text:
Having undesirable fat in different locations of your body can have a considerable effect on your health and self-confidence. While standard weight loss through exercise and diet is a terrific way to slim down overall, even the very best exercises cannot target issue locations like the stomach, inner thighs, arms, and butts. Liposuction is a time tested treatment that is used to get rid of excess fat from specific locations of the body, enabling an individual to shape and contour their body to their taste. Is liposuction right for you? Learn now.
Pros of Liposuction
There are lots of benefits to this cosmetic procedure, including:
• Right away visible changes. Unlike traditional weight loss, liposuction develops changes that are immediately visible in the body. Some distinction is noticeable immediately, and the wanted results are usually accomplished in just a couple of days.
• Proven and safe. This cosmetic procedure has been carried out by skilled specialists all over the world for years and the method has been refined over and once again to be safe and effective.
• Recovery time is normally fast. The downtime needed after having this type of treatment is typically much less than exactly what is needed for other types of cosmetic procedures, consisting of tummy tucks, breast reduction, and more. Individuals who have had the procedure can often go back to work much more quickly than they anticipated and can get back to living a healthy, active lifestyle.
• Weight loss can be permanent. With the ideal maintenance strategies, the fat that was eliminated during the liposuction treatment will not return.
• Complete control over your body. With liposuction, an individual can have complete control over how they want to look, beyond what conventional diet and workout can offer. Giving people this power over their bodies increases self-esteem and assistance individuals feel their very best.
While there countless advantages to liposuction, there are obviously a couple of caveats that need to be taken into consideration before making the decision to progress with the treatment.
Cons of Liposuction
Before having actually liposuction done, it's important to examine the possible disadvantages of the procedure and identify if the advantages exceed the threats in your certain case. Your cosmetic surgeon can assist you find out more about the threats associated with the treatment and can help you choose if moving on is the right thing for you.
• Complications with general anesthesia. Since liposuction is performed under general anesthesia, the treatment brings the same threats as other type of surgery where general anesthesia is used. Underlying medical conditions may enhance these dangers.
• Unfavorable responses. Bruising, bleeding, and pain are all to be expected, however, in unusual cases can cause more considerable issues.
• The possible to acquire the weight back. After having actually liposuction done, it is vital to preserve a healthy diet plan and workout correctly as recommended by your physician. Failure to do so might lead to gaining back the weight that was lost or perhaps even more.
There are dangers associated with liposuction, for lots of people, the advantages far outweigh them. Educate yourself about the procedure by having in-depth conversations with your specialist and consider how liposuction has the prospective to affect you as a distinct individual. Just you and your specialist can figure out if liposuction will provide you with the outcomes you are searching for within your expectations.
Laser Liposuction procedure is a new non invasive procedure to loose unwanted bodyfat in North Miami Oklahoma
Laser liposuction is a newer, minimally intrusive treatment that includes heating the fat cells to melting point and removing the melted fat through a small cannula. The treatment is typically done right in your doctor's office and is an outstanding alternative for people who have less than 500 ml of fat to eliminate from any one area. Laser liposuction can be a safe, complementary treatment to weight loss in order to sculpt the body you've constantly wanted.
Contact a Surgeon in your North Miami Oklahoma today.
If you're thinking about liposuction as a weight-loss solution, it is necessary that you discuss your desires with a certified plastic surgeon in your location. Your cosmetic surgeon will carry out a total examination and health history questionnaire to identify if liposuction can benefit you and assist you reach your physical and psychological objectives. Call today for an assessment and learn more about how liposuction can help you accomplish the body of your dreams.


text:
How to use H2O2 in a bath? How mucch peroxide to add ito the bath water?
Contact Us - About - Sponsors - Stats
Link Exchange - Add URL - How To Exchange Links?
Terms of Service - Privacy Policy - Spam Policy - Disclaimer - Guidelines & Rules
CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with www.netatlantic.com
Copyright 2000 - 2016 www.curezone.org
0.0352 sec from 22.214.171.124
Gallbladder Problems & Remedies
Do You Have One of These Symptoms? Gallstones, Polyps,...
Reverse Type 2 Diabetes
In 3 simple steps, she nails what no one wants to reveal how t...
I Cured My Candida
Eliminate Candida Symptoms Within Hours!
ClarkFx Parasite Tincture
Enhanced all in one Parasite Cleansing Tincture according to...
Probiotics, prebiotics, and enzymes
in one product ProbiCell
The Worlds Best Nutrition Supplement
Optimize your health with a whopping 415 100% or...
Hulda Clark Zapper by ParaZapper
From the Basic 6 zappers in one to the Worlds Best Za...
Google Ads

subset: commoncrawl


text:
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK RTGS HO Branch in PATNA - Address, IFSC, MICR Code
PUNB0758400MICR Code
ASHIANA NAGAR PATNAContact
ASHIANA NAGAR M S SMRITI COMPLEXCity
ASHIANA DIGHA ROADState
What is IFSC Code of PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK situated at ASHIANA NAGAR PATNA- RTGS-HO?
IFSC Code of PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK situated at ASHIANA NAGAR PATNA - RTGS-HO is
What is the meaning of IFSC Code, MICR Codes in Banking industry?
IFSC or Indian Financial System Code is the code allocated to all banks branches. Bank branches use this code to participate in RTGS and NEFT transactions.
What is the significance of IFSC Code and how we can use it?
IFSC Code is a 11 digit code and we can use this code to communicate between different branches of different banks. Upon receiving the request for fund transfer it is easy for a bank to identify the payee branch. First four characters are code of bank, last six digits are branch code and fifth character is left 0, for any future use.


text:
16 Angel Crafts to Make: Homemade Christmas Ornaments & Decorations
Bonus: Get our newsletter & special offers for free. We will not share or sell your email address. View our Privacy Policy
Latest Comments
"I saw this pattern and thought it would be great to go in my gift tins for my homemade spa sets for Christmas. I started the pattern but kept having trouble with the puff stitch. When I try to pull through the loop the hook gets stuck and pull a strand or two out making it look un-neat. Is there a way to prevent this? Could it be the yarn I am using?"
"I love this pattern for making dishcloths! It is so simple and it's so easy to remember. It makes a great,durable dishcloth. Does anyone tried this pattern with that new yarn that is made for making dishcloths? I think it might be a rayon blend. I'm going to try it next time I need dishcloths."
"This is a great beginner project, it was easy to follow and gave great instruction. I was able to work up several of these for co-workers who thought it was so cute. I am going to make several more for my home for company to use when they come over and have coffee."
"These spiral beaded trees are so pretty! For extra sparkle, I am going to place a battery tea light candle in the center of the spiral. Several of these trees would look great placed within a strand of twinkle or small rice lights on a mantle or table center piece!"
"That's a great idea!"
Red and Gold Glitter Ornament
By: Beacon Adhesives
We are adding the craft to your Craft Projects.
The project was added to your Craft Projects.
Click here to view your Craft Projects.
Add some sparkle and shine to your holiday this year. Make your very own Red and Gold Glitter Ornaments to decorate your tree.You can also give these DIY Christmas ornaments to friends during the Christmas season. Easy homemade Christmas ornaments are a great way to show off your creative skills and get in the spirit of the season. For this project, grab glitter, beads and ribbon to get started. Don't make a traditional ornament this year - change red and green to red and gold for an unexpected color scheme. This ornament is super fun to make and is sure to stick out on your tree.
- GEM-TAC Embellishing Glue
- DAZZLE-TAC Jewelry Glue
- Small gold, white pearl, and amber flat back beads
- Clear 4" diameter glass ornament
- Two different patterned holiday ribbons (example uses red & green plaid)
- Fine gold glitter
- Scissors, small funnel, toothpick, small medicine cup.
- Rinse out glass ornament with warm water to wash away any dust.
- Carefully remove the top of the ornament. Mix 1/2 tsp of GEM-TAC with a few drops of water, mixing with a toothpick. Mixture should be thin but not too runny. Pour mixture into ornament and shake and turn ornament to coat the inside of the ball with glue. Turn ball upside down over a paper cup to drain excess glue. Let stand about one minute.
- Place the funnel into opening and pour in at least ½ tsp of gold glitter. Place thumb over opening and shake until the entire inside of the ball is well coated. Let dry overnight and repeat process if any bare spots can be seen. Glue ornament top on with a little DAZZLE-TAC.
- Cut two lengths of the plaid ribbon and glue onto the ball using a bit of DAZZLE-TAC, crisscrossing the ribbon. Repeat process with gold and red ribbon.
- Apply a bead of DAZZLE-TAC between the ribbons and press on the gold, pearl, and amber beads as in the photo. Use a toothpick to gently press them in place. Repeat around the ball until complete. Glue extra beads around top to finish. Tie cord onto cap loop to hang.
Tags / Related Topics
Your Recently Viewed Projects
Images from other crafters
Love these projects? Get MORE delivered to your Inbox – FREE Click Here!
trunkee 0104753
Oct 31, 2012
Looks nice, if a little too 'busy' for my taste (but it's for Christmas, so I can live with that!). Just one 'nit-picking' point - surely it'd be easier to rinse the ornament out (step 1) if we remove the top (1st sentence in step 2) FIRST..?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Are you sure you would like to report this comment? It will be flagged for our moderators to take action.
Thank you for taking the time to improve the content on our site.
Something worth saving?
- SAVE all your favorite crafts
- ADD personal notes
- QUICKLY reference your crafts
Free eBooks
- 11 Crochet Shawl Patterns: Crochet Poncho Patterns, Free Easy Crochet Patterns and More
- 11 DIY Christmas Decorations and Gift Ideas
- 12 Knitted Scarf Patterns: Fabulous Free Knitting Patterns for Beginners
- 16 Free Crochet Hat Patterns, Scarves, and Gloves
- 24 Thanksgiving Dinner Recipes and Fall Craft Projects
- 7 Adult Coloring Pages
- 8 Free Apron Sewing Patterns
- Easy Lace Knitting Patterns
- Jolly Holidays: 15 Free Knit and Crochet Gifts and Holiday Projects
- Quick & Easy Decoupage: 12 Fabulous Mod Podge Projects for Your Home
Our Newest Projects & Articles
- The Thinker Dragon Coloring Page
- Abstract Coloring Pages for Kids
- Spring Buggies Coloring Pages
- Elegant Rose Zentangle Coloring Page
- Zebra Zentangle Coloring Page
- Butterfly Zentangle Coloring Page
- Lion Zentangle Coloring Page
- Giraffe Zentangle Coloring Page
- Ladybug Zentangle Coloring Page
- Bald Eagle Zentangle Coloring Page


