text: 2nd person respectful present imperative tense of পড়া: পড়া1 [ paṛā1 ] v to fall, to drop (বৃষ্টি পড়া); to fall down, to drop down (পড়ে যাওয়া, তাল পড়া); to lean to (গায়েপড়া); (as an aux.) to perform an action (ঘুমিয়ে পড়া); to come to, to fall into (দুঃখে পড়া); to be uncultivated (জমি পড়ে থাকা); to be vacant or unoccupied (বাড়ি পড়ে থাকা); to stay or remain (পিছনে পড়া); to be unpaid or unrealized, to get into arrears (অনেক টাকা পড়ে আছে); to be outstanding (কাজ পড়ে থাকা); to set in, to begin, to ensue (আকাল পড়া); to attack, to raid (ডাকাত পড়া); to infest (পোকা পড়া); to be at tacked (রোগে পড়া); to be caught (in) (জালে পড়া, দায়ে পড়া); to be affected with, to contact, to incur (মরচে পড়া, টাক পড়া, দায়ে পড়া); to arrive or appear (গিয়ে পড়া); to come across or fall upon (পথে পড়া); to set in for a spell (ঠান্ডা পড়া); to come upon, to strike, to occur (মনে পড়া = to call to mind); to require or involve or to involve an expenditure (অনেক টাকা পড়বে); to exude, to ooze, to flow out (রক্ত পড়া, রস পড়া, লাল পড়া); to fall off, to shed or to be shed, to fall (দাঁত পড়া, পাতা পড়া); to be placed (পাত পড়া); to be served (পাতে খাবার পড়া); to be paralyzed (অঙ্গ পড়ে যাওয়া); to come to a close, to decline (বেলা পড়া); to terminate; to be applied or set (হাত পড়া); to be allayed (রাগ পড়া); to be abated, to decrease (তেজ পড়া); to be directed or cast or set (চোখ পড়া); to be attracted (মন পড়া); to go into, to take in (পেটে পড়া); to be born (পেট থেকে পড়া); to be married (মেয়েটি বড় ঘরে পড়েছে). ☐ a. fallen, dropped; fallen down, dropped down; leaning to (গায়ে পড়া); hanging loose (ঝুলে-পড়া চামড়া); fallen into (বিপদে পড়া লোক); uncultivated or fallow; unoccupied, vacant; deserted (পড়া বাড়ি); staying, remaining, laid down (বিছানায় পড়া লোক); attacked; infested; caught; affected with; lying unclaimed or met with by chance (পড়া টাকা); abandoned, derelict (পড়া মাল). ~নো v. to cause to fall or drop or lean to or in fest or be attacked or be affected with or require or involve or involve an expenditure of or be turned or be directed or be cast or be set or be attracted or enter. পড়ে পড়ে কিল বা মার খাওয়া to take constant insult or suffer oppression without retaliation. পড়ে-পাওয়া v. to come upon something unexpectedly; to get a thing by chance and unexpectedly. পড়ে-পাওয়া a. got by chance and unexpectedly; that which has been obtained unexpectedly. See also পাওয়া । বাজারে পড়তে না পাওয়া to have a ready market, to go or sell like hot cakes. 2nd person respectful present imperative tense of পড়া: পড়া2 [ paṛā2 ] v to read, to go through, to peruse; to study; to recite (মন্ত্র পড়া, হলফ পড়া). ☐ n. reading, perusal; study; recital, recitation; an instalment of lesson, lesson, exercise. ☐ a. that which has been read, perused; studied; recited. পড়া করা v. to learn or prepare one's lessons. পড়া ধরা, পড়া নেওয়া v. to test whether one can say one's lessons. পড়া দেওয়া, পড়া বলা v. to say one's lessons. (কারও) কাছে পড়া v. to read, to take lessons from. পড়ে শোনানো v. to read to. বিদ্যালয়ে পড়তে যাওয়া to go to school. ~নো v. to teach; to cause to read or study or recite; to instruct, prepare by (repeated) instruction, to tutor, to rehearse, to prime (সাক্ষি পড়ান). পড়ার ঘর n. a study; a reading room. পড়ার নেশা n. a great liking for or attachment to reading; love of reading. ~শোনা n. study; academic education, schooling. পড়াশোনা করা v. to study; to have one's schooling; to learn one's lessons. পড়াশোনায় মন থাকা to take care of one's lessons or studies, to be mindful of one's lessons or studies.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


On this website we recommend many pictures abaout nail ideas for kids that we have collected from various sites conversionbay.com, and of course what we recommend is the most excellent of picture for nail ideas for kids. If you like the picture on our website, please do not hesitate to visit again and get inspiration from our website.
And if you want to see more images more we recommend the gallery below, you can see the picture as a reference design from your nail ideas for kids.
Thank you for seeing gallery of nail ideas for kids, we would be very happy if you come back.
Similar Keyword nail ideas for kids : 3d nails art images, acrylic nails art designs, art nails kitten, beautiful nails art images, best nail art near me, best nails art images, creative nails art ideas, gel nails art ideas, kit nails art pas cher, nail art around me, nail art classes near me, nail art images for short nails, nail art near me prices, nail art shop near me, nail art studio near me, nail artist around me, nails art 2018, nails art 2018 estate, nails art 2018 instagram, nails art 2018 pinterest, nails art 2018 primavera, nails art 2018 spring, nails art 2018 trend, nails art 2018 winter, nails art christmas ideas, nails art design 2018, nails art design images, nails art designs, nails art designs 2016, nails art designs 2017, nails art designs 2018, nails art designs french, nails art designs gallery, nails art designs pic, nails art designs simple, nails art hello kitty, nails art ideas, nails art ideas 2018, nails art ideas cute, nails art ideas for prom, nails art images, nails art images download, nails art images free download, nails art images hd, nails art jeddah, nails art jeddah number, nails art kit, nails art kit price, nails art kitty, nails art korean ladies salon, and more.


text:
The Elim Gospel Hall, Ipoh is part of a community of the Christian faith currently known as the Christian Brethren. Allow us to take you back in time to the start of the Brethren movement.
The Christian Brethren started in Dublin, Ireland in 1825 by Dr. Edward Cronin a convert from the Roman Catholics. He met with his friend Edward Wilson, assistant secretary to the Bible Society in Dublin to worship, break bread and study the word of God in Wilson’s residence. The two were later joined by Dr. Edward Cronin’s cousins, the two Misses Drury. Later on they were joined by Francis Hutchinson and Anthony Norris Groves and the number began to grow. Dr. Edward Cronin wrote how they were affected by the same truth, the oneness of the Body and the presence of the Holy Spirit. These well meaning and faithful first Brethren had met together because they moved away from the doctrinal slants of their day and endeavoured to emulate the historic Christian practice as exemplified in the New Testament. By 1831, the movement had spread to Bristol, England and then to other cities and countries of the British empire especially Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
The history of the Brethren Movement most probably started in Malaysia (British Malaya) in 1859. Mr. and Mrs. John Chapman came and began a witness in Penang, then an important port in British Malaya. They were joined by Mr. and Mrs. William McDonald in 1866. In October 1898, a group of five missionary women had accompanied Mr. William McDonald from New Zealand to Penang. Among them were Mrs. M. E. Davies, Miss Sarah Shirtliff, Miss Elizabeth Dron, Miss M. A. Emerson. They soon settled down in Penang, Kuala Lumpur or other towns to do various missionary work for the Lord namely preaching, teaching and nursing duty.
The Holy Spirit laid the ground work through these men and women and by 1915, Brethren assemblies had been established in most of the major towns, like Penang, Taiping, Kampar, Ipoh, Kuala Lumpur, Klang, Malacca and Singapore. These early missionaries came to our land at great personal sacrifice and risks. They were not supported by any missionary society or mission board and as such had no guaranteed financial aid. They came by faith, totally dependent on Almighty God to meet their every need.
These Brethren assemblies were simply known as Gospel Hall, Gospel Chapel or Gospel Centre governed by responsible brethren who were Elders or Overseers. Each assembly was fully autonomous.
Around 1900 a young adventurous missionary named George Wilson arrived in Penang from Britain. He soon settled down in Taiping to do the Lord’s work. In 1902 he married Elizabeth Dron and they lived in Taiping for a while. Through visitation and preaching, the testimony was established there and soon the Wilsons moved to Kampar (about 1906-1913), at that time an important tin mining town. They lived in Kampar for several years where later a small hall was built.
Mr. George Wilson travelled about on his trusted old fashioned bicycle which had fixed solid tyres. In 1912 he rode for hours from his house in Kampar through Ipoh to preach the Word in Batu Gajah. As he passed through Ipoh he eyed a piece of rubber estate land for sale. It was actually a “belukar,” overgrown with undergrowth and lallang and covered a large area at the intersection of Chung Thye Phin Road, a small winding dirt road with the main road Hugh Low Street. Mr. Wilson had the foresight to sense that here was the ideal location for the siting of a new gospel hall to facilitate assembly work in this new developing township of Ipoh. Mr. Wilson knelt down on the land and asked God to provide it for the Lord’s work. The Lord answered his fervent prayer. Before he went back with his family to England on furlough in 1913, he was able to come up with the money for the purchase of this piece of land. Eventually two more lots were acquired.
Mr. Wilson and his family returned to England on furlough in 1913 when the First World War (1914-1918) broke out in Europe. While the Wilsons were away, Sarah Shirtliff and her colleagues took charge of the work in Ipoh.
The first building erected was the big and imposing double storey Mission House (presently the Mission House / residence of the Full-time Worker) made of half-wood, half-concrete. It was built by Mr. Claude Henry Labrooy (the late Miss Leila Labooy’s father) an architect and contractor. Mr. Claude Henry Labrooy also gave generously to the Lord’s work. Building work started in 1913 most probably before the Wilsons went on leave and the building was completed in early 1914. A baptism pool made of cement was built outside just beside the house for baptism services. Around this time the first assembly conference was held in Ipoh. As the Mission House was not quite ready for use, the conference was held in a workers’ construction shed in the Labrooy compound in Dulcieville Lane, behind the Main Convent School.
