text:
Opinion by Judge WEBB.
This case juxtaposes important air transportation safety procedures established by federal statute against remedies for defamation under state common law. Defendant, Air Wisconsin Airlines Corporation, appeals the judgment entered on a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff, William L. Hoeper, on his defamation claim, awarding $849,625 in compensatory damages and $391,875 in punitive damages.
Air Wisconsin primarily asserts that section 44941 of the Federal Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) provides immunity from liability for its employee's allegedly defamatory statements to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) connoting that Hoeper was a threat to a departing aircraft because he was mentally unstable and possibly armed. Hoeper cross-appeals the trial court's refusal to award prejudgment interest. These issues are before us on a C.R.C.P. 54(b) order entered pending retrial of Hoeper's outrageous conduct claim, on which the jury failed to reach a verdict.
We conclude that the trial court properly submitted the ATSA immunity issue to the jury; the record supports the jury's rejection of immunity; the employee's statements to TSA were not protected opinions because they conveyed provably false negative connotations; reviewed de novo, the record includes clear and convincing evidence that the employee acted with actual malice; and Hoeper did not preserve his claims for prejudgment interest under Virginia law. Therefore, we affirm and remand for further proceedings on his outrageous conduct claim.
I. Facts
Air Wisconsin is a commercial airline that provides regional service as United Express. When this action arose, Hoeper had been an Air Wisconsin captain since 1998 and the individual defendants, Mark Schuerman, Patrick Doyle, and Scott Orozco, who are not
In September, October, and November 2004, Hoeper failed three proficiency checks during his flight simulator training to fly a larger aircraft. In debriefings following two of those failures, verbal confrontations occurred between Hoeper and Doyle, Air Wisconsin's fleet manager, and between Hoeper and Todd Hanneman, an Air Wisconsin instructor pilot.
Although Air Wisconsin could have terminated Hoeper after the third proficiency check failure, he was given a fourth opportunity under a last chance agreement. In exchange, Hoeper waived certain rights under his collective bargaining agreement. Before Hoeper could attempt the final proficiency check, however, he needed additional training and the recommendation of an Air Wisconsin instructor pilot.
On December 8, 2004, Hoeper flew from Denver to Virginia for flight simulator training with Schuerman, another instructor pilot, in a simulator owned by another company. During that training, a dispute arose. Hoeper raised his voice, used profanity, and terminated the session. For an experienced pilot, such behavior was unusual. He also told Schuerman that he intended to contact the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) for legal advice.
About 11:00 a.m., CST, Schuerman called Doyle, who was at Air Wisconsin's headquarters in Wisconsin, to report that Hoeper "had blown up and was very angry at me," and that he was "uncomfortable" remaining at the simulator with Hoeper. Schuerman did not say that Hoeper was threatening or unstable, nor did Doyle ask if Schuerman felt threatened by Hoeper. Doyle testified that based on this information, he was very fearful of what Hoeper might do.
Doyle arranged for Air Wisconsin to book Hoeper on a United Air Lines (UAL) flight to Denver leaving from Dulles International Airport (Dulles) at 1:30 p.m. Then Doyle called Daniel Scharf, an Air Wisconsin employee who had been acting as Hoeper's first officer during the training, and asked him to drive Hoeper to Dulles. Doyle did not request Scharf to provide any information about what had occurred at the simulator, nor did Doyle tell Scharf that Hoeper might be dangerous. Doyle had no further contact with either Schuerman or Scharf that day, and he never spoke to Hoeper.
When Hoeper could not make the 1:30 flight, Air Wisconsin booked him on a later UAL flight. Doyle did not take any steps to induce UAL, for which Air Wisconsin performs passenger and baggage transfer services at Dulles and elsewhere in the country, to limit Hoeper's access to the aircraft. UAL could have done so independently of TSA had it been informed of a problem with Hoeper.
Before noon, Doyle approached Orozco, Air Wisconsin's Chief Pilot, who officed next to Doyle about Hoeper. Orozco told Doyle that he was leaving for a meeting. By approximately 1:30 p.m., Orozco had returned and taken a very brief telephone call from Hoeper and an ALPA attorney. Orozco confirmed that the training was over and Hoeper was to fly back to Denver, but made no other inquiries. Orozco never spoke to Schuerman or Scharf.
Shortly thereafter, Doyle and Orozco began discussing Hoeper. They were joined by Kevin LaWare, an Air Wisconsin vice president to whom Doyle reported, and later by Robert Frisch, the Assistant Chief Pilot, who reported to Orozco. The four talked about: Doyle's conversation with Schuerman; Hoeper's prior displays of anger in training sessions; Hoeper's expectation of being terminated based on the failed training and the last chance agreement; as a Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO), Hoeper could carry a weapon aboard a commercial aircraft
The meeting lasted 15-20 minutes and included unrelated operational issues. LaWare was not told that Orozco had just spoken to Hoeper. Orozco, Doyle, and LaWare testified that the group had concluded they could not determine whether Hoeper had his FFDO firearm with him. Orozco and LaWare also testified that they had no specific reason to believe Hoeper had brought his weapon with him in violation of FFDO procedures, although they could not preclude that possibility. Frisch testified that he did not remember discussing any specific reason why Hoeper would have brought his weapon with him.
According to Orozco, the whereabouts of Hoeper's weapon "was more of a question than a concern," and he would not have wanted Doyle to tell TSA that Hoeper "may be armed." LaWare did not anticipate that Doyle would use those words to TSA. None of the four men knew of Hoeper having brought his weapon to the earlier trainings or otherwise having ever violated FFDO weapons procedures.
At the end of the meeting and without calling Schuerman for more information, LaWare decided that TSA should be contacted. He testified that he acted pursuant to that agency's Aircraft Operator Standard Security Program
In a pretrial deposition, Schuerman testified that Hoeper did not pose a threat to anyone. At trial, LaWare agreed that this testimony was not as Doyle had articulated the situation. Orozco testified that Schuerman's description of Hoeper "wasn't the information conveyed to me [by Doyle]." Frisch recalled no reason having been presented why Hoeper would be a threat to the UAL flight, nor did he draw this conclusion.
Doyle called TSA shortly after 2:00 p.m., CST. The jury found that Doyle made the following statements during that call:
At trial, Doyle acknowledged that he lacked the ability to assess Hoeper's mental stability and denied having made such a statement to TSA "because I did not want to cause Mr. Hoeper undue harm." LaWare and Orozco testified that they did not consider Hoeper mentally unstable, although Orozco felt that Hoeper "was acting irrational" when he stopped the simulator training. Frisch did not have any information at the time that Hoeper's mental stability was in question. LaWare could not recall Doyle saying that he had concerns about Hoeper's mental stability, and testified that he would not have told TSA Hoeper was mentally unstable. Orozco testified that he did not intend for Doyle to tell TSA anything about Hoeper's mental stability.
As a result of Doyle's call, the aircraft carrying Hoeper was returned to the gate and armed officers removed him. He was detained and questioned by TSA, which eventually released him, and he returned to Denver. The next day, Orozco told him that his Air Wisconsin employment was terminated.
Doyle admitted that he had not previously documented this incident, but testified that he had reported it to Orozco. Orozco recalled Doyle having said that he was not comfortable being in the same room with Hoeper after the training, although Orozco had never heard from Doyle or anyone else that Hoeper had left Doyle fearful for his safety or that of others. Orozco explained that any such fear should have been contemporaneously documented in Hoeper's records. Orozco added that he never considered Hoeper a threat to the safety of Air Wisconsin personnel before December 8.
Doyle also admitted that he took no action concerning the alleged confrontation with Hoeper, such as referring him to the company's employee assistance program, or to protect staff at the simulator. He arranged for Hoeper to have additional simulator training in November with Air Wisconsin personnel. Hoeper acknowledged that, in a meeting with Doyle after the mid-October training, he had used profanity and Doyle told him to sit down, but denied any more to the alleged "confrontation" than this exchange.
In a 2006 arbitration between Hoeper and Air Wisconsin, Doyle testified that following the alleged October confrontation with Hoeper, he had driven him to the airport. Hoeper testified that after the training he, Doyle, and another Air Wisconsin employee involved in that training had dinner and drinks together. Doyle acknowledged that upon hearing Hoeper's testimony, he realized his own testimony about what happened after the training session ended had been inaccurate but did not correct his testimony.
II. Immunity under Section 44941 of the ATSA
A. Judge/Jury Function
Air Wisconsin first contends the trial court erred in submitting the question of its ATSA immunity for reporting a suspicious transaction to the jury rather than treating immunity as a threshold issue for the court. Because of the fact-dependent nature of the statutory criteria — "suspicious transaction" and "reckless disregard" — we conclude that the trial court correctly sent this question to the jury.
The parties agree that Virginia substantive law and Colorado procedural law apply. We begin by examining the ATSA. Statutory interpretation is an issue of law that we review de novo. Stamp v. Vail Corp., 172 P.3d 437, 442 (Colo.2007). When the statutory language is unambiguous, we construe the plain meaning of the statute without resorting to other rules of statutory construction. Id. at 443.
The ATSA, enacted in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, federalized aviation security and created the TSA.
ATSA provides qualified immunity:
49 U.S.C. § 44941. This language requires fact-finding at two levels: first, whether a suspicious transaction occurred; and, second, whether the air carrier exhibited reckless disregard in making the disclosure.
The parties have not cited any case, nor have we found one, reaching the merits of immunity under section 44941.
A court usually applies its own procedural rules even where, as here, the substantive law of another state (Virginia) governs the merits. Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 122; see Apache Village, Inc. v. Coleman Co., 776 P.2d 1154, 1155 (Colo. App.1989). The right to a civil jury trial in Colorado is procedural. C.R.C.P. 38; Setchell v. Dellacroce, 169 Colo. 212, 215, 454 P.2d 804, 806 (1969). Hence, the allocation of decision-making between judge and jury is a procedural question to be governed by Colorado law, not the substantive law of Virginia.
Colorado has approximately 30 statutes that confer qualified immunity in a variety of circumstances. But we have not found any reported case in which a court has taken from the jury an immunity question involving a disputed issue of material fact.
Because section 44941 provides qualified immunity that is forfeited by reporting with reckless disregard for the truth of the facts reported, we are guided by Martin v. Weld County, 43 Colo.App. 49, 598 P.2d 532 (1979), decided under the Colorado abuse reporting statute, section 19-3-309, C.R.S.2009. Persons who report child abuse are protected as long as the report is made in "good faith." Such decisions "necessarily involve [a defendant's] state of mind" and must be resolved from all evidence, cross-examination, and "determination of credibility made by the trier of facts." Martin, 43 Colo.App. at 53, 598 P.2d at 535.
We are not persuaded otherwise by Air Wisconsin's citation to cases decided under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (CGIA), §§ 24-10-101 to -120, C.R.S.2009, and the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 11101-11152.
The CGIA prohibits actions against government entities and their employees, subject to certain exceptions and statutory notice. Thus, these threshold questions are jurisdictional for the trial court's resolution under C.R.C.P. 12(b)(1), even if the facts are disputed. City of Lakewood v. Brace, 919 P.2d 231, 244 (Colo.1996); see also Trinity
However, where an action proceeds based on an exception, the CGIA provides government employees with qualified immunity from tort suits if their conduct was not "willful and wanton." City of Lakewood v. Brace, 919 P.2d at 246. That determination is for the jury. Id.
Thus, on the one hand, the ATSA is different from the CGIA because the ATSA does not prohibit actions, subject to exceptions that are jurisdictional. On the other hand, it is like the CGIA qualified immunity provision for government employees, under which the jury decides immunity where, as here, material factual disputes exist.
The HCQIA is distinguishable because it presumes immunity. In contrast, under the ATSA, a defendant air carrier or its employees must prove that they are within the protection of the statute.
The HCQIA has been extensively analyzed by several federal courts, which have relied on its legislative history in concluding that the immunity question is for the court. See, e.g., Brown v. Presbyterian Healthcare Services, 101 F.3d 1324, 1333 (10th Cir.1996). No similar analysis exists for the ATSA, perhaps because its legislative history is silent on judge/jury allocation.
Moreover, any error in submitting the immunity question to the jury was rendered harmless because the jury necessarily found actual malice in awarding presumed and punitive damages, which we conclude on de novo review in section IV(C) below is supported by clear and convincing evidence. As amicus United States observes, "[w]hile the jury made this finding [of actual malice] in the context of awarding punitive damages, such a finding — if supported by the evidence — precludes application of Aviation Security Act immunity because the statute does not apply to statements made `with actual knowledge that the disclosure was false, inaccurate or misleading' or `with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of that disclosure.'" Cf. Government Micro Resources, Inc. v. Jackson, 271 Va. 29, 624 S.E.2d 63, 70-71 (2006) (failure to instruct jury on qualified privilege was harmless error because actual malice, which jury necessarily found in awarding punitive damages, defeats privilege).
Accordingly, we conclude that because issues of material fact were in dispute, the question of Air Wisconsin's immunity was properly submitted to the jury.
B. The Jury's Rejection of ATSA Immunity
Consistent with section 44941, the jury was instructed:
