On April 10, 1979, the Landmark Commission recommended to the city council that the property, including the Rincker House, be designated as a landmark. On August 10, 1979, the city council passed an ordinance designating the property, including the Rincker House, as a Chicago historical landmark.
In April of 1979, Romono, on behalf of Roppolo, applied the second time for a permit to demolish the house. A permit was issued on May 7, 1979, and revoked on the same day by the commissioner of the Department of Buildings.
On February 29, 1980, Roppolo applied for a zoning amendment in order to develop the tract on which the house stood. Hearings on the proposed amendment were held on July 10, 1980, by the Chicago plan commission. The application was modified by the agreement of Roppolo and the plan commission to include a provision that Roppolo would retain the house as a designated Chicago Landmark, move it to another part of the tract, and restore and reconstruct the house at the direction of the Landmark Commission. This development was to be known as "Landmark Square." The plan commission then approved the modified plan of development.
Prior to July 30, 1980, Roppolo asked Mario Rizzi to inquire of various demolition contractors whether any of them would be willing to apply for a permit to demolish the Rincker House. Rizzi spoke to Cirro. Mrs. Cirrincione, owner of Cirro, agreed to apply for a permit only if the company was given a contract to perform the actual demolition. Roppolo thereupon authorized Rizzi to enter into the contract with Cirro for the demolition of the house. Thereafter, Mrs. Cirrincione began the application process.
On July 30, 1980, Mrs. Cirrincione went to the permit control desk of the city's Department of Inspectional Services, Plans, and Examinations (formerly the Department of Buildings) with a partially completed application for a demolition permit. Annette Bueck, an employee of the department, made an entry in the permit application received log showing the receipt of a permit application to demolish the building at 6366 North Milwaukee Avenue. Mrs. Cirrincione then went to the Department of Streets and Sanitation to register the application. That department requires a two-day notice before a sidewalk permit can be issued. No demolition permit can be issued without a sidewalk permit.
Shortly after these preliminary steps in the application process were completed, Alderman Roman Pucinski, in whose ward the property is located, received notice of the application to demolish the structure at 6366 North Milwaukee. Pucinski telephoned the permit control desk to inquire about the application and was informed that the structure was a landmark and that no permit would be issued. At about the same time, Philip Margolis, a city sidewalk inspector, visited the demolition site. He found no structures bearing the address 6366 North Milwaukee in the area, then telephoned his office for a more detailed description of the building to be wrecked. Margolis was finally able to determine that the structure to be demolished as a wood-frame structure bearing signs identifying it as a landmark.
Mrs. Cirrincione received an executed contract for the demolition work prior to August 20, 1980. On that date, she went to the demolition site and took the photograph of the structure to be demolished which must accompany all demolition permit applications. This photograph of the house was submitted with the application. It was last seen in the possession of a city employee. It was not produced during pretrial discovery or at trial. On the same day, Mrs. Cirrincione went to Roppolo's office, showed him the application for the permit and gave him a letter of authorization which required his signature. She also asked him if she should use the 6366 address on the application. She said that she had observed that the addresses of the other buildings on the tract were 6374 through 6382, and that the house must be numbered out of sequence, as the other buildings all stood to the south of the house. She asked Roppolo if the proper house number shouldn't be higher than 6382. Roppolo stated that the address that should be used was 6366, and then signed the application *fn1 and authorization letter with that address. At the same time, Roppolo provided Mrs. Cirrincione a legal description of the property and the number of water cutoff and dust control permits obtained by Roppolo in his previous attempts to obtain a demolition permit for the house.
Mrs. Cirrincione then went to city hall. She obtained permits of approvals that were necessary to process the application from the Sewer Department, Streets and Sanitation, the Water Department, the Environmental Control Section, the Flammable Liquid Tank Section, the Zoning Department, and the Map Department. In the Map Department, the location of 6366 North Milwaukee Avenue was plotted on the official city map. The employees of the Map Department determined that 6366 was not the correct address of the house, then issued a house certificate bearing the address 6384 North Milwaukee Avenue. It was not unusual for the addresses on applications to be changed in this manner during processing. There was testimony that 6366 North Milwaukee was the house number affixed to the tool shed which had stood adjacent to the Rincker House until the city caused the shed to be demolished. Mrs. Cirrincione took the house number certificate, the corrected application with other documents to the Demolition Department and received an approval of the permit application.
Mrs. Cirrincione then returned to the permit control desk. She gave all the documents to Helen Cowell, a Department of Inspectional Services employee, who was assigned the duty of processing applications for building and demolition permits at the permit control counter. She calculated the permit fee, had it checked and organized the permit papers. She gave the papers to Annette Bueck, another employee assigned at the counter who passed the papers back to the remote terminal operator, whose terminal is located behind the permit control counter.
The remote terminal operator's job is to type the street address and other information contained on a permit application into the computer. If the address of a designated landmark is entered from the terminal, the computer will buzz and the work "landmark" will appear on the screen. No further information can be entered unless the operator manually overrides the system. If the address entered is not listed as a landmark, all the information from the application can be entered and the computer will print out the permit. On the application at issue, a line had been drawn through the number 6366 and the number 6384 was written above it. The operator entered the 6384 number, and the computer printed out Permit No. B586952, which permit gave Cirro permission to demolish the two-story frame structure at that address.
Five days later, employees of Cirro demolished the Rincker House. The application for a demolition permit was never reviewed by the Landmark Commission.
The Rincker House, built in 1851, was the second oldest building in Chicago, and the oldest example of the "balloon frame" construction method which originated in Chicago. It was also an example of the architectural style known as "carpenter gothic." Signs were attached to the house identifying it as a landmark, with one sign being approximately three feet by four feet. Several witnesses testified that the signs were always attached to the house during the summer of 1980, although other testimony indicated that vandals would occasionally remove the plywood window coverings to which the signs were attached in order to enter the house. Alfred Cirrincione, the bulldozer operator who wrecked the house, testified that he did not see the signs before wrecking the building, and that the plywood window coverings were lying on the ground around the house when he arrived on the site. Two neighbors testified that they had spoken to Alfred after the demolition and that he had made statements indicating that he had been told to expect landmark signs and that he was to ignore them.
Mrs. Cirrincione testified that she had never been told that the building was a landmark, and that she had seen no signs when she had visited the site to take the photograph for the application. She also testified she did not inform anyone at City Hall that the building was a landmark. Mrs. Cirrincione also testified that she called Commonwealth Edison (the electric company) to instruct it to remove its equipment from the site. The electric company maintains a record of customer calls known as the "terminal transaction record" which memorialized a call on August 21, 1980, at 3:57 p.m. from Mrs. Lee Cirro (Mrs. Cirrincione's business name) from the telephone number of Cirro, who stated, "Cirro Wrecking Co. will be demolishing two-story, green frame building on Monday, 8/25/80 at approximately 8:00 a.m. requests removal of CECO [Commonwealth Edison Co.] equipment customer warns there are four buildings on lot remove equipment from building with Chicago Historical Landmark sign on it."
Testimony on behalf of the city indicated that to reconstruct the Rincker House and move it to a new location on the five-acre site would cost approximately $200,000 to $250,000; that the demolition of the Rincker House had an adverse effect on the neighborhood surrounding the house and resulted in a loss to Chicago's cultural and aesthetic heritage. On the other hand, Roppolo offered the testimony of a real estate appraiser that the demolition of the house had no effect on real estate values in the neighborhood or the city. Roppolo testified that the destruction of the Rincker House and the continuing debt service and attorney fees had cost him $325,000 between the date of demolition and the trial.
Plaintiffs appeal, contending that the proofs presented at trial established that defendants demolished the Rincker House without authority; that defendants are guilty of fraud, and that damages to plaintiffs were proved. Defendants filed a cross-appeal contending, amongst other things, that the trial court erred in not granting a change of venue, in denying their request for a jury trial and other relief.
The foremost issue in this appeal is whether a constructive trust arises by operation of law as the result of the actions, either jointly or severally, of defendants Roppolo, Cirro and Mrs. Cirrincione in demolishing the Rincker House, a Chicago landmark. In order to answer this question, we must first review some general principles of law and then examine the facts in the record.
Plaintiffs say that the defendants without authority wilfully demolished a landmark, thereby causing damages. The trial court held that the evidence did not clearly and convincingly prove any of the allegations of the complaint. *fn2
In County of Cook v. Barrett (1975), 36 Ill. App.3d 623, 627, 344 N.E.2d 540, appeal denied (1976), 63 Ill.2d 555, this court said, "[t]he particular circumstances in which equity will impress a constructive trust are `* * * as numberless as the modes by which property may be obtained through bad faith and unconscientious acts.' (4 Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence § 1045, at 97 (5th ed. 1941).) The barriers to its effective operation are few. The form of the property claimed determines nothing, since a constructive trust will extend to reach real and personal property, choses in action and funds of money. (4 Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence § 1044 (5th ed. 1941).) To make out a case a plaintiff must allege facts which disclose either actual or constructive fraud or an abuse of a confidential relationship."
• 1 The way in which a transaction assailed in constructive trust cases arises is immaterial. (Village of Wheeling v. Stavros (1980), 89 Ill. App.3d 450, 455, 411 N.E.2d 1067, appeal denied (1981), 82 Ill.2d 588.) In determining whether to impose a constructive trust, we should consider the principles of equity, good conscience and unjust enrichment, if any. (Cf. Zack Co. v. Sims (1982), 108 Ill. App.3d 16, 29, 438 N.E.2d 663.) As we noted in Chicago Park District v. Kenroy, Inc. (1982), 107 Ill. App.3d 222, 224, 437 N.E.2d 783, "[t]he recent trend in the Illinois law of constructive trusts has been a broadening of the circumstances in which this remedy is available."
Plaintiffs claim the court has the authority to compel defendants to pay a sum of money equal to that sum of money saved by Roppolo as the result of the demolition of the Rincker House, thereby eliminating his obligation to the city to move, reconstruct and restore said landmark. Thus, if the city can prove its theory, we think the right is one of those rights referred to in Barrett, Stavros, etc.
Plaintiffs claim defendants wilfully, intentionally and without authority demolished a landmark, and that in so doing the defendants are guilty of fraud. In order to determine the validity of plaintiffs' claim, we shall analyze and evaluate the separate conduct of each defendant.
We first consider defendant Roppolo. He was associated with Roppolo-Prendergast Builders, developers and builders, with offices at 6315 North Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago. *fn3 In March 1978, Roppolo and Prendergast purchased the approximately five acres of real property on which the Rincker House was then located. Title to the property was placed in a land trust with the Northwest National Bank of Chicago, Roppolo and Prendergast each owning 50% beneficial interest. Prendergast is not a party in this litigation, and there is nothing in the record to suggest he was more than nominally involved.
About April 3, 1978, shortly after the purchase of the property, Roppolo caused one Joseph Romono to file with the city an application for a permit to wreck a building at 6366 North Milwaukee Avenue. The building to be demolished was the Rincker House. On May 1, 1978, the city advised that the demolition permit would not be issued. Thereupon, Roppolo and Prendergast commenced a mandamus action in the circuit court of Cook County which was dismissed on June 16, 1978. An appeal to this court was dismissed for want of prosecution.
On June 5, 1978, proceedings were commenced to designate the Rincker House and the tract of property on which it was located as an official Chicago historical and architectural landmark. Roppolo was represented by an attorney who appeared at the landmark proceedings. After a recommendation by the Landmark Commission on April 10, 1979, the Chicago city council on August 10, 1979, by ordinance, designated the Rincker House as a Chicago historical landmark. Roppolo opposed the designation throughout. He also testified that he knew that upon designation of a building as a landmark, thereafter permission to demolish the building had to be obtained from the Landmark Commission. In 1979, signs appeared on the house identifying it as an "Official Chicago Landmark."
During the pendency of the landmark proceedings, Joseph Romono, on behalf of Roppolo, in April 1979 filed with the city a second application for a demolition permit which was issued by the city on May 7, 1979, and revoked on the same date.
On February 29, 1980, Roppolo filed with the city an application for an amendment to its zoning ordinance. Specifically the amendment requested approval of a planned development to be called "Landmark Square" and provided for relocating the Rincker House in the corner of the property. It was referred to the Chicago Plan Commission for a public hearing.
On July 10, 1980, during the course of the plan commission public hearings on the proposed amendments for "Landmark Square," Roppolo agreed, through his attorney, to the following language to be included in the application:
"9. Roppolo-Prendergast Builders, Inc. will retain the Rincker House, a designated Chicago Landmark, and will move the House to the landscaped site designated in the attached site plan. Roppolo-Prendergast Builders, Inc. will reconstruct the House. The movement, reconstruction and use of the House will be subject to the approval of the Commission on Chicago Historical Landmarks and may be modified with the approval of said body; * * *." *fn4
Notwithstanding all of the preceding action, around July 10, 1980, Roppolo authorized one Mario Rizzi to find a demolition contractor to apply to the city for a demolition permit to demolish the Rincker House. There is evidence in the record that Roppolo made the application to protect his legal rights. Around July 30, 1980, Rizzi secured Mrs. Cirrincione to agree to apply for a permit only if there was a contract to demolish the structure. Roppolo agreed to that and authorized a contract with Cirro to demolish the Rincker House. In fact, Roppolo signed a "Letter of Authorization" to Cirro to wreck the building. Thereupon, Mrs. Cirrincione applied to the city for a demolition permit, which application contained the signature of Roppolo as the owner.
During the application procedure, questions were raised as to the exact address of the house. The application, dated July 30, 1980, indicated 6366 North Milwaukee Avenue. *fn5 Roppolo advised Mrs. Cirrincione to use that number and provided a legal description. During the application processing, the Map Department of the city identified the property as 6384 North Milwaukee Avenue. As the landmark was designated 6366 North Milwaukee Avenue, a demolition permit was issued on August 20, 1980, notwithstanding the application to demolish the Rincker House was never submitted to or reviewed by the Landmark Commission prior to the demolition of the house. The application having been issued on Wednesday, August 20, 1980, the Rincker House was demolished about 9 a.m. on Monday, August 25, 1980.
The record clearly established (1) that Roppolo had knowledge the Rincker House was designated a landmark; (2) that Roppolo knew approval by the Landmark Commission was necessary to demolish a landmark; (3) that Roppolo neither applied to the Landmark Commission for approval to demolish or directed Mrs. Cirrincione, on his behalf, to apply; (4) that in consideration for the approval of pending rezoning of the Landmark Square, Roppolo agreed to move and reconstruct the house which, along with the use, would be subject to the approval of the Landmark Commission; (5) that Roppolo in authorizing the demolition promised to comply with the Municipal Code of the city; (6) that there would be a cost to move and reconstruct the Rincker House which would be approximately $200,000 to $250,000; and (7) that application to demolish had been twice refused. Knowing all of the aforesaid, Roppolo nevertheless concealed from the Landmark Commission his intent to demolish a landmark. Then he caused the action which resulted in the demolition of the Rincker House in violation of his promises, and also in violation of the requirement that the permission of the Landmark Commission was required before demolition would proceed. By so doing, he caused the injury to the city by the unlawful destruction of the landmark.
We consider Roppolo's conduct to have been irresponsible, in utter disregard of the law and his commitments to the city. During the period Mrs. Cirrincione was attempting to secure the permit, she and Roppolo admittedly discussed the address question. Placing that in its best light, it is obvious Roppolo was aware that he had everything to gain and nothing to lose by having Mrs. Cirrincione, as his agent, seek a demolition permit. Immediately following the issuance of the permit, Mrs. Cirrincione called the gas, electric and telephone companies, and went to the Illinois Department of Transportation offices for permits to transfer her equipment from its garage to the property. Yet, Mrs. Cirrincione testified that after obtaining the permit, she never advised Roppolo.
• 2 We think the facts clearly indicate Roppolo acted in bad faith in that he used Mrs. Cirrincione to obtain the permit to demolish, knowing that he had a continuing duty to move and reconstruct the landmark. Roppolo knowingly and wilfully triggered the demolition, by agreeing to pay $4,000 to demolish that which he knew he was obligated not to demolish, thereby saving a large amount of money estimated to be approximately $200,000 to $250,000. Roppolo, by using Mrs. Cirrincione, was ready to, and willingly, accepted the benefits of the erroneously issued permit. This is the type of action in which equity, good conscience and the prospective unjust enrichment (by not having to fulfill his obligation) demands the imposition of a constructive trust.
We think the facts as to Roppolo can be characterized as either fraud or constructive fraud. In re Estate of Neprozatis (1978), 62 Ill. App.3d 563, 568, 378 N.E.2d 1345, this court discussed "fraud" and "constructive fraud." (See Gary-Wheaton Bank v. Burt (1982), 104 Ill. App.3d 767, 773-74, 433 N.E.2d 315.) Fraud is a generic term, embracing all multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get advantage over another by false suggestions or by suppression of truth, and includes all surprise, trick, cunning, dissembling, and any unfair way by which another is cheated. It comprises all acts, omissions, and concealments involving a breach of a legal or equitable duty and resulting in damage to another. Black's Law Dictionary 594-95 (5th ed. 1979).
In People ex rel. Chicago Bar Association v. Gilmore (1931), 345 Ill. 28, 46, 177 N.E. 710, our supreme court said, "fraud includes anything calculated to deceive, whether it be a single act or combination of circumstances, whether the suppression of truth or the suggestion of what is false, whether it be by direct falsehood or by innuendo, by speech or by silence." We think Roppolo's conduct meets the definition of "fraud."
Constructive fraud consists in any act of commission or omission contrary to legal or equitable duty which operated to injure another, which if generally permitted would be prejudicial to the public welfare. (Black's Law Dictionary 595 (5th ed. 1979).) We think Roppolo's conduct can also be classified as a "constructive fraud."
Roppolo falsely led Mrs. Cirrincione to believe that he was entitled to a demolition permit, falsely induced the city, through Mrs. Cirrincione acting as his agent, to issue a permit to demolish a landmark without the approval of the Landmark Commission, and falsely omitted, through his agent, to advise and inform the city employees of the agreement he had with the city to move and reconstruct the building for which he sought the demolition permit. We think that his acts, and those of his agent, were intended to deceive the city employees for Roppolo's gain and to the detriment of the plaintiffs.
Roppolo failed to act when he had a duty to secure the permission of the Landmark Commission prior to any demolition. By using Mrs. Cirrincione, he was able to conceal the true facts and was the willing beneficiary for his financial gain, of the administrative error which occurred in issuing the permit. The conduct of Roppolo and Mrs. Cirrincione had a detrimental effect upon public interest and public confidence in city government.
Mrs. Cirrincione was acting as agent for Roppolo for the specific purpose of securing the permit and demolishing the building. By failing to disclose to the city employees that the address involved was a landmark, Mrs. Cirrincione, as Roppolo's agent, concealed a material fact. It is well established that the principal may be liable to third persons for wrongful or tortuous acts committed by his agent at his direction or while acting within the scope of his authority. Mrs. Cirrincione's failure to disclose a material fact with intent to mislead in order to obtain the permit amounted to fraudulent concealment. Roppolo cannot hide behind the acts of Mrs. Cirrincione or Cirro. The acts of the agent are imputable to the principal. 1 Ill. L. & Prac. Agency secs. 181-182 (1953); see United States v. Fox Lake State Bank (N.D. Ill. 1965), 240 F. Supp. 720, 722, aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds (7th Cir. 1966), 366 F.2d 962.
As the result of the actions which Roppolo triggered, the Rincker House was demolished. The city was damaged as the result of the destruction of the landmark. The city established the Commission on Chicago Historical and Architectural Landmark for the purpose of, amongst other things, designating buildings having a special historical, community, or aesthetic interest or value as "Chicago Landmarks" to preserve, protect, enhance, rehabilitate and perpetuate the designated landmarks. (1981 Municipal Code of Chicago, ch. 21, sec. 21-64 et seq. (1981).) *fn6 Thus, the city in order to enhance the cultural and historical environment elected to officially designate the Rincker House as a Chicago Landmark. The destruction of the building frustrated the city's action and diminished the cultural and historical quality of the city. It is to be remembered the Roppolo demonstrated his awareness of the benefit of a landmark designation by identifying his proposed redevelopment as "Landmark Square."
Defendant Roppolo argues that the judgment of the circuit court is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court held that as to all defendants, the evidence failed to prove fraud, a breach of fiduciary duty, a constructive trust or damages of any kind.
It is elementary that a reviewing court will not disturb a trial court's finding and substitute its own judgment unless the holding of the trial court is manifestly against the weight of the evidence. On the other hand, it is our duty as a reviewing court to reverse any judgment wherein the findings are clearly and palpably against the manifest weight of the evidence. (Drovers National Bank v. Great Southwest Fire Insurance Co. (1977), 55 Ill. App.3d 953, 956, 371 N.E.2d 855, appeal denied (1978), 71 Ill.2d 602.) As to the defendant Roppolo, for the reasons set out in this opinion, we find the trial court's findings clearly and palpably against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Defendant Roppolo further urges that he was under no duty to insure that the city's employees properly performed their jobs and followed its own procedures. And, as it issued the permit, the city was estopped from bringing the instant action. (Cities Service Oil Co. v. City of Des Plaines (1961), 21 Ill.2d 157, 171 N.E.2d 605.) Roppolo argues, rather imaginatively that, as he was required by ordinance to apply for a permit, it would be inequitable to impose a constructive trust when the city issued the permit.
