From: "Saved by Windows Internet Explorer 7" Subject: Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 17:37:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="text/html"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001C_01C82A09.B93B1B70" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C82A09.B93B1B70 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=83963 Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion
Send this document to a=20 colleague    Close=20 This Window


Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part, = Remanded, and=20 Opinion filed October 30, 2007.

 

 

In The

 

Fourteenth=20 Court of Appeals

____________

 

NO. 14-06-00966-CV

____________

 

PRAIRIE VIEW=20 A&M UNIVERSITY, DORIS PRICE, AND GEORGE = WRIGHT, = Appellants

 

V.

 

BRIAN=20 DICKENS, = Appellee

 

 

On Appeal from the = 164th District Court

Harris=20  County,=20 Texas

Trial Court Cause = No. 05-78225

 

 

O P I N I=20 O N

A former=20 employee sued a state university, its president, and = vice-president=20 alleging a variety of claims and seeking a money judgment as well = as=20 declaratory relief.  The defendants asserted pleas to the=20 jurisdiction, which the trial court granted in part and denied in = part.=20 The defendants have appealed the partial denial of their = pleas.  We=20 affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

I. =20 Factual and Procedural=20 Background

Appellee/plaintiff = Brian=20 Dickens was employed as Director of Student Activities and = Leadership at=20 Prairie View A&M University.  After his employment was=20 terminated, Dickens filed suit against Prairie View A&M = University,=20 Doris Price, and George Wright (collectively, the APrairie View = A&M=20 Parties@) alleging breach = of=20 contract, breach of implied contract, and violation of = constitutional=20 rights.  Dickens sought monetary damages for his contract = claims and=20 constitutional claims as well as reasonable and necessary=20 attorney=3Ds fees, prejudgment = interest,=20 and postjudgment interest.  He also sought a declaration that = (1)=20 applicable provisions of the school=3Ds policies are=20 unconstitutional for various reasons, (2) the Prairie View A&M = Parties=3D decision to = terminate=20 Dickens is without any force and effect, and (3) Price and Wright = failed=20 to follow school policy and are not entitled to immunity.  = The=20 Prairie View A&M Parties filed pleas to the jurisdiction = alleging the=20 trial court lacked jurisdiction over Dickens=3Ds claims.  = After an oral=20 hearing, the trial court granted the pleas in part, denied the = pleas in=20 part,[1]=20 and dismissed all of Dickens=3Ds claims for lack = of=20 subject-matter jurisdiction, except for the claims for breach of = contract=20 and Dickens=3Ds claims for = declaratory=20 relief.[2] =20 The Prairie View A&M Parties have appealed the denial of their = pleas=20 to the jurisdiction.[3] =20 Dickens did not file a timely notice of appeal as to the trial=20 court=3Ds granting in part = of the=20 pleas to the jurisdiction.  Accordingly, we address only = those issues=20 raised by the Prairie View A&M Parties.[4]=20

           = ;   =20 II.  Issues and = Analysis=20

A.     =20 Did the trial court err in denying the = university=3Ds plea to the = jurisdiction as=20 to the contract claims?

In their=20 first issue, the Prairie View A&M Parties contend that the = trial court=20 erred in denying their pleas to the jurisdiction on = Dickens=3Ds claims=20 for breach of contract.  We first examine this issue as to = Prairie=20 View A&M, which is part of the Texas A&M University System = and a=20 state entity.  See Tex. Educ. Code Ann. = '' = 87.101,=20 87.102 (Vernon 2002); Prairie View A&M Univ. v. Brooks, = 180=20 S.W.3d 694, 705, n.10 (Tex. App.CHouston=20 [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet.).  Under the doctrine of sovereign = immunity, a unit of state government, such as Prairie View = A&M, is=20 immune from suit and liability unless the state consents. = Dallas Area=20 Rapid Transit v. Whitley, 104 S.W.3d 540, 542 (Tex. = 2003). =20 Immunity from suit defeats a court=3Ds=20 subject-matter jurisdiction.  Id.  In a suit = against a=20 governmental unit, the plaintiff must affirmatively demonstrate = the=20 court=3Ds=20 jurisdiction by alleging a valid waiver of immunity. =20 Id. 