text:
Cyril Thereau caused a huge upset when snatching Chievo's victory in the final minute away to a shocked Roma. The Giallorossi were on sparkling form and hoping to continue their march on Europe after a surprise win away to Fiorentina. Bogdan Lobont started just three days after fracturing his nose, as Maarten Stekelenburg is injured and Federico Balzaretti banned. Erik Lamela was rested to test a new strike partnership and 3-4-1-2 system. Chievo were on the fringes of the drop zone, but missed Francesco Acerbi, Sergio Pellissier, Alberto Paloschi and the suspended Luca Rigoni.
Roma Falls to Chievo on 90' Goal
From Football-Italia.net
Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
Paolo Bruno/Getty Images


text:
Vermont Gas raises Phase 2 price tagAugust 03,2014Vt. Gas increases
Phase 2 price tag
BURLINGTON Less than a month after raising the estimated cost of Phase 1 of a natural gas pipeline project by 40 percent, Vermont Gas has announced that the Phase 2 cost is going up as well.
Phase 1, from Chittenden County to Middlebury, is under construction now. The company hopes to follow that up with Phase 2 from Middlebury to the International Paper plant in Ticonderoga, N.Y., with an extension under Lake Champlain.
The paper company is paying most of the cost of Phase 2, and that applies to the $10 million cost increase as well.
Vermont Gas also plans a third phase to extend the pipeline to Rutland.MORE IN This Just InSPRINGFIELD Downtown Springfield has a little-appreciated wow factor. Full Story
Staff Report
SPRINGFIELD A Craftsbury Common woman is charged with mailing... Full StoryWHITE RIVER JUNCTION A judge cast doubt Wednesday on the most serious charge facing a carpenter... Full Story
- Most Popular
- Most Emailed


text:
Written on: 12/06/2010
Heres the Deal with Iams, I have a 3 year old 95 lb. WEIMARANER. Total Stud, super healthy and active, energy..ect.
He has been on Iams since he was a puppy. Anyhow i tried Blue buffalo thinking hey , I need to go healthier.., he immediatly started ripping some stink bombs, even with just a 1/4 mixed in with his Iams. Even if I try to be nice and mix in some ground turkey or meat with his Iams he starts ripping more bombs, brutal!
He is perfect with no weirdness at all with iams and some hot water. I give him a few chicken strips a day also, Good Doggy!!
As rated by our community of reviewers
" Crumbled " Read More
" FOOD MY DOGS LOVE " Read More
Written by lov3mydog5
" Big price increases month on month " Read More
" Bad Food " Read More
" Awful gasoline smell and molds " Read More


text:
Share < br />this article:
Shirtless Brody Jenner Takes a Dip in Hawaii
Barbara DeFranco
| June 1, 2012 - 8:50 am
Share < br />this article:
View Full Size
Return to Story
Brody Jenner
Recommended for you
Scott Eastwood Thinks He Looks Like a 'Total Creep' in These Shirtless Photos
Mark-Paul Gosselaar and the Rest of the 'Pitch' Cast Strip Down for New Photos
Shirtless Scott Eastwood Strutted Around Australia
Please Enjoy These Shirtless Photos of Tyler Posey Cleaning Out His Garage
WATCH: A Shirtless Chris Hemsworth Gets Attacked by a Dog
WATCH: Nick Jonas Debuts 'Champagne Problems' Music Video After Posing Shirtless on Snapchat
Did Liam Payne and Cheryl Cole Confirm that They're Expecting a Baby?
Exes Bella Hadid and The Weeknd Gaze Lovingly at Each Other on the 2016…
Tom Ford 'Declined' to Dress Melania Trump Years Ago
'Hawaii Five-0′ Star Keo Woolford Dies at 49
Kanye West Was Reportedly Suffering from 'Severe Paranoia' and…
Sign Up For The Latest Celebuzz News
Thank you for signing up for our newsletter. You will receive a confirmation shortly.
Sign Up
Top Photos
All »
Eddie Redmayne Meets Queen Elizabeth II, Is Honored with OBE
Lady Gaga Says Fame and Fortune Won't Make You Happy
Rihanna and Prince Harry Getting Tested for HIV Lead Today's Star Sightings
Zendaya Addresses Those Rumors That She and Odell Beckham Jr. Are Rekindling Their Romance
Lady Gaga Wore a $1 Million Hat to the 2016 Victoria's Secret Fashion Show
Kaley Cuoco Celebrates Her Birthday with Boyfriend Karl Cook
You'll Love
Kristen Stewart Stars in Rolling Stones Video
Here Are All the New Albums This Week
What's Up with 'Gilmore Girls' Coffee?


text:
Introducing the PDN, Rangefinder and DPReview Gift Guide
Posted by Sponsored Post on Tuesday November 24, 2015 | Photo Gear
Our team at PDN and Rangefinder has put together our first annual Gift Guide in collaboration with DPReview. It's the perfect companion for this holiday season, and it's available for free online. Pick out some products for fellow photographers and filmmakers, or drop some hints for your own friends and family. Products available on Amazon include direct URLs to streamline your shopping... More ›


text: I went with two friends who had the red dragon and alpenglow roll. I opted for the hor-fun noodles. The service from the waiter was unfriendly and pretentious and the noodles and calamari were tasteless and rubbery. The red dragon sushi was okay, the alpenglow however was unremarkable. Not a place I'd visit again.


text:
Oscar de la Renta
Oscar de la Renta Brown Python Leather Trim Shoulder Tote Bag
Oscar de la Renta genuine python tote bag featuring brown leather trim. Gold toned metal studs. Enamel logo detail at the center front. Lined interior features a zipper pocket and a cell phone pocket. Comes with dust bag.
Made in: Italy
Color: Brown and Tan
Content: Python and Leather
Condition: Pre-owned. This item is in good condition. Light scratching throughout leather details. No other visible signs of wear and tear.
- Total Height: 12"
- Total Length: 14"
- Depth: 6"
- Handle Length: 22.25"
- Handle Drop: 9"
RETURNS: We accept returns of clothing and shoes when notified via email to email@example.com within 3 days of receiving the item/items. Handbags, accessories and jewelry are final sales. We only accept returns on these items if they are in the condition they were received. Items must have original Luxury Garage Sale tags and be unworn.
SHIPPING: Standard shipping in the Continental US is free via FedEx Ground. Second Day Air is $25 and next-day air is $45. International shipments are a flat rate of $45.
- All
- Bags
- Black Friday 2016
- Bags
- Totes
- Brown
- Pre-Owned
- Oscar de la Renta
- Designers
- Frontpage
- New Arrivals
- New-Arrivals-Spring-Bags
- Oscar de la Renta
- $200-500
LGS is not affiliated with OSCAR DE LA RENTA. We guarantee this OSCAR DE LA RENTA item to be authentic. OSCAR DE LA RENTA® is a registered trademark of OSCAR DE LA RENTA.


text:
Contact us
Contact us
Programme Management
If you have any issues and questions, do not hesitate to contact the Pre-Master (English-language) Programme Manager, Ms Chantal de Groot. You can find the contact details below.
Ms Chantal de Groot (email@example.com)
RSM Erasmus University
Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, T-building, Room T05-20
3062 PA Rotterdam
The Netherlands
Admissions & Recruitment
For admissions related questions please contact the MSc Admissions Office at firstname.lastname@example.com
Erasmus Student Service Center (ESSC)
ESSC is the front office of the Erasmus University Central Registration Office, Studielink, the Student Counsellor's Office, etc. You can find the contact details below.
Phone: +31 - (0)10 - 408 23 23
Desk: Burgemeester Oudlaan 50 in Rotterdam Hall E-building, Woudestein Campus (09.30-16.00 hrs; Mondays to Fridays)
You can find more details about their services here.


text:
THIS IS A DIRECTORY PAGE. Britannica does not currently have an article on this topic.
Learn about this topic in these articles:
...teleosts include virtually all the world's important sport and commercial fishes, as well as a much larger number of lesser-known species. Teleosts are distinguished primarily by the presence of a homocercal tail, a tail in which the upper and lower halves are about equal. The teleosts comprise some 30,000 species (about equal to all other vertebrate groups combined), with new species being...


text:
Wrong location?Change it here.
Place of origin: New York, United States
Willow Grove Park Mall PA 19090 Willow Grove, United States
Bala Plaza 19004 Bala-Cynwyd, United States
242 0
South 4th Street 19147 Philadelphia, United States
King of Prussia Mall® PA 19406 King of Prussia, United States
18,396 labels and 117,501 shops worldwide!
© 2016 by TLF LabelFinder GmbH


text:
If you are interested in procuring an email address or sub-domain at hazlett.us, please contact Joey Hazlett via email to initiate the process.
Check if the sub-domain you want is available:
Some domains already in use:
The fine print:
When procurring an email address or domain, all rights to the domain are reserved by Joey Hazlett. You agree that you will be leasing this email address or domain name. You may cancel at any time without expectation of a refund. A calendar year is defined as starting January 1 at 00:00 and ending December 31 at 23:59. Requesting a domain or email address anytime within a calendar year will be valid until the end of that calendar year, the price is not prorated. Renewal fees are due no later than 14 calendar days after the end of the expiration date of December 31st. Any email addresses or domains that have not been renewed will be deleted January 15th of each year.


text:
Sci fi/Fantasy image byAmber Gilbert
this is a recent pic that I did, I thought 'Hey! Almost everyone else on elfwood has done a faery of some kind so I think I'll try one too.' I like htis one I think.
Published More than a year ago
Category Fantasy
Be the first to favourite this image.


