text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Douglas County; the Hon.
JAMES N. SHERRICK, Judge, presiding.
Mr. JUSTICE MILLS delivered the opinion of the court:
Coal lease.
Verdict for plaintiffs: $4,019,867.08.
We affirm upon remittitur to $1,573,455.57. Otherwise, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
This will be a long opinion. The facts are prolix and complex, but their tiresome recitation is requisite to a hopefully lucid discussion of the substantial issues before us on appeal.
On June 20, 1945, the Dethloffs' predecessors in title executed a mining lease in favor of Zeigler's predecessors in title. The lease covered a 40-acre tract located in Douglas County, Illinois, and by its terms, pertained to "all of the coal lying in or under" that property. Plaintiffs acquired their title to the property as joint tenants on October 18, 1969, for a payment of $20,000, and it is agreed by the parties that the mining lease was in full force and effect at least until the time of the conveyance of October 18, 1969. Through various mergers and name changes, Zeigler is the present lessee.
The Dethloffs sued Zeigler as follows: Count I sought compensatory damages for a trespassory taking of coal commencing on or about January 10, 1976; count II asked for punitive damages for the trespass based upon the alleged wilful, malicious and deliberate actions of Zeigler; count III prayed for a declaration that the mining lease expired by its own terms solely because there had been no mining or removal of coal from the premises by Zeigler prior to June 20, 1970 (which was 25 years after the lease was executed). Zeigler's answer denied the material allegations and asserted the affirmative defenses of laches and unreasonable delay, estoppel and accord and satisfaction.
A hearing before the circuit court on count III (terms of the lease) was held on September 14, 1977. It was established that Zeigler's mining operations commenced on the leased property in January 1976. Mr. Dethloff testified that at the time of acquisition of the property he knew of the existence of the mining lease and was aware of the terms of the lease. Sometime in 1971, plaintiffs' attorneys commenced correspondence and negotiation with the defendant respecting the lease in question and in July of that year H.E. Wenninger, general mine manager, was directed to contact plaintiffs' attorneys. In approximately May 1975, Dethloff went to Zeigler's Murdock, Illinois, offices where he learned from an employee of defendant that within perhaps a year mining operations would be commenced under plaintiffs' land. Dethloff then recontacted one of his attorneys. An advance royalty payment and a transmittal letter (bearing date of March 25, 1976) from defendant were received by plaintiff and placed in his lock box, since he considered them to be evidence of mining a certain quantity of coal. He did not cash the check. Other similar checks and transmittal letters reflecting production of coal by defendant from the land in question were subsequently received by Dethloff and similarly handled.
George P. Latchford III (called by plaintiffs under section 60) testified that he had been a licensed attorney in Illinois since 1955 and was senior vice president of finance and general counsel for Zeigler, a position that he had held since about May 1973. He knew on June 2, 1975, that plaintiffs had taken the position (as early as 1973) that the mining lease had previously expired and he was still of the opinion, as he was in 1972, that the defendant should proceed under the lease and he intended to recommend to defendant to go forward with mining operations. He said that the first time coal was mined under plaintiffs' property was in January 1976, and the first royalty check was March 25, 1976. He allowed as how the royalty check and transmittal letter were probably the first notice to the plaintiffs that coal was in fact being mined. Zeigler continued its mining operations under plaintiffs' land, notwithstanding receipt of the original of plaintiffs' exhibits 13-16, and notwithstanding receipt of papers commencing the present litigation. Plaintiffs' exhibit 15 is an opinion of counsel relating to the mining lease in question rendered on or about November 30, 1973, to defendant.
On direct, Latchford testified that Zeigler has never received from plaintiffs a copy of their deed of conveyance and received no instructions subsequent to 1969 with respect to payment or the depositing of advance royalties or delayed rentals; that the coal mine (of which the underground portion of plaintiffs' land formed a part) is approximately 200 feet below the surface, deploys four operating units or four separate sets of equipment and is equipped to wash coal; that modern equipment is used and underground haulage is accomplished by electrically driven belts; that the coal is raised to the surface by the same method as a slope belt; that the production capacity of the mine is about 1,500,000 tons per year; that there are at least 5,000-6,000 acres of ground under lease as part of the mining operation; that many acres under lease are necessary to economically justify investment in a mine; and that obtaining mining leases was relied upon prior to initial installation of the mine. (There was an offer of proof that large sums of money had been invested in the mine, that approximately 350 people are employed at the Murdock Mine, and that several miles of mining corridors were present in the mine, but the circuit court rejected the offer.)
The circuit court opined that there was no ground for legal action by plaintiffs until the knowledge of the alleged trespass was known and that he saw no laches or estoppel. His written order declared that the lease expired by its own terms on June 20, 1970, at the end of 25 years. Defendant filed a motion for rehearing and to vacate the judgment, and plaintiffs filed a motion to strike. Defendant, over objection of plaintiffs, presented testimony by offers of proof (a chief mining engineer, a mining expert, and an accountant), which were rejected by the circuit court. Motion for rehearing was denied and the trial judge sent a letter to counsel of record setting forth the reasons for his rulings. In that memorandum he indicated that the "basic problem" presented in count III was "the meaning" of the clause referring to a specific 25-year term, stated that under Illinois law there is an implied covenant to produce within a reasonable time, found that the language in the instant mining lease was almost identical to language used in standard oil and gas leases, and held that: "I believe this clause has universally been construed to grant the right to produce within the stated term and to continue production for so long as there is any oil. If production is not attempted on the premises within the term, the lease expires."
Thereafter, Zeigler moved to transfer venue of the case to Piatt County and for summary judgment on count II (punitive damages). Over 200 affidavits in support of the petition for transfer of venue were filed by Zeigler, and plaintiffs filed six affidavits in opposition. The circuit court denied transfer of venue and allowed summary judgment on count II.
The cause went to jury trial on count I (compensation for trespassory taking of coal). In chambers prior to voir dire the Dethloffs argued their motion to strike Zeigler's affirmative defenses (laches, estoppel, accord and satisfaction) which over objection the circuit court allowed. In the course of the argument on plaintiffs' motion in limine (which would exclude defendant's evidence of good faith), they moved to amend by omitting language from count I reading "* * * knowingly, wantonly and wilfully, and with force and arms," and there being no objection by defendant, it was allowed. The operative language of count I was reduced to "Defendant * * * broke and entered said vein of coal * * *." The trial judge ruled that once the plaintiffs had communicated to defendant a claim that the lease had expired, any mining thereafter could not be in good faith, and the question of whether there was good faith or not was not for the jury, but for the court. The motion in limine was allowed. (The motion for change of venue was renewed, but again denied.)
Upon trial, the evidence may be compressed and summarized like this:
GEORGE SEAMAN (surveyor for Zeigler): testified as to measuring the quantity of coal taken; coal is weighed when sold or shipped; it is possible for the amount of coal mined to be computed from the figures he recorded in field book #6.
ROBERT HINKLE (mine superintendent): all coal goes through a rotary breaker for sizing and discharge of impurities; some is crushed, some washed; raw coal is coal that has gone through the breaker and the crusher.
THOMAS G. CORMAN (vice president and comptroller of Zeigler): testified as to sales prices realized by defendant; an average sales figure of $19.88 per ton; this is determined by dividing the total dollars realized by defendant by the tons sold to arrive at an average price; the figure is an "arithmetical" average of the number of contract prices, divided by the number of customers; the figure is also stated as $19.33.
(Over objection, Zeigler's answer to a written interrogatory was read to the jury: The cost of loading and hauling coal from the place where mined to the foot of the shaft is $1.038 per ton.)
ROY HELFINSTINE (head of the Mineral Section, Illinois State Geological Survey over objection, read from the evidence deposition): Two exhibits are part of sulphur reduction of Illinois coal washability studies; Part I refers to samples taken from 1967 to 1969, including samples from the Murdock Mine; washability tests were made under his supervision and direction.
GEORGE EADIE (mining engineer and professor): by his calculations, 5,610,030 cubic feet of coal had been removed from plaintiffs' property; coal has a weight of 85 pounds per cubic foot; cubic footage multiplied by weight gives 238,426 tons as the amount of coal removed; this is untreated, raw coal; figures are subject to a margin of error of 1.5%. (He apparently bases the weight figure on the tests run under Helfinstine's direction.)
Plaintiffs rested. Defendant's motion for directed verdict was denied.
CLAYTON SLACK (vice president for engineering of Zeigler): the marketable tonnage extracted from plaintiffs' tract was 215,247.40 tons.
THOMAS G. CORMAN (comptroller): by offer of proof, attempted to show Zeigler's costs of mining. (The evidence was excluded.)
GEORGE P. LATCHFORD (corporate counsel): evidence of the good faith nature of Zeigler's actions; he was aware of a potential dispute over the lease before 1973; the lease was examined by a "land lawyer" employed by Zeigler, by Latchford himself, and by outside counsel; all three concluded that the lease was valid and would continue beyond 25 years; corporate records show royalty payments to the Dethloffs; a similar suit was brought in Douglas County in 1974 but was dismissed; no payment was made to that claimant by defendant; the Dethloff coal either had to be mined sequentially by Zeigler or not at all, because once having passed, the engineering people advised that they could not go back for it.
MACK H. SHUMATE (offer of proof): only way for plaintiffs' parcel to have been mined was for defendant to mine it; exploration showed that the coal was thin, with a bad roof, and was questionable.
HAROLD E. WENNINGER (general mine manager): in 1976 the royalty offered for coal leases was 15 cents per ton.
SCOTT L. ROGERS (vice president of marketing for Zeigler): offer of proof; all of the Murdock Mine product for 1976 was sold; all was prepared to some extent; none was sold from the mouth of the mine; coal, as it was at the mouth of mine, could not be marketed.
ELMER C. HILL (coal broker): offer of proof; coal as it was at the mouth would not be marketable, unless a steam electric plant was located very near the mine.
CHARLES LINKE (an economist and professor): offer of proof; he was familiar with measurement of losses from an economic standpoint; legal rules are not always consistent with economic reality; he measured plaintiffs' loss as worth 15 cents per ton.
The jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs of $4,019,867.08 and judgment was entered accordingly. Defendant appeals from the declaratory judgment (count III) and the jury's money judgment (count I), and plaintiffs' cross-appeal the summary judgment (count II).
The cardinal issue in this appeal pivots on the construction of the habendum clause of the Dethloff-Zeigler Coal Company lease:
"This lease shall be and continue for the term of 25 years from and after the date hereof, and for so long thereafter as shall in the opinion of lessee to be necessary to mine and remove all of the coal in and under the above described leased land and other lands in the vicinity thereof, or included in the block of leased coal hereinafter referred to, unless the lease is sooner terminated as hereinafter provided and unless in the opinion of the lessee the coal which can be economically mined in accordance with good and accepted mining practices from said lands shall be sooner exhausted. It is expressly agreed, however, that the rents and royalties hereinafter provided for shall not be payable after such coal in and under the above described real estate hereby leased cannot be economically mined, as aforesaid. But the right to remove coal and other materials from other lands through any underground ways and entries in said above described leased lands, which rights are hereby expressly granted, shall continue, as an extension of this lease, free of rents and royalties as long as the lessee shall desire to have or use the same, even though all coal economically and practically minable shall have been mined and removed from the above described leased lands, even though the said term of 25 years shall have expired."
The trial court's declaratory judgment held that the lease had terminated by its own terms on June 20, 1970. As already noted, the trial judge held that under Illinois law there is an implied covenant to produce within a reasonable time, and if production is not attempted on the premises within the term, the lease expires.
Production of coal from plaintiffs' land occurred 31 years after the lease was executed. Defendant urges this court to construe this lease as a freehold, contending that by mining in the "vicinity" of plaintiffs' premises within the 25-year term, it has complied with the implied covenant to produce. Plaintiffs, however, contend an estate on special limitation was granted, which expired by its own terms on June 20, 1970.
Plaintiffs cite to us the Oregon case of Fremont Lumber Co. v. Starrell Petroleum Co. (1961), 228 Ore. 180, 364 P.2d 773. The mineral lease involved there had a term "`* * * for * * * 5 years * * * and as long thereafter as oil, gas or other mineral is produced from said land * * *.'" (228 Ore. 180, 186, 364 P.2d 773, 776.) The defendant-lessee argued that the thereafter clause was a condition subsequent which required notice before the lease would terminate. Agreeing with plaintiff-lessor, however, the court found it to be a 5-year lease on special limitation, with the incident of automatic termination at the end of the primary term unless production was occurring at that time.
The Fremont case, incidentally, contains an excellent discussion of the similarities between mining and oil and gas leases, as well as a lucid review of "unless" leases, special limitations, conditions subsequent, "drill or pay" provisions, primary terms and indefinite terms, "thereafter" clauses, and the legal meaning of "mine" and "mining."
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Pape v. Hughes (1960), 398 Pa. 436, 158 A.2d 547, interpreted a lease which provided for:
"* * * the sole and exclusive right and privilege of mining, removing and marketing of minerals and material, including gravel, sand, clays, stone and ore * * * for a period of 5 years, `and for such additional longer period as the hereinbefore mentioned minerals and materials may be found on the premises * * * in sufficient quantity as to be profitable commercially to remove, the duration of said extended period to be determined by the' grantee." 398 Pa. 436, 437, 158 A.2d 547, 548.
In the landowner-lessor's action to quiet title, the Pennsylvania court found as a matter of fact that at the end of the 5-year period specified in the lease, minerals were not found on the premises in sufficient quantity to be removed profitably and that the lease expired at the end of the 5-year period. The condition upon which the lease was to be extended beyond the initial 5-year period was that a commercially profitable quantity of minerals be found and that that condition exist at the end of the 5-year base term.
A similar analysis was applied by this court in Metz v. Doss (1969), 114 Ill. App.2d 195, 252 N.E.2d 410. The lease, dated July 29, 1956, provided for a primary term of 1 year and as long thereafter as oil or gas or either of them is produced from said land by lessee. A well was drilled within the primary term and gas was encountered, but there was no commercial production of gas from the lease at any time. Lessees then attempted to develop the area as a gas storage reservoir. Under the terms of the lease, lessor was entitled to have the lease terminate at the end of the primary term unless there was production. Plaintiff-lessor sought a release of record of an oil and gas lease, and the trial court granted plaintiff summary judgment.
An oil and gas lease was also involved in Morris v. Mayden (1976), 35 Ill. App.3d 338, 340, 341 N.E.2d 428, 429. Plaintiffs owned an executory interest in one-half of the oil, gas, and other minerals beneath property they owned in fee that was to become possessory upon the termination of the oil and gas lease between defendant Mayden and the Pure Oil Company. The lease, executed in April 1936, was to "* * * remain in force for a term of 10 years from this date, and as long thereafter as oil or gas or either of them is produced from said land by lessee." In the absence of any allegation that production had ceased from such land, the trial court dismissed on the ground that plaintiffs failed to show a present interest in the oil and gas.
• 1 The distinction of an estate on condition subsequent (urged by defendant) and an estate on special limitation (argued by plaintiffs) is primarily the requirement of notice. While an estate on limitation will terminate automatically, an estate on condition subsequent continues until notice that the conditions will be enforced. Zeigler argues that the Dethloffs' failure to provide notice of termination as provided in the lease leads to the conclusion that the lease was in full force and effect at the time of production. However, the notice provisions in the lease are in reference to default or breach on the part of defendant. Plaintiffs' action for declaratory judgment was not premised on default or breach it was based on the expiration of the lease by its own terms.
The Dethloffs refer this court to the recent case of Shannon v. Stookey (1978), 59 Ill. App.3d 573, 375 N.E.2d 881, in further support of their position. Shannon brought an action alleging abandonment of an oil and gas lease and the equipment thereon. The Shannon lease was executed January 9, 1974, and was extended to run until July 23, 1974, or as long thereafter as oil and gas was produced. The evidence was undisputed that during the primary term, no oil or gas had ever been produced. The court pointed out that the lease had expired under its own terms prior to the alleged abandonment.
The special limitation construction concept found in Fremont and urged by plaintiffs is somewhat confusing since limitations traditionally cut short estates in land rather than extend such estates. Although the effect is essentially the same, the limitation terminology does not appeal to us and we purposefully avoid it.
