From: "Saved by Windows Internet Explorer 7" Subject: Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 20:38:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="text/html"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0023_01C7FD58.7B13E800" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16480 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C7FD58.7B13E800 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://www.14thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/htmlopinion.asp?OpinionId=83768 Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion
Send this document to a=20 colleague    Close=20 This Window


Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 30, = 2007.

 

 

In The

 

Fourteenth Court=20 of Appeals

____________

 

NO. 14-06-00432-CV

____________

 

KELVYN AND=20 SUSANA LAZO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND D/B/A LAZO=3DS CUSTOM WOODWORK = AND PABLO=20 ABELLO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND D/B/A PABLO ABELLO INSURANCE=20 AGENCY,=20 Appellants

 

V.

 

RSI INTERNATIONAL, = INC. AND=20 ST. PAUL REINSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., Appellees

 

 

On Appeal from the = 61st District Court

Harris County, = Texas

Trial Court Cause = No. 02-63470-A

 

 

M E M O R=20 A N D U M   O P I N I O N

In this=20 appeal, Kelvyn and Susana Lazo, individually and d/b/a = Lazo=3Ds Custom=20 Woodwork (Lazo) and Pablo Abello, individually and d/b/a Pablo = Abello=20 Insurance Agency (Abello), appeal the granting of a summary = judgment in=20 favor of St. Paul Reinsurance Company (St. Paul) and its managing = general=20 agency, RSI International, Inc. (RSI).  Four motions for = summary=20 judgment were filed, and the trial court ruled on three of = them.  The=20 main issue in each motion, and the only issue on appeal, is = whether an=20 insurance policy underwritten by St. Paul and purchased by Lazo = was in=20 effect at the time of an accident.  Finding that the policy = had been=20 cancelled, we affirm.

Factual=20 and Procedural Background

Lazo works=20 as a contractor, providing custom woodwork for construction=20 projects.  As a subcontractor, Lazo must maintain general = liability=20 insurance coverage to protect against the risk of loss occurring = on the=20 job.  Lazo had purchased a policy of general liability = insurance,=20 underwritten by St. Paul, through a local agent, Pablo = Abello.  The=20 premiums were financed through Surety Premium Finance Corp.=20 (Surety).  Surety paid all premiums in advance, and then = collected=20 periodic payments from Lazo.  As part of its agreement to = finance=20 Lazo=3Ds=20 premiums, Surety had a power of attorney which enabled it to = cancel the=20 policy as though the cancellation were directly from Lazo if a = payment=20 from Lazo was more than ten days late.

The first=20 payment under the finance agreement with Surety was due on June = 18, 2001.=20 Lazo was eight days late in his first payment.  Despite the = fact that=20 the payment was not yet overdue enough to warrant cancellation, = Surety=20 sent a notice of cancellation to RSI on July 3, 2001.  RSI=20 subsequently issued an endorsement which read in pertinent part,=20 AIt is=20 hereby agreed that in consideration of the return premium of = $578.00, this=20 policy is cancelled effective 7/03/2001.@  For=20 the next several months, Lazo continued making timely payments to = Surety,=20 never having been told that the policy had been cancelled, and St. = Paul=3Ds agent,=20 RSI, retained the unearned premiums despite its duty to return any = unearned premiums upon policy cancellation.

On August=20 25, 2002, Aniceto Garcia, a worker on a building project, fell = from a=20 ladder that he was climbing in order to inspect an air = conditioning unit=20 installed in the attic.  Garcia sued  Lazo, among = others,=20 claiming Lazo was negligent in failing to properly install and = inspect the=20 ladder leading to the attic.  Lazo submitted = Garcia=3Ds claims=20 to St. Paul, who denied coverage, claiming that prior to the = filing of the=20 case, coverage had been cancelled for failure to pay the required=20 premiums. 