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.
April 10, 2012
CHRISTOPHER J. REICHERT, PLAINTIFF,v.ELIZABETHTOWN COLLEGE, ET AL.,DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff Christopher Reichert brought this action against Elizabethtown College, Dr. Carroll Tyminski, Dr. Mimi Staulters, Dr. Rachel Finley-Bowman, Dean Marie Calenda, Provost Susan Traverso, and Dr. Susan Pitcher under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the Rehabilitation Act ("RA") for failure to provide reasonable accommodations for his disabilities and for creating a hostile environment. He also sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 for conspiracy to discriminate against him based on his disabilities and under Pennsylvania law for breach of contract. The Court conducted a bench trial from January 9, 2012 through January 12, 2012. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds in favor of Defendants.
A. Reichert's Disabilities
Reichert suffers from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ("ADHD"), epilepsy, and other challenges in learning, including "extremely slow language processing." (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 43, 117-18, 128.) His disabilities create difficulties with comprehension, organization, and time management. (Id. at 46, 73, 171.) As a result of Reichert's ADHD and slow language processing, Reichert has poor listening comprehension and frequently interrupts people. (Id. at 44.) Reichert also has seizures related to his epilepsy, which can be brought on by a lack of sleep. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 114; Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 130.)
Reichert's ADHD life coach, Casey Dixon, testified that Reichert's greatest deficit is his slow processing speed, which places his academic fluency in the first percentile for his college year. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 39.) Due to his processing disorder, Reichert has a hard time listening and processing speech. (Id. at 118.) As a result, he must spend more time to accomplish the same work as his peers, causing him extreme frustration. (Id.) Dixon explained that Reichert's frustration manifests in trembling and eye rolling and leads him to raise his voice. (Id. at 49.) Reichert also mutters to himself as a compensatory strategy to help him focus, and he was often not aware of his muttering at the time. (Id. at 109, 120.)
Reichert's disabilities adversely affected his performance in college. (Id. at 128.) He had difficulty comprehending lectures and focusing in class. (Id.) If he did not get enough sleep, he might appear disheveled. (Id.) He sometimes blurted out inappropriate comments in class. (Id. at 129.) However, Reichert testified that none of these challenges affect him when he is teaching because he is "hyper-focused" and not distracted. (Id. at 130.)
B. Reichert's Accommodations and Initial Experience at Elizabethtown College
In Spring 2007, Reichert was accepted to Elizabethtown College. (Id. at 133.) Reichert hoped to be a teacher, so he and his mother evaluated colleges based on their education departments and disability services offices. (Id. at 133-35.) Reichert and his mother attended Elizabethtown College's open house, and they spoke with Dr. Tyminski, Chair of the Education Department, and Shirley Deichert, Director of Disability Services, to learn how the college supports its students with disabilities. (Id. at 133-35.) After enrolling at Elizabethtown College, Reichert submitted to the college his high school psychological evaluations, which document his learning disabilities. (Trial Ex. P-1 [Psychological Assessments] at 1.) Reichert's evaluations note the support services and accommodations that he received in high school, and that when in college, Reichert would benefit from a note-taker for his classes. (Id. at 1, 4.)
In July 2007, Reichert's high school psychologist prepared a psychoeducational evaluation addendum to provide recommendations to Elizabethtown College. These recommendations include:
(1) appropriate modifications and accommodations in all classes, including foreign language classes, or a substitute for the foreign language requirement; (2) 50 percent or greater extended time for class assignments and tests; (3) development of Reichert's self-advocacy skills with support from the disability services office and (4) the option for Reichert and his parents to pursue an updated independent evaluation at their own expense if Reichert's needs change. (Id. at 5.)
In August 2007, Elizabethtown College approved the following accommodations for Reichert for the Fall 2007 semester: (1) 100 percent extended time for tests; (2) a distraction-free test site; (3) a note-taker if needed; (4) books on Kurzweil, software that scans and reads aloud printed material; (5) a substitution for the foreign language core requirement; and (6) no penalty for in-class misspelling. (Trial Ex. D-3 [Accommodations Sheet, Fall 2007].) In January 2008, the college added priority course scheduling to Reichert's list of accommodations. (Trial Ex. D-4 [Accommodations Sheet, Spring 2008].) Reichert received all of these accommodations as a student at Elizabethtown College. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 138-39, 195-98, 204-05.) Additionally, Reichert received extended time for written assignments, which was added to Reichert's accommodation sheet in Fall 2008, so long as the accommodation did "not jeopardize integrity of [the] course." (Trial Ex. D-6 [Accommodations Letter Additions, Fall 2008]; Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 198.) Director of Disability Services Deichert worked with Reichert in course selection to ease his transition to college. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 137.)
During Reichert's first semester at Elizabethtown College, he was caught cheating on a final exam that he was taking in the disability services office. (Id. at 151.) Rather than report the incident, Reichert's professor, Dr. Toro, allowed him to retake it for partial credit. (Id. at 151-52.) As a result of the cheating incident, however, Reichert was required to take his exams in the education department instead of the disability services office. During an exam in the education department, the proctor left the door open, preventing Reichert from having a distraction-free testing environment. (Id. at 166.) The new Director of Disability Services, Kris Sagun, shared Reichert's concerns about the test-taking environment with his education department advisor, Dr. Staulters, who agreed to allow Reichert to take exams in the disability services office if he was prevented from cheating. (Trial Ex. P-21 [Staulters' Notes] at 3/13/09 entry.)
Throughout Reichert's time at Elizabethtown College, faculty and students raised concerns about whether Reichert completed his own work. For example, during a group project in March 2009, one of Reichert's teammates reported to Dr. Staulters that she was frustrated because Reichert's work "had clearly been plagiarized." (Id. at 3/16/09 entry; Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 57.) The teammate said that a Google search revealed that Reichert's work had been copied from a website, but when she asked Reichert to redo the work, he responded defensively. (Staulters' Notes at 3/16/09 entry.) Additionally, in a May 2009 meeting between Dr. Staulters and Reichert, Reichert's mother, and Dixon, among others, Dr. Staulters asked Dixon and Mrs. Reichert whether either had written Reichert's curriculum-based assessment ("CBA"). (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 65, 167.) Dr. Staulters said that the vocabulary was too complex and that the assignment did not match the materials from class. (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 55.) Dixon and Mrs. Reichert both denied the charge. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 65.)
C. Children's Literature Assignment and Aftermath
During Fall 2008, Reichert took a children's literature course with Dr. Snyder, which required the students to read and write brief reviews of 100 children's books over the course of the semester. Reichert felt overwhelmed by the assignment, and on September 30, 2008, Reichert and Dr. Staulters discussed whether he should drop the course. Because the course was a requirement for his major, Reichert would have to retake the course in a later semester. (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 41.) The education department denied Reichert's request for an exception to that course requirement due to his disability because the department's course work is approved by the Pennsylvania Department of Education for accreditation purposes. (Id.)
Dr. Staulters worked with Reichert on strategies to ease the workload, and they discussed the importance of the assignment for teaching and for his subsequent course work. (Staulters' Notes at 9/30/08 entry.) Upon Reichert's request, Dr. Staulters discussed the assignment with Dr. Snyder who said that "the assignment was a priority particularly because elementary teachers would be required to read hundreds of books over the course of a few months." (Id. at 10/6/08 entry.) However, Dr. Snyder said that "she was very flexible about deadlines for accepting the reading responses and that she had already told [Reichert] he could have extra time if necessary." (Id.) During their meeting, Dr. Snyder told Dr. Staulters about her concerns about Reichert's participation in class, noting that "he tended to make statements that were offensive to her or to some of the other students in class and that . . . he did not think about the impact of what he was saying before he spoke." (Id.) Throughout the semester, Dr. Staulters met with Reichert on numerous occasions to work on strategies to complete the assignment, though Reichert repeatedly expressed his anger over having to complete it. (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 71.)
On the evening of November 10, 2008, Reichert approached Dr. Snyder after class and asked her to halve the number of children's books that he was required to read and review for the class because of his disabilities. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 145; Trial Ex. P-3 [Snyder-Tyminski-Rankin Emails, 11/10/08-11/11/08] at 3.) At that point, Reichert had turned in ten of sixty required responses. (Snyder-Tyminski-Rankin Emails, 11/10/08-11/11/08 at 3.) In an email, Dr. Snyder expressed to Dr. Tyminski her serious concerns about Reichert's request and his conduct in the meeting. (Id.) Dr. Snyder wrote, "I understand that he has some disabilities, but I am concerned that this is a big reduction compared to what's expected for everyone else." She asked, "[w]hat is reasonable for him with regard to this assignment given his disability? He cites stress and epilepsy as the reasons that he can't handle this class." (Id.) Dr. Snyder also noted her more serious concerns about Reichert's conduct during their discussion:
Compounding this issue is the fact that when I suggested that other students are also feeling overwhelmed, he threatened to "get loud" with me if [I] compared him to other students. He asked me to call his mother (!). He was shaking when he talked with me.
I assured him that I would seek guidance from you. I also told him that I felt that he was threatening me and that I wouldn't stand for that kind of language from him.
This seemed to calm him down a bit. The whole conversation was very civil, but still inappropriate in my mind. (Id.) Reichert justified the encounter by noting that Dr. Snyder had insulted him by "comparing [him] to typical, non-disabled peers or adults, and [he's] not them." (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 146.) Reichert said he never threatened Dr. Snyder and agreed with Dr. Snyder's description of the meeting as "very civil." (Id. at 147.)