Air Wisconsin does not challenge the form of the instruction, but asserts that the evidence entitled it to immunity. We disagree.
The reckless disregard language of section 44941(2) tracks the definition of "actual malice" required for defamation actions to pass constitutional muster. See, e.g., Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., 466 U.S. 485, 510-11, 104 S.Ct. 1949, 80 L.Ed.2d 502 (1984). Because in section IV(C) below we conclude that the evidence shows Doyle acted with reckless disregard, we necessarily also conclude that the record supports the jury's finding that Air Wisconsin failed to meet the immunity provision of the ATSA. And because reckless disregard defeats Air Wisconsin's immunity, we need not address whether Hoeper's behavior was a "suspicious transaction" under the ATSA.
III. Publication of the Second Statement
Air Wisconsin next contends Hoeper presented insufficient evidence that Doyle ever made the second statement, "Unstable pilot in FFDO program was terminated today," which the jury found that he had made. We disagree.
The jury resolves disputed issues of fact, including the credibility of witnesses. See, e.g., Clinger v. Hartshorn, 89 P.3d 462, 466 (Colo.App.2003).
We conclude that the following substantial and competent evidence supports the verdict:
IV. Defamation
Air Wisconsin next challenges the defamation verdict on two grounds: first, because Doyle's statements to the TSA were opinion and substantially true, they should not have been submitted to the jury; and, second, an independent review of the record does not support the jury's finding of actual malice. We conclude that the statements were not protected as opinion because they conveyed provably false factual connotations, and our independent review of the record identifies clear and convincing evidence of actual malice.
A. Law
The jury was instructed that to award either presumed or punitive damages, it had to find that Air Wisconsin acted with actual malice: knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth. Neither party challenges these instructions.
The parties concede that we must review the punitive damages award de novo, applying the actual malice standard. However, Hoeper contends de novo review does not extend to compensatory damages. We are not persuaded.
Defamation law has been constitutionalized to protect the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and the press. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 270, 84 S.Ct. 710, 11 L.Ed.2d 686 (1964). Here, those constitutional protections apply because Hoeper was awarded both punitive and presumed damages
"[W]hether the evidence in the record in a defamation case is of the convincing clarity required to strip the utterance of First Amendment protection" must be determined independently by the reviewing court. Bose Corp., 466 U.S. at 511, 104 S.Ct. 1949. This standard of review requires an appellate court to determine whether "the evidence in the record ... is sufficient to support a finding of actual malice." Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657, 687, 109 S.Ct. 2678, 105 L.Ed.2d 562 (1989). To prove actual malice, a plaintiff must show that the defendant published a false statement knowing it to be false or in reckless disregard of its falsity. New York Times, 376 U.S. at 280, 84 S.Ct. 710.
1. Presumed and Punitive Damages
In Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 349, 94 S.Ct. 2997, 41 L.Ed.2d 789 (1974), the Supreme Court held that defamation plaintiffs awarded presumed or punitive damages must demonstrate that the publisher acted with actual malice. Id. at 349-50, 94 S.Ct. 2997; see also Fleming v. Moore, 221 Va. 884, 275 S.E.2d 632, 638 (1981) (applying New York Times actual malice standard of proof to award of punitive damages). In Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc., 472 U.S. 749, 759-60, 105 S.Ct. 2939, 86 L.Ed.2d 593 (1985), the Supreme Court clarified that the First Amendment does not require actual malice or de novo review in purely private defamation cases, even those involving awards of presumed and punitive damages. But the Court went on to explain that it would strike a different balance between the First Amendment and the state interest in providing compensation for reputational injury where the speech dealt with matters of public concern: "speech on public issues occupies the `highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values,' and is entitled to special protection." Id. at 759, 105 S.Ct. 2939 (internal references omitted).
Because in the next subsection we conclude that Doyle's statement raised a matter of public concern, we decline to address Hoeper's argument that Virginia law does not require de novo review of presumed compensatory damages in a purely private action. Compare Gazette, Inc. v. Harris, 229 Va. 1, 325 S.E.2d 713, 727 (1985) ("[A]n appellate court in Virginia must conduct such independent examination of the whole record on the issue of punitive damages or where New York Times malice must be established, but not on the question of compensatory damages when New York Times malice need not be proven."), with Great Coastal Express, Inc. v. Ellington, 230 Va. 142, 334 S.E.2d 846, 852 (1985) ("[T]he question whether to apply the Gertz rule prohibiting presumed damages in the absence of New York Times malice depends not on the status of the defendant, but rather upon the nature of the defamatory words. ... [W]e will not, as a matter of state law, apply to speech actionable per se, involving no matters of public concern, the Gertz rule inhibiting presumed compensatory damages.").
2. Matter of Public Concern
Awards of actual damages in defamation cases based on statements involving matters of public concern require actual malice and de novo review. Gertz, 418 U.S. at 349, 94 S.Ct. 2997; Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1, 15-16, 110 S.Ct. 2695, 111 L.Ed.2d 1 (1990).
"Whether ... speech addresses a matter of public concern must be determined by [the expression's] content, form, and context [of a given statement], as revealed by
Public concern is interpreted broadly. See, e.g., TMJ Implants, Inc. v. Aetna, Inc., 498 F.3d 1175, 1185-86 (10th Cir.2007) (health care provider's bulletins disparaging implant manufacturer's product a matter of public concern because "thousands of people... have a legitimate interest in the utility" of those devices); Blue Ridge Bank v. Veribanc, Inc., 866 F.2d 681, 686 (4th Cir.1989) (company's inaccurate publication regarding bank's financial stability a matter of public concern because of "obvious importance of banks to the financial health of our communities").
Contrary to the parties' assertions, the record does not show that the trial court ruled on public concern. Nevertheless, we conclude that Doyle's statements suggesting a threat to airline passenger safety — especially because an FFDO may be "unstable" and carrying his federally-issued weapon — involve a matter of public concern. Such a threat directly impacts many people, indirectly affects air transportation overall, and may raise policy questions about the prudence of arming FFDOs.
B. Doyle's Statements Were Actionable
Air Wisconsin next contends Doyle's statements were protected opinions rather than facts, which should not have been submitted to the jury because they depended on Doyle's viewpoint and were only expressions of concern. It also contends that they were substantially true, at least in part. We reject both contentions in turn.
1. Opinion
Pure opinions are constitutionally protected. Gertz, 418 U.S. at 339-40, 94 S.Ct. 2997. Statements of opinion that "reasonably impl[y] false and defamatory facts" are not. Milkovich, 497 U.S. at 21, 110 S.Ct. 2695. And "[s]imply couching ... statements in terms of opinion does not dispel these implications." Id. at 19, 110 S.Ct. 2695. Although Milkovich draws the constitutionally-required line between fact and opinion, states have developed their own jurisprudence in applying this distinction to particular facts.
Virginia courts consider two questions in determining whether a statement is fact or opinion: does it contain a provably false factual connotation, or is it "relative in nature," depending "largely on the speaker's viewpoint"? Fuste v. Riverside Healthcare Ass'n, 265 Va. 127, 575 S.E.2d 858, 861 (2003).
With respect to the first question, the following factors bear on whether a statement conveys a provably false factual connotation:
The trial court must decide whether a statement conveys a provably false factual
We conclude that the statements were properly submitted to the jury because both conveyed the factual connotation that Hoeper was a threat to aircraft or passenger safety, which was provably false, and informing TSA that Hoeper posed such a threat because of his mental instability was not relative in nature.
TSA would have understood the statements as connoting that Hoeper was a threat to aircraft or passenger safety because Air Wisconsin, through Doyle, had no other reason to communicate with TSA about him, and TSA had no other use for the information than responding to a threat, as it did. See § 44941 ("any suspicious transaction relevant to ... a threat to aircraft or passenger safety"); Fuste, 575 S.E.2d at 863 (concluding that doctors' and hospital officials' statements to patients and other medical personnel that plaintiff doctors had "abandoned" their patients were actionable in part because prospective patients would understand them to mean that plaintiffs had breached their professional responsibility to patients). Thus, the components of the first statement — Hoeper "may be armed" and concern existed "about his mental stability" — were germane to TSA only as they bore on its threat assessment.
The second statement conveys the same factual connotation that Hoeper is a threat, and for the same reasons. It references an "unstable pilot" who is "in [the] FFDO program." Because such a pilot can carry a firearm aboard an aircraft, it injects into TSA's threat assessment that, as in the first statement, Hoeper "may be armed." And by adding "terminated today," which was untrue, it includes an additional factor suggesting why TSA should consider him a threat.
The context in which Doyle made the statements also contributed to their being understood as provable fact. In Fuste, 575 S.E.2d at 861-62, the court concluded that statements conveyed provably false factual connotations because they carried particular factual weight when spoken by medical professionals about other professionals within the medical community. Id. As in Fuste, Doyle's call to TSA carried comparable factual weight because he spoke on behalf of an air carrier, about a pilot and FFDO, to the agency charged with ensuring airline security.
WJLA-TV is also instructive. There, the court found that by airing the story, which was based on its "under cover" investigation but minimized contradictory information, as a warning to viewers about a "Dirty Doc" who had sexually assaulted his patients, WJLA-TV had authoritatively presented the opinions of some patients as fact. WJLA-TV, 564 S.E.2d at 393. As in WJLA-TV, Doyle's statements to the TSA had weight because he was in a position to have reliable information about Hoeper's alleged mental instability and employment status.
2. Provably False
The factual connotation that Hoeper posed a threat was capable of being proven true or false, see Raytheon, 641 S.E.2d at 91 (statement was fact because its "negative import" was "susceptible to empirical proof"), by considering it in the context of airline security. See Fuste, 575 S.E.2d at 862 ("since the term `abandon' has a particular connotation in the context of a doctor's professional responsibility to a patient ... the statement that Drs. Fuste and Vanden Hoek `abandoned' their patients is demonstrably true or false"). Hoeper's alleged termination and mental instability were likewise provable as true or false. His employment status was determinable from company records and his stability was ascertainable from the people who had been in recent contact with him at the simulator, driving to the airport, and at ALPA. See Tronfeld, 636 S.E.2d at 447 (explaining that whether a lawyer rendered value to
Doyle's use of the word "concern" in characterizing Hoeper's mental stability does not require a contrary conclusion. As the court explained in Fuste, 575 S.E.2d at 862, "evidence could be presented to show whether there were, in fact, concerns about the plaintiffs' competence."
3. Relative in Nature
Air Wisconsin's attempt to avoid liability based on Raytheon, because the statements about Hoeper's mental instability allegedly were "relative in nature," is unpersuasive, both factually and legally.
In Tronfeld, 636 S.E.2d at 449, the court held statements that the plaintiff attorney "just takes people's money" and that his clients "would receive more money [for their claims] if they had not hired" him provably false rather than dependent on the defendant's viewpoint. The court distinguished Chaves v. Johnson, 230 Va. 112, 335 S.E.2d 97, 99 (1985), where it had first articulated the "relative in nature" test concerning a competitor's statement that the plaintiff architect was charging "more than what could be considered a reasonable fee." The Chaves court held the statement to be opinion because given its source, the "relative nature of such opinions is obvious to anyone who hears them," in that the import "depended largely on the speaker's viewpoint." Id. at 101. The court explained that "[a] corporal might seem inexperienced to a sergeant but not to a private." Id.
But the Tronfeld court declined to extend the reasoning in Chaves, explaining that the statements in Tronfeld were not "based solely on a speaker's viewpoint of what `reasonable' would be." 636 S.E.2d at 451. The statements in Tronfeld were objectively measurable — whether the defendant "took people's money" without furthering their cases — whereas the statement in Chaves was not objectively measurable because it depended on the "speaker's viewpoint," a competitor asserting it "can undersell others." Id.
Doyle's statements to TSA identifying Hoeper as a threat to aircraft or passenger safety are not relative because unlike a competitor, as an industry participant Doyle would be expected to provide unbiased information to TSA. And unlike statements of a competitor, which "fall on prospective customers' ears like repetitive drumbeats," id., TSA must investigate any threat reported by an air carrier. See ATSA §§ 44904-44905. As in Tronfeld, Doyle's assessment was provably false because he asserted specific, objective information about mental instability and termination rather than subjective information reflecting only his viewpoint.
In contrast, the Raytheon court concluded that three of five statements had been improperly submitted to the jury as actionable because they were opinions. Raytheon, 641 S.E.2d at 91-92. The court held that stating the plaintiff was so verbose as to stop open participation in dialogue, referring to the plaintiff's "unwillingness to accept and work with this feedback," and describing the plaintiff as "inappropriately ... critical" were matters of opinion because "the negative conduct, and whether and how often it occurred, is a matter of the speaker's perspective." Id. at 92. But here, on behalf of Air Wisconsin, Doyle conveyed that Hoeper was a threat because of mental instability. Thus, he removed comparable relativity by advising the agency of circumstances he knew would invoke its responsibility to investigate threats to aircraft and passenger safety.
