From: "Saved by Windows Internet Explorer 7" Subject: Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:48:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="text/html"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C8EDB5.799FD300" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C8EDB5.799FD300 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=84746 Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion
Send this document to a=20 colleague    Close=20 This Window


Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 24,=20 2008.

 

 

In The

 

Fourteenth=20 Court of Appeals

____________

 

NO. 14-07-00673-CV

____________

 

FRANK F.=20 STARR, = Appellant

 

V.

 

HENRY=20 DART,=20 Appellee

 

 

On Appeal from the = 189th District Court

Harris County, = Texas

Trial Court Cause = No. 2007-04182

 

 

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

Appellant=20 Frank F. Starr appeals from the trial court=3Ds judgment=20 on cross-motions for summary judgment in favor of appellee Henry=20 Dart.  In a single issue, Starr contends that the trial court = erred=20 by denying his summary judgment motion and granting that of Dart, = because=20 the settlement agreement Dart sued to enforce imposed usurious=20 interest.  Consequently, Starr argues that the settlement = agreement=20 is void and Dart owes Starr penalties and attorney=3Ds fees=20 under the Texas Finance Code.  We = affirm.

Factual and=20 Procedural Background

Starr and=20 Dart are parties to a Settlement and Release Agreement (the = ASettlement=20 Agreement@) under=20 which Dart agreed to dismiss a lawsuit and transfer all of his = stock in=20 Edugration, Inc. to Starr in consideration for $424,000.00.  = This=20 amount was to be paid by Starr as follows:  (1) $100,000.00 = on August=20 1, 2005; (2) $162,000.00 on June 1, 2006; and (3) $162,000.00 on = January=20 1, 2007.  Starr also agreed to pay an additional $1,000.00 = per day=20 for any late payments.

Starr made=20 the first payment of $100,000.00, and in accordance with the = Settlement=20 Agreement, Dart dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice.  = However, Starr=20 failed to timely make the second payment.  Starr and Dart = then=20 negotiated an amendment to the Settlement Agreement, entitled = AAddendum=20 A.@ =20 Under Addendum A, Starr agreed to pay Dart $22,000, representing = the=20 Aliquidated=20 damages@ = that had=20 accrued between June 1, 2006, and June 23, 2006, as a result of=20 Starr=3Ds failure=20 to timely make the second payment.  Starr and Dart also = agreed that=20 the remaining balance of $324,000.00 would be due on or before = October 2,=20 2006, and Starr again agreed to pay $1,000.00 per day as = liquidated=20 damages for each day after October 2, 2006, that the full payment = was not=20 made.  However, Starr failed to pay the $324,000.00 due = October 2,=20 2006, or any liquidated damages as provided in Appendix = A.

Dart sued=20 Starr to enforce the Settlement Agreement and Addendum A, and = moved for=20 summary judgment on claims for breach of contract and = attorney=3Ds=20 fees.  Starr responded to Dart=3Ds motion=20 and filed a cross-motion for summary judgment, asserting that the=20 $1,000.00 per day liquidated damages provision was an = unenforceable=20 penalty and constituted usurious interest under the Texas Finance=20 Code.  In the trial court=3Ds judgment=20 granting Dart=3Ds motion=20 for summary judgment and denying Starr=3Ds=20 cross-motion for summary judgment, signed July 24, 2007, the trial = court=20 ordered that the liquidated damages provision was an unenforceable = penalty, but granted judgment in favor of Dart in the amount of=20 $324,000.00, as well as attorney=3Ds fees and=20 pre- and post-judgment interest.  This appeal=20 followed.

Analysis of=20 Starr=3Ds = Issue

Starr=20 contends that the late fees of $1,000.00 per day are not only an=20 unenforceable penalty as the trial court held, but also are = interest=20 charges far exceeding what is usurious under Texas law.  As a = result,=20 Starr argues that the excessive charges both extinguish his debt = and=20 obligate Dart to pay him statutory penalties and = attorney=3Ds=20 fees.  When, as here, the parties file cross-motions for = summary=20 judgment, one of which was granted and the other denied, we review = the=20 summary judgment evidence presented by both sides, determine all = questions=20 presented, and affirm or reverse accordingly.  See Valence = Operating Co. v. Dorsett, 164 S.W.3d 656, 661 (Tex. = 2005).

