title: Summary judgment

abstract: In law, a summary judgment, also referred to as judgment as a matter of law or summary disposition, is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Summary judgments may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case. The formulation of the summary judgment standard is stated in somewhat different ways by courts in different jurisdictions. In the United States, the presiding judge generally must find there is "no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." In England and Wales, the court rules for a party without a full trial when "the claim, defence or issue has no real prospect of success and there is no other compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at a trial." In common-law systems, questions about what the law actually is in a particular case are decided by judges; in rare cases jury nullification of the law may act to contravene or complement the instructions or orders of the judge, or other officers of the court. A factfinder has to decide what the facts are and apply the law. In traditional common law the factfinder was a jury, but in many jurisdictions the judge now acts as the factfinder as well. It is the factfinder who decides "what really happened", and it is the judge who applies the law to the facts as determined by the factfinder, whether directly or by giving instructions to the jury. In the absence of an award of summary judgment, a lawsuit ordinarily proceeds to trial, which is an opportunity for litigants to contest evidence in an attempt to persuade the factfinder that they are saying "what really happened", and that, under the applicable law, they should prevail. The necessary steps before a case can get to trial include disclosing documents to the opponent by discovery, showing the other side the evidence, often in the form of witness statements. This process is lengthy, and can be difficult and costly. A party moving (applying) for summary judgment is attempting to avoid the time and expense of a trial when, in the moving party's view, the outcome is obvious. Typically this is stated as, when all the evidence likely to be put forward is such that no reasonable factfinder could disagree with the moving party, summary judgment is appropriate. Sometimes this will occur when there is no real dispute as to what happened, but it also frequently occurs when there is a nominal dispute but the non-moving party cannot produce enough evidence to support its position. A party may also move for summary judgment in order to eliminate the risk of losing at trial, and possibly avoid having to go through discovery, by demonstrating to the judge, via sworn statements and documentary evidence, that there are no material factual issues remaining to be tried. If there is nothing for the factfinder to decide, then the moving party asks rhetorically, why have a trial? The moving party will also attempt to persuade the court that the undisputed material facts require judgment to be entered in its favor. In many jurisdictions, a party moving for summary judgment takes the risk that, although the judge may agree there are no material issues of fact remaining for trial, the judge may also find that it is the non-moving party that is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

text:
# Summary judgment

In law, a **summary judgment**, also referred to as **judgment as a matter of law** or **summary disposition**, is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Summary judgments may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case. The formulation of the summary judgment standard is stated in somewhat different ways by courts in different jurisdictions. In the United States, the presiding judge generally must find there is "no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." In England and Wales, the court rules for a party without a full trial when "the claim, defence or issue has no real prospect of success and there is no other compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at a trial."

In common-law systems, questions about what the law actually is in a particular case are decided by judges; in rare cases jury nullification of the law may act to contravene or complement the instructions or orders of the judge, or other officers of the court. A factfinder has to decide what the facts are and apply the law. In traditional common law the factfinder was a jury, but in many jurisdictions the judge now acts as the factfinder as well. It is the factfinder who decides "what really happened", and it is the judge who applies the law to the facts as determined by the factfinder, whether directly or by giving instructions to the jury. In the absence of an award of summary judgment (or some type of pretrial dismissal), a lawsuit ordinarily proceeds to trial, which is an opportunity for litigants to contest evidence in an attempt to persuade the factfinder that they are saying "what really happened", and that, under the applicable law, they should prevail. The necessary steps before a case can get to trial include disclosing documents to the opponent by discovery, showing the other side the evidence, often in the form of witness statements. This process is lengthy, and can be difficult and costly.

A party moving (applying) for summary judgment is attempting to avoid the time and expense of a trial when, in the moving party's view, the outcome is obvious. Typically this is stated as, when all the evidence likely to be put forward is such that no reasonable factfinder could disagree with the moving party, summary judgment is appropriate. Sometimes this will occur when there is no real dispute as to what happened, but it also frequently occurs when there is a nominal dispute but the non-moving party cannot produce enough evidence to support its position. A party may also move for summary judgment in order to eliminate the risk of losing at trial, and possibly avoid having to go through discovery (i.e., by moving at the outset of discovery), by demonstrating to the judge, via sworn statements and documentary evidence, that there are no material factual issues remaining to be tried. If there is nothing for the factfinder to decide, then the moving party asks rhetorically, *why have a trial?* The moving party will also attempt to persuade the court that the undisputed material facts require judgment to be entered in its favor. In many jurisdictions, a party moving for summary judgment takes the risk that, although the judge may agree there are no material issues of fact remaining for trial, the judge may also find that it is the *non-moving* party that is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

## Specific jurisdictions

### United States

In the United States federal courts, summary judgment is governed by Federal Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, derived primarily from the three seminal cases concerning summary judgment out of the 1980s. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56; *Celotex Corp. v. Catrett*, 477 U.S. 317, 322–27 (1986) (clarifying the shifting allocations of burdens of production, persuasion, and proof at summary judgment); *Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.*, 477 U.S. 242, 257 (1986) (applying heightened evidentiary standard of proof in libel action to judicial assessment of propriety of summary judgment); *Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp.*, 475 U.S. 574, 596–98 (1986) (holding antitrust plaintiff with an inherently implausible claim was subject to dismissal at summary judgment).

In American legal practice, summary judgment can be awarded by the court before trial, effectively holding that no trial will be necessary. At the federal level, a summary-judgment motion in United States District Court is governed by Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Other pretrial motions, such as a "motion for judgment on the pleadings" or a "motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted", can be converted by the judge to summary-judgment motions if matters outside the pleadings are presented to  and not excluded by  the trial-court judge.

A party seeking summary judgment (or making any other motion) is called the **movant** (usually, this is *defendant*); the opposing party is the **nonmovant** (usually, *plaintiff*). Per Rule 56(a), issuance of summary judgment can be based only upon the court's finding that, *both:*

1. there exists no disputed, genuine issue of material fact between the parties requiring a trial to resolve; and
2. in applying the law to the (undisputed) facts, one party is clearly entitled by law to judgment.

Here:

* An **issue of (purported) fact** is a (potential) event that the factfinder at trial (jury, or judge in the case of a bench trial) is charged with **crediting** (determining what "really happened", according to the credibility of the witnesses/experts/etc. at trial).
* A **disputed** issue/fact means movant claims one thing, while nonmovant makes a different (conflicting/contradictory) claim.
* A **genuine** issue/fact is one that can be resolved in favor by either party, by some rational/reasonable factfinder.
* A **material** issue/fact is one that has the potential of affecting the outcome of the case/issue in dispute (judgment in favor of one party over the other).

Of cardinal importance here is that, by design, the judge had no discretion at summary judgment time: all fact-finding is done by the jury at trial, not by the judge at summary judgment (the judge only looks for the existence of disputed facts to be found).

Summary judgment in the United States applies only in civil cases. It does not apply to criminal cases to obtain a pretrial judgment of conviction or acquittal, in part because a criminal defendant has a constitutional right to a jury trial. Some federal and state-court judges publish general guidelines and sample summary judgment forms.