Roppolo's estoppel argument is without merit. The Chicago Landmark Ordinance (section 21-64.1(a)) required the approval of the Landmark Commission in order to obtain a permit. This was not obtained. The fact is the permit was issued by virtue of an incorrect street address being placed on the application in the city Map Department.
In O'Laughlin v. City of Chicago (1975), 28 Ill. App.3d 766, 772, 329 N.E.2d 528, aff'd (1976), 65 Ill.2d 183, 357 N.E.2d 472, we discussed the issue of estoppel at great length and examined the supreme court's opinion in the Cities Service Oil Co. case. The supreme court also discussed this issue and the Cities Service Oil Co. case in affirming O'Laughlin. (See 65 Ill.2d 183, 192.) The subject of estoppel has also been discussed in other cases. (E.g., Sharrett v. Campbell (1982), 109 Ill. App.3d 1, 6-10, 440 N.E.2d 167; Hagee v. City of Evanston (1980), 91 Ill. App.3d 729, 733-34, 414 N.E.2d 1184, appeal denied (1981), 83 Ill.2d 570; and Ganley v. City of Chicago (1980), 81 Ill. App.3d 877, 881-82, 401 N.E.2d 1184.) Estoppel generally arises against a municipality in two situations: (1) where there is a substantial change of position under a permit validly issued which is later revoked due to a subsequent change in the law; or (2) where there has been a substantial change of position under an invalid permit and the party to whom the permit was issued was actively induced or misled by city officers.
As discussed below, we are satisfied beyond any doubt that Mrs. Cirrincione, at the time she was processing the application, knew that the building was a landmark. Further, on the morning Mrs. Cirrincione secured the permit, she met with Roppolo across the street from the site and then took a picture of the building. Mrs. Cirrincione, acting for Roppolo, had a duty to secure the Landmark Commission approval. Roppolo had a duty to insure that the Rincker House was not destroyed until the Landmark Commission had approved. To hold otherwise would make a mockery of existing city ordinances. The principle that everyone is presumed to know the law has been the cornerstone of our law far too long to require citation.
• 3 It therefore follows that the act of demolition was not induced by the employees of the city and Roppolo stood to gain, rather than lose, by the demolition. We find no basis for applying the estoppel theory.
We therefore reverse the judgment against Roppolo and Northwest and remand the matter to the circuit court of Cook County for trial on the question of damages.
Next we consider Mrs. Cirrincione. We think the record clearly established she knew the property was designated as a landmark. Two factors clearly support that contention. First, she inspected Rincker House prior to obtaining the demolition permit. The record is replete with evidence that signs were on the building indicating the landmark status. Although the fact that the photograph she allegedly took on the morning of the issuance of the permit and turned over the city was mysteriously missing, there is ample evidence to permit the conclusion the signs were on at the time she photographed it. Secondly, the records of Commonwealth Edison memorialized a telephone discussion with Mrs. Cirrincione on August 21, 1980, the day after the permit was issued, when the fact that there were landmark signs on the property was noted by Mrs. Cirrincione. And the record indicates Cirro wanted the job as work had been slow during the summer of 1980.
• 4 Notwithstanding, there is nothing in the record to suggest Mrs. Cirrincione was aware of Roppolo's obligation to the city to move, restore and reconstruct the Rincker House. Consequently, one of the principal elements to establish fraud or constructive fraud upon the city is missing. For this reason, as to Mrs. Cirrincione, although we do not condone her actions, we conclude that the facts are missing for applying the constructive trust theory, or for finding fraud or constructive fraud. It follows that the same conclusion must be reached as to defendant Cirro.
The city suggests it is entitled to damages by virtue of Roppolo's actions. The city suggests the cost to Roppolo of moving the Rincker House and reconstructing it as permitted by the Landmark Commission would have been $200,000 to $250,000. The city argues that by demolishing the building, Roppolo relieved himself of this financial obligation and was thereby unjustly enriched. In addition, the city points out that by the act of demolition, Roppolo caused the destruction of a part of Chicago's history and heritage that had existed for approximately 130 years.
We do not think the record before us is sufficient for this issue to be resolved at this time. For that reason, as to defendant Roppolo, we are remanding to the circuit court of Cook County the issue of damages.
Defendants Mrs. Cirrincione and Cirro urged certain trial errors relative to a motion for change of venue, denial of a jury request, and the trial court's errors in failing to quash a motion to dismiss and the certification as a class action. In view of our affirming the judgment as to Mrs. Cirrincione and Cirro, it is not necessary to discuss these issues.
The judgment of the circuit court of Cook County: (1) as to defendants Roppolo and Northwest National Bank of Chicago, as trustee under trust agreement dated March 1, 1978, is reversed and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with the views expressed herein; and (2) as to defendants Cirro Wrecking Co. and Lela Cirrincione, is affirmed.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.
PERLIN, J., concurs.
JUSTICE STAMOS, dissenting:
The majority holds that the actions of Roppolo prior to the demolition of the Rincker House amount to a fraud and a constructive fraud, and that therefore the trial court erred in refusing to impose a constructive trust on the property where the Rincker House once stood. However, the evidence which was adduced at trial, taken with the stipulations of the parties, is not sufficient to establish a fraud or a constructive fraud. Because plaintiffs did not make out their cause of action, I would hold that the trial court correctly refused to grant the relief that they sought.
The majority holds that Roppolo is guilty of fraud in connection with the demolition of the Rincker House, stating that fraud is a generic term and quoting a general definition of fraud from People ex rel. Chicago Bar Association v. Gilmore (1931), 345 Ill. 28, 46, 177 N.E. 710. In Gilmore, the court was not required to determine if a cause of action for fraud had been proven by the party seeking relief. That case dealt only with the sanctions to be imposed on an attorney for professional misconduct, and the definition for fraud was given by the court while characterizing the pattern of deception, overreaching, and concealment which the respondent was found to have engaged in, and for which he was disbarred. However, when a plaintiff seeks legal or equitable relief from harm caused by actions of the defendant, it is not enough to characterize those actions as "fraudulent" in a generic sense. The plaintiff, rather, must prove the elements of a cause of action which will justify the court in granting the relief which is sought.
The essential elements of a cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation are that:
(1) a statement of material fact was made;
(2) the statement was untrue;
(3) the party making the statement knew it was untrue or believed it to be so;
(4) the person to whom the statement was made believed it and relied on it, and was justified in doing so;
(5) the statement was made for the purpose of inducing the other party to act; and
(6) the reliance on the statement by the person to whom it was made cause his injury. See Perlman v. Time, Inc. (1978), 64 Ill. App.3d 190, 194-95, 380 N.E.2d 1040; Broberg v. Mann (1965), 66 Ill. App.2d 134, 139, 213 N.E.2d 89.
Fraud does not always consist of an affirmative statement of fact; fraud may also consist of the concealment of a material fact accompanied by scienter, deception, and injury. (Skidmore v. Johnson (1948), 334 Ill. App. 347, 360, 79 N.E.2d 762.) However, where a failure to disclose information is the basis of the cause of action, there must be a duty to speak on the part of the silent party, and an active concealment of the pertinent fact. (See Zanbetiz v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. (1966), 72 Ill. App.2d 192, 200-01, 219 N.E.2d 98.) Additionally, the facts which are not disclosed must not only be known to the silent party, but must be "unknown to or beyond the reach of" the party relying on the silence. (See Lingsch v. Savage (1963), 213 Cal.App.2d 729, 738, 29 Cal.Rptr. 201, 206; Prosser, Torts sec. 106, at 697-98 (4th ed. 1971).) Each element of the cause of action for fraud must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. National Republic Bank v. National Homes Construction Corp. (1978), 63 Ill. App.3d 920, 924, 381 N.E.2d 15.
Constructive fraud differs from actual or intentional fraud in that constructive fraud may be inferred from the facts and circumstances surrounding a transaction regardless of a lack of proof of any actual dishonesty of purpose. (See In re Estate of Neprozatis (1978), 62 Ill. App.3d 563, 568, 378 N.E.2d 1345.) Constructive fraud is "often equated with a breach or abuse of a confidential or fiduciary relationship." (Williams v. Estate of Cross (1980), 85 Ill. App.3d 923, 926, 407 N.E.2d 704.) Where a fiduciary or confidential relationship does not arise as a matter of law, such a relationship must be shown to have existed by clear and convincing evidence. (Collins v. Nugent (1982), 110 Ill. App.3d 1026, 1036, 443 N.E.2d 277.) No Illinois cases have made a finding of constructive fraud in the absence of a showing that the parties stood in a confidential relationship. (See, e.g., Neprozatis; Williams; Federal Life Insurance Co. v. Griffin (1912), 173 Ill. App. 5, 18.) On the contrary, the absence of a fiduciary or a confidential relationship precludes the imposition of liability for a constructive fraud. (See Gary-Wheaton Bank v. Burt (1982), 104 Ill. App.3d 767, 774, 433 N.E.2d 315.) Before turning to the question of whether Roppolo is guilty of an actual fraud with regard to the demolition of the Rincker House, it need be noted only briefly that there is nothing in the record which would justify a conclusion that Roppolo stood in any type of confidential relationship with the city of Chicago, its employees, or its citizens, and therefore no constructive fraud can be inferred from the circumstances surrounding this case.
The majority refers to several of the acts and omissions of defendants in support of its conclusion that Roppolo's conduct meets the definition of fraud. The acts that the majority characterize as fraudulent are: (1) that Roppolo led Mrs. Cirrincione to believe that he was entitled to a demolition permit; (2) that Roppolo falsely induced the city to issue the permit; (3) that Roppolo, using Mrs. Cirrincione as an agent, omitted to advise the employees of the city of his agreement with the Planning Commission to restore the Rincker House; (4) that Roppolo had the duty to ensure that the Landmark Commission reviewed the application for the demolition permit, and that he failed to do so; and (5) that Mrs. Cirrincione, with the intent to mislead, failed to inform the city employees that the application was for a permit to demolish a landmark.
For Roppolo to be guilty of intentional fraud, it must be shown that he made some statement with the intent to deceive, and that that statement was relied upon by the city, inducing it to issue the permit. In the alternative, it must be shown that there was a concealment of a material fact which Roppolo had a duty to disclose, that the fact was unknown to the city, and that the city had a right to rely on Roppolo's silence. As was previously noted, each of the necessary elements must have been proven by clear and convincing evidence in order to justify a finding by this court that the verdict of the trial court was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
It cannot be gainsaid that Roppolo, by engaging Mrs. Cirrincione to apply for the permit and by neglecting to tell her that the building was a landmark for which no demolition permit would be issued, set in motion a series of events which led to the unlawful destruction of the Rincker House. It likewise cannot be gainsaid that the circumstances surrounding this case are of the type that naturally raise grave suspicions. However, suspicion is not the standard of proof in any civil or criminal proceeding in our courts, and suspicion is not clear and convincing evidence.
The first act that the majority characterizes as fraudulent is Roppolo's failure to inform Mrs. Cirrincione that he was not entitled to a permit to demolish the Rincker House. This failure to speak may or may not amount to a fraud on Mrs. Cirrincione. She had made it clear to Roppolo, through Rizzi, that she would not go through the application process unless she had a contract to perform the actual demolition. Had the permit been denied, Roppolo would have gained the benefit of Mrs. Cirrincione's efforts on his behalf for the price of executing a contract which could never be performed. However, it is difficult to see how Roppolo's lack of candor with Mrs. Cirrincione translates into a fraud on the city. It must be stressed that the fact that Roppolo made an application for the permit cannot be interpreted as a representation to the city that he was "entitled" to approval of the application. This is so because of the procedures which have been formulated by the city for dealing with properties which have been designated as landmarks.
A designation of a property as a landmark imposes a financial burden on the landowner. The landowner can shift some or all of that burden to the city by following the procedures set forth in chapter 21 section 21-64.1 of the Municipal Code of the City of Chicago. That section provides that when the Building Department receives an application for a permit to alter or demolish a designated landmark, it shall forward the application to the Landmark Commission. The Landmark Commission then considers the application and approves or disapproves it. A disapproval "shall not be deemed by the applicant for permit as a denial thereof." The Landmark Commission forwards the disapproved application to the finance committee of the city council. The finance committee must give the application prompt consideration, after which it recommends grant or denial of the application. If the committee decides that the application should be denied, its recommendation on the matter to the full city council must include a report on the ways and means by which the city can arrange to lease or sublease the landmark property, contract with the owner for covenants designed to preserve the landmark, acquire the property by eminent domain, or take other action under section 11-48.2-2 of the Illinois Municipal Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 24, par. 11-48.2-2). Courses of action available to the city under that statute include the creation of transferable development rights in favor of the owner of the landmark. After receiving the recommendation of the finance committee, the city council must pass an ordinance either approving the issuance of the permit or denying the permit. If the permit is denied, the city council must take one of the actions recommended by the finance committee with respect to the property. In short, the city cannot deny a permit to demolish a landmark without also taking action which will result in some form of compensation to the landowner for the burden imposed on him by the landmark designation. The only way to acquire this compensation is to apply for a permit to demolish the landmark. Any owner of a landmark-designated property has the right to apply for a permit to demolish the landmark, and, as is obvious from the foregoing, he is well advised to do so. The mere act of applying for the permit cannot be construed as a representation to the city that the applicant is "entitled" to the issuance of the permit because the Municipal Code encourages him to make the application even if he knows to a certainty that it will be denied. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that Roppolo, by leading Mrs. Cirrincione to believe that he was entitled to a demolition permit, was making any representation which was calculated to deceive the city. It likewise cannot be concluded that Mrs. Cirrincione's belief in that entitlement in any way induced the city to issue the permit, because she would have handled the application process in the same way had she known the true facts and had she been expressly engaged only to begin the process in order to get the application before the city council.
The majority also holds that Roppolo, through Mrs. Cirrincione, falsely induced the city to issue the permit. In this regard, it must be stressed that Roppolo instructed Mrs. Cirrincione to use the 6366 address on the application despite Mrs. Cirrincione's suggestion that that was not the correct street address. This fact was not adduced through testimony at trial, but was stipulated to by the parties. That stipulation is binding on this court, and no inference contrary to the stipulation can be drawn on appeal. (See Village of Schaumburg v. Franberg (1981), 99 Ill. App.3d 1, 4, 424 N.E.2d 1239.) It was also stipulated that Roppolo had twice before applied for demolition permits using the 6366 address. Both of those applications were made before the landmark designation. One permit was denied and one was revoked. It can only be concluded that Roppolo knew that a third application using that address would be rejected, but that he caused the permit to bear that address rather than the correct address. The inducement which caused the issuance of the permit was, in fact, not a result of any act of Roppolo's, but resulted from the changing of the address on the application at the direction of city employees. Roppolo's affirmative statements on the face of the application were an inducement to reject rather than to approve the application. The stipulated facts of this case negate any inference that Roppolo attempted to use deception to induce the city's actions.
The majority also asserts that Roppolo agreed in the application for the permit that all work pursuant to the permit would conform to the Municipal Code, and that therefore he had the duty to secure the approval of the Landmark Commission before demolishing the Rincker House. While it is true that no permit to demolish a landmark can issue without the approval of the Landmark Commission, the Municipal Code does not impose on the applicant the duty of seeking the Commission's review of an application for a permit to alter or demolish a landmark. Chapter 21, section 21-64.1(b) of the Municipal Code provides that "prior to issuing any permit [for the alteration or demolition of a landmark], the Building Department shall forward any application for such permit * * * to the Commission on Chicago Historical and Architectural Landmarks within (7) days of the receipt thereof."
The Building Department clearly has the obligation under the code to process the application in this fashion, and a failure to ensure that the Building Department is doing its job properly can hardly be characterized as a breach of a promise by an applicant for a permit that the work will be performed in compliance with the Municipal Code. The Building Department, by forwarding the application to the Landmark Commission, begins the administrative process which ultimately ends with compensation being paid to the owner of a landmark-designated property. Once the application is made, the process is out of the hands of the applicant. If everyone is presumed to know the law, then it cannot be said that Roppolo acted fraudulently by failing to do something that he knew that the city, and not he, was obliged to do.
The majority also characterizes two omissions of defendants as fraudulent. They are Roppolo's failure to disclose through his agent (Mrs. Cirrincione) that he had an agreement with the Planning Commission to move and restore the Rincker House, and Mrs. Cirrincione's failure to disclose to city employees at the permit control desk that the house was a designated landmark.
As has been previously noted, silence can amount to a fraud only when the silent party has a duty to speak. It is difficult to say that such a duty existed with regard to Roppolo's agreement with the Planning Commission. That agreement in no way affected Roppolo's right under the Municipal Code to apply for the permit and receive whatever compensation he might be awarded after the permit was denied. It is significant to note that the agreement with the Planning Commission does not specifically state that Roppolo would pay for the costs of moving and restoring the Rincker House, although it does state that Roppolo's company would perform the work. Therefore, an attempt by Roppolo to have the city assume part, if not all, of the expense of preserving the landmark is not only consistent with his rights under the Municipal Code, but is not in any way inconsistent with his agreement with the Planning Commission. The personnel at the permit control desk could not have refused to process the application had they known of that agreement. This is not to say that they might not have processed it with greater care; but the conclusion that a person would have acted differently if a certain fact were known to him is a conclusion that the fact was material. A conclusion that a fact is material is only one element which must be proven to establish fraud. Although the fact may be regarded as material, Roppolo had no duty to disclose it. Additionally, the fact had little relevance to the application process. It must be reiterated that Mrs. Cirrincione was going through the application process in the expectation that she would perform the demolition contract, and that Roppolo was less than candid with her when he avoided informing her that the house was a landmark which was not likely to be demolished, but rather was to be moved and restored. However, it cannot be concluded that those omissions were calculated to deceive the city. It was stipulated between the parties that Roppolo instructed Mrs. Cirrincione to use the 6366 address on the application. By that act, he was providing the city with all the information it needed to determine that the structure was a landmark and that no demolition permit should be issued. Having disclosed all the material facts which were necessary for the city to handle the application correctly, Roppolo was under no duty to disclose more.
The foregoing discussion is equally applicable to the issue of whether Mrs. Cirrincione's failure to tell the city employees that the Rincker House was a landmark was a fraudulent concealment which can be imputed to Roppolo. Additionally, that omission cannot be characterized as a fraudulent concealment because such a concealment must be of a fact which was not only known to the silent party, but which was also unknown or unavailable to the party which relied on the silence. It is evident from the stipulated facts that the city, through its computerized record keeping system, has far superior access to facts concerning the status of any particular piece of property than does the applicant for a building permit. Both the 6366 address and the 6384 address were conspicuously visible on the application, and it would have been a simple matter to enter both addresses in the computer. Indeed, it would have been prudent to do so because the presence of the two addresses should have indicated to a reasonable person that there was some confusion concerning the correct address of the structure to be demolished. Because the facts not expressly disclosed to the city by defendants were readily accessible to the city, the failure to disclose those facts cannot be characterized as a fraud. It is also questionable whether the employees of the city department which collects, stores, and retrieves the information which the city claims should have been disclosed to those employees could ever be said to have justifiably relied on the silence of an applicant for a permit. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that any of the omissions of defendants were of the type which support a finding that defendants perpetrated a fraud through their silence.
This case presents a set of facts which demand a choice between a determination that a series of unlikely fortuitous accidents and errors occurred and a determination that the destruction of the Rincker House was the result of fraudulent calculation and deception. The latter conclusion would comport with the natural suspicions that any reasonable person would entertain when confronted with the circumstances of this case. Truly, a determination that the destruction of the Rincker House was the result of inexplicable inadvertence rather than fraud seems naive at first blush. However, there is no alternative to that determination in the absence of clear and convincing evidence that a fraud was committed. No matter how suspicious the circumstances surrounding a transaction, the party complaining of the transaction is not released from the obligation to prove the elements of the cause of action.
Therefore, I would affirm.
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:
Related quotes
"The policemen or soldiers are only a gun in the establishments hand. They make the racist secure in his racism."
"In today's climate in our country, which is sickened with the pollution of pollution, threatened with the prominence of AIDS, riddled with burgeoning racism, rife with growing huddles of the homeless, we need art and we need art in all forms. We need all methods of art to be present, everywhere present, and all the time present."
"I don't think it's racism, I think it's economic. But poverty disproportionately affects African-Americans in this country. And it happened because they were poor."
"Don't you ever think that racism that has poisoned the bloodstream of religion, education, jurisprudence, politics, culture -- that it is not existent in FEMA and the Red Cross?"