Air Wisconsin cites generalized statements about mental instability in cases from jurisdictions other than Virginia. But they are not analogous to an airline employer reporting one of its employee's mental instability in the context of his threat to a departing passenger
Here, Doyle conveyed "unstable" in the literal sense because this information was inextricably intertwined with his overall connotation that Hoeper was a threat to a departing airline flight. Accordingly, we conclude that Doyle's statements to the TSA were actionable, because the factual connotation that Hoeper was a threat to aircraft and passenger safety was provably false.
4. Substantially True
Alternatively, Air Wisconsin contends portions of the statements were substantially true because as an FFDO officer, Hoeper was authorized to carry a gun, the whereabouts of his weapon was unknown to Doyle, and his termination was imminent. According to Air Wisconsin, those portions of the statements render the statements as a whole substantially true, and thus, not actionable. We disagree.
An alleged defamatory statement "must be provable as false before there can be liability under state defamation law." Milkovich, 497 U.S. at 19, 110 S.Ct. 2695 (citing Philadelphia Newspapers Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767, 106 S.Ct. 1558, 89 L.Ed.2d 783 (1986)). The plaintiff in a defamation action must prove that the statement is false. Williams v. Garraghty, 249 Va. 224, 455 S.E.2d 209, 216 (1995). Once the trial court has determined that a statement can be proven true or false, proof of falsity is a question for the jury and our review is limited to whether sufficient evidence supports the jury's decision. McIntyre v. Jones, 194 P.3d 519, 528 (Colo.App.2008) ("[t]he answer to the question whether a statement is true... will not implicate constitutional protections").
"Slight inaccuracies of expression are immaterial provided the defamatory charge is true in substance." Saleeby v. Free Press, Inc., 197 Va. 761, 91 S.E.2d 405, 407 (1956). And "[a] plaintiff may not rely on minor or irrelevant inaccuracies to state a claim for libel." Jordan v. Kollman, 269 Va. 569, 612 S.E.2d 203, 207 (2005).
Air Wisconsin has conceded that Hoeper was not terminated until the day after Doyle made the call. Given the context — a warning to TSA about a passenger who posed a threat because he was unstable — adding to the threat assessment that Hoeper was terminated "today" is not a harmless inaccuracy. Rather, it presents an additional fact purporting to explain to TSA why Hoeper was unstable, and thus, a threat.
We will assume that stating an FFDO may be armed is always potentially true. But the factual connotation depends on looking at the statement as a whole. Raytheon, 641 S.E.2d at 91 ("we do not isolate one portion of the statement at issue from another portion of that statement"). As we have explained, taken as a whole, the statement connoted that this FFDO was so unstable as to threaten the safety of the aircraft he was boarding. Thus, partial truth does not defeat liability for the negative factual connotation.
Furthermore, Raytheon does not support Air Wisconsin's assertion that if portions of the two statements are substantially true, they should not have been submitted to the jury, and we must order a new trial. The Raytheon court reviewed five separate statements that were submitted to the jury, evaluating whether each statement, taken as a
C. De Novo Review of Actual Malice
Air Wisconsin finally argues that the record does not include clear and convincing evidence sufficient to warrant a finding of actual malice. Because we conclude that Doyle had obvious reasons to doubt the accuracy of his statements that Hoeper was unstable, which along with the statement that he may be armed connoted a threat to an aircraft or passengers, we disagree.
Alone, falsity does not establish actual malice. Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc., 491 U.S. at 681, 109 S.Ct. 2678. Instead, actual malice requires proof that the defendant "entertained serious doubts as to truth of his publication." St. Amant v. Thompson, 390 U.S. 727, 731, 88 S.Ct. 1323, 20 L.Ed.2d 262 (1968). Although "mere proof of failure to investigate, without more, cannot establish reckless disregard [of] the truth," Gertz, 418 U.S. at 331, 94 S.Ct. 2997, a defendant's purposeful avoidance of the truth may be sufficient to demonstrate actual malice. Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc., 491 U.S. at 692, 109 S.Ct. 2678.
Because alone, "[p]rofessions of good faith will be unlikely to prove persuasive," a court must probe a defendant's good faith when presented with evidence to the contrary. St. Amant, 390 U.S. at 731, 88 S.Ct. 1323. Such inquiry may also be necessary where a defendant publishes statements that are "highly improbable." Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc., 491 U.S. at 691, 109 S.Ct. 2678.
"[A] plaintiff is entitled to prove the defendant's state of mind through circumstantial evidence ... and it cannot be said that evidence concerning motive or care never bears any relation to the actual malice inquiry." Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc., 491 U.S. at 668, 109 S.Ct. 2678. Actual malice may be inferred "from objective circumstantial evidence, which can override a defendant's protestations of good faith." Brown v. Petrolite Corp., 965 F.2d 38, 47 (5th Cir.1992); see also Fiber Systems Int'l, Inc. v. Roehrs, 470 F.3d 1150, 1170 (5th Cir.2006); Perk v. Reader's Digest Ass'n, 931 F.2d 408, 411 (6th Cir.1991).
Such evidence may involve a "defendant's own actions or statements, the dubious nature of his sources, [or] the inherent improbability of the story or other circumstantial evidence." Liberty Lobby, Inc. v. Dow Jones & Co., 838 F.2d 1287, 1293 (D.C.Cir.1988).
Circumstantial proof of a speaker's state of mind also includes credibility evidence. See Celle v. Filipino Reporter Enterprises Inc., 209 F.3d 163, 190 (2d Cir.2000) ("[t]he finding of actual malice is bolstered by Pelayo's conflicting testimony"); Dunn v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, 193 F.3d 1185, 1210 (11th Cir.1999) (Tjoflat, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (noting actual malice could be inferred from some ALPA officials' knowledge at odds with statements of other officials).
In constitutional defamation cases involving media publishers, reckless disregard turns on what the publisher knew or had reason to know at the moment of publication. Courts look at the publisher as a whole — sources, reporters, and editors — to weigh prepublication awareness that the statements were probably false.
Here, Doyle made the call to TSA. The other three Air Wisconsin employees involved in the pre-call decision provided limited information to Doyle, primarily details of the FFDO program. They disavowed any knowledge of what he would, or specific direction about what he should, tell TSA. Hence, our reckless disregard analysis focuses on whether Doyle had obvious reasons to doubt the accuracy of his statements, and we conclude that he did.
As discussed in section IV(B) above, we have identified the provable negative connotation in both statements as Hoeper posed a threat to airline passenger safety. And whether Hoeper posed such a threat hinged on his alleged mental instability. We first consider whether Doyle had obvious reasons to doubt that Hoeper was mentally unstable.
The other three Air Wisconsin employees with whom Doyle met just before he called TSA did not express their concerns about Hoeper's mental state, nor did any of them provide specific information from which Doyle could draw that conclusion. To the contrary, based on the discussion neither LaWare nor Orozco would have told TSA that Hoeper was unstable, and Frisch did not have any reason to question Hoeper's mental instability. Thus, we conclude that Hoeper presented clear and convincing evidence Doyle entertained significant doubt as to the accuracy of his statement about Hoeper's mental instability.
We further conclude that Doyle had obvious reasons to doubt that Hoeper posed a threat to airline passenger safety. Doyle knew that while Hoeper's termination was likely, he had not yet been terminated. Doyle was informed during the meeting that Hoeper should not have had his firearm with him, per FFDO procedures, and he lacked information that Hoeper had ever violated any procedures required by his FFDO certification.
The connotation that Hoeper posed a threat to the UAL flight was also inherently improbable. Hoeper had been a commercial pilot for twenty years and an Air Wisconsin captain for almost a decade, most recently in a trainer position. The record contains no evidence that Hoeper had ever acted contrary to passenger safety.
Neither LaWare nor Orozco identified any information, other than Doyle's rendition of his telephone conversation with Schuerman, indicating that Hoeper posed a threat. Frisch recalled no reason having been presented why Hoeper would have been a threat to the UAL flight. Moreover, Hoeper's quarrel, if any, was with Air Wisconsin, not UAL, and the other Air Wisconsin employees from the training were not booked on the same flight as Hoeper.
Three aspects of Doyle's conduct on December 8 and thereafter assist us in resolving against him any doubt as to clear and convincing evidence of actual malice.
First, Doyle's actions following Schuerman's 11 a.m. telephone call reporting the simulator incident were inconsistent with his then purported belief that Hoeper was a threat. After the phone call, Doyle: asked Scharf to drive Hoeper to the airport, but did not warn him to be cautious in dealing with Hoeper; caused Hoeper to be booked on the 1:30 UAL flight; saw Orozco at noon but agreed to postpone discussion about Hoeper until after Orozco returned at 1:30; never contacted UAL; and waited over three hours to contact TSA. Cf. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 838 F.2d at 1293.
Second, the day after the TSA call, Doyle first documented another alleged training incident involving Hoeper. According to Doyle's notes, this incident had occurred on October 14, and he "fear[ed] for [his] own physical harm." At some point after December 9, Doyle added to his notes that based on Hoeper's conduct, he also feared for others' safety.
However, Doyle had not previously mentioned to anyone at Air Wisconsin that he had felt threatened by Hoeper or warned any Air Wisconsin personnel to be cautious in dealing with Hoeper. He had not taken any corrective action with Hoeper, but instead had arranged for Hoeper to have more simulator training with Air Wisconsin personnel. Doyle had not made any contemporaneous notes about this incident in Hoeper's record, although that would have been proper had he felt threatened. The credibility of Doyle's documentation that he was in fear for himself and others is further undercut by the arbitration testimony of Hoeper that he, Doyle, and the Air Wisconsin instructor met for dinner and drinks that evening, which Doyle acknowledged was correct.
Evidence of Doyle's discussion of the ramifications of his call to TSA with various federal agencies before he began these notes
Third, in Doyle's notes of the TSA call, also made the next day, he wrote:
But in his trial testimony, Doyle denied having told TSA of concerns about Hoeper's "mental stability." This testimony was contradicted by TSA's records of the call, which refer to "unstable tendencies" and "unstable pilot." See Celle, 209 F.3d at 190 (finding of actual malice bolstered by reporter's conflicting testimony).
In sum, we agree with amicus United States that, "[o]nly in the highly unusual situation in which an air carrier has acted with knowing falsity or reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of its statements does the air carrier need to fear being held liable for its statements to TSA. ..." On the particular evidence presented, this is just such an unusual case.
Accordingly, on de novo review we conclude that clear and convincing evidence shows Doyle acted with actual malice in communicating to TSA.
V. Prejudgment Interest
On cross-appeal, Hoeper contends the trial court erred by denying his request for prejudgment interest. We disagree.
Hoeper moved for entry of judgment and requested prejudgment interest under Colorado law. Air Wisconsin opposed the motion, arguing that Virginia law applied to prejudgment interest. Citing AE, Inc. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 168 P.3d 507 (Colo.2007), which was decided before trial, the court found that Hoeper had waived prejudgment interest because he failed to tender jury instructions or verdict forms on recovering prejudgment interest, as required by Virginia law. In AE, Inc., 168 P.3d at 511, the Colorado Supreme Court discerned "no convincing reason to engage in a different choice of law analysis to determine the law applicable to a claim for prejudgment interest," and held that "the same law that governs the underlying cause of action in a tort case also governs the award of prejudgment interest."
Section 8.01-382 of the Virginia Code "provides for the discretionary award of prejudgment interest by the trier of fact, who `may provide for' such interest and fix the time of its commencement." Dairyland Ins. Co. v. Douthat, 248 Va. 627, 449 S.E.2d 799, 801 (1994). Thus, in Virginia the decision whether to award prejudgment interest rests with the jury. See Upper Occoquan Sewage Authority v. Blake Construction Co., 275 Va. 41, 655 S.E.2d 10, 23 (2008).
Here, we agree with the trial court that because Hoeper failed to request jury instructions or verdict forms on prejudgment interest, he waived this issue. See Banks v. Mario Industries of Virginia, Inc., 274 Va. 438, 650 S.E.2d 687, 694 (2007) (applying waiver to a party's failure to request jury instructions and explaining "trial court was not required to instruct the jury, sua sponte, on the elements of damages Mario was entitled to recover in the absence of a request from Banks to do so")
We reject Hoeper's argument, for which he cites no authority, that because his jury instructions — while silent on prejudgment interest — were consistent with Colorado law, Air Wisconsin was required to object on choice of law grounds. The pretrial ruling that Virginia law would apply to defamation dictated that Virginia law also governed prejudgment interest under AE, Inc. Thus, Air Wisconsin was not required to object on this basis. Cf. Tait v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., 49 P.3d 337, 341 (Colo.App.2001) ("An appellate court will not disturb the trial court's ruling if the complaining party failed either to tender a desired jury instruction or
We also reject Hoeper's argument that Air Wisconsin's email response to his proposed order for entry of judgment — "this looks right, but please give me until the end of the day to give you a formal response" — indicated Air Wisconsin's consent to apply Colorado law to prejudgment interest. The email used qualified and indefinite language, and made no specific reference to prejudgment interest. Cf. Sumerel v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 232 P.3d 128, ___, 2009 WL 1477006 (Colo.App. No. 07CA2465, May 28, 2009) (use of qualifying language in email does not constitute an offer capable of acceptance).
Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court did not err by denying prejudgment interest.
The judgment is affirmed and the case is remanded for further proceedings on Hoeper's outrageous conduct claim.
Judge ROMÁN and Judge ROTHENBERG