According to Federal Judicial Center research, summary-judgment motions are filed in 17% of federal cases. 71% of summary-judgment motions were filed by defendants, 26% by plaintiffs. Out of these, 36% of the motions were denied, and 64% were granted in whole or in part.

From a tactical perspective, there are two basic types of summary-judgment motions. One requires a *full* evidentiary presentation, and the other requires only a more limited, targeted one.

First, a plaintiff may seek summary judgment on any cause of action, and similarly, a defendant may seek summary judgment in its favor on any affirmative defense. But in either case, the moving party must produce evidence in support of *each and every* essential element of the claim or defense (as it would have to do at trial). To be successful, this type of summary-judgment motion must be drafted as a written preview of a party's entire case-in-chief (that it would put before the finder of fact at trial) because *all* parts of an entire claim or defense are at issue.

Second, a different and very common tactic is where a defendant seeks summary judgment on a plaintiff's cause of action. The key difference is that in this latter situation, the defendant need only attack *one* essential element of the plaintiff's claim. A finding that the plaintiff cannot prove *one* essential element of its claim necessarily renders all other elements immaterial and results in summary judgment for the defendant. So these motions tend to be precisely targeted to the weakest points of the plaintiff's case. It is also possible for a plaintiff to seek summary judgment on a defendant's affirmative defense, but those types of motions are very rare.

Regardless of the type of summary judgment motion, there is a standardized rule(-like) framework for evaluating the first clause of Rule 56(a) ("no disputed genuine issue of material fact"), formulated as the following six core *summary judgment tenets of review* (SJTOR) (where the emphasized must indicate the lack of judicial discretion permitted):

1. **All issues/facts**: All ("each/every", not just "some") factual issues must be considered/discussed—especially, all disputed/contested genuine issues of material facts.
2. **Whole record**: The entire record ("whole set/totality of circumstances", not just a "subset"), must be considered, regarding each/every issue.
3. **In context**: All issues must be considered in holistic relationship with one another, within the whole-record environment (not context-free line-by-line isolation); patterns may emerge.
4. **Nonmovant trumps movant**: Tenets 1–3 must be interpreted/construed in the light most favorable/advantageous to nonmovant (never to movant), and belief/credit awarded thereto (as to whether a dispute exists, not as to who wins the dispute, though either interpretation unambiguously satisfies the only question at summary judgment, which is whether or not a dispute exists).
5. **All inferences**: All reasonable/justifiable logical/legal inferences/implications from tenets 1–3 must also be interpreted favorably to nonmovant, and credit awarded thereto.
6. **Light burden**: For tenets 4–5, nonmovant bears the undemanding requirement of production only of favorable facts (and law)—i.e., *de minimis* proof/persuasion (that a rational/reasonable jury could find for nonmovant). All fact/credibility-finding must be reserved for the jury at trial, none for the judge at summary judgment.

A party seeking summary judgment may refer to any evidence that would be admissible at trial, such as depositions (or deposition excerpts), party admissions, affidavits in support from witnesses, documents received during discovery (such as contracts, emails, letters, and certified government documents). The pieces of evidence should be accompanied by a declaration from the moving party that all copies of the documents are true and correct, including deposition excerpts. Each party may present to the court its view of applicable law by submitting a legal memorandum supporting, or opposing, the motion. The opposing party may also file its own summary-judgment motion (called a *cross-motion*), if the deadline still allows. The court may allow for oral argument of the lawyers, generally where the judge wishes to question the lawyers on issues in the case.

Deadline for filing of the dispositive motions in U.S. federal court system is set by judge in the initial discovery plan order. If a party wants to file a motion or a cross-motion for summary judgment after the deadline, it needs to ask for leave of court. Normally, federal judges require valid reasons to alter case-management deadlines and only do so with reluctance.

There are also freely accessible web search engines to assist parties in finding court decisions that can be cited as an example or analogy to resolve similar questions of law. Google Scholar is the biggest database of full-text state and federal court decisions that can be accessed without charge. These web search engines often allow one to select specific state courts to search. Summary judgment is awarded if the undisputed facts and the law make it clear that it would be impossible for one party to prevail if the matter were to proceed to trial. The court must consider all designated evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the summary judgment motion.

If a trial could result in the jury (or judge in a bench trial) deciding in favor of the party opposing the motion, then summary judgment is inappropriate. A decision granting summary judgment can be appealed without delay. A decision denying summary judgment ordinarily cannot be immediately appealed; instead, the case continues on its normal course. In United States federal courts, a denial of summary judgment cannot be appealed until final resolution of the whole case, because of the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (the final judgment rule).

To defeat a summary-judgment motion, the non-moving party only has to show substantial evidence that a dispute of material facts exists, regardless of the strength of that evidence. For example, even if the moving side can produce the testimony of "a dozen bishops", and the non-moving side only has the testimony of a known liar, then summary judgment is not appropriate. Deciding on the relative credibility of witnesses is a question for the factfinder at trial.

Where appropriate, a court may award judgment summarily upon fewer than all claims. This is known as *partial summary judgment*.

#### Reviews of summary judgments

It is not uncommon for summary judgments of the lower U.S. courts in complex cases to be overturned on appeal. A grant of summary judgment is reviewed *de novo*, meaning, without deference to the views of the trial judge, both as to the determination that there is no remaining genuine issue of material fact and that the prevailing party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

#### State-court practice

Summary judgment practice in state courts in most U.S. states is similar to federal practice, though with minor differences. For example, the U.S. state of California requires the moving party to actually present evidence rather than merely refer to evidence. This is done by attaching relevant documents and by summarizing all relevant factual points within those documents in a separate statement of facts. In turn, the record to be reviewed by the judge can be very large; for example, the landmark *Aguilar* case involved a record of about 18,400 pages. Also, California uses the term "summary adjudication" instead of "partial summary judgment". The California view is that the latter term is an oxymoron since a judgment is defined by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 577 as the "final determination of the rights of the parties" and a "partial summary judgment" is not actually final since it necessarily leaves some issues to be decided at trial. There is currently a conflict between the different districts of the California Courts of Appeal as to the availability of summary adjudication; most superior courts tend to side with the narrowest interpretation of California Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, under which a party may make such a motion only with respect to an entire cause of action, an affirmative defense, or a punitive-damages claim. There is also language in section 437c about "issues of duty", but some Court of Appeal panels have given that phrase an extremely narrow interpretation due to evidence that the California State Legislature has been trying to stop the state courts from engaging in the piecemeal adjudication of individual issues.

In New York, there is the procedure of summary judgment in lieu of complaint CPLR § 3213. This allows a plaintiff in an action based on an instrument to pay money only or a judgment to file a motion for summary judgment and supporting papers with the summons instead of a complaint. The motion must be noted to be heard on the date the defendant is required to appear under CPLR 320(a). If the plaintiff sets down the hearing date later than the minimum, he may require the defendant to serve a copy of the answering paper on him within the extended period. If the motion is denied the moving and answering papers shall be deemed the complaint and answer, respectively, unless the court orders otherwise.