• 2 The analysis, however, applied in interpreting the habendum clauses of the mineral leases in Fremont, Pape, Metz and Morris stand for sound and solid reasoning, and we believe it to represent the correct yardstick by which to measure the lease before us. In 1945, the original parties entered into a coal lease for a primary term of 25 years. If, at the end of this term, coal had been found on the premises and the lessee considered it profitable to commence production, the lease was to be automatically extended by the "thereafter" clause. If, however, the 25-year period ended and there was no ongoing production at that time, the lease terminated by its own terms. (This construction does not require a court to imply a covenant on the part of lessees to produce in a reasonable time, as the trial judge did here.) Since there was no production of coal from plaintiffs' land at the end of the primary term, the lease terminated June 20, 1970.
But Zeigler contends that the lease creates a freehold estate and acts as a conveyance of the minerals. Since an estate for years is a nonfreehold estate, a classification of this instrument as a freehold would, of course, render the trial court's interpretation erroneous.
In Fowler v. Marion & Pittsburg Coal Co. (1924), 315 Ill. 312, 146 N.E. 318, an instrument that conveyed authority to mine all the coal contained in or under the property was held to pass a freehold estate because the lessee was given the unlimited right to go upon the land and mine for coal. Daughettee v. Ohio Oil Co. (1914), 263 Ill. 518, 524, 105 N.E. 308, 310, found a lease "* * * for the term of five years, and as much longer as gas or oil is found in paying quantities * * *" to be a freehold for the reason that it may continue indefinitely. Bruner v. Hicks (1907), 230 Ill. 536, 537, 82 N.E. 888, 889, interpreted a lease "* * * of ten years or so long as oil and gas might be found on said premises * * *" as a freehold, requiring a release of homestead rights. However, in Blue Bird Air Service, Inc. v. City of Chicago (1941), 376 Ill. 272, 33 N.E.2d 456, interpreting a lease of hangar space at an airport, the court pointed out that a lease for any number of years is not a freehold.
In determining whether the instrument is a conveyance of minerals or lease of the minerals, the consideration paid to the lessors is relevant. Under the document here (entitled "MINING LEASE"), lessors were to receive $1 per acre "during the first year of the term," and then $2 per acre "at the end of the second year of such term and at the end of each succeeding year thereof." The next sentence of the "MINING LEASE" provides that after Zeigler begins to mine coal from the "described leased lands, if at the end of any year of such term" no coal has been taken from the leased land, then $2 per acre shall be paid. Any rent paid to lessors was to be credited as advance royalty when production began and royalties became payable. (A royalty of five cents per ton was set forth.) After 1970, the Dethloffs received no compensation under the lease. Yet Zeigler attempted to pay plaintiffs royalties in 1976 when production began. We view this as highly significant and rather indicative of intent to treat our document as a lease.
• 3 Furthermore, the granting clause itself indicates a lease. To construe this instrument as a conveyance of the coal renders the term of 25 years meaningless. And the parties to the instrument treated it as a lease: Defendant's predecessors assigned to Zeigler their rights under the lease and plaintiffs' predecessors conveyed the coal to the Dethloffs by specific reference. As we read this lease, there is no provision whatever for the payment of rent after the end of the term where mining has not been commenced. We again conclude that this instrument should be construed as a lease for 25 years, with a self-executing extension clause at the end of the 25-year period if the condition of coal being produced is met.
The trial court found an implied covenant to produce within a reasonable time under Illinois law. Zeigler correctly contends there is no express covenant in the mining lease requiring that coal be mined from plaintiffs' land by any specified time. Defendant then argues that by mining coal in the "vicinity" of plaintiffs' premises or in the "block of coal" encompassing plaintiffs' premises within 25 years, it has complied with the implied covenant to produce during the primary term. This contention focuses on this portion of the habendum clause:
"* * * and so long thereafter as shall in the opinion of Lessee be necessary to mine and remove all of the coal in and under the above described leased lands and other lands in the vicinity thereof, or included in the block of leased coal hereinafter referred to, * * *." (Emphasis ours.)
Rejecting this contention, the trial court observed that, reading the instrument as a whole, this phrase allowed Zeigler to carry coal mined in the vicinity through the empty passages in plaintiffs' land after the primary term was over.
When faced with the issue, courts have found an implied covenant to produce in mineral leases for a term of years with a thereafter clause. This recognizes that a lessor enters into a mineral lease with the purpose and expectation of receiving royalties. In Stoddard v. Illinois Improvement & Ballast Co. (1916), 275 Ill. 199, 200, 113 N.E. 913, 914, the lessor of a stone quarry sought damages based on the lessee's refusal to quarry. The lease was "* * * for a term of ten years, `or as long thereafter as the property is suitable for quarrying purposes.'" The court found an implied covenant that the lessees would quarry stone with reasonable diligence if it was found and so long as it was found in a quantity and kind that could be quarried at a profit to the lessee. See also Annot., Implied obligation of purchaser or lessee to conduct search for, or to develop or work premises for, minerals other than oil and gas, 76 A.L.R.2d 721 (1961).
It occurs to us that both of the parties and the trial court have unduly emphasized the "implied covenant to produce" aspect of mineral leases. Zeigler argues that it has complied with its covenant to produce by mining in the vicinity and that this extends its right to mine coal from plaintiffs' premises. The Dethloffs argue that defendant's failure to mine from their land within the 25-year term terminates the lease. And the trial judge found an implied covenant to produce coal from plaintiffs' premises. In our view, what the defendant lessee covenanted to do during the primary term is not at issue at all, and it is wholly unnecessary to imply a covenant to produce.
On the second page of the lease appears a paragraph that was marked through in pen and "VOID" was handwritten over the printed wording. That stricken paragraph spoke of the proposal to lease "coal in other lands" and "in a substantial block in which the above described leased lands will be included." This provision having been voided, we deem Zeigler's "vicinity" or "block of coal" assertion under the habendum clause as meaningless and the argument simply falls. At best, the terms "vicinity" and "block" are rendered so ambiguous as to afford no clear direction, definition or meaning in the context of this lease.
The litigants dispute not only the measure of damages but also the character of the trespass. The remaining two major issues measure of damages and good faith or wilful trespasser are inexorably intertwined. They are interdependent and the former is actually determined by which latter category the defendant here qualifies for. Lambach v. Town of Mason (1944), 386 Ill. 41, 53 N.E.2d 601, discusses the measure of damages for the trespassory taking of oil and gas which we deem equally adaptable to cases dealing with the taking of coal. Lambach dealt with a trespasser who acted in "good faith" and the supreme court held that such a trespasser was entitled to a credit for the reasonable cost and expenses of drilling, completing, equipping and operating the well, and producing the oil, less the reasonable value of any of the equipment salvaged. (It is not stated in the opinion at what point in the production and distribution chain the value of the oil and gas to the owner was to be determined.)
Lambach relies on Guffey v. Smith (1915), 237 U.S. 101, 59 L.Ed. 856, 35 S.Ct. 526, a case that arose in Illinois, but was decided under the notions of a Federal common law. The defendants in Guffey were assignees under a lease and took their assignment without actual notice of a prior recorded lease that was held by complainants. They acted upon the advice of an abstractor who failed to make a proper examination of the record. With the lessor's approval, lessee-defendants drilled wells and developed oil. When advised of the prior lease and of the complainants' purpose to insist upon their rights and to obtain redress, defendants persisted in the drilling, production, and sale of oil. The supreme court held that damages for oil taken up to the point that defendants acquired actual notice of the prior lease were measurable by the value of the oil in the pipeline where sold, less cost of improvements and operations whereby oil was taken from the earth and delivered at the pipeline. The damages for oil taken after actual notice was given, however, were indeed another matter. A distinction between a good faith and a wilful trespass is drawn from this reasoning from Guffey:
"[T]he constructive notice resulting from the recording of the prior lease was not inconsistent with an honest, though mistaken, belief on their [defendants'] part that they had acquired a perfect right to take and dispose of the oil. But the expenses incurred after August 1, 1907, are upon a different footing. On that date Solley and his associates were actually and fully informed of the prior lease and of the complainants' purpose to insist upon the rights conferred by it and to obtain redress for the invasion of those rights, so what was done thereafter cannot be regarded as anything less than a wilful taking and appropriation of the oil which was subject to the complainants' superior right." (237 U.S. 101, 118-19, 59 L.Ed.2d 856, 866, 35 S.Ct. 526, 531-32.)
Although not specifically expressed in the opinion, it seems the wilful trespasser receives no credit for his production efforts.
The annotation at 21 A.L.R.2d 380 (1952) sets out the general rules: Where the taking of coal is in good faith, the so-called mild rule applies. This is the value of the minerals in situ. Where such value cannot be ascertained, the measure is (1) the market royalty; (2) the value of minerals after extraction, less production costs. But if the taking is wilful, reckless, or intentional, or without claim of right or title, the trespasser is liable for the enhanced value of the product when and where it is finally converted to the trespasser's use, without any deduction for expenses incurred, or for any value he may have added to the mineral by his labor. (A.L.R. lists the jurisdictions stating this rule as the United States, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.)
As pointed out in the A.L.R. annotation, Lambach was a break with the established Illinois precedent. Our review of the cases leads us to conclude that the measure of damages, without regard to the character of the trespass, had been the value of the coal at the mouth of the pit, less the cost of conveying the coal from the place where dug to the mouth, but not allowing credit for mining and digging. The seminal case appears to be Robertson v. Jones (1874), 71 Ill. 405. There, the question presented for review was the correct measure of damages and the court said this:
"[I]n an action of trespass, he has the right to recover the value of the coal after it is dug in the bank; or, he could recover the value of the coal at the mouth of the pit, less the cost of conveying it, after dug, from the mine to the mouth of the pit." 71 Ill. 405, 407.
Thirty some years later, in the case of McGuire v. Boyd Coal & Coke Co. (1908), 236 Ill. 69, 86 N.E. 174, there was a knowing and intentional taking of coal. The parties (and the supreme court) agreed that the measure of damages was the value of the coal at the mouth of the pit, less the cost of conveying it there from the place where mined. Defendant argued that its costs should include all work connected with the production of the coal, except the actual cost of separating it from its natural position by the miner, and costs of constructing the mine, sinking the shaft, and of permanent structures. The supreme court held that the trespasser was not entitled to the additional costs. (However, it does appear that the defendant was allowed a deduction for impurities extracted from the mined coal. Here, Zeigler argues for such a deduction also.)
A variation on this measure is found in Smothers v. Cosgrove-Meehan Coal Co. (1932), 264 Ill. App. 488. There, the value of the coal to the owner was established as its market value f.o.b. the mine. The trespasser was entitled to its costs of loading the coal upon cars, in addition to the costs of transporting it to the mouth of the pit. This rule had earlier been applied in Donovan v. Consolidated Coal Co. (1900), 187 Ill. 28, 58 N.E. 290.
It can readily be seen that we can value the coal at any point in the marketing chain, so long as we give credit to the trespasser for transporting it there. This springs from the notion that we cannot value something without an appropriate market; and to speak of value without a market is impossible, at least as far as this case is concerned. Zeigler argues that the measure of damages should be determined under the royalty method. This method gives the wronged owner only the royalty for coal prevailing in his field or vicinity. In our case, Zeigler's testimony is that this would be 15 cents per ton. Other jurisdictions have used this method, especially when the owner was not developing the mineral himself. However, this method of valuation finds no support in Illinois law.
• 4 We conclude that Lambach changed the law of damages recoverable from a good faith trespasser to conform to the general rule: That is, the good faith trespasser is allowed to deduct his production costs from the value of the coal as measured at the mouth of the pit.
(Since the trespasser in Lambach was held to be in good faith, we cannot say that the rule as to wilful trespassers has been brought into conformity with the general rule. The old Illinois rule treats a wilful trespasser more leniently than does the general rule. In Illinois, the wilful trespasser receives credit for the costs of moving the coal to the pit mouth, or other place. Under the general rule, the wilful trespasser receives no such credit.)
This issue arose when the Dethloffs presented a motion in limine to preclude evidence on Zeigler's cost of operation of the mine; on the cost, purchase price, or consideration for the plaintiffs' property; on payments made or tendered to the plaintiffs or their predecessors by the defendant; and on the provisions of the lease which formerly existed. The trial court granted the motion, making clear that it was ruling as a matter of law that defendant could not show its good faith.
There is no national consensus as to what constitutes good faith in this context. And the Illinois cases seem reluctant to adjudge a trespasser in good faith.
In Donovan v. Consolidated Coal Co. (1900), 187 Ill. 28, 58 N.E. 290, the issue of good faith was presented by appellant, who owned a tract with a coal mine. He also owned the surface of an adjoining tract, but appellee owned the coal under the surface. Appellant entered into a lease, granting the right to mine the coal under both tracts. Appellant's sublessee mined appellee's coal, and an action was brought for trespass. The supreme court held the appellant was liable for the trespass. The measure of damages was found to be the full value of the coal at the mouth of the pit less the cost of transporting it from the place where it was dug to the mouth, and if it was loaded upon railroad cars, less the loading costs.
Appellant argued that this measure was not applicable to the case because it was not a wilful trespasser, and that the proper measure would be the value of the coal as it was before it was mined. Appellant pointed to the evidence that he had never had possession of appellee's coal, and never claimed title to it; that he had a large plat in his office; that in making the contract he failed to remember that the coal had been sold to plaintiff; that he could give no other explanation of his contract; and never intended to dispose of the plaintiff's coal.
The supreme court rejected appellant's argument, holding that negligence or innocent mistake on the part of the trespasser does not bring him within the good faith rule.
As noted under the preceding issue, Lambach adopted Guffey v. Smith (1915), 237 U.S. 101, 59 L.Ed. 856, 35 S.Ct. 526, as stating the distinction between the two classes of trespassers. Under Guffey, a good faith trespasser apparently must have an honest, though mistaken, belief that he has acquired a perfect right to take and dispose of the mineral. One may become a wilful trespasser by proceeding in the face of actual notice of an adverse claim.
Good faith has been defined as something more than the trespasser's assertion of a colorable claim to the minerals. (United States v. Wyoming (1947), 331 U.S. 440, 91 L.Ed. 1590, 67 S.Ct. 1319, rehearing denied (1947), 332 U.S. 787, 92 L.Ed. 370, 68 S.Ct. 37.) Good faith requires that the taking be without culpable negligence or a wilful disregard of the rights of others and in the honest and reasonable belief that it was rightful. (Miller v. Tidal Oil Co. (1932), 161 Okla. 155, 17 P.2d 967.) The Kentucky Supreme Court has listed four factors to be considered as evidencing good faith:
(1) At least reasonable doubt of the other party's exclusive or dominant right;
(2) That the trespasser acted upon advice of reputable counsel;
(3) That a court of competent jurisdiction had rendered a favorable judgment upon identical or similar issues;
(4) Whether delay would endanger loss, and urgent action would seem to be called for, recognizing that a distinction is to be made between land producing mineral ores and land producing fugacious minerals (oil). Swiss Oil Corp. v. Hupp (1934), 253 Ky. 552, 69 S.W.2d 1037.
That court also noted that the test of good faith is not the trespasser's violation of the law in light of the maxim that every man knows the law, but is his sincerity and his actual intention at the time. And the Kentucky Supreme Court has also said that the mere fact of notice of an adverse claim (or even the pendency of a suit asserting an adverse claim) would not be conclusive on the question that a claimant had not acted in good faith, because he might honestly be of the opinion that his contention was right. Loeb v. Conley (1914), 160 Ky. 91, 169 S.W. 575.
The facts relied on by Zeigler to justify its trespass are that it acted under the lease, that its own officers and independent counsel considered their title to be good, and that their development of the coal was economically necessary. But on the other side of the coin, defendant had some five or six years after receiving notice of plaintiffs' adverse claim during which it could have obtained a declaration of rights under the lease. The question of good faith here was a very crucial issue and in our view a factual determination too illusive to be decided as a matter of law. We conclude that the trial court was unwarranted in invading the jury's domain.