As a=20 result of this denial of coverage, Lazo, on July 16, 2004,  = filed a=20 second lawsuit against several defendantsCAbello,=20 Surety, RSI, and St. Paul.  Lazo sought a declaratory = judgment that=20 the coverage contract was in full force and effect as of the date = of the=20 Garcia accident, and in his Eighth Amended Petition he asserted = claims of=20 breach of contract, negligence, breach of fiduciary duties, = violations of=20 the Texas Insurance Code, violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade=20 Practices Act, fraud, and violation of common law duty of good = faith and=20 fair dealing.  Over the next several months, the defendants = filed=20 answers, counterclaims, and cross-claims against each other.  = This=20 suit, regarding insurance coverage, was consolidated with the = personal=20 injury suit on May 24, 2005. 

On June=20 26, 2005, Abello filed a motion for partial summary judgment on = the=20 issue  of whether the insurance policy was in force at the = time of=20 Garcia=3Ds=20 accident.  Lazo also filed a motion for summary judgment = solely on=20 the issue of whether the policy had been cancelled.  St. Paul = filed a=20 single response to both Abello=3Ds and=20 Lazo=3Ds motions=20 for summary judgment.  St. Paul then filed its own motion for = summary=20 judgment on the coverage issue as well as on all collateral = claims, and in=20 an amended motion for summary judgment, sought indemnity from = Abello and=20 RSI.  RSI answered all three motions for summary judgment = separately,=20 joined St. Paul=3Ds first=20 motion for summary judgment, and then later, after St. Paul = amended its=20 motion, RSI filed its own motion for summary judgment as to all = claims=20 asserted by Lazo, including coverage.

On=20 February 3, 2006, the trial court granted RSI=3Ds motion=20 for summary judgment.  The court also granted St. = Paul=3Ds motion=20 for summary judgment as to coverage and all collateral claims = asserted by=20 Lazo, but denied St. Paul=3Ds motion=20 as to indemnity against Abello and RSI.  Finally, the court = denied=20 Abello=3Ds partial=20 summary judgment motion seeking a declaration that the policy was = in=20 effect at the time of the accident.  Nothing in the record = indicates=20 that the court ever ruled on Lazo=3Ds motion=20 for summary judgment.  On May 25, 2006, the court entered an = order=20 that all claims by Lazo and Abello against RSI and St. Paul be = severed and=20 that a final judgment be entered as to all issues between RSI, St. = Paul=20 and the remaining parties.  Abello and Lazo brought this=20 appeal.

Analysis

The sole=20 issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in deciding that = the=20 policy purchased by Lazo had been effectively cancelled as a = matter of law=20 at the time Garcia=3Ds accident=20 took place.

I.       =20 Standard of Review

We review=20 the trial court=3Ds summary=20 judgment de novo.  Valence Operating Co. v. Dorsett, = 164=20 S.W.3d 656, 661 (Tex. 2005).  When reviewing a summary = judgment, we=20 take as true all evidence favorable to the nonmovant, and we = indulge every=20 reasonable inference and resolve any doubts in the = nonmovant=3Ds=20 favor.  Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. = Knott, 128=20 S.W.3d 211, 215 (Tex. 2003).  When more than one party files = a motion=20 for partial summary judgment on the same issue, and the trial = court grants=20 one or more motions and denies one or more motions, the reviewing = court=20 should review all summary judgment evidence and determine all = questions=20 presented.  See Dorsett, 164 S.W.3d at 661.  The=20 reviewing court should render the judgment the trial court should = have=20 rendered.  City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 = S.W.3d=20 351, 356 (Tex. 2000). 

II.      =20 Policy Had Been Effectively Cancelled

The=20 language of the original policy says that cancellation of the = policy will=20 be effective even if a refund has not been made or offered.  = Lazo and=20 Abello urge three reasons that this contract language does not = control: 1)=20 failure to follow the Insurance Code=3Ds mandate=20 that unearned premiums be returned within 60 days of cancellation = prevents=20 cancellation; 2) the language used in an endorsement makes = cancellation=20 dependent on the return of unearned premiums; and 3) equitable = estoppel=20 prevents St. Paul from cancelling the policy.[1] =20 We discuss these arguments in turn.