On November 11, 2008, Dr. Tyminski forwarded Dr. Snyder's email to Stephanie Rankin, Assistant Dean of Students, and Reichert's academic advisors. (Snyder-Tyminski-Rankin Emails, 11/10/08-11/11/08 at 1.) Dr. Tyminski pointed out that Reichert had previously intimidated or threatened his education professors. (Id.) Dr. Tyminski said that she "had complaints from three ED professors before this incident. His classroom behavior is disruptive and rude. He is creating a classroom environment that makes it difficult for his peers to learn." (Id.) Dr. Tyminski sought advice on how to proceed. (Id.) Dean Rankin said that Reichert's continuing outbursts and threatening tone "would be cause for seriously considering whether this student is an optimum candidate for teaching young people." (Id. at 9.) She also noted that Mrs. Reichert had called disability services to complain about the 100-book requirement. (Id.) Dr. Staulters responded that she had repeatedly spoken with Reichert about his conduct and tone, telling Reichert "that he needs to monitor his behavior because when he becomes defensive he comes off as aggressive and very rigid in his thinking, . . . [which] appears unprofessional." (Id.)
Dr. Snyder and Dr. Tyminski further discussed the encounter on November 11, 2008, and Dr. Snyder emphasized that she "never felt not in control of the situation," but that she had thought about her safety when she left the building and wondered if she would find her tires slashed. (Id. at 7.) She also told Dr. Tyminski about Reichert's inappropriate comments that Reichert made in class, including racist remarks and ethnic generalizations. (Id.)
On November 12, 2008, Tyminski called an emergency meeting of the education department to discuss the concerns raised by Reichert's behavior. (Trial Ex. P-5 [Educ. Dep't Emergency Meeting Minutes, 11/12/08]; Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 134.) Dr. Toro brought up Reichert's cheating incident, sleeping in class, and "inappropriate racial and sexist comments," and that his attitude was arrogant and defensive. (Educ. Dep't Emergency Meeting Minutes, 11/12/08 at 2.) Dr. Pitcher, noted Reichert's disruptive side conversations and defensive responses. (Id.) Another faculty member, Dr. Elizabeth Coyle, felt that, based on the comments of others, Reichert was a prime candidate for a risk assessment and suggested that a school safety expert evaluate his case. (Id.) Dr. Tyminski expressed her concerns for the safety of faculty who teach at night and suggested that campus security should be notified. (Id. at 3.) The faculty voted unanimously to remove Reichert from the education program after the Fall 2008 semester because "he does not possess the dispositions necessary to become a teacher." (Id.)
Following the meeting, Dr. Tyminski left a message for Dean Calenda to advise her of the situation. (Trial Ex. P-6 [Phone Message for Calenda from Tyminski, Nov. 12, 2008].) When they later met, Reichert and his mother were in a meeting in the disability services office. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 144.) Dr. Tyminski asked the Reicherts to join them in Dean Calenda's office, where faculty members discussed their concerns and requested a mental health evaluation. (Id. at 145.) Dr. Tyminski also said that the education department was considering barring Reichert from returning to the program. (Id.) Reichert and his parents met with Provost Traverso the following day to object to Reichert's potential removal from the education department. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 159; Trial Ex. P-10 [Traverso Email to Tyminski, 11/13/08].) Provost Traverso overturned the decision to remove Reichert and said that the department would follow its standard process and review his case after the semester concluded. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 159; Traverso Email to Tyminski, 11/13/08.) Provost Traverso urged Reichert to meet with Dr. Tyminski to understand the department's concerns and to learn to show respect for his faculty members. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 159; Traverso Email to Tyminski, 11/13/08.) Provost Traverso also explained the professional standards required to become an educator but that not all students have the necessary maturity level to become a teacher at the time of graduation. (Traverso Email to Tyminski, 11/13/08.) Reichert's mother attributed her son's behavioral problems to his disabilities and insisted that he would achieve his goal to become a teacher. (Id.)
D. Ongoing Concerns Raised by the Education Department
On January 5, 2009, following Reichert's request for a meeting, Dr. Tyminski and Dr. Staulters met with Reichert to discuss their professional expectations for him. They informed him that extended time would sometimes not be appropriate, such as with his upcoming field work, because he would need to prepare lesson plans for classes that he would be teaching the following day. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 161-62, 212; Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 148; Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 75-76.)
During that semester, Reichert was enrolled in the special education block of classes taught by Dr. Staulters. The classes included a field placement at an elementary school, supervised by Barbara Gordon. Dr. Staulters worked extensively with Reichert on lesson planning, and she was regularly frustrated by his lack of preparedness for their meetings. (Staulters' Notes.) Gordon also relayed her concerns about Reichert's teaching, the materials he used in class, and his lesson plans, and when Dr. Staulters discussed these concerns with Reichert, he continually responded defensively. (Id. at 2/25/09, 3/3/09, 3/31/09, 4/1/09, 4/2/09, 4/3/09 entries.).
During the Spring 2009 semester, Reichert continued to have difficulties in his classes. In addition to the March 2009 incident involving Reichert's teammate's allegation of plagiarism, Dr. Staulters also noted that Reichert's presentation was based on old and incomplete information. (Id. at 3/16/09 entry.) Later that semester, Dr. Staulters assigned the students an ungraded, untimed, in- class, individual writing activity. (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 80-81.) Reichert characterized the exercise as a "pop quiz" and complained that he was not permitted to complete the exercise in the disability services office as his accommodations required. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 165-66.) After completing the exercise, students were told to wait in the hallway. Reichert claimed that the talking and laughing in the hallway was "extremely distracting, humiliating, [and] . . an embarrassment." (Id. at 166.) Throughout the year, Reichert turned in assignments after the agreed-upon extended deadlines. (Staulters' Notes.) Dixon intervened by meeting with Dr. Staulters and Provost Traverso and arguing that Dr. Staulters' refusal to further extend deadlines was unfair, and Dr. Staulters relented at Provost Traverso's direction. (Id. at 4/23/09 entry; Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 81-82.)
In August 2009, in advance of Reichert's junior year, Provost Traverso, Dr. Tyminski, Dr. Staulters, and Dr. Sagun met with Reichert, his parents, and Dixon. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 65; Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 202-03.) At that meeting, the Reicherts were informed that Dr. Tyminski was replacing Dr. Staulters as Reichert's advisor, about which the Reicherts were concerned because they viewed Reichert and Dr. Tyminski's relationship as strained. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 65-66.) They also discussed Reichert's accommodations sheet for the upcoming semester, and the faculty members informed the Reicherts that extended time was not be applicable for the methods block course work because the class required field work and not exams. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 66.) Instead, Reichert would have to timely submit his lesson plans, and he could not receive extensions because he would be teaching those lessons shortly thereafter. (Id. at 67-68.) Provost Traverso reminded Reichert that he could take the methods block courses in the following semester and take different courses in the fall semester. (Id. at 68.) Dixon requested advance copies of Reichert's syllabi, which she said was necessary due to his disabilities. (Id. at 66-67.) The faculty said no such accommodation was included on Reichert's accommodation sheet. (Id. at 66-67; Trial Ex. D-3-D-8 [Disability Accommodations Sheets, Fall 2007 to Fall 2009].) Dixon also requested a tutor who had previously taken the methods block courses, and Dr. Sagun responded that she could only a provide a tutor who happened to be in the disability services office at the time when Reichert was requesting a peer tutor. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 68; Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 106.) Finally, Dixon requested that faculty and administrators at Elizabethtown College provide feedback on Reichert directly to her, rather than through Reichert. (Id. at 69.) Again, the faculty members refused this request based on their practice of not working through outside tutors and because Reichert's accommodations list did not include communications with a third party. (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 108-09; Disability Accommodations Sheets, Fall 2007 to Fall 2009.)
On September 1, 2009, at the beginning of the fall semester, all students enrolled in education courses received the education department's new Teacher Dispositions/Foundational Competencies Policy and Acknowledgment Form. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 175; Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 50; Trial Ex. D-10 [Teacher Dispositions/Foundational Competencies].) The policy set out the professional standards that all candidates must achieve: (1) communication/interpersonal skills, including the ability to effectively express themselves in writing and orally, communicate responsively to different perspectives in diverse classrooms, and function effectively with students and parents and collaboratively on a professional team; (2) emotional and physical abilities, including the ability to work under time constraints and concentrate in distracting situations and have the physical stamina to perform additional duties during after-school events; (3) cognitive dispositions, including the ability to organize time and materials and prioritize tasks and adapt to changing situations; and (4) personal and professional requirements, including timely arrival for professional commitments, the ability to respond to constructive review from supervisors, an attitude of integrity, responsibility and tolerance, respect for self and others, and an ability to refrain from emotional, verbal, or physical threats or intimidation. (Teacher Dispositions/Foundational Competencies.) The policy acknowledged the college's legal obligation to provide appropriate accommodations to students with documented disabilities. (Id.) Reichert signed the form. (Id.)
Reichert believed that the policy was specifically designed to address his behavior. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 176.) However, despite the new format, the policy reflected the same expectations that were required of students prior to September 2009. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 185.) These expectations were based on the Pennsylvania Statewide Evaluation Form for Student Professional Knowledge and Practice that the education department was required to use to evaluate all student teachers prior to recommending them for certification by the Pennsylvania Department of Education. (Trial Ex. D-70 [Pa. Statewide Evaluation Form for Student Professional Knowledge and Practice]; Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 185.) The education department decided to formulate the teacher dispositions document after a few students, without documented disabilities, failed to exhibit the professional dispositions necessary to be certified as a teacher despite their strong academic performances. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 187.) The education department modeled the Elizabethtown College teacher dispositions on documents used by the University of Maryland and the University of Texas. (Id. at 186-87.)