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Description from the owner
Description from the owner
Bedrooms: 2/
Bathrooms: 2/
Sleeps: 4/
Type: Apt. / Condo
Book this 2 bedroom, 2 bathroom apt. / condo in Yuma today! A total of 4 people can sleep here comfortably. This property has been booked 3 times.
Guests can enjoy a pool, outdoor grill, and air conditioning 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 $600.00, depending on travel dates.
The owner responds to 100% of inquiries and last updated the property's calendar 3 weeks ago.
Proximity to TripAdvisor's Top Yuma Attractions
Proximity to TripAdvisor's Top Yuma Attractions
Reviews (0)
Also consider
- FlipKey has rentals in over 11,000 destinations around the world:
- Florida vacation rentals- 44,309 rentals from $89/night
- Southwestern Utah vacation rentals- 381 rentals from $75/night
- Mount Lemmon vacation rentals- 110 rentals from $125/night
- Asilah vacation rentals- 32 rentals from $41/night
- Bisbee vacation rentals- 19 rentals from $99/night


text:
Pinwheel Appetizers
Total Time
Prep 15 mins
Cook 0 mins
I found this recipe in one of my magazines. I haven't tried it yet, but it sounds good.
Ingredients Nutrition
- 1 (8 ounce) package cream cheese, softened
- 1 tablespoon grated onion
- 1 teaspoon horseradish
- 1 dash Worcestershire sauce
- thinly sliced ham or beef
- Blend cream cheese, onion, horseradish, and Worcestershire sauce until of spreading consistency.
- Separate the meat slices. Overlap the pieces slightly. Lay out three rows of meat in such a way that a rectangle is formed.
- Spread the cheese mixture over the meat and roll up jelly roll fashion.
- Chill thoroughly. Just before serving, slice into 1-inch slices.
Most Helpful
This is so easyand so tasty. I cut the recipe back to make 8 appetizers. Made them early in the day, cut & served them at midnight New Yeas Eve. I used roast beef and it really went well.