A.=20      Return of Unearned Premiums Not = Prerequisite to=20 Cancellation Under Insurance Code

Lazo and=20 Abello argue that when an insurer fails to return unearned = premiums within=20 the allotted time, the result is that the policy is not cancelled. = The=20 provision of the Insurance Code relied upon by Lazo and Abello is = former=20 Texas Insurance Code article 24.17(f), which provides the = following in=20 pertinent part:

Whenever a=20 financed insurance contract is canceled, and the premium finance = agreement=20 contains an assignment or power of attorney for the benefit of the = premium=20 finance company, the insurer shall return whatever unearned = premiums are=20 due under the insurance contract directly to the premium finance = company=20 within 60 days after the policy cancellation date.

Act of=20 June 14, 1989, 71st Leg. R.S., ch. 690, ' = 2, 1989=20 Tex. Gen. Laws 3187, 3187, repealed by Act of June 21, = 2003, 78th=20 Leg. R.S., ch. 1274, ' = 26(b)(4)=20 (current version at Tex. = Ins. Code=20 ' = 651.162(b)) (because former Tex.=20 Ins. Code art. 24.17 governs this case, we will cite to the = article).  Plain statutory language does not support Lazo and = Abello=3Ds=20 argument.  Nowhere in the remainder of the section nor in the = remainder of the Insurance Code is the failure to refund unearned = premiums=20 connected to the continued effectiveness of the insurance = contract. =20 In fact, the plain language of the section suggests that = cancellation=20 occurs separately from the refunding of any unearned = premiums. =20 See id. (providing that the refund of premiums is to occur = within=20 60 days of cancellation). =  

Neither=20 Lazo nor Abello provides any case law to support their = proposition. =20 A recent case from this court, although it does not expressly = refer to=20 former article 24.17(f), establishes that  the failure to = return=20 unearned premiums is immaterial to cancellation of the policy when = the=20 contract language does not make return of unearned premiums a = condition=20 precedent to cancellation.  See Autobond Acceptance Corp. = v.=20 Progressive N. Ins. Co., 76 S.W.3d 489, 494 (Tex. = App.CHouston=20 [14th Dist.] 2002, pet. denied);  see also Austin Fire = Ins. Co. v.=20 Polemanakos, 207 S.W. 922, 924B25 (Tex.=20 Comm=3Dn App.=20 1919, judgm=3Dt=20 adopted); Ins. Co. of Tex. v. Parmelee, 274 S.W.2d 944, 946 = (Tex.=20 Civ. App.CAustin=20 1955, no writ);   Transcontinental Ins. Co. of N.Y. = v.=20 Frazier, 60 S.W.2d 268, 270 (Tex. Civ. App.CWaco 1933,=20 no writ); Ellis v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 21 S.W.2d 88, 91 = (Tex.=20 Civ. App.CAmarillo=20 1929, writ ref=3Dd); 2 Lee R. Russ & Thomas F. = Segalla,=20 Couch on Insurance ' = 32:62 (3d=20 ed. 2006) (stating the general rule that return of unearned = premiums is=20 not a prerequisite to cancellation, and citing cases from several=20 jurisdictions); 43 Am. = Jur.=20 2d Insurance ' = 436=20 (2003) (same). 

The=20 failure to comply with former article 24.17(f) does not mean that = the=20 insurance policy will survive despite cancellation.  = Therefore, we=20 overrule appellants=3D = first=20 argument.

B.     =20 Endorsement Language Not Controlling

Lazo and=20 Abello argue alternatively that the contract language, as amended = by an=20 endorsement issued by St. Paul, makes the return of unearned = premiums a=20 condition precedent to cancellation. 