Turning now to the lesser issues, Zeigler argues that its motion for change of venue was improperly denied because it could not receive a fair trial in Douglas County. Defendant points to its 200-plus affidavits and says that reasons for prejudice are clear from local newspaper coverage regarding rulings of the circuit court, the fact that in prior years defendant and some county residents had disputes over consideration for leasing rights, and that there had been efforts to organize residents of the county to negotiate lease rights with defendant.
Since the venue question was presented after plaintiffs' declaratory relief was granted, it comes too late. Section 3 of the venue act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 146, par. 3; now Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 110, par. 503) provides:
"Every application for a change of venue by a party or his attorney shall be by petition, setting forth the cause of the application and praying a change of venue, which petition shall be verified by the affidavit of the applicant. A petition for change of venue shall not be granted unless it is presented before trial or hearing begins and before the judge to whom it is presented has ruled on any substantial issue in the case, provided that if any grounds for such change of venue occurs thereafter, a petition for change of venue may be presented based upon such grounds." (Emphasis added.)
In Gilliland v. Board of Education (1977), 67 Ill.2d 143, 365 N.E.2d 322, a petition for change of venue was filed after the trial judge had ruled on a motion to dismiss the complaint. The supreme court held that denial of the late petition for change of venue was proper, and cited section 3 of the venue act.
In Gilliland, the prejudice alleged was that of a judge. In our case, the inhabitants of the county are said to be biased. However, the language of section 3 refers to "[e]very application." Furthermore, section 1 provides in part:
"A change of venue in any civil action may be had in the following situations:
(2) Where any party or his attorney fears that he will not receive a fair trial in the court in which the action is pending, because the inhabitants of the county are or the judge is prejudiced against him, or his attorney, or the adverse party has an undue influence over the minds of the inhabitants. In any such situation the venue shall not be changed except upon application, as provided in this Act, or by consent of the parties." (Emphasis added.) Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 110, par. 501.
In reading section 3 together with section 1(2), it is clear that "[e]very application" is intended to cover applications alleging the prejudice of the inhabitants as well as those alleging the prejudice of the judge. The reason for the rule requiring an early filing of the application is the need for the orderly and efficient administration of trials. We perceive that the legislature intended, by means of section 3, to require that any application for change of venue be before the trial judge early in the proceedings so as to permit a proper scheduling of the case. Any other reading of section 3 would permit its use as a weapon for the dilatory litigant, and we do not see this as the purpose intended.
• 5 Our holding on the venue issue is that an application for change of venue premised upon the prejudice of the inhabitants of a county is not timely filed if the trial or hearing begins and the judge has ruled on any substantial issue.
We find that there is an alternate basis for affirming the trial judge on this issue.
• 6 There was extensive voir dire examination in the case at bench and the trial court granted defendant extra peremptory challenges. We especially note that Zeigler used only seven of its eight peremptory challenges. Corbetta Construction Co. v. Lake County Public Building Com. (1978), 64 Ill. App.3d 313, 381 N.E.2d 758, holds that where a party does not exhaust peremptory challenges while seeking jurors acceptable to it, there is no abuse of discretion in denying a petition for change of venue.
The trial court heard the voir dire examination, and found no prejudice existing in the jurors who were selected. This court should not reverse unless the trial court abused its discretion. Gouker v. Winnebago County Board of Supervisors (1967), 37 Ill.2d 473, 228 N.E.2d 881.
No abuse of discretion shown.
Defendant turns our attention now from the larger issues to the smaller.
• 7 First, error is claimed because during opening argument Dethloffs' attorney commented that the sale price for coal at the mine approached $20 per ton. Defendant attacks not the $20 figure, but the reference to a sales price. Zeigler contends that the possible measures of value are value of the coal at the mouth of the pit, or leasehold value, or profit and loss experience of defendant. We see no error in assuming that the value of coal taken by a trespasser is the price obtained by the trespasser for that coal at the mine, less the credits allowed by law, which is essentially what counsel was saying. No error.
• 8 Defendant next claims error because Zeigler's computer printout of its business records showing prices received for coal from the mine was received in evidence. The objection at trial was that the price was not shown to be the price at the mouth of the pit. This exhibit was described by Mr. Corman, Zeigler's vice president and comptroller, as a 12-page sales register for the Murdock Mine, one for each month of calendar year 1976. It shows total tonnage sold and the total charge to customers, monthly tonnage and charges, differentiates between raw and washed coal, and shows a current or prevailing price figure. This was a relevant exhibit. No error. • 9 Defendant objects to admission of the deposition of Helfinstine which concerned tests made under his supervision and control in 1967 and 1968 and which established the specific gravity of coal from the Murdock Mine. Defendant's specific objection at trial was that the tests were not shown to have been made under Helfinstine's supervision and control. The trial court ruled that while some tests were not so performed, the deposition showed that the tests at issue were made under his supervision and control. The record also discloses that Helfinstine was a public official and that the records were maintained in connection with his duties. The evidence was properly admitted. People ex rel. Wenzel v. Chicago & North Western Ry. Co. (1963), 28 Ill.2d 205, 190 N.E.2d 780.
Next, defendant alleges that the trial court should have precluded plaintiffs' impeachment of witness Corman. Mr. Corman testified on direct examination that the cost of loading and hauling coal to the mouth of the mine was $1.317 per ton. On cross-examination, plaintiffs' counsel read from a deposition where Corman had given the cost as $1.038 per ton. He said at trial that the $1.317 figure includes costs for a conveyor, but that the $1.038 figure did not. However, the answer given by Corman in the deposition, that costs were $1.038, includes the cost of the conveyor. The deposition was impeaching. No error.
The coal company was precluded from offering testimony of witnesses Hill and Rogers as to the crushing and washing of coal after it reached the mouth of the mine, but before it went to customers. Rogers said that in his expert opinion the coal would have no value at the mouth of the mine to its customers before it passed through a crusher.
• 10 Although we disagree with such view that the coal had no value at the mouth of the mine, we likewise disagree with the Dethloffs that Zeigler is not entitled to credit for enhancement of the coal. Economic reality tells us that no one is standing at the mouth of the mine seeking to purchase the coal. Therefore, there is no market at that point and we are unable to assign a value to the coal. As we have heretofore pointed out, the measure of damages is for value in situ, but since we can't measure value there, courts have hit upon evaluating at the mouth of the mine. (If ever coal was marketed from the mouth, it is no longer.) Accordingly, defendant should recover cost for loading and hauling to the mouth, as has always been allowed. In addition, defendant should receive credit for the steps in preparing the coal to the state where it becomes coal f.o.b. the mine. Especially is this so where, as here, plaintiffs are relying on defendant's sales price for valuation.
• 11 Defendant's argument that evidence of its costs of mining should have been admitted stands on a different footing. Defendant argues that had it not mined plaintiffs' coal, it would not have incurred these costs. True but if that were the case, then defendant would not have been a trespasser, either. Here again, the good faith/wilful trespasser issue is crucial. The rule of damages does not allow a wilful trespasser to deduct mining costs, but costs of mining are quite relevant in the case of a good-faith trespasser.
As plaintiffs' counsel was about to use a deposition to impeach George Seaman, a registered surveyor employed by Zeigler, defendant's counsel objected. Plaintiffs' counsel stated:
"This is a witness under the control of the Defendant. He's an employee of the Defendant. A person who made measurements and who made responses to questions concerning measurements and now he is starting to allude. He's making a statement different from what he made before."
• 12 The trial court denied defendant's motion for mistrial but ruled that the witness could not be impeached. Error, if any, did not affect the verdict and is governed by the harmless error doctrine. Lawson v. G.D. Searle & Co. (1976), 64 Ill.2d 543, 356 N.E.2d 779.
Defendant complains of the trial court's rulings on some 15 of the tendered instructions. Since 12 of those instructions go to measure of damages, definitions, issues, or burdens of proof, we do not need to minutely deal with them. Our substantive treatments in this opinion clarify how the jury is to be instructed in those matters in the event of a retrial of this cause.
We are prompted, however, to comment upon the other three of those instructions: Plaintiffs' #5 and defendant's #17 and #18.
• 13, 14 Plaintiffs' #5. Defendant contends it was error to give this one because it told the jury, "The Court had already entered a judgment that the defendant is liable to the plaintiffs for the mining of coal from the plaintiffs' property" and characterized the lawsuit as "* * * an action for trespass to land." Zeigler's tendered instruction advised the jury that plaintiffs sought recovery for trespass by defendant and told the jury they were to decide the amount of "just compensation to be paid plaintiffs." We cannot see the giving of plaintiffs' instruction as error, and defendant's instruction is no more accurate or less argumentative. Furthermore, the injection into the case of the eminent domain concept of "just compensation" would not have been proper.
Defendant's #17 and #18. Both recited that a verdict must be unanimous. Both were denied. The pertinent part of Illinois Pattern Instructions, Civil, No. 45.01 (2d ed. 1971) (hereinafter IPI) reads:
"Forms of verdict are supplied with these instructions. After you have reached your verdict, fill in and sign the appropriate form of verdict and return it into court. The verdict should be signed by each of you. You should not write or mark upon this or any of the other instructions given you by the court."
There is nothing in this or any other IPI Civil instruction concerning unanimity of verdicts. No. 17 adds the language: "In order to return a verdict, it is necessary that each juror agree. Your verdict must be unanimous." No. 18 adds to the IPI form only: "Your verdict must be unanimous." The court refused #17 and #18 and gave the plaintiffs' #7 in IPI form.
• 15 Not only was the verdict signed by each member of the jury, but the record reflects that it was also polled. While we consider it a better practice to have the jury instructed that their verdict must be unanimous and hope that the IPI Civil instruction will be amended accordingly there was no error here.
There is no basis for claiming that the verdict was the result of passion or prejudice on the jury's part. The trier of fact arrived at a simple arithmetic figure, based on the evidence. Coal was taken. Zeigler was liable. Given the terms of the trial court's charge, the jurors had little latitude. Error, if any, was in the charge.
The trial court, in the declaratory judgment on count III (term of lease), ruled that the laches, estoppel, and accord and satisfaction had not been proved. Defendant claims that these defenses are different as they pertain to the trespass count, yet any such differences are not pointed out in its briefs. We do not perceive the distinction.
• 16 Zeigler points out that it expended large sums of money in developing its mine over many years, and claims that the Dethloffs simply stood by until their coal was mined. As we view the case, defendant had notice of an adverse claim long before it entered plaintiffs' land. Plaintiffs sued soon after the entry. Laches, of course, akin to a statute of limitations, would relate to the time element. We have here only a couple of months between entry and suit. This clearly is not the type of case for which estoppel is intended: "A" builds a garage; "B" watches without protest, knowing that "A" is mistaken in building on "B's" land; "B" claims the finished product. Laches and estoppel simply don't apply.
• 17 The accord and satisfaction is said to arise from plaintiffs' retention of royalty checks issued in early 1976. Mr. Dethloff, however, asserted that he retained these checks only to later prove the quantity of coal taken, and the fact that they were never cashed or deposited appears to us to cause this theory to dissipate.
• 18 Defendant argues that a verdict should have been directed because plaintiffs failed to introduce any evidence of the value of the coal at the mouth of the pit. But even if there were an absolute failure of proof on the measure of damages, defendant would not be entitled to a directed verdict in a trespass case, since the law implies at least nominal damages for the wrong. Additionally, there is an alternate rule of valuation from the Donovan and Smothers cases: value of the coal f.o.b. the mine. Plaintiffs proved this measure when they introduced the defendant's sales records for coal f.o.b. the mine.
• 19 We conclude that the trial court correctly precluded the jury from considering the punitive damages alleged in count II. We so hold for three basic reasons:
First, Zeigler's conduct was not oppressive or vindictive, even though it may have been a wilful disregard of the Dethloffs' rights. This is highlighted by the fact that defendant kept accurate records of what it took from plaintiffs' land (although the records are apparently required by law). The fact that a defendant displayed a conscious disregard or indifference to the rights of a plaintiff should not be enough here, because oppression must also be present or other circumstances which can be said to equate oppression. In Roark v. Musgrave (1976), 41 Ill. App.3d 1008, 355 N.E.2d 91, punitive damages were awarded, in addition to the value of timber cut. But there, the scenic beauty of land bought for recreational use was impaired. In Miller v. Simon (1968), 100 Ill. App.2d 6, 241 N.E.2d 697, realtors had stripped topsoil from two lots owned by plaintiff, and had dumped gravel on them, all in furtherance of developing the 300 surrounding lots which they owned. The court termed the actions of defendant in response to protests by plaintiffs as defiant, irresponsible, and aggravating. Punitive damages were allowed.
Second, the measure of damages in cases of this nature does more than simply compensate plaintiffs for any loss. In fact, there is inherently involved a punitive aspect already. (See Annot., 21 A.L.R.2d 380, 382 (1952).) The economic value of this coal to these plaintiffs, who could not themselves mine it, was the value of the right to mine, or the 15 cents per ton royalty.
Third, punitive damages are not favored in the law, and their application is to be carefully watched. In Knierim v. Izzo (1961), 22 Ill.2d 73, 174 N.E.2d 157, the supreme court decided that an action is maintainable by the widow against the murderer of her husband for great mental anguish that resulted from the defendant's threat to her that he would kill her husband and the fulfillment of the threat. The supreme court said:
"Whether punitive damages may be assessed in a particular case is properly a question of law. [Citation.] Generally such damages may be recovered in cases where the wrongful act complained of is characterized by wantonness, malice, oppression or circumstances of aggravation. [Citation.] The alleged conduct of the defendant in intentionally causing the severe emotional disturbance is characterized by these elements. Indeed it is the outrageous nature of his conduct that forms the basis for the action.
We believe, nevertheless, that punitive damages cannot be sanctioned as an additional recovery in such an action. Since the outrageous quality of the defendant's conduct forms the basis of the action, the rendition of compensatory damages will be sufficiently punitive." 22 Ill.2d 73, 87-88, 174 N.E.2d 157, 165.
Plaintiffs have shown nothing more malicious, oppressive, or aggravating than the action of trespass contemplates, and punitive damages are not warranted.
Zeigler was entitled to have the issue of good faith submitted to the jury. Because the trial court precluded this, a new trial is necessary. However, we are graphically aware of the weeks devoted to the trial of this cause, the plethora of pleadings and motions involved, the countless legal and judicial manhours devoted, and the vast financial expense entailed. In order to hopefully avoid a replay of such efforts, we would prefer to utilize a procedural device found in Smothers v. Cosgrove-Meehan Coal Co. (1932), 264 Ill. App. 488. We believe that one reasonable approximation of a fair verdict can be arrived at by multiplying the tonnage of 215,247 by the net profit of $7.31, equaling $1,573,455.57. (The tonnage represents a net figure after deducting impurities. Counsel for plaintiffs argued to the jury that $17.91 was the average price per ton realized by defendant. Defendant claims that its cost was $10.60 per ton.)
The bottom line is this: If plaintiffs will agree to remittitur within 28 days, in the office of the clerk of this court, the judgment will be affirmed in the amount of $1,573,455.57. Otherwise, the cause is reversed and remanded for a new trial on count I in a manner consistent with this opinion.
(Caveat: By positing the facts upon which the suggested verdict is based, this court expresses no view as to the validity of the facts, or their relevance in any further proceedings.)
Affirmed upon remittitur; otherwise, reversed and remanded for a new trial.
REARDON, P.J., and TRAPP, J., concur.
The remittitur reducing the amount of the judgment to $1,573,455.57 having been filed in this court on March 14, 1979, the judgment of the circuit court as modified is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
REARDON, P.J., and TRAPP, J., concur.
© 2002 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:
Vintage Swiss ladies Art Deco diamond and sapphire wrist watch by Omega. This platinum watch features 86 pave set single cut and Old European cut diamonds at 2.73 carat total weight having VS1-SI1 clarity and G color, along with 8 channel set, custom cut baguette sapphires. This watch also has the original silver dial and a 17 jewel movement by Omega, circa 1920. Weight of the watch is 18.5 grams. Movement #6247285. Appraisal value is $13,452.
4 other shoppers have this item in their Cart or Wish List .
California's Finest Collective ~ Over 35 Years Experience
Summer Sale Going on NOW! Save 20-80% on select furniture, fine art, jewelry, clocks and more!
|Shipping & Handling :
Price for shipping to USA
change location
UPS Next Day Air