Another incident took place in September 2009. Reichert was speaking with a classmate during Dr. Pitcher's class, and another student asked Reichert to stop talking. When Reichert failed to stop, the student cursed at Reichert and asked Dr. Pitcher to repeat himself because he had not heard him. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 86-87.) After class, the student apologized to Dr. Pitcher for the disruption and inappropriate language. (Id. at 87.) He also expressed his frustration over Reichert, and Dr. Pitcher indicated that he could speak with Dean Calenda. (Id. at 86-87.) The student met with Dean Calenda on November 13, 2009 to make a formal complaint. (Id.; Trial Ex. D-53 [Calenda Notes, 11/13/09].) He noted multiple derogatory statements that Reichert had made about his classmates and professors, and he also reported that Reichert had told him that he had cheated on tests and not been caught. (Id.)
In November 2009, Reichert was absent from school for several days due to sickness. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 221.) Reichert received extended deadlines from his professors, which he met. (Id.) During his absence, Reichert mistakenly sent a Facebook friend request to the thirteen-year-old sister of a classmate. (Id. at 180.) The classmate called Reichert, yelled at him, and said he was a pedophile. (Id.) Following their conversation, the classmate and Reichert engaged in an argument over a series of text messages. (Id.; Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 97-100.) The classmate and her friend approached Dr. Staulters about the situation, and Dr. Staulters brought the students to Dr. Tyminski. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 156.) The students expressed fear of retribution from Reichert, and Dr. Tyminski said that if they feel fearful, then they should go to the student life office. (Id.) The students showed the text messages to Kat Matic, Director of Student Rights and Responsibilities. (Id. at 98; Trial Ex. P-46 [Matic, Calenda, Traverso, Dixon Emails, 11/24/09-11/30/09].) Matic described the messages as using inappropriate language and obscenities in anger, but she did not deem them threatening. (Matic, Calenda, Traverso, Dixon Emails, 11/24/09-11/30/09.) The classmate refused to let the messages be copied. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 103.) Dean Calenda later spoke with the classmate, but she ultimately withdrew her complaint. (Id. at 100, 103.) Nevertheless, on November 30, 2009, Reichert received a hearing notice regarding alleged conduct that was "disorderly, lewd, or indecent," and he was required to appear at a hearing on December 3, 2009.
(Trial Ex. P-47 [Hearing Notice, 11/30/09].)
E. Disciplinary Charges, Recommended Removal, and Medical Withdrawal
On December 3, 2009, the faculty of the education department met with Provost Traverso to discuss Reichert. (Trial Ex. P-49 [Educ. Dep't Meeting Minutes, 12/3/09].) Provost Traverso explained that there were three separate pending actions, in which Reichert was entitled to due process before he could be removed from the education department. (Id.) These actions included the charges by students for classroom disruptions and the inappropriate language over text message, and an additional accusation by Professor Wile of plagiarism of a class assignment. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 223; Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 178.) Provost Traverso also noted that the Education Standards Committee was required to evaluate teacher dispositions before recommending his removal from the department. (Educ. Dep't Meeting Minutes, 12/3/09.)
Throughout the Fall 2009 semester, the education department received weekly reports from Reichert's field placement elementary school that he was not meeting standards in the classroom. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 178.). Reichert's supervising teacher, Melissa Elliott, regularly communicated her criticisms to him, and Reichert would often respond defensively and blame his students for his mistakes. (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 122-24.) Reichert made inappropriate comments to his students during lessons. (Id.) For example, he once joked about hanging the students with his tie. (Id. at 121.) In early December 2009, a week before Reichert's scheduled final evaluation, Elliott told Reichert's field placement professor, Dr. Don Myers, that Reichert needed more practice in the classroom and was not ready to move on to student teaching. (Id. at 123.) On December 3, while Elliott met with Reichert to discuss an earlier lesson, she raised her concerns about his overall work throughout the placement. (Id. at 123-24.) During their meeting, Reichert raised his voice, started stuttering and shaking, and then fell to the ground. (Id. at 124.) Elliott, who recognized Reichert was having a seizure, stayed with him until he was transported by ambulance to the emergency room. (Id.) A week later, Reichert returned to the field placement, and while in the parking lot, he received a phone call from Dr. Tyminski informing him that the placement was terminated, and he was not allowed into the school. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 185.) On December 11, Elliott emailed Reichert expressing the inappropriateness of a telephone call that she received at her home from Reichert's mother questioning why he was unable to finish his placement. (Trial Ex. D-94 [Elliot-Reichert Email, 12/11/09].) Elliott told Reichert that if he wanted additional information about the placement termination, then he should reach out to her through the college. (Id.)
Reichert scheduled a meeting for December 9, 2009 with Provost Traverso and Dr. Tyminski to discuss the termination of his field placement. (Trial Ex. P-51 [Tyminski, Graham, Peterson, Calenda Communications, 12/5/09-12/21/09] at 6.) Provost Traverso assured him that the meeting was not a hearing rather was meant to convey information to him about his placement. (Id.) Reichert requested to see his assessments in advance of the meeting, but Provost Traverso refused so that they could review them together. (Id.) Also on December 9, the Education Standards Committee reviewed Reichert's teacher dispositions forms and recommended to Dr. Tyminski that Reichert be removed from the teacher certification track. (Id. at 7.) Dr. Tyminski never acted on the committee's recommendation for Reichert's removal. The December 9 meeting with Reichert never occurred. Instead, in a letter dated December 9, 2009, Reichert's neurologist requested that Elizabethtown College reconsider Reichert's disciplinary status, remove unnecessary stresses that otherwise provoke his physical condition, and permit an immediate medical leave of absence and halting all disciplinary hearings and actions until Reichert's medical condition stabilized. (Id. at 11.)
The college granted the medical withdrawal. (Trial Ex. D-141 [Traverso to Reichert Letter, 1/5/10].) All of the pending hearings were put on hold, to be resumed when Reichert returned to Elizabethtown College. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 113, 207.) Reichert never returned to Elizabethtown College, and instead, weeks after Reichert's withdrawal, he enrolled at Montgomery County Community College for the Spring 2010 semester. (Id. at 18.) Reichert later enrolled at Westminster College in Utah where he received similar accommodations of extended time and assistive technology as he received at Elizabethtown College. (Id. at 7-8; Trial Transcript, 1/9/12 at 85-86.)
Reichert alleges that Elizabethtown College's conduct toward him violates the ADA and the RA. He also claims Elizabethtown College breached a contract it had with him and that its faculty conspired to discriminate against him based on his disabilities in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985.
A. Reichert's ADA and RA Claims
Reichert contends that Elizabethtown College failed to provide reasonable accommodations for his disabilities, which constitutes discrimination in violation of Title III of the ADA. Section 12182(a) provides:
No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a). The term "discrimination" is not directly defined in Title III of the ADA, but the statute includes several general prohibitions, the violation of which constitutes discrimination under section 12182(a). Menkowitz v. Pottstown Mem'l Med. Ctr., 154 F.3d 113, 116 (3d Cir. 1998).
One such general prohibition is the "denial of participation," which sets out that it is discriminatory to subject an individual, on the basis of his disability, to a denial of the opportunity of that individual to participate in or benefit from the services and privileges of an entity. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(I). Additionally, a public accommodation is also prohibited from providing an individual, on the basis of his disability, an unequal opportunity to participate in or benefit from the services and privileges of that entity. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(ii). Title III also sets out "specific prohibitions" that define discrimination, including: a failure to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii). To prove a violation of the ADA, a plaintiff must establish: (1) he is an individual with a disability; (2) the defendant is an entity covered by the ADA; and (3) based on his disability, the plaintiff was denied participation in, or benefits of, the defendant's services or accommodations. See, e.g., Douris v. Dougherty, 192 F. Supp. 2d 358, 368 (E.D. Pa. 2002).
Section 504 of the RA provides that "[n]o otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). To prove a violation of section 504, a plaintiff must prove: (1) he is an individual with a disability; (2) he is otherwise qualified to receive the benefit in question; (3) he was denied benefits of the program solely by reason of his disability; and (4) the program received federal financial assistance. Id. "[I]n looking at whether an individual is otherwise qualified, [a court] must analyze whether the person would be otherwise qualified if reasonable accommodations are made for his/her handicap." Wagner by Wagner v. Fair Acres Geriatric Ctr., 49 F.3d 1002, 1009 (3d Cir. 1995). Courts interpret the RA and ADA consistently, and "the substantive standards for determining liability are the same." McDonald v. Pa. Dep't of Public Welfare, Polk Ctr., 62 F.3d 92, 95 (3d Cir. 1995).
It is not disputed that Reichert is disabled under the ADA and RA and that Elizabethtown College is a covered entity. At issue in this case is whether Reichert was denied participation in, or the benefits of, Elizabethtown College's classes and facilities.
1. No Failure to Accommodate
Section 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii) sets out three requirements that must be met before an entity is obligated to provide a requested modification to a disabled individual. The Court must determine "whether the requested modification is 'reasonable,' whether it is 'necessary' for the disabled individual, and whether it would 'fundamentally alter the nature of'" the service provided. PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661, 683 n.38 (2001).
"To determine whether a specific accommodation is reasonable, courts apply a 'fact-specific, case-by-case inquiry that considers among other factors, the effectiveness of the modification in light of the nature of the disability in question and the cost to the organization that would implement it.'" Mucci v. Rutgers,Civ. A. No. 08-4806, 2011 WL 831967, at *21 (D.N.J. Mar. 3, 2011) (quoting Staron v. McDonald's Corp., 51 F.3d 353, 356 (2d Cir. 1995)). Additionally, "[t]he Third Circuit requires both parties to act in good faith by engaging in an interactive process for purposes of identifying and agreeing on a reasonable accommodation." Id. (citing Taylor v. Phoenixville Sch. Dist., 184 F.3d 296, 311-14 (3d Cir. 1999) (imposing good-faith obligation in employment context)). Furthermore, if accessing a service is difficult but not beyond a plaintiff's capacity, then the accommodation is not necessary. Logan v. Am. Contract Bridge League, 173 F. App'x 113, 117 (3d Cir. 2006).