text:
Turmeric Orange Ginger Infused Rice
Total Time
Prep 15 mins
Cook 20 mins
I made up this recipe from the only turmeric rice recipe I found on Zaar. It was made totally on the fly, and turned out delicious. I hope you feel the same. Rather than writing a review on the original recipe I thought it better to post a different one, since I had made several changes, instead of singling them out in my review of the first one. The mint adds just a hint of freshness to the rice, the mango a small sweetness along with the orange water, the toasted pine nuts add great crunch and texture, and the ginger/garlic marry well with all other flavors without being overpowering.
Ingredients Nutrition
- 1 cup rice (short or long grain, not Aborio)
- 1 tablespoon butter
- 1 finely minced garlic clove
- 1 tablespoon freshly and finely minced gingerroot
- 1 tablespoon frozen orange juice concentrate, thawed
- 1⁄2 cup dried mango
- additional water, for cooking rice
- 1⁄2 teaspoon salt
- 1⁄4 teaspoon cinnamon
- 1 teaspoon turmeric
- 1 pinch of freshly cracked black pepper
- 1⁄2 cup toasted pine nuts
- four finely minced mint leaf (lemon balm will work well also)
- olive oil (for drizzling)
- Take ½ cup diced dried mango in a small cup and add 1 tablespoon thawed frozen orange juice concentrate.
- Add enough very warm, but not hot, water to cover. Let sit to plump and infuse mango with orange juice.
- Meanwhile, melt butter over low-medium heat in 2 quart saucepan, but do not brown.
- Add garlic and ginger to butter and let combine until entire mixture is no longer raw and cooked to infuse the butter. Do not brown.
- Drain mango, take juice and pour into measuring cup and add water to equal 1 ¾ cup.
- Add liquid to saucepan and bring to a boil. Add rice, salt, cinnamon and pepper and turmeric.
- Cover and simmer about 15 minutes til rice is tender and all liquid is absorbed. Remove from heat, covered.
- Then add macerated mango, fluffing with a fork. Recover. Before serving, sprinkle with freshly minced mint and pine nuts. Refluff. Taste for seasoning (salt and pepper), and adjust to taste.
- Drizzle with Extra Virgin Olive Oil and serve. Enjoy.
Most Helpful
This is delicious! I had it with steamed sole & added a garnish of mint and also added some dried hot red peppers to the recipe for some heat. I am dairy-free, so used extra virgin olive oil in place of the butter! I will definitely be making this dish again. I like Barbry T's idea of dried apricots - will have to try that too!
This is outstanding! The only change I made was to use dried apricots rather than mango (which I dislike rather intensely). The only other "fruity" rice dish I have made in the past was w-a-y too sweet...and this isn't. The balance of flavors is perfect to my taste.