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Friday, July 26, 2013
Claire Donato, Amina Cain & Jeff T. Johnson
The Poetic Research Bureau presents...
Saturday, July 27 2013
Doors open @ 6:30pm, reading starts 7pm
NOTE: Perform Chinatown is happening on the same night. We will be starting promptly at 7pm to accommodate a performance in our space at 8pm. Stick around after the reading to see Sheree Rose perform.
The Poetic Research Bureau @ Telic Arts
951 Chung King Rd.
Los Angeles, CA
Claire Donato is the author of the novel Burial, from Tarpaulin Sky Press. She grew up in Pittsburgh, PA, holds an MFA in Literary Arts from Brown University, and lives in Brooklyn, NY. Her fiction, poetry, and lyric essays have appeared or are forthcoming in the Boston Review, Aufgabe, Encyclopedia, Evening Will Come, Octopus, and 1913: a journal of forms. She is the author of a poetry chapbook, Someone Else's Body (Cannibal Books), and was recently a finalist for the National Poetry Series. For more information, visit somanytumbleweeds.com.
Amina Cain is the author of Creature (Dorothy, a publishing project, fall 2013) and I Go To Some Hollow (Les Figues Press, 2009). Stories have appeared in places such as Denver Quarterly and the Encyclopedia Project and are forthcoming in BOMB and n+1. You can read more about her at aminacain.com.
Jeff T. Johnson's poetry is forthcoming or has recently appeared in coconut, smoking glue gun, and Newark Review 3.0, and he holds a digital residency at The Organism for Poetic Research. Critical writing has appeared in The Aviary, Poetry Project Newsletter, Sink Review, The Rumpus, and elsewhere. With Claire Donato, he collaborates on SPECIAL AMERICA. He lives in Brooklyn, is Editor in Chief at LIT, and edits Dewclaw. He teaches at The New School and St. John's University. For more information, visit jefftjohnson.com.
Posted by Joseph Mosconi at 2:44 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
Acrylic Jewelry Tbar Organizer Display 10 1/2" x 4"D x 10"H. Tbar : 1/2" Dia. Made In Taiwan
Free Shipping on Orders Over $75
Use spaces to separate tags. Use single quotes (') for phrases.
You have no items in your shopping cart.
You have no items to compare.
Free Shipping on orders over $75. This offer is valid on all our store items.