text:
15 Weird Celebrity Hot Bod Secrets
Hayek went for a professional look with natural eyes and a soft pink gloss. Rather than her typical voluminous waves, she opted for a sleek, swept-back middle part ponytail.
Alba was glowing, per usual, with a neutral eyeshadow that complements her golden skin tone and free-flowing lob.
10 Celebrities Who Look Just Like Their Moms

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Jacki Graham's Profile
Thank you for visiting Embroitique for extraordinary embroidery designs. We have a selection of our most popular items here on ETSY.
We hope your experience with us will be enjoyable and personal. Please convo us with any questions you may have.
All orders placed here on ETSY will be sent via email. We usually send orders out every couple of hours throughout the day but, we guarantee email delivery within 24 hours of your payment posting.
If you prefer instant download visit our main website where you will find a full selection of our designs that are all available for immediate access as soon as your payment clears! Be sure to sign up so you don't miss out on our new design releases, or follow us on facebook to keep up with the new fun at Embroitique!!!…
- Female
- Born on June 16
- Joined October 11, 2009
- Jacki Graham
- Orlando, FL, United States


text: Since most hedge funds get paid based on their returns for the year, managers who do not want to underperform often turn to shareholder activism as a way to increase shareholder value and ultimately boost their returns.Stockpickr tracks the latest activist situations so you can learn to piggy-back off of the best managers around. This week we focus on Axcelis Technologies ( ACLS). Sterling Capital is suggesting to Axcelis Technologies that they sell off valuable assets and complete a share buyback in order to maximize shareholder value. To read more, visit Stockpickr.com.