When the Mission House was completed, Sarah Shirtliff and Rose McCann moved from Kampar to live in it. The Wilsons returned to Malaya from England in early 1915 and moved into the Mission House in Ipoh. Subsequently Sarah transferred to Kuala Lumpur to do further missionary work. Rose McCann stayed on and later moved out of the Mission House to Brewster Road.
After the Wilsons took up residence in Ipoh in 1915, assembly work in Elim Gospel Hall began in earnest. Initially assembly or worship meetings were held in the Mission House in the large front room downstairs as there was no hall then. The first congregation probably numbered about twenty, made up of the missionaries, some expatriate civil servants and a few locals. There were so few Christians in those early years. Mr. Wilson began his main thrust of missionary work by working tirelessly for the conversion of souls. He even preached in Hakka, one of the main Chinese dialects in the Kinta Valley, which he had learned in China back in 1899. Work was slow but God’s faithful worker shared the love, the power and majesty of Jesus in all the indoor and outdoor meetings and God prospered his ministry.
It was also in early 1915 that another interesting and exciting chapter in the history of Elim Gospel Hall unfolded. This was the beginning of the Elim orphanage work when Mr. and Mrs. Wilson took in six orphan Chinese girls from Singapore. These six little girls aged eight to ten years old, helpless and alone, nameless and without any personal records had by chance encountered a godly missionary lady named Bessie McClay on the waterfront of Canton (Guangzhou today) harbour in China in 1914. They had been sold by their families to unscrupulous agents who were waiting to ship them to Singapore, to be sold into slavery or bonded servitude to rich families, which was a common practice among the Chinese in those early hard times. Incredibly this kind woman was able to pay for them and rescued them. Miss McClay brought them across the seas to Singapore. Initially they were housed at the Church Zenana Mission Society (CZMS). Miss McClay gave them names: Kwai Fong (married, in Myanmar), Kwai Leong (in U.K. and worked for an English family), Kwai Yung (succumbed after an ear operation), Kwai Mei (retired nursing sister in Batu Pahat), Kwai Heng (married, in Kuala Lumpur) and Kwai Fah (retired nurse; migrated with husband Sung Chiew Hoay to Australia). This adoption was a spur of the moment decision so Bessie McClay decided to go back to Ireland to solicit for support and finance for her orphanage work. Unfortunately she perished when the ship she was on, the Lusitania, was torpedoed and sunk by the Germans. Once again the girls were left alone without a benefactor. Mr. and Mrs. Wilson heard about their plight and agreed to take them in, so they were transported to Ipoh and came to live with the Wilsons and their family. They took on the surname “Wai” after Wilson. This was the beginning of the orphanage which came to be called the Elim Home.
At first the six girls stayed in two rooms at the back of the Mission House adjacent to the main building. Soon news of this Elim “orphanage” spread around Ipoh and elsewhere and more children were taken into the Home. The number of children increased and so in 1917 proper premises to house the orphans were built after Mr. Wilson added another strip of land along Chung Thye Phin Road directly opposite today’s Ave Maria Convent School. This was a big double storey building with many rooms and came to be called the Girls’ Home (now our present Elim Gospel Hall library). At one time a portion of the Mission House (our present Elim Gospel Hall office) was turned into a mini hospital or isolation ward with Miss McCann as nurse to cater for the many epidemics and sicknesses that occurred with so many children staying together. This work was later abandoned when the government insisted on a resident doctor.
Miss Ding Tuan Sing moved from Sitiawan to Ipoh to replace Auntie Tan as a full time worker when she left for Malacca. Other boarders were Mak Choon Hau (nursing matron), Chooi Wai Ying (Chooi Yew Hong’s sister), Mrs. Yu Choong (Shuk Lan, in UK today), and Mrs. Ong Cheng Siang (Ong Hock Huat’s mother).
As the children grew up and the numbers increased, it became necessary that the boys be housed separately. In the beginning there were about six to ten boys staying together in the Home, so a Boys’ Home was built in 1925 adjacent to the Elim Gospel Hall. It was enlarged again in 1926 to accommodate as many as thirty boys. This building was demolished in 1986 to make way for the building of the new triple storey Chinese Elim Gospel Hall. Some of the boy boarders were Chooi Fook Chon followed by his cousin Chooi Yew Hong (hospital assistant, Ipoh), Low Ah Yu (businessman, Ipoh), Timothy Chew (Singapore), Wai Thin Loke (Johor), his brother Wai Thin Fook (salesman, Ipoh), Ng Chong Choy (Sabah), Choo Theam Yong (Registrar for RIMV, Penang), Fred Philip (Penang), Koo Chong Kong (Chief Police Officer, Perak), his brother Koo Sze Kong (photographer), Tan Shen Kai (well-known blind masseur, Ipoh and organist for Chinese assembly) and Yu Choong (UK).
Life in the Home was not easy; all the children had chores to do; cleaning, washing, ironing and mending. The older children helped to look after the younger ones. However it was not all work or studies as there was time for fun too. The missionaries took them out for walks after every meal and sometimes they would go on picnics. The children looked forward to Christmas and Chinese New Year when they would get presents or new clothes. Another highlight in their lives was during each Chinese New Year when a kind Christian lady from Kampar would visit and gave each children an angpow of thirty cents, a large sum in those days. And on Saturday each weekend the gates of the Home were opened for hawkers to come into the compound to allow the children to buy their favourite delicacies.
Behind the old Elim Gospel Hall was a small mining pool where the boys could go fishing. In front of the old Hall across Chung Thye Phin Road where the present shops are standing, was a piece of barren land on a small hill with a few fruit trees. During the fruit season, people came in huge numbers to pluck the fruits like a free-for-all.
The Elim Home gained the respect of the community so much so that at one time the number rose to sixty. Definitely the Elim Home and all its workers and activities exerted a great influence molding the character of the children. Many of them grew up, got married, worked and became assembly and community leaders.
It was said that Mr. and Mrs. George Wilson were very stern-looking and strict, nevertheless they were kind and caring and provided a protective father/mother figure for the children. As education was not free and funds were limited, Mrs. Wilson started a school for the children in 1920, which was held at the meeting place in the Mission House. Mrs. Wilson assisted by Sarah Shirtliff had the responsibility of the Home and the school which employed two other teachers besides themselves. They were given basic education in reading and writing, both in English as well as Chinese (Primary School level). This gave rise to a need for a separate hall for meetings.
So in 1920 the first Gospel Hall was built by Mr. Claude Henry Labrooy. It was a smaller building than the Mission House or Girls’ Home, made of half wood, half concrete. (This building was torn down in 2002 to make way for the Chinese Assembly Library, Office and Conference Halls.) It was named “Elim,” a resting place with twelve springs and seventy palm trees mentioned in the Bible. A Chinese-speaking Assembly was also formed. This new hall known by old timers in town as “Elim Hall” began to be used by both the English and Chinese speaking assemblies. In the beginning Mr. Wilson pioneered the Chinese work but later he was assisted by other capable leaders like Mr. Koo Song Khiun, the first local Chinese Full-time Worker for the Chinese assembly. He had come from China and served from 1925 to 1957. In 1931 the church grounds were further extended by the purchase of land beside the Girls’ Home (the present site of Elim Gospel Hall - English and the playing field) for $10,000 from a gift given by Mr. Toft when he sold his rubber estate.
Brother Wilson carried the gospel to outlying villages and travelled as far as Enggor and Salak North in the north to as far south as Menglembu, Lahat and Tanjung Tualang. At first it was open-air preaching but later as Mr. Wilson got older, he rented shop houses in these villages for gospel meetings. At first his only means of transport was his old bicycle with solid tyres. His habit was to keep peddling till he came to a village, then not being able to stop because his legs were cramped, he would go through the town and fall off the bicycle onto the grass verge. After recovering he would walk back into the village to sell scriptures, preach and buy some food to eat. Then he rested by taking out his boots and placed them under his head and snatched some sleep on a plank bench. Much later the Lord provided him a new bicycle with pneumatic tires. From 1919 he used a motorcycle to visit many towns travelling hundreds of miles. That machine enabled him to cover the distance more quickly and he also would not be away from home and family so often. Many who heard the “Jesus Religion” were saved. In Enggor, thirty believers were baptised by Mr. Wilson at one time. In those days it was the practice for many Chinese to return to China, their homeland. Many died there or never returned but these new Christians spread the gospel in their villages in China.
As the years passed, the pattern of assembly work was established. Prayer meetings originally held on Thursday were changed to Wednesday which remain to this day. Bible Studies were conducted for assembly members and these laid good firm foundations for years ahead. The members were more knowledgeable and the young people matured with time and experience. Those in fellowship constituted a stabilising influence in today’s assemblies in Ipoh as well as other towns.
Under Mr. Wilson’s gracious ministry, other workers answered God’s call and served devotedly at Elim Gospel Hall. In the 1930’s Phyllis Wilson helped her mother in the Home and school; Miss Clare Shirtliff (Sarah’s sister) helped with the women’s ministry. Mr. Leonard Cornwall (the Wilsons’ son-in-law who married their elder daughter Mabel) assisted in the outreach to surrounding towns. He was also fluent in Hakka. Others were Mr. and Mrs. Toft and their daughter Margaret; Miss Pearl Matthews who married Mr. Arthur Simpson and moved to Kampar; Miss Nelly Holehouse; Mr. and Mrs. Oswald Wyllie (from Tasmania) stood in for a year during the Wilsons’ furlough in New Zealand in 1928. One among them was Miss H.E. Falconer.
The leading local brethren who helped in the ministry were the elders A. E. Pereira (Secretary of Kinta Sanitary Board), Mr. U. P. Madhavan (Chief clerk, Ipoh Electric Supply); Dr. James J. Samuel (an Indian doctor in Kampar). Both Dr. Samuel and Mr. Madhavan also used Tamil to proclaim the gospel regularly in the Buntong Tamil School. Mr. Madhavan was called home on 15 Feb. 1941, and Dr. Samuel in 1967 in Ipoh.