"Educational institutions are in the best position to know what modifications would fundamentally alter their services. Courts generally will not substitute their judgment for that of an educational institution regarding what modifications fundamentally alter these policies." Doe v. Haverford Sch., Civ. A. No. 03-3989, 2003 WL 22097782, at *8 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 6, 2003). Similarly, the RA does not require "an educational institution to lower or to effect substantial modifications of standards to accommodate a handicapped person." Se. Cmty. Coll. v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397, 413 (1979). However, while academic judgments of an educational institution are accorded judicial deference, a court must determine that "the educational institution . . . arrived at a rationally justifiable conclusion." Haverford Sch., 2003 WL 22097782, at *7.
Elizabethtown College provided Reichert numerous accommodations including extra time for tests, a distraction-free test site, a note-taker if needed, a substitute for the foreign language requirement, priority course scheduling, and additional time for writing assignments, so long as it did not jeopardize the integrity of the course. (Disability Accommodations Sheet, Fall 2009.) Reichert agreed to these accommodations, and each semester, he signed his accommodation sheets. (Id.) These accommodations were more extensive than those recommended by Reichert's high school psychologist. (Psychological Assessments at 5.) The high school psychologist also recommended that Reichert's parents pursue an updated independent evaluation if they believed his needs had changed during college. (Id.)
At times, during Reichert's numerous meetings with faculty, Reichert, his mother, and Dixon requested certain additional benefits, such as an exception to the education course work requirements, feedback provided directly to Dixon, and peer tutoring by a student with a particular background. These requests were not honored. Nevertheless, Reichert's claim fails because he does not present any evidence suggesting that his requested modifications were necessary, reasonable, and would not fundamentally alter the nature of the services Elizabethtown College provides. See PGA Tour, Inc., 532 U.S. at 683 n.38.
Based on the psychoeducational evaluations that Reichert submitted, Elizabethtown College provided all of the recommended accommodations. Elizabethtown College only refused to provide additional time for fieldwork writing assignments, such as lesson plans. Extensions on these assignments are not a reasonable accommodation because, as the faculty explained, Reichert would use the lesson plans to teach classes on scheduled days. Such extensions would prevent student teachers with disabilities from receiving the critical feedback necessary to improve their lesson plans in advance of teaching those lessons and would deprive them of the benefits that students receive from the education department. Such an extension would therefore "fundamentally alter the nature of the services" that Elizabethtown College provides its education students and is not required under the ADA. See Millington v. Temple Univ. Sch. of Dentistry, 261 F. App'x 363, 367 (3d Cir. 2008). The Court finds that Elizabethtown College's academic judgment is rationally justifiable. See Se. Cmty. Coll., 442 U.S. at 413.
Reichert also failed to show that his other requested modifications were "necessary" or "reasonable" based on his disabilities. See Logan, 173 F. App'x at 117. A number of Reichert's additional requests, such as a peer tutor with a certain background or feedback through Reichert's outside life coach, do not qualify as "reasonable" under the ADA because they fall under "services of a personal nature." The Department of Education's regulations for higher education entities specifically exclude "devices or services of a personal nature," such as as "attendants, individually prescribed devices, [or] readers for personal use or study," from the list of auxiliary aids that must be considered to ensure students with disabilities are not denied the benefits of or participation in post-secondary education. 34 C.F.R. § 104.44(d)(2); see also 28 C.F.R. § 36.306.
Given that Elizabethtown College provided Reichert with reasonable accommodations and Reichert's additional requests for accommodations were not shown to be reasonable, necessary, or not to fundamentally alter the nature of Elizabethtown College's services, the Court finds that Reichert fails to demonstrate a failure to accommodate claim under the ADA or the RA.
2. No Denial of Services nor Constructive Denial by Hostile Environment
Reichert has also failed to demonstrate that he was denied the services or advantages of Elizabethtown College. He voluntarily withdrew from the college for medical reasons after having a seizure at his field placement elementary school. On December 9, 2009, his neurologist requested a medical withdrawal "permitting immediate leave of absence and halting all disciplinary hearings and actions until the medical situation is stabilized." (Tyminski, Graham, Peterson, Calenda Communications, 12/5/09-12/21/09 at 11.) Elizabethtown College granted Reichert's medical withdrawal request and informed him that all further requirements for the semester, including course work, conduct and integrity hearings, and professional dispositions review, would be postponed. (Id. at 18.) Provost Traverso emphasized that all matters were postponed, not concluded, and that the education department had not taken any final action regarding Reichert's status, course grades, alleged conduct violation, alleged academic integrity violation, or professional assessments. (Id.) Reichert never returned to Elizabethtown College. Instead, he enrolled at Montgomery Community College for the following semester, and he later enrolled at Westminster College in Utah. (Trial Tr., 1/10/12 at 7-8, 18; Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 85-86.)
However, Reichert contends that he was forced to withdraw due to Elizabethtown College's "campaign of harassment and denial of accommodations, . . . [which] is analogous to a claim of constructive discharge" in the employment context. (Pl.'s Am. Proposed Conclusions of Law ¶ 26.) "A hostile-environment constructive discharge claim entails something more [than a hostile work environment]: A plaintiff who advances such a compound claim must show working conditions so intolerable that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign." Pa. State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 147 (2004); see also Smith v. V.I. Port Auth., App. A. No. 10-2230, 2012 WL 34670, at *3 (3d Cir. Jan. 9, 2012) (finding that "the alleged harassment did not rise to the required level of 'something more' than offensive behavior" when "the alleged workplace hostility alone was not so unbearable as to cause [the plaintiff] to resign").
The Third Circuit uses an objective test to determine whether a plaintiff can recover on a claim of constructive discharge by determining "whether a reasonable jury could find that the [defendant] permitted conditions so unpleasant or difficult that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign." Colwell v. Rite Aid Corp., 602 F.3d 495, 502 (3d Cir. 2010) (citations omitted). The Third Circuit recognized the following factors as relevant to the issue of constructive discharge in an employment discrimination context: threats of discharge or suggestions to resign, demotions, reduction in pay or benefits, involuntary transfer to a less desirable position, alteration of job responsibilities, and unsatisfactory evaluations. Clowes v. Allegheny Valley Hosp., 991 F.2d 1159, 1161 (3d Cir. 1993).
The Court need not determine whether a hostile workplace constructive discharge claim is viable in the educational context or whether the Clowes factors are relevant to such a determination because it finds no merit to Reichert's charge of a hostile environment or a constructive discharge. Reichert alleges the following actions by Elizabethtown College created a hostile environment that forced him to withdraw: (1) inducing him to take course loads for which he was not ready; (2) penalizing him for turning in late work; (3) refusing to provide any accommodations during his junior year, including no extensions for written assignments, advance syllabi, or tutoring; (4) accusing him of medical instability; (5) covertly inspecting his emails; (6) assigning Dr. Tyminski as his advisor; (7) telling his classmates that he was unwelcome at the college; (8) failing to discipline another classmate for cursing at him; (9) deliberately destroying emails discussing him; and (10) falsely accusing him of sexual misconduct based on inaccurate reports.
All of these allegations are premised on either incorrect assertions or were permissible actions. The college never induced Reichert to take courses for which he was not ready; to the contrary, it informed him he could take his junior methods block in a later semester. Reichert was not penalized for late work, as he was given numerous extensions. Assigning the department chair as Reichert's advisor, regardless of the perceived tense relationships, does not create a hostile environment. Furthermore, the Court has determined that the college provided Reichert with adequate accommodations. Reichert points out that Elizabethtown College threatened to remove him from the department, instituted hearings against him based on his academic integrity and misconduct, discontinued his field placement thereby jeopardizing his remaining course work, and provided unsatisfactory teacher dispositions. However, the Court attributes each of these actions to the college's concern whether Reichert was otherwise qualified for this program, rather than its hostility toward Reichert because of his disabilities. "An otherwise qualified individual is a person who can meet all of a program's requirements in spite of a disability, with or without reasonable accommodation." Millington, 261 F. App'x at 366. In evaluating whether Reichert was otherwise qualified, the Court must consider the basis for Elizabethtown College's academic decision and "should show great respect for the faculty's professional judgment." Regents of Univ. of Mich. v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214, 225 (1985). "University faculties must have the widest range of discretion in making judgments as to the academic performance of students and their entitlement to promotion or graduation." Bd. of Curators, Univ. of Mo. v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78, 96, n.6 (1978) (Powell, J., concurring).
Viewing the justifications for Elizabethtown College's decisions, and according respect for the faculty's professional judgment, the Court finds that none of Elizabethtown College's actions was the result of Reichert's disabilities. Rather, the actions were based on whether Reichert was otherwise qualified for the program. First, Reichert had been caught cheating on an exam, was accused of plagiarizing material for a group project, was suspected of having a parent or tutor complete an assignment for him, all of which bolsters the college's decision to conduct an academic integrity hearing based on a new allegation of plagiarism by Dr. Wile. Second, the college properly acted upon a complaint about inappropriate text messages, which an administrator had read and summarized, creating a basis for Reichert's pending misconduct hearing. Third, after the chair of the education department learned about a threatening conversation between Reichert and a professor, she found it necessitated an emergency meeting to discuss the situation. During that meeting, numerous professors raised serious concerns about Reichert's comments and conduct during and outside of class, leading to the department's reservations about whether he should stay in the department. Fourth, Reichert's supervising teacher at his field placement repeatedly critiqued Reichert's student teaching before she ultimately recommended discontinuing the placement. Finally, there was a significant basis for the unsatisfactory teacher disposition evaluations. The Court finds that each of these actions is properly due to Elizabethtown College's concerns over whether Reichert was otherwise qualified for the education program at the college and not due to his disabilities..
