A disciplined and unique to approach to access the body's energetic system. This allows the intelligence of your body to make it heard and return as much as possible, to a balanced state – your place of health.
Our bodies have normal self healing functions continuously at work caring for us without conscious thought or control. This is called "Body Wisdom". Kinesionics Practitioners are trained to connect to those self healing mechanisms and assist your body in its individual requirement to heal.
Your energetic system consists, in part, of energetic circuits that are located all over the body. These circuits connect through energy channels to the organs, nervous system and muscles. This concept is nothing new; the use of energy channels (meridians and marma points) in the body and points on the body surface are firmly rooted in the Ayurvedic and TCM healing systems. When you are healthy, the energy in your body flows unimpeded, like a free-flowing river. But when energy cannot reach specific areas, the stress can lead to an energy imbalance and a state of disease.
When there is a health imbalance, the Kinesionics practitioner uses muscle testing with your body's energetic system to identify your current health needs and to find helpful therapies for promoting, restoring, and maintaining balance. This involves testing the body's responses by applying slight pressure to a large muscle (usually the anterior deltoid or shoulder muscle) and by touching energetic response points on your body.
An energetic response point connects to various organs and systems of the body with your muscle acting as an interface between your neurological system and your energetic body (the point). The muscle test amplifies the fluctuations in your nervous system, allowing the practitioner to assess the relative strength or weakness of that point, and of the system or organ represented by that point.
Based on the feedback a practitioner receives from your body, they are able to recommend appropriate therapies, and monitor progress in returning to health. With our bodies continually demonstrating that they can function without our conscious intervention, Kinesionics allows us to understand your needs without distortion by anyone's assumptions.
The use of Kinesionics in an integrated practice considers the fact that any philosophy of medicine has both benefits and limitations. To disregard any is of significant disservice to the patient, eliminating the prospect of complete care.


text:
Nintendo Wii - Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law
Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law
Published by Capcom, Developed by Capcom
Genres: Adventure (1 players)
US release date: Jan 8th, 2008 | EU release date: -
Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law is a fully animated interactive adventure game that merges the fun and mayhem of the popular Adult Swim TV show with Capcom's unique style of gameplay. Players will step into the shiny wingtips of Harvey Birdman, a third-rate superhero turned third-rate defense attorney charged with exonerating parodied classic cartoon characters.
Over the course of the game, players must guide Harvey through a series of odd and comical cases. Each of the game's five interactive stories takes the winged crusader of justice to familiar locations from the TV show. In order to prove his client's innocence, Harvey must peruse the scene of the crime, gather evidence, talk with other cartoon characters, occasionally have drinks with opposing council, and of course, tear holes - no matter how ridiculous - in the testimony provided by the witness for the prosecution. Harvey must bring the whole story together to defend his client in a court where anything can happen... including a confrontation with the prosecution who brandishes a Shrink Ray Gun. With outrageous gameplay and the comical antics of hilarious animated characters, players and fans alike will feel that they are not just taking control of a character, but actually taking part in a brand new episode of Harvey Birdman.
Sleuth your way through five uproarious all new court cases
Experience fully animated gameplay and voice-over dialogue
Enjoy the vocal talents of series regulars like Gary Cole, Lewis Black, Peter MacNicol, John Michael Higgins and more
Visit and explore familiar locales from the show
Interact with favorite series characters - let Mentok take your mind! Get shrunk by Reducto! Avoid Phil Ken Sebben's quadruple entendres!
Investigate and collect evidence for courtroom battles with semi-private prosecutors
Press, confront and break witnesses for your chance to reveal lies and scintillating secrets
For Wii version, players will be able to point and aim their way through the cases, using the Wii Remote
Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law has no review on Wii's World. Write a review
Harvey Birdman gameplay video
Some gameplay footage of Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law has been released. I'm thinking this game will be pretty funny. Developed...
Godzilla & Birdman cruisin' to Indy500 box art
A number of new box arts have cropped up. Here's the US version of Godzilla: Unleashed. A good time was had by all. Next is Harvey...
This show is hilarious.
sidkid004 said:
This seems like a cheap (yet faithful) point-and-click mystery game based on a great show. Harvey Birdman GO.
Master Foot said:
That's Colonel Guile! I hope that the game captures the wit of the show without being just another tv show dump.
I heard there were going to be multiple Street Fighter cameos in this game. If they even DARE put Chun-Li in this, I'm going to turn Harvey Birdman into Roast Bird.
lilyputt said:
Great show, game?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Vetus HRC40 Tweezers helps you to easily remove support structures. Furthermore, you can use it in everyday life and grab fine objects and parts.
Do you have troubles to remove support structures when you finished 3D printing an object? Support material can stick very tough to your object, especially if you manufacture your actual part with the same filament as your support material. It can be hard to remove and you may damage your object if you use a tool which is too big. Vetus HRC40 Tweezers helps you to easily remove support structures. Furthermore, you can use it in everyday life and grab fine objects and parts.
Easily remove support structures and grab fine objects with the Vetus HRC40 Tweezers. Buy it here.


text:
Explore Resources For...
Cases & Codes
ARE YOU A LEGAL CONSUMER?
Visit FindLaw for Consumers
CA Ct. App.
ITT TELECOM PRODUCTS CORPORATION v. DOOLEY
Reset A A Font size: Print
Court of Appeal, Sixth District, California.
ITT TELECOM PRODUCTS CORPORATION, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Gerald DOOLEY, et al., Defendant and Respondent.
No. H003501.
Decided: September 26, 1989
Morrison & Foerster, Robert D. Raven, Gary M. Rinck, Andrew E. Monach and Peter L. Shaw, San Francisco, for plaintiff and appellant. Caputo, Liccardo, Rossi, Sturges & McNeil, Salvador A. Liccardo, R. Donald McNeil, Robert A. Franklin and Robert C. Colyar, San Jose, for defendant and respondent.
1. Introduction
Does the statutory privilege for statements made in judicial proceedings (Civ.Code, § 47, subd. 2) preclude liability for an otherwise wrongful disclosure of trade secrets? Plaintiff ITT Telecom Products Corporation filed the instant suit for damages alleging its former employee, defendant Gerald Dooley, had violated contractual and other duties of confidentiality. Dooley moved for summary judgment or summary adjudication based on the privilege, asserting his disclosures were made as a consultant to a party involved in litigation with ITT. The trial court granted Dooley's motion for summary judgment and ITT has appealed.
As explained below, we will reverse, holding the privilege does not apply to the voluntary disclosure of trade secrets in violation of a contract of confidentiality.
2. Scope of review
"Since a summary judgment motion raises only questions of law regarding the construction and effect of the supporting and opposing papers, we independently review them on appeal, applying the same three-step analysis required of the trial court. (Code Civ.Proc., § 437c․)" (AARTS Productions, Inc. v. Crocker National Bank (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 1061, 1064, 225 Cal.Rptr. 203.) "First, we identify the issues framed by the pleadings․" (Ibid.) Second, we identify which, if any, material facts are truly undisputed by comparing the separate statements of facts and supporting evidence in the motion, the opposition, and in any reply. (Code Civ.Proc., § 437c, subd. (b).) Third, disregarding disputed facts, we consider whether the motion has "establish[ed] a complete defense or otherwise show[n] there is no factual basis for relief on any theory reasonably contemplated by the opponent's pleading." (AARTS Productions, Inc., supra, at p. 1064, 225 Cal.Rptr. 203.) 1
3. The pleadings
ITT alleged that after July 1982 and before September 1983 Dooley disclosed confidential information and trade secrets as a paid consultant to Intercontinental De Communicaciones Por Satelite, S.A., a Panamanian corporation ("Intercomsa"). The disclosures were concurrent with ITT's October 1982 demand for arbitration with Intercomsa and Intercomsa's April 1983 lawsuit against ITT concerning an allegedly defective telephone switching system purchased from ITT, a Delaware corporation.