text:
Russian Pickled Mushrooms
Total Time
Prep 15 mins
Cook 5 mins
The Russians really like pickles and most of their summer vegetables are pickled to make it through the long winters. These mushrooms are good served over fresh lettuce or served with toothpicks for a quick appetizer.
Ingredients Nutrition
- 1⁄4 cup dry white vinegar
- 1⁄4 cup red wine vinegar
- 3 tablespoons water
- 2 teaspoons olive oil
- 2 large garlic cloves, crushed
- 1 teaspoon sugar
- 1⁄2 teaspoon dried basil
- 1⁄2 teaspoon dried thyme
- 1⁄4 teaspoon salt
- 1⁄4 teaspoon pepper
- 12 ounces mushrooms, cut into quarters
- In a small saucepan, combine all ingredients, except for the mushrooms.
- Bring to a boil over medium heat and cook for 3 minutes.
- Add mushrooms and when mixture boils again continue to cook and stir, 1 minute more.
- Chill several hours or overnight to blend flavors.
- Serve cold.
- Preparation and cooking time does not include flavor blending time.
Most Helpful
Great! Nice bold flavor that doesn't need too much pickling time and complements the mushrooms very well. I've snacked on a few along with a cold beer which was a great combo and plan to serve the remainder along with lettuce as a salad tonight.
Quite tart and tasty! These are wonderful on their own, but would be a nice addition to any buffet or "bite" size appetizer tray. I will make these again and again. The thyme is the star here! Made for Football Divisional Playoffs Week, 2010.
This made a great addition to our Eastern European dinner tonight! I didn't marinate quite overnight, but I still loved the flavor! Thanks morgainegeiser! Made for ZWT4.