#### Filing and privacy

Many U.S. district courts have developed their own requirements included in local rules for filing summary-judgment motions. Local rules can set limits on the number of pages, explain if a separate factual statement is required, whether it is acceptable to combine motion petition with a response, and if a judge needs an additional copy of the documents (called a judge's copy), etc. Local rules can define page-layout elements like margins, text font/size, distance between lines, mandatory footer text, page numbering, and provide directions on how the pages need to be bound together – i.e., acceptable fasteners, number and location of fastening holes, etc. If the filed motion does not comply with the local rules, then the judge can choose to strike the motion completely, or order the party to re-file its motion, or grant a special exception to the local rules.

Summary-judgment motions, like many other court filings, are a matter of public record. So under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 5.2, sensitive text like Social Security number, Taxpayer Identification Number, birthday, bank accounts and children's names, should be redacted from the summary-judgment motion and accompanying exhibits. The redacted text can be erased with black-out or white-out, and the page should have an indication that it was redacted – most often by stamping the word "redacted" on the bottom. Alternately, the filing party may ask the court's permission to file some exhibits completely under seal. A minor's name of the petitions should be replaced with initials.

However, certain types of filings containing information that would otherwise be redacted are excepted from redaction. Additionally, the local rules may require parties seeking to seal documents to first file a motion to seal and obtain leave of the court prior to filing the sealed documents.

A person making a redacted filing can file an unredacted copy under seal, or the court can choose to order later that an additional filing be made under seal without redaction. Copies of both redacted and unredacted documents filed with the court should be provided to the other parties in the case.

#### Criminal law counterpart

In the United States, the criminal law counterpart to summary judgment is the motion to dismiss.

### England and Wales

In England and Wales, Part 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules governs the award of summary judgment. Summary judgment is available in all claims against both the defendant and claimant with the following exceptions.

* There may be no summary judgment in possession proceedings against a mortgagor or a person holding over after the end of his tenancy whose occupancy is protected within the meaning of the Rent Act 1977 or the Housing Act 1988.
* There may be no summary judgment against a defendant in admiralty proceedings *in rem*.

### Canada

Summary judgment procedures were broadened in Canadian courts in the 1980s. With the exception of Quebec (which has its own procedural device for disposing of abusive claims summarily), all provinces feature a summary judgment mechanism in their respective rules of civil procedure. Ontario, after a study on the issues of access to justice, reformed its rules in 2010 to extend the powers of motion judges and masters for ordering summary judgment, following the introduction of similar measures in Alberta and British Columbia.

In 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada encouraged greater use of the procedure by the courts in its ruling in *Hryniak v. Mauldin*. In this case, the Supreme Court of Canada announced a cultural shift, in favor of greater reliance on summary judgment motions to adjudicate disputes, as opposed to reliance on conventional trial. This shift was urged by a desire to increase access to civil justice, by interpreting summary judgment rules broadly, "favoring proportionality and fair access to the affordable, timely and just adjudication of claims".

However, since the decision in *Hyniak*, a number of court decisions have sought to limit its use in the context of motions for partial summary judgments. In *Butera v. Chown, Cairns LLP*, the Ontario Court of Appeal reports "the increase in summary judgment motions that have flowed since Hryniak" and that judges "are required to spend time hearing partial summary judgment motions and writing comprehensive reasons on an issue that does not dispose of the action."

### Turkey

Summary judgments are not permitted under Turkish law.

### Germany

There is no specific provision in German law for summary judgment, though a judge may dismiss a clearly unfounded case on the merits after a hearing and without receiving evidence into the record.

### China

Summary judgment exists in Hong Kong. The test is whether there is a triable issue and if there is one, whether it amounts to an arguable defense.


abstract: The Sumathi Best Television Current Reporting Award is presented annually in Sri Lanka by the Sumathi Group of Campany associated with many commercial brands for the best Sri Lankan current news reporting of the year in television screen. The award was first given in 2011. The award is given to the best two current news reporting television channel. Following is a list of the winners of this prestigious title since then.

text:
# Sumathi Best Television Current Reporting Award

The **Sumathi Best Television Current Reporting Award** is presented annually in Sri Lanka by the Sumathi Group of Campany associated with many commercial brands for the best Sri Lankan current news reporting of the year in television screen.

The award was first given in 2011. The award is given to the best two current news reporting television channel. Following is a list of the winners of this prestigious title since then.

| Year | Place | TV channel |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2010 | 1st place - *Live @ 8* | Swarnavahini |
| | 2nd place - *Ada Derana* | TV Derana |
| 2011 | 1st place - *Ada Derana* | TV Derana |
| | 2nd place - *Live @ 8* | Swarnavahini |
| 2012 | 1st place - *Ada Derana* | TV Derana |
| | 2nd place - *Live @ 8* | Swarnavahini |
| 2013 | *Ada Derana* | TV Derana |
| 2014 | 1st place - *Live @ 8* | Swarnavahini |
| | 2nd place - *Ada Derana* | TV Derana |
| 2015 | 1st place - *Hari Puduma Iskole* | Independent Television Network |
| | 2nd - *Uma Oya Nisa Galana Kandulu* | Swarnavahini |
| 2016 | 1st place - *Sajith Ranasinghe* | Swarnavahini |
| | 2nd - *Indika Weerakoon* | Independent Television Network |
| 2017 | 1st place - *Pahiyangala* | TV Derana |
| | 2nd - *Puvath Satahana* | Independent Television Network |
| 2018 | 1st place - *Ada Dawasa* | Swarnavahini |
| | 2nd - *Sanhindiyawe Paalama* | Independent Television Network |
| 2019 | 1st place - *Lankawe Bus Nala* | Siyatha TV |
| | 2nd - *Hithakami Mee Masso* | Independent Television Network |
| 2020 | 1st place - *PCR Parikshanawala Awashyathawa* | TV Derana |
| | 2nd - *Covid Asadithaya* | Swarnavahini |
| 2021 | 1st place - *Rambaken Oya Wana Vinasaya* | Sirasa TV |
| | 2nd - *Pakisthanyadi Priyantha Kumara Ghathanaya* | Hiru TV |
| 2022 | 1st place - *Nadungamuwe Hasthiyage Sanrakshanaya* | Hiru TV |
| | 2nd - *Sarasvi Sisunge Siyadivi Nasaganim* | Independent Television Network |
| 2023 | 1st place - *Sri Padaye Virusay* | Hiru TV |
| | 2nd - *Adhivegayata Biliwu Karanda Gasa* | Swarnavahini |


title: Superior labial artery

abstract: The superior labial artery is larger and more egregious than the inferior labial artery. It follows a similar course along the edge of the upper lip, lying between the mucous membrane and the orbicularis oris, and anastomoses with the artery of the opposite side. It supplies the upper lip, and gives off in its course two or three vessels which ascend to the nose; a septal branch ramifies on the nasal septum as far as the point of the nose, and an alar branch supplies the ala of the nose.

text:
# Superior labial artery

The **superior labial artery** (**superior labial branch of facial artery**) is larger and more egregious than the inferior labial artery.