An insured=20 has the right to cancel an insurance policy in accordance with a = specific=20 policy provision giving it the right to do so.  See = Autobond=20 Acceptance Corp., 76 S.W.3d at 494.  Here, the policy = provisions=20 provided that the Afirst=20 Named Insured@ = may=20 cancel the policy by mailing or delivering to the insurance = company=20 advance written notice of cancellation, and that the notice will = state the=20 effective date of cancellation, on which date the policy period = will=20 end.  Surety, under its power of attorney, gave notice of=20 cancellation, with the effective date of cancellation being July = 3,=20 2001.  Thus, the contract was cancelled effective July 3, = 2001. =20 The endorsement in question was not issued until August 17, 2001,=20 approximately a month and a half after the contract was already=20 cancelled.  The contract that the endorsement purported to = amend was=20 no longer effective as a legal obligation.  See Savage v.=20 Doyle, 153 S.W.3d 231, 235 (Tex. App.CBeaumont=20 2004, no pet.); Ferguson v. DRG/Colony N., Ltd., 764 S.W.2d = 874,=20 887 (Tex. App.CAustin=20 1989, writ denied).  Thus, there was nothing to amend.  = The=20 endorsement was, at that point, a nullity.  We overrule Lazo = and=20 Abello=3Ds second=20 argument.

C.     =20 Equitable Estoppel Not Applicable =

Abello=3Ds third=20 argument is that equitable estoppel precludes a finding that the = policy=20 was cancelled.[2] =20 According to the Texas Supreme Court, equitable estoppel requires = the=20 following elements: 1) a false representation or concealment of = material=20 facts; 2) made with knowledge, actual or constructive, of the = facts; 3)=20 the party to whom it was made must have been without knowledge or = means of=20 knowledge of the real facts; 4) it must have been made with the = intention=20 that it should be acted on; and 5) the party to whom it was made = must have=20 relied on or acted on it to his prejudice.  Gulbenkian v.=20 Penn, 252 S.W.2d 929, 932 (Tex. 1952). 

Abello=20 fails to set out the elements of estoppel, or point to specific = evidence=20 that would prove each element.  The only argument Abello = makes=20 regarding estoppel is that St. Paul admitted that it has held=20 Lazo=3Ds money=20 for years and had no plans to give it back.  This is = insufficient to=20 prove even the first element.  As we held above, refund of = the=20 unearned premiums is not necessary to cancellation.  = Therefore,=20 retention of the funds is not inconsistent with the position that = the=20 policy had been cancelled.  See id. (noting that plain = contradiction of former allegations or acts is necessary to invoke = estoppel).  Furthermore, payment of the unearned premiums = would have=20 been to Surety, not to the insured, which means that even had=20 reimbursement of the unearned premiums been made, it would not = have put=20 Lazo on notice that his policy was cancelled, unless the refund = was for=20 more than Lazo owed.  See Tex. Ins. Code art.=20 24.17(g).  St. Paul and RSI did nothing inconsistent with = their=20 position that the policy had been cancelled.  Therefore, = there was no=20 Afalse=20 representation@ = of=20 continued coverage.  See Gulbenkian, 252 S.W.2d at = 932.[3] =20 We overrule Abello=3Ds third=20 argument. 

Conclusion

Having=20 overruled each argument making up Lazo and Abello=3Ds sole=20 issue on appeal, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. =20

 

 

 

 

/s/     =20 Wanda McKee Fowler

Justice

 

 

 

 

Judgment=20 rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed August 30, 2007.

Panel=20 consists of Justices Anderson, Fowler, and = Seymore.


[1]  Lazo and Abello, with an = exception noted=20 below, make the same arguments.  Therefore, we consider them=20 together. 

[2]  Although Lazo purports to adopt = all of=20 Abello=3Ds arguments by reference, Lazo did not = include the=20 equitable estoppel ground in his motion for summary judgment.=20  Therefore, he cannot assert it as a ground for reversing the = summary=20 judgment on appeal.  See Tex. R. Civ. P. = 166a(c). =20

[3]  We note that Lazo makes an = additional=20 argument in his brief concerning the Aduty to defend.@  However, this argument assumes = the=20 existence of an insurance policy.  Since we have held the = policy had=20 been cancelled at the time of the Garcia injury, we need not = address this=20 issue.  =