ITT's appeal concerns only two of its causes of action. One alleged that Dooley breached a written contract not to disclose confidential information obtained during his employment. The other alleged misappropriation of ITT's trade secrets and confidential, proprietary information.2 ITT sought compensatory damages and punitive damages for the tort.3
4. Material, undisputed facts
In 1967 in Ohio, Dooley signed an "employee's agreement to assign inventions" with ITT's predecessor which provided in pertinent part: "I further agree that I will not, except as required in the conduct of the Company's business or as authorized in writing on behalf of the Company, publish or disclose, during such term of employment or subsequent thereto, any secret or confidential knowledge concerning any invention or other matter relating to the Company's business which I may in any way acquire by reason of my employment by the Company."
In December 1977, ITT retained Dooley after acquiring the assets, including contract rights, of Dooley's former employer. Dooley left ITT's employ in July 1982.
After Intercomsa became dissatisfied with an international telephone switching system it had purchased from ITT, in October 1982 ITT demanded arbitration in New York. Intercomsa contacted a telecommunications consulting firm to assist its arbitration defense.
In October 1982, the consulting firm hired Dooley for $600 to $800 per day as an expert consultant. Dooley traveled to Panama for a week in November 1982 to consult with Intercomsa. Intercomsa wanted to know whether the switching system conformed to ITT's product descriptions and specifications and the contract between Intercomsa and ITT. Dooley answered eleven of Intercomsa's questions by a written report dated November 19, 1982. Dooley also instructed Intercomsa on traffic engineering of telephone calls based on his general education, his work experience with ITT and previous employers, and his knowledge of particular product developments by ITT.
Dooley supplied Intercomsa with other information about the system which he obtained from another former employee of ITT who wished to remain anonymous. Dooley could not recall if his informant was still employed by ITT when he obtained this information.
Dooley discussed his report with Intercomsa's attorneys in Washington, D.C. in December 1982 or January 1983.
Dooley provided Intercomsa with information for the purpose of assisting it in litigation with ITT. In April 1983, Intercomsa filed a complaint against ITT in a Florida federal district court. On February 1, 1984, the district court granted Intercomsa's motion precluding ITT from deposing Dooley or obtaining his report because he was not a designated trial witness, although he was designated an expert consultant.4 This action was filed on February 28, 1984. The following day, ITT filed an ex parte motion to expedite Dooley's deposition and production of his report.
5. Overview of statutory privilege for statements made in judicial proceedings
In Financial Corp. of America v. Wilburn (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 764, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653, this court examined the nature of the privilege for statements made in judicial proceedings.5 We explained in part: "By statute an action for defamation cannot be predicated on certain privileged oral or written statements. 'A privileged publication or broadcast is one made ․ 2. In any ․ (2) judicial proceeding․' (Civ.Code, § 47.)" (Id. at p. 771, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.) "This privilege is absolute in that it applies regardless of whether a statement was uttered with malice or bad faith. ( [Citation]; Thornton v. Rhoden [ (1966) ] 245 Cal.App.2d 80, 93 [53 Cal.Rptr. 706, 23 A.L.R.3d 1152]; [citation].) However, its applicability depends on whether the statement was 'made in' a 'judicial proceeding.' Albertson [ v. Raboff (1956) ] 46 Cal.2d 375 [295 P.2d 405], faced the question whether a notice of lis pendens was privileged. The court determined the privilege should be given a broad application in view of its underlying policy, holding: 'It is our opinion that the privilege applies to any publication, such as the recordation of a notice of lis pendens, that is required [citation] or permitted [citation] by law in the course of a judicial proceeding to achieve the objects of the litigation, even though the publication is made outside the courtroom and no function of the court or its officers is invoked. [Citation.] Thus, it is not limited to the pleadings, the oral or written evidence, to publications in open court or in briefs or affidavits. If the publication has a reasonable relation to the action and is permitted by law, the absolute privilege attaches.' (Id., at pp. 380–381 [295 P.2d 405].) The court supported this expansive reading of the statutory privilege by reference to common-law absolute privileges described in the Restatement of Torts sections 585–589 which protect certain actors in judicial proceedings against defamation actions. (Id., at pp. 378, 381 [295 P.2d 405].)" (189 Cal.App.3d 764, 771–772, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.)
At issue in Financial Corp. of America v. Wilburn, supra, 189 Cal.App.3d 764, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653, was whether statements by an attorney preceding (id. at pp. 777–778, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653) and during litigation (id. at pp. 774–777, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653) were privileged against claims of intentional interference with economic advantage and abuse of process. We noted that the statutory privilege has been applied to statements made by actual and prospective nonparty witnesses in litigation and other quasi-judicial proceedings. (Id. at pp. 772, 777–778, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653; cf. Ribas v. Clark (1985) 38 Cal.3d 355, 364–365, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637; Bernstein v. Alameda etc. Med. Assn. (1956) 139 Cal.App.2d 241, 245–247, 293 P.2d 862; Thornton v. Rhoden, supra, 245 Cal.App.2d 80, 93, 99, 53 Cal.Rptr. 706; Kachig v. Boothe (1971) 22 Cal.App.3d 626, 641, 99 Cal.Rptr. 393; Block v. Sacramento Clinical Labs, Inc. (1982) 131 Cal.App.3d 386, 393–394, 182 Cal.Rptr. 438; McClatchy Newspapers, Inc. v. Superior Court (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 961, 971, 973–974, 234 Cal.Rptr. 702; Carden v. Getzoff (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 907, 913–916, 235 Cal.Rptr. 698.) 6
6. Were the statements made in a judicial proceeding?
We preliminarily dispose of several of ITT's contentions regarding the applicability of the privilege to Dooley's disclosures to Intercomsa. Here, as in Wilburn, "[t]he dispute between [the parties] is fueled by the tension in the law between liberal and restrictive applications of the privilege." (189 Cal.App.3d 764, 773, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.) Examples of liberal applications are Albertson v. Raboff, supra, 46 Cal.2d 375, 295 P.2d 405, and Thornton v. Rhoden, supra, 245 Cal.App.2d 80, 53 Cal.Rptr. 706, and of restrictive applications are Bradley v. Hartford Acc. & Indemn. Co. (1973) 30 Cal.App.3d 818, 106 Cal.Rptr. 718, and its progeny, such as Barbary Coast Furniture Co. v. Sjolie (1985) 167 Cal.App.3d 319, 334, 213 Cal.Rptr. 168. (Wilburn, supra, 189 Cal.App.3d 764, 772–774, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.)
ITT's contentions are based on Bradley, supra, 30 Cal.App.3d 818, 106 Cal.Rptr. 718, where "[t]he court interpreted existing California precedent and the Restatement categories as sketching the outermost boundaries for application of the privilege (id., at pp. 824–825 [106 Cal.Rptr. 718] ), and concluded: '[A]bsolute privilege in judicial proceedings is afforded only if the following conditions have been met: the publication (1) was made in a judicial proceeding; (2) had some connection or logical relation to the action; (3) was made to achieve the objects of the litigation; and (4) involved litigants or other participants authorized by law.' (Id., at p. 825 [106 Cal.Rptr. 718].) The third condition was further refined by the court, which underlined 'the requirement that [the publication] be made in furtherance of the litigation and to promote the interest of justice.' (Id., at p. 826 [106 Cal.Rptr. 718].)" (Wilburn, supra, 189 Cal.App.3d 764, 772–773, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653; emphasis omitted.) We note that Bradley's elaboration on the third condition has been questioned (O'Neil v. Cunningham (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 466, 475, 173 Cal.Rptr. 422) and expressly rejected (McClatchy Newspapers, Inc., supra, 189 Cal.App.3d 961, 971, 234 Cal.Rptr. 702).