A.     =20 Usury

A usurious=20 transaction is composed of three elements.  There must be (1) = a loan=20 of money; (2) an absolute obligation to repay the principal; and = (3) the=20 exaction of a greater compensation than allowed by law for the use = of the=20 money by the borrower.  See, e.g., First Bank v.=20 Tony=3Ds Tortilla=20 Factory, Inc., 877=20 S.W.2d 285, 287 (Tex. 1994); Domizio v. Progressive County Mut. = Ins.=20 Co., 54 S.W.3d 867, 872 (Tex. App.CAustin=20 2001, pet. denied); Wiley-Reiter Corp. v. Groce, 693 S.W.2d = 701,=20 703 (Tex. App.CHouston=20 [14th Dist.] 1985, no writ).  AInterest@ = is=20 defined under the Finance Code as Acompensation=20 for the use, forbearance, or detention of money.@ =20 See Tex. Fin. = Code=20 ' = 301.002(a)(4).  AUsurious=20 interest@ = is=20 defined as Ainterest=20 that exceeds the applicable maximum amount allowed by = law.@ =  Id. ' = 301.002(a)(17).  Because usury statutes are penal in nature, = they are=20 strictly construed, and if there is any doubt as to legislative = intent to=20 punish the activity complained of under usury statutes, the doubt = must be=20 construed in favor of the lender.  Domizio, 54 S.W.3d = at 872;=20 Tygrett v. Univ. Gardens Homeowners=3D = Ass=3Dn, 687=20 S.W.2d 481, 484B85 (Tex.=20 App.CDallas=20 1985, writ ref=3Dd=20 n.r.e.).

 

B.     =20 Starr=3Ds = Contentions

According=20 to Starr, the late fees in this case constitute interest because = they are=20 compensation for the detention of money, which Aarises=20 when a debt has become due and the debtor has withheld payment = without a=20 new contract giving him the right.@ =20 See Tygrett, 687 S.W.2d at 483.  Starr also cites = Pentico=20 v. Mad-Wayler, Inc., 964 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.CCorpus=20 Christi 1998, pet. denied), for the proposition that the late fees = are=20 interest because A[l]ate=20 charges fall into the category of a contingent additional charge = which=20 [is] treated as interest and added to the interest contracted for = if a=20 payment is received after the expiration of the grace = period.@ =20 Id. at 715 (stating that late charges assessed for failure = to=20 timely make payments under promissory note constituted interest = because=20 the statutory definition includes compensation for the = obligor=3Ds=20 detention of money past the date it is due and payable).=20

Dart=20 concedes that in some instances the usury statutes may apply to = late fees,=20 but argues that the usury statutes do not apply to the Settlement=20 Agreement and Addendum A, because the first essential element of a = usurious transaction is missing; namely, there is no loan of = money. =20 See, e.g., Crow v. Home Sav. Ass=3Dn of=20 Dallas County, 522=20 S.W.2d 457, 459B60 (Tex.=20 1975) (AIt is a=20 fundamental principle governing the law of usury that it must be = founded=20 on a loan or forbearance of money; if neither of these elements = exist,=20 there can be no usury.@);=20 Garcia v. Tex. Cable Partners, L.P., 114 S.W.3d 561, 566 = (Tex.=20 App.CCorpus=20 Christi 2003, no pet.) (holding that late fees charged to cable = television=20 subscriber did not constitute usury because a lending transaction = was not=20 involved); Domizio, 54 S.W.3d at 873 (stating that = Afor the=20 usury laws to apply, there must be an overcharge by a lender for = the use=20 forbearance, or detention of the lender=3Ds=20 money@);=20 Bexar County Ice Cream Co., Inc. v. Swensen=3Ds Ice=20 Cream Co., 859=20 S.W.2d 402, 406 (Tex. App.CSan=20 Antonio 1993, writ denied), overruled on other grounds, = Barraza=20 v. Koliba, 933 S.W.2d 164 (Tex. App.CSan=20 Antonio 1996, writ denied) (noting that [t]here is a line cases = holding=20 that late charges are not usurious interest if their payment is = not=20 pursuant to a credit or lending transaction); Potomac Leasing = Co. v.=20 Housing Auth. of the City of El Paso, 743 S.W.2d 712, 713 = (Tex.=20 App.CEl Paso=20 1987, writ denied) (holding lease agreement did not involve a = lending or=20 credit transaction and therefore the usury laws did not apply); = see=20 also Sage St. Assocs. v. Northdale Constr. Co., 863 S.W.2d = 438, 440=20 (Tex. 1993) (holding that constitutional provision proscribing = usurious=20 interest did not apply to the rate of prejudgment interest set by = a court=20 because its language Agoverns=20 only lending and credit transactions@).