text:
...I am here to help and encourage. So, don't hesitate to contact me for an encouraging tutorial experience.-I have over 25 years teaching/tutoring math and science. -I have extensive experience tutoring math at the following levels: Elementary, Middle School, High School, GED, and College. -I am w...
Lawrenceville, GAView Tutor
...I am a certified Math teacher and have taught math including Geometry for over 20 years. I am a certified Math teacher grades 7-12. I have over 20 years experience in Mathematics teaching in many Math subjects including Algebra 1 & 2, Geometry, Precalculus, Calculus among others.
Woodstock, GAView Tutor
As a highly dedicated professional with a strong background in K-12 education, I can provide the tutoring your students needs. For example, I have taught Physics, AP Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Anatomy and Physiology, Environmental Science, and Biology at the high school level. In additi...
Ellenwood, GAView Tutor
...I have taught 6th, 7th and 8th grade mathematics on the middle school level and I have taught Algebra and Geometry on the high school level. I have served in the military for seven years. I have a passion for teaching and enjoying helping students to understand mathematics.
Atlanta, GAView Tutor
...I have exceptional leadership, project management, and statistical analysis and modeling skills, and I am proficient in SPSS software (using it for statistical analysis and modeling) and Modeler software (using it for statistical analysis and modeling and for text and data mining). I am also pre...
Atlanta, GAView Tutor