text:
21st Annual Italian Festival
|Thursday, May 19, 2016
|5 pm – 9 pm
|Friday, May 20, 2016
5 pm – 10 pm
|Saturday, May 21, 2016
|9:00 am (Cannoli Run)
|10:00 am (Outside activities, including food, crafts and children's games)
|11:00 am – 8:00 pm (Full Festival)
"Benvenuti" ~~~~~ "Welcome"
A word from our pastor…..
…..And the St. Philip Neri Parish community warmly welcomes one and all once again.
Our patron, Saint Philip Neri, known as the "Apostle of Joy," set an example for us as we show and share our happiness in God's abundance and love.
We have been very fortunate for the 21 years that we have sponsored our festival, and it is our great pleasure to extend that celebration to include the whole community. We hope that you and your families, and friends too, will experience the joy and blessings that abound within our parish community.
"Come, Share our Joy!!"
Fr. John P. Giuliani, C.O.
Pastor, St. Philip Neri Catholic Church & Our Lady of Grace
Location & Directions
St. Philip Neri's Italian Festival takes place on the church grounds located at 292 Munn Road in Fort Mill, SC. Take I-77 to SC Exit 85. Turn east on Rt. 160 toward downtown Fort Mill. Beyond the I-77 Interchange, take right at first traffic light onto Munn Road. Travel a distance of approximately one-half mile – the church is on the right side. Follow the signs….you can't miss it.
View Larger Map
Volunteer Opportunities
Numerous volunteers are needed to ensure the successful operation of the Italian Festival. Please remember, great things happen when we work together for the common good. Please check out Volunteer Opportunities to review the many areas in which help is needed. Thanks to all, in advance, for your time and dedication.
A Heartfelt Thank You
Thank you to these Platinum Sponsors for their generous support of our Italian Festival.
For a complete list of Sponsors, Vendors, and Artisans and Crafters for the 21st Annual Italian Festival, refer to Festival Participants


text:
Published Dec 3, 2016
Published Sep 24, 2016
Published Sep 13, 2011
Hey, Thank you for dropping by. I hope you will enjoy your stay here.
Garage Doors SetWritten Sep 19, 2016
Today i finished my Fake GarageDoors set for Sims 4. Now you can also build houses with what looks like a Garage untill we finaly have some... Ready to download October 1st... ...More
it's been a whileWritten Sep 05, 2016
It HAS been a while, but i finaly found some time to start something new.. The Kayo Bathroom, all inspired from the Latis one, but all new meshes for Sims 4.. Here's a preview picture for the set in progress for you all!! ...More
Working on the Nicole TeenroomWritten Feb 22, 2016
Just a work in progress! ...More
kai RayOct 01, 2016
Thanks agin for your help and wonderull crestions
PiggletSimmerJun 27, 2016
I love all of your sims 3 creations. my game is going to be confused because of everything im downloading
eliza78grJun 22, 2016
Your pure living(room) is by furthest my favourite set in tsr. Thank you
We have detected that you are using an Ad-blocker plugin. This means our main source of income to cover bandwidth costs is blocked when you are using our free service. We would ask that you whitelist us and allow ads to show.
Anyone using an Ad-blocker plugin will be forced to wait 30 seconds instead of 10 on the "please wait" page.
VIP Membership
For as little as $3.50 per month you can become a VIP member. This lets you use our service free of all ads and unlocks access to our popular Download Basket and Quick Download features.
Not a Member yet?
Click here to Register now


text:
Recently added item(s) ×
You have no items in your shopping cart.
In stock
iShopping.pk brings you the best price for Sinbo Latte Mixer Turbo Whisker (STO-6516) with 1 year official warranty and free shipping all over Pakistan.
Stainless steel housing
Elegant, exquisite and simple design
Very convenient to mix sauce or eggs etc
Easy storage, light weight and portable
Suitable for home, and outdoor use
2pcs × AA batteries (not included)
Be the first to review this product
Check items to add to the cart or select all
Cambridge Hand Mixer (HM-0302)
Russell Hobbs Desire Hand Mixer (18966-56)
Black & Decker Hand Mixer (M350)
Moulinex Easy Max Hand Mixer (ABM11A30)
© Copyright 2011-2016 iShopping.pk. All rights reserved.
Please wait...
* Required Fields
I accept Warranty Terms & Conditions*
« Back to Login
Please enter your email address below. You will receive a link to reset your password.
« Cancel


text:
Saturday, 10-December-2016 07:56
All categories
Civil society
Yemen in news
Yemenis abroad
Home Page
Yemenis abroad
Civil society
Yemen in news
comments in
A message to woman engaging in political battlefields
I can't Agree more
Relations Between Regime and Opposition
thank you for this site GUYS.We need it sincerely
Democracy could not jump
Thanks dearfor your intellectual aspects about DEMOCRACY.you are always great EBTIHAG
War Without End on Congo's Women
Sunday, 06-January-2008
Project Syndicate
- NEW YORK – The violence in Congo is unspeakable. But, if the horror of Congo's recent wars – which have killed more people than any war since World War II – is to end, the unspeakable must be spoken.
Across the eastern regions of the Democratic Republic of Congo, government soldiers, members of renegade government military units, and myriad militias are gang raping untold thousands of women. They are making sex slaves of some women, branding some victims like cattle, and maiming and mutilating women and girls, some as young as three years old, by destroying their vaginas and other internal organs.
Sometimes, the gunmen force their victims' fathers, brothers, and husbands to rape them, or the women to eat the flesh of their murdered relatives. Afterward, many of the women find themselves utterly alone as they suffer the physical and psychological effects of trauma and cope with destitution, unwanted pregnancies and children, HIV/AIDS, and ostracism by their loved ones who shun them as "diseased" or "tainted."
Who are these killers and rapists, these men who have committed appalling crimes for more than a decade with complete impunity? Many are the so-called "genocidaires" who fled from Rwanda into Congo after participating in the massacre of 800,000 Tutsis in 1994. Others are Rwandan rebels and members of Congo's army. Still others are men and boys recruited and press-ganged into militia units.
Violence has displaced more than 350,000 people in eastern Congo since the beginning of 2007. Recently, thousands more fled fresh outbreaks of fighting between local militias and supporters of Laurent Nkunda, a renegade general of Congo's army, who has rejected a call to begin disarming his troops. A United Nations peacekeeping force deployed in eastern Congo was supposed to have protected the region's civilians; the peacekeeping force's failure to safeguard the women has gone unremarked, in part, because a veil of silence surrounds what is occurring.
Women in the eastern Congo have no say in the decision-making that drives the conflict consuming so many of their lives. They have no access to political and economic power in a society that considers them of scant value.
Congo's government has undertaken no significant effort to bring those responsible for these gender atrocities to justice; new laws have paid lip service to sexual violence, but no one has been prosecuted. The international community, too, has failed. The International Criminal Court in The Hague, which is investigating the crimes in eastern Congo, has only this week indicted the first Congolese militia commander for gender-based crimes.
It is Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon's duty to speak up, to take a leadership role, to bring this situation before the Security Council, call for it to meet in a special session, and urge it to take effective action immediately. Thousand more peacekeepers – let many of them be women – must be deployed in the affected provinces.
The Chief Prosecutor of the ICC, Luis Ocampo Moreno, should be urged to accelerate his investigations and, once the evidence is sufficient, bring charges against those who have committed these crimes or failed to discipline or prosecute the perpetrators. The local authorities should be assisted in efforts to pursue, arrest, and prosecute accused perpetrators before new local tribunals that enjoy significant prosecutorial and police powers. Support should be given to courageous local women's groups that are providing care to the victims. Medical and other assistance is needed to treat the overwhelming numbers of victims.
If the people with the power to end the violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo maintain their silence and continue to do nothing, the perpetrators will grow only bolder in their destruction of women's lives. When impunity for unspeakable acts goes unchallenged, those acts become even more unspeakable.
Maryam Elahi is chair of the International Human Rights Committee of the American Bar Association and director of the International Women's Program at the Open Society Institute in NY.
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2007.
More from "Articles"
Yemeni Female Prisoners: Between Bitterness And Social Rejection
Poverty And Early Marriage Two Sides For The Same Problem
When Children Are Raped By Their Protectors
Children Harmed By Official Negligence
Death Stole Them But Their Work Immortalized Them
Other titles:
Saudi aggression airstrike kill Mother, her 3 children
Saudi aggression jets strike Sanhan, Bani Bahlol, targets houses, farms
Parliament debates National Salvation Government's new program
5 citizen martyred from Saudi brutal airstrikes on Saada
Saudi Aggression airstrikes kill civilian in Saada
Saudi aggression renews air striking capital Sanaa
Saudi brutal airstrikes hit Bilad al-Ros again, severely injure little girl
Army fires missiles on Saudi-paid mercenaries in Lahj
Saudi aggression launch 24 air strikes on Saada, dropping cluster bombs
6 Pakistani sailors killed in Saudi airstrike off Mokha, others still missing
Saudi warplanes bomb mountainous road of Blad al-Rous again
Saudi aggression air strikes kill woman, wound 2 daughters in Baqim
Rocketry forces launch 2 ballistic missiles on Saudi-paid mercenaries
Saudi aggression jets strike Sanhan 11 times
Students demand world to stop ongoing Saudi brutal airstrikes
Army launches missiles on Saudi mercenaries in Marib
Aggression jets resume striking road linking capital with Dhamar
2 citizen injured in Saudi missile shelling in Saada
Many mercenaries killed in Marib
Sudan congratulates Yemen National Salvation Government
Army's artillery targets gathering of Saudi mercenaries in Nehm
Saudi aggression jets strike Moton
Saudi warplanes kill 4 children of one family in Marib
Army hits gathering of mercenaries in Taiz
Army artillery hit mercenary gathering in Lahj
Saudi aggression airstrike kill Mother, her 3 children
Thursday, 08-December-2016
A mother and her three children were killed when Saudi aggression warplane struck her home in Bakim district of Saada province overnight, a security official said on Thursday.
The targeted house belongs to citizen, Jabir Jubran, and the victims were his wife and his three children.
Saudi aggression jets strike Sanhan, Bani Bahlol, targets houses, farms
Thursday, 08-December-2016
Saudi aggression warplanes launched four strikes on Sanhan and Bani Bahlol district southeast the capital Sanaa overnight, a security official said on Thursday.
The strikes targeted al-Tikhraf area, causing large damage to resident's houses and farms.
Parliament debates National Salvation Government's new program
Wednesday, 07-December-2016
On Wednesday, Parliament took up debate on the new National Salvation Government's program ahead of a confidence vote expected to be very soon.
The session led by parliament speaker Yahya al-Raiee with the attendance of the parliament members and members of the new cabinet, including prime minister Abdulaziz bin Habtour.
The program was presented by bin Habtour and his cabinet
5 citizen martyred from Saudi brutal airstrikes on Saada
Wednesday, 07-December-2016
Five citizens were martyred and six others wounded when the Saudi aggression warplanes targeted a farm in Baqim district of sadaa province overnight, a security official said on Wednesday.
The raid hit the villagers' farm and badly affected the neighboring farms and destroying a car.
Saudi Aggression airstrikes kill civilian in Saada
Wednesday, 07-December-2016
A citizen was martyred and another wounded when Saudi aggression warplanes renewed Wednesday morning striking Bakim district in the northern province of Saada overnight, as well as other districts, a security official said.
Meanwhile, the warplanes launched more than
Saudi aggression renews air striking capital Sanaa
Wednesday, 07-December-2016
Saudi aggression warplanes renewed air striking the capital Sanaa overnight with a series of brutal raids, an official said on Wednesday.
The strikes targeted Ayah roundabout three times and another violent strike struck Attan area.
The strikes severely damaged homes, public and private properties.
Saudi brutal airstrikes hit Bilad al-Ros again, severely injure little girl
Tuesday, 06-December-2016
A little girl was critically wounded after Saudi aggression air strikes struck her village overnight in Bilad al-Ros district southeast of the capital Sanaa, officials and residents said on Tuesday morning.
The strikes hit the home of resident Abdulkarim
Army fires missiles on Saudi-paid mercenaries in Lahj
Tuesday, 06-December-2016
The army and popular committees' missile forces fired rockets on gatherings of Saudi-paid mercenaries in Karich district of southern Lahj province, a military official said on
Saudi aggression launch 24 air strikes on Saada, dropping cluster bombs
Monday, 05-December-2016
Saudi aggression warplanes launched 24 air strikes on several areas of Bakim district in Saada province over the past hours, dropping in some raids cluster bombs, a security official said on Monday.
The official said the strikes targeted Menabih, Thaban, Al Maghram and Al Zamah areas of the border district, killing a mother and her two daughters, as
6 Pakistani sailors killed in Saudi airstrike off Mokha, others still missing
Monday, 05-December-2016
Six Pakistani sailors were killed overnight when American-Saudi aggression fighter jets hit directly their boat off the coast of Mokha in Taiz province, an official said on Monday.
The official said the boat was carrying 12 Pakistani nationals fishing on the Red Sea when it was air attacked, killing six Pakistani fishermen while the others were still missing.
who we are | Advertising |
contact us
All rights reserved © Almotamar Net, Developed by