The Second World War started in Europe in September 1939. The Japanese occupation which started on 7th December 1941 ended missionary work in Ipoh and throughout Malaya. It was a time of chaos and great fear and suffering. Foreigners, especially whites, were hurriedly evacuated to Singapore. The Wilsons and their daughter Phyllis were evacuated to Singapore in late December 1941. Mr. Wilson who had been quite ill while in Ipoh died on 6th January 1942 aged sixty in Singapore and was buried there. Mrs. Wilson and Phyllis were evacuated to India and then on to United Kingdom where they arrived in March 1942. Other missionaries also evacuated to India, Australia or New Zealand.
The Japanese forces immediately seized Elim’s buildings and land. Initially the Mission House became a transit centre for European detainees with Japanese wives. Six months later the mission house was converted into an officers club. The nearby Girls’ Home was turned into a ‘comfort house’ for immoral purposes while Japanese intelligence agents occupied the Boy’s Home. Thankfully the Gospel Hall was spared and used as a military store inspite of all such undesirable activities going on. Prior to the Japanese occupation when the fall of Ipoh seemed imminent, the Boys and Girls’ Homes were disbanded and the children were sent home to their relatives and friends who would take them in.
With the absence of the foreign missionaries, worship duty and plans were left to the local leaders and faithful senior members of the church. Among these leaders were Mr. Yin Choo Soon, Mr. A. E. Pereira, Mr. Cunard, Mr. Leach, Dr. Jumeaux and Mr. Choo Thean Yong. Another devoted worker was Dr. James J. Samuel who faithfully came to Ipoh from Kampar every first week of each month to preach the gospel.
It is reported in Elim records that throughout the Occupation period, both Chinese and English speaking assemblies did not miss a single worship meeting or Sunday School. Right from the start of the Occupation, the Japanese authorities allowed the Christians to worship. From the early period of the Occupation when Elim Gospel Hall was in Japanese hands, both assemblies held combined meetings, initially in Mr. Yin Choo Soon’s house in Dulcieville Lane (present site of Ipoh Parade) for about ten months; then later moved to a dilapidated wooden hut in the Yuk Choy Chinese Primary School along Hugh Low Street for some six months or more. Later four elders approached the Japanese authorities for the reuse of Elim Gospel Hall. The elders were asked to state the assembly policies and they quoted Romans Chapter Thirteen. They got back the use of Elim Gospel Hall but were driven out twice. Eventually when the Hall was demilitarised, both the assemblies began to use it again.
The Lord continued to bless the ministry even during the Occupation period and some forty believers were added into His kingdom. Usually they were baptised in the Kinta River (near where YMCA is situated). On one occasion, brother Yin Choo Soon arranged for a bus to take the believers to the Kampar Gospel Hall for baptism. On two other occasions the believers were baptised in Kampar River just before the town.
When the war ended in August 1945, Brethren missionaries who were prisoners of war in Singapore regained their freedom and went home to recuperate. Those who were evacuated also gradually returned to their mission fields to continue their work. Mrs. E. Wilson and her daughter Phyllis returned to Ipoh in October 1945 to begin the work of repairing and reorganising the “Elim Home”. Some very needy children came to the Wilsons and lived with them temporarily in the Mission House while the Girls Home was undergoing repairs and a new kitchen was being built. When all repairs were done, the Home was reopened and some very poor children, mostly from Christian homes were taken in. The Social Welfare Department officer also brought in some children.
Mr. & Mrs. Arthur Simpson worked for a while in Elim Gospel Hall in 1946 before they moved to Kampar in 1947. Mr. Simpson was called home in 1950. In 1947 Mr. & Mrs. Frank A. V. Regler came to Elim Gospel Hall for a few months before they were transferred to Malacca.
During this time the assembly elders were Mr. A. E. Pereira, Mr. Samuel A. Cunard, Mr. H. C. Leach, Mr. William Rode, Dr. J. J. Samuel and Mr. Low Ah Yu with Mr. David Boler (a teacher in ACS Ipoh) coming in later. Sketchy records of the past also included these other brethren who had served on previous Oversights in Elim Gospel Hall: U. P. Madhavan, J. R. Tharmalinkam, D. Caleb, C. W. Price, Kong Yeng Choon and Sung Chiew Hoay.
Altogether, some thirty people were brought to the Lord and were baptised during this period.
Mr. and Mrs. Ernest V. Brewerton who were commended from New Zealand first came to Klang in 1924. Mrs. Brewerton (nee Bertha Townley) prior to her marriage had worked among the Tamils in India for ten years. She spoke excellent Tamil. Mr. Ernest V. Brewerton had learned to speak Hokkien fluently and together the Brewertons served the Lord faithfully. In 1948 they moved to Elim Gospel Hall Ipoh and gave themselves wholeheartedly to the Lord’s work. The Lord used Mr. Ernest V. Brewerton mightily in congregational preaching. He was an outstanding speaker and secured a tremendous interest in the gospel. The Lord blessed his ministry wonderfully by gathering more believers into assembly fellowship.
Mr. Ernest V. Brewerton was of great help to many brethren, males and females who came to him with all sorts of problems. Through his counseling and assistance many were rescued from difficult circumstances. Mrs. Brewerton also showed great spirituality and was a very approachable person. She never forgot the Lord’s work and made many visits to hospitals to visit the sick and feeble and to comfort them. The Brewertons were also noted for their regular house visitations. Assembly members whom they called upon appreciated their visits very much. They were truly missionaries and great friends.
In 1954, the Brewertons went on furlough for about six months during which time Mr. and Mrs. W. S. Scott relieved the work at Elim Gospel Hall. It was in this year too that Mr. Ernest V. Brewerton began to teach and nurture a young man named Victor Doss in the ways of the Brethren. Mr. Doss had come from Madras in May 1953 and belonged to the Church of England. He started coming to Elim Gospel Hall regularly and in November 1953 he was saved and in June 1954 he was baptised.
As Mr. Ernest V. Brewerton got older, his state of health began to weaken. God sent Mr. Frank A. V. Regler to relieve him of some of his responsibilities. Mr. and Mrs. Ernest V. Brewerton served until early 1964 when they retired to New Zealand. In 1975 Mr. Ernest V. Brewerton went home to the Lord.
Miss Holehouse arrived in Ipoh in 1929. She began serving in Elim Gospel Hall and the surrounding areas with missionaries like Miss Rose McCann, Miss Claire Shirtliff and assisted by Miss Voon Nyook Yoon and others until the Japanese Occupation. Mr. Frank A. V. Regler married Nelly Holehouse in 1942.
In 1947 Mr. and Mrs. Frank A. V. Regler were commended for the Lord’s work to this country, leaving England in March. They settled in Malacca and laboured for ten years and the saints there were greatly encouraged by their devoted service. In 1957 they went back to England on furlough. On their return in 1958 and learning that the Brewertons needed assistance, they moved from Malacca to Ipoh. Their desire and purpose in service was to bear witness for the Lord among old and young and to teach the word of God. With his passion for souls, Mr. Frank A. V. Regler constantly preached in Elim Gospel Hall and also moved about as an itinerant preacher in Kampar, Kuala Kangsar, Teluk Anson (Teluk Intan today), Batu Gajah and Cameron Highlands. Mr. Frank A. V. Regler conducted several open-air meetings in the children’s playground in Brewster Road. The Reglers were in close fellowship with Mr. and Mrs. James Samuel of Kampar, so this led to Mr. Regler preaching and teaching in the Kampar Gospel Hall regularly and in their children’s meetings.
For about a year, Mr. Regler took the teaching of the word of God to three hundred boys from Forms 1-4 of the Anglo-Chinese School, Ipoh. Mr. David Boler made the arrangement for the special service held at 7:30 am. before the school began. This service was held on four consecutive days of each week during the three school terms and each session lasted half an hour.
In 1960 from March 14-24, a short term Bible School was held in the Mission House, where a good number of the younger brethren attended. Bible teaching was given by several Brethren missionaries. From time to time, Bible camps were held in St. Anthony School (a private institution) in Ipoh, the Government School in Tanah Rata and the Christian Convention Centre (C.C.C.) in Penang.
In 1966 Mr. and Mrs. Frank Regler left Ipoh and retired to England. They had served the Lord faithfully. Their testimonies had contributed to the development of Elim Gospel Hall and other assemblies. Their departure too, marked the end of more than half a century of missionary work in Ipoh and the surrounding region. It also marked the end of foreign missionaries.
The Elim Home from its formation by Mr. and Mrs. George Wilson in 1915 had proved very popular and successful. In those early years, there was slavery or bonded servants, no free education or medical treatment. Girls were not allowed out on their own, or to get an education or to hold jobs. After World War II the whole outlook had changed and many old ideas were thrown away. On the political front, many countries in Asia and Africa started independence movements to fight for self-rule from the colonial powers. Slavery was outlawed and boys as well as girls enjoyed more freedom. Girls had more access to education and travel.
As the economic situation improved and advanced, the churches were able to support the poor families in their areas, so the numbers in the Elim Home decreased. When the girls were fourteen years old and home conditions were suitable, Mrs. Wilson and Miss Phyllis Wilson sent them home to live with their families and helped them with expenses. It was the same with the boys. In this way those children grew wholesomely in a ‘family’ environment. The remaining children were progressively channeled back to families.
Phyllis Wilson kept the Home going as her mother was very concerned for the children even in her old age. After a fall, Mrs. Wilson was weak and feeble for a few years and went to be with the Lord on 14th January 1967 aged 91 in Ipoh. Subsequently Miss Wilson left for New Zealand but returned to Ipoh in December that year. She asked permission from the elders to stay for one year in Ipoh after which she planned to move to some other work. Just then some money was received from the Ding family to build a church in Johor Baru and the missionaries and elders in Kuala Lumpur (stewards of the money) agreed that Miss Wilson could help in Johor Baru to get a suitable place for a Hall and start a testimony there. Miss Phyllis Wilson served in Johor Baru from 1968-1980. In 1980 she made a visit to Ipoh to Elim Gospel Hall for a reunion with old friends before she retired to New Zealand due to health reasons. She went to be with the Lord from New Zealand in December 2002.
In 1968 four brethren in the assembly were appointed deacons, namely Mr. Cheong Nyuk Seng, Mr. Koon Fook Sam, Mr. Edward Low and Mr. Chooi Peng Kwan. At the time there were two elders: Mr. Victor Doss and Mr. Low Ah Yu. In 1970 Mr. Chooi Yew Hong who had been in close fellowship became the third elder. In 1974 the number of elders increased to five with the appointment of Mr. Cheong Nyuk Seng and Mr. Chooi Peng Kwan.