The Court concludes that Reichert has failed to demonstrate Elizabethtown College discriminated against him by failing to accommodate him, denying its services, or creating a hostile environment based on his disabilities, and thus Reichert has not established a violation of the ADA or the RA. The Court finds for Defendant Elizabethtown College and against Plaintiff Reichert on Counts I and II.
B. Breach of Contract Claim
Reichert claims that Elizabethtown College breached a contract with him by failing to provide appropriate accommodations and by engaging in a pattern of misconduct that forced him to leave the college. Reichert argues that he lost the benefit of his contractual bargain for his entire sophomore year and for the first semester of his junior year, during which Elizabethtown College failed to provide appropriate accommodations. He argues that he suffered additional damages because he had to pay Dixon for "services to enable him to make sense of" Elizabethtown College's program and fees for counseling services due to the "intense humiliation and depression" that he suffered as a result of Elizabethtown College's conduct. (Pl.'s Am. Proposed Findings of Fact ¶¶ 109-10, 112-13.)
To prevail on a claim for breach of contract under Pennsylvania law, a plaintiff must establish: "(1) the existence of a valid and binding contract to which he and the defendants were parties; (2) the contract's essential terms; (3) that he complied with the contract's terms; (4) that the defendants breached a duty imposed by the contract; and (5) damages resulting from the breach."
Gundlach v. Reinstein, 924 F. Supp. 684, 688 (E.D. Pa. 1996). The relationship between a private college and its students is contractual in nature. Swartley v. Hoffner, 734 A.2d 915, 918-19 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1999). "[A] student may bring a contract action to enforce the specific promises made by his university." Gundlach, 924 F. Supp. at 688 (citing cases). However, the plaintiff must "identify the specific benefits he was allegedly promised, the means by which he was promised them, and the manner in which Defendants allegedly reneged on those promises." Id.
Here, Reichert argues that Elizabethtown College "breached its agreement to provide appropriate accommodations to [him] and instead engaged in a pattern of misconduct that forced [him] to leave the University." (Pl.'s Am. Conclusions of Law ¶ 34.) While Reichert introduced evidence that he and his mother researched colleges, reviewed various websites and college catalogues, and looked into numerous education departments and disabilities departments to determine "which ones were best suited for disabilities," Reichert did not present any evidence of specific promises that were made to him by Elizabethtown College. (Trial Tr., 1/9/12 at 133.) Instead, Reichert testified that he went to an Elizabethtown College open house, listened to Dr. Tyminski speak about the education department, and learned "how they're accepting of students with disabilities and that they . . . treat people equally." (Id.) After the meeting, Reichert and his mother spoke privately with Dr. Tyminski and inquired whether the education department worked well with students with disabilities. Dr. Tyminski assured Reichert that the college supported students with disabilities. (Id. at 134.) Reichert and Mrs. Reichert also spoke with Deichert, then-Director of Disability Services, who suggested certain testing that must be done to receive accommodations at the college level, and she said that they would "help [him] with self-advocacy, learning [his] skills, working with [him]; . . . they would do whatever was necessary to help [him] succeed, despite having disabilities." (Id. at 135.) Based on these conversations with Dr. Tyminski and Deichert, as well as reviewing the college handbook and catalogue, Reichert enrolled at Elizabethtown College. (Id. at 134.)
Assuming the existence of a valid and binding contract that included a promise to provide a supportive environment for students with disabilities, accommodations based on individual student needs, and assistance with self-advocacy and work with him to help him succeed, Reichert has failed to prove that Elizabethtown College breached that agreement. Statements in the college handbook and catalogue, website, and discussions at the open house would all become part of any contract between Reichert and Elizabethtown College. See Gundlach, 924 F. Supp. at 689. However, despite Reichert's assertions to the contrary, Elizabethtown College provided Reichert with appropriate accommodations and support. Dr. Sagun, Director of Disability Services, testified that she spent five hours a week or more dealing with Reichert and his family, despite another 175 to 200 students at the college with disabilities. (Trial Tr., 1/11/12 at 113.) Dr. Staulters provided lengthy documentation of her contact with Reichert during the 2008-09 academic year, which demonstrated the substantial support that she gave Reichert as his advisor to help him succeed at Elizabethtown College. (Id. at 39-40; Staulters' Notes.)
The Court has already found that Elizabethtown College provided Reichert with sufficient accommodations under the ADA and the RA, and it does not find that the college breached any agreement to provide additional accommodations beyond those required under law. For these reasons, the Court finds for Defendant Elizabethtown College and against Plaintiff Reichert on Count III.
C. Section 1985
Reichert brought a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 against Drs. Tyminski, Finley-Bowman, Calenda, Traverso, Pitcher, and Staulters for conduct that denied him his equal protection rights. Reichert argues that the faculty members conspired to remove Reichert from the education department at their emergency meeting in November 2008 and that they were motivated by animus to deprive persons with disabilities from the equal protection of the laws. (Compl. ¶¶ 60, 62.) In furtherance of their conspiracy, Reichert alleges that the faculty voted to not let him continue in the department after Fall 2008 and by completing teacher disposition forms in December 2009 to ensure that he would be removed from the department. (Id. ¶¶ 63, 64.) However, Reichert failed to include any arguments on this claim in his pre-trial Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or post-trial Amended Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
To state a cause of action under section 1985, a plaintiff must establish:
(1) a conspiracy; (2) for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws; and (3) an act in furtherance of the conspiracy; (4) whereby a person is injured in his person or property or deprived of any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States.
United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners v. Scott, 463 U.S. 825, 828-29 (1983). A plaintiff must also establish "some racial, or perhaps otherwise class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus behind the conspirators' action." Farber v. City of Paterson, 440 F.3d 131, 135 (3d Cir. 2006) (citing Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88, 102 (1971)). To demonstrate class-based invidiously discriminatory animus, the Third Circuit requires a showing of both form-that the conspiracy was motivated by discriminatory animus against an identifiable class-and function-that the discrimination against the identifiable class was invidious. Id. at 136. The class-based group must have "an identifiable existence independent of the fact that its members are victims of the defendants' tortious conduct." Id. at 136.
While the Supreme Court has only considered whether section 1985 applies to racial classification, it left open the possibility that the statute might apply to other forms of class-based animus. Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263, 268 (1993); see also Lake v. Arnold, 112 F.3d 682, 685 (3d Cir. 1997). The Third Circuit has extended the statutory protections to classes based on gender and mental retardation. Novotny v. Great Am. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 584 F.2d 1235, 1243 (3d Cir. 1978); Lake, 112 F.3d at 686. While the Third Circuit recognized that "the courts of appeals which have considered whether the handicapped as a class are entitled to the protection of section 1985(3) are divided," the Lake court expressly declined to define the class of mentally retarded individuals "more broadly to include a wider range of handicaps or the handicapped in general." Lake, 112 F.3d at 686 n.5.
This Court need not determine the scope of section 1985 because Reichert has failed to demonstrate that the alleged discrimination was motivated by a "discriminatory animus against an identifiable class" as a whole, rather than against Reichert individually. See, e.g., Burgos v. Canino, 641 F. Supp. 2d 443, 458 (E.D. Pa. 2009) (finding plaintiff offered no "evidence of an animus on the part of the defendants against blacks in general, rather than against the plaintiff as an individual"); Majewski v. Luzerne Cnty., Civ. A. No. 05-2396, 2007 WL 1074769, at *8 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 9, 2007) (noting that "plaintiff does not allege a discriminatory animus against an identifiable class, but a discriminatory attitude against him") (internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, the Court finds for the individual Defendants and against Plaintiff Reichert on Count V.
Having concluded that Reichert has failed to demonstrate that Elizabethtown College or any of the individual Defendants discriminated or conspired to discriminate against him based on his disabilities or breached a contract with Reichert, the Court therefore rules in favor of Defendants on all counts. An Order consistent with this Memorandum will be docketed separately.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Puri Dibya Property PT
Site Manager
Deskripsi Pekerjaan
- Minimum has experience in the same position at least 5 years in hotel, mall or office building is A MUST
- Candidates must possess at least Bachelor Degree majoring Architecture/Civil Engineering
- Able to speak in English both oral and written
- Able to use AUTOCAD, SketchUp will be an advantage
Job Specification :
- Responsible for entire job assignments
- Knowledgeable and experienced in construction.
- Knowledgeable in building and health and safety regulations.
- Good analytical thinking, firm, energetic, open minded, creative, innovative, enthusiasm, commitment with the job
- Having strong leadership skill and good communication skill
- Able to adapt new environment, accept challenges and work in fact paced environment
- Customer oriented and give excellent service to tenants
- Could work in a team and work under pressure
- Having a positive attitude towards work, be self-discipline and self-motivated
Ke halaman yang merekrut lowongan ini
Data pekerjaan
|Depok, Jawa Barat
|Properti / Pengembangan Properti / Real Estate
|Puri Dibya Property PT lihat lowongan lihat gaji lihat profil
Deskripsi Perusahaan
PT. Puri Dibya Property has well known retail and property in Depok, West Java which are Margocity and The Margo Hotel.
Margocity is the largest mall in Jl. Margonda Raya, Depok and concentrated from middle to up level. Mall with trendy designed, cozy environment, easy access and with friendly services to customers.
The Margo Hotel is new 4 star luxurious and outstanding hotel located in front of Margocity and has an elegant design, sophisticated technology and big ballroom with capacity around 1000 pax inside.
Our location is surrounded by office tower, university, apartment which is will bring advantage for the business.
Currently we're seeking candidates for the position as :
Mengapa bergabung dengan kami?
Enjoy working with us. We take pride in our strong team culture - one of mutual trust, learning, sharing, care, willingness, cooperation and concern. This includes providing a conducive, family-friendly work environment that enhances our staff's professional and personal growth. We are seeking for highly motivated, dynamic, independent individuals and disciplined person who willing to come forward and can work independently and team work and be one of our great team.
Ke halaman yang merekrut lowongan ini
lowongan kerja rekomendasi
Sipil Inspektor
Site Manager
Civil Engineers
Visual Promotion (Photographer)
- baru
Tenant Relation
- baru
Freelance Marketing