text:
Our client is a global technology business and are looking for a Software Engineer to join a team in Scotland. A key requirement is to have a keen interest in the design of mechanical systems operating under software or firmware command & control.
Main responsibilities:
- Design, develop and document firmware and software drivers controlling embedded real time devices.
- Design, develop and document test procedures and software
- Support the integration and systems testing procedures
- Regular progress reporting on schedule and change
Skills Needed:
- A Degree in a Software\Computer\Electronics Engineering (Hons 2:1 or better preferred)
- Significant programming experience.
- Project experience developing embedded real time firmware in C, C++ or Java
- Python knowledge would be a plus


text:
Danze D510555BNT Brushed Nickel Shower Only Trim is part of the Sheridan Bath collection. D510555BNT Shower Only Trim requires D112000BT or D115000BT rough-in valve, sold separately. D510555BNT Single lever handle meets all requiements of ADA.
|Shower Trim Kit
|Rough-In Valve Series:
|Pressure Balance
|Number of Handles:
|Single handle
|Brushed Nickel
|Product Collection:
|Faucet Part Type:
|Trim Kits
|Mpn #
|Shipping Dimensions
|8.7" x 7.1" x 4.1"
|4.08 lbs.
4.5 out of 5 rating is our rating for PlumbersStock, we got that rating because we have lots of experience and great people with expertise in plumbing. BUT WE WANT YOUR HELP. This product doesn't have any reviews yet, and we don't want to write our own reviews. It is more valuable to us that the customers get to share their experience with our products. Please, if you have any experience with this product, take a moment to share and help someone else who is trying to make a decision. Thank you!