With the growth of Elim and the increasing number of converts, Mr. Kong Yeng Choon, working in Shell Company, Ipoh, was made an elder. He was used by God in the expansion work of Elim Gospel Hall in these years. He led in prayers and preached the gospel. In 1976, he was transferred to Kuala Lumpur and in 1980 migrated with his family to Australia.
In 1955 Mr. Victor Doss commenced preaching and in 1959 became an elder in Elim Gospel Hall. In 1960 he took over the work in Kampar. In 1969 he resigned his job with the Geological Department in Ipoh to become a full time worker and missionary. Mr. Victor Doss served faithfully at Elim Gospel Hall until he retired to Klang in 1987.
Since the first Elim Gospel Hall was built in 1920, it had been shared by both the Chinese and English speaking assemblies. The English worship meeting would start at 8:30 am., followed by the Chinese meeting at 11:00 am. In 1974 the increase in the number of believers made it necessary for new plans to build a bigger hall or for separate halls for the two assemblies.
Immediately the English-speaking assembly launched a building fund for a new hall estimated to cost around RM80,000. However active collection only began in 1976 when the English assembly moved out from the original Elim Gospel Hall to hold their worship service in the Girls Home building, after fifty years of sharing the same premises with the Chinese assembly.
In 1979 under the leadership of Mr. Victor Doss, building plans for the new Elim Gospel Hall were submitted for approval with the Ipoh Town Board. However the project was delayed because of problems which were solved only by April 1981 and construction began. The new Elim Gospel Hall was completed in mid December 1981. By then the total cost of the project including furniture and fitting had risen to RM200,000. Everyone was thrilled to hold the first meeting in the new hall - worship service on Sunday 26th December 1981. The Thanksgiving and Official Opening Ceremony for the new Elim Gospel Hall was held on Saturday 18th June 1982. Mr. W. McVey was invited to give the message.
Meanwhile the Chinese brethren built their own beautiful triple-storey structure on the site of the previous wooden Boys’ Home built in 1925. It was officially opened on 1st May 1987. The first hall built in 1920 has been pulled down in 2002 and now a new concrete building stands in its place (Chinese Assembly Library, Office and Conference Halls) opened on 27th July 2002. Only the Mission House (first building to be built in 1914) and the Girls Home (built in December 1917) are still standing; slowly being worn out by the ravages of time and termites.
In June 1980 after discussion and approval by the Oversight, a new outreach service began in the residential area of Canning Garden-Ipoh Garden in a rented double-storey shophouse on the first floor at 32A Lengkok Canning, Ipoh Garden. This outreach point called Ipoh Garden Gospel Centre went on for sometime and stopped. The key brethren heading this outreach later initiated another assembly.
Before Mr. Victor Doss retired to Klang in late 1987, a working committee was initiated by Victor Doss which later became the Oversight with Leong Sea Fook and Jimmy Ho Chee Meng as elders and Ronny Low Kheng Onn and Wong Leong Yan as deacons. Mr. Jimmy Ho Chee Meng, formerly a Scripture Union Staffworker took over as the Full-time Worker in Elim Gospel Hall starting from 1st January 1988. Later on in an exercise to enhance the leadership in 1989, Fun Chen Cheong and Yap Kok Keong came in as elders and Ho Cheong Ming as deacon.
In 1990 Ronny Low Kheng Onn returned from Gospel Literature Outreach Training School in Tasmania and began serving full-time in Elim Gospel Hall. He was partly assigned to help out the work in Kuala Kangsar Gospel Hall as well. He went for a second term with GLO Training School, Tasmania and went on to serve as a missionary to Samar Island in the Philippines in 1998.
Richard Chin started serving as another Full-time Worker for Elim Gospel Hall in 1991. He serves mainly amongst the Youth and Sunday School as well as managing the audiovisual ministry. In February 1993, three new deacons were added on: Cheam Tong Kan, Jeffrey Suah Ah Kow and Wilson Koo Soo Lok. On May 1996, Jeffrey Suah stepped up to be an elder with Steven Low Kheng Cheang, Lee Kim Seong and N. Asogan coming in as deacons.
Under the leadership and initiative of Leong Sea Fook, an outreach was spearheaded in First Garden beginning with Sunday School in his house in 1994. Weekly Sunday School and Prayer Meetings with Breaking of Bread on the first Sunday of each month followed later. A shoplot was rented for a while in nearby Bandar Baru Menglembu to cater for the bigger number and the variety of activities. Meanwhile the Lord provided two double-storey shoplots in the vicinity of Taman Mas through the sacrifice of His saints and ex-members from Elim Gospel Hall with the help of assemblies throughout Malaysia. The saints had their first meeting in the new premises on 20th October 1996. This assembly named Kledang Community Chapel shared a common Oversight with Elim Gospel Hall. Later as the work advanced and flourished, an Oversight was appointed in Kledang Community Chapel and they became autonomous on 1st January 1997 with Leong Sea Fook and Jeffrey Suah Ah Kow serving as elders, and Ho Cheong Ming, Wong Leong Yan, Lee Kim Seong and Steven Low Kheng Cheang as deacons.
In June 1997 Chun Sam Tuck was added in as an elder of Elim Gospel Hall with William Chang Chee Kai and Wong Kim Siong as deacons. Currently the leaders in Elim Gospel Hall are Chun Sam Tuck and Jimmy Ho Chee Meng as elders with Cheam Tong Kan, William Chang Chee Kai and N. Asogan as deacons. We are in the process of appointing new elders and deacons into our leadership.
The current members of the Kledang Community Chapel’s Oversight are Leong Sea Fook, Lee Kim Seong and Steven Low Kheng Cheang as elders, and Ho Cheong Ming, Wong Leong Yan and Hooi Hou Yuen as deacons.
We have many amongst us who went out as missionaries to foreign lands as well as serving locally. Some serving presently are: Ronny (and Sharon) Low Kheng Onn in Philippines, Jeff Loh (whose wife Fay Lee Ai Lin gave her life on the mission field) in Australia, Loh Lai Keng in Tajikistan, Har, the Yeohs and Richard Chin Weng Seng. Kay Lee Poay Lin, Peter Chang Choong Ching, Steven Low Kheng Cheang and John Yip are serving within our country.
Today Elim Gospel Hall is celebrating its ninetieth anniversary. This year 2003 we are embarking on a new chapter of Elim’s history. We are replacing two of our old buildings. We plan to demolish the Library (formerly the Girls’ Home) and build a multipurpose hall in its place and a two-storey education block where the Elim office now is. The cost of this project stands at RM600,000. Plans have been submitted to Ipoh City Hall (Dewan Bandaraya Ipoh) and various authorities for approval. With God’s help and blessings we shall proceed with our dreams.
To all those who have been a part of Elim Gospel Hall and have come to join us today, as well as those who are still serving, we say “THANK YOU!” with all our hearts - for all your labour of love, your vision and your sacrifice. May GOD BLESS YOU!
©Copyrights Elim Gospel Hall 2005. Undergirded by God's grace.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


text:
P. J. MEEHAN vs. NORTH ADAMS SAVINGS BANK.
An interlocutory decree in a suit in equity in the Superior Court was technically irregular in the following particulars: (a) conclusions of fact contrary to those found by a master were drawn from summaries of evidence made by him under Rule 90 of the Superior Court (1932), instead of an exception to the report on the question involved being sustained; (b)) an order for a final decree was included in the interlocutory decree; (c) the decree purported to pass upon "objections," instead of upon exceptions which resulted therefrom; (d) a blanket statement was made sustaining "objections [exceptions] not inconsistent with the foregoing findings and rulings"; (e) no part of the master's report was confirmed although some exceptions were not sustained.
Questions as to the admission or exclusion of evidence by a master do not come before this court without the filing under Rule 90 of the Superior Court (1932) of specific objections relating thereto: a report of such questions by the master with, appended thereto, an omnibus objection to his rulings on evidence "as referred to" by him is not sufficient.
Evidence that a copy of a letter was found in the files of the writer, that the practice and regulations in the writer's business were that after a letter had been signed the original was sent to his mailing department to be mailed and the copy was filed, and that the copy would not appear in the files unless the original had been duly mailed, warranted a finding that the original had been duly mailed and received by the addressee although he denied having received it.
The mere fact, that a bank, with whom a loan was being negotiated, received from a brokerage firm by whom the borrower was employed a letter stating that it was sending certain shares of stock with a draft for the amount of the loan attached "for the account of" a named person "under advice to him," did not warrant a finding by a master that the bank was thereby put upon notice that the stock sent, which was in the form of "street" certificates, was the "absolute" property of the person named in the letter and not of the borrower, and that the borrower was acting as agent for that person; nor render the bank liable to that person for later releasing the certificates to the borrower.
Where, upon appeals in a suit in equity from an interlocutory decree sustaining several exceptions to a master's report and from a final decree dismissing the bill, the final decree was affirmed by this court by dealing with one exception only, the other exceptions became immaterial and were not considered, and the interlocutory decree was ordered modified by overruling them.
BILL IN EQUITY, filed in the Superior Court on May 21, 1935.
The suit was heard on a master's report by Burns, J., by whose order there were entered an interlocutory decree as to the report and a final decree dismissing the bill. The plaintiff appealed from both decrees.
J. N. Alberti (P. J. Ashe & J. L. Burns with him,) for the plaintiff.
W. A. O'Hearn, for the defendant.
LUMMUS, J. The facts appear in the report of a master. The plaintiff was a clergyman in Greenfield. He was friendly with one Coyne, a young man in his parish, and trusted him. Coyne was a "customers' man" for Goodbody & Co., a stock brokerage house in New York with a branch office at North Adams in charge of one Dudley. The plaintiff closed out his account with another brokerage house, and through Coyne opened a margin account with Goodbody & Co. on September 27, 1927. He did all his business with Goodbody & Co. through Coyne. At the close of business on October 28, 1929, Goodbody & Co. held for the plaintiff securities of the market value of $69,225, against which the plaintiff owed them $46,411.19, leaving an equity in the account worth $22,813.81. The account was short $536.19 of the margin required by Goodbody & Co., but apparently that caused no anxiety.