text:
There are two movies in "Jackie." One of these movies is just OK. The other is exceptional. The first one keeps undermining the second.
There are two movies in "Jackie." One of these movies is just OK. The other is exceptional. The first one keeps undermining the second.
Things to Come is the detailed tapestry of one woman's life, as she moves through an important transition.
Roger Ebert on James Ivory's "Howards End".
"The Ballad of Narayama" is a Japanese film of great beauty and elegant artifice, telling a story of startling cruelty. What a space it opens…
A table of contents featuring all of Jana Monji's coverage from this year's AFI FEST.
A recap of the fifth annual Los Cabos International Film Festival, including reviews of select titles.
For the 36th installment in his video essay series about maligned masterworks, Scout Tafoya examines Ken Russell's "Lisztomania."
A reposting of Brent Northup's review of "Shut In."
A review of the new documentary, "Magicians: Life in the Impossible."
FFC Pablo Villaça explores the themes at the heart of Denis Villeneuve's sci-fi film "Arrival."
A report from a special Washington D.C. premiere of "Jackie," featuring a Q&A with director Pablo Larraín and Oscar-winning actress Natalie Portman.
A piece on the experience gained from seeing bad movies.
Families can go along for years without ever facing the underlying problems in their relationships. But sometimes a tragedy can bring everything out in the open, all of sudden and painfully, just when everyone's most vulnerable. Robert Redford's "Ordinary People" begins at a time like that for a family that loses its older son in a boating accident. That leaves three still living at home in a perfectly manicured suburban existence, and the movie is about how they finally have to deal with the ways they really feel about one another.
There's the surviving son, who always lived in his big brother's shadow, who tried to commit suicide after the accident, who has now just returned from a psychiatric hospital. There's the father, a successful Chicago attorney who has always taken the love of his family for granted. There's the wife, an expensively maintained, perfectly groomed, cheerful homemaker whom "everyone loves." The movie begins just as all of this is falling apart.
The movie's central problems circle almost fearfully around the complexities of love. The parents and their remaining child all "love" one another, of course. But the father's love for the son is sincere yet also inarticulate, almost shy. The son's love for his mother is blocked by his belief that she doesn't really love him, she only loved the dead brother. And the love between the two parents is one of those permanent facts that both take for granted and neither has ever really tested.
"Ordinary People" begins with this three-way emotional standoff and develops it through the autumn and winter of one year. And what I admire most about the film is that it really does develop its characters and the changes they go through. So many family dramas begin with a "problem" and then examine its social implications in that frustrating semifactual, docudrama format that's big on TV. "Ordinary People" isn't a docudrama; it's the story of these people and their situation, and it shows them doing what's most difficult to show in fiction, it shows them changing, learning, and growing.
At the center of the change is the surviving son, Conrad, played by a wonderfully natural young actor named Timothy Hutton. He is absolutely tortured as the film begins; his life is ruled by fear, low self-esteem, and the correct perception that he is not loved by his mother. He starts going to a psychiatrist (Judd Hirsch) after school. Things are hard for this kid. He blames himself for his brother's death. He's a semi-outcast at school because of his suicide attempt and hospitalization. He does have a few friends, a girl he met at the hospital, and another girl who stands behind him at choir practice and who would, in a normal year, naturally become his girlfriend. But there's so much turmoil at home.
The turmoil centers around the mother (Mary Tyler Moore, inspired casting for this particular role, in which the character masks her inner sterility behind a facade of cheerful suburban perfection). She does a wonderful job of running her house, which looks like it's out of the pages of Better Homes and Gardens. She's active in community affairs, she's an organizer, she's an ideal wife and mother, except that at some fundamental level she's selfish, she can't really give of herself, and she has, in fact, always loved the dead older son more. The father (Donald Sutherland) is one of those men who wants to do and feel the right things, in his own awkward way. The change he goes through during the movie is one of the saddest ones: Realizing his wife cannot truly care for others, he questions his own love for her for the first time in their marriage.
The sessions of psychiatric therapy are supposed to contain the moments of the film's most visible insights, I suppose. But even more effective, for me, were the scenes involving the kid and his two teen-age girlfriends. The girl from the hospital (Dinah Manoff) is cheerful, bright, but somehow running from something. The girl from choir practice (Elizabeth McGovern) is straightforward, sympathetic, able to be honest. In trying to figure them out, Conrad gets help in figuring himself out.
Director Redford places all these events in a suburban world that is seen with an understated matter-of-factness. There are no cheap shots against suburban lifestyles or affluence or mannerisms: The problems of the people in this movie aren't caused by their milieu, but grow out of themselves. And, like it or not, the participants have to deal with them. That's what sets the film apart from the sophisticated suburban soap opera it could easily have become. Each character in this movie is given the dramatic opportunity to look inside himself, to question his own motives as well as the motives of others, and to try to improve his own ways of dealing with a troubled situation. Two of the characters do learn how to adjust; the third doesn't. It's not often we get characters who face those kinds of challenges on the screen, nor directors who seek them out. "Ordinary People" is an intelligent, perceptive, and deeply moving film.
This message came to me from a reader named Peter Svensland. He and a fr...
A piece on the experience gained from seeing bad movies.
A clip of Gene Siskel & Roger Ebert defending Star Wars on ABC.
For the 36th installment in his video essay series about maligned masterworks, Scout Tafoya examines Ken Russell's "L...


text:
Halloween Live Wallpapers Free
by: blakit • 6.2K
All Android applications categories
All Android games categories
by: blakit • 6.2K
Holidays Pumpkins Live Wallpaper.
Halloween pumpkins which you can smash, vampire smile, flying witch, Halloween castle - horror and fun! This Halloween Live Wallpaper lets you play with pumpkins under the moonlight, turn the window lights on and off, make the witch fly across the night sky! Make the bat scream and see the owl blinking! Turn the sound on and off by tapping the moon. Listen to the sound of horror that scares the hell out of you! But still it's fun!
Enjoy Free Halloween LWP! Happy Halloween! Let the Nightmare be fun!
You like scary creatures? Here is some good news: they all are ready for Christmas and New Year! Your favorite Halloween characters are now dressed up for scary Xmas party in Scary Christmas and New Year Live Wallpaper! A new character ghost and Christmas countdown. The Nightmare Before Christmas.
You can also select Love Pumpkins (made especially for St. Valentine's Day) with St. Valentine's Day countdown or St. Patrick's Day Live Wallpaper with St. Patrick's Day countdown. Shamrocks decorate the wallpaper and the characters have got festive attributes. The wallpaper became greener and a bit more Irish. Enjoy the St. Patrick's spirit!
Each season brings up new features in this Live Wallpaper. Choose the holiday you like and enjoy the festive spirit with us!
Features Holidays Pumpkins Live Wallpaper Free:
- Several holidays. Choose a holiday in Settings.
- Holidays countdown Live Wallpaper
- Interactive Live Wallpaper (LW)
- Funny scary creatures
- Horror sounds (tap the moon)
- Scrolling. Wallpaper scrolling is also supported on Samsung Galaxy S 3, S 4 and HTC Sense
- The button to select and install Live Wallpaper
Like Live Wallpaper on FB: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Live-Wallpaper/292869810741828
See news and backstage on http://pinknapalm.blogspot.com/
Tags: halloween castle wallpaper , scary christmas wallpaper , 貓頭鷹 桌布 , festa de natal assustadoras , wallpapers halloween animados , livehintergrund weihnachten katze , scary christmas screensavers , el scary christmas live wallpaper , hintergrund screensaver weihnachtslandschaft anzeigen als zuckerstangen
Users review
from 6.227 reviews
Download Halloween Live Wallpapers Free
Free - V1.6.9 - 7M
More actions