text:
Featured AdPromote Your Ad
ADVERTISE HERE [Click to Learn More]
A Featured Ad is a unique, long-term ad upgrade option that allows you to purchase the top ad placement on the first page of a specific category for either one, three or six months.View Details »
Recent AdsPlace Your Ad Here
Log In needed
Outside Central Alberta
Natural Wood Flooring made from Fir, Hemlock and Pine. Choose from narrow to wide width boards. All products are Kiln Dried. We ...
Ad Id: 18535868
Renewed: August 15, 2017
Details: New, Commercial Seller
Log In needed
$60 · Rugs - Persain (red/green) or contemporary (black white beige) 5x7 approx
Red Deer and Vicinity
Excellent condition - like new. $60 each (paid twice that new). Small one - entrance/hall contemporary $10
Ad Id: 29442128
Posted: May 23, 2017


text:
Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently, see our mental health web guide which can point you to expert advice.
If you take propranolol for anxiety, what dosage do you take?(5 Posts)
BuffyxSummers Tue 07-Jan-14 13:03:31
Stardust123 Tue 07-Jan-14 18:30:55
Arkina Tue 07-Jan-14 18:37:05
Queenofknickers Sat 11-Jan-14 19:49:33
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.


text:
Armed robbers have attacked Balogun Market on the Lagos Island, hacking three security men with machetes, in a failed attempt to burgle some shops in the market.
In the attack which occoured on Friday at about 5am, one of the robbers, a Nigerien identified only as Saidu, was also hacked to death by a mob.
It was gathered that the robbers, whose number had yet to be ascertained, were armed with cutlasses and attempted to open some shops.
Punch correspondent learnt that a distress call was put across to the Ebute Ero Police Division, after which policemen went to the scene. The robbers, except Saidu, reportedly fled.
A night guard, who did not want his name in print, however, told Punch that the injured security men were rushed to the Lagos Island General Hospital.
He said, "It was around 5.30am on Friday. We were the only ones on the market premises, except for some Muslims praying in nearby mosques. We observed that the robbers were armed with cutlasses. They wanted to break into some shops. We confronted them and they attacked us.
"They injured three security men with cutlasses. Some people called the police at the Ebute Ero division. Two policemen were also on patrol around the market. They assisted us in confronting the robbers.
The Lagos State Police Public Relations Officer, SP Dolapo Badmos, confirmed the incident.


text:
Status: Closed
Know more about this business than we do? Cool! Please submit any corrections or missing details you may have.Help us make it right
019170attr:sellerart galleries
Custom Framing On Site, Giclee, Jewelry, Limited Edition Prints, Local Pottery, Original Paintings
Be the first AL.com user to add photos or videos of Tino's Fine Art & Frames
Tino's Fine Art & Frames can be found at E 2nd St 2200. The following is offered: Art Galleries. The entry is present with us since Sep 10, 2010 and was last updated on Nov 14, 2013. In Gulf Shores there are 1 other Art Galleries. An overview can be found here.
Custom framing and original art can be found at Tino's. Work by a variety of artists are available here, many of which are locals. The owner, Rick Tino, is himself an artist.


text:
Four season-opening series conclude on Wednesday, and three others resume after a Tuesday off, as we enter the third day of a streak of 15 consecutive days featuring at least one daytime game. Wednesday is a special day for two foreign imports who will be making their major league debuts: Koji Uehara of Japan, the Orioles' No. 2 starter, who battles the mighty Yankees; and Walter Silva of Mexico, the Padres' No. 3 starter, who faces the Dodgers.
Uehara's opponent, Chien-Ming Wang, will be making his first start since having his 2008 season cut short by a foot injury last June 15. Meanwhile, two other notable names will be making their season debuts for new teams, as Javier Vazquez toes the hill for the Braves and Randy Johnson for the Giants.
For starters
Starting pitcher rankings for Wednesday, April 8 (* all stats listed are from 2008)
Key: Rk. = The author's ranking of that pitcher for that day only. T: pitcher throws left-handed or right-handed. Record: pitcher's win-loss record. ERA: pitcher's earned run average. WHIP: pitcher's average number of walks plus hits surrendered per inning. K/9: pitcher's average number of strikeouts per nine innings. OPSA: pitcher's on-base plus slugging percentage surrendered to opponents. OPS: pitcher's opponent's composite team on-base plus slugging percentage. CT%: pitcher's opponent's success rate putting the ball in play (versus striking out).
Selected notes: Billingsley at Petco Park is about as automatic as it gets. So he lost there last June 11, so what? He has a 2.53 ERA in eight career appearances at Petco, and the matchup presents him with tons of strikeout potential. Though Yovani Gallardo had the second-worst start of his career at AT&T Park on Aug. 25, 2007 (his worst came at Coors Field three weeks earlier), it's tough to ignore that he's 9-4 with a 3.38 ERA and 1.29 WHIP in 21 career starts, and facing one of the game's more ordinary offenses. There was once a time I'd have believed in Scott Kazmir facing the Red Sox, but not after he had a dreadful 9.00 ERA, 2.11 WHIP and allowed a 1.123 OPS and six home runs to them in four starts in 2008. Battling Jon Lester makes him even less attractive as a fantasy option, especially in a road start. Speaking of Lester, before losing both his ALCS starts to the Rays last October, he was 3-0 with a 0.90 ERA in three regular-season starts against them. Ted Lilly dominated the Astros to a tune of a 2-0 record, 1.40 ERA and 0.83 WHIP in three starts in 2008. Zack Greinke has never won a game at U.S. Cellular Field. He's 0-6 with a 7.78 ERA and 1.57 WHIP in eight games (six starts) there, and was soundly pounded for a 15.00 ERA and five home runs in two starts at "The Cell" in 2008. If there's a perfect time to use Todd Wellemeyer, it's in a home game versus Pittsburgh. He was 3-0 with a 3.45 ERA and 1.05 WHIP in five starts against the Pirates in 2008. Mike Pelfrey had an ERA almost a run and three-quarters higher and a WHIP more than 50 points higher on the road than at home in 2008, and he's a pitch-to-contact type who served up three home runs at Great American Ball Park last July 20. No thank you. Food for thought: Fausto Carmona, a ground-ball pitcher, has won both his career starts at Rangers Ballpark, one in 2007 and one in 2008 while tallying 14 innings and allowing one unearned run and a 1.07 WHIP. He also had a 2.67 spring ERA. Sneaky-good start, anyone? Daniel Cabrera has been soundly crushed during his interleague career -- 2-11 record, 6.08 ERA in 17 games (16 starts) -- and he's no longer the strikeout pitcher he once was. Don't be fooled by that low Marlins contact rate.
Now batting
Hitters' count:
• Melvin Mora, 3B, Orioles: 9-for-20 (.450 BA) lifetime versus Chien-Ming Wang.
• Dustin Pedroia, 2B, Red Sox: 14-for-25 (.560) with four extra-base hits and four walks lifetime against Scott Kazmir.
• Jermaine Dye, OF, White Sox: 12-for-33 (.364) with three doubles and three home runs in his career against Zack Greinke.
• Joe Crede, 3B, Twins: 11-for-33 (.333) with two doubles and three home runs lifetime versus Carlos Silva.
• Ryan Spilborghs, OF, Rockies: 3-for-7 (.429) with two doubles lifetime versus Doug Davis, and batted .357 in eight games at Chase Field in 2008.
• Justin Upton, OF, Diamondbacks: 3-for-5 with a home run against Franklin Morales in their brief careers, and has a .967 career OPS at home.
• Raul Ibanez, OF, Phillies: Two home runs and five hits in 14 career at-bats against Javier Vazquez.
• J.J. Hardy, SS, Brewers: In five career at-bats versus Randy Johnson, he has two home runs and a single.
• Rick Ankiel, OF, Cardinals: Four hits, one of them a home run, in five career at-bats against fellow left-hander Zach Duke.
• Yadier Molina, C, Cardinals: 6-for-17 (.353) lifetime versus Duke.
• Ryan Doumit, C, Pirates: 5-for-11 (.455) with a double and a home run in his career against Todd Wellemeyer.
Pitchers' count:
• Kevin Youkilis, 1B/3B, Red Sox: 7-for-35 (.200) with three doubles and 13 strikeouts lifetime against Scott Kazmir.
• Mark Teahen, OF, Royals: 2-for-12 (.167) with one extra-base hit -- a home run -- but five strikeouts versus Gavin Floyd.
• Paul Konerko, 1B, White Sox: Zack Greinke has limited him to five hits in 37 career at-bats, striking him out 10 times.
• Jimmy Rollins, SS, Phillies: Two home runs lifetime versus Javier Vazquez, but in 43 at-bats; has batted .186 with 12 K's against the right-hander overall.
• Miguel Tejada, SS, Astros: Has batted .182 (6-for-33) with no home runs and eight strikeouts in his career against Ted Lilly.
• Brian Giles, OF, Padres: 3-for-21 (.143) in his career against Chad Billingsley.
• Mike Cameron, OF, Brewers: Though both hits were doubles, he's 2-for-29 with 18 strikeouts in his career against Randy Johnson.
• Bill Hall, 3B, Brewers: 0-for-13 with eight K's versus the "Big Unit."
• Freddy Sanchez, 2B, Pirates: Two hits in 18 career at-bats against Todd Wellemeyer.
If you're hardcore
• Russell Branyan, 3B, Mariners: In six career at-bats versus Kevin Slowey, he has two doubles and hasn't struck out.
• Jeff Keppinger, SS, Astros: Should get a start at third base over Geoff Blum, and is 5-for-15 (.333) in his career against Ted Lilly. Keppinger also has a .904 OPS against left-handers since the beginning of the 2006 season.
• Edgar Gonzalez, 2B, Padres: He's 4-for-7 with a home run in his career against Chad Billingsley, if he can just sneak in a start at second base.
• Gabe Kapler, OF, Rays: He'll presumably start in right field in this game (and versus most left-handers), seeing as he has an .886 OPS against them since 2006.
• Dexter Fowler, OF, Rockies: The Rockies would be smart to play him every day against a left-hander, as he managed a 1.098 OPS against that side in the minors in 2008.
Injury list: Out
• Jamey Carroll, 2B/3B, Indians (15-day disabled list, hand)
• Cliff Floyd, DH, Padres (15-day DL, shoulder)
• Ichiro Suzuki, OF, Mariners (15-day DL, ulcer)
• Delwyn Young, OF, Dodgers (15-day DL, elbow)
Injury list: Day-to-day
• Vladimir Guerrero, OF, Angels (chest): Playing, but might serve as the designated hitter on occasion
• Carlos Guillen, 1B/3B, Tigers (hamstrings): Playing, but might DH on occasion
• Matt Lindstrom, RP, Marlins (rotator cuff): Active and available to close
• Mike Redmond, C, Twins (groin)
• Rafael Soriano, RP, Braves (oblique): Active and available in the bullpen
• Willy Taveras, OF, Reds (illness): Missed Opening Day
Weather concerns
• Wednesday's weatherproof games: Tigers-Blue Jays, Rockies-Diamondbacks, Mariners-Twins and Cubs-Astros.
• Incredibly there's a chance of rain in San Diego -- between 20 and 40 percent -- but be aware that only once since 1999 has a Padres game in that city been postponed. For the record, it happened in April (April 4, 2006), so it can't be declared impossible.
• The forecast calls for it being a bit breezy in Philadelphia, with winds of 11-20 mph and a 20-percent chance of rain.
• The low temperature in Boston is expected to be 38 degrees.
• Expect winds of 20 mph in Texas, with gusts of up to 30 mph.
• There is a 50 percent chance of rain in Cincinnati and the low is expected at 36 degrees, though the detailed forecast suggests the rain might not arrive until overnight.
Tristan H. Cockcroft is a fantasy baseball analyst for ESPN.com and a two-time champion of the League of Alternative Baseball Reality (LABR) experts league. You can e-mail him here.