text:
It makes you appreciate life so much more for what it is.. You only get one of these things and all the louis vuitton, hermes, balenciaga and dior couture cannt even compare to one of those.. So you have to give it all that you can..
Live life to the fullest, the most respectably as you can, as humble as possible and as fly & fashionable as it gets!!
Love you guys!!
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone


text:
The face of an angel and the body of a playboy bunny - meet the very delicious sxygal ...
alot of the best shots, was asked for some more clear pics, and showing more. here u go, hope u enjoy
Get complete and unrestricted access to all photos and videos - Upgrade Today
No Account? Register for FREE


text:
This is a book about the causes, effects, and coping strategies pertaining to Schizoaffective Disorder. The story is an account of my struggle with this difficult mental illness. The book is a description of a descent into madness, the repercussions of that descent, and the things I did to get my life back on track after my frightening and bizarre experience with Schizoaffective Disorder. If you or someone you know is suffering from Schizoaffective Disorder, Schizophrenia, Bi-Polar Disorder, or severe depression, then you should think about reading this book. This book provides insight into the mind of a person affected by this most misunderstood illness and explains the steps necessary to make a full recovery from it. Readers of this book will come away with an understanding that there is much hope for people suffering from mental illness, and that if the illness is taken seriously, a meaningful and productive life can still be lived regardless.She tried doing everything except entering in my pin numbers and had no success. Then, The Voice told me ... I eventually had to go to the Customer Service desk and have a lady there make the transfer to the card for me. After my little runanbsp;...
|For a Minute, I Lost Myself: The Past and Present of a Schizophrenic
|Scott Gann
|Lulu.com - 2009-08-01


text:
MediaTakeOut.com CONFIRMED with two people close to the couple that rapper Fabolous and Emily are officially man and wife. The insiders told MediaTakeOut.com that the couple is not looking to publicize it. The couple – who are notoriously PRIVATE about their relationship – are said to have jumped the broom in a private ceremony in the Caribbean last month.
Both Fabolous and Emily are now rocking their wedding rings.
The insider explained, "Fab always told Em he would marry her. And he did. It's a true hip hop love story." See ladies, sometimes you have to HANG IN THERE FOR YOUR MAN!!
Here is a video, showing Fab wearing his wedding ring. Congrats to the happy couple – we knew it would PAY OFF for Emily.


text:
Best Fishing Times: 9:59AM to 11:59AM
Alternate Fishing Times: 2:09PM to 4:09PM
Fishing Fort Payne Dam, AL on 12/5/2016 will be best from 9:59AM through 11:59AM. If that time won't work for you, 2:09PM to 4:09PM looks promising. Remember to adjust these times based on barometric pressure, and weather changes.


text:
Duration: 13min 57sec Views: 387 Submitted: 1 year ago Submitted by:
Description: How's about a sweet solo play? Let's watch how an asian cutie fingers her sweet tight pussy so hard that it seems that she is gonna cum right now! She willingly puts her sensual fingers in her vulva and starts teasing it. She bends her waist in pure pleasure making her body shake and tremble in orgasmic culmination, what a beautiful show!


text:
this wiki
Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you've made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
- The mighty charger serves as the steed for all those who serve the Light.[1] (TCGWG 51)
The Charger is an epic version of the Warhorse mount only available to paladins. It is trainable at level 40 and up until Patch 4.0.1 was a reward for completing a lengthy quest series. Completing the lengthy chain awarded a Feat of Strength achievement and also rewarded Journeyman Riding. Training this ability at level 40 requires 150 riding skill and the Warhorse ability learned.
Alliance v Horde Edit
Blood elf paladins receive a different but similar ability, [Summon Thalassian Charger], by the same means. Humans and dwarves receive a [Charger] with blue livery and golden-plated armor, and which exudes a light golden aura. However, the blood elf Charger has red livery, with what appears to be brass armor, and exudes a reddish aura.
Charger questsEdit
These quests were removed in Patch 4.0.1
Patch changes Edit
- / Patch 4.0.1 (12-Oct-2010): Quest chain removed.
- Patch 3.2.0 (04-Aug-2009): Can now be learned at level 40.
- Patch 3.0.3 (04-Nov-2008): Is now available on the trainer at level 61, requiring 150 riding skill, and the non-epic mount learned.
- Patch 1.6.0 (12-Jul-2005): New icon.
- Patch 1.4.0 (2005-05-05): Added.
See also Edit
- [Argent Charger]
- [Bridle of the Argent Charger]
- Charger
- [Summon Charger]
External links Edit
- Lore


text:
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
|Thread Tools
Missionary, birth-worker, midwifery student
Mama to DD (9yr), DS (3yr), & UC twin DDs (5yr)
Me. With 1 spouse, 4 kids, 16 chickens, 74 matchbox cars, 968,562+ legos, a dishwasher waiting to be emptied, a washing machine waiting to be filled and a lost cup of tea in the house.
|Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
|Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Online Users: 11,477
|12 members and 11,465 guests
|Hedgehog , katelove , Lemongrass , lisak1234 , mckittre , mike121 , moominmamma , nlineb04 , rubelin , sciencemum , shantimama
|Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 01:21 PM.


text:
X360, PS3 Thursday, May 29, 2008 | 9:00 PM
BF:BC demo code giveway, it's here!
All comments1 2 ... 6 7 >>
I need one for the Xbox 360 Please.
Yes i have only just joined but i have been using this website for absoloutley ages!
Yes i have only just joined but i have been using this website for absoloutley ages!
I'm going for the ps3 version :)
I hope the amount of days that I'm a member won't keep me from winning! ;)
I'd like the code for Playstation 3, thanks!
I'd like the code for Playstation 3, thanks!
http://imageupload.com/out.php/i123440_att891050wm7.jpg<br> I would take the PS3 Version! PS3 is superior!!!
Xbox 360 version please :P
Xbox 360 version please :P
Madonna remercie Gamersyde!
About the game
- Battlefield: Bad Company
- Published by Electronic Arts
- Developed by DICE
- French release: Available
What's up?
Top stories
- Copyright 2007-2016 Gamersyde SARL
- About gamersyde - Privacy Policy
$693 of $700 per month
Log in
Gamersyde LiveNo upcoming streams
Express links
- Rockstar confirms Red Dead Redemption 2, coming Q4 2017
- inXile to launch crowdfunding campaign for Wasteland 3
- Hitman: The Complete First Season coming January 31
- Gran Turismo Sport release date delayed to 2017
- Ubisoft Motion Pictures announces "The Division" film
- Legendary to adapt Life Is Strange into digital series
- Red Dead Redemption on Xbox One Backward Compatibility
- BioShock: The Collection coming Sept. 13
- Batman: Return to Arkham delayed
- Xbox unveils Project Scorpio
- Koei Tecmo announces Berserk (working title)
- Techland officially becomes a global video game publisher
- No Man's Sky delayed to August 9
- Mass Effect: Andromeda will now ship in early 2017
- EA & Respawn developing a new Star Wars game