It follows a similar course along the edge of the upper lip, lying between the mucous membrane and the orbicularis oris, and anastomoses with the artery of the opposite side.

It supplies the upper lip, and gives off in its course two or three vessels which ascend to the nose; a septal branch ramifies on the nasal septum as far as the point of the nose, and an alar branch supplies the ala of the nose.

## Additional images

*This article incorporates text in the public domain from page 555 of the 20th edition of* Gray's Anatomy *(1918)*

## InfoBox

| Superior labial artery | |
| --- | --- |
| The labial coronary arteries, the glands of the lips, and the nerves of the right side seen from the posterior surface after removal of the mucous membrane. | |
| The arteries of the face and scalp. (Superior labial labeled at bottom right.) | |
| Details | |
| Source | Facial artery |
| Vein | Superior labial vein |
| Supplies | Upper lip, nasal septum, ala of the nose |
| Identifiers | |
| Latin | *ramus labialis superior arteriae facialis, arteria labialis superior* |
| TA98 | A12.2.05.026 |
| TA2 | 4394 |
| FMA | 49570 |
| Anatomical terminology | |


title: Panthiades ochus

abstract: Panthiades ochus is a butterfly in the family Lycaenidae. It was described by Frederick DuCane Godman and Osbert Salvin in 1887. It is found in Mexico and Guatemala.

text:
# Panthiades ochus

***Panthiades ochus*** is a butterfly in the family Lycaenidae. It was described by Frederick DuCane Godman and Osbert Salvin in 1887. It is found in Mexico and Guatemala.

## InfoBox

| *Panthiades ochus* | |
| --- | --- |
|
| Scientific classification | |
| Kingdom: | Animalia |
| Phylum: | Arthropoda |
| Class: | Insecta |
| Order: | Lepidoptera |
| Family: | Lycaenidae |
| Genus: | *Panthiades* |
| Species: | ***P. ochus*** |
| Binomial name | |
| ***Panthiades ochus***<br>(Godman & Salvin, \[1887\]) | |
|
| Synonyms | |
| * *Thecla ochus* Godman & Salvin, \[1887\] | |


title: The Most Extreme

abstract: The Most Extreme is a documentary television series on the American cable television network Animal Planet. It first aired on July 7, 2002. Each episode focuses on a specific animal feature, such as strength, speed, behavior, anatomy, or diet, and examines and ranks ten animals that portray extreme or unusual examples of that quality. Along with each animal on the countdown, each episode presents an animated segment which compares the animal's ability with something equivalent in humans, followed by an interview segment with people who share some common trait. Old, often public domain, cartoons, movie clips and trailers are often included.

text:
# The Most Extreme

***The Most Extreme*** is a documentary television series on the American cable television network Animal Planet. It first aired on July 7, 2002. Each episode focuses on a specific animal feature, such as strength, speed, behavior, anatomy, or diet, and examines and ranks ten animals that portray extreme or unusual examples of that quality. Along with each animal on the countdown, each episode presents an animated segment which compares the animal's ability with something equivalent in humans, followed by an interview segment with people who share some common trait. Old, often public domain, cartoons, movie clips and trailers are often included.

## Episodes

> "Earth is a planet of extremes. Extreme places, and extreme animals. But some animals are more extreme than others. Join us as we count down to find the most unusual, and the most extraordinary, on Animal Planet's The Most Extreme."
>
> Opening of the show.

The show was narrated by Adam J. Harrington. On Animal Planet, the episodes were also announced by Simon Arnstein.

### Season 1

| # | Original airdate | Title | Overview | Animal that was Number 1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
| 1 | 7 July 2002 | *Jumpers* | The fastest, highest and best jumpers. | Flea |
| 2 | 7 July 2002 | *Gluttons* | The greediest eaters in the world. | Caterpillar |
| 3 | 14 July 2002 | *Speed* | The fastest animals on land, air and water. | Tiger beetle |
| 4 | 21 July 2002 | *Births* | Extreme reproduction in number of young, size and other factors. | Tapeworm |
| 5 | 28 July 2002 | *Cheats* | The ways animals trick one another. | Cuckoo |
| 6 | 3 August 2002 | *Survivors* | The animals who best survive extreme conditions. | Water bear |
| 7 | 11 August 2002 | *Fighters* | Warriors of the animal kingdom. | Ant |
| 8 | 18 August 2002 | *Builders* | The animal kingdom's most innovative construction engineers. | Termite |
| 9 | 25 August 2002 | *Horrors* | The animals that most inspire terror in human beings. | Parasitic worm |
| 10 | 3 September 2002 | *Strength* | Proportionally, the strongest animals in the world. | Rhinoceros beetle |
| 11 | 11 October 2002 | *Biters* | The deadliest, most prolific and most extreme bites. | Cookiecutter shark |
| 12 | 3 November 2002 | *Smarts* | Geniuses in the animal kingdom. | Parrot |
| 13 | 10 November 2002 | *Lovers* | Most extreme courtship rituals. | Redback Spider |

### Season 2

| # | Original airdate | Title | Overview | Animal that was Number 1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
| 14 | 11 May 2003 | *Moms* | Mothers with the heaviest, hardest or most unusual jobs on the planet. | Sea louse |
| 15 | 15 June 2003 | *Dads* | Fathers in the wild can go to extremes to take care of their young. | Seahorse |
| 16 | 22 June 2003 | *Venom* | Animals with the most lethal venomous bites or stings. | Box jellyfish |
| 17 | 29 June 2003 | *Disguise* | These animals are experts at pretending to be what they are not. | Mimic octopus |
| 18 | 13 July 2003 | *Swarms* | Hordes in the animal kingdom numbering millions and even billions of individuals. | Argentine ant |
| 19 | 7 September 2003 | *Body Parts* | Animals with relatively large body parts. | Giraffe |
| 20 | 14 September 2003 | *Predators* | The most efficient hunters come in many sizes. | Shrew |
| 21 | 21 September 2003 | *Stinkers* | The worst-smelling animals, including one with a stench that kills. | Skunk |
| 22 | 28 September 2003 | *Super Senses* | The world's best at keeping up with their environments. | Shark |
| 23 | 23 November 2003 | *Eaters* | Animals with the most unusual menus. | Vulture |
| 24 | 30 November 2003 | *Daredevils* | Top stuntmen of the natural kingdom. | Barnacle goose |
| 25 | 7 December 2003 | *Defenders* | The best and most unusual self-protectors. | Bee |
| 26 | 21 December 2003 | *Oddities* | Strange animals and their human equivalents. | Deep-sea anglerfish |