ITT concedes for purposes of this appeal that Dooley's statements meet Bradley's first two conditions, but contends they do not meet the third and fourth conditions.7
ITT argues Dooley's statements were not made to promote justice or achieve the objects of the arbitration or the federal action. Instead, he made them solely for compensation. As Dooley responds, it is undisputed that his statements were made in order to assist ITT's adversary in litigation.
Wilburn summarized the law as follows. "The privileged status of a particular statement ․ depends on its relationship to an actual or potential issue in an underlying action. Courts respect the absolute aspect of the privilege by considering a statement's apparent or ostensible connection to the underlying action, without exploring the writer's [or speaker's] actual, subjective intent or purpose." (189 Cal.App.3d 764, 776, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.) 8 Dooley's statements fit the third condition of the privilege because they were made to assist in litigation.
ITT also contends Dooley, as a consultant and not a witness or party, is not the type of person entitled to claim the privilege. This contention assumes, as Bradley indicated (30 Cal.App.3d 818, 826, 106 Cal.Rptr. 718), the statutory privilege is confined to the types of persons identified as privileged at common law in the Restatement of Torts. The statutory language, however, contains no such limitations. (Cf. O'Neil v. Cunningham, supra, 118 Cal.App.3d 466, 473–474, 173 Cal.Rptr. 422.) Who made the statement is merely a circumstance to consider in ascertaining its relationship to litigation. (Cf. Wilburn, supra, 189 Cal.App.3d 764, 778, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.)
Moreover, the privilege has been extended to statements made by potential expert witnesses much like Dooley. (Bernstein v. Alameda etc. Med. Assn., supra, 139 Cal.App.2d 241, 245–247, 293 P.2d 862—medical society could not expel doctor for report on another doctor's performance provided to attorney for use in worker's compensation proceeding; Block v. Sacramento Clinical Labs, Inc., supra, 131 Cal.App.3d 386, 393–394, 182 Cal.Rptr. 438—no professional negligence claim arises from toxicologist's report to district attorney on blood sample studies or later testimony at hearing on resulting criminal charges; Carden v. Getzoff, supra, 190 Cal.App.3d 907, 913–916, 235 Cal.Rptr. 698—accountant's written and oral valuations of business for purpose of dissolution no basis for husband's claims of negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress or abuse of process.) Here, Dooley's statements were made to assist a potential litigant seeking potential evidence. Nothing about this relationship to the litigation disqualifies Dooley from claiming the privilege. (Accord Kahn v. Burman (E.D.Mich.1987) 673 F.Supp. 210, 213—report on doctor's performance by expert consultant preliminary to malpractice action absolutely privileged at common law.)
Again invoking Bradley, supra, 30 Cal.App.3d 818, 826, 106 Cal.Rptr. 718, ITT warns that to apply the privilege is to condone filing lawsuits for the sole purpose of shielding related trade secret disclosures. Such allegations do not appear in ITT's complaint.
The application of the privilege should not depend on Intercomsa's later decision, relevant to discovery under federal civil procedure, whether to designate a consultant as an expert witness. A contrary conclusion would hinder judicial search for the truth. (Cf. Kahn, supra, 673 F.Supp. 210, 213.) We conclude that statements by Dooley as a consultant to assist a potential litigant qualify for the statutory privilege.
7. Does the privilege apply to statements violating a contract of confidentiality?
ITT contends the statutory privilege of Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2, does not apply to statements in breach of an express contract of confidentiality or nondisclosure.
ITT acknowledges the statutory privilege has not been limited to defamation claims. In Albertson v. Raboff, supra, 46 Cal.2d 375, 295 P.2d 405, the privilege was applied to a claim of disparagement of title. (Id. at pp. 378–379, 295 P.2d 405.) As explained in Oren Royal Oaks Venture v. Greenberg, Bernhard, Weiss & Karma, Inc., (1986) 42 Cal.3d 1157, 232 Cal.Rptr. 567, 728 P.2d 1202, "In the three decades since Albertson, numerous California cases have followed that decision's application of section 47(2) outside of the defamation arena and have held the statutory privilege applicable to a wide variety of tort theories on which plaintiffs have attempted to rely in order to recover monetary damages for conduct of a defendant that would be privileged for defamation purposes.5 " (Id. at p. 1164, 232 Cal.Rptr. 567, 728 P.2d 1202.) Footnote 5 states: "See, for example, Kachig v. Boothe [, supra,] 22 Cal.App.3d 626, 640–641 [99 Cal.Rptr. 393] ․ (intentional infliction of emotional distress); ․ Pettit v. Levy (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 484 [104 Cal.Rptr. 650] ․ (same, fraud and negligence); Agostini v. Strycula (1965) 231 Cal.App.2d 804 [42 Cal.Rptr. 314] ․ (inducing breach of contract); Brody v. Montalbano (1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 725, 737–738 [151 Cal.Rptr. 206] ․ (intentional interference with prospective economic advantage); Block v. Sacramento Clinical Labs, Inc.[, supra,] 131 Cal.App.3d 386 [182 Cal.Rptr. 438] ․ (professional negligence). See, in addition, Ribas v. Clark [, supra,] 38 Cal.3d 355, 364–365 [212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637] ․ (statutory invasion of privacy claim)." (Ibid.) "The Thornton [, supra,] decision ․ [held] that the section 47(2) privilege applies to a tort action for abuse of process." (Id. at p. 1165, 232 Cal.Rptr. 567, 728 P.2d 1202.)
Dooley emphasizes the following statement in Ribas v. Clark, supra, 38 Cal.3d 355, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637. "[A]lthough the statutory privilege accorded to statements made in judicial proceedings appears in the code in the chapter on defamation, it applies to virtually all other causes of action, with the exception of an action for malicious prosecution." (Id. at p. 364, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637; accord Wilburn, supra, 189 Cal.App.3d 764, 771, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.) Ribas applied the privilege to a statutory cause of action for invasion of privacy (Pen.Code, § 631) by an eavesdropper's reporting of a telephone conversation. (38 Cal.3d 355, 364–365, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637.)
The parties have not cited and we have not found any precedent considering application of the privilege for a witness's statements in judicial proceedings to the breach of an express nondisclosure agreement. (Compare Bond v. Pecaut (N.D.Ill.1983) 561 F.Supp. 1037, 1041, affirmed (7th Cir.1984) 734 F.2d 18—common law witnesses' privilege would apply to breach of implied confidentiality contract.) ITT again relies on Bradley in arguing the privilege should be narrowly confined to cases where its application is required by public policy and should not be extended without a "specific justification" for so doing. Without endorsing the restrictive view, we agree the privilege should not be automatically applied to new legal theories without consideration of the competing policies involved.
The policy served by the privilege accorded witnesses has been explained as follows. "The function of witnesses is of fundamental importance in the administration of justice. The final judgment of the tribunal must be based upon the facts as shown by their testimony, and it is necessary therefore that a full disclosure not be hampered by fear of private suits for defamation. The compulsory attendance of all witnesses in judicial proceedings makes the protection thus accorded the more necessary. The witness is subject to the control of the trial judge in the exercise of the privilege. For abuse of it, he [or she] may be subject to criminal prosecution for perjury and to punishment for contempt." (Rest.2d Torts, § 588, com. a, p. 250.) More succinctly, "Underlying the privilege is the vital public policy of affording free access to the courts and facilitating the crucial functions of the finder of fact." (Ribas v. Clark, supra, 38 Cal.3d 355, 364–365, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637.)