text:
Do you mean Muslims? They eat meat, vegetables, grains... the usual stuff. See "What do christians eat?"
Many Muslims adhere to dietary laws and methods of slaughter called dhabihah. Foods which are haraam (harmful) per the Qur'an are:
- Pork meat (i.e. flesh of pig) [Qur'an 2:173]. Pork may be eaten in any instance wherein it will save your life and there is no other sustenance.
- Blood [Qur'an 2:173].
- All carnivores and birds of prey.
- Animals slaughtered in the name of anyone but Allah. All that has been dedicated or offered in sacrifice to an idolatrous altar or saint or a person considered to be "divine". [Qur'an 2:173] [Qur'an 5:3]
- Carrion [Qur'an 2:173]
- An Animal that has been strangled, beaten (to death), killed by a fall, gored (to death), savaged by a beast of prey (except that which you may have slaughtered while it was still alive); [Qur'an 5:3].
- Food over which Allah's name is not pronounced. [Qur'an 6:121].
- Alcohol and other intoxicants. [Qur'an 5:90-91].


text:
Juice For Geoff McFetridge
The crew over at Juice was kind to give me their annual holiday deck. Last years guest artist was Evan Hecox and I must confess, the shape looked too fun not to setup and ride (thanks for that deck as well). So this years holiday deck was ripped open immediately since the shape looked awesome once again and featured Geoff McFetridge's artwork. A solid combination in my book and with Juice being the coordinator's of these annual gift decks, a perfect all-around present. Mahalo guys!
200 of these decks were made and sent out… If you've received one, you're stoked.
Thank you: Matt, Brett, Andrew, & Chris.
San Nin Fai Lok!
At the top of the stairs leading to the Juice studio, you'll find these rides up against the wall.
Directly outside of the Juice studio, a perfect, smile-inducing painting by Jeff Canham.
kenny forever
solitary arts
mini skate shop
jef hartsel bob lake geoff mcfetridge
is jef hartsel and jay adams
interviews yong-ki chang
our inclusion
in stuff
bob lake
geoff mcfetridge
equal dist. is
yong-ki chang
in the bay area
champion don't stop
is geoff mcfetridge
in atwater village


text:
As we all are familiar with this amazing and popular streaming service. We no need to tell the popularity of Netflix. Many contents arrive and many contents say goodbye to this streaming platform. Netflix is the hub for all popular television series, motion pictures, and documentaries. As we know last year Netflix released many astonishing and fascinating documentaries such as Barry, Amanda Knox, and Audrie and Daisy etc. When it comes to documentaries then Netflix holds various documentaries and we recommend you to don't miss them. If you're new to this streaming service and face difficulty in activation process then you can visit www Netflix Com for the accurate and precise process or simply contact professionals.
Here we have some titles which linked with porn industry and it often happens whenever some person utters the word 'porn' then mind starts work in a dirty manner but kindly keep that in mind that of we're talking about porn it doesn't mean every time we'll talk about sex or pleasure may be want to tell you the darkest secrets behind, or the life they're living behind the cameras. If you're a Netflix user then fill up the credentials into Netflix Com Login and you can stream these titles. Take a glimpse at these titles
- Hot Girls Wanted (2015)
Hot Girls Wanted is an American documentary on young adult pornography directed by Jill Bauer and Ronna Gradus in 2015. This documentary follows the lives of many 18 and 19-year-old porn actresses. The film aired at the 2015 Sundance Film Festival and was released on Netflix on 29th of May, 2015. To know the full story you need to stream this motion picture.
- Buying Sex (2013)
Buying Sex looks at the controversial debate over pending refine to Canadian prostitution laws, prompting us to think again our attitudes toward the 'oldest profession'. You just need to visit Netflix Com Activate if you want to activate this superlative streaming service and stream this documentary.
- Kink (2013)
In human intercourse, kinkiness is any unusual sexual practices, concepts or fantasies. The term derives from the idea of a 'bend' in one's sexual behavior to contrast such behavior with 'straight' or 'vanilla' sexual customs and tendency. This term has been claimed by some who practices sexual fetishism as a term or similar for their practices, showing a range of sexual practices from playful to sexual objectification and definite paraphilias.
An ex-adult film star, a 12-year-old girl and a 22-year-old who pines for 'common' private parts are recorded in this thought-provoking doc about who porn, social media and pop culture affect female. The movie is directed by Jill Bauer and Ronna Gradus in 2012.
If you're a Netflix user then simply fill up your appropriate credentials and stream these amazing documentaries. If you find any obstacle in signing up then you can visit Netflix Sign In Help for precise and better technical support.