### Season 3

| # | Original airdate | Title | Overview | Animal that was Number 1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
| 27 | 3 August 2004 | *Gross-Outs* | The most disgusting behavior in the wild. | Fly |
| 28 | 10 August 2004 | *Home Designers* | The most extreme, unusual and innovative animal architects. | Termite |
| 29 | 7 September 2004 | *Tough Babies* | The strongest babies in the animal kingdom, with human comparisons. | Sand tiger shark |
| 30 | 14 September 2004 | *Wild Partiers* | How the most extreme partiers in the wild compare to human parties. | Christmas Island red crab |
| 31 | 21 September 2004 | *Monster Myths* | The reality behind some of the most feared animals in the world. | Wolf |
| - | 25 September 2004 | *The Best of the Best* | Retroactive examination of Number 1s from earlier episodes, with a countdown to the most extreme among them. | Cookiecutter shark (from *Biters*) |
| 32 | 12 October 2004 | *Killer Cats* | The most ferocious felines in the world. | House cat |
| 33 | 19 October 2004 | *Battle of the Sexes* | Males and females of animals in which the two sexes have very little in common with one another and are not always good for each other's health. | Whiptail lizard |
| 34 | 23 November 2004 | *Big Mouths* | Proportionally, the 10 largest mouths in the world. | Argentine horned frog |
| 35 | 30 November 2004 | *Deadly Snakes* | The most venomous, dangerous and prolific killer snakes. | Cobra |
| 36 | 14 December 2004 | *Killers* | The animals with the highest human kill counts. | Mosquito |
| 37 | 8 February 2005 | *Bloodsuckers* | Vampires in the animal kingdom. | Tick |
| 38 | 15 February 2005 | *Super Sharks* | The "highest tech" sharks in the ocean. | Hammerhead shark |
| 39 | 22 February 2005 | *Poison* | The deadliest chemical defenses. | Golden poison frog |
| 40 | 1 March 2005 | *Super Dogs* | The 10 dog breeds that have evolved the farthest from their wolf ancestor. | Chihuahua |
| 41 | 8 March 2005 | *Global Conquerors* | The most invasive animal species. | Cockroach |
| 42 | 15 March 2005 | *Outrageous Flirts* | The unusual ways that animals attract one another. | Elephant |
| 43 | 27 April 2005 | *Athletes* | The most athletic animals and their human equivalents. | Arctic tern |
| 44 | 4 May 2005 | *Odd Couples* | When two kinds unite: unexpected animal partnerships. | Greenland shark/*Ommatokoita* |
| 45 | 25 May 2005 | *Movers* | The animals that move the best with the fewest limbs for movement. | Scallop |
| 46 | 1 June 2005 | *Troublemakers* | The animals that cause the most trouble for humans just by doing what they do. | Termite |

### Season 4

| # | Original airdate | Title | Overview | Animal that was Number 1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
| 47 | 25 October 2005 | *Hissy Fits* | The worst temper tantrums in the animal world. | Elephant |
| 48 | 1 November 2005 | *Living Dead* | Not actual zombies, these extreme animals can play dead or, when dormant, can appear to come back from the dead. | Water bear |
| 49 | 8 November 2005 | *Divers* | The animals that can hold their breaths the longest or dive the relative deepest. | Sperm Whale |
| 50 | 29 November 2005 | *Dieters* | Some animals can eat a lot without gaining weight, while others can go for long times between meals. | Tick |
| 51 | 24 January 2006 | *Loudmouths* | The world's loudest animals. | Pistol shrimp |
| 52 | 2 February 2006 | *Appendages* | The most unusual animal attachments. | Anglerfish |
| 53 | 7 March 2006 | *Transformers* | Ten transformers capable of altering themselves in extreme ways. | *Ribeiroia* |
| 54 | 14 March 2006 | *Fashion Disasters* | Animals whose appearances can put them in danger. | Deer |
| 55 | 21 March 2006 | *City Slickers* | Animals best adapted to life in human urban environments. | Macaque |
| 56 | 28 March 2006 | *Workaholics* | The hardest-working animals in the natural world. | Honey bee |
| 57 | 25 April 2006 | *Slime Balls* | The animals who have found the most or most innovative ways to use slime. | Banana slug |
| 58 | 2 May 2006 | *Animal Myths* | The most misunderstood animals. | Lemming |
| 59 | 6 June 2006 | *Gourmets* | Animals that put time and effort into their food preparation. | Honey bee |
| 60 | 13 June 2006 | *Diggers* | Most extreme cavity makers. | Termite |
| 61 | 20 June 2006 | *Weird Weapons* | The strangest ways animals defend themselves or attack. | Electric eel |
| 62 | 26 September 2006 | *Cleaners* | Nature's most unusual neat-freaks. | Japanese macaque |
| 63 | 3 October 2006 | *Pirates* | Animals who act like pirates, taking from others or hunting for treasure. | Amazon ant |
| 64 | 10 October 2006 | *Gardeners* | The unusual ways that animals impact vegetable growth. | Lemon ant |
| 65 | 17 October 2006 | *Freeloaders* | Opportunistic animals that gain benefits by associating with others. | Tapeworm |
| 66 | 24 October 2006 | *Awesome Ancestors* | Prehistoric animals larger than their modern descendants/relatives. | *Megatherium* |

### Season 5

| # | Original airdate | Title | Overview | Animal that was Number 1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
| 67 | 24 April 2007 | *Inventors* | Innovative tools nature-built right into an animal's body. | Wood frog |
| 68 | 1 May 2007 | *Night Lights* | The brightest animals in the wild. | Deep-sea anglerfish |
| 69 | 8 May 2007 | *Leaders* | Animals with extreme numbers of followers. | Termite |
| 70 | 15 May 2007 | *Medics* | The unusual ways some animals self-treat themselves. | Axolotl |
| 71 | 22 May 2007 | *Freaky Fliers* | Animals with unusual ways of moving through the air. | Spider |
| 72 | 5 June 2007 | *Bodysnatchers* | Animals that take over the bodies of others. | *Toxoplasma* |
| 73 | 12 June 2007 | *Gadgets* | The animals which create/use the most tools. | Chimpanzee |
| 74 | 19 June 2007 | *Psychics* | Animals that seem to predict the future. | Ladybird beetle |
| 75 | 26 June 2007 | *Dirty Jobs* | The "jobs" of animals that are the most revolting. | Dung beetle |
| 76 | 3 July 2007 | *Crazy Collectors* | The most obsessive hoarders in the wild. | Pack rat |

* "Dr. Remote / 'Most Extreme' Leaves Viewers Hungry for More Bizarre Factoids". *The Press of Atlantic City*. 2003-01-28. Archived from the original on 2022-05-21. Retrieved 2022-05-21.
* Spreier, Jeanne (2002-07-28). "Animal Planet looks at creatures who go to extremes". *The Dallas Morning News*. Retrieved 2022-05-21.
* McDonough, Kevin (2002-06-29). "'The Most Extreme' looks at strange animals". *Record-Journal*. Archived from the original on 2022-05-21. Retrieved 2022-05-21.
* Stasi, Linda (2002-07-05). "Quick Quiz: The Fastest Animal on Earth Is... ... Big Hint: Not Him". *New York Post*. Archived from the original on 2022-05-21. Retrieved 2022-05-21.