text:
|About Us
Editor's note: Today, Jeff Clark takes us 43 years into the future to answer the question "What went wrong?"
This Explains EverythingBy Jeff Clark
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
For years, historians have argued about the reasons for America's decline. What could have caused the U.S. – which held so much promise when it was born in 1776 – to become the desolate, barren wasteland we now have 280 years later?
We finally know the answer...
Last week, a janitor was clearing out an abandoned locker at the public storage warehouse at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. He was making space for The Exalted Leader of All that is Good and Right in the Universe Mei-Ling Obama's childhood unicorn collection, when he stumbled across a box labeled "Useless Documents."
Along with the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, a binder of women's résumés, and a Chevy Volt operating manual, the janitor found an assortment of envelopes containing what can only be described as "love letters."
One envelope was titled "Ron and Nancy." Another was "Liz and Richard." A third envelope had no label at all, and it contained only one note. It is dated January 1, 2013. And it explains everything.
Read it for yourself...
My love,
My heart is heavy today, and it pains me to write you this letter.
Our relationship isn't working out for me anymore. We seem to be going in two different directions. We want different things. So as hard as this is to do, I'm leaving.
I know it hurts. And I wish I could ease your pain by saying something like, "It's not you, it's me." But I can't say that. It is you... entirely you... 100%.
You've changed. You're no longer kind, supportive, and protective – all the traits I fell in love with so many years ago. Instead, you've become untrusting, ungrateful, and abusive. And I can't take it anymore.
You used to trust me. I could go almost anywhere and do almost anything. I could experience everything that life had to offer. No matter what I did, you understood it would benefit both of us.
But now I found out you've been checking my cell phone and monitoring my e-mails. You watch the activity in my bank accounts, and on my credit card statements. You even keep track of what I buy on Amazon.
I know you've been hurt before. So I put up with some of your intrusions. But now it's just too much.
You used to let me dream. Remember... we called it our "American Dream." Whatever I wanted to do, and whoever I wanted to be, you said it was possible. And you would give me the freedom to pursue it.
That's not true anymore. I need to ask for your approval before I do anything. I need to follow your instructions, adhere to your guidelines, and obey your rules. Oh sure, I can still dream. But now it has to be your version of the dream, not mine... not ours... and certainly not "American."
And the real kicker is that even if I somehow still manage to overcome the burdens you piled on my shoulders, and make my own dream come true, you have the nerve to brag to your friends, "See, he couldn't have done it without me."
And I haven't even mentioned the money issues yet...
At first, you didn't ask for much from me... just enough to fund a little project or two. I didn't mind back then. You had our mutual best interest at heart, and you seemed to appreciate my willingness to help out.
But over the years, you gradually asked for more. And I willingly gave, even though I thought some of what you were using the money for was wasteful and even a bit silly. I never doubted your integrity or your honesty when you said "this will benefit both of us."
Of course, that was a lie. You took my money and gave it to your friends. You wasted it on things we don't need and can't afford. You maxed out our credit cards with your foolish schemes. And all the money you claimed to put aside for our retirement is gone.
What's worse is that now when I come home with my paycheck, you're just sitting there at the table with your hand out. No matter how much I give you, it isn't enough. You sneer at me and demand that I give you more. Then you turn all of our friends against me by telling them I'm greedy and unwilling to pay my fair share.
Frankly, I don't know why I've put up with this abuse for so long. I should have left you years ago. But I thought you could change. You promised me four years ago you would. And you made the same promise eight years before that.
But you won't change. You're incapable of it.
As long as I'm around, you'll remain untrusting, ungrateful, and abusive. You'll get worse and worse until your actions finally destroy us both. So for the good of both of us, I'm leaving.
I'm leaving so that I'll be free to enjoy the God-given rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That's what we talked about when we first got together so many years ago. I still believe it's possible... But I'm not sure I can do it with you.
You aren't the same as before.
Without me around to enable your behavior, perhaps you'll finally see what you've become. Maybe then you can finally change.
For your sake, I only hope when that happens it's not too late.
The 1%
Further Reading:
Following the recent election, Jeff spoke with a neighbor of his... who was shocked to find that Jeff was "greedier" than he ever imagined. Get the full story here: A Shocking Story About Greed and Taxes.
Home improvement companies Lowe's and Home Depot soar... shares hit fresh all-time highs.
Big Australian fund EWA quietly touches its highest level in over a year.
Biotech bellwether Amgen is sitting less than 2% off a new all-time high.
Social media companies Groupon and Zynga top a short list of stocks that are down 75%-plus in 2012.


text:
Depth Charge
Release Date: January 1st, 2008
Not Yet Rated|1 hr. 36 min.
Plot Summary
The American captain (Eric Roberts) of a nuclear submarine demands a ransom of $1 billion from the United States.
Cast: Eric Roberts, Jason Gedrick, Chris Warren Jr., David Dayan Fisher, Maury Sterling, Deobia Oparei,
Director: Terrence O'Hara


text:
Nostalgia Fact-Check: How Does the Cranberries' Everybody Else Is Doing It ... Hold Up?
Do you still know all the words to "Linger"? We bet you do.By Amanda Dobbins
Do you still know all the words to "Linger"? We bet you do.By Amanda Dobbins
Enjoy.By Amanda Dobbins
Bieber does it again.By Amanda Dobbins
It's pretty depressing.By Margaret Lyons
"The Joy" samples Johnson's "Different Strokes."By Margaret Lyons
The label will make up for nearly five decades of lost time with the release of a ballet recording.By Caroline Bankoff
We are impressed and slightly intimidated.By Amanda Dobbins
The sunny sound is back.By Amanda Dobbins
Florence is making moves on Robyn in the Best Indie Dancer category.By Amanda Dobbins
Though there was alcohol.By Willa Paskin
It's time to get things started.By Margaret Lyons
Listen to the title track off his new album.By Margaret Lyons
Airing in 2012.By Willa Paskin
It's out August 29.By Amanda Dobbins
Plus: Donald Glover as Childish Gambino, the Rapture, Nas, and more death!By Ray Rahman
See if you can stomach the whole thing.By Amanda Dobbins
"Most people are pretty mediocre on there, so it's good for my ego to play a lot."By Ray Rahman
Blacklight ballet!By Amanda Dobbins
And he didn't cry.By Amanda Dobbins
Full of colors and memories.By Amanda Dobbins
New Tumblr Tracks People Who Are Regretful Over Their Trump Votes
Jon Stewart Has a Very Simple Solution for How to Stop Spreading Fake News
Bernardo Bertolucci Admits Last Tango in Paris Butter-Rape Scene Was Nonconsensual
What's New on Netflix: December 2016
Why the Casey Affleck Sexual-Harassment Allegations Just Won't Stick
Jennifer Aniston Isn't Too Pleased With SNL Impersonating Her Friends Character
A Simple Guide to Westworld's Multiple Timelines
See You in 4 Years, When I Awake From My Medically-Induced Coma
Futurama's Writers Reveal Six Hidden Jokes You Probably Missed
Every One of Donald Trump's Cabinet Picks So Far Opposes LGBT Rights


text: We have eaten before at the Mermaid and have always enjoyed the delicious food, good service and traditional atmosphere. We all choose the 'early menu' which was good value at £21 for 3 courses. The oriental duck pancakes were lovely and just right for a starter and we all choose the steak which was cooked to perfection with a variety... More


text:
Search Profile Post Profile Log In Membership Plan Site Map
Awarded as Best Matrimonial Site...
Call Us : +91-11-47652233
Profile Created for Self , Last Logged In : 10th, July 2016
39 years/ 5Ft. 3In. (160 cm)
Master Degree
Business / Consultant
Lives in India, Tamil Nadu,...
Christian, Christian Tamil
Detailed profile
About MI-347248
I wish to marry a person who is God fearingisn't money minded and ready to accept me as minister of God doing translation work.I am ready to relocate abroad if I get a suitable person to marry.I prefer to marry a sda girl and or one who converts to sda church.Converting to sda church will definitely be worth it. I very strongly believe that sharing the same belief and attending the same church together will keep the marriage intact. I want someone whom I can confide intrustdepend uponshare my feelings i can take care of etc .I am really serious about marriage.Even if the bride has children I can take care of them as my own. I worked as teacher for 2 years in sda school at chengalpet near chennai and started my own school in chennai which i ran for 7 years. In 2010 i disposed off my schoolbought a 15 acre farmhouse in the kalrayan hills at salem and settled there. My bad marriagemy son lives with his mum and parents' recent death rudely shocked me.My sister in UK suggests me to marry someone abroad and move from here inorder to forget my past and old reminders.Hence I decide to leave my farmhouse to a caretaker and settle down abroad.Farming is my source of income here.I translate christian literature from english to tamil which is my ministry.I'm ready to marry either a sda or one who converts to SDA church.Let God's will be done.
All Rights Reserved - MatrimonialsIndia.Com (2000)
Web Design by WeblinkIndia.NET


text:
Fine Art Lamps Beveled Arcs 26"e 3 Light Semi Flush Mount in Muted Silver Leaf
Home > 1800lighting.com > Fine Art Lamps
Semi-flush mount in warm muted silver leaf finish. Features beveled crystal accents. Look for the distinctive crystals, registered trademarks of Fine Art Lamps (Reg. US Pat and TM Off.) 3 Light Semi Flush Mount in Muted Silver Leaf
Fine Art Lamps http://www.1800lighting.com/images/jqzoom/fine art lamps/704340ST_lg.jpg
Only $5,796.00 at 1800lighting.com