Moreover,=20 in Wiley-Reiter Corp. v. Groce, this Court reasoned that = the usury=20 statutes did not apply to a settlement agreement because it did = not=20 involve a lending transaction or a debtor-creditor = relationship. =20 See Wiley-Reiter Corp., 693 S.W.2d at 703.  In that = case,=20 Groce sued the Wiley-Reiter Corporation and others (AWiley-Reiter@) over his=20 investment in certain gas leases in which Wiley-Reiter held an = interest,=20 claiming breach of contract, common law fraud, fraud in connection = with a=20 transaction involving stock or real estate, and violation of the = Deceptive=20 Trade Practices Act and the Texas Securities Act.  Id. = at=20 702.  The parties entered into a written settlement agreement = in lieu=20 of Groce=3Ds=20 obtaining a confession of judgment for punitive damages under the = DTPA and=20 other statutory claims.  Id.  The settlement = agreement=20 provided that Wiley-Reiter would pay Groce=3Ds=20 out-of-pocket damages and attorney=3Ds fees on=20 an installment basis.  Id.  Groce also agreed to = convey,=20 sell or assign working interests in certain oil and gas leases to=20 Wiley-Reiter, provided all payments were made on time. =  Id. at=20 703.[1] =20 The settlement agreement also authorized Groce to confess judgment = in his=20 favor in the amount of three times the balance of the remaining = payments=20 due under the terms of the agreement if Wiley-Reiter failed to = timely=20 pay.  Id. at 702.  

When=20 Wiley-Reiter missed two payments, Groce sought and was granted = judgment in=20 the amount of $97,920.00, which represented three times the = remaining=20 balance due.  Id.  Wiley-Reiter appealed, = claiming that=20 the amount of the judgment included interest of = $72,420.00Cthe=20 equivalent of 284%Cand so=20 clearly violated the usury statutes as a matter of law. =20 Id.  Groce responded that the settlement agreement did = not=20 violate the usury statutes and that Wiley-Reiter failed to = preserve the=20 issue for appeal.  Id. at 702B03. =20 Turning to the first issue concerning whether the settlement = agreement was=20 usurious, the court determined that the usury laws did not = apply.  As=20 the court explained, AAppellants=20 did not borrow any money from appellee, nor did Appellee charge=20 appellant[s] for the use or detention of appellee=3Ds=20 money.  Thus, the fundamental principle of the usury laws did = not=20 exist.@ =20 Id. at 703.  Further, the court noted that the = requisite=20 credit relationship which might have entitled Wiley-Reiter to = invoke the=20 protection of the usury laws did not exist, as the settlement = agreement=20 Awas not in=20 any way based on a lending transaction.@ =20 Id.  Thus, the court concluded, the settlement = agreement=20 Adid not=20 involve a debtor-creditor relationship@ = as=20 contemplated by the usury statutes.  Id.  The = court next=20 considered whether Wiley-Reiter had failed to preserve the issue = for=20 appeal, and found that it had failed to do so because it did not = properly=20 raise the issue below.  Id. at=20 704.

Starr=20 attempts to distinguish Wiley-Reiter by arguing that the = holding=20 was limited to the facts of the case, it was dicta because the = issue was=20 waived, and the terms did not involve a transfer of an interest in = property.  Starr also argues that the basis for the usury = claim, a=20 provision that called for the payment of three times the balance = of the=20 payments due, could not have been usurious interest because the = amounts=20 claimed to be usurious Awere=20 included within the principal amount of the judgment@ = and were=20 meant to equate to the punitive or statutory damages the plaintiff = sought.  In contrast, Starr contends the payment and = Alate=20 fee@ = provisions of the settlement agreement in this case amount to a = promissory=20 note from Starr to Dart, and there is no good policy reason to = treat such=20 a settlement agreement differently than any other contract. =20