text:
Upcoming Events
Corvallis Youth Symphony Concert 2016-2017PerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GallerySun, 12/11/2016 - 3:00pm - 5:30pm
(More infoprmation to come.)
Happy Holiday- A Jazz Kings Christmas 2016PerformanceAustin AuditoriumTue, 12/13/2016 - 7:30pm - 9:30pm
Happy Holiday: A Jazz Kings Christmas
Reception for OSU Faculty & Staff Art ExhibitOtherEntire FacilityTue, 12/20/2016 - 5:00pm - 8:00pm
International Orientation TeamLectureConstruction and Engineering HallTue, 01/03/2017 - 8:00am - Thu, 01/05/2017 - 1:00pm
More information to come at a later date.
FIRST Robotics Kickoff 2017PerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GallerySat, 01/07/2017 - 6:00am - 9:30am
(More information to come.)
Faculty SenateConstruction and Engineering HallAgriculture Production Conference RoomThu, 01/12/2017 - 2:30pm - 11:30pm
The Faculty Senate is the governing body at Oregon State University, representing faculty in all academic and administrative units. It has legislative responsibility regarding academic policies, educational standards, curricula, academic regulations, faculty welfare, and makes recommendations to University administration.
Nut Grower 2017LectureAustin AuditoriumWed, 01/18/2017 - 7:30am - 3:30pm
TRIAD MeetingMeetingAgriculture Science Conference RoomThu, 01/19/2017 - 11:30am - 1:30pm
For 90 years, the TRIAD Club at OSU has provided faculty and now staff with an opportunity to gather over a meal to share fellowship, discuss the challenges of the day, celebrate success and learn something new.
TRIAD is grounded by three values: fellowship, service, and cooperation. While fellowship seems to dominate, TRIAD members have endowed a scholarship that is given annually to one or more deserving OSU students.
(More information to come.)
Board Training for Non-Profits 2017ConferenceEntire FacilitySat, 01/21/2017 - 8:00am
Registration link will be posted closer to the event date.
Non Crop Vegetation Managment 2017ConferenceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryTue, 01/24/2017 (All day) - Wed, 01/25/2017 (All day)
wo days of presentations on pesticide related topics with emphasis on turf, weed management and safety.
Intramural Sports Manager's MeetingConstruction and Engineering HallTue, 01/24/2017 - 4:00pm - 7:30pm
Private event.
SMILE Teacher WorkshopMeetingAgriculture Conference RoomsFri, 01/27/2017 - 8:00am - Sat, 01/28/2017 - 12:00am
This is a two day event starting January 27, 2017 to January 28, 2017. On the first day, the event will run from 8:00am to 5:30pm and on the second day, the event will run from 8:00am to 12:30pm.
For information about this event, make sure to check out the SMILE Program website in the sponsor link.
Dance of Spring - Concert 2017PerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GallerySat, 01/28/2017 - 7:30pm - 9:30pm
Ticket registration link and additional information will be added closer to the event date.
China Night 2017PerformanceEntire FacilityTicket information will be posted soonSun, 01/29/2017 - 5:30pm - 9:00pm
MECOP PlacementEntire FacilityTue, 01/31/2017 (All day) - Thu, 02/02/2017 (All day)
Students are selected into the program through two screening processes. First, they are screened academically after their sophomore year. This is primarily an effort to insure that students are academically qualified to take upper-division courses. A second screening takes place through an interview process during which all members of the Advisory Board interview the students applying for the program. The goal of this screening is to make every effort to insure that the students are qualified and ready for future internship placement.
Coates- Provost LectureLectureAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryThu, 02/02/2017 - 6:00pm - 8:00pm
Ta-Nehisi Coates is a journalist, blogger, and memoirist who brings personal reflection and historical scholarship to bear on America's most contested issues. Writing without shallow polemic and in a measured style, Coates addresses complex and challenging issues such as racial identity, systemic racial bias, and urban policing. He subtly embeds the present—in the form of anecdotes about himself or others—into historical analysis in order to illustrate how the implications of the past are still experienced by people today.
FSPCA TrainingMeetingAgriculture Science Conference RoomWells Fargo Bank Conference RoomMon, 02/06/2017 - 8:00am - Wed, 02/08/2017 - 8:00am
Willamette Fisheries Science Review 2017Construction and Engineering HallTue, 02/07/2017 - 8:00am - Thu, 02/09/2017 - 5:00pm
Private event.
Day 1 - 8:00am to 5:00pm
Day 2 - 8:00am to 5:00pm
Day 3 - 8:00am to 1:30pm
The Emerald City Jazz Kings -Clarinet MarmaladePerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryFri, 02/10/2017 - 7:30pm - 9:30pm
Insight Into Gardening 2017Entire FacilitySat, 02/11/2017 - 9:00am
SAC Presents David SedarisAustin AuditoriumGiustina GallerySat, 02/11/2017 - 6:00pm
David Sedaris, humor writer and best selling author.
Event Cost: $50, $40, $30, reserved; $10 OSU students (balcony seating)
Student Note: A limited number of balcony seats are reserved for you to purchase for $10 ea., one per student, with ID card. Purchase IN PERSON ONLY, Tues. & Thurs., Noon - 5 p.m. at The LaSells Stewart Center, first come-first served.
Corvallis - OSU Piano International Concert 2016-2017PerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina Gallery$25 per ticketSun, 02/12/2017 - 4:00pm
Featuring Nareh Arghamanyan.
Highly acclaimed for her unique style, colorful tone and dazzling virtuosity, Nareh Arghamanyan is one of the promising talents of her generation.
Born in Armenia in 1989, Nareh Arghamanyan studied at the Tchaikovsky Music School for Talented Children in Yerevan and become the youngest student to be admitted to the University for Music and Performing Arts Vienna.
In 2008, Nareh won the Montreal International Music Competition and, in 2011, she signed an exclusive recording contract with Pentatone releasing a CD of solo works by Rachmaninov and a disc featuring the Liszt concertos. Her latest recording, released in November 2014, includes the piano concerto by Khachaturian as well as Prokofiev's third piano concerto.
Youth Outreach Luncheon 2016-2017OtherAgriculture Production Conference RoomMon, 02/13/2017 - 11:30am - 1:30pm
More Information to Come
Fish & Wildlife Advisory Committee MeetingAgriculture Leaders Conference RoomTue, 02/14/2017 - 8:00am - 5:00pm
Private meeting.
Career Development InterviewsMeetingAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryWed, 02/15/2017 - 8:00am - 5:00pm
(More Information to come closer to event)
Eugene Ballet - Midsummer 2017PerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryThu, 02/16/2017 - 7:30pm - 10:00pm
Tickets on sale August 1, 2016!
In February, we'll whisk you away from winter's cold to the warm, lush green forests of A Midsummer Night's Dream. Shakespeare's adored comedy of love, magic, fairies, mixed up lovers, and the mischievous Puck comes alive in Toni Pimble's delightful choreography set to Felix Mendelssohn's spirited score.
A new EBC-commissioned ballet set on the Company by award-winning choreographer Stephanie Martinez opens the program. Chicago-based Martinez, winner of the Joffrey Ballet's 2014 "Winning Works: Choreographers of Color," brings her acclaimed talent to Eugene, stretching the creative minds of our dancers and of you, our audience. Stephanie Martinez's ballet is supported by The Hult Endowment of The Oregon Community Foundation
Small Farms Conference 2017MeetingEntire FacilitySat, 02/18/2017 - 6:00am - 6:00pm
The Oregon Small Farms Conference is a daylong event geared toward farmers, agricultural professionals, food policy advocates, students and managers of farmers markets. Thirty educational sessions are offered on a variety of topics relevant to the Oregon small farmers and include a track in Spanish. Speakers include farmers, OSU Extension faculty, agribusiness, and more.
F3T (Fly Fishing Film Tour)OtherConstruction and Engineering HallSat, 02/18/2017 - 6:30pm - 10:00pm
Benton County High School Career Convention 2017 - ProposedConferenceEntire FacilityTue, 02/21/2017 - 8:00am - 3:00pm
The Benton County High School Career Convention is a partnership between the Corvallis School District 509J, Oregon State University's College of Business (COB), Austin Entrepreneurship Program (AEP), Enactus, Benton County High Schools, Corvallis Public Schools Foundation, and Corvallis Chamber of Commerce.
The purpose of this event is to provide a career development opportunity for high school students in Benton County. This event also provides students with the opportunity to meet state career requirements in a professional business setting.
Teen Summit 2017Entire FacilityWed, 02/22/2017 - 7:30am - 2:30pm
More information to follow at a later date.
OSU Bands - Winter 2017PerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryTue, 02/28/2017 - 7:30pm - 9:30pm
(More information to come.)
Contest Philosophy
Schedule and Format
To provide a sound educational experience for all participants, enable Oregon bands to qualify for the Oregon School Activities Association State Band Championships recording pool, and supply valid, thorough critique and clinics to all students and directors.
High school bands from Oregon, Washington, California, Idaho, and British Columbia are invited to apply. The schedule will be filled on a first come, first served basis. "Second" bands will be accepted ONLY if space is available.
Bands will be scheduled from approximately 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. each day. Bands are expected to be present to hear at least 4 other groups to ensure that everyone has an audience. Oregon Large Group Festival/Contest Guidelines will be followed. Oregon Band Director's Association Adjudication System and Oregon Band Director's Association Required Literature List will be used. These are available on the OBDA website (www.obda.org).
All China Gala DinnerMeetingAgriculture Science Conference RoomWed, 03/08/2017 - 5:30pm - 7:30pm
More information to come at a later date.
Provost Lecture with Robin ChaseAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryWed, 03/08/2017 - 7:30pm - 9:00pm
Robin Chase is a transportation entrepreneur. She is co-founder and former CEO of Zipcar, the largest carsharing company in the world; Buzzcar, a peer to peer carsharing service in France (now merged with Drivy); and GoLoco, an online ridesharing community. She is also co-founder and Executive Chairman of Veniam, a vehicle communications company building the networking fabric for the Internet of Moving Things. She is also author of the newly released book Peers Inc: How People and Platforms are Inventing the Collaborative Economy and Reinventing Capitalism.
Come enjoy her riviting story and advice!
Era of MegafiresLectureConstruction and Engineering HallWed, 03/15/2017 - 7:00pm - 8:30pm
(More information to come closer to event date.)
Corvallis Community BandPerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryTue, 03/21/2017 - 7:30pm - 9:30pm
Variable Probability SamplingMeetingAgriculture Science Conference RoomMon, 04/03/2017 - 8:00am - Fri, 04/07/2017 - 5:00pm
(More information to come closer to the event dates.)
CDI HSE MeetingConferenceAgriculture Leaders Conference RoomTue, 04/04/2017 - 8:00am - Wed, 04/05/2017 - 8:00am
OSU Gerontology ConferenceConferenceAgriculture Production Conference RoomWed, 04/05/2017 - 8:00am - Thu, 04/06/2017 - 5:00pm
More information to follow.
Naomi Klein TalkLectureAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryWed, 04/05/2017 - 7:00pm - 9:00pm
(More information to come closer to the event date.)
Spring Preview - AdmissionsAustin AuditoriumConstruction and Engineering HallWells Fargo Bank Conference RoomGiustina GalleryFri, 04/07/2017 - 7:00am - 11:00am
An in-depth look at Oregon State and what we have to offer, including campus tours and visits with faculty and students. Nothing beats a visit to picture yourself as an Oregon State student. As you tour our beautiful campus, you'll see where you'll learn, where you'll live, where you'll spend time with friends and where you'll experience all the university has to offer. Come visit and discover this amazing place to start your future. Admitted students will have sessions specific to next steps to enrolling at Oregon State.
SAC Presents: NW Dance ProjectMeetingAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryThu, 04/13/2017 - 7:00pm - Fri, 04/14/2017 - 10:00pm
(More information to come closer to the event dates.)
NW Dance Project was founded in Portland in 2004 by acclaimed dancer, mentor and choreographer Sarah Slipper. NW Dance Project is dedicated to the creation and performance of innovative, new contemporary dance works from established and emerging dance makers created in an open and artistically stimulating environment.
NW Dance Project has fostered the creation and Portland premiere of over 190 original contemporary dance works to date. Our dedication to providing dancers and dance makers the resources and creative room needed to realize new, inspired dance works led Dance International Magazine to proclaim that we are "changing the way dance is created" and that NW Dance Project has become "a laboratory, factory and repository for risk-taking new works from the next generation of choreographers from Europe and North America."
In order to produce the next wave of significant dance works, we are also committed to advancing dance education and community involvement. In March 2104, NW Dance Project opened our beautiful new 8,500 square foot well-appointed Creative Center in the heart of Portland's Inner Eastside, where we lead dance education for adults and children through our various projects, intensives, workshops and classes as well as opportunities for established and emerging dance makers to choreograph and refine new works set on our company of classically trained, fearless contemporary company dancers.
Because dance cannot survive without new audiences and a deepened appreciation of the art form, we strive to engage individuals and communities with dance through accessible performances by our company, studio sessions, dance samplers, outdoor performances, special events, master classes, collaborations with artists of other performing arts and visual genres and conversation with artists. We even do the unexpected – bringing performances to the streets, coffee shops, hospitals and the occasional escalator in shopping malls! We also love offering the experience of dance and ongoing, interactive dance education programs for young, challenged members of our community through our cost-free Dance Moves program and holding free public performances as often as possible.
Willamette Valley Symphony & OSU SACPerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GallerySat, 04/15/2017 - 12:00pm - 6:00pm
Intramural Sports Manager's MeetingMeetingConstruction and Engineering HallTue, 04/18/2017 - 4:00pm - 7:30pm
Private event.
Corvallis Repertory Singers/ Band ConcertPerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryTue, 04/18/2017 - 6:00pm - 9:30pm
Provost LectureLectureAustin AuditoriumGiustina GalleryTue, 04/18/2017 - 7:30pm - 9:00pm
Maya Lin-
Born in 1959 in Athens, Ohio, Maya Lin catapulted into the public eye when, as a senior at Yale University, she submitted the winning design in a national competition for a Vietnam Veterans Memorial to be built in Washington, DC.
Come Listen to her story.
Uniform Traffic Control DevicesAgriculture Science Conference RoomTue, 04/25/2017 - 8:00am - Thu, 04/27/2017 - 5:00pm
More Information to come as the event day approaches.
Spring Career ExpoExpoAgriculture Production Conference RoomGiustina GalleryWed, 04/26/2017 - 8:00am - 6:00pm
(More Information to come closer to event date)
American Association University Professors State ConferenceConferenceAgriculture Science Conference RoomSat, 04/29/2017 - 8:00am - 5:00pm
Corvallis - OSU Piano International Concert 2016-'17 (Jon Kimura Parker)PerformanceAustin AuditoriumGiustina Gallery$25 for single ticketsSun, 05/07/2017 - 4:00pm - 6:00pm
Featuring Jon Kimura Parker:
Jon Kimura Parker's brilliant and wide ranging career has taken him from Carnegie Hall and Berlin's Philharmonie to the Beijing Concert Hall and the Sydney Opera House. A true Canadian ambassador of music, Mr. Parker has given command performances for Queen Elizabeth II, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Prime Ministers of Canada and Japan. He is an Officer of The Order of Canada, his country's highest civilian honor, and he has a Gold Medal from the prestigious Leeds International Piano Competition.
Concert Program:
Prelude in B-flat Major, Op. 32, No. 2
Prelude in G Major, Op. 32, No. 5
Sonata in F minor, Op. 57 Appassionata
Bernard Herrmann Fantasy
Scenes from a Jade Terrace
Jeux d'Eau
Fantasy on "The Wizard of Oz"
Youth Outreach Luncheon 2016-2017OtherAgriculture Production Conference RoomMon, 05/08/2017 - 11:30am - 1:30pm
More Information to Come.