This privilege has been applied to new claims on the following reasoning. "The salutary purpose of the privilege should not be frustrated by putting a new label on the complaint." (Thornton v. Rhoden, supra, 245 Cal.App.2d 80, 99, 53 Cal.Rptr. 706.) " 'The resulting lack of any really effective civil remedy against perjurers is simply part of the price that is paid for witnesses who are free from intimidation by the possibility of civil liability for what they say.' (Prosser, Law of Torts (4th ed. 1971) p. 778.) This policy is equally compelling in the context of common law and statutory claims for invasion of privacy; there is no valid basis for distinguishing between the two." (Ribas v. Clark, supra, 38 Cal.3d 355, 365, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637; accord Hagan v. Fairfield (1965) 238 Cal.App.2d 197, 201, 47 Cal.Rptr. 600; Bernstein v. Alameda etc. Med. Assn., supra, 139 Cal.App.2d 241, 246, 293 P.2d 862; Block v. Sacramento Clinical Labs, Inc., supra, 131 Cal.App.3d 386, 390–391, 182 Cal.Rptr. 438.)
On the other hand, trade secrets have been recognized as a constitutionally protected intangible property interest. (Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. (1984) 467 U.S. 986, 1001–1004, 104 S.Ct. 2862, 2871–2874, 81 L.Ed.2d 815.) Evidence Code section 1060 provides: "If he or his agent or employee claims the privilege, the owner of a trade secret has a privilege to refuse to disclose the secret, and to prevent another from disclosing it, if the allowance of the privilege will not tend to conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice."
Moreover, it is possible to waive even First Amendment free speech rights by contract. In In re Steinberg (1983) 148 Cal.App.3d 14, 20, 195 Cal.Rptr. 613, the court recognized that a movie maker had a First Amendment right to disseminate his movie, but that this right was limited by his agreement to submit the final version of the movie to the juvenile court for editing.9 In Erie Telecommunications, Inc. v. City of Erie, Pa. (3d Cir.1988) 853 F.2d 1084, 1094–1101, a cable television franchisee was held under federal law to have voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waived its First Amendment rights by an agreement with the franchisor.
Thus, we balance society's interest in accurate judicial proceedings against ITT's property interest in information yielding a competitive advantage and Dooley's written promise of nondisclosure.
Dooley relies on Willig v. Gold (1946) 75 Cal.App.2d 809, 171 P.2d 754, which observed that an agent is under no legal duty to refrain from disclosing his principal's dishonest acts to their victim. (Id. at p. 814, 171 P.2d 754.) Willig involved no assertion of privilege and its irrelevance is manifest.
ITT asks us to follow Cutter v. Brownbridge (1986) 183 Cal.App.3d 836, 228 Cal.Rptr. 545, in striking a balance between these competing policies. There a patient sued his psychotherapist for voluntarily disclosing confidential information to the patient's litigation opponent. The court perceived it had to balance the witnesses' privilege 10 against the patient's constitutional right to privacy. (Id. at p. 845, 228 Cal.Rptr. 545.) The court determined this balance had already been struck by the Legislature, noting Evidence Code section 1015 requires a psychotherapist to assert the patient's privilege against disclosure of confidential communications. (Id. at pp. 845–846, 228 Cal.Rptr. 545.) The court concluded, "when disclosure of constitutionally protected material is contemplated, compliance with the Evidence Code requirements for claiming the privilege when that disclosure is sought and resort to the protective procedures provided are necessary prerequisites to protection of section 47, subdivision 2, immunity. Thus, a psychotherapist who volunteers information concerning a patient obtained in connection with their relationship, does so at his or her peril." (Id. at pp. 846–847, 228 Cal.Rptr. 545; see Anno. (1986) 48 A.L.R.4th 668.)
Cutter is useful for both its dissimilarities and similarities. Notably, it did not involve an express agreement on nondisclosure or confidentiality. Instead, the psychotherapist was recognized to have a statutory duty to protect the patient's confidences. In contrast, Evidence Code section 1060 imposes no similar duty on an employee or other party to a trade secret to claim the owner's privilege against disclosure.
The protection afforded by section 1060 would be nugatory unless an employer is able to fill the gap in the statute by contractually requiring an employee to assert the employer's privilege against trade secret disclosure, as ITT essentially did here. By the express nondisclosure agreement, Dooley undertook an obligation similar to the psychotherapist's statutory duty.
We note there is no claim Dooley's disclosures were judicially compelled. Dooley does not argue that his alleged breach of contract is excused because his performance was prevented by operation of law (Civ.Code, § 1511) or that the nondisclosure agreement is unenforceable because its object or the consideration is illegal. (Civ.Code, §§ 1550, 1598, 1599, 1607, 1608, 1667.)
Under the circumstances before us, we hold that Dooley was not privileged under Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2, to voluntarily breach an express confidentiality agreement.
8. Has Dooley disclosed any trade secrets?
Dooley contends a separate ground for granting summary judgment is ITT "has not identified any specific information, statement or report it considers a trade secret or confidential information that was disclosed by" Dooley.
The undisputed facts do not warrant this sweeping assertion. What is undisputed is that ITT is unaware of Dooley disclosing trade secrets or confidential information to anyone other than Intercomsa. As ITT points out, the disclosure of confidential information not amounting to trade secrets is arguably a breach of Dooley's express contract. The undisputed facts recited in part 4 above indicate Dooley's statements to Intercomsa were based on information which might have been confidential.
In any event, as we observed in AARTS Productions, Inc. v. Crocker National Bank, supra, 179 Cal.App.3d 1061, 225 Cal.Rptr. 203, a summary judgment motion "must stand self-sufficient and cannot succeed because the opposition is weak. [Citations.] A party cannot succeed without disproving even those claims on which the opponent would have the burden of proof at trial. [Citations.]" (Id. at pp. 1064–1065, 225 Cal.Rptr. 203.) Dooley's separate statement of undisputed facts did not require ITT to prove its case at this stage of the proceedings.
We address the remaining contentions to provide guidance in further proceedings. (Code Civ.Proc., § 43.)
9. Does the privilege apply to a tort claim of misappropriation of trade secrets?
ITT contends "the section 47(2) privilege does not apply to the tort of unlawfully misappropriating and disclosing trade secrets." (Capitals omitted.)
This cause of action arose from an employee's duty at common law not to disclose an employer's trade secrets.11 (Diodes, Inc. v. Franzen (1968) 260 Cal.App.2d 244, 250–251, 67 Cal.Rptr. 19, and cases there cited.) "Generally the law of unfair competition prohibits former employees from disclosing or misusing an employer's trade secrets and confidential information—even in the absence of contractual restrictions." (Loral Corp. v. Moyes (1985) 174 Cal.App.3d 268, 275, 219 Cal.Rptr. 836.) This cause of action appears to have been "merely a species of the broader tort" (Buckaloo v. Johnson (1975) 14 Cal.3d 815, 823, 122 Cal.Rptr. 745, 537 P.2d 865) of breach of confidence, namely, the unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. (Tele–Count Engineers, Inc. v. Pacific Tel. & Tel. Co. (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 455, 462–463, 214 Cal.Rptr. 276, and cases there cited; Davies v. Krasna (1966) 245 Cal.App.2d 535, 549–550, 54 Cal.Rptr. 37.) Trade secrets were protected by "the tort law of the marketplace" (Loral Corp v. Moyes, supra, 174 Cal.App.3d 268, 275, 219 Cal.Rptr. 836) in order to preserve a business's resulting competitive advantage. (Diodes, Inc. v. Franzen, supra, 260 Cal.App.2d 244, 251, 67 Cal.Rptr. 19; Rigging Internat. Maintenance Co. v. Gwin (1982) 128 Cal.App.3d 594, 606, 180 Cal.Rptr. 451.)
The applicability of the witnesses' privilege to this tort cause of action presents different policy questions than the breach of a nondisclosure agreement discussed above in part 7.
Tort and contract law have been contrasted as follows. "As Professor Prosser has explained: '[Whereas] [c]ontract actions are created to protect the interest in having promises performed,' '[t]ort actions are created to protect the interest in freedom from various kinds of harm. The duties of conduct which give rise to them are imposed by law, and are based primarily upon social policy, and not necessarily upon the will or intention of the parties․' (Prosser[, supra,] p. 613.)" (Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 167, 176, 164 Cal.Rptr. 839, 610 P.2d 1330.) "The law imposes the obligation that 'every person is bound without contract to abstain from injuring the person or property of another, or infringing upon any of his rights.' (Sec. 1708, Civ.Code.) This duty is independent of the contract and attaches over and above the terms of the contract․ 'It may be granted that an omission to perform a contract obligation is never a tort, unless that omission is also an omission of a legal duty. But such legal duty ․ may spring from extraneous circumstances not constituting elements of the contract as such, although connected with and dependent upon it and born of that wider range of legal duty which is due from every man to his fellow, to respect his rights of property and person, and refrain from invading them by force or fraud.' " (Jones v. Kelly (1929) 208 Cal. 251, 255, 280 P. 942.) " 'The common thread woven into all torts is the idea of unreasonable interference with the interests of others.' " (Smith v. Superior Court (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 491, 496, 198 Cal.Rptr. 829, quoting Prosser, supra, at p. 6; emphasis omitted.) Tort law may be viewed as attempting to define the terms of the unwritten social contract that binds members of a society together.
We note that Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2, has been applied to claims involving alleged breaches of confidence. In Lebbos v. State Bar (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 656, 211 Cal.Rptr. 847, an attorney claimed, among other things, the State Bar had violated a "mandatory duty of confidentiality" (id. at p. 663, 211 Cal.Rptr. 847) in interviewing complainants about her. The court reasoned, "since Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2, has been applied to provide immunity from a variety of tort actions based on publications in protected proceedings it can be inferred that section 47, subdivision 2, bars actions for violation of mandatory duty where the 'violation' consisted of communications in the course of a disciplinary investigation which is a quasi-judicial proceeding and consequently protected." (Id. at p. 667, fn. 4, 211 Cal.Rptr. 847; emphasis omitted.) In O'Neil v. Cunningham, supra, 118 Cal.App.3d 466, 173 Cal.Rptr. 422, a client claimed his attorney disclosed confidential information in order to settle a case. (Id. at p. 470, 173 Cal.Rptr. 422.) The court found the disclosure privileged, though it might subject the attorney to state bar discipline. (Id. at p. 476, 173 Cal.Rptr. 422.) The underlying tort theory was defamation, rather than any new tort. (Id. at pp. 471–472, 173 Cal.Rptr. 422.)
We also derive guidance from cases considering whether an alleged invasion of privacy was privileged. The personal secrets of individuals are comparable to the trade secrets of businesses. We have already discussed in part 7 above both Ribas v. Clark, supra, 38 Cal.3d 355, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637, where the witnesses' privilege overcame both common law and statutory invasion of privacy claims, and Cutter v. Brownbridge, supra, 183 Cal.App.3d 836, 228 Cal.Rptr. 545, where the privilege was limited by a constitutional invasion of privacy claim. We add that in Hagan v. Fairfield, supra, 238 Cal.App.2d 197, 201, 47 Cal.Rptr. 600, the privilege defeated a common law invasion of privacy claim.
We consider ITT's interest in trade secrets to be closer to the common law privacy right in Ribas than the constitutional privacy right in Cutter. As already explained, unlike the psychotherapist in Cutter, Dooley had no statutory duty to assert ITT's trade secret privilege.
The trade secret protection desired by ITT is spelled out in the nondisclosure agreement with Dooley. We are unconvinced any similar obligation imposed by tort law should overcome the witnesses' privilege to voluntarily make statements in judicial proceedings. We hold the privilege applies to ITT's tort claim of unauthorized disclosure of trade secrets.
10. Did Dooley engage in unprivileged tortious conduct?
ITT contends that even if Dooley's disclosures to Intercomsa are privileged against a tort claim, he engaged in other conduct not similarly privileged.
ITT relies on Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman v. Cohen (1983) 146 Cal.App.3d 200, 194 Cal.Rptr. 180, which states, "See also Westlack [sic ] Community Hospital v. Superior Court (1976) 17 Cal.3d 465, 482 [131 Cal.Rptr. 90, 551 P.2d 410] ․ where the court reaffirms the rule that Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2 is a statute which confers an absolute privilege which attaches only to statements or publications, but not actions of the person invoking the privilege." (Id. at p. 234, 194 Cal.Rptr. 180; emphasis in original.)
ITT more specifically asserts Dooley "is liable not just because the information was disclosed, but because he breached the solemn trust of his former employer. [Fn. omitted.]" ITT does not advance its position by reiterating it in various ways. The breach of trust was the disclosure and vice versa.
ITT also asserts Dooley's "liability derives not just from the statements themselves, but from his actions in soliciting and receiving money for the sale of information that was not his to sell." ITT misunderstands the nature of its tort cause of action. Absent unauthorized disclosure of trade secrets, there is nothing wrongful about Dooley being paid for his expertise. ITT identifies no other tortious conduct by Dooley other than his privileged statements.
11. Disposition
The summary judgment is reversed because the privilege is inapplicable to Dooley's voluntary disclosures allegedly violating his nondisclosure agreement. ITT to recover costs on appeal.
1. This analysis modifies that in AARTS Productions, Inc. to recognize the separate statements required since 1984. (Stats.1983, ch. 490, § 1, p. 1991.)
2. ITT's other purported causes of action were: breach of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the written employment contract, unfair competition, violation of Labor Code section 2860, and injunctive relief.
3. We note no issue is made of the absence of the defense of privilege from Dooley's answer.
4. ITT requests us to judicially notice the order terminating the federal action in its favor on January 24, 1987. (Evid.Code, §§ 452, subd. (c), 459.) ITT fails to show its relevance. We decline to notice irrelevant matter. (Mozzetti v. City of Brisbane (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 565, 578, 136 Cal.Rptr. 751; Gbur v. Cohen (1979) 93 Cal.App.3d 296, 301, 155 Cal.Rptr. 507.)
5. We assume, as have the parties, that this appeal should be decided under California law, where Dooley has resided since May 1983. (Compare e.g. Offshore Rental Co. v. Continental Oil Co. (1978) 22 Cal.3d 157, 148 Cal.Rptr. 867, 583 P.2d 721.)
6. The cited cases involve only witnesses in judicial proceedings, though Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2, renders privileged statements made in "any (1) legislative or (2) judicial proceeding, or (3) in any other official proceeding authorized by law, or (4) in the initiation or course of any other proceeding authorized by law and reviewable pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1084) of Title 1 of Part 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure․"
7. ITT here does not question that Dooley made prelitigation statements in good faith contemplation of litigation. (Cf. Wilburn, supra, 189 Cal.App.3d 764, 773, 777, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653; Rest.2d Torts, § 588, com. e, p. 251.) Though the relationship between the statements and the requested arbitration is undeveloped, we observe "an arbitration hearing falls within the scope of this privilege because of its analogy to a judicial proceeding." (Ribas v. Clark, supra, 38 Cal.3d 355, 364, 212 Cal.Rptr. 143, 696 P.2d 637.)
8. In Wilburn we applied the privilege liberally, implicitly rejecting Bradley's restrictive view. (189 Cal.App.3d 764, 776–778, 234 Cal.Rptr. 653.) The authors of Bradley and Barbary Coast disassociated themselves from Wilburn's conclusions in Silberg v. Anderson (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 29, 37, footnote 5, 249 Cal.Rptr. 697, also relied on by ITT. Presumably the California Supreme Court granted review of that case (on October 27, 1988 (S007056)) to resolve this conflict in authority.
9. Steinberg cites cases upholding secrecy agreements by Central Intelligence Agency employees against First Amendment claims. They rely primarily on national security concerns rather than particular contract language. (E.g., Snepp v. United States (1980) 444 U.S. 507, 509–511, fns. 3, 6, 100 S.Ct. 763, 765–766, fns. 3, 6, 62 L.Ed.2d 704; United States v. Marchetti (4th Cir.1972) 466 F.2d 1309, 1316–1317, cert. den. 409 U.S. 1063, 93 S.Ct. 553, 34 L.Ed.2d 516.)
10. We employ this terminology simply to distinguish the privilege of Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2, from the statutory trade secret privilege without retreating from our observations in part 6 above.
11. We observe this cause of action is not based on the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Civ.Code, §§ 3426–3426.10) enacted effective January 1, 1985 (§ 3426.10), since Dooley's alleged misappropriation occurred before September 1983.
AGLIANO, Presiding Justice.
COTTLE and ELIA, JJ., concur.
Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals
Opinion Summaries
Sample Business Contracts
Research An Attorney or Law Firm
Law Firm Marketing Services
JusticeMail
Attorney Websites
Buy a Directory Profile
On-Demand Webcasts


text:
Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk ROM
File name: Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk
Console: Amstrad CPC
Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk ROM Download
Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk ROM you can download for Amstrad CPC on roms-download.com. Play Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk it's a genre game that was loved by 103 of our users, who appreciated this game have given 4,0 star rating. Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk ISO is available in the USA version on this website. Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk is a Amstrad CPC emulator game that you can download to your computer and enjoy it by yourself or with your friends. Tai-Pan (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk file size - 190.2KB is absolutely safe because was tested by most trusted antiviruses.
Championship Baseball (UK) (1987).dsk GFL Championship Football (UK) (1987).dsk Championship Basketball - 2 On 2 (UK) (1987).dsk
Donkey Kong (UK) (1986) [a1].dsk Donkey Kong (UK) (1986).dsk Abu Simbel Profanation (S) (1986).dsk
New Zealand Story, The (UK) (1989) (Tape Conversion).dsk Databox 10-86 (1986) (PD).dsk Highlander (UK) (1986) [f1][t1].dsk
Conjugasions (19xx).dsk Boulder Dash 3 (UK) (1984) [a1].dsk Music Disk - MDLS28B (PD).dsk
CPC Telegramm - Nummer 9 (1995) (PD).dsk Galivan (UK) (1986) [f1][t1].dsk One's Plasma Factory (2000) (PD).dsk
Drakkar (S) (1989) [a1].dsk ZZZ UNK cpcdiscm.dsk DISC097B.dsk
TOP 10 AMSTRAD CPC ROMS
3D Fight & Billard & Maccadam Bumper & Donkey Kong & Tempest.dsk
Street Fighter (UK) (1988) [a1].dsk
Donkey Kong & Super Sprint.dsk
Les Geants D'Arcade 2 (Disk 1 Of 3) (SideArms & Street Fighter).dsk
Championship Baseball (UK) (1987).dsk
Street Fighter (UK) (1988).dsk
Fallout (UK) (1987).dsk
1943 & Commando & Green Beret.dsk
GFL Championship Football (UK) (1987).dsk


Check out my Let's Play, Now in Season 2! Also, TF2 commentaries!
He doesn't need a life, he can just respawn.
EDIT: Are you some Minecraft Fanboy?
Which sites do you think he sent them to? Definitely checking PCgamer often.
Not to be a Time-Zone fanboy, but the sun has already rose in my part of the world.
He's a gamer he doesn't need a life!
Rock Paper Shotgun might be one!
You call him out for posting about an update in only 4 minutes, yet you responded to this thread in just one minute.
Could've gotten home from going to work and saving kids from a shootout and checking minecraft for all you know.
lol look at some of my posts about the update one of them I made in a record 1 minute after Notch posted them on twitter. this is mostly because im on the computer as the tweet gets posted and Im lucky lol. and yes he has a life hes a gamer he has many lifes.
WHEN ALL KIRBY BREAKS LOOSE!
So, have any of the sites posted anything yet?
I hope that it comes up soon, im bored and want to read. about minecraft.
besides minecraft would be no fun if I couldn't eat pork once in a while.


text:
Home » Cruce
Shprits Y., V. Angelopoulos, C. Russell, R. Strangeway, A. Runov, D. Turner, R. Caron, P. Cruce, C. Russell, V. Petrov, M. Panasyuk, I. Yashin, A. Drozdov, A. Kellerman, V. Kalegaev, I. Nazarkov, J. Clemmons, I. Michaelis, (2018), Observations of the trapped and precipitating ionizing radiation from the LEO orbit, EGU General Assembly 2018, EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, 7312
Shprits Y. Y., V. Angelopoulos, C. T. Russell, R. J. Strangeway, A. Runov, D. Turner, R. Caron, P. Cruce, D. Leneman, I. Michaelis, V. Petrov, M. Panasyuk, I. Yashin, A. Drozdov, C. L. Russell, V. Kalegaev, I. Nazarkov, J. H. Clemmons, (2018), Scientific Objectives of Electron Losses and Fields INvestigation Onboard Lomonosov Satellite, Space Science Reviews, 214, 25, doi:10.1007/s11214-017-0455-4
Shprits Y., R. J. Strangeway, C. T. Russell, I. Michaelis, I. Yashin, V. Kalegaev, I. Nazarkov, V. Angelopoulos, J. Clemmons, P. Cruce, A. Kellerman, V. Petrov, A. Drozdov, D. Turner, M. Panasyuk, R. Caron, C. Russell, A. Runov, (2018), Observations of the trapped and precipitating ionizing radiation from the LEO orbit, 42nd Cospar Scientific Assembly, PRBEM.2-9-18
Turner D. L., V. Angelopoulos, Y. Shprits, A. Kellerman, P. Cruce, D. Larson, (2012), Radial distributions of equatorial phase space density for outer radiation belt electrons, Geophysical Research Letters, 39, doi:10.1029/2012GL051722
Turner D. L., V. Angelopoulos, Y. Y. Shprits, P. Cruce, D. Larson, (2012), First results of phase space density radial distributions through the outer radiation belt using THEMIS-SST, EGU General Assembly 2012, Vienna, Austria, 2012
Turner D., Y. Y. Shprits, V. Angelopoulos, P. Cruce, (2012), Understanding outer radiation belt losses, 39nd COSPAR Scientific Assembly, and acceleration processes using THEMIS-SST, COSPAR, Mysore, India, 2012.
Cruce P. R., D. L. Turner, V. Angelopoulos, D. E. Larson, Y. Y. Shprits, C. Huang, A. Y. Ukhorskiy, (2011), Studying the Important Relationship Between Earth's Plasma Sheet and the Outer Radiation Belt Electrons Using Newly Calibrated and Corrected Themis-Sst Data, AGU 2011 Fall Meeting, San Francisco, USA, 2011
Shprits Y., D. Subbotin, B. Ni, R. Horne, D. Baker, P. Cruce, (2011), Profound change of the near-Earth radiation environment caused by solar superstorms, J. Space Weather Space Clim., 9, doi:10.1029/2011SW000662


text:
Developer is : Silicon & Synapse
Hardware is : ECS
Developer name Silicon & Synapse
Birth year 1991
Website http://www.blizzard.com/
Mother country USA
Notes Headquartered in Irvine, California, USA, Silicon & Synapse was founded in 1991 by chairman Allen Adham, president Michael Morhaime and vice president Frank Pearce.
In 1994, the company changed its name to Blizzard Entertainment, establishing the Blizzard label at the same time, under which they gained a worldwide reputation for 3-D PC games like WarCraft, StarCraft and Diablo.
This developer page has been viewed : 9207 times
#-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Battle Chess II: Chinese Chess ECS OCS
1991 Silicon & Synapse Electronic Arts
Castles ECS OCS
1992 Silicon & Synapse Interplay
Lord Of The Rings: Volume 1 ECS OCS
Lost Vikings, The ECS OCS


text:
View Artist Sampler
By Artist Name
A - N
Mel Curtis
Pat Hansen
Painted Vases
Michael Mabry
Ryan Ovsienko
Robert Perlman
Laura Pollak
David Coleridge Ryan
Anne Traver
Large - more than 24"
Medium - 12+ to 24"
Small - 12" or smaller
About Portfolio2
Become a Portfolio2 Artist
FREE SHIPPING WITHIN THE U.S.! 100% SECURE SITE.
The Portfolio 2 Gallery Story
Founded by Seattle's Pat Hansen, Portfolio2 Gallery is the culmination of Pat's 40-some years of design practice, her private penchant for creating beautiful art, and decades of personal friendships with designers around the United States.
Pat graduated from the University of Washington with a BFA in Graphic Design and soon after founded her own design firm. Hansen Design Company's first client was Boeing, and many of the region's largest companies and organizations soon joined the roster of clients. Among them, Microsoft, Seattle Art Museum, Seattle Repertory Theatre, and Boys & Girls Clubs of America. Honors and awards poured in. Pat found herself a frequent guest lecturer and judge of international design shows all around the globe.
Realizing that simply giving back was one of the best rewards, Pat delved into the world of non-profits, serving on numerous boards and donating thousands of hours of her time. She became highly involved with the American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA), and served as founding President of the Seattle Chapter in 1987. Pat served on the National AIGA Board for four years, and in the early 2000s, was recognized with an AIGA Fellow Award.
All through her years of professional work as a hands-on manager and creative lead at Hansen Design Company, Pat reveled in pursuing her own artistic endeavors. In this realm, her art was free to take any direction, yet was undeniably design-influenced.
In early 2017, while ruminating on how she might sell some of her personal works online, Pat had an epiphany. How many other professional designers were making art outside the parameters of their careers where they created strictly for clients? She suspected quite a few, and began to contact her many design friends around the country, posing the possibility of an online gallery of artwork that she and other designers create "on the side."
The response was immediate excitement and Pat's invitations to offer others' own personal works on the new site were readily accepted. Portfolio2 today is proud to represent a group of some of the best designers, photographers, illustrators and architects, and others are in the process of preparing to join.
Pat's lifelong dedication to design, her recognized body of work, her own personal art, and the many rich friendships she has formed with the country's best designers have culminated in this rewarding and newest venture.
Portfolio2 Gallery launched in November of 2017.
Copyright © 2020, Portfolio2 Gallery. Powered by Shopify


text:
Central-West
Top-Selling Houston Developer Johnson Development
Johnson Development Sees Most Communities on National Report
Once again, Johnson Development Corp. has the most top-selling master-planned communities in the nation than any other developer, according to a recently released report.
The Houston-based firm had six communities ranked among the nation's 50 top-selling in a mid-year tally by housing research firm Robert Charles Lesser & Co. (RCLCO).
"Our vision for lifestyle-based communities and the strength of our dedicated staff of professionals is apparent in these results as we not only again have more top-selling communities on this national list, but most of our communities are showing year-over-year gains in new home sales," said Doug Goff, Co-President and Chief Operating Officer of Johnson Development.
At No. 1 in Houston and No. 15 nationally, Sienna Plantation in Missouri City was the highest-ranked Johnson community on the RCLCO report. Sienna reported 292 new-home sales during the first six months of 2018, a 41 percent increase over last year. Cross Creek Ranch in Fulshear placed No. 25, with 246 sales — a 16 percent increase. And Viridian in Arlington ranked No. 26 with 240 sales versus 158 in 2017. Viridian's 52 percent year-over-year increase was one of the biggest gains listed on the report.
However, Harmony in Spring showed the largest gain of all 50 communities, with a 72 percent increase. Harmony ranked No. 30 and reported 234 sales during the first six months of this year versus 136 in 2017. Woodforest in South Montgomery County saw 200 sales — a 9 percent increase — during the report's timeframe and placed at No. 38. Riverstone in Fort Bend County ranked No. 41 with 189 sales.
"For years the No. 1 best-selling community in Texas and in the top 10 nationally," Goff said. "Unfortunately, it is now nearing close-out, with fewer neighborhoods offering new homes for sale."
In its 43rd year of development, Johnson Development has 17 communities under active development — 14 in the Houston area, two in Dallas-Fort Worth and one in Atlanta. At mid-year 2018, home sales in all Johnson communities totaled 2,171, which is an 18 percent overall increase from 2017. For more information, visit www.johnsondevelopment.com.
PreviousWoodforest Ranks in Top-Selling Master-Planned Communities
NextLago Mar Ranks Among Nation's Top Communities
Best-Selling Houston Area Communities
Fulbrook Acreage Estates
Cross Creek Ranch Ranks in Top 50 Master-Planned Communities
Sienna Ranks as Houston's Top Selling Community
Relocation Directory
Accountants & Consultants
Management Districts
Daycare & Preschools
Assisted/Senior Living Facilities
Athletic Gyms & Health Clubs
Specialists & Surgeons
Moving and Storage
Boat Clubs & Marinas
Golf Courses & Country Clubs
Sporting Events & Tickets
Public & Private Transportation
Resort & Conference Centers
Active Adult Living
Apartments Locators
Local City / Government
Neighborhoods & Communities
Real Estate Groups
Cable & Internet
Worship Centers
Relocation Partners
Houston Community College - Southwest
D. R. Horton Homes
Consolidated Communications
Choose & Order Your Free Guide Today


Havana, Sep 12 (Prensa Latina) Cuba has today called a conspiracy the insinuations published in the United States that Russia would be behind alleged health incidents with U.S. diplomats in this capital, called by Washington "attacks".
"The NBC article lends itself to dangerous play. To insinuate conspiracies of third countries in Cuba without evidences or foundation, citing sources without names and inventing intrigues," wrote in his Twitter, the General Director of the US at Cuban Foreign Ministry, Carlos Fernandez de Cossio.
NBC blamed this conclusion on intelligence agencies investigating the events, although without naming sources and under the argument of interception of communications.
According to Fernandez de Cossio, this is an irresponsible and malicious version, and above all, lacking credibility.
"It's fair to ask why NBC lends itself to such a dangerous game, as investigations by Cuba and U.S. law enforcement officials discard the use of weapons," he said.
From the United States, the term "attacks" has been used to explain alleged health problems, including brain damage, of 26 diplomats, a scenario which served the administration headed by President Donald Trump to escalate hostility towards Cuba, dismantling the bilateral rapprochement that Barack Obama began.


They say milk does a body good, so we knew these indulgent Bath Milks from Mox Botanicals were just the ticket for a spa-rivaling experience at home. The oversized tea bags infuse bathwater with relaxing scents that'll make you want to never leave the tub, even when you start to get all pruney.
I bought these when the Birch Box Aces program offered a dollar amount off purchase- leaving me getting these free.
If I had paid for them I would have insisted on a refund. I ordered them in the coconut vanilla. The package was as dusty as could be and the seals were covered in dirt.
When I opened the packet, the smell was like stale baby formula. I was really taken aback but thought if I used them the smell may transform in the tub.
But in reality it ended up smelling like spit up baby formula vomit. I was gagging in the tub and had to get out. It didn't do anything besides stink.
I truly think this product had been sitting in their warehouse since they opened and the Ace's offer was to get rid of old stock.
I enjoyed the product. Not sure if I'll repurchase,As I rarely bath. It's always a shower. But it was good.
Not sure if the quantity of the sample given was insufficient to properly provide the experience they were hoping for but 1 bag to 1 tub and leaving to soak for foreverrrrr before I got in was not enough. Ended up like lightly chalked yuck.
When I turned on the steamy water and set up a nice bath, i could not wait to use this product. The package said you could either use it like a tea bag or pour the contents into the bath. I decided to pour it into the bath. When i did there were all sorts of weird white clumpy chunks! I figured it was normal but the steam started to smell like week old milk and I could not take my bath! I would recommend using this product immediately after purchase and using the tea method.
I bought this product without reading the reviews which was a HUGE mistake. These went straight into the garage. Not even kidding. It smelled like rotten milk and tuna fish. had my boyfriend smell it and he said it smelled like dog poo. I was looking so forward to these and I am really disappointed. MONT EVER BUY THESE. So disgusting.
i really wanted to enjoy this product. i love taking baths and pampering myself. i did not like this bath milk. I opened mine and allowed the little flowers to float around in the bath. the powder didn't fully dissolve-there were big chunks of powder floating around in the tub. may be better to just leave in sachet while in bath.
This did nothing for me. My skin did not feel smoother after my bath. Zero scent. Not the luxurious bath soak I was looking forward to.
I actually really like this. It's cheaper than most stuff you might find at the store, and works fairly well, for my skin at least. Would definitely recommend.
Really disliked this product. Someone else described it as baby formula and that is exactly what I thought also.
It made my tub so dirty. Would rather just relax in my bath than have to clean it right after using it. Horrible.


text:
DON FENLEY @ CORE DATA
Localized housing, economic, demographic trends in NE Tenn.
Home › Home › CORE DATA › Keep a weather eye on trade war's affect on Eastman and Bell Helicopter
Keep a weather eye on trade war's affect on Eastman and Bell Helicopter
By donfenley.com on July 7, 2018 • ( 0 )
Many in the media and pundits have been talking about a trade war, but now it looks like the real thing is here.
The U.S. is now involved in a disagreement with six out of its top export markets which, according to Kiplinger, account for 53% of all American made exports.
The thing to keep in mind is the U.S. economy is so big that it will take a long time for all of this to have a big national economic impact, and the administration's plans are reported based on a long game.
Kiplinger and others think Tennessee is in pretty good shape to weather any fallout. But it's also one of the states that's vulnerable.
It's worth keeping a weather eye on how the state's auto factories and their supply clusters fare when push comes to shove. According to Tennessee Economic & Community Development, nearly 1,000 auto suppliers operate in the state, and there were more than 830,000 vehicles built here in 2016. More than 135,000 people work for those businesses and exports in 2016 were nearly $6 billion.
Closer to home, it should be noted at cellulose acetate is one of the more than 150 chemicals and derivates targeted by China's retaliation to U.S. tariffs. Eastman Chemical is one of the top players in the cellulose acetate market.
The American Chemistry Council estimates that $5.4 billion in US exports of chemicals and plastics would be exposed to China's proposed tariffs. If demand does not decline and tariffs are at 25%, then the Chinese government would collect $1.3 billion in duties.
Piney Flats' Bell Helicopter operations should also be on the watch list. They are a prime player in getting helicopters manufactured in Canada then ferried to Piney Flats for finishing and delivery. Many of those deliveries are to foreign customers.
At the same time, the National Homebuilders Association says increased costs for Canadian lumber has added up to $5,000 to the cost of a new home with more increases to come.
Tennessee farm products and bourbon will also feel the trade pinch.
‹ Tri-Cities foreclosures up 61% in housing market with tight inventory, high demand
Kingsport-Bristol sales tax collection stumble in May – growth rate still leads region ›
Categories: CORE DATA, ECONOMY
Email me for a research or ghost writing quote
Don Fenley
Local, data-driven reports powered by our sponsors:
Copyright © donfenley.com All Rights Reserved.


Tuesday, May 28 1907 -- As best I can figure out, boxing promoter Jim Coffroth is doing everything possible to reassure the public of a fair fight on July 4 between Tommy Burns and Bill Squires. A recent match in San Francisco had been revealed to be a scam and Frisco politicians were grumbling about making the events illegal there. Apparently Coffroth, trying to give the impression of angelic innocence all around, has vowed not to have a drink until the fight has come off. What that has to do with throwing a fight I have no idea.
Wednesday, May 29 1907 -- Slightly over-the-hill fighters Marvin Hart and Mike Schreck are to box at Tonopah Nevada tomorrow, and promoter Jack Curley is billing it as the greatest fight ever staged at that popular venue. The boxing world collectively heaves a yawn over the news.
in case in needs to be said again from time to time.
You are doing us a rare favor of showing this stuff that I always presumed I would never see.
Thanks Eddie. It is good to get affirmation occasionally that readers still want to see this stuff. Right now the microfilm photocopies are in bad shape needing a lot of work to be presentable, and I do find myself wondering if the effort is appreciated since there's few comments on the posts.
Hope y'all had a merry Christmas, a happy Hanukkah, a fine Festivus, and today's entry in the holiday sweepstakes, a joyous Kwanzaa. Not to mention a blissful Boxing Day. Me, I'm still in abject pain from eating waaaay too much smoked turkey and fixins'. I'm in no shape to celebrate anything that doesn't include a ritual of laying around moaning and clutching a stomach in which I can still discern the shapes of various parts of the holiday meal.
T.S. Allen was one of the most prolific contributors to the Hearst dailies at the turn of the century (the 20th, that is). In addition to his ubiquitous urban kid cartoons he did a number of other series. One of the more memorable was Adam and Eve, a long series of single panel cartoons about a family of antediluvians with the unique pedigree of having previously held a starring role in Genesis.
The series never had a consistent title, so I assigned this as the official one for Stripper's Guide. Other perfectly reasonable contenders would be Adam's Family or In The Garden of Eden, both of which occasionally headlined the panels.
The series, which appeared sporadically, began in the New York Evening Journal on August 17 1898 and finally petered out in 1902. Although I indexed the Journal, the microfilm was incomplete and I was unable to assign a definitive end date. The characters also appeared in a Sunday version, and were later revived in another series, but we'll cover those appearances in separate posts one of these days.
A tip of the hat to Cole Johnson who provided these samples, all from March 1901. The microfilm of the Journal is so awful that I saved no samples, at least none worthy of reproduction here, so these samples scanned from Cole's cache of San Francisco Examiners are greatly appreciated.
Theodore Simon Alvin, uh, Allen?
Good question, DD. He just went by T.S., and a cursory look through the standard histories doesn't elaborate (the few that deign to even mention him, that is). I don't find a bio or obit in my file folders either.
For those of you who didn't get my snail mail Christmas card, here are the images that adorned this year's yuletide greetings. The outside is a Percy - Brains He Has Nix strip from Christmas 1911, the inside is Cole Johnson's delightful work as a counterpoint on the robot theme. I shamelessly stole this image from Cole's card to me from 2007.


text:
Man Utd transfer latest: Pedro reacts angrily to claims he wants to leave Barca
Barcelona's Pedro Rodriguez applauds the supporters after winning the UEFA Super Cup soccer match between FC Barcelona and Sevilla FC at the Boris Paichadze Dinamo Arena stadium, in Tbilisi, Georgia, on Wednesday, Aug. 12, 2015. (AP)
Published Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Barcelona forward Pedro was unclear over whether he wants to leave the club after reacting angrily to comments by technical secretary Robert Fernandez that he was seeking a move away.
Pedro came off the bench to score an extra-time winner in a 5-4 thriller over Sevilla in the European Super Cup final on Tuesday and afterwards was ambiguous over his future.
"Robert made some unfortunate comments. We spoke only a few words and he doesn't know what I have lived here in this club to speak that way about me," Pedro told reporters.
"I know that I am and will always be for Barca, people should not doubt that.
"The response is no (I don't want to go) but it is a complicated situation for a lot of reasons.
"It is not down to money as has been said and that is disrespectful.
"It is down to consistency, minutes and I am an ambitious player. Whether I stay or go, I will always follow this team."
Pedro has had limited chances at Barca due to the presence of players like Lionel Messi, Neymar and Luis Suarez, with reports he is close to agreeing a move to Manchester United.
Following the Super Cup match Fernandez repeated that Pedro wanted to go and that any club would have to pay his buy-out clause of 30 million euros ($33.12 million).
"We have all said ...that we don't want him to leave but it is his decision," Fernandez told reporters.
"He is an extraordinarily talented player on and off the pitch for Barca but he wants to leave and there is nothing we can do.
"The clause is not negotiable and this could be his last game."