text:
Felim collapsed into the snow, exhausted. It felt like it would be the last fall this time, his limbs stiffening and flesh numb. The adventurer had heard of natives that thrived out here, men who slew bears and made coats of seal fur. But who could build anything out here...?
Just as he felt light start to fade, Felim cast his gaze up to see the sky one last time. He was startled - or would have been, if his body had the energy - to see a furred hood and a leathery face with a toothless grin. "Ho there, brother!" it spoke. "You came to just the right place."
"O Divine Broker, merchant of souls, bless our transaction, make it holy and righteous in Your sight. May those that profit from it be ever prosperous, and earn our reward in Your Sacred Market. Release us from our debts, and grant us lucrative exchange now and forever."
- Prayer before a trade, from Bashad the Spectacular's "The Handbook of Divine Wealth"
Any number of clergymen might be accused of putting their demands for secular wealth over their spiritual needs. Even these, however, would never claim to worship their prosperity. Yet such is the case with the followers of the Way of Divine Wealth, a religion of uncertain history and unabashed cupidity.
A spell for a penny
Red Dogs? his shop isnt on the market, you'll have to wind over behind it, on one of the back streets. Wont be hard to find though, just look for the metal dogs and you've found him.
Should we fail to deliver a good promised within seven days, whence it arrives it shall be delivered free of all charges.
Baldric and Frog's Semaine Promise
The customers who find this elusive little shop may leave with more than a simple love potion in their pocket.
Many think gold and silk are the way to wealth, but people always need to eat and they hate to eat the "same old bland thing". Thus they will always buy herbs, spices, and salt.
The Local Barron does not own this business, but he certain keeps it in business. It was named in his honor by two (now old) men who realized that non wizard generated cold drinks and foods could be profitable. In doing such, they have literally change the country.
The Returning Gem buys and sells goods, like a good pawn shop should.
Brownworks is a leatherworking shop and store. It is not much to look at from the outside. You know it is a leather shop the moment you open the door.
The city is large enough, and filled with enough nobles and rich merchants, that it can support a number of "frivolous businesses". Thus Garden in the City is the first Florist in the city (heck… in The Land).
It is an unassuming brick building. However, it is made assuming because it is surrounded by more traditional timber and plaster buildings. There are no windows and a very plain door. On the door is incribed the name of the establishment Zenorcans. Almost no one knows what goes on in there.
Silver Thread's shop is a tailors shop. The shop mistress and her crew can produce a wide variety of local styled clothing in a wide variety of local cloths. While most clothes are always custom made, Silver Thread's shop actually has premade clothing.
The Silver Chalice is the shop (and market stall) where Fredius Cancian of Amar sells his fine wines. His wines are a bit pricey, but worth the cost as they are generally better than the local wines. (note: He sells finer local wines as well, just they are few and far between).
On the intersection of Noble Avenue and First Street lies Kandorr's Fine Perfumery. The shop occupies the entire building which is built in a classical style with majestic marble pillars and stylish stained glass windows.
Nestled in between the other vendors and shops in the market is a small shop, humble in appearance, yet exclusive in clientele…
Wizard's Shop? Where's the Magic Shop? What sort of rubbish are you going on about sir?
It is a colorful shop, full of dolls, puppets, mannequins, small statues, and other things that are just "shadows" of a human. That is what this shop sells.
It was a single store that sold a variety of good made by a variety of people. It was such a novel concept that most people will dislike it. "It is just not the way we do things around here", they would say. Yet they still buy things here.
The city has clay tiles on its roofs. This is the bane of sneaky thieves in the city. So where do these tiles come from? And why does anyone think there might be an adventure related to this.
The old clock tower stands tall, but the bulk of the uppermost storey is crumbling and unsafe, with gaping cracks in the walls. The metal struts and girders supporting the great bronze bells are still intact, though, and the bells survive. The grotesque gargoyles and arabesques which decorated the original design have either fallen into the street (once or twice a year more bricks fall from the tower, prompting calls for its demolition) or have been defaced, but the main doors to the clock tower are still intact and show signs of being kept in working order. This is the home of The Captains, clad in raggedy clothes, with sooty faces, and perpetually runny noses. But behind each set of eyes is the look of a survivor. They live to stick together and make it through each day. Older than their years in many ways, the friendship they share with each other and Wims ghost keeps the core of a childs innocence and hope alive in each. But they are still very suspicious of outsiders. They are a group of street children who live in the clock tower. Some are orphans, some runaways, and some nomads who occasionally return to their homes. But they're all poor, dirty and perpetually hungry, as well as being wily, unscrupulous and mischievous in a fairly brutal way. Enough of them have suffered at the hands of adults for all of them to be wary of any grown-ups, particularly ones who ask too many questions, although with hard work and a lot of food it might be possible to win the confidence or even the trust of a few of them.


text:
Interested in iPhone and iPad apps development? Want to learn more? Whether you're a self-taught iPhone and iPad apps development genius or have just made your way through the pages of Beginning iOS 6 Development, we have the perfect book for you. More iOS 6 Development: Further Explorations of the iOS SDK digs deeper into Apple's latest iOS 6 SDK. Bestselling authors Dave Mark, Alex Horovitz, Kevin Kim and Jeff LaMarche explain concepts as only they can--covering topics like Core Data, peer-to-peer networking using GameKit and network streams, working with data from the web, MapKit, in-application e-mail, and more. All the concepts and APIs are clearly presented with code snippets you can customize and use, as you like, in your own apps. If you are going to write a professional iPhone or iPad app, you'll want to get your arms around Core Data, and there's no better place to do so than in the pages of this book. The book continues right where Beginning iOS 6 Development leaves off, with a series of chapters devoted to Core Data, the standard for Apple persistence. Dave, Alex, Kevin and Jeff carefully step through each Core Data concept and show techniques and tips specifically for writing larger apps--offering a breadth of coverage you won't find anywhere else. The Core Data coverage alone is worth the price of admission. But there's so much more! More iOS 6 Development covers a variety of networking mechanisms, from GameKit's relatively simple BlueTooth peer-to-peer model, to the addition of Bonjour discovery and network streams, through the complexity of accessing files via the web. Dave, Alex, Kevin, and Jeff will also take you through coverage of concurrent programming and some advanced techniques for debugging your applications. The enhanced multitasking, threading, memory management and more are important. Apps are getting more and more complex, including sophisticated game apps that offer virtual or augmented reality experiences and new mapping views that take advantage of sensors and other APIs in the newest iOS 6 SDK. Whether you are a relative newcomer to iPhone and iPad or iOS development or an old hand looking to expand your horizons, there's something for everyone in More iOS 6 Development. What you'll learn * All about Core Data: key concepts and techniques for writing larger applications * How to utilize a variety of networking mechanisms, including peer-to-peer connections over Bluetooth using GameKit * Details on the addition of Bonjour discovery and network streams * How to embed maps with Map Kit and use in-application email * How to access a user's iPod library and integrate music into apps * Essentials of concurrent programming and advanced debugging techniques * How to work with enhanced multitasking, threading, memory management and other APIs * Tips on working with data from the web and the cloud, including Apple's iCloud * How to work with the iOS 6 SDK when dealing with sensors, gyroscopes, etc. for augmented reality experiences in game and socia media apps Who this book is for All iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad app developers, especially developers already familiar with the basics of Apple's iPhone SDKs and who have read the previous volume, Beginning iOS 6 Development. Table of Contents * Here We Go Round Again * Core Data The What, Why
About David MarkDave Mark is a longtime Mac developer and author who has written a number of books on Mac and iOS development, including Beginning iPhone 4 Development (Apress, 2010), More iPhone 3 Development (Apress, 2010), Learn C on the Mac (Apress, 2008), The Macintosh Programming Primer series (Addison-Wesley, 1992), and Ultimate Mac Programming (Wiley, 1995). Dave loves the water and spends as much time as possible on it, in it, or near it. He lives with his wife and three children in Virginia.
Details Book
|David Mark
|Data Published
|26 December 2012
|Format Book
|PDF, Epub, DOCx, TXT
|Number of Pages
|552 pages
|Age +
|15 years
Reviews More IOS 6 Development
Margo Anderson Get eBook More IOS 6 Development
Finally I get this ebook, thanks for all these I can get now!
Lisa Doran Best website free download ebook
I was suspicious at first when i got redirected to the membership site. Now I'm really excited i found this online library....many thanks Kisses
Markus Jensen How to download More IOS 6 Development eBook?
I did not think that this would work, my best friend showed me this website, and it does! I get my most wanted eBook
Sandy Griffon to David Mark - thanks
wtf this great ebook for free?!
Roddy Murray
My friends are so mad that they do not know how I have all the high quality ebook which they do not!
Tina Milan
It's very easy to get quality ebooks ;)
Lindsay Brown
Lukasz Czaru
so many fake sites. this is the first one which worked! Many thanks
Caroline Smith
wtffff i do not understand this!
Andrew Smith
Just select your click then download link, and complete an offer to start downloading the ebook. If there is a survey it only takes 5 minutes, try any survey which works for you.
Kevin Mason
lol it did not even take me 5 minutes at all! XD


text:
Is Topnotch SoftsolIndiaPvt Ltd. incorrect or missing key business information? Update your Hotfrog listing today.
Contact details
Are these details correct?
Hotfrog INDIA provides information regarding Topnotch SoftsolIndiaPvt Ltd. in Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh. Topnotch SoftsolIndiaPvt Ltd. is located at 8-3-978 Main Road, Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh 500073 and provides Computers services. Contact them on 094400 63282.
Is Topnotch SoftsolIndiaPvt Ltd. in 8-3-978 Main Road, Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh 500073 your business? Claim your listing and attract more leads by adding more content, photos and other business details.
We have more Computers services in Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh available on Hotfrog INDIA. You can update your search for Hyderabad Computers by location, keyword or service options.
7-1-621/274/102, Mhr House, Sr Nagar, S R Nagar Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh 500038
Near Atillery Centre Gate Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh 500008
Floor 4, Uptown Banjara, Road 3, Banjara Hills 4th Floor Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh
Shop No 6, 9 - 6 - 193, Bhavan Nagar Colony, Santosh Nagar Hyderabad Uttar Pradesh 500059
Small Business Hub
Sharing tips, ideas and advice to help grow your small business.
Your profile without ads
Have you considered upgrading to Hotfrog AdVantage? No competitor advertising means exclusive focus on your business. You take centre stage.
Create your free Hotfrog business profile
Follow Hotfrog on:
Share on:
Hotfrog Small Business Hub


text:
Find everything you need to plan your visit to Niagara Falls right here!
Planning a visit?
Planning your visit to Niagara Falls has never been easier. First you need to figure out the best way to get here. Our How do I get to Niagara Falls page is full of information on everything from planes to trains and automobiles. The Travel Tips page tells you what to expect at the border to what type of weather you can expect. Of course you will want to view the falls in all its splendor but we're sure you will want to try some of the associated attractions. Just visit our attractions page and pick and choose what you might like to try. There are discount passes available for those who want to visit multiple attractions or if you have limited time just pay as you go. The next step is to decide on where you would like to stay. Our Niagara Falls Hotels pages offer all the insight you need to choose a place that will suit your needs.
Niagara Falls day to night timelapse video! (watch in full screen mode)
SPECIAL NOTICE: Terrapin Pointe on Goat Island is now open after extensive rehabilitation work and it's beautiful! You can read a full account of all the upgrades here.
The value of the Canadian dollar (also known as the Loonie) continues to plummet when compared to the US Dollar. If you are a US citizen and have ever considered taking a vacation to Niagara Falls Canada now is the time to do it! If you reserve your hotel now you will pay the current rate of exchange. Right now you can buy a Canadian dollar for $00.78 US.
Niagara Gorge Hiking
Many visitors to Niagara Falls are unaware that we possess some of the most beautiful hiking trails in North America. The area known as the Niagara Gorge begins at the Falls and extends almost 5.5 miles (9 km) to the north. The gorge is accessible at various points along the Niagara Parkway. You can hike down to the rivers edge for some breathtaking views of the local flora and fauna. Visit our hiking page for details!
Best Niagara Falls promo video!
The Niagara Falls Canada Tourism group hired Toronto based Skymotion to take some of the most impressive video we've ever seen of Niagara Falls. Using a remote controlled helicopter equipped with a video camera they captured from angles which have never been seen before. View the Niagara Falls Video.
Niagara Falls photo contest
Congratulations to the winners of our fifth annual Niagara Falls photo contest. We had hundreds of great entries from visitors from all over the world. A big thank you to all that participated !
Niagara Tower Hotel
If you are visiting Niagara Falls and want to stay at a truly unique hotel check out the Niagara Tower Hotel. Originally built in the 1960's as a restaurant and observation tower. In 2002 it was converted to a boutique hotel with floor to ceiling windows and a view that is second to none. Spend a night or two at this amazing Niagara Falls Hotel. Find more information here: Niagara Tower Hotel.
If we could recommend any one attraction that is a "must try" during the tourist season it would have to be the Whirlpool Jetboat Tours. It's truly a one of kind adventure for everyone. If you don't mind getting soaking wet, it's better than any e-ticket ride at Disney. And if you don't want to get wet, they now offer the "Jet Dome" for those looking for a more relaxed site seeing tour on the Niagara River. Visit their page for a great discount coupon and more information.