------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C7FD58.7B13E800 Content-Type: image/gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.14thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/resource/opinions/images/icoEMail.gif R0lGODlhFAAPAKIAAAAAgIAAAP///8DAwICAgAAAAAAAAAAAACwAAAAAFAAPAAADNCi63P4wykaq vba4Mrr/ndaITxAM5JI2JrotQCwr7jjVDCnPAq7eKwEHRAwWjshkcsJsShIAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C7FD58.7B13E800 Content-Type: text/css; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://www.14thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/resource/includes/oca.css .TitleBlue { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif; TEXT-ALIGN: left } .TitleBlueCenter { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif; TEXT-ALIGN: center } .TitleMaroon { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: maroon; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-ALIGN: left } .TitleWhite { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: white; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-ALIGN: left } .TitleBlack { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-ALIGN: left } .NavWhite { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: white; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.NavWhite:hover { TEXT-DECORATION: underline } .BreadCrumbs { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif } A.BreadCrumbs { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A.BreadCrumbs:hover { COLOR: blue } .TextNormal { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif } .TextJustify { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; COLOR: = black; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif; TEXT-ALIGN: justify } A.TextNormal { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000099; FONT-FAMILY: = Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A.TextNormal:hover { FONT-WEIGHT: bold } .TextSmall { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; FONT-FAMILY: = Arial Narrow } .TextSmallBlue { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; COLOR: = #000099; FONT-FAMILY: Arial Narrow } .TextSmallJust { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; FONT-FAMILY: = Arial Narrow; TEXT-ALIGN: justify } A.TextSmall { COLOR: #000099; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A.TextSmallJust { COLOR: #000099; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A.TextSmall:hover { FONT-WEIGHT: bold } A.TextSmallJust:hover { FONT-WEIGHT: bold } .TextSmallWhite { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; COLOR: = white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial Narrow } .TextWhite { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: = Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif } A.TextWhite { =09 } A.TextWhite:hover { FONT-WEIGHT: bold } .LinksSite { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: #000099; FONT-FAMILY: Arial = Narrow; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.LinksSite { =09 } A.LinksSite:hover { FONT-WEIGHT: bold } .TextNotify { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: #000099; FONT-FAMILY: Arial = Narrow } .SiteMaster { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A.SiteMaster { LINE-HEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A.SiteMaster:hover { COLOR: blue } .SiteMenu { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.SiteMenu { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.SiteMenu:hover { COLOR: blue } .SiteBase { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.SiteBase { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; COLOR: maroon; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, = Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.SiteBase:hover { COLOR: blue } .ErrorNormal { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; COLOR: red; = FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif } .ErrorSmall { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; COLOR: red; = FONT-FAMILY: Arial Narrow } .SystemMSG { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; COLOR: white; = FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: = navy } .SystemErrorMSG { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; VERTICAL-ALIGN: top; COLOR: white; = FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: red } .buttonUnused { PADDING-RIGHT: 1pt; PADDING-LEFT: 1pt; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: = 9pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1pt; MARGIN: 1pt; COLOR: #fff5d7; PADDING-TOP: 1pt; = BACKGROUND-COLOR: #576a9d; font-face: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif } .buttonTanUnused { PADDING-RIGHT: 1pt; PADDING-LEFT: 1pt; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: = 9pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1pt; MARGIN: 1pt; COLOR: #576a9d; PADDING-TOP: 1pt; = BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff5d7; font-face: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif } .TextLargeBlue { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, = sans-serif; TEXT-ALIGN: left } .DocketHeaderTitle { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, ' Helvetica', sans-serif; TEXT-ALIGN: center } .TextLargeBlack { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: black; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-ALIGN: left } .TextLargeBlackcenter { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: black; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-ALIGN: center } .TextBlue { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif } A.TextBlue { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000099; LINE-HEIGHT: = normal; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; = TEXT-DECORATION: none } .TextRed { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: red; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; = FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif } .TextHidenGray { FONT-SIZE: 0pt; COLOR: #ebebe1; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: = Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-ALIGN: left } .Time { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: red; LINE-HEIGHT: 4em; = FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-ALIGN: center } ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C7FD58.7B13E800--