The only=20 waiver of sovereign immunity alleged by Dickens is section 271.152 = of the=20 Local Government Code.  See Tex. Loc. Gov=3Dt=20 Code Ann. = ' = 271.152=20 (Vernon 2005).  Therefore, we must review this statute to see = if it=20 constitutes a clear and unambiguous waiver of Prairie View=20 A&M=3Ds=20 sovereign immunity.  See Tooke v. City of Mexia, 197 = S.W.3d=20 325, 328B29 (Tex.=20 2006).  Under its unambiguous language, the waiver of = sovereign=20 immunity in this statute applies only to Aa local=20 governmental entity.@ =20 Tex. Loc. Gov=3Dt=20 Code Ann. = ' = 271.152.  A Aunit of=20 state government@ = is=20 excluded from the definition of  Aa local=20 governmental entity.@ =20 See id. ' = 271.151=20 (Vernon 2005).  Prairie View A&M is an Ainstitution=20 of higher education@ = under=20 section 61.003 of the Education Code, and such institutions are = included=20 in the definition of a Aunit of=20 state government,@ = and thus=20 are not Alocal=20 government entities.@ =20 See Tex. Educ. = Code=20 Ann. ' = 61.003=20 (Vernon 2006) (defining Ainstitution=20 of higher education@ = to=20 include public universities and public state colleges); Tex. Gov=3Dt=20 Code Ann. = ' = 2260.001=20 (Vernon 2000) (defining Aunit of=20 state government@ = to=20 include an Ainstitution=20 of higher education@ = as=20 defined by section 61.003 of the Education Code); Tex. Loc. Gov=3Dt=20 Code Ann. = ' = 271.151=20 (excluding a Aunit of=20 state government@ = from the=20 definition of Aa local=20 governmental entity@ = as used=20 in section  271.152 of the Local Government Code).  = Under the=20 unambiguous language of the relevant statutes, Prairie View = A&M is not=20 a Aa local=20 governmental entity@ = covered=20 by section 271.152 of the Local Government Code.  Therefore, = as a=20 matter of law, the legislature cannot have waived sovereign = immunity as to=20 Prairie View A&M by enacting this statute.  Because the = only=20 alleged waiver of sovereign immunity as to Prairie View A&M = does not=20 waive sovereign immunity as to Prairie View A&M, the trial = court erred=20 in denying the university=3Ds plea to=20 the jurisdiction as to Dickens=3Ds contract=20 claims. See Tooke, 197 S.W.3d 341B46; =20 Whitley, 104 S.W.3d at 542; Prairie View A&M = Univ., 180=20 S.W.3d at 705, 711.  Accordingly, we sustain Prairie View=20 A&M=3Ds first=20 issue.

B.     =20 Did the trial court err in denying the university=20 president=3Ds and=20 vice-president=3Ds pleas to=20 the jurisdiction as to the contract claims?       =20

In their=20 first issue, Price and Wright also contend that the trial court = erred in=20 denying their pleas to the jurisdiction on Dickens=3Ds claims=20 for breach of contract.  The Texas Supreme Court recently = held that=20 we have interlocutory appellate jurisdiction under section = 51.014(a)(8) of=20 the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code over interlocutory = appeals by=20 state officials seeking review of the trial court=3Ds denial=20 of their jurisdictional pleas.  See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code = Ann.=20 ' = 51.014(a)(8) (Vernon Supp. 2006); Texas A&M Univ. Sys. v.=20 Koseoglu, CS.W.3dC, 2007 WL=20 2562359, at *10 (Tex. Sept. 7, 2007).  Therefore, we have = appellate=20 jurisdiction.

However,=20 Dickens has sued these employees of Prairie View A&M both in = their=20 official capacities and in their individual capacities.  As = to=20 Dickens=3Ds contract=20 claims against  these parties in their official capacities, = Price and=20 Wright are entitled to dismissal based on sovereign immunity for = the same=20 reasons stated above as to Prairie View A&M.  See id. = at=20 *7; Univ. of Tex. Med. Branch at Galveston v. Hohman, 6 = S.W.3d 767,=20 775B77 (Tex.=20 App.CHouston=20 [14th Dist.] 1999, pet. dism=3Dd=20 w.o.j.).  Therefore, we sustain the first issue as to the = contract=20 claims against Price and Wright in their official = capacities.

As to the=20 claims against Price and Wright in their individual capacities, = these=20 defendants  might seek to obtain a summary judgment based on = official=20 immunity or on some other basis; however, they cannot obtain a = dismissal=20 for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction based on sovereign = immunity.[5] =20 See Koseoglu, 2007 WL 2562359, at *7.  Therefore, the = trial=20 court did not err in denying the pleas to the jurisdiction as to = the=20 contract claims against Price and Wright in their individual=20 capacities.

C.=20      Did the trial court err in denying the = pleas to=20 the jurisdiction as to the request for declaratory relief?=20