text:
clock application Windows 8 downloads - Free Download Windows 8 clock application - Windows 8 Downloads
Results: 1 - 20 of 153
Show: All Software Only Freeware
A clean looking Adobe Air desktop clock Clock is a simple analogue desktop time display application within a transparent native window. Users can ...
Price: FREE / Open Source
Clock.NET is a "simple always-on-top clock with alarms and calendar" that can do many ... anybody will like it. The general ideas while Clock.NET writing were style and simplicity. The "Clock.NET" ...
Price: FREE / Freeware
Voice Digital Clock and Digital Countdown Timer is a simple Windows application that allows both to count down the time ... of the programs button brings back default settings. Application brings back timer's display to default color. Also ...
Price: $9.99 / Shareware
... this calendar cannot be customized and personalized. Eusing Clock is a small desktop clock application that will place a great looking, colorful ...
Price: FREE / Freeware
Application that displays standard Windows OS analog clock on the desktop window. You can resize the clock and move it anywhere. Options: * Scale; * ...
Price: FREE / Freeware
Opaloflux Clock and Calendar Application is a stylish clock and calendar tool designed to replace the system clock with a more powerful application. This powerful application ...
Price: FREE / Freeware
Project Clock Web is a very affordable simple to use multi-user project time recording web application. Project Clock is a useful application for consultants, ...
Price: $35.00 / Commercial
Atomic Alarm Clock is an application that comes to replace the standard Windows clock. Offers users a bunch of extra utilities not ...
Price: $14.95 / Shareware
Perfect Free Alarm Clock is a free software that enables you to ... time, daily, or weekly basis. Perfect Free Alarm Clock not only plays any audio file you specify ...
Price: FREE / Freeware
The minimalist concept of this desktop clock wallpaper adds a nice effect to your background. ... time at your fingertips. With as much practical application as clever design, this unique clock could easily ...
Price: FREE / Freeware
Analogue Vista Clock is an outstanding quality alarm clock for your desktop. This awesome clock is a desktop extension - it will stay ...
Price: $14.95 / Shareware
Aquarius Soft PC Alarm Clock Pro is a simple, accurate, light, flexible, yet elegant and powerful PC alarm clock software. It's so good that we at Aquarius ...
Price: $14.90 / Shareware
... for users who want to display real time clock on their PC. When started, the software will ... real time. There are options to keep the clock always on top of other windows, to swap ...
Price: $19.99 / Shareware
This software offers a solution to users who want to play an MP3 file at a specified time. The user simply ...
Price: $19.99 / Shareware
... tracking time can be very valuable. Markosoft's Time Clock simplifies the capturing of time data and makes ... simple as clicking a button. And, the Time Clock's recently expanded reporting features create high resolution professional ...
Price: $23.00 / Shareware
Motivate Clock is a compact Air-based application whose purpose is to help you track how ... pushes you to manage your time better. Motivate Clock is a loyal and totally free digital assistant ...
Price: FREE / Freeware
Project Clock Pro is an easy to use multi-user project time tracking software application. Project Clock is a useful program for engineers, ...
Price: $55.00 / Commercial
Project Clock Standard is an affordable easy to use project time recording and time billing program. Project Clock is a useful application for consultants, lawyers, engineers ...
Price: $35.00 / Commercial
TimeClick is an effective employee time clock software solution for the small to mid-size business. ... creating a software to meet your employee time clock needs. Either run TimeClick alone on one computer ...
Price: $99.00 / Shareware
TimeClick is an effective employee time clock software solution for the small to mid-size business. ... creating a software to meet your employee time clock needs. Either run TimeClick alone on one computer ...
Price: $99.00 / Shareware
Results: 1 - 20 of 153
Show: All Software Only Freeware
Similar clock application for Windows 8 keywords
clock rss reader built in clock timer clock sync clock reader clock synchronizer clock practice clock application clock card clock in clock gadget clock widget clock swf clock screensavers clock screen saver clock on desktop clock radio clock mechanism screensaver clock christmas screensaver clock screensaver clock
Windows 8 Coupons
10% Off
MAGIX Music Maker
20% Off
Media Player Morpher
85% Off
IObit Uninstaller
50% Off
IObit Malware Fighter
50% Off
Saved Downloads
You have not saved any software.
Click "Save" next to each software.
Click "Save" next to each software.
Would you like to receive announcements of new versions of your software by email or by RSS reader?
FREE Registration Here!
Win8 Download Picks
Top Win8 Downloads
- MoboLot for Android Transfer
- Android PC Sync Manager
- MoboPlay for Android
- Android Sync for Windows
- Android Manager for Windows
- MoboPlay for PC
- Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Ultimate Vice City Mod
- Bluetooth Driver Installer
- Turbo C++
- Internet Explorer 11
- Windows 8
- Windows Movie Maker
- Dev-C++
- Adobe Flash Player
- Windows 8 x64


text:
Explore Educação Física, 1960 Paris e muito mais!
lapitiedangereuse: " Paris 60's - Academy for Physical Education final exam…
Noël à Paris dans les années 60.
back-then: French village. 1950s
books0977: " Woman reading at newsstand, "Ref. 105," Paris, 1958. Gérard Castello-Lopes (1925-2011). Courtesy Family Castello-Lopes, Paris. With a life divided between Portugal and France, he made his mark not only on cinema (both as a critic, actor,...
thinkabout6: " ©Garry Winogrand Women Are Beautiful Paris, 1969 "
the60sbazaar: " Fans at a Manchester Beatles concert "
federer7: " Nico Jesse, Boy drawing on a wall in the street, Paris, 1960 "
Paris 60s
Bw Snapshot,Bw Vintage,Manhã,Vida,Anos,Vernacular,Life,Years


text:
Pre-order now. Dispatches in 15-20 days*. Conditions Apply*
This product dispatches in 8-10 business days*. Conditions Apply*
Order today with Bajaao Express , and your product will dispatch in 24 hours
Special Import. Usually dispatches in 12-15 Days. Conditions Apply*
Special import. Dispatches in 5-8 days from International Warehouse. Conditions Apply*
This item is out of stock
Pearl VBL925SP VBL Vision Birch Drums
Pearl VBL925S VBL Birch Drum Shell Kit, 5-PieceThe affordable Pearl VBL925S VBL Vision Birch 100% birch drum shell kit produces a focused naturally EQ'd sound which is ideal for both stage and studio. This shell kit comes standard with professional two ply heads, a steel SensiTone snare drum and a high gloss lacquer finish.
Pearl VBL925S VBL Birch Drums: Birch Shells
Birch drums feature boosted high frequencies, slightly reduced mids, and a good low end punch, ideal for live and recorded situations when you want extra presence and cut.
Pearl VBL925S VBL Birch Drums: Steel SensiTone Snare
The Vision Series features Pearl's legendary SensiTone snare drums, which have been the choice of discerning drummers for years. As the name implies these drums provide extreme sensitivity combined with amazing tone and clarity due to their 5.5 inch steel shell, which projects intense volume with articulate response for dynamic power and cut.
Pearl's innovative SR900 Duo-Motion strainer can be converted from a side lever action to a Gladstone-type throw-off. The precision contoured lever allows for fast and absolute on/off function. A large adjustment knob insures fine tuning for superior snare sensitivity.
Pearl VBL925S VBL Birch Drums:
Professional Two Ply HeadsTwo ply heads are easier to tune, and deliver a full, powerful sound right out of the box. Vision is the only series in its category to be packaged with two ply heads.
Pearl VBL925S VBL Birch Drums:
SST (Superior Shell Technology) Shell DesignVision Series offers a sonically advanced recipe of strategically arranged plies of premium wood to maximize frequency response of every component. As with all Pearl drums, each shell is formed from our legendary SST construction process that uses extreme heat, Precision-cut scarf joints, our proprietary Acoustiglue and over 1000 lbs of hydraulic pressure to create the ultimate acoustic air chamber.
Collections: Acoustic Drum Kits, Drums & Percussion, Electronic and Acoustic Drum Kits, Mega Discount, Musical Instruments, OS, Over ₹50,000, Pearl
Sign up for access to exclusive deals, special offers and more …
© 2016 BAJAAO.COM. BAJAO | BAJAAO Music Private Limited


text:
modern warfare 3 prestige
Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you've made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
As a long term fan and player of the Call of Duty series it has been a passion of mine to create a fan site that would be of interest and benefit to other players and fans of the COD series. The aim of this site is to provide a quick overview of the main weapons of interest and see how they could be of benefit to you in your own way of playing the game. There have been so many times I have aimed on achieving the possession of a particular weapon only to find it doesn't perform as I dreamed and have ended up returning to the good old weapons I started with. If I had used a guide or seen how other players used the different types of weapons or how they related to different maps then I'm sure I would have made different choices. So in short I hope that the site is of interest and help to you and your friends. If you see any areas that need to be corrected or improved I am more then happy to listen.