On the next day, October 29, 1929, a crash in the stock market took place. Coyne told the plaintiff that the securities in his account would be sold out unless $10,000 should be deposited as additional margin with Goodbody & Co. But Coyne told the plaintiff that because of Coyne's relations with an officer of the defendant bank Coyne could borrow the needed $10,000, and even more, from that bank for the plaintiff, upon collateral security consisting of two thousand shares of stock in the Kelvinator Corporation held in the margin account. The Kelvinator Corporation is incorporated in Michigan, which has adopted the uniform stock transfer act, and consequently the transfer in Massachusetts of stock of that corporation is governed by our uniform stock transfer act. Edgerly v. First National Bank of Boston, 292 Mass. 181, 184-185.
It was arranged that Coyne would borrow from the defendant bank $15,000 for the plaintiff upon the security of the two thousand shares of Kelvinator stock, and pay the $15,000 to Goodbody & Co. in reduction of the amount due them upon the margin account.
received the certificates from that bank, and held them as collateral for its loan to Coyne. Up to this point, therefore, the plaintiff received all the benefit from the $15,003.80 borrowed by Coyne from the defendant, for the plaintiff's debt to Goodbody & Co. was reduced by that amount.
Notice of the coming due of instalments of interest was given by the defendant to Coyne. From time to time the plaintiff paid interest on the loan by giving to Coyne his own check payable to the defendant, whereupon Coyne gave it to the defendant. In this way the interest was paid to October 30, 1933. The plaintiff in the same way paid about $9,500 on the principal. But on December 13, 1934, the plaintiff made a written demand upon the defendant for the return of the two thousand shares of Kelvinator stock, stating that he was prepared to pay the debt against which it was held. This was the first written communication between the parties. The plaintiff has never received the stock or learned the amount of the debt. The balance of debt due on August 3, 1934, was $5,437.50.
What happened to the Kelvinator stock held by the defendant as security? As early as November 12, 1929, the defendant gave back to Coyne three hundred shares as unnecessary to its security. The other seventeen hundred shares were from time to time surrendered by the defendant to Coyne. Many of them were sold by Coyne through Goodbody & Co., but the defendant received none of the proceeds. The plaintiff knew nothing about the withdrawal of the shares or the disposition of them, and authorized neither.
knew that Leo Coyne was acting for and in behalf of the plaintiff and that the plaintiff was the absolute owner of . . . 2000 shares of Kelvinator subject only to the lien of Goodbody & Co. on it, and that the aforesaid loan of $15,003.80 was carried in the name of Leo Coyne for his convenience with the knowledge and approval of one of the officers of the defendant that it was for the benefit of the plaintiff."
the bill with costs followed. The plaintiff appealed from both decrees.
Technically the course taken was irregular. (a) The judge, under Rule 90 of the Superior Court (1932) had no right to draw conclusions of fact from the summaries of the evidence reported by the master under that rule. The judge could use those summaries only for the purpose of determining whether a particular finding was warranted by the evidence as matter of law. Morin v. Clark, 296 Mass. 479, 482-483. It seems that the judge did no more than that; but the accurate mode of expressing a decision that a finding is not so warranted is by sustaining an exception taking the point. (b) An order for a final decree has no proper place in an interlocutory decree dealing with a master's report. (c) "Objections" are properly neither sustained nor overruled; the exceptions which impliedly result therefrom should be sustained or overruled. Rule 90 of the Superior Court (1932). Pearson v. Mulloney, 289 Mass. 508, 514. (d) The sustaining of "the defendant's objections [exceptions] not inconsistent with the foregoing findings and rulings" burdens us with the task of studying all the defendant's exceptions, and discovering which ones are "not inconsistent" with the judge's "findings and rulings." Exceptions ought to be sustained or overruled specifically. (e) Furthermore, since a final decree was ordered upon facts established only by a master's report, the judge evidently intended to confirm the report as modified by the sustaining of the exceptions, and impliedly did so; but by the better practice that should have been done by interlocutory decree. Simpson v. Bright, 257 Mass. 309, 330. Druker v. Druker, 268 Mass. 334, 342. A master's report can have no effect until confirmed. North Carolina Railroad v. Swasey, 23 Wall. 405. C. A. Briggs Co. v. National Wafer Co. 215 Mass. 100, 108.
We must therefore discover how the defendant's exceptions have affected the master's findings.
by reporting the questions of evidence saved during the hearing, duly saved them for the parties. The only reference to them in the objections brought in was of an omnibus character. [Note 1] Even though the questions and the evidence upon which they are based are fully reported by the master, no question of evidence is presented for the consideration of the judge or of this court without an objection, specifically addressed to the particular question of evidence, brought in under Rule 90 of the Superior Court (1932). Arnold v. Maxwell, 230 Mass. 441, 444. Commissioner of Banks v. Tremont Trust Co. 267 Mass. 331, 336, 337. Pearson v. Mulloney, 289 Mass. 508, 512, 513.
Nevertheless the judge appears to have sustained a supposed exception to the admission of a copy of a letter from Goodbody & Co., addressed to the defendant, dated October 31, 1929, which mentioned the plaintiffs name, as already stated in this opinion. The importance of this copy is that it formed the basis for the finding that the original letter was received by the defendant. An accountant for Goodbody & Co. testified that the copy was found in the files of that company; that the practice and regulations of that company were that after a letter had been signed the original was sent to the mailing department to be mailed and the copy was filed; and that the copy would not appear in the files unless the original had been duly mailed. The defendant denied the receipt of the original. An exception to the admission of this copy should not have been sustained. The master could infer that the original had been duly mailed. Prudential Trust Co. v. Hayes, 247 Mass. 311.
Whitney Wagon Works v. Moore, 61 Vt. 230. Hastings v. Brooklyn Life Ins. Co. 138 N.Y. 473. Farmers' State Bank & Trust Co. of Gorman v. Central State Bank of Dallas, 281 S.W. 632 (Texas Civ. App.). Myers v. Moore-Kile Co. 279 Fed. 233, 25 Am. L. R. 1, and note. Prescott, Wright, Snider Co. v. Cherryvale, 134 Kans. 53. See also Santarpio v. New York Life Ins. Co. 301 Mass. 207, 209. Compare William Gardam & Son v. Batterson, 198 N.Y. 175, 19 Ann. Cas. 649; Cook v. Phillips, 109 N.J. L. 371, 86 Am. L. R. 539. He could also infer that it had been received by the defendant. Avisais's Case, 285 Mass. 56, 58. The action of the judge in this respect was erroneous.
The defendant brought in an objection, numbered 14, to the finding of the master, quoted earlier in this opinion, that the defendant knew that Coyne "was acting for and in behalf of the plaintiff and that the plaintiff was the absolute owner of . . . 2000 shares of Kelvinator . . .," on the ground that the finding was neither supported by the subsidiary facts found nor warranted by the evidence. Upon the last point, that the evidence was not "sufficient in law to support" the finding, the conditions of Rule 90 of the Superior Court (1932) having been met, the master came under the duty to "append to his report, for the sole purpose of enabling the court to determine such question of law, a brief, accurate and fair summary of so much of the evidence as shall be necessary for such purpose." The master purported to discharge this duty in these words: "Reference is made to the entire summary given herein plus the subsidiary fact and the express inference drawn by the master as set forth in paragraph 16 . . . of the report." These references are (a) to summaries of evidence relating to many different exceptions, comprising twelve pages of the printed record, and (b) to the very paragraph of the report already quoted, which contains the finding to which the objection was addressed. Apparently the exception which resulted from this objection was one of those which the judge sustained. It goes to the vitals of the case.
which the finding could have been based was the letter from Goodbody & Co. to the defendant dated October 31, 1929, which mentioned the plaintiff's name. We do not discuss a communication from Goodbody & Co. to the defendant on December 9, 1929, which also contained the plaintiff's name, for that was less informative than the letter of October 31, 1929. The letter, which we must treat as having been sent and received, informed the defendant that Goodbody & Co. was forwarding to a New York bank "with draft attached, two-thousand shares Kelvinator Corporation, in the amount of $15,003.80 for the account of P. J. Meehan, Esq., 133 Main Street, Greenfield, Mass., under advice to him," and requested the defendant to "honor our draft upon presentation." That letter did not warrant a finding that the defendant knew that Coyne was acting merely as agent for the plaintiff, that the plaintiff was the real borrower, and that the plaintiff owned the stock. Street certificates are often "lent" by the holder and owner to another to enable that other to pass title to them for his own benefit, the only obligation being to replace them with similar certificates and sometimes to pay for the use of them. The defendant might know from the letter that the plaintiff had ordered the delivery of the certificates to the defendant, but that did not fasten upon the defendant any such knowledge of the entire transaction as the master found. See Equitable Trust Co. v. Rochling, 275 U.S. 248. For all the defendant knew, Coyne owned the certificates, or had full power of disposition of them. The defendant took a good title as pledgee, for value and in good faith. G.L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 155, Sections 27 (a), 31, 34, 43, 44. Edgerly v. First National Bank of Boston, 292 Mass. 181. Ironside v. Levi, 278 Mass. 18. Ripley v. J. Murray Walker & Co. Inc. 286 Mass. 264. DeBoer v. Anthony, 300 Mass. 403. When it saw fit to release the certificates, it was entitled to deliver them back to Coyne, or even to accept them as collateral upon other indebtedness of his.
to discover which of the other exceptions were in truth sustained by the cryptic interlocutory decree, and we overrule the other exceptions as unimportant in view of the decision. Central Trust Co. of New York v. Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway, 57 Fed. 441, 450. Montague v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 124 Mass. 242, 249. Cushman v. Noe, 242 Mass. 496, 502.
The interlocutory decree is to be modified by sustaining the defendant's fourteenth exception to the master's report and by overruling all others; by confirming the master's report as so modified; and by omitting the order for a final decree; and as so modified the interlocutory decree is affirmed. The final decree is affirmed with costs.
[Note 1] There was a finding numbered 27 in the master's report as follows: "27. Certain exceptions were taken by each of the parties to the master's rulings in regard to the admission or exclusion of evidence. A list of such exceptions is appended to this report and made a part hereof." Under a heading, "Exceptions of the Defendant," the master stated the circumstances of the admission in evidence of the letter of October 31, 1929, from Goodbody & Co. to the defendant and that an exception of the defendant to its admission was "saved". An objection of the defendant appended to the master's report and numbered 21 was as follows: "21. The defendant objects to the master's rulings in regard to the admission or exclusion of evidence wherein it took certain exceptions as referred to in finding numbered 27 of the master's report and attaches hereto a request for the master to report the defendant's exceptions saved during the taking of the evidence before the master, to the court, as required by the order of reference, and under the provisions of Rule 90 of Superior Court Rules (1932)."

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


Paul G. Schepers, argued, Kansas City, Missouri (James R. Lloyd II, Kansas City, Missouri, on the brief), for appellant.
Dale L. Beckerman, argued, Kansas City, Missouri (Brian G. Fedotin, Kansas City, Missouri, on the brief), for appellee.
Before SMITH, HEANEY and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Appellants National Research Center for College and University Admissions, and its president Donald M. Munce (collectively "the NRCCUA"), survey high-school students and distribute the results to colleges and universities for the purposes of recruitment and admissions.
In 2001, the Federal Trade Commission began investigating the survey's funding, and the use of survey data for commercial purposes not disclosed to students. The FTC notified the NRCCUA that it intended to seek all remedies available, including recovery of civil damages. In a consent decree, the FTC eventually ordered the NRCCUA to stop misrepresentations and to make clear and conspicuous disclosures. The NRCCUA made no money payments under the FTC order.
Several state attorneys general then investigated the NRCCUA for violations of their consumer-protection laws, initially requesting only documents. Eventually, the Iowa Attorney General, acting also for 26 other states, demanded that the NRCCUA pay $300,000 as part of an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance. The Missouri Attorney General, after a separate investigation, requested that the NRCCUA pay $20,000 in another Assurance. In addition to these sums, the NRCCUA incurred its own attorney's fees responding to the states and the FTC.
[State Farm] will pay those sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages because of . . . personal injury or advertising injury to which this insurance applies. . . .
[State Farm] will have the right and duty to defend any claim or suit seeking damages payable under this policy even though the allegations of the suit may be groundless, false or fraudulent.
The Policy does not define the term "damages."
State Farm asked the district court to declare that the Policy does not require it to reimburse, defend, or indemnify the NRCCUA for any payment in response to the FTC and the states. The NRCCUA counterclaimed, seeking a declaration that the Policy requires State Farm to pay and indemnify it for all costs and expenses incurred in defending those complaints. The court granted summary judgment for State Farm, finding that the claims against the NRCCUA were not for "damages" under the Policy. The NRCCUA appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
This court reviews de novo the district court's grant of summary judgment. See Pieper, Inc. v. Land O'Lakes Farmland Feed, LLC, 390 F.3d 1062, 1065 (8th Cir. 2004). The parties stipulated to the facts, both moved for summary judgment, and agree there is no genuine issue of material fact. Summary judgment is therefore proper if either party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). The district court's interpretation of a provision in an insurance policy is reviewed de novo. Pac. Ins. Co. v. Burnet Title, Inc., 380 F.3d 1061, 1064 (8th Cir. 2004). This court applies Missouri law in this diversity case. Id.
State Farm argues that the payments sought are not covered under the Policy because they are not caused by "personal injury" or "advertising injury." The Policy defines both terms to include "oral or written publication of material that violates a person's right of privacy." The Policy does not define the term "privacy." According to State Farm, no relief was sought from the NRCCUA for violation of privacy.
A. Information collected from high school students through the Survey is shared not only with colleges, universities, and other entities provided educational-related services, but also with commercial entities for marketing purposes.
B. The survey is not funded solely by educational institutions, but also receives substantial funding from ASL and ECI for commercial purposes. Therefore, the representations set forth in [the Survey] were, and are, false and misleading.
The Missouri Attorney General alleged in its Assurance of Voluntary Compliance that the NRCCUA has released personally identifiable information by selling it to commercial third-parties not disclosed to the students. Similarly, the Iowa Attorney General alleged that the NRCCUA, in violation of its own privacy statement, shared students' information with commercial entities.
This court agrees with the district court that the FTC and the state attorneys general allege a personal injury for invasion of privacy. Webster's Third New International Dictionary (1966) defines "privacy" as "isolation, seclusion, or freedom from unauthorized oversight or observation." This ordinary, lay definition encompasses the investigating entities' allegations. See Farmland Indus., Inc. v. Republic Ins. Co., 941 S.W.2d 505, 508 (Mo. banc 1997); cf. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Lou Fusz Auto. Network, Inc., 401 F.3d 876, 881 (8th Cir. 2005) (unsolicited faxes are "invasions of privacy"). Gathering and disseminating personal information beyond disclosed terms arguably violates "privacy," as evidenced by the "Privacy Statement" at the bottom of the NRCCUA's surveys. State Farm objects at length that the gravamen of the investigating entities' complaints is "misrepresentations," but the Policy covers occurrences which result in personal injury or advertising injury. The claims against the NRCCUA allege such occurrences.
The district court ruled that State Farm had no duty to defend because the payments sought in this case are fines and penalties, and thus not do qualify as "damages" under the policy. It relied on the Missouri Supreme Court's decision in Farmland Industries, Inc. v. Republic Insurance Co., which states that "fines" and "penalties" are not "damages." See Farmland, 941 S.W.2d at 510-11.
To determine coverage, this court compares the allegations in the underlying claims to the language of the insurance policy. See Reliance Ins. Co., 81 F.3d at 791-92, citing Benningfield, 561 S.W.2d at 736. Uncertainty about coverage is resolved in favor of the insured, here the NRCCUA. See Howard v. Russell Stover Candies, Inc., 649 F.2d 620, 623 (8th Cir. 1981).
Reference to standard English language dictionaries reveals that "damages" means "the estimated reparation in money for detriment or injury sustained." WEBSTER'S THIRD NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY 571 (1961). Webster's also defines "damages" as "compensation or satisfaction imposed by law for a wrong or injury caused by a violation of a legal right." Id. These definitions of "damages," those that a layperson would reasonably understand "damages" to mean, are broad and inclusive. The ordinary meaning of damages, therefore, includes environmental response costs required by the government.
Respondents nevertheless argue that "damages" does not include equitable relief even if "damages" is given its ordinary meaning. Respondents contend that the government has ordered that Farmland undertake specific actions in this case, such as investigating, planning, and cleaning up pollution. Respondents argue that such actions are not the "money equivalent for detriment or injuries sustained;" therefore, they are not "damages."
Respondents' argument fails. The definitions of "damages" do not distinguish between legal damages and equitable relief. Farmland's cost of undertaking the actions required by the government under CERCLA or similar state laws are "damages" within the ordinary meaning of the term. In other words, the equitable relief at issue is a cost that Farmland is legally obligated to pay as compensation or satisfaction for a wrong or injury.
State Farm tries to distinguish Farmland, arguing that in this case there is no "compensable injury, i.e., injury of a type that might give rise to a damage payment within the meaning of Farmland," and that the payments will not be used "to compensate an aggrieved party for past wrongs." State Farm emphasizes the fact that no specific person has complained or been identified.
Farmland controls this case. The damages there, for environmental response costs required by the government, benefitted the public at large, not an identifiable victim. Yet, the Missouri Supreme Court held that the environmental response costs were "damages," or "compensation or satisfaction for a wrong or injury." Id. at 509. Equally in this case, the civil damages sought by the FTC would benefit the public at large, and thus are "damages" under the Policy.
The initial requests for documents from the attorneys general do not mention payments at all, and thus do not trigger the duty to defend under the Policy. The Assurances of Voluntary Compliance, in contrast, are claims seeking money payments. This issue is whether these money payments are "damages" under the Policy.
As for the sums demanded by the Missouri Attorney General, the NRCCUA is to pay $5,000 to the "Missouri Merchandising Practices Revolving Fund for use by the Attorney General to reimburse attorney fees and other costs of the investigation leading to this Assurance and for funding for consumer education, investigations and litigation as allowed by law."
Missouri courts have held that payments to the Revolving Fund for the Attorney General's investigatory cost, attorneys fees and incidental expenses are "clearly punitive in nature" and are penalties and forfeitures. See State ex rel. Webster v. Cornelius, 729 S.W.2d 60, 65-66 (Mo.Ct.App. 1987); cf. State v. Polley, 2 S.W.3d 887, 894-95 (Mo.Ct.App.1999) (reimbursement of "the Attorney General's costs of investigation and prosecution" discussed as "penalties"). The Merchandising Practices Act is remedial as it relates to restitution and injunctive relief, but penal as it relates to claims for investigation and prosecution costs. See State ex rel. Webster v. Myers, 779 S.W.2d 286, 289-90 (Mo.Ct.App.1989). True, Missouri courts have not addressed whether payments to the Revolving Fund for "consumer education" are remedies or penalties. However, "consumer education" appears more like the items the Missouri courts label as "penalties" than the "restitution and injunctive relief" that are classified as remedies.
The payments demanded by the Iowa Attorney General (on behalf of 26 other states) are stipulated to be for "attorneys' fees and investigative costs, consumer education, litigation, public protection or local consumer aid funds." These purposes are nearly identical as those of the Missouri Attorney General. The parties discuss authority from many jurisdictions addressing whether the payments to Iowa (and the other states) are "damages." However, in this appeal from a Missouri forum, Missouri law governs the interpretation of a policy issued there to a Missouri corporation, with its principal place of business and principal risk in the state. See Highwoods Properties, Inc. v. Executive Risk Indem., Inc., 407 F.3d 917, 920 (8th Cir. 2005), citing Superior Equip. Co., Inc. v. Maryland Cas. Co., 986 S.W.2d 477, 480-81 (Mo.Ct.App.1998). The analysis above of the payments to the Missouri Revolving Fund dictates that similar payments to other states are not covered as "damages" under the Policy.
The Missouri Attorney General, in the Assurance of Voluntary Compliance, also requests payment of $15,000 to the "Custodian of the Public School Fund." The Assurance does not further detail the payment. True, the public school funds receive all fines and penalties for violations of the penal laws. See Mo. Const., art. IX, §§ 5, 7; Reorganized School Dist. No. 7 Lafayette County v. Douthit, 799 S.W.2d 591, 593 (Mo. banc 1990). See generally §§ 54.160, 166.131 Mo.Rev.Stat. (2000) (establishing county funds). However, the facts in the Assurance show that the personal injury was to high-school students, and that the Missouri Attorney General has information that the NRCCUA has released personally identifiable information by selling it to commercial third-parties not disclosed to the students. The payment to the public school fund is compensation or satisfaction for that injury. Under Farmland, the payment to the Public School Fund is "damages" under the Policy.
Finally, as the NRCCUA first informed State Farm of the allegations one month after the proposed consent agreement was reached, State Farm asserts that the NRCCUA failed to notify it promptly of the claims at issue. The Policy states that the NRCCUA must provide "prompt written notice" of any claim or suit. The Policy also provides: "Except at their own cost, no insureds will voluntarily make a payment, assume any obligation or incur any expense . . . without [State Farm's] consent."
Under Missouri law, however, an insurer cannot deny a claim based on the insured's failure to provide timely notice unless the insurer proves "actual prejudice resulting from the untimely notice." Weaver v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 936 S.W.2d 818 (Mo. banc.1997). Because State Farm has not alleged prejudice from any delay in providing notice, it cannot deny coverage on that basis.
In sum, because the FTC sought all remedies available—including civil damages—State Farm had a duty to defend against the FTC's claims. The payments sought by the Iowa Attorney General (on behalf of the other states) are not covered as "damages" under the Policy. State Farm had no duty to defend against that Assurance of Voluntary Compliance.
The payments to the Revolving Fund requested by the Missouri Attorney General are not "damages," but the payment to the Public School Fund is "damages" under the Policy. Under Missouri law, a duty to defend arises even though claims beyond coverage are present with potentially insured claims. See Truck Ins. Exchange v. Prairie Framing, LLC, 162 S.W.3d 64, 79 (Mo.Ct.App.2005), citing Superior Equip. Co. v. Maryland Cas. Co., 986 S.W.2d 477, 482 (Mo.Ct.App.1998). Therefore, State Farm had a duty to defend against the Assurance presented by the Missouri Attorney General.
The district court's judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and the case remanded.


While working on another article I came across the case below. I’ve written articles recently about debt relief companies and the exposure of Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims.
“1. Defendant Rescue 1 Financial, LLC (“Defendant” or “Rescue 1”) is a national financial services company that focuses on consumer debt management such as: debt settlement, debt consolidation and other bankruptcy alternatives.
2. To attract customers, Defendant advertises via radio, print and online. Defendant collects and stores data, including cellular telephone numbers, for the purpose of sending automated blast messages promoting its products to consumers’ mobile phones in the form of Short Message Service (“SMS”) text messages, the text messaging service component of mobile telephones.
3. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. and its implementing regulations, 47 C.F.R. §64.1200, et seq. prohibit companies, such as Defendant, from sending automated SMS text messages to mobile telephones without first obtaining consent. Defendant has violated, and continues to violate, the TCPA and its regulations by sending automated SMS text messages to cellular telephone subscribers who have not expressly consented to receiving such messages.
“[i]f the call is intended to offer property, goods, or services for sale either during the call, or in the future (such as in response to a message that provides a toll-free number), that call is an advertisement. Similarly, a message that seeks to help sell or market a business’ products, constitutes an advertisement if the individuals are encouraged to purchase, rent or invest in property, goods, or services during or after the call. In the Matter of Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, 2003 WL 21517853, 18 F.C.C.R. 14014 at¶ 142 (FCC July 3, 2003).
5. By sending such SMS marketing text messages to consumers, Defendant has caused consumers actual harm, including the aggravation and privacy invasion that accompanies receiving unsolicited text messages. In particular, consumers are damaged by having to pay cellular telephone service providers for the receipt of Defendant’s Complaint for Damages Pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq. unsolicited text messages and must endure the aggravation and nuisance that accompanies the receipt of unwanted text messages.
6. Plaintiff brings this suit under the TCPA on behalf of himself and a class of similarly situated persons. Plaintiff and the class seek an award of statutory damages, together with costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.
12. In recent years, marketers, who often felt stymied by federal or state laws limiting solicitations, have looked to alternative technologies through which to send bulk solicitations cheaply. One of the newest types of bulk marketing is through SMS. SMS allows marketers to send (and receive) short messages, usually limited to 160 characters, to (and from) cellular telephone subscriber’s cellular telephone devices.
13. An SMS message is directed to a wireless device through use of the device’s assigned telephone number. The message sender’s telephone number is preserved as part of the recipient’s message, so that the recipient knows, at least by number, who is sending the message. When an SMS message is successful, the recipient’s cellular phone typically rings, alerting him or her that the phone is receiving a text message. As cellular telephones are inherently mobile and are frequently carried on their owner’s person, calls to cellular telephones, including SMS messages, may be received by the called party virtually anywhere worldwide.
14. The use of SMS messaging (known colloquially as “text messaging”) has become ever present in the United States.
15. Marketers have seized on this billion-dollar industry as a vast marketing and exposure opportunity. Using SMS technology, companies and individuals can now extend the promotional reach of their products, brands, services and ideas to potentially millions of consumers, almost instantaneously. And, with SMS technology, marketers know with near certainty that their message is received.
16. Many companies, including Defendant, use automated computer equipment to send bulk SMS text messages to cellular telephone subscribers using a unique five or six digit number called “short code,” as opposed to using an ordinary ten-digit telephone number. U.S. companies obtain short code numbers form an independent agency, Neustar, Inc. (“Neustar”), which manages and assigns U.S. short code numbers in order to run automated mobile text messaging applications.
17. Unlike conventional solicitations, SMS text messages actually cost the recipients of the marketing messages money. Cellular telephone users must pay their respective wireless service providers to receive text messages, either for each individual text message or as part of a specified (and often limited) messaging plan, regardless of whether or not the incoming message is authorized.
18. By sending such SMS text messages to consumers, Defendant has caused consumers actual harm, including the aggravation and privacy invasion that accompanies receiving unsolicited text messages. Moreover, consumers are damaged by having to pay cellular telephone service providers for the receipt of Defendant’s unsolicited text messages.
19. Pursuant to the TCPA, a company must obtain consent before sending automated SMS text messages to a cellular telephone. See 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. In many instances, Defendant’s SMS text messages sent to consumers’ cellular telephones violate the TCPA because the telephone owner did not expressly consent to receiving the SMS text messages.
22. The purpose of Defendant’s website submission page is to solicit potential clients and encourage potential clients to retain Defendant for the services described on the website submission page.
23. Nowhere on Defendant’s website submission page, www.rescueonefinancial.com, are there any customer service elements that would be utilized by existing customers such as an existing client login account or customer service contact information. The sole purpose of the website submission page that Plaintiff visited was for the marketing of Defendant’s services and to generate sales for Defendant.
24. On or after May, 2014, Plaintiff contacted Defendant for a consultation via its online website submission page.
25. At no time did Plaintiff speak with any of Defendant’s representatives nor did Plaintiff submit a loan application or personal financial materials of any kind to Defendant. The only information Plaintiff provided to Defendant was his first and last name, cellular telephone number, and email address.
Text No. 1: oval, please check ur spam/junk folders if u don’t see it,my phone # is 949 274-8346. Thanks!
Text No. 3: This is David Miller with Rescue 1 Financial are you still interested into following up on your online loan inquiry?
28. The SMS short code number for all of the unauthorized text messages that Plaintiff received was 244-13.
29. The content of the text messages Plaintiff received was generic, impersonal and commercial in nature, indicating that they were sent to a group of consumers en masse.
30. The first text message received by Plaintiff in which “Marii” inquired about his “recent loan application” was disingenuous due to the fact that Plaintiff had not at any time submitted a loan application. Additionally, the text from “Marii” did not address Plaintiff by his name, which indicates that a template was used by Defendant. The text from “Marii” was purely commercial in nature and the purpose of the text message was to promote Defendant’s goods and services to Plaintiff.
31. Defendant did not at any time request or obtain Plaintiff’s prior express consent to receive unsolicited text messages utilizing a prerecorded, artificial voice or ATDS, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A).
32. The telephone number that Defendant, or its agents, texted was assigned to a cellular telephone service for which Plaintiff incurs a charge for incoming calls pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227 (b)(1).
34. The text messages from Defendant, or its agents, constituted calls that were not for emergency purposes as defined by 47 U.S.C. §227 (b)(1)(A)(i).
35. Defendant sent these text messages via an automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 227(a)(1).
37. This ATDS utilized by Defendant also has the capacity to automatically dial telephone numbers from a list or database of telephone numbers without human intervention.
38. The text messages from Defendant also constitute artificial or prerecorded voice calls pursuant to 47 U.S.C. §227(a)(1).


1. A disclosure made by a witness not amounting to an actual admission of guilt or of incriminating facts does not deprive him of his privilege of stopping short in his testimony whenever it may fairly tend to incriminate him. P. 262 U. S. 358.
2. This rule applies to the involuntary examination of a bankrupt. Id.
3. Where the only issue presented by the marshal's return, or passed upon by the district court in a habeas corpus proceeding was whether the relator, who had been imprisoned for refusal to answer questions propounded in his examination as a bankrupt upon the ground that they might incriminate him, had waived his privilege in that regard, and contentions as to whether some of the questions were such that the answers could not have incriminated him and as to whether his claim of privilege was not in good faith were first made on appeal to this Court from the order of the district court discharging him in the habeas corpus, held that this Court was not called upon to scrutinize the voluminous record of his examination and decide for the first time whether such contentions were justified, especially as the district judge, in the contempt proceeding, had expressed his opinion that answers to the questions might furnish incriminating information. P. 262 U. S. 360.
Appeal from an order of the district court discharging the appellee in habeas corpus.
This is an appeal from an order of the district court sustaining a writ of habeas corpus and discharging the appellee from custody. It involves the same proceeding which was before this Court at an earlier stage in Arndstein v. McCarthy, 254 U. S. 71 and 254 U. S. 379.
Arndstein, having been adjudicated an involuntary bankrupt and called before a special commissioner for examination as to his assets under Section 21a of the Bankruptcy Act, refused to answer 447 of the questions which were asked him, asserting his constitutional privilege upon the ground that to do so might tend to degrade and incriminate him. The district judge, having "no doubt that the answers might furnish information which would render him liable to prosecutions in the federal courts for concealment of assets," denied a motion to punish him for contempt. After his examination, however, Arndstein filed, without objection, sworn schedules of his assets and liabilities, showing only one item of property, namely, a bank deposit of $18,000. Thereupon, the district judge, being of opinion that Arndstein thus asserted not only that he had this bank deposit, but also that he had no other property, and had thereby become subject to examination as to his property, ordered him to answer 426 of the former questions. Being recalled for further examination, he again refused to answer them, upon the same ground as before. He was then adjudged to be guilty of contempt of court and committed to the custody of the marshal for confinement in jail so long as he persisted in his refusal to answer.
of the federal Constitution. This petition was held to be insufficient, and the writ was refused. Upon an appeal by Arndstein, this Court held that as the schedules did not amount to an admission of guilt or furnish clear proof of crime, they did not constitute a waiver of his right to stop short whenever he could fairly claim that to answer might tend to incriminate him, and the order of the district court was accordingly reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings in conformity with the opinion. Arndstein v. McCarthy, supra, pp. 254 U. S. 72-73. In a supplemental memorandum (p. 254 U. S. 379), it was added that this decision only required the district court to issue the writ and proceed as usual, and that, if proper reasons existed for holding Arndstein not shown by the petition, they might be set up in the return for consideration.
refuse to testify further about his property, and that he was at liberty to cease disclosures, even though some had been made, whenever there was just ground to believe the answers might tend to incriminate him, and it accordingly sustained the writ and discharged him from custody. The marshal, by reason of the constitutional question involved, has appealed directly to this Court. Jud.Code, § 208; Boske v. Comingore, 177 U. S. 459, 177 U. S. 465; Collins v. Miller, 252 U. S. 364, 252 U. S. 365, 252 U. S. 371; Arndstein v. McCarthy, supra, p. 254 U. S. 72.
"The schedules, standing alone, did not amount to an admission of guilt or furnish clear proof of crime, and the mere filing of them did not constitute a waiver of the right to stop short whenever the bankrupt could fairly claim that to answer might tend to incriminate him. See Brown v. Walker, 161 U. S. 591, 161 U. S. 597; Foster v. People, 18 Mich. 266, 274; People v. Forbes, 143 N.Y. 219, 230; Regina v. Garbett, 2 C. & K. 474, 495."
stop, but must go on and make a full disclosure;"
in Foster v. People, the court, while holding that a witness who has voluntarily admitted his guilt of a criminal offense is not protected from further disclosures on the same subject, said that if he has not actually admitted criminating facts, he "may unquestionably stop short at any point, and determine that he will go no further in that direction;" in People v. Forbes, 143 N.Y. 219, it was held that a witness, by answering questions exonerating himself in general terms from all connection with a criminal transaction, does not thereby waive his right to remain silent when it is thereafter sought to draw from him circumstances which might form another link in the chain of facts capable of being used to his peril, and in Regina v. Garbett, it was held that it makes no difference in the right of a witness to protection from incriminating himself that he has already answered in part, he "being entitled to claim the privilege at any stage of the inquiry."
opinion that he was entitled to decline to answer further questions when so to do might tend to incriminate him.
2. The marshal also contends that, in many instances, the questions which Arndstein refused to answer were plainly of such a character that the answers could not have incriminated him, and that his whole testimony shows that he was not making his claim of privilege in good faith, but largely in obedience to suggestions of his counsel, who in some instances claimed the privilege for him. It is, however, a sufficient answer to this contention that no such reasons for denying the writ were set up in the marshal's return, or, so far as it appears, brought to the attention of the district court or ruled upon by it. And in such case, we are not called upon, on appeal, to examine, as with a microscope, the multitudinous questions in issue, involved in an unduly protracted examination, containing many vain and futile repetitions, much of which does not appear to have had any relation to a discovery of assets of the bankrupt, but was of such character as to suggest that the underlying purpose was the discovery of evidence to support the charge of grand larceny for which Arndstein had been indicted in the state court, or to determine, as original questions in this Court, matters not in issue under the pleadings in the district court or determined by that court.
Arndstein v. McCarthy, supra, p. 254 U. S. 72.


text:
Cincinnati v. Flannery, 176 Ohio App. 3d 181, 2008-Ohio-1437 – Iraq War protestors were arrested for criminal trespass hours after Congressman Chabot‘s office had closed. He was in D.C. They insisted he sign a document expressing support for a speedy end to the war. Necessity doesn‘t fly as a defense. ¶7: The harm the protestors sought to avoid was not a 'legal' harm because the war was not shown to be illegal."
Scheidler v. National Organization for Women (2003), 123 S.Ct. 1057 -- R.I.C.O. class action against abortion protesters fails as the predicate acts were not established. Protestors did not commit extortion as they did not seek to obtain property.
Hill v. Colorado (2000), 120 S.Ct. 2480 -- Provision barring approach within eight feet of persons near health care facilities found narrowly tailored, content-neutral, neither vague or overly broad, and not a prior restraint on speech.
State v. Cephus, 161 Ohio App. 3d 385, 2005-Ohio-2752 -- Dayton ordinance proscribing boisterous conduct interfering with a city commission meeting held not to be unconstitutionally vague, or violate First Amendment rights. Testimony concerning prior disruptive acts properly admitted as similar acts evidence. The offense does not merge with disorderly conduct.
State v. Logsdon, 160 Ohio App. 3d 517, 2005-Ohio-1875 -- Abortion protestor's sign was carried into a clinic by the executive director. Sign's owner was privileged to enter the premises and retrieve it. Criminal trespass conviction reversed.
Cincinnati v. Summers, Hamilton App. No. C-020624, 2003-Ohio-2773 -- Disorderly conduct conviction was not supported by the evidence. At ¶ 8: "Simply protesting within the limits of the law did not reasonably support the inference that Summers was insulting, taunting, or challenging passing motorists. Further, from out review of the record, we hold that peacefully protesting in a crosswalk while raising a small bat in the air and yelling 'Black Power,' without swinging the bat so as to hit a passing vehicle, was not something that was likely to provoke a violent response."
State v. Wolf, Hamilton App. No. C-030957, 2004-Ohio-5053 -- Demonstrator blocked traffic on a downtown street, and refused to move out of the way at an officer's request. Evidence would have supported a conviction for obstructing official business, but court found her guilty of disorderly conduct. Disorderly held not to be a lesser-included offense.
Cleveland v. Swieciki, 149 Ohio App. 3d 77, 2002-Ohio-4027 -- Baseball fan was charged with disorderly and resisting after heckling an Indians left fielder. (1) Merely being seen drinking beer did not establish the intoxication element. (2) Nor was the alarm or offense element proved. Fans are invited to cheer. At ¶24: "Appropriate conduct in this type of setting differs from what may be appropriate in church...(T)he words uttered by Swieciki to voice his displeasure at Branyan's lack of speed in a baseball game can hardly be perceived as offensive to ordinary sensibilities rising to the level of criminal disorderly conduct; some in attendance may even have shared his sentiments."
Bellecourt v. Cleveland, 104 Ohio St. 3d 439, 2004-Ohio-6551 -- Protestors were arrested, but not prosecuted, for arson after a newspaper stuffed effigy of Chief Wahoo flared up. Subsequent 1983 action is shot down. Pfeifer dissenting at ¶27: "If we allow flag burning in this country, we should certainly allow Chief Wahoo effigy burning. Our flag stands for over 200 years of freedom and unity; Chief Wahoo stands for 56 years (and counting) of baseball futility."
State v. Gregorino, Portage App. No. 2003-P-0071, 2004-Ohio-4698 -- Leader of protesters commemorating the anniversary of the Kent State shootings was charged with disorderly conduct after the group entered a city street closed by the police. Inconvenience element was based on the testimony of a woman who had to take an alternate route on the way home from a pizza shop, though it had been the police who closed the street, impeding traffic. Court refuses to apply a proximate cause standard. Reversed.
Cleveland v. Sundermeir (1989), 48 Ohio App. 3d 204 -- First amendment right to free speech did not give abortion protester right to trespass on parking lot of clinic.
Dayton v. Gigandet (1992), 83 Ohio App. 3d 886 -- Necessity does not excuse criminal trespass by abortion protesters.
Dayton v. Dunnigan (1995), 103 Ohio App. 3d 67 -- (1) Aggravated menacing convictions were supported by the evidence where the defendant, while picketing, asked workers at an abortion clinic if they wore bullet proof uniforms, and made express reference to a fatal shooting at another clinic. (2) There was no First Amendment violation. Analogy to "fighting words" disorderly conduct cases is ill-conceived, as the sort of threats giving rise to menacing charges are not among the class of utterance protected by the First Amendment. Also see State v. Smith (1998), 126 Ohio App. 3d 193.
Dayton v. Esrati (1997), 125 Ohio App. 3d 60 -- Disrupting a lawful meeting and other charges were properly dismissed where city could not show its actions were not directed at the communicative nature of the defendant's conduct. Defendant quietly donned a ninja mask during city council meeting to protest proposal to reduce public participation.
State v. Wolf (1996), 111 Ohio App. 3d 774 -- Disturbing a lawful meeting and obstructing official business convictions upheld where defendant, protesting procedure at a county board of health meeting, took a seat at the board meeting table, refused to leave and read a prepared statement.
Cleveland v. Anderson (1992), 82 Ohio App. 3d 63 -- Abortion protestors refused to pay fine upon conviction for disorderly conduct and asked to be sent to the workhouse. Instead, judge proposed to place them on probation and order them to perform eighty hours of community service. Upon refusal either to pay the fine or do the community service, the judge found the defendants in contempt. Conduct held not to be subject to punishment as contempt as it was not motivated by improper or illegitimate purpose. The defendants had a statutory right to refuse to perform community service and by statute were required to work off the fine at thirty dollars per day if they refused to pay and were not indigent.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.