## InfoBox

| *The Most Extreme* | |
| --- | --- |
| Title card | |
| Genre | Nature documentary, edutainment |
| Developed by | Shelby Wilson |
| Narrated by | Adam Harrington |
| Country of origin | United States |
| Original language | English |
| No. of seasons | 5 |
| No. of episodes | 77 |
| Production | |
| Producer | Ian McGee |
| Running time | 46 minutes |
| Production company | NHNZ Ltd |
| Original release | |
| Network | Animal Planet |
| Release | July 7, 2002 (2002-07-07) <br>July 3, 2007 (2007-07-03) |


title: Fetal aortic stenosis

abstract: Fetal aortic stenosis is a disorder that occurs when the fetus’ aortic valve does not fully open during development. The aortic valve is a one way valve that is located between the left ventricle and the aorta, keeping blood from leaking back into the ventricle. It has three leaflets that separate when the ventricle contracts to allow blood to move from the ventricle to the aorta. These leaflets come together when the ventricle relaxes.

text:
# Fetal aortic stenosis

**Fetal aortic stenosis** is a disorder that occurs when the fetusaortic valve does not fully open during development. The aortic valve is a one way valve that is located between the left ventricle and the aorta, keeping blood from leaking back into the ventricle. It has three leaflets that separate when the ventricle contracts to allow blood to move from the ventricle to the aorta. These leaflets come together when the ventricle relaxes.

## Mechanism

Since the valve does not open properly in aortic stenosis, there is a decrease in the forward movement of blood into the aorta. Fetal aortic stenosis impairs left ventricular development, which can lead to hypoplastic left heart syndrome. If untreated, HLHS is lethal, as a result of the inability of the left heart to pump enough blood to sustain normal organ function. In fetal life, this is condition is manageable because the ductus arteriosus acts as a bypass, and supports the delivery of oxygenated blood to the systemic circulation. However, the ductus arteriosus closes during the first few days of life, resulting in systemic circulation failure in babies born with aortic valve stenosis.

## Diagnosis

Fetal aortic valve stenosis can be diagnosed by echocardiography before birth. The diagnostic features include a poorly contracting left ventricle, aortic valve thickening/restriction, a varying degree of left ventricular hypertrophy and abnormal Doppler flow characteristics in the left heart. There may be little or no detectable flow into or out of the left side of the heart.

There are two screening periods, one during the first trimester and the other during the second trimester. Fetal aortic stenosis is typically detected between 18 and 24 weeks gestation. This early detection is important because it allows for parents to be counseled in a timely and rational manner, allowing for discussion of prognosis and possible outcomes. Another reason for this crucial early detection is because it allows for postnatal management planning.

## Treatment

Intervention inutero may need to be done if there is concern that the aortic stenosis is severe enough to lead to the development of hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Management before birth is done by a fetal aortic valvuloplasty. In this procedure, fetal positioning is crucial. It is important that the left chest is located anteriorly, and that there are no limbs between the uterine wall and the apex of the left ventricle. The LV apex needs to be within 9 cm of the abdominal wall and the left ventricle outflow track has to be parallel to the intended cannula course in order for the wire to be blindly directed at the aortic valve. An 11.5 cm long, 19-gauge cannula and stylet needle passes through the mother's abdomen, uterine wall, and fetal chest wall into the left ventricle of the fetus. Then a 0.014 inch guide wire is passed across the stenosis aortic valve, where a balloon is inflated to stretch the aortic annulus.

Once born, critical or severe aortic stenosis is often treated through a less invasive catherization procedure knows as aortic valvuloplasty. Other options for newborns involve open heart surgery. Potential open heart surgeries may include aortic valve repair or the Ross procedure.

If the fetal aortic stenosis is critical it may lead to hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome (HLHS) it is treated with the Norwood procedure. This typically consists of three surgeries creating and removing shunts. The atrial septum is removed, the aortic arch is reconstructed to remove any hypoplasia, and then the main pulmonary artery is connected into this reconstructed arch, resulting in the right ventricle ejecting directly into systemic circulation. the result is the right ventricle pumping blood to both the body and to the lungs.

An alternative to the Norwood procedure is known as the hybrid procedure, was developed in 2008. In the hybrid procedure, bilateral pulmonary artery bands are positioned to limit pulmonary flow while, at the same time, placing a stent in the ductus arteriosus to hold it open. This maintains the connection between the aorta and the systemic circulation. A balloon atrial septostomy is also done. This ensures that there is enough of a connection between the two atria of the heart to provide open blood flow and mixing of oxygen rich and poor blood This procedure spares the baby from undergoing open heart surgery until they are older. They typically come back at 4–6 months of age when they are stronger for the open heart surgery.

## InfoBox

| Fetal aortic stenosis | |
| --- | --- |
| Specialty | Neonatology |


title: Filipino Freethinkers

abstract: Filipino Freethinkers is the largest and most active organization for freethought in the Philippines. It aims to promote reason, science, and secularism as a means of improving every Filipino's quality of life. FF is active in the secularism movement, working to promote the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill. They also fight for equal rights for women and the LGBT community, and have been regular participants in Metro Manila Pride March events since 2010. They work with other organizations doing mobilization activities and were part of the Occupy for RH movement in 2011. They also advocate freedom of expression and science education. The organization and its different chapters hold informal meet-ups, usually in coffee shops and restaurants. In between general meet-ups every other week, some chapters opt to hold local meet-ups.

text:
# Filipino Freethinkers

**Filipino Freethinkers** (also known as **FF**) is the largest and most active organization for freethought in the Philippines. It aims to promote reason, science, and secularism as a means of improving every Filipino's quality of life.

FF is active in the secularism movement, working to promote the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill. They also fight for equal rights for women and the LGBT community, and have been regular participants in Metro Manila Pride March events since 2010.

They work with other organizations doing mobilization activities and were part of the Occupy for RH movement in 2011. They also advocate freedom of expression and science education.

The organization and its different chapters hold informal meet-ups, usually in coffee shops and restaurants. In between general meet-ups every other week, some chapters opt to hold local meet-ups.

## History

Filipino Freethinkers was founded by Ryan "Red" Tani. It was officially established on February 1, 2009, when members of the Filipino Freethinkers Yahoo! Group had their first meetup. The organization then began meeting-up regularly in coffee shops to discuss current events, politics, theology, science, and other topics related to secularism and freethought.

### Excommunication Party

On November 26, 2010, the organization hosted an "Excommunication Party" (full title “If Supporting the RH Bill Means Excommunication, Excommunicate Me!”), as a protest against the Catholic Church's opposition to the Reproductive Health Bill.