However,=20 although we have carefully considered Starr=3Ds=20 arguments, we find Wiley-Reiter=3Ds analysis=20 of the issue instructive and applicable to this case.  We = agree with=20 the Wiley-Reiter court=3Ds=20 reasoning that a settlement agreement such as this one, freely = entered=20 into by parties to litigation to compromise and settle their = dispute, does=20 not involve a lending or credit transaction and is not the type of = agreement the usury laws were intended to govern.  Further, = Starr has=20 not cited to us any case that holds, contrary to = Wiley-Reiter, that=20 such a settlement agreement may be subject to the usury laws.[2] =20 Therefore, based on Wiley-Reiter and our review of the case = law and=20 the Finance Code, we reject Starr=3Ds=20 contention that the Settlement Agreement and Appendix A were=20 usurious.  We overrule Starr=3Ds=20 issue.

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

Having=20 concluded that the Settlement Agreement and Addendum A were not = lending or=20 credit transactions subject to the usury laws, we overrule=20 Starr=3Ds issue=20 and affirm the trial court=3Ds=20 judgment.

 

 

 

 

 

/s/     =20 Wanda McKee Fowler

Justice

 

 

 

 

Judgment=20 rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed July 24, 2008.

Panel=20 consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Fowler and=20 Boyce.


[1]  The compromise also included=20 Groce=3Ds agreement to non-suit one of the = individual=20 defendants at the time and, if all parties performed their = obligations=20 under the terms of the agreement, to execute a take‑nothing = judgment=20 against individual and corporate defendants.  Wiley-Reiter Corp., = 693 S.W.2d at = 703.  In the=20 event all obligations were performed, Groce agreed to waive any = cause of=20 action he might have under the Texas Securities Act or any other = cause of=20 action which might arise from his continued ownership interest in = the=20 leases and wells.  Id. 

[2]  Starr cites several cases he = contends have=20 extended the reach of the usury laws since Wiley -Reiter, = but these=20 cases are distinguishable because they involve either  = promissory=20 notes or commercial or consumer contracts for goods or services, = and none=20 apply the usury statutes to a settlement agreement.  See = Hoxie=20 Implement Co., Inc. v. Baker, 65 S.W.3d 140, 154B55 (Tex. App.CAmarillo 2001, pet. denied) (on = reh=3Dg) (holding that, because a jury found = buyer did=20 not breach allegedly usurious agreement to purchase farm machinery = from=20 seller, no creditor/debtor relationship existed upon which to = conclude=20 that seller committed usury); Pentico, 964 S.W.2d at=20 715B16 (holding that erroneously-prepared = amortization=20 schedule accompanying demand letter seeking late charges for = failure to=20 timely make payments on promissory note constituted interest); = Hardwick=20 v. Austin Gallery of Oriental Rugs, Inc., 779 S.W.2d 438, 443 = (Tex.=20 App.CAustin 1989, writ denied) (holding that = late=20 charge demanded by holder of promissory note for late payments = constituted=20 interest); Commerce, Crowdus & Canton, Ltd. v. DKS Constr., = Inc., 776 S.W.2d 615, 617B18 (Tex. App.CDallas 1989, no writ) (holding that = interest=20 charged in construction contracts was usurious without addressing = whether=20 the contracts constituted loans or lending transactions); = Butler v.=20 Holt Mach. Co., 741 S.W.2d 169, 173B74 (Tex. App.CSan Antonio 1987, writ denied) (holding = late=20 charges paid under extension of credit to refinance outstanding = balances=20 on three contracts to purchase tractors and an open account = constituted=20 interest). =

------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C8EDB5.799FD300 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_0012_01C8EDB5.799FD300 Content-Type: image/gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.14thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/resource/images/icons/close.gif R0lGODlhFwAPAMQAAMDAwP//nP/OnPf39+/v5+/e3ufn5+fWxt7e3s7OY6+vMpycAISEhISEAFlN MkpCQkpCOTEhAAAAhAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEA AAAALAAAAAAXAA8AQAVxICCOJMCU6KgMQesGArwYUTouCTMAgzQMBkijYRMtYkgYTLCoFQGLqA74 eIoU0aw2ijBUbYuXEsl0Fh3otNqKYgTZt0Rut/PCF25DQUKQHAxBRCkKIj88IwIJCwcIXyhhLTFj iU1FYZJJSJWWW51mIiEAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C8EDB5.799FD300 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_0012_01C8EDB5.799FD300--