text:
CHICAGO, IL – Hyatt Hotels Corporation today announced the brand transition of The Concourse Hotel at Los Angeles Airport from a Hyatt affiliated hotel to Hyatt Regency Los Angeles International Airport. The 580-room hotel is undergoing an extensive $75 million renovation, which is scheduled to conclude January 1, 2017.
Currently open and accepting guests, Hyatt Regency Los Angeles International Airport is under the expert direction of Managing Director Jeff Rostek with the support of Prism Hotels & Resorts.
"Our hotel is not only helping to transform Century Boulevard, but it is elevating the hotel experience for travelers who want the convenience of staying close to the airport," says Rostek. "We offer a level of upscale quality and a fine attention to detail with the hotel's design and service. Our reimagined public spaces, guest room design and anticipatory service will remind guests why it's good not to be home."
Hyatt Regency Los Angeles International Airport is the only airport hotel with direct shuttle service, which is provided complimentary to registered hotel guests and runs every 10 minutes between the hotel and airport.


text:
Home Sports Tickets Soccer Serie B Bari
Bari Tickets
Find the Bari tickets you're looking for on viagogo, the world's largest ticket marketplace. Select a match from the Bari fixtures to view the range of tickets available. You can also sell your spare Bari tickets on viagogo, and listing tickets is free. All Bari tickets are covered by the viagogo Ticket guarantee!
Sign Up for Bari Ticket Alerts
Sign up for the latest information on upcoming Bari events. Be the first to know when Bari tickets go on sale!
The email address you entered is invalid


text:
Humboldt County releases My Humboldt app
EUREKA- Humboldt county released it's new "My Humboldt" app for Android and Apple products on Thursday.
The app allows users to report road concerns and submit photos geo-tagged with their location. You can also check road conditions and submit crime reports. Along with those features, you can access emergency alerts and county news and find county parks for recreation.
The app was built with citizen input. Officials with the county did not have immediate access to the number of times the app had been downloaded after its release.


text:
Moving to Austin?
Moving to a new city can be stressful. Committing to a house or apartment without seeing it is nerve racking. As a current Austin resident, I will vet your future rental, check out the amenities, prices and neighborhood. I can even take you on a Skype tour.
Training & Qualifications
I am a current Austin resident. I did a lot of shopping around before choosing my apartment and spent a lot of time to do it.
Availability & Preferences
About Madeline Nelson
I'm a 25 year old college graduate with an unhealthy fixation on conservationism. No car, few belongings and heading towards life in a tiny house. Hopefully, I can barter using my time instead of my m...oney.show moreOpen to other proposals
Madeline Nelson is looking for:
- Fitness
- Experiences
- Learning
- Fun & Quirky
- Gaming
- Cheap & Easy


text:
Last week came and went before I was ready, and now I'm playing catch-up (not to be confused with ketchup - tee hee hee)! It was such a strange week because Monday was a holiday and Friday was an all-day-in-service day for teachers. That meant I only had students for three days! THREE days! Oh to be a kid again! I could easily get used to three-day-work weeks! So here it is, the end of another week, and I'm trying to reflect on two weeks instead of my usual one.
All in all the year is going quite smoothly so far. Almost too smoothly that it is somewhat scary. Sure, we had some technology frustrations, but over all, things are going quite well. I think it helps that a good percentage of my students have had me before. Those kids know what I expect of them and that makes my job so much easier. It can't continue can it? Isn't that wishful thinking? I've taught long
enough that I know a dream when I'm in one, so I keep waiting for the
hammer to fall.
Each day is bringing about a whole new set of challenges. The change we made from having student accounts on the district server to having student accounts stored on individual flash drives is certainly solving most of the log in issues, but it is definitely creating a whole new set of problems. If I hear "I forgot my flash drive" one more time, I cannot be held responsible for my actions. I have tried to equate not bringing a flash drive with not wearing pants, but even than analogy hasn't phased them. What part of "you HAVE to have it" do they not understand?
Along with having to face a few technology issues, writing curriculum on the fly is another great challenge. I'm the type of person who likes to know, well in advance, what is going on ahead of time. I don't like feeling unprepared. But at the of each day I find myself scrambling for something to do in class the next day. Just typing that sentence makes me shudder! That is so unlike me. But I'm managing. And so far I'm pretty pleased with what I've come up with. At least I haven't lost the ability to think creatively. I just take it one day at a time. I'll keep moving forward. And when I get to the end, I know I will have done the very best that I possibly could for my students and for myself.


text:
Those lost hours interest us, and the experiences offered by best sleep tracking are a piece of their allure. Researchers have been mapping our rest designs for quite a long time and concur that great eating regimen, low push and a lot of activity can offer us some assistance with sleeping better, yet in an always associated world loaded with due dates, dramatizations, wheezing friends and family and shouting youngsters getting a decent kip can be near on unimaginable. In any case, can joined innovation act the hero? We've found the exceptionally most recent in best sleep tracking that guarantees to make your evenings longer, mornings less demanding and even handle wheezing accomplices.
Withings Aura
The Aura is a finished unit for the individuals who routinely experience the ill effects of poor rest. It works by following your rest examples and afterward awakening you amid your lightest rest stage. The obvious piece of the framework is an abnormal looking next to light that screens you're resting environment clamor contamination and temperature while calming you with new age sounds and delicate, gradually fluctuating light examples. In the meantime, a dainty sensor cushion under the bedding screens your rest designs for the duration of the night and sends all the information it gathers – heart rate, movement and breath – to the bedside light gadget which then ascertains the most proficient time to tenderly stir you from sleep.
Beddit Smart 2.0
Taking into account something wellbeing proficient call BCG, the second era Beddit Smart ultra-slim sensor tucks under your bed sheets and assembles information on rest quality, length of time, heart rate and breath rate. It will then naturally track your rest, without being told when you're sleeping, which goes far to taking the whine out of rest following. The Beddit sensor sneaks by the top sheet of your bed, and uses Bluetooth Low Energy to join with your cell phone, which collects the information. Beddit says that the Bluetooth association will be made naturally when your cell phone is set inside of extent.
Sense is a rest tracker that, as opposed to strapping to your wrist as you kip, cuts onto your pad. The Pill unit distinguishes the measure of development you make amid the night and the preparing is finished by the unit imagined. It gets the data from the Pill and examines it together with temperature, encompassing light and even clamor also for a practically finish profile of your daily routine and sources that may be influencing it. The thought is that Sense will then have the capacity to make sense of what you have to change with a specific end goal to improve night's rest. You may have the capacity to purchase thicker blinds or turn down the radiators.
Rest Cycle Alarm Clock
Tuck your cell phone iOS or Android under your bed sheet and Sleep Cycle utilizes the telephone's accelerometer to watch your nighty movement and wake you amid your lightest rest stage. A mess less expensive than a committed rest tracker – and a mess more constrained – however the telephone still groups packs of information and gives you a decent diagram of your rest.


text: Shubh Navratri 2016 wallpaper in good quality – Happy Navratri Wishes in Hindi/ Cute Navratri Images/Photos/Wishes By admin | September 28, 2016 0 Comment Shubh Navratri to all new visitors of the Happy New year. Navratri a nine days Hindu Festival is very popular in North India. You must be looking for the best Navratri wishes for your friends and Family. So here i am going to help you by sharing some of my Shubh Navratri Wishes/ Images Collection.


text:
Let us know when your receive great advice so we can thank our lawyers and point others with similar questions in the right direction.Got it!
I have contracted a lawyer to process my divorce. I was married for 9 years to a mentally abusive man. While I was gathering information for my divorce I run in to a note on my husband's birth certificate which listed the place and name of the person he married in Mexico, before he married me. I had a friend in Mexico check this information, she did find and sent me a marriage certificate. As soon as I had the certificate, I took it to my lawyer, but he has not done anything with it. I found out from my 5 year old son that he is having a woman stay over with her children and her son bit him. I need to know if there is something else I can do. Please help. I really need a lawyer who can take care of this for me.
From the information you provided it sounds like your soon to be ex may have been married to another woman in Mexico at the time you were married? Are you asking if you can have your marriage annuled in Utah if your husband was still married at the time the two of you married? If that is the case, the answer is most likely yes.Ask a similar question
Sign up to receive a 10-part series of useful information and legal advice about the divorce process.
Post a free question on our public forum.Ask a Question
- or -
Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.Find a Lawyer