### Bantay Bishop

In July 2011, certain Roman Catholic bishops admitted to receiving SUVs from the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO). This allegedly violated certain Philippine laws that prohibit and/or limit transactions between religious and state institutions under the principle of secularism. In reaction, FF founded the "Bantay Bishop Movement" and spearheaded a protest demonstration on July 13, 2011, in front of the Philippine Senate alongside other activist groups that denounced the bishops' behavior.

### March against art censorship

On August 21, 2011, FF and other organizations gathered at the Cultural Center of the Philippines to protest censorship and show their support for freedom of expression following the controversy generated by the exhibition there of Mideo Cruz's installation art piece titled *Poleteismo*. Catholic groups labeled *Poleteismo* as blasphemous for juxtaposing religious images and representations of genitalia, among many other objects. FF also emphasized the legal argument against censorship by referring to General Comment 34, a document released by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which affirms blasphemy as a human right.

### Globe Tatt Awards

On August 26, 2011, FF was awarded "The One" award in the Globe Tatt Awards, "for leading the pack in terms of online popularity and shaping opinion in the local online community".

### Reason, Science, Secularism (R.S.S.) Forum and Awards

On April 1, 2012, FF held their own "Reason, Science, and Secularism Forum" at U.P.–Ayala Land TechnoHub, cosponsored by the University of the Philippines Center for Women's Studies. The forum was held to discuss issues such as the reproductive health bill, freedom of expression, science, freedom of religion, and rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

The R.S.S Awards were presented during the forum, with each winner receiving a trophy and 10,000 pesos awarded to their cause. The winners were former law dean Raul Pangalangan for the Reason Award, astrophysicist Reina Reyes for the Science Award, and RH-bill author Senator Pia Cayetano for the Secularism Award.

Additionally, a Bigot of the Year award was given to Senator Vicente “Tito” Sotto III as “a Filipino who best exemplifies irrational prejudice against a group of people, and who has used considerable power and influence to offend and oppress this group.”. The 10,000 pesos prize for the award was donated to an organization that works for the betterment of the offended group or supports a cause opposed by the winner.

## InfoBox

Filipino Freethinkers
|
|  |
| Founded | February 2009 |
| Founder | Ryan "Red" Tani |
| Purpose | Reason, Science, Secularism |
| Location |  |
| Key people | Ryan "Red" Tani (President)
Kristine Chan (Reproductive Health Advocacy Director)
Garrick Bercero (Affiliations Director)
Dustin Celestino (Freedom of Expression Advocacy Director)
Pepe Bawagan (Secularism Advocacy Director)
Kevin Enriquez (LGBT Advocacy Director)

Pecier Decierdo (Science Advocacy Director) |
| Website | filipinofreethinkers.org |


title: Filiz Taçbaş

abstract: Filiz Taçbaş is a Turkish film and television series actress and former national tennis player.

text:
# Filiz Taçbaş

**Filiz Taçbaş** (born 1964) is a Turkish film and television series actress and former national tennis player.

## Early life

Filiz Taçbaş was born in İzmir, Turkey in 1964. She is of Azerbaijani descent.

Already at age ten, she appeared as child actress in the film *Bacım* (literally "My Sister"), written and directed by Bilge Olgaç. In 1981, she won the first place in the "Fresh Faces" beauty contest organized by the children's magazine *Saklambaç*. She started acting in the Theatre Abdullah Şahin. She played on stage with Defne Yalnız, Müjdat Gezen, Abdullah Şahin, Enis Fosforoğlu and Teoman Aksoy. She also worked as a model at the fashion shows of fashion designer Zühal Yorgancıoğlu abroad.

## Actress

She continued her acting career in films after a long break. In 1987, she appeared in the film *Aile Pansiyonu* with Adile Naşit.

Her recognition by a wide audience came in 1992 with her role in the TV series *Mahallenin Muhtarları* (literally: "Representatives of the Neighborhood"). She played the character "Behiye" in the TV series until 2002. Between 2006 and 2014, Taçbaş played in the TV crime series *Arka Sokaklar* ("Back Streets") in the role of teacher "Ayla Soylu", the wife of Chief Superintendent "Rıza Soylu", played by Zafer Ergin. She acted in the TV series *Ah Neriman* with Perran Kutman in 2014. In 2020, she joined the cast of the TV series *Çukur* ("Pit").

## Tennis player

Taçbaş played tennis professionally. In 2007, after getting a high score, she was admitted to the national team qualifiers, and became a member of the Turkey national team. She also writes columns on tennis in newspapers. She was the tennis partner of Hülya Avşar.

## Private life

In 2000, she married tennis coach and tennis court manager Cavit Yavuz, whom she met during a tennis tournament about a year before. She gave birth to their daughter Selin in 2002. The couple divorced in 2011.

Tired of city life, in early 2020 Taçbaş moved to Aliağa in İzmir Province, where she purchased 1.5 daa (0.37 acres) of agricultural land. She obtained a farming certificate from the local Directorate of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Affairs. She started agriculture farming by growing olive, lemon, and various fruits in her field.

For her acting career, she commutes between Aliağa and the film set in Istanbul.

## Filmography

### Films

| Year | Title |
| --- | --- |
| 1974 | *Bacım* |
| 1979 | *Önce İnsan* |
| 1986 | *Korkusuz* |
| 1986 | *İntikamcı* |
| 1986 | *Asi Kabadayı* |
| 1987 | *Aile Pansiyonu* |
| 1988 | *Ferman* |
| 1988 | *Bacım* |
| 1989 | *Elveda Mutluluklar* |
| 1989 | *Bu Şehrin Geceleri* |
| 1990 | *Ölürayak* |
| 1990 | *Eskici ve Oğulları* |
| 1990 | *Afacan Ateş Parçasi* |
| 1992 | *Fırtına Kuşu* |
| 1992 | *Bizim Eller* |
| 1994 | *Gönül Bahçelerinde* |
| 1999 | *Yaşama Hakkı* |
| 2018 | *Moral Compensation* |

### Short films

| Year | Title |
| --- | --- |
| 1993 | *Ömer Seyfettin: Bomba* |
|  | *Wrinkle* |

### Videos

| Year | Title |
| --- | --- |
| (1987) | *Randevu* |
| 1987 | *Alman Gelin* |
| 1988 | *Belalı Gelin* |
| 1990 | *İşte Suzan* |

### TV series

| Year | Title |
| --- | --- |
| 1989 | *Doktorlar* |
| 1992 2002 | '*Mahallenin Muhtarları* |
| 1994 1995 | *Geçmişin İzleri* |
|  | *Şimdiki Aklım Olsaydı* |
| 2002 2004 | *Koçum Benim* |
| 2004 | *Bütün Çocuklarım* |
| 2006 2011 | *Arka Sokaklar*First Ayla |
| 2012 2013 | *İşler Güçler* |
| 2014 | *Ah Neriman* |
| 2015 2016 | *Eve Dönüş* |
| 2017 | *Klavye Delikanlilari* |
| 2019 2020 | *Vuslat* |
| 2020 2021 | *Çukur* |

## InfoBox

| Filiz Taçbaş | |
| --- | --- |
| Born | 1964 (age 5960)<br>İzmir, Turkey |
| Nationality | Turkish |
| Occupation(s) | Actress, tennis player |
| Years active | 1986–present |
| Spouse | Cahit Yavuz  (m. 2000; div. 2011) |
| Children | 1 |


title: Carabus melancholicus

abstract: Carabus melancholicus is a species of beetle from family Carabidae, found in France, Portugal, and Spain. They could also be found in Morocco. They are brownish-black coloured.

text:
# Carabus melancholicus

***Carabus melancholicus*** is a species of beetle from family Carabidae, found in France, Portugal, and Spain. They could also be found in Morocco. They are brownish-black coloured.

## Subspecies

## InfoBox

| *Carabus melancholicus* | |
| --- | --- |
|
| Scientific classification | |
| Domain: | Eukaryota |
| Kingdom: | Animalia |
| Phylum: | Arthropoda |
| Class: | Insecta |
| Order: | Coleoptera |
| Family: | Carabidae |
| Genus: | *Carabus* |
| Species: | ***C. melancholicus*** |
| Binomial name | |
| ***Carabus melancholicus***<br>Fabricius, 1798 | |
|


abstract: The Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions of the United States and Canada (FOTLU) was a federation of labor unions created on November 15, 1881, at Turner Hall in Pittsburgh. It changed its name to the American Federation of Labor (AFL) on December 8, 1886.

text:
# Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions

The **Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions of the United States and Canada** (**FOTLU**) was a federation of labor unions created on November 15, 1881, at Turner Hall in Pittsburgh. It changed its name to the American Federation of Labor (AFL) on December 8, 1886.

## Forces influencing the formation of FOTLU

During the Long Depression of 1873-1878, the Knights of Labor emerged as a potent force for workers in the United States. Many in the American labor movement, such as Samuel Gompers, sought to implement a 'New Unionism' program which would free unions from political affiliation and limit their goals to the day-to-day concerns of working people.

Following a failed 107-day cigar-makers' strike in 1877, Gompers assisted President Adolph Strasser in radically restructuring the Cigar Makers' International Union (CMIU) in 1879. Henceforth, the union would be run like a business. The international union would have the authority to take control of local affiliates. Dues would be raised to build financial reserves, and to pay sick and death benefits. A union bank would be established to provide short-term loans for workers who had been laid off and were seeking new jobs. The constitution of the union would be changed to permit the international to seize funds from locals with flush treasuries and transfer the money to locals in distress.

Other unions such as the Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners also quickly adopted the principles of the 'New Unionism.'

In April 1881, Gompers lost a re-election campaign for the presidency of Local 144 of the Cigar Makers' International Union to a coalition of socialists who advocated militancy as a way to improve working conditions of cigar makers. But Gompers and his allies refused to turn over the keys to the offices or the contents of the union's treasury, arguing that the socialists were not fit to hold office. William H. Bailey and Thomas Barry, two executive board members of the Knights of Labor, supported the insurgents against Gompers and may have sabotaged a compromise which would have permitted Gompers to step down. The experience embittered Gompers against the Knights.

## FOTLU's founding

The same month of April 1881, the Paterson 'Home-Journal,' a socialist newspaper in Paterson, New Jersey, called for a conference of labor unions to form a new organization which would organize large numbers of workers. A group of disaffected Knights of Labor in Indiana calling themselves the Knights of Industry and a shadowy group calling itself the Amalgamated Labor Union took up the charge and announced a conference to be held August 2, 1881 in Terre Haute. The International Typographical Union, eager to establish a national labor union, also widely publicized the conference. But more delegates from trade associations and the United States Greenback Party attended than unionists. A resolution against trade unionism was actually proposed, and labor union delegates had to work hard to secure adjournment in order to avoid passage of the motion. The trade unionists decided to call another conference for November 15, 1881 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where a larger number of trade union members could participate.

The Pittsburgh convention was attended by 107 delegates from eight national unions, 11 city labor federations, 42 local craft unions, and three district and 46 local assemblies of the Knights of Labor. The International Typographical Union had the largest trade union delegation, with 14 attendees. The Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers, International Molders and Foundry Workers Union of North America, the American Flint Glass Workers' Union of North America, the Cigar Makers' International Union, the Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, the Coopers' International Union of North America, the International Granite Cutter's Union and the Lake Seamen's Union also attended. Gompers participated as a delegate from the Cigar Makers'.

John J. Jarrett, president of the Iron and Steel Workers, was elected chairman. Gompers was elected chairman of the Committee on Organization. Gompers led his committee to propose that FOTLU restrict its membership to skilled craft unions, excluding unskilled workers and political labor organizations. The proposal was hotly debated. The Knights of Labor believed fervently in a concept of the labor movement that was inclusive of both skilled and unskilled labor. A mass movement of workers was the Knights' goal. But Gompers' Committee on Organization had proposed limiting FOTLU membership to skilled workers, and restricting the labor movement to a select few. Knights of Labor delegates were outraged. Nevertheless, the resolution was adopted. The name of the organization was also altered to adopt an international character by adding 'United States and Canada.'

In large part, FOTLU's founding principles and constitutional structures mirrored those Gompers had helped institute in the cigar makers' union. The FOTLU constitution provided for a governing body of five executive council members, who would also act as a legislative committee. Annual conventions were established at which each national affiliate would receive one vote for 1,000 members, two votes for 4,000 members and three votes for 8,000 members. Local labor bodies were given one vote each, regardless of size. The voting rules effectively disenfranchised bodies belonging to the Knights of Labor, and Knights-dominated central labor bodies.

The Committee on Platform subsequently proposed, and the delegates approved, a preamble to the FOTLU constitution which sharply delineated the new federation from the Knights of Labor. It rejected the Knights' assertion that the interests of capital and labor were one. FOTLU asserted that 'A struggle is going on in the nations of the civilized world between the oppressors and the oppressed...a struggle between capital and labor, which must grow in intensity from year to year and work disastrous results to the toiling millions of all nations...'

The committee also proposed a number of resolutions, all of which were passed by the delegates. These included calls for:

* The legal incorporation of unions;
* Compulsory education of children;
* Prohibition of child labor under the age of 14;
* Apprenticeship laws;
* Establishment of an eight-hour work day;
* Repeal of state conspiracy laws which did not provide a safe harbor for labor unions;
* Establishment of a federal agency to collect labor statistics;
* Abolition of convict labor;
* Prohibition of the importation of foreign workers;
* Federal legislation requiring ventilation and inspection of mines;
* Support for Irish liberation;
* Legislation making employers responsible for industrial accidents; and
* A high protective tariff.

Two resolutions were rejected. One called for federal regulation of railroad and telegraph companies in the public interest, and another demanded that only homesteaders be eligible to receive public domain land.

Gompers was elected to the executive committee.

## Struggle for survival

FOTLU was not very successful. District and local assemblies of the Knights of Labor withdrew almost immediately, as did most national unions. Only 19 delegates attended the second convention, and 26 