In their=20 second issue, the Prairie View A&M Parties contend that the = trial=20 court erred in denying their pleas to the jurisdiction as to=20 Dickens=3Ds request=20 for a declaratory relief.  In their appellate brief, the = Prairie View=20 A&M Parties correctly state that they did not assert in their = pleas to=20 the jurisdiction that the trial court lacked subject-matter = jurisdiction=20 over Dickens=3Ds request=20 for declaratory relief.  Nonetheless, the Prairie View = A&M=20 Parties claim that this court still has appellate jurisdiction = because of=20 the rule that lack of subject-matter jurisdiction can be raised = for the=20 first time on appeal. However, interlocutory orders are not = appealable=20 unless explicitly made so by statute.  Stary v. = DeBord, 967=20 S.W.2d 352, 352B53 (Tex.=20 1998).  The Prairie View A&M Parties overlook the narrow = scope of=20 this court=3Ds=20 jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals.  Even if a trial = court signs=20 an interlocutory order that is void for lack of subject-matter=20 jurisdiction, this court still has no jurisdiction to entertain an = interlocutory appeal from that order absent statutory = authority. =20 See Young v. Villegas, 231  S.W.3d 1, 6 (Tex. = App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 2007, pet. = filed);=20 Fenno v.=20 Sam Reece Air Cond. & Heating, Inc., 572=20 S.W.2d 810, 811 (Tex. Civ. App.CHouston=20 [14th Dist.] 1978, no writ).  In this appeal, we can review = only the=20 trial court=3Ds partial=20 denial of the Prairie View A&M Parties=3D = pleas to=20 the jurisdiction.  In these pleas, the parties did not assert = that=20 the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over=20 Dickens=3Ds request=20 for a declaratory relief.  Therefore, the trial court did not = deny=20 such a plea, and this court lacks appellate jurisdiction to = consider this=20 issue.[6] =20 See Young, 231 S.W.3d at 6; Fenno, 572 S.W.2d at = 811.=20

           = ;            =             &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;=20 III. Conclusion

We affirm=20 the part of the trial court=3Ds order=20 denying the pleas to the jurisdiction as to the contract claims = against=20 Price and Wright in their individual capacities.  Under the = doctrine=20 of sovereign immunity, the trial court lacks subject-matter = jurisdiction=20 over Dickens=3Ds contract=20 claims (for both breach of express contract and breach of implied=20 contract) against Prairie View A&M and against Price and = Wright in=20 their official capacities.  Therefore, we reverse the part of = the=20 order denying the pleas to the jurisdiction as to these claims, = and we=20 remand this case to the trial court with instructions to dismiss = these=20 claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and for further = proceedings=20 in accordance with this opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

/s/     =20 Kem Thompson Frost

Justice

 

 

 

Judgment=20 rendered and Opinion filed October 30, 2007.

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


[1]  The Prairie View A&M Parties = challenged=20 the trial court=3Ds jurisdiction over the contract claims = in their=20 pleas.  The trial court stated that it granted the pleas in = part and=20 that it did not dismiss the contract claims.  Therefore, we = conclude=20 the trial court denied the pleas as to the contract claims, even = though=20 the trial court did not expressly say so in its = order.

[2]  The trial court=3Ds order dismisses all claims except for=20 breach-of-contract claims and Aclaims for equitable relief.@  Dickens=3Ds petition does not assert any claims = for=20 equitable relief; however, at various points in the record, = Dickens=20 referred to his request for declaratory relief as a request for=20 reinstatement of his employment or as a request for equitable=20 relief.  Therefore, we conclude that the trial court excepted = out the=20 contract claims and the claims for declaratory relief. =

[3]  The Prairie View = A&M=20 Parties included in their notice of appeal all the items required = by the=20 appellate rules, including the date of the order from which they=20 appeal.  See Tex. R.=20 App. P. 25.1(d).  Though their notice of appeal = mentions some=20 of the issues involved, it is sufficient to appeal all aspects of = the=20 trial court=3Ds denial of their = pleas to=20 the jurisdiction.  See Vazquez v. Vazquez, No. = 14-05-01257-CV,=20 CS.W.3dC,C, 2007 WL 1745324, = at *1=20 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th = Dist.] June 19,=20 2007, no pet.).

[4]  Dickens has attempted to bring a=20 cross-appeal by means of cross-points in which Dickens seeks = various=20 relief beyond that which he received when the trial court denied, = in part,=20 the pleas to the jurisdiction.  However, Dickens did not file = a=20 notice of cross-appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. =  26.1. =20 Thus, we lack jurisdiction to entertain Dickens=3Ds attempted cross-appeal. Charette v. = Fitzgerald, 213 S.W.3d 505, 509 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.) = (concluding=20 that untimely notice of cross-appeal deprived the court of = jurisdiction to=20 consider the cross-appeal).

[5]  In reviewing the trial = court=3Ds denial of the pleas to the = jurisdiction, we do=20 not consider the merits of Dickens=3Ds claims.  See County of Cameron = v.=20 Brown, 80 S.W.3d 549, 555 (Tex. 2002).  Therefore, we = presume for=20 the purposes of the jurisdictional analysis that Price and Wright = may be=20 held liable under Dickens=3Ds contract claims, and we consider only = whether=20 sovereign immunity deprives the trial court of subject-matter = jurisdiction=20 over these claims.

 

[6]  We express no opinion regarding = the merits=20 of the second issue.

 

------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C82A09.B93B1B70 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_001C_01C82A09.B93B1B70 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_001C_01C82A09.B93B1B70--