text:
bSchool of Energy and Power Engineering, Jiangsu University, 212013 Jiangsu, China.
*The first and second authors contributed equally to the present work.
Aplicaciones farmacéuticas e impactos ambientales de la Spirulina (Arthrospira). Una visión general. Recientemente, el cultivo de microalgas para diferentes aplicaciones, incluida la producción de compuestos activos nutricionales y farmacéuticos, está recibiendo una atención cada vez mayor. Entre los diferentes géneros, Spirulina (Arthrospira sp.) es una de las microalgas azul-verde más prometedoras (Cyanophyta) porque es rica en antioxidantes, aminoácidos esenciales (EAAs), minerales, proteínas, ácidos grasos poliinsaturados y vitaminas. Tiene un alto contenido de proteína (60-70% del peso seco) es una proteína completa, es decir, contiene todos los EAAs. Por lo tanto, la Spirulina es actualmente un producto comercial con alto valor nutricional y también una fuente importante parala medicina complementaria y alternativa. El objetivo del presente trabajo es revisar las aplicaciones farmacéuticas y terapéuticas de Spirulina, especialmente propiedades antioxidantes, antiinflamatorias, anticancerígenas, antimicrobianas, antidiabéticas, antiobesidad y antitóxicas. Los resultados se obtienen a partir de trabajos experimentales realizados in vitro e in vivo utilizando animales de experimentación. Los principales ingredientes activos reportados en Spirulina incluyen ficocianina, tocoferol, β-caroteno, ácidos caféicos y clorogénico que mostraron efectos individuales o sinérgicos. Además, en la presente revisión se discute las perspectivas futuras de la Spirulina genéticamente modificada como fuente de productos industriales, al mismo tiempo que se produce una valiosa biomasa fotoautotrófica. Además, se discutieron los impactos ambientales consiguientes del cultivo a gran escala de la Spirulina.
Microorganisms have unique characteristics and therefore, they are considered good pillars for the large-scale production of many useful metabolites. Microbial cells have a high area/volume ratio, which results in high efficiency of nutrient uptake for the biosynthesis of different metabolites through different metabolic pathways. Microalgae are a wide group of photosynthetic microorganisms that can be isolated from various habitats and can grow efficiently in commercial large-scale raceway ponds or photobioreactors (Figure 1), where cells can grow on inexpensive nutrient sources to produce valuable compounds. Cyanophytes are a group of microalgae commonly grown in rice paddies and have a positive impact on growth, yield and nitrogen levels of the crop plants (Whitton, 2000). This group of microorganisms also known as cyanobacteria, as they resemble bacteria in that they are prokaryotes and lack the internal structures such as nucleus and other organelles found in eukaryotic microalgae. From the practical and economical point of view, microalgae offer numerous advantages, such as high photosynthetic efficiency which results in high growth rates, high CO2 mitigation rate, possibility for cultivation on arid lands using marine-, fresh- or wastewater (Abomohra et al., 2018).
Figure 1. Surface view of a raceway ponds (A) and partial view of tubular photobioreactor (B) used for microalgae cultivation (Modified from Abomohra et al., 2016).
Although many previous studies focused on different cyanophytes as nitrogen-fixing organisms, Spirulina is gaining attention due to its high nutritional value and extensive pharmaceutical applications (Table 1). The correct identification of a certain species is a fundamental requisite for research study and/or developmental applications. The genus Spirulina has been incorrectly used to describe two different genera, Spirulina and Arthrospira. However, Stizenberger (1854) and Gomont (1892–1893) classified the forms with visible septa within the genus Arthrospira Stizenberger 1852; while coiled filaments with invisible septa were classified as belonging to the genus Spirulina Turpin 1829 (Tomaselli, 1997). The view of Arthrospira and Spirulina as two separate genera has been officially accepted by Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology (Castenholz, 1989). The separation between these two genera has been repeatedly affirmed on the basis of many other characteristics such as cell wall structure, helicity, trichome size, motility, gas vesicles, thylakoid pattern, GC analysis and phylogenetically using 16S rRNA. Depending on the later, 16S rRNA of two Arthrospira strains (PCC 7345 and PCC 8005) and one Spirulina strain (PCC 6313) confirmed that the two Arthrospira strains form a tight cluster not closely related to the Spirulina strain, which supports the separation of these two genera (Tomaselli, 1997). Therefore, a molecular approach is not only useful for the precise identification of a certain species, but it also helps to understand the evolutionary relationships occurring among various microorganisms.
Antioxidant Manoj et al., (1992); Miranda et al., (1998); Abomohra et al., (2016).
Anti-inflammatory Romay et al., (1998); Vázquez-Velasco et al., (2014).
Anti-cancer Schwartz and Shklar (1987); Schwartz et al., (1988); Liu et al., (2000); Subhashini et al., (2004).
Anti-microbial Kokou et al., (2012); Özdemir et al., (2004); Santoyo et al., (2006).
Anti-diabetes and anti-obesity Schwartz et al., (1988); Han et al., (2006).
Anti-toxicity Shastri et al., (1999); Kim et al., (2011); Abdel-Daim et al., (2016); Ebaid et al., (2017).
Spirulina is a photosynthetic autotrophic organism containing the blue pigment phycocyanin as the main photosynthetic pigment in addition to the green pigment chlorophyll a, which results in the blue-green color of the cells. Spirulina is one of multicellular unbranched non-heterocystous filamentous microalgae which are recognizable by the unique open left-handed helix along the entire length of the filament (Figure 2). The filaments are 50-500 μm in length and 2-4 μm wide, composed of only vegetative cells containing gas vacuoles. The long size filaments and strong cells allow successful filtration comparing to unicellular microalgae which results in the cost-effective harvest of Spirulina compared to other microalgal species. Currently, microalgae cultivation takes place in two major cultivation systems, namely closed photobioreactors (PBR) and open ponds. Both approaches have their own advantages and disadvantages which were discussed in details by Soni et al., (2017). However, Spirulina is mainly reported to be grown commercially in open ponds. Recently, new hybrid cost-effective techniques such as poly bags can also be used to increase algal biomass productivity (Soni et al., 2017).
Figure 2. Microscopic examination of Spirulina under light microscope (A, Ebaid et al., 2017) and scanning electron microscope (B, Ciferri 1984).
Many microorganisms are used as a massive sustainable resource for bio-pharmaceuticals which can be produced by direct extraction or after biomass bioprocessing. During secondary metabolism, microorganisms produce special secondary metabolites which possess special chemical structures and are not critical for the growth of the producing organism. In general, such metabolites are produced under unfavorable conditions in defense against predation, herbivory and competition for space. So far, some secondary metabolites from different microorganisms were isolated and identified in pure form. For example, chlorellin is a fatty acid produced by the green microalga Chlorella vulgaris and was first identified as an active anti-bacterial substance in 1940s (Centeno and Ballentine, 1999). On the other hand, the limited availability of fossil fuels and their environmental issues, especially participation in global warming, enhanced the extensive worldwide search for new renewable energy sources with combined CO2 mitigation. Spirulina was discussed as one of microalgae capable of producing different kinds of bioenergy with high efficiency of CO2 fixation (Sumprasit et al., 2017; Shao et al., 2018; Rempel et al., 2018), which provides the advantage of an eco-friendly utilization of Spirulina. The main aim of the present work was to provide a critical overview of the current status of the pharmaceutical applications of Spirulina, including antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, anti-microbial, anti- diabetes & obesity and anti-toxicity activities. In addition, future perspectives in genetic engineering technologies to enhance valuable products from Spirulina were discussed. The present work shed light on the environmental impacts of large-scale cultivation of Spirulina as one of the economically important microalgae.
Compared to other foods, Spirulina shows extraordinary nutritional value as it provides high levels of many essential nutrients and minerals (Table 2). However, the biochemical composition of Spirulina is highly dependent on growth conditions and the methods used for harvest and drying. In general, Capelli and Cysewski (2010) reported that the amount of calcium in Spirulina is 1.8 times higher than that in whole milk, total protein is 6.7 times that of tofu, iron is 51 times greater than that of spinach and β-carotene is 31 times more abundant than in carrots. Therefore, Spirulina was given the label of ‘super food’ by The World Health Organization (WHO). In addition, it was sent to space by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) due to its high nutritional value (Khan et al., 2005). Spirulina is produced commercially in open ponds by many producers (Table 3). Earthrise Farms, located in USA, covering 437060 m2, is the world’s largest producer of Spirulina. The company produces dried Spirulina in the form of tablets and powder in over 20 countries around the world with an average annual production of 550 tons. Other large Spirulina production plants are Cyanotech and Hainan DIC Microalgae located in USA and China, covering 364217 and 100000 m2 with annual production of 400 and 350 tons, respectively (Table 3). However, other companies sell Spirulina special products such as nutraceuticals, e.g. Myanmar Spirulina Factory (Yangon, Myanmar) sells tablets, chips, pasta and liquid extract.
Spirulina is the most highly consumed microalga (Bleakley and Hayes, 2017), which has been widely used as human healthy food centuries ago; and it is currently produced commercially as healthy food and valued additives in a hugely profitable business. In addition to its high nutritional value, Spirulina shows many biological activities such as antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, anti-microbial, anti- diabetes & obesity and anti-toxicity.
Spirulina extracts show relatively high antioxidant activities that have attracted the attention of many researchers. Manoj et al., (1992) confirmed the activity of alcoholic extract of Spirulina in lipid peroxidation inhibition more significantly (65%) than some chemical antioxidants like α-tocopherol (35%) and β-carotene (48%). In addition, they reported that a hot-water extract of Spirulina has a greater antioxidant effect (76%) than chlorogenic acid (56%) and gallic acid (54%). Miranda et al., (1998) studied the in vivo and in vitro antioxidant activity of S. maxima methanolic extract. In vivo antioxidant activity as lipid peroxidation was studied in the plasma, brain and liver homogenates of experimental rats using a daily dose of 5 mg of methanolic extract. The extract contained total tocopherol, β-carotene and total phenolic compounds of 18 mg·L–1, 27.5 mg·L–1 and 96.3 mg·L–1, respectively. Upon treatment, the antioxidant activity increased in the plasma of the Spirulina-treated group by 31.5% over the control group. The antioxidant effect was mainly associated with the individual or synergetic effect of tocopherol, β-carotene and phenolic compounds. In another study, the antioxidant activity was attributed to the phenolic compounds found in the methanolic alga extract including salicylic, chlorogenic, trans-cinnamic, caffeic acids, quimic and synaptic; individually or in a synergistic action (Baicus and Baicus, 2007). However, the caffeic acids and chlorogenic acid present in the Spirulina extract recorded more antioxidant efficiency than other acids (Henrikson, 1994); which also recorded a potential preventive action against cancer (Subhashini et al., 2004). Recently, Abomohra et al., (2016) concluded that the exposure of A. platensis to gamma radiation induces the cellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) by purinergic signaling, stimulating cells to produce more antioxidants under the induced oxidative stress.
The light-harvesting pigment “phycocyanin” is one of phycobiliproteins along with phycoerythrin and allophycocyanin, and found exclusively in cyanobacteria, cryptophytes and red algae (Hu et al., 2018). The presence of phycocyanin gives the characteristic blue color of cyanophytes, and hence the name of blue green algae. Eriksen (2016) concluded that Spirulina is the sole efficient source of natural phycocyanin production under photoautotrophic conditions. Despite the challenges facing Spirulina cultivation and phycocyanin extraction, there are no other particular sources of natural phycocyanin (Hu et al., 2018). In addition to the autotrophic growth of Spirulina, it is also capable of heterotrophic growth in the presence of glucose, with a phycocyanin content of 57 mg·g−1 dry weight, which represents half of that obtained in mixotrophic cultivation (Marquez et al., 1993). Phycocyanin can also be produced from other microalgae, e.g. from the unicellular red alga Galdieria sulphuraria under heterotrophic conditions. However, the phycocyanin content in Spirulina grown phototrophically is much higher than that of G. sulphuraria grown heterotrophically (Table 4), which gives the advantage of a lower cost production of phycocyanin using Spirulina.
Table 4. Comparison of heterotrophic cultivation of Galdieria sulphuraria and phototrophic cultivation of Spirulina for phycocyanin production (Hu et al., 2018).
In a previous study, Ebaid et al., (2017) estimated the phycocyanin content of 46.57 mg·g−1 dry weight in A. platensis grown in a Zarrouk medium for 18 days at 25 ± 3 °C and light intensity of 2500 Lux with a photoperiod of 18:6 h light: dark cycle. It is worth noting that the relative content of phycocyanin showed significant changes under different conditions of prevalent light, which was confirmed as a scavenging mechanism to prevent or reduce photoinhibitory damage (Mohanty et al., 1997). Romay et al., (1998) studied four in vivo experimental inflammation models (n = 7) and confirmed the activity of pure phycocyanin as an anti-inflammatory agent in all the studied models. Using 50, 100 and 200 mg·kg−1 of phycocyanin significantly reduced ear oedema induced by tetradecanoylphorbol acetate and arachidonic acid in mice by 47.6, 60.3 and 66.6%, respectively. In addition, the application of 50-200 mg·kg−1 of phycocyanin in experimental rats inhibited leukotriene B4 (LTB4), prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) levels and oedema induced by arachidonic acid (Romay et al., 2000). Vázquez-Velasco et al., (2014) concluded that Spirulina protects against negative proinflammatory effects induced by glucomannan in Zucker Fa/Fa rats due to the high phycocyanin content.
Many cancer forms result from cellular DNA damage, leading to uncontrolled cellular growth. Cellular endonucleases frequently repair the damaged DNA in order to keep the cell alive and healthy. The deactivation of these enzymes by oxidation, radiation or toxins results in errors in DNA, and eventually leads to the development of cancer. Many studies confirmed the anti-cancer activities of Spirulina extracts, either alone or in combination with other compounds. In vitro studies suggested the unique composition of Spirulina polysaccharides which enhance enzymatic activity and DNA repair. Decades ago, Schwartz and Shklar (1987) studied the effect of microalgae extracts on the induced squamous cell carcinoma of hamster buccal pouches in 20 animals. The results showed that Spirulina extract (Phycotene) resulted in total tumor regression by 30% of treated animals; while β-carotene and canthaxanthin resulted in total tumor regression by 20% and 15% of treated animals, respectively. This confirmed the higher anti-cancer activity of Spirulina extract than β-carotene or canthaxanthin. One year later, Schwartz et al., (1988) reported that the anti-cancer activity of the Spirulina extract was attributed to stimulation of the immune response to selectively destroy the small foci of developing malignant cells with no negative impacts on the normal cells. Liu et al., (2000) found that 160 mg·L−1 of c-phycocyanin from S. platensis significantly inhibited the in vitro growth of human leukemia K562 cells as colony numbers reduced from 4.8 in the control to 2.3 in the phycocyanin-treated cells after 12 days of incubation. In addition, Subhashini et al., (2004) reported that treatment with 50 μM of highly purified c-phycocyanin from S. platensis up to 48 h results in the inhibition of K562 cell proliferation by 49%. In another in vivo study, Simsek et al., (2008) suggested that S. platensis supplementation is useful in the treatment of anemia and leukemia induced by lead and cadmium toxicity. Moreover, Choi et al., (2013) investigated the anti-cancer activity of the marine cyanophyte S. maxima grown in deep seawater and reported effective suppression in the over-expression of the Bcl2 gene in A549 cells leading to the inhibition of various human cancer cells.
A large number of algal extracellular products and/or extracts have been reported as antimicrobial (anti-viral, anti-bacterial, anti-fungal, anti-algal, anti-protozoal) agents, although the detailed structure and identity of the active constituents of many of these are not yet known (Borowitzka 1995). Among microalgae, Spirulina is gaining more and more consideration as a natural antimicrobial agent. Kokou et al., (2012) confirmed the anti-bacterial activity of Spirulina against 6 Vibrio strains; V. anguillarum, V. splendidus, V. parahaemolyticus, V. scophthalmi, V. lentus and V. alginolyticus. The anti-microbial activity of acrylic acid, which is found in Spirulina in relatively high quantities, was confirmed at the end of 1970s. In addition to acrylic acid, probionic, benzoic, and mandelic organic acids were also reported as antimicrobial active compounds. Özdemir et al., (2004) also tested different extracts of S. platensis against bacteria and yeasts. They found that methanol extract was the most potent anti-microbial fraction. Santoyo et al., (2006) confirmed the anti-microbial activity of S. platensis using ethanol, hexane and petroleum ether as extracting solvents against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Aspergillus niger and Candida albicans. Moreover, purified c-phycocyanin extracted from S. platensis showed substantial inhibition in the growth of many multidrug-resistant bacteria. For example, purified c-phycocyanin showed minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) in vitro of 125, 100, 75 and 50 mg·L−1 against S. aureus, E. coli, Klebsiella pneumonia and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Sarada et al., 2011).
In addition, Arun et al., (2012) confirmed the antifungal activity of S. platensis methanolic extract. According to Hayashi et al., (1993), S. platensis water-soluble extract also significantly inhibited the in vitro HSV−1 replication in HeLa cells with ED50 (the lowest phycocyanin concentration for reducing plaque number by 50%) at 0.173 mg·mL−1. The addition of 1 mg·mL−1 of S. platensis extract 3 h before viral infection resulted in 50% inhibition of virus protein synthesis without affecting the host. Subsequently, Hayashi et al., (1996) isolated calcium spirulan (Ca-SP) from S. platensis as a novel sulfate polysaccharide. The isolated Ca-SP inhibited the in vitro replication of several enveloped viruses such as the human cytomegalo virus, HSV−1, influenza A virus, measles virus, HIV−1 virus and mumps virus.
The disease diabetes mellitus results from abnormalities in carbohydrate metabolism and is characterized by deficiencies in insulin secretion, resulting in hyperglycemia. The later was widely reported as the main reason for diabetic complications. Recently, the activity of Spirulina as anti-obesity and anti-diabetes was confirmed. The administration of 2 g·kg-1·day-1 of Spirulina for 21 days to alloxanized-induced diabetic rats (n = 10) resulted in a significant reduction in plasma glucose levels by 13.7% below the diabetic group (El-Desouki et al., 2015). They attributed the antihyperglycemic action of Spirulina to the potentiation of the pancreatic secretion of insulin from islet β-cells, or to enhancement of blood glucose transport to the peripheral tissue. In addition, Spirulina supplementation promotes vasodilation and restricts vasoconstriction which decreases the levels of plasma lipids and reduces blood pressure (Schwartz et al., 1988). Han et al., (2006) reported that glycolipid H-b2 extracted from Spirulina was found to reduce postprandial triglyceride (TGs) levels and inhibit pancreatic lipase activity in a dose-dependent way; while phycocyanin inhibited the pancreatic lipase activity, which resulted in higher excretion of TGs in experimental animals’ feces and reduced serum TGs.
Shastri et al., (1999) investigated the protective effect of S. fusiformis against lead toxicity in albino mice and recorded a pronounced increase in survival rate by administration of Spirulina. Recently, Ebaid et al., (2017) studied the protective effect of A. platensis against liver toxicity produced by treatment with copper nanoparticles. They confirmed the beneficial role of A. platensis as antioxidant markers which enhanced the hepatic functional parameters. Numerous mechanisms of cellular toxicity induction under stress conditions were suggested. Lipid peroxidation is one of the main mechanisms to induce cell damage due to the reaction of free radicals with lipids (Rajesh and Kala 2015). It results in malondialdehyde (MDA), which leads to oxidative stress by further interaction with many other molecules. Nigma et al., (1999) attributed ROS production under copper stress to antioxidant depletion or the direct effect of copper on the peroxidation reaction. However, Kim et al., (2011) reported that ROS alter various signal-transduction pathways in addition to the oxidation of vital cellular macromolecules such as DNA and lipids. ROS also increases the cytosolic Ca+2 levels by activation of non-selective cation channels in cell membranes (Mukherjee et al., 2002), promoting cell damage. The protective effect of Spirulina against oxidative stress was attributed to the relatively high contents of phycocyanin and carotenoids which result in antioxidant activity (Ebaid et al., 2017). In addition, S. platensis was found to positively influence the antioxidant enzyme level and oxidative stress markers under deltamethrin toxicity (Abdel-Daim et al., 2016), urethane and cisplatin (Premkumar et al., 2004) and mitomycin C and cyclophosphamide (Premkumar et al., 2001). In addition to its antioxidant properties, Spirulina showed a strong heavy metal chelating activity which reduced its toxicity as well (Rangsayator et al., 2002).
The scarcity of clean environments for the safe livelihood of human beings has gained global concerns. Continuous growth of the human population has resulted in an increase in petroleum consumption and growing energy demands all over the world. Due to human population growth, the world energy consumption is predicted to grow by 8.1% between 2015 and 2040, from 97.8 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) to 105.7 quadrillion Btu (Fig. 3A). The extensive use of fossil fuels contributes to high atmospheric CO2 levels, which are predicted to increase by 2.2% between 2015 and 2040 (Figure 3B). Increases in atmospheric CO2 raise the global air temperature, which is known as “global warming”. If this development continues, the planet will be threatened with the catastrophic changes in the earth’s climate. Global warming does not only mean the earth’s getting warmer, but it is associated with massive negative impacts on economic, social, and physical health which are of great distress. The melting of polar ice, violent surges of hurricanes and collapse of wildlife are all examples of how climate change can affect the planet. Microalgae are widely discussed to diminish the greenhouse effect by CO2 sequestration and abundant oxygen production. A stoichiometric amount of 1.8 kg CO2·kg−1 of microalgal biomass can be consumed which makes Spirulina cultivation using flue gas more economically and environmentally useful (Doucha et al., 2005). Based on the biomass produced by the area of Earthrise Farms (550 tons in 0.437 km2), about 990 tons of CO2 can be mitigated annually by Earthrise Farms. Thus, 28.9% of USA land area would be theoretically used to mitigate the global CO2 produced in 2015, which could be increased to 29.5% by the expected increase in CO2 emission in 2040 (Figure 3B). In addition, environmental pollution might result from the corruption of human resources by various micropollutants including pharmaceutical contaminants (Xiong et al., 2018). The distribution of these synthetic chemicals through the air, water and soil develop multidrug-resistant microorganisms. Therefore, the use of naturally synthesized products with the limitation of using chemical compounds will enhance the optimal utilization of pharmaceuticals.
Figure 3. Current and predicted global population and total energy consumption (A) and global CO2 emission as a result of fuel combustion with the estimated USA area required for global CO2 mitigation (B). Data in part was calculated from “Global Energy Statistical Yearbook 2015”.
Water and land use are two important environmental factors that need to be considered. Interestingly, Spirulina cultivation can be done in arid lands where no other crops can survive (Soni et al., 2016). In addition, it needs relatively lower amount of water, as water can be recycled after harvest. After the extraction of essential compounds from the biomass, the residual biomass can be used in many other applications in what is called refining process (Figure 4). For example, sugar-based and cellulosic biorefining results in the accumulation of protein by-products, which can be used as animal feed (Soni et al., 2016). In addition, after the extraction of essential compounds, the residual biomass can be used as energy feedstock for biodiesel production from lipids and/or bioethanol production from carbohydrate residues. Thus, integrated food and energy systems are designed to combine, intensify, and increase the productivity of food and energy simultaneously through sustainable land management (Soni et al., 2016). Using Spirulina as bioenergy feedstock showed promising results in many studies. Sumprasit et al., (2017) studied energy recovery in the form of biodiesel and biogas from ubiquitous S. platensis and recorded a biodiesel yield of 7.1% of dry weight. The results also confirmed that lipid-free residue can be used as feedstock for biogas production with an average methane yield of about 290 mL·g−1 VS. In addition, Shao et al., (2018) reported the efficiency of Cd2+-sorbed Arthrospira platensis for bioethanol production due to the accumulation of carbohydrates. Moreover, Chagas et al., (2016) studied the catalytic pyrolysis of Arthrospira platensis and Arthrospira maxima using pyrolysis/GC–MS. They found that the high acidity of HZSM-5 catalysts could maximize the conversion of biomass to aromatic hydrocarbons and the aromatic yields increased as the catalyst/biomass ratio increased from 1:1 to 10:1.By food-energy integration, Spirulina products are even more economically competitive with high diversification. Consequently, large-scale cultivation of Spirulina will not only have healthy and economic benefits, but will also help to save our planet.
Figure 4. Illustration showing the refining concept and different pathways of Spirulina applications.
Genetic engineering facilitates the duplication and manipulation of specific fragments of DNA for industrial, medical and research purposes. Recently, genetic engineering led to a revolution in molecular biology with many benefits in different fields, especially in medicine. The cloning of recombinant DNA facilitates the use of bacteria to produce important proteins such as human insulin which is of great importance and now marketed throughout the world. It was revealed that biosynthetic pathways for the production of different cellular macromolecules are complex processes which include many genes (Bhunia et al., 2018). Many industrial compounds can be produced by several molecular techniques such as rational and non-rational mutagenesis, including site-specific mutagenesis, random mutagenesis, and site-saturation mutagenesis. In the last few decades, extensive research has been carried out to understand the biosynthesis genetic regulations of different valuable products in cyanophytes. For example, enhanced alcohol production via genetic engineering has been implemented in two independent cyanobacterial strains through the over-expression of pyruvate decarboxylase and alcohol dehydrogenase II genes (Deng and Coleman, 1999). In addition, previous studies on the regulation of desaturase gene expression in Spirulina platensis revealed that the mRNA level and mRNA stability of the D6D gene increased drastically by decreasing the growth temperature from 35 to 22 °C, which led to an increase in the cellular γ-linolenic acid level by approximately 30% (Deshnium et al., 2000; Honsthong et al., 2003). Further, site-specific mutation studies by Subudhi et al., (2008) demonstrated that the sequence TATAAT located at −33 bp was essential for the D6D promoter function and suggested a complex regulation of D6D gene expression in Spirulina.
Currently, most cloned genes are introduced into bacteria or fungi on heterotrophic growth media for industrial enzyme production. However, developing a protocol for using Spirulina instead involves an economic and procedural reason for considering it as an alternate producer of industrial enzymes. Spirulina can grow autotrophically by converting light energy into biomass rich in minerals, protein, vitamin B12, essential fatty acids, amino acids and β-carotene. In addition, Spirulina does not require physical or chemical pre-treatment in order to become digestible due to the absence of a cellulosic cell wall (Toyomizu et al., 2001a). Moreover, residual biomass after the extraction of valuable molecules can be used as feed for fish, farm animals and poultry (Toyomizu et al., 2001b; Abomohra et al., 2014). Therefore, the development of a method for stable gene cloning into Spirulina as a biological factory for recombinant enzyme production will have many advantages. Unfortunately, the genetic engineering methods for Spirulina have been almost non-existent due to the absence of plasmids in Spirulina (Vachhani and Vonshak, 1997; Toyomizu et al., 2001a). Some Spirulina platensis genes involved in fundamental processes such as protein synthesis, carbon dioxide fixation and nitrogen metabolism were successfully cloned (e.g. Bini et al., 1992; Nelissen et al., 1994; Murata et al., 1996). However, the development of gene transfer systems is a big challenge. Using the plasmid pKK232–8 carrying a promoterless chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) gene, Cheevadhanarak et al., (1993) transformed S. platensis to stably express the CAT gene which maintained under selection pressure for several generations. However, the stability of the transformants was a major problem, as the transformation system developed for Spirulina must be efficient and allow not only a good degree of expression of the introduced gene but also to maintain itself in a fast-growing culture. Toyomizu et al., (2001a) studied the optimization of electroporation of plasmid pHSG399 in S. platensis. The plasmid contained a chloramphenicol resistance gene which produces an E. coli protein, Cm acetyltransferase (CAT). They reported that Spirulina is a suitable organism for the expression of genetically engineered proteins, but the gene transfer system has not yet been established. Later, Kawata et al., (2004) employed a new approach using natural transposase, mini-Tn5 transposon, and a cation liposome to transform Spirulina platensis as a stable recombinant DNA methodology. According to Toyomizu et al., (2001a), more research is needed to investigate other requirements for a ‘stable’ S. platensis gene transfer system, which include; (1) cloning and assessment of Spirulina promoters using a plasmid carrying a promoterless CAT reporter gene, (2) developing a simple and rapid method for sensitive fluorometric determination of Spirulina transformants, and (3) subjecting Spirulina transformants to protoplast fusion in glycine, for cloning. Thus, genetic engineering techniques currently used in plant and microbial biotechnology are required to enable Spirulina, as an autotrophic factory, to produce desired molecules in order to incorporate algal biotechnology products into industrial technologies.
Spirulina is considered as a valuable pharmaceutical agent which offers many unique features with many environmental and health benefits. Despite their extensive applications for nutrition, the industrial production of Spirulina is still more or less limited to relatively small areas. In addition, the molecular engineering of Spirulina seems as a neglected research field in spite of its importance to resolving many challenges, and any piece of work accumulated at this stage will be undoubtedly of great value. There is much more research which needs to be done, including innovative cultivation systems and development of successful genetic and molecular biology tools for Spirulina. The development of a reliable genetic engineering methodology will open the way, not only for better basic research, but also will enable a better program for the development of new and better strains to be used by the industry. This could integrate Spirulina into the industrial sector for the production of essential industrial products while producing valuable nutrient-rich biomass. In addition, nutritional awareness and increasing the acceptance level of Spirulina are required in order to develop such Spirulina-fortified products. At the same time, further scientific, clinical and toxicological research is required to evaluate the safety of large-scale production of Spirulina with harvest at minimum contamination rates, since contamination with harmful elements or toxic substances might potentially cause several serious human health effects.
This work was financially supported by the Key Program of Science and Technology of the Jiangsu Province, China (grant number BE2016353) and Egyptian Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (MHESR).
○ Castenholz RW. 1989. Subsection III, Order Oscillatoriales. In Stanley JT, Bryant MP, Pfenning N, Holt JG (Eds), Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, Vol. 3, Baltimore: William and Wilkins, p. 1771.
○ Cheevadhanarak S, Kanokslip S, Chaisawadi S, Rachdawong S, Tanticharoen M. 1993. Transformation system for Spirulina platensis. In Masojidek J, Setlik I. (Eds) Book of Abstracts of the 6th International Conference on Applied Algology, Czech Republic, p. 109.
○ Ciferri O. 1984. Spirulina, the edible microorganism. Microbiol. Rev. 47, 551–578.
○ Deng MD, Coleman JR. 1999. Ethanol synthesis by genetic engineering in cyanobacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65, 523–528.
○ Global Energy Statistical Yearbook, Enerdata 2015. Available at https://yearbook.enerdata.net, Accessed on December 2017.
○ Gomont M. 1892–1893. Monographie des Oscillarièes. Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot. 15, 263–368, 16, 91–264.
○ Henrikson R. 1994. Microalga Spirulina, superalimento del futuro. Ronore Enterprises. 2nd ed. Ediciones Urano, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 222.
○ Manoj G, Venkataraman LV, Srinivas L. 1992. Antioxidant properties of Spirulina (Spirulina platensis). In: Seshadri CV, Jeejibai N, editors. ETTA National Symposium on Spirulina. MCRC Publishers, New York, USA, pp. 148–154.
○ Mohanty P, Srivastava M, Krishna K. 1997. The Photosynthetic Apparatus of Spirulina: Electron Transport and Energy Transfer. In: Vonshak A, Spirulina platensis (Arthrospira) Physiology, cell-biology and biotechnology. 1997, Taylor & Francis Ltd., London.
○ Moorhead K, Capelli B, Cysewski G. 2012. Spirulina: Nature’s Superfood. 3rd edition, Cyanotech Corporation, Kailua Kona, Hawaii, USA.
○ Murata N, Deshnium P, Tasaka Y. 1996. Biosynthesis of gamma-linolenic acid in the cyanobacterium Spirulina platensis. In Huang Y, Milles DE (Eds) Gamma-linolenic acid, metabolism and its role in nutrition and medicine, AOC Press, Champaign, Illinois, p. 22.
○ Romay C, Ledon N, Gonzalez R. 2000. Effects of phycocyanin extract on prostaglandin E2 levels in mouse ear inflammation test. Arzneim -Forsch. 50, 1106–1109.
○ Soni R, Sudhakar K, Rana R. 2016. Sustainable biomass production from microalgae for food, feed and biofuels: An integrated approach. Biosci. Biotech. Res. Comm. 9, 729–736.
○ Stizenberger E. 1854. Spirulina und Arthrospira (nov. gen.). Hedwigia 1, 32–41.
○ Tomaselli L. 1997. Morphology, Ultrastructure and Taxonomy of Arthrospira (Spirulina) maxima and Arthrospira (Spirulina) platensis. In: Vonshak A, Spirulina platensis (Arthrospira) Physiology, cell-biology and biotechnology. Taylor & Francis Ltd., London.
○ Vachhani A, Vonshak A. 1997. Genetics of Spirulina. In: Vonshak A, Spirulina platensis (Arthrospira) Physiology, cell-biology and biotechnology. 1997, Taylor & Francis Ltd., London.
○ Whitton BA. 2000. Soils and rice-fields. In: Whitton BA, Potts M, editor. The ecology of cyanobacteria. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 233–255.

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


text:
Shortly afterwards, Congress responded with the Uniformed Services Former Spouses' Protection Act (USFSPA), 10 U.S.C. � 1408 (1982). Section 1408 became effective in February, 1983, and applies to payments to military retirees after June 25, 1981, the day prior to the Supreme Court's decision in McCarty v. McCarty, supra. [Note 11] Adkins v. Rumsfeld, 464 F.3d 456, 460-461 (4th Cir. 2006), cert. denied sub nom. Adkins v. Gates, 551 U.S. 1130 (2007).
The USFSPA "unambiguously leaves to the states the choice of whether to treat disposable retired pay earned for service during marriage as divisible property." [Note 12] Id. at 461. After the enactment of � 1408, "[i]t appears that nearly every state has elected to treat military retired pay as divisible marital property. See generally State-by-State Analysis of Divisibility of Military Retired Pay, 2002 Army Law. 42." Id. at 462.
b. Massachusetts law. The Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines specifically indicate that "veterans' benefits," "military pay, allowances and allotments," and "pensions" may be considered as income when calculating an award. Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines I-A(9), I-A(10), I-A(14) (2009). On the other hand, G. L. c. 208, � 34, amended by St.
However, "[c]onsiderable as the trial judge's discretion may be in weighing these factors [under � 34], it is not unbounded . . . . It is the duty of the reviewing court to consider whether the apportionment of assets flows rationally from the judge's findings under � 34." Denninger v. Denninger, 34 Mass. App. Ct. 429 , 430-431 (1993). Here, viewing the financial award as a whole, including the treatment of the husband's military pension as a stream of income, combined with the failure to award any alimony, [Note 13] and the errors made in attributing income to the wife and in establishing the child support award (discussed further below), we conclude that the combination resulted in an inequitable award to the wife. Under all the circumstances, the judge's financial disposition leaves the parties in significantly disparate circumstances. The husband "is virtually guaranteed continued enjoyment of the secure, comfortable marital lifestyle." Sampson v. Sampson, 62 Mass. App. Ct. 366 , 370 (2004). The wife has no such guarantee. See Goldman v. Goldman, 28 Mass. App. Ct. 603 , 611 (1990) ("Absent good reason, in a long term marriage, there is no justification for the life-style of one spouse to go down while the other remains high"). See also Kehoe v. Kehoe, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 958 , 959-960 (1992).
The wife again points to the husband's financial statement and argues that he failed to include in his income the $29 per week that he receives as veteran's disability pay. "[T]the Uniformed Services Former Spouses' Protection Act, 10 U.S.C. � 1408 (2000), which provides for the divisibility of military retirement pensions, does not permit State courts 'to treat as property divisible upon divorce military retirement pay that has been waived to receive veterans' disability benefits.' " Krapf v. Krapf, 439 Mass. 97 , 108 (2003), quoting from Mansell v. Mansell, 490 U.S. 581, 595 (1985).
provisions of Federal law governing veteran's disability benefits did not conflict with the enforcement of State child support awards even where disability benefits represented the veteran's sole source of income and would necessarily be used to pay child support. Ibid. See Krapf v. Krapf, 439 Mass. at 108 n.11 ("The Federal act does permit courts to order alimony payments from VA disability benefits. See 10 U.S.C. � 1408[a][B][ii]"). It was error, therefore, for the husband to fail to include the disability payment amount in his financial statement listing his income.
4. Conclusion. We vacate so much of the judgment as fails to include the husband's military pension as an asset for division. Under the circumstances of this case, findings are needed to support a new order as to the percentage of the pension that the wife is entitled to, as a divisible marital asset. [Note 18] See 10 U.S.C. � 1408(e)(1). We also vacate the order for child support.
[Note 12] USFSPA also provides that in order for a State to exercise jurisdiction over the service member's pension rights, the State must be the member's domicile or the member must consent to jurisdiction of the court. See 10 U.S.C. � 1408(c)(4); McMahon v. McMahon, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 504 , 505 (1991). Here, although the husband was likely domiciled in Florida during the divorce proceedings, through his pleadings and participation in the litigation, he consented to jurisdiction of the Massachusetts court.

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


Petitioner brought this suit for post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, alleging that, after his conviction on several narcotics charges, he had been improperly denied his right to appeal. Petitioner was sentenced to 11 concurrent 20-year terms on June 20, 1963. Immediately after the sentencing, petitioner's retained counsel attempted to make a motion requesting leave for petitioner to proceed in forma pauperis. The trial judge cut petitioner's counsel off, saying that all motions had to be in writing. Without making any further inquiry, he adjourned the court. No written motions were ever filed, and petitioner's counsel did not submit a notice of appeal within the 10-day period specified by the applicable rule. [Footnote 1] On August 7, 1963, after the time had expired, petitioner attempted to file a notice of appeal himself. He declared that an oral notice had been given at trial. The trial judge ruled that the expiration of the appeal period deprived the court of jurisdiction. Petitioner then sought relief in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He alleged that he had told his counsel to perfect an appeal, but that counsel had failed to do so. The Ninth Circuit denied petitioner's motion for lack of jurisdiction, citing United States v. Robinson, 361 U. S. 220 (1960). It also refused habeas corpus.
This action was commenced on February 15, 1966. Petitioner alleged that he was of Mexican descent and that his knowledge of English was limited. He further contended that his retained counsel had fraudulently deprived him of his right to appeal. He asked that his conviction be set aside and that he be resentenced so that he could properly take an appeal. The District Court for the Northern District of California denied petitioner's application, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. 387 F.2d 117 (1967). Both courts relied on a Ninth Circuit rule requiring applicants in petitioner's position to disclose what errors they would raise on appeal and to demonstrate that denial of an appeal had caused prejudice. We granted certiorari to resolve a conflict among the circuits about the propriety of such a requirement. [Footnote 2] 393 U.S. 951 (1968). We reverse.
of right." Coppedge v. United States, 369 U. S. 438, 369 U. S. 441 (1962). The Ninth Circuit seems to require an applicant under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to show more than a simple deprivation of this right before relief can be accorded. It also requires him to show some likelihood of success on appeal; if the applicant is unlikely to succeed, the Ninth Circuit would characterize any denial of the right to appeal as a species of harmless error. We cannot subscribe to this approach.
Applicants for relief under § 2255 must, if indigent, prepare their petitions without the assistance of counsel. See Johnson v. Avery, 393 U. S. 483, 393 U. S. 487-488 (1969). Those whose education has been limited and those, like petitioner, who lack facility in the English language might have grave difficulty in making even a summary statement of points to be raised on appeal. Moreover, they may not even be aware of errors which occurred at trial. They would thus be deprived of their only chance to take an appeal even though they have never had the assistance of counsel in preparing one. Like the approach rejected long ago in Powell v. Alabama, 287 U. S. 45, 287 U. S. 69 (1932), the Ninth Circuit's requirement makes an indigent defendant face "the danger of conviction because he does not know how to establish his innocence." Moreover, the Ninth Circuit rule would require the sentencing court to screen out supposedly unmeritorious appeals in ways this Court rejected in Coppedge. Those whose right to appeal has been frustrated should be treated exactly like any other appellants; they should not be given an additional hurdle to clear just because their rights were violated at some earlier stage in the proceedings. Accordingly, we hold that the courts below erred in rejecting petitioner's application for relief because of his failure to specify the points he would raise were his right to appeal reinstated.
The Government, while not arguing that the courts below properly denied relief on the pleadings, urges us to remand this case for a truncated factual hearing. Drawing upon this Court's recognition in Machibroda v. United States, 368 U. S. 487, 368 U. S. 495 (1962), that the hearing requirement of § 2255 "does not strip the district courts of all discretion to exercise their common sense," the Government suggests that the District Court be instructed to obtain an affidavit from petitioner's trial attorney explaining why no notice of appeal was filed. This explanation, together with petitioner's allegations, would be used to judge the propriety of a hearing.
obtain leave for petitioner to proceed in forma pauperis should have put the trial judge on notice that petitioner would be unrepresented in the future. Moreover, unless an appeal was contemplated, there would be no reason to make such a motion. As the trial judge should have recognized, petitioner was therefore precisely the kind of defendant who needed the protection afforded by the rule. Had he known that the clerk would file a notice of appeal for him, he could easily have avoided the difficulties he has faced. At the very least, the trial judge should have inquired into the circumstances surrounding the attempt to make the in forma pauperis motion. His failure to do so effectively deprived petitioner of his right to appeal. Since this deprivation appears on the record before us, we see no need for any factual determinations on remand. Cf. United States v. Smith, 387 F.2d 268 (C.A. 6th Cir.1967).
The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the District Court where petitioner should be resentenced so that he may perfect an appeal in the manner prescribed by the applicable rules.
The Ninth Circuit rule originated in two 1964 decisions, Wilson v. United States, 338 F.2d 54, and Miller v. United States, 339 F.2d 581. Cf. McGarry v. Fogliani, 370 F.2d 42 (C.A. 9th Cir.1966). The First Circuit has adopted an intermediate position; the defendant is not required to show plain reversible error in his application, but the Government may defeat relief by showing that an appeal would be futile. Desmond v. United States, 333 F.2d 378 (1964). Both petitioner and the Government attempt to find support in the position of the Tenth Circuit. Hannigan v. United States, 341 F.2d 587 (1965). The Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and District of Columbia Circuits do not require any showing about the issues to be raised on appeal. Camp v. United States, 352 F.2d 800 (C.A. 5th Cir.1965); United States v. Smith, 387 F.2d 268 (C.A. 6th Cir.1967); Calland v. United States, 323 F.2d 405 (C.A. 7th Cir.1963); Williams v. United States, 402 F.2d 548 (C.A. 8th Cir.1968); Dillane v. United States, 121 U.S.App.D.C. 354, 350 F.2d 732 (1965).
I agree with Part I of the Court's opinion, but cannot subscribe to Part II, in which the Court reinstates petitioner's right to appeal without further proceedings below. In taking this course, I think the Court has been too insensitive to what, on this record, is due the trial judge, petitioner's trial counsel, and the orderly administration of the criminal process.
petitioner wished to appeal in forma pauperis, and that the judge informed the lawyer that "all motions" had to be made in writing. Thereafter no written notice of appeal was filed within the 10-day limit. Petitioner further alleges that he told his counsel to perfect an appeal, and that counsel neglected to do so, but those allegations have never been tested by the adversary process.
The Court undertakes to justify its decision not to require a hearing and findings on this score by characterizing as "error" the sentencing judge's failure "to advise petitioner of his right to appeal," as then supposedly required by Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 37(a)(2), and by concluding that it is "just under the circumstances," 28 U.S.C. § 2106, to dispose of the case at this level. See ante at 395 U. S. 331-332.
petitioner's own statement of the facts reveals that this inference was wholly justified, for petitioner asserts that, after his sentencing, "his counsel advised both him and his wife that he would arrange for their appeals." [Footnote 2/2] Thus, even if it is assumed that "the trial judge should have inquired into the circumstances surrounding the attempt to make the in forma pauperis motion," ante at 395 U. S. 332, the judge's omission was surely, at most, harmless error.
I would therefore remand the case to the District Court, so that it may be determined whether petitioner, in fact, did instruct his attorney to perfect an appeal and whether the attorney, in fact, neglected to do so. This course seems to me to be required both in the interest of orderly procedure and in fairness to petitioner's trial attorney.
Furthermore, as suggested by the Government, I would permit the District Court discretion to begin by obtaining an affidavit from petitioner's attorney in response to petitioner's allegations. Who knows whether the attorney may not have in his possession documentary evidence conclusively showing the allegations to be unfounded? Or who knows whether the attorney may not wish to concede the accuracy of the allegations? In either case, the affidavit procedure might obviate the necessity for a full-blown hearing. If the attorney has no documentary evidence, and if his affidavit reveals a factual controversy, then, of course, a hearing would be required. Such a procedure entirely fits the language of 28 U.S.C. § 2265 and this Court's statement in Machibroda v. United States, 368 U. S. 487, 368 U. S. 495 (1962), that § 2255 "does not strip the district courts of all discretion to exercise their common sense."
This provision was subsequently amended to require that the judge so advise all defendants, whether or not represented by counsel. See ante at 395 U. S. 331, n. 3. See also Peoples v. United States, 337 F.2d 91 (1964); Calland v. United States, 323 F.2d 405 (1963); Boruff v. United States, 310 F.2d 918 (1962).


Nov. 16, 1982.Decided Nov. 29, 1982.
Edgar M. Snyder, Snyder & Gainor, P.A., Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant.
J. Alan Johnson, U.S. Atty., Paul J. Brysh, Asst. U.S. Atty., Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee.
Before GIBBONS, HIGGINBOTHAM and BECKER, Circuit Judges.
Carl B. Benson's appeal from a judgment of sentence following his conviction for Mail Fraud and Securities Fraud presents the question, of first impression in this court, whether in prosecutions for violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 2 and 15 U.S.C. §§ 77q(a) and 77x it is proper to charge that the specific intent to deceive may be found from a material misstatement of fact made with reckless disregard of the facts. We affirm.
a fraudulent intent is necessary to sustain the charge of a scheme to defraud. An untrue statement or representation which is in fact false only amounts to fraud if the defendant making it either knew the statement to be false and he made it, made the statement with the intent to defraud, or, as I have said, these things were due to recklessness on his part.
The court also carefully distinguished between conduct which is reckless and conduct which is merely negligent.
Benson objected to the reference to recklessness, contending that its inclusion had the effect of reducing the specific intent required for proof of mail fraud or securities fraud. The district court rejected that contention, and we do so also.
In McLean v. Alexander, 599 F.2d 1190 (3d Cir. 1979), a civil fraud case brought pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. Sec. 240.-106-5 and under the Delaware common law of fraud, we held that the scienter required to sustain a claim under Section 10(b) included misrepresentations made knowingly or wilfully, or with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity, or without a genuine belief in their truth. The reasons for that holding are set forth at length in McLean v. Alexander, supra, and need not be repeated here. The standard of proof for civil liability in fraud is lower than the proof beyond a reasonable doubt required for a criminal conviction. But there is no reason to suppose that in enacting criminal statutes prohibiting mail fraud or securities fraud the Congress intended that the substantive element of the offense--the scienter--should be different than for civil liability for fraud. We conclude, therefore, that inclusion in the charge of a reference to reckless disregard of the facts was not improper. In so ruling we join those courts of appeals which have considered the question.
See United States v. Farris, 614 F.2d 634 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 926, 100 S. Ct. 3022, 65 L. Ed. 2d 1120 (1980); United States v. Themy, 624 F.2d 963, 965 (10th Cir. 1980); United States v. Henderson, 446 F.2d 960, 966 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 991, 92 S. Ct. 536, 30 L. Ed. 2d 543 (1971); United States v. Frick, 588 F.2d 531, 536 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 913, 99 S. Ct. 2013, 60 L. Ed. 2d 385 (1979). Cf. United States v. Hanlon, 548 F.2d 1096, 1101 (2d Cir. 1977).
Benson also contends that the court erred in charging that " [n]o amount of honest belief that the enterprise would ultimately make money can justify baseless, false or reckless misrepresentations or promises." Such an instruction was approved in United States v. Habel, 613 F.2d 1321, 1328 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925, 100 S. Ct. 3018, 65 L. Ed. 2d 1117 (1980). We hold that on this record it was appropriate. Finally Benson contends that the trial court abused its discretion under Fed.R.Evid. 403 in limiting cross-examination of two government witnesses. That contention, considering the extensive cross-examination which was permitted, is on this record meritless.
The judgment appealed from will be affirmed.


On September 1, 2017, Texas Senate Bill 10 / House Bill 1774, entitled “An Act relating to actions on and liability associated with certain insurance claims” and otherwise known as the “Hailstorm Bill,” (the “Bill”) went into effect. Before it took effect, the Bill was touted by its proponents as a tailored remedy to curb the allegedly abusive actions of “storm-chasing lawyers.” From the face of the Bill, which bolstered previously existing pre-suit notice requirements and provided consequences for noncompliance, it was clear that such curtailment would come at the expense of policyholders. Without judicial guidance, however, policyholders and practitioners were left to speculate about how exactly the Hailstorm Bill would affect the realities of litigating property insurance disputes in Texas. Now, after sixteen months, some of those questions have been answered.
The terms of the Bill raise many questions, such as those about the Bill’s scope, the level of specificity required of pre-suit notices, and the Bill’s applicability to insurance coverage actions brought to federal court. After sixteen months of the Bill (codified as Chapter 542A of the Texas Insurance Code), some of those questions have been answered. Though the relevant case law is scarce under this still “new” law, and while many questions remain, as opponents of the Bill predicted, the effect of Chapter 542A has been to benefit insurers at the cost of additional burdens placed on policyholders. Policyholders and practitioners should be wary of the potential pitfalls associated with a failure to adhere strictly to Chapter 542A’s pre-suit notice requirements, which can serve to limit or entirely cut off the recovery of otherwise available attorneys’ fees.
(C) arises from damage to or loss of covered property caused, wholly or partly, by forces of nature, including an earthquake or earth tremor, a wildfire, a flood, a tornado, lightning, a hurricane, hail, wind, a snowstorm, or a rainstorm.
the amount of reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees incurred by the claimant, calculated by multiplying the number of hours actually worked by the claimant's attorney, as of the date the notice is given and as reflected in contemporaneously kept time records, by an hourly rate that is customary for similar legal services.
include in the notice a statement that a copy of the notice was provided to the claimant.
In order to provide some measure of protection to claimants giving pre-suit notice, Chapter 542A ensures dismissal of pre-emptive actions brought by insurers during the sixty (60) days following notice.
the 15th day after the date of the requested inspection, photographing, or evaluating of the property is completed.
If a defendant in an action to which this chapter applies pleads and proves that the defendant was entitled to but was not given a presuit notice stating the specific amount alleged to be owed by the insurer under Section 542A.003(b)(2) at least 61 days before the date the action was filed by the claimant, the court may not award to the claimant any attorneys' fees incurred after the date the defendant files the pleading with the court.
Recovery between 20 and 79% of damages demanded in presuit notice entitles the policyholder to recover the corresponding percentage of its reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees.
Chapter 542A Applies in Federal Court.
Although Chapter 542A’s pre-suit notice requirements are superficially procedural in nature, courts have held that Chapter 542A applies in federal diversity cases. In Carrizales v. State Farm Lloyds, 3:18-CV-0086-L, 2018 WL 1697584 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 6, 2018), the Northern District of Texas compared Chapter 542A to medical malpractice and Deceptive Trade Practices Act notice requirements, which the Fifth Circuit have directly and indirectly held, respectively, apply in federal court. The Carrizales court opined that “the notice statute for actions brought under the Texas Insurance Code likewise presents a procedural requirement that is so intertwined with Texas’s substantive policy that federal courts sitting in diversity must enforce its requirements.” Id. at *2 (emphasis added).
Thus, the Court is of the opinion that, although providing sufficient notice is a procedural process, federal courts should apply the notice provision in § 542A because its purpose is intertwined with Texas’s substantive policy.
Id. at *3. Likewise, in Perrett v. Allstate Ins. Co., 4:18-CV-01386, 2018 WL 2864132 (S.D. Tex. June 11, 2018), the Southern District of Texas applied Chapter 542A without explicitly discussing the statute’s applicability. Id. at *1–2.
Careful Compliance with Chapter 542A is Critical.
Before the Bill took effect, and soon thereafter, policyholders and practitioners may have wondered whether their existing demand practices were sufficient to satisfy Chapter 542A’s pre-suit notice requirements. After all, the bill was purportedly intended to target “storm-chasing lawyers” who would often bring insurance coverage claims in high volumes with little or no notice of actual amounts being sought. Could standard claims handling practices and exchanges—which often already involve extensive documentation and information exchanges between policyholders and insurers detailing the circumstances giving rise to the claim and claim amounts—be enough to satisfy the new pre-suit notice requirements?
Thus far, the decisions of courts applying Chapter 542A have not been encouraging to policyholders. In In re Allstate Indemnity Company, No. 14-18-00362-CV, 2018 WL 3580644 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 26, 2018, no pet. h.), owners of a condominium brought an insurance coverage action against Allstate Indemnity Company for certain property damage sustained during Hurricane Harvey. Allstate filed a petition for writ of mandamus after the trial court denied its plea in abatement under Chapter 542A and awarded the claimants attorneys’ fees “as a sanction against Allstate for filing a frivolous plea.” Sitting per curiam, the appellate court granted Allstate’s petition and directed the trial court to set aside its order. Without much elaboration, the court held that a series of letters and e-mails from claimants to Allstate failed to strictly comply with the requirements of § 542.003, thereby rendering the trial court’s order an abuse of discretion.
Although the Allstate court did not discuss the exact deficiencies of the supposed pre-suit notice, federal courts have adopted a formalistic approach, requiring strict compliance with Chapter 542A’s individual requirements. For example, in Perrett v. Allstate Ins. Co., 4:18-CV-01386, 2018 WL 2864132 (S.D. Tex. June 11, 2018), the Southern District of Texas granted a motion to abate on the basis that an otherwise proper notice letter (compliant with § 542A.002(b)’s factual statement and claimed amounts requirements) failed to satisfy § 542A.002(c)’s specific requirement that an attorney providing notice on behalf of a claimant “include in the notice a statement that a copy of the notice was provided to the claimant.” In Davis v. Allstate Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 4:18-CV-00075, 2018 WL 3207433 (E.D. Tex. June 29, 2018), the Eastern District of Texas came to the same conclusion. Specifically, the Davis court observed that “district courts that have recently analyzed the notice provision in § 542A have found that federal courts should apply it strictly.” Id. at *3.
The Exact Scope of Chapter 542A is Still Unclear.
The first full year of practice under the Bill has made clear that policyholders and practitioners should (1) be wary of Chapter 542A in both state and federal court and (2) pay close attention to its specific requirements when preparing a pre-suit notice. Many questions, however, remain.
For example, no court to date has tackled the exact scope of the statute. The meanings of “providing coverage for real property or improvements to real property” and “arises from damage to or loss of covered property caused, wholly or partly, by forces of nature” are hardly self-evident. Although Chapter 542A clearly covers a wide variety of natural events, no court has tested the outer bounds of the “arises from” language. Additionally, the breadth of the property policies to which Chapter 542A applies has not yet been tested. Likewise, no case law thus far has addressed the adequacy of specific notice language. Rather, as outlined above, existing decisions have only addressed the adequacy of notice letters on a high level. Further, the Fifth Circuit has not had occasion yet to opine about the Hailstorm Bill in any respect.
Policyholders and practitioners can expect more answers—though, perhaps, more questions to arise as well—as the jurisprudence surrounding Chapter 542A continues to develop. In the interim, however, what is clear is that Chapter 542A and its pre-suit notice requirements warrant a cautious approach. Policyholders and practitioners should, when in doubt, make every effort to comply with the statute’s literal terms. In the absence of compliance, courts have demonstrated a willingness, and perhaps obligation, to abate policyholders’ actions under the statute and potentially limit or foreclose their recovery of attorneys’ fees.
 Lucy Nashed, Communications Director, Texans for Lawsuit Reform, “When Storm-Chasing Lawyers Win, Texans Lose,” TLR, May 2, 2017, https://www.tortreform.com/news/when-storm-chasing-lawyers-win-texans-lose.
This publication/newsletter is for informational purposes and does not contain or convey legal advice. The information herein should not be used or relied upon in regard to any particular facts or circumstances without first consulting a lawyer. Any views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the law firm’s clients.


text:
1 Corwin v. KKR Fin. Holdings LLC, 125 A.3d 304 (Del. 2015).
2 Kahn v. M & F Worldwide Corp., 88 A.3d 635 (Del. 2014).
3 Schnatter v. Papa John’s Int’l, Inc., 2019 WL 194634, at *16 (Del. Ch. Jan. 15, 2019); see also KT4 Partners LLC v. Palantir Techs. Inc., 2019 WL 347934, at *10 n.76 (Del. Jan. 29, 2019) (quoting Schnatter, 2019 WL 194634, at *16).
4 191 A.3d 268 (Del. 2018), as revised (July 27, 2018).
5 Id. at 272 (citation omitted).
6 DFC Glob. Corp. v. Muirfield Value Partners, L.P., 172 A.3d 346 (Del. 2017).
7 Dell, Inc. v. Magnetar Glob. Event Driven Master Fund Ltd, 177 A.3d 1 (Del. 2017).
8 2018 WL 6719718 (Del. Ch. Dec. 19, 2018).
10 Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver Cty. Emps. Ret. Fund, 138 S. Ct. 1061 (2018).
11 This ruling will likely be appealed. Defendants already attempted to appeal the ruling, but the appeal was refused by the Delaware Supreme Court as interlocutory since the Court of Chancery had not yet resolved plaintiff’s request for legal fees. Salzberg v. Sciabacucchi, 2019 WL 549039 (Del. Feb. 12, 2019).
This post comes to us from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. It is based on the firm’s memorandum, “Delaware Corporation Law: Trends Impacting M&A and Corporate Litigation in 2019,” dated February 28, 2019, and available here.

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


text:
Be sure to read the Transcription of this document as well as Part One and Part Two of the analysis.
Atchison, Samuel Ayers. (1810 – 1869) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney and real estate agent. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 22; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Sixth Ward, p. 13.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0023, KYR-0001-004-0024, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-2939, KYR-0001-004-2944, KYR-0001-004-3407, KYR-0001-033-0011.
Bacon, Byron. (1835 – 1900) New York native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Martin Bijur after 1864. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 24; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Sixth Ward, p. 32.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0454, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-2270, KYR-0001-004-3407, KYR-0001-020-0828, KYR-0001-031-0160.
Baker, Charles Samuel. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, saddler. J. D. Campbell’s Louisville Business Directory, For 1864 (Louisville: L. A. Civill, nd.), 103.
Barbour, Catherine. (c. 1805 – ?) Native of France and Louisville, Kentucky, resident. Resided in 1860 with her husband, Constance Barbour, and son, Joseph. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, District 1, p. 36.
Barbon, John G. (c. 1830 – ?) Native of Spain and Louisville, Kentucky, resident. A laborer by trade. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, District 1, p. 63.
Beattie, James A. (1832 – 1893) Missouri native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with William S. Bodley and Alexander Casseday. Judge Advocate of the Kentucky State Guard. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 30, 344; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Fifth Ward, p. 62; Kentucky, Death Records, 1852-1953 [database on-line via Ancestry.com], Jefferson County, 1893, p. 113.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-007-0476, KYR-0001-017-0314, KYR-0001-017-0337.
Bender, F. (? – ?) Signatory to Louisville, Kentucky, petition on behalf of William Brockman.
Bijur, Martin. (1833 – 1882) Native of Prussia, Louisville, Kentucky, attorney and politician. Practiced law in partnership with Lewis N. Dembitz until 1864. Practiced law in partnership with Byron Bacon afterwards. Elected as a Republican to the 1865-1867 Kentucky General Assembly. “Death of Hon. Martin Bijur,” Louisville Courier-Journal, May 1, 1882, p. 2; Report of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Bar Association, Held at Saratoga Springs, New York, August 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th, 1882 (Philadelphia: George S. Harris & Sons, 1883), 143-4.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-0865, KYR-0001-004-1375, KYR-0001-004-1379, KYR-0001-004-1388, KYR-0001-004-1409, KYR-0001-004-1566, KYR-0001-004-1987, KYR-0001-004-1988, KYR-0001-004-2030, KYR-0001-004-2839, KYR-0001-005-0051, KYR-0001-005-0142, KYR-0001-020-0323, KYR-0002-156-0004.
Bramlette, Thomas Elliott. (1817 – 1875) Twenty-third governor of Kentucky. Clinton County, Kentucky, native. Represented Clinton County in the state legislature in the 1840s. Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit at outset of the war. Resigned office to become colonel of Third Kentucky Volunteer Infantry U.S.A. Resigned commission in 1862 to become U.S. District Attorney for Kentucky. Elected governor in November 1863 over Charles A. Wickliffe and served until 1867. Ross A. Webb, “Thomas E. Bramlette (1863-1867)” in Lowell H. Harrison, ed., Kentucky’s Governors (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004), 93-97.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-001-0001, … [2,258 more at present].
Brockman, William. (c. 1824 – ?) Native of Germany and Louisville, Kentucky, resident. Laborer by trade. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, District No. 1, p. 60.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0418, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0004-004-0823, KYR-0001-004-3258.
Brown, Jeff. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, and New Albany, Indiana, attorney. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 43.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-0004-0016, KYR-0001-004-0018, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0159, KYR-0001-004-0425, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1418, KYR-0001-004-1712, KYR-0001-004-2939, KYR-0001-004-2944, KYR-0001-004-3407, KYR-0001-007-0591, KYR-0001-017-0332, KYR-0001-020-0333, KYR-0001-020-0712, KYR-0001-020-1422, KYR-0001-020-1499, KYR-0001-020-1575, KYR-0001-020-1617, KYR-0001-020-1618, KYR-0001-020-1812, KYR-0001-020-1823, KYR-0001-020-2056, KYR-0001-020-2113, KYR-0001-029-0063.
Burkhardt, Henry S. (? – ?) Louisville businessman. Worked in the wholesale grocery and commission merchant business at W. & H. Burkhardt, with William Burkhardt. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 47; J. D. Campbell’s Louisville Business Directory, For 1864 (Louisville: L. A. Civill, nd.),119.
Bush, Samuel S. (1830 – 1877) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Partner in the firm of Bush & Shivell, along with Henry C. Shivell. Kentucky Marriages, 1797-1865, U. S. City Directories, 1821-1989 [database online, Ancestry.com; Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 234.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1601, KYR-0001-004-2133, KYR-0001-020-0637.
Chrisler, Rudolph. (? – ?) Gave testimony in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
Clement, Joseph. (c. 1819 – 1882) New Hampshire native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney and magistrate. History of the Ohio Falls Cities and Their Counties, Vol. 1 (Cleveland: L. A. Williams, 1882), 356; Kentucky, Death Records, 1852-1953 [database on-line via Ancestry.com], Jefferson County, 1882, p. 7.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0047, KYR-0001-004-0180, KYR-0001-004-0364, KYR-0001-004-0418, KYR-0001-004-0454, KYR-0001-004-0551, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-0920, KYR-0001-004-1193, KYR-0001-004-1418, KYR-0001-004-1957, KYR-0001-004-1968, KYR-0001-004-2270, KYR-0001-0004-2293, KYR-0001-004-2358, KYR-0001-004-2399, KYR-0001-004-2416, KYR-0001-004-2510, KYR-0001-004-2540, KYR-0001-004-2789, KYR-0001-004-2898, KYR-0001-004-3184, KYR-0001-004-3407, KYR-0001-005-0057, KYR-0001-005-0058, KYR-0001-005-0117, KYR-0001-006-0005, KYR-0001-020-0174, KYR-0001-020-0351, KYR-0001-020-1133, KYR-0001-020-1437, KYR-0001-020-1649, KYR-0001-020-1944, KYR-0001-020-2113, KYR-0001-029-0087, KYR-0001-029-0156, KYR-0001-029-0164, KYR-0001-031-0009, KYR-0001-033-0004, KYR-0001-033-0005, KYR-0001-033-0030.
Conn, T. Jackson. (c. 1826 – ?) Kentucky native and Jefferson County Court Clerk. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 60; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Sixth Ward, p. 120.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0018, KYR-0001-004-0133, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0660, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1055, KYR-0001-004-1283, KYR-0001-004-2337, KYR-0001-004-2789, KYR-0001-006-0084, KYR-0001-007-0489, KYR-0001-020-1527, KYR-0001-029-0156, KYR-0001-029-0307.
Craig, Edwin S. (c. 1820 – 1882) Commonwealth’s Attorney for the Seventh Judicial District until 1861. Practiced law in partnership with Robert J. Elliott. “Death of Judge E.S. Craig,” Louisville Courier-Journal, May 27, 1882, p. 4; Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 64; Seventh Manuscript Census of the United States (1850), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, District Three, p. 94.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0364, KYR-0001-004-0454, KYR-0001-004-0479, KYR-0001-004-0660, KYR-0001-004-0732, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-0843, KYR-0001-004-0957, KYR-0001-004-1957, KYR-0001-004-2192, KYR-0001-004-2404, KYR-0001-020-0134, KYR-0001-020-0552, KYR-0001-020-0554, KYR-0001-020-0869, KYR-0001-029-0239.
Dannecker, Frederick G. (1828 – ?) German native and New Albany, Indiana, attorney. John M. Scott, The Bench and Bar of Chicago (Chicago: American Biographical Publishing Company, 1883), 496-97; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Indiana, Floyd County, New Albany, Third Ward, p. 8.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0685, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1379, KYR-0001-004-1644, KYR-0001-004-1718, KYR-0001-004-2270, KYR-0001-004-2294, KYR-0001-004-2416, KYR-0001-004-3084, KYR-0001-004-3114, KYR-0001-004-3407.
DeFlour, [unknown]. (? – ?) Gave testimony in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
Dembitz, Lewis Naphtali. (1833 – 1907) Native of Prussia and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Delegate to the 1860 Republican national convention. Practiced law in partnership with Martin Bijur until 1864. Uncle of future Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis. “Dembitz, Lewis Naphtali” in The Encyclopedia of Louisville, ed. John E. Kleber (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2001), 241-42.
Donheimer, [unknown]. (? – ?) Gave testimony in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
von Donhoff, Albert. (1806 – 1882) Native of Berlin, Germany, and Louisville, Kentucky, physician. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 75; “Dr. Albert Von Donhoff: The Unusual Life and Career of a Prussian Nobleman’s Son, and a Brilliant Physician” Louisville Courier-Journal, Nov. 7, 1882, p. 2.
Fields, Moses S. (c. 1828 – ?) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Sixth Ward, p. 119.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-023-0117.
Frend, [unknown]. (? – ?) Gave testimony in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
Fry, Jack. (1839 – 1870) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Franklin Gorin in 1865. Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 310; “Jack Fry – Find A Grave Memorial” http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=86941179&ref=acom.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1957, KYR-0001-004-2944, KYR-0001-020-0333, KYR-0001-020-1579, KYR-0001-023-0117.
Fry, William W. (c. 1798 – 1865) Virginia native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, District 2, p. 18; “W.W. Fry – Find A Grave Memorial” http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=96183143&ref=acom.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0108, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0180, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-020-0129, KYR-0001-020-0167, KYR-0001-020-1618, KYR-0001-029-0278.
Gailbreath, Joseph P. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 97.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0024, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1418, KYR-0001-004-1983, KYR-0001-004-2416, KYR-0001-004-3407, KYR-0001-017-0352, KYR-0001-017-0355, KYR-0001-017-0356, KYR-0001-020-0828.
Gazlay, Addison M. (1818 – 1881) New York native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Franklin Gorin. History of the Ohio Falls Cities and Their Counties, Vol. 1 (Cleveland: L. A. Williams, 1882), 509-10; Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 98.
Associated Documents: KYR-001-004-0115, KYR-0001-004-0364, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1791, KYR-0001-004-1803, KYR-0001-004-1805, KYR-0001-004-1806, KYR-0001-004-3407, KYR-0001-017-0001, KYR-0001-017-0062, KYR-0001-020-0129, KYR-0001-020-1527.
Gibson, Thomas Ware. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 99.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0267, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1509, KYR-0001-004-1528, KYR-0001-004-1553, KYR-0001-004-1554, KYR-0001-007-0109, KYR-0001-007-0229.
Gorin, Franklin. (1798 – 1877) Barren County, Kentucky, native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Addison M. Gazlay and with Jack Fry in 1865. E. Polk Johnson, A History of Kentucky and Kentuckians: The Leaders and Representative Men in Commerce, Industry and Modern Activities, Vol. III (Chicago and New York: Lewis Publishing, 1912), 1673-74; Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 102; Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 323.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0108, KYR-0001-004-0109, KYR-0001-004-0110, KYR-0001-004-0111, KYR-0001-004-0112, KYR-0001-004-0113, KYR-0001-004-0114, KYR-0001-004-0115, KYR-0001-004-0116, KYR-0001-004-0117, KYR-0001-004-0118, KYR-0001-004-0119, KYR-0001-004-0120, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0122, KYR-0001-004-0123, KYR-0001-004-0124, KYR-0001-004-0139, KYR-0001-004-0364, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1803, KYR-0001-023-0117, KYR-0002-204-0076, KYR-0002-204-0082.
Griffiths, Thomas J. (c. 1826 – 1884) Native of Wales and Louisville, Kentucky, physician. Practiced in partnership with Benjamin F. Grant. Accompanied an 1861 movement south of Louisville by General William T. Sherman, and provided medical services to the military barracks in Louisville through the end of the war. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 105; “Dr. Thomas J. Griffiths” The Louisville Medical News XVII no. 23 (June 7, 1884): 360-61; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Eighth Ward, p. 320.
Hanna, John. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, businessman. Partner in Hanna & Co., printers, with Alexander Hanna. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 111.
Harris, James. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 339.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0083, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1418, KYR-0001-004-1644, KYR-0001-004-1957, KYR-0001-004-2270, KYR-0001-004-2510, KYR-0001-017-0352, KYR-0001-017-0355, KYR-0001-020-1579.
Hoke, William B. (1838 – 1904) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Samuel S. English. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 82, 123; Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Kentucky State Bar Association Held at Covington, Kentucky, June 22-23, 1905 (Louisville: George G. Fetter, 1905), 56; John J. McAffee, Kentucky Politicians: Sketches of Representative Corn-Crackers and Other Miscellany (Louisville: Courier-Journal Job Printing Co., 1886), 92-94.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0682, KYR-0001-004-0683, KYR-0001-004-0684, KYR-0001-004-0685, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1377, KYR-0001-004-2161, KYR-0001-020-1598, KYR-0001-031-0125.
Hornsby, Isham H. (c. 1822 – ?) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 125; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Sixth Ward, p. 20.
Huber, [unknown]. (? – ?) Gave testimony in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
Jefferson Circuit Court. Part of the Seventh Judicial Circuit, which also included Bullitt, Oldham, Shelby, and Spencer Counties. Peter B. Muir (1861) and George W. Johnston (1862-1865) were the judges. Edwin S. Craig (1861) and J. R. Dupuy (1862-65) were the Commonwealth’s Attorneys. James P. Chambers was the Circuit Court Clerk.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0003, … [390 more at present].
Kahnt, Charles. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, furniture maker. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 135.
Kramur, Franz. A. (? – ?) Signatory to Louisville, Kentucky, petition on behalf of William Brockman.
Logel, Adolph. (? – 1864) Killed in altercation with William Brockman in Louisville, Kentucky, in 1864.
Louisville, Kentucky. Seat of Jefferson County on the Ohio River. Largest city in Kentucky during the Civil War. “Louisville” in The Kentucky Encyclopedia, ed. John E. Kleber (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1992), 574-8. The Encyclopedia of Louisville, ed. John E. Kleber (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2001).
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-001-0001, … [1,102 more at present].
Mattingly, John N. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Isaac R. Greene. Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 434, 327.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0180, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-0827, KYR-0001-004-0828, KYR-0001-004-2250, KYR-0001-004-2416, KYR-0001-004-3407, KYR-0001-005-0042.
McDowell, William Preston. (c. 1838 – ?) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, law clerk. Assisted in raising the Fifteenth Kentucky Volunteer Infantry Regiment and was appointed its adjutant. After August 1862, served as aide-de-camp and assistant adjutant general to Major General Lovell H. Rousseau. Wounded in action at the battle of Stones River. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Fourth Ward, p. 74. Compiled Service Records of Volunteer Union Soldiers Who Served in Organizations from the State of Kentucky, National Archives and Records Administration, RG94, M397, Roll 284, Fifteenth Infantry, Hu-McE; J.H. Battle, W.H. Perrin, and G.C. Kniffin, The History of Kentucky, Eighth Edition, Part I (Louisville and Chicago: F.A. Battey, 1888), 839-40.
Meriwether, William A. (1825 – ?) Deputy U.S. Marshal from 1861 to 1864 and appointed U.S. Marshal for Kentucky in 1864. J.H. Battle, W.H. Perrin, and G.C. Kniffin, The History of Kentucky, Eighth Edition, Part I (Louisville and Chicago: F.A. Battey, 1888), 847.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-020-0927, KYR-0001-031-0109.
Miller, Isaac Price. (c. 1818 – ?) Kentucky native and Jefferson County, Kentucky, farmer. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, District 1, p. 195; Miller-Thum Family Collection, 990PC47, Filson Historical Society, Louisville, Kentucky.
Miller, John K. (? – ?) Signatory to Louisville, Kentucky, petition on behalf of William Brockman.
Oakland House and Race Course. Louisville, Kentucky, horse racing track established in 1832. Saw its heyday in the 1830s and 1840s, and closed in the 1850s. “Oakland Race Course” in The Encyclopedia of Louisville, ed. John E. Kleber (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2001), 665.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0309, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0002-036-0045, KYR-0002-036-0046.
Ormsby, Collis. (1817 – 1891) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, merchant. Owner of the hardware and cutlery business of Collis Ormsby. Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, Louisville, Fifth Ward, p. 208; Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 189; Louisville Daily Journal, Jun. 22, 1861, p. 1.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0002-058-0006, KYR-0002-220-0147, KYR-0002-220-0149, KYR-0002-220-150.
Ormsby, Robert J. (1822 – 1879) Louisville, Kentucky, businessman. Bookkeeper in the hardware and cutlery business of Collis Ormsby. A founding director and stockholder of Cedar Hill and Oakland Railway Company in 1868. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 189; Acts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (Frankfort, Ky.: Kentucky Yeoman Office, John H. Harney, Public Printer: 1868), 553-554.
Pope, Alfred Thurston. (1842 – 1891) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Kentucky Death Records, 1852 – 1953 [database online, Ancestry.com], Jefferson County, 1891; J.H. Battle, W.H. Perrin, and G.C. Kniffin, The History of Kentucky, Eighth Edition, Part I (Louisville and Chicago: F.A. Battey, 1888), 877-78.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-031-0215.
Pope, Hamilton. (1815 – 1894) Louisville, Kentucky native and attorney. Practiced in partnership with John G. Barrett. Commanded Louisville Home Guards that accompanied William T. Sherman on an expedition towards Muldraugh’s Hill in 1861. Thomas Speed, The Union Regiments of Kentucky (Louisville: Courier-Journal Job Printing Company, 1897), 24, 28, 427. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 196.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0139, KYR-0001-004-0364, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0448, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-2416, KYR-0001-004-3055, KYR-0001-007-0109, KYR-0001-007-0229, KYR-0001-007-0309, KYR-0001-009-0024, KYR-0001-017-0265, KYR-0001-020-0351, KYR-0001-020-0637, KYR-0001-020-1575, KYR-0001-031-0215, KYR-0001-033-0039, KYR-0002-060-0029, KYR-0002-060-0030, KYR-0002-067-0053, KYR-0002-204-0037, KYR-0002-218-0014, KYR-0002-218-0056, KYR-0002-218-0098, KYR-0003-158-0103.
Ronald, William A. (? – ?) Sheriff of Jefferson County in 1864-65. Stock agent for the Louisville and Nashville Railroad. J. D. Campbell’s Louisville Business Directory, For 1864 (Louisville: L. A. Civill, nd.),70; Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 502; Genealogical and Historical Notes on Culpeper County, Virginia (Culpeper, Va.: Raleigh Travers Green, 1900), 90; Louisville Daily Democrat, July 19, 1867, p. 1.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0180, KYR-0001-004-0233, KYR-0001-004-0234, KYR-0001-004-0235, KYR-0001-004-0748, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1070, KYR-0001-004-1332, KYR-0001-004-1379, KYR-0001-004-1600, KYR-0001-004-1966, KYR-0001-004-2030, KYR-0001-004-2399, KYR-0001-004-2511, KYR-0001-004-2878, KYR-0001-005-0051.
Rousseau, Richard Hilaire. (1815 – 1872) Lincoln County, Kentucky, native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with his brother, Lovell H. Rousseau. The National Cyclopaedia of American Biography, Vol. XII (New York: James T. White, 1904), 185; Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 210.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0018, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0180, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-0841, KYR-0001-007-0109, KYR-0001-020-0712, KYR-0001-023-0117, KYR-0001-034-0050.
Semms, [unknown]. (? – ?) Gave testimony in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
Sherley, Zachariah Madison. (1811 – 1879) Virginia native and Louisville, Kentucky, businessman. Owned and operated steamboats along the Ohio River, contracting many of them to the United States army during the war. Partner in the ship chandler firm of Sherley, Bell & Co. with Jesse K. Bell and Richard H. Woolfolk. “Sherley, Zachariah Madison ‘Zachary’” in The Encyclopedia of Louisville, ed. John E. Kleber (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2001), 814; Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 224.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-007-0552, KYR-0001-020-1812, KYR-0002-205-0045, KYR-0002-207-0095, KYR-0002-207-0147, KYR-0002-209-0130, KYR-0002-220-0130, KYR-0002-221-0999, KYR-0002-221-1000, KYR-0002-221-1001, KYR-0002-221-1009, KYR-0003-158-0595, KYR-0003-158-0714.
Shivell, Henry C. (1841-1869) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Samuel S. Bush. President of a lead mine along the Kentucky River in Owen County, Kentucky in 1865. Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 529; New Albany Daily Ledger, February 27, 1866, 2; New Albany Daily Ledger, August 5, 1865, 2; The Louisville Daily Journal, April 12, 1867; Daily Courier, July 26, 1866.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-2155, KYR-0001-007-0381, KYR-0001-007-0432.
Shrader, Augusta. (? – ?) Gave affidavit in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
Shrader, John. (? – ?) Gave affidavit in The Commonwealth v. William Brockman, tried in the Jefferson Circuit Court in 1864.
Smith, Samuel B. (c. 1800 – 1866) Virginia native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with Joshua F. Bullitt. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 46, 230; Eighth Manuscript Census of the United States (1860), Population Schedules, Kentucky, Jefferson County, District One, p. 32; “Death of Samuel B. Smith, esq.—Bar Meeting,” Louisville Courier, Dec. 15, 1866, p. 1.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-007-0476, KYR-0001-020-0327.
Tennessee. Sixteenth state to join the Union in 1796. Shares Kentucky’s southern border. Capital at Nashville.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-002-0001, … [162 more at present].
Wolfe, Nathaniel. (1808 – 1865) Virginia native and Louisville, Kentucky, attorney and politician. Practiced in partnership with Silas N. Hodges. Former Commonwealth’s Attorney and State Senator. Served in the House of Representative of the Kentucky General Assembly from 1859-1863. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 267. “Wolfe, Nathaniel” in The Kentucky Encyclopedia, ed. John E. Kleber (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1992), 962.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0351, KYR-0001-004-0439, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-0811, KYR-0001-017-0194, KYR-0001-017-0358, KYR-0001-017-0375, KYR-0001-017-0384, KYR-0001-020-0323, KYR-0001-020-0863, KYR-0001-020-1244, KYR-0001-020-1437, KYR-0001-023-0109, KYR-0001-029-0097, KYR-0001-031-0202, KYR-0001-033-0010, KYR-0002-050-0008, KYR-0002-207-0142, KYR-0002-218-0044, KYR-0002-218-0349, KYR-0003-158-0241.
Wood, Logan A. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Practiced in partnership with L. A. Civill. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 267; “Lawyer L.A. Wood,” Louisville Courier-Journal, Dec. 3, 1886, p. 2.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-006-0049, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0234, KYR-0001-004-0264, KYR-0001-004-0310, KYR-0001-004-0384, KYR-0001-004-0483, KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-004-1057, KYR-0001-004-1260, KYR-0001-004-1458, KYR-0001-004-1644, KYR-0001-004-1957, KYR-0001-004-2161, KYR-0001-004-2293, KYR-0001-004-2294, KYR-0001-004-2416, KYR-0001-004-2867, KYR-0001-004-2927, KYR-0001-004-3168.
Wood, William C. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, attorney. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 267.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0113, KYR-0001-004-0114, KYR-0001-004-0117, KYR-0001-004-0121, KYR-0001-004-0122, KYR-0001-004-0123, KYR-0001-004-0124, KYR-0001-004-0787.
Wood, William F. (? – ?) Louisville, Kentucky, businessman. Partner in the wall paper and window shade business of Wood & Bros. with Charles A. and John B. Wood. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 267; Edwards’ Annual Directory to the Inhabitants, Institutions, Incorporated Companies, Manufacturing Establishments, Business Firms, Etc., Etc., in the City of Louisville for 1865-6 (Louisville: Maxwell & Co., 1866), 602.
Woolfolk, Richard Henry. (1823 – 1885) Kentucky native and Louisville, Kentucky, businessman. Owned and operated steamboats along the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. Partner in the ship chandler firm of Sherley, Bell & Co. (later Sherley, Woolfolk, & Co.) with Zachariah M. Sherley and Jesse K. Bell. Tanner’s Louisville Directory, and Business Advertiser for 1861 (Louisville: Henry Tanner, 1861), 224, 268; “Capt. Woolfolk Dead,” Louisville Courier-Journal, Jun. 13, 1885, p. 3.
Associated Documents: KYR-0001-004-0787, KYR-0001-007-0552, KYR-0002-207-0095, KYR-0002-207-0147, KYR-0002-209-0026, KYR-0002-220-0130, KYR-0002-221-0999, KYR-0002-221-1000, KYR-0002-221-1001, KYR-0002-221-1009, KYR-0003-158-0595, KYR-0003-158-0714.
Please check back soon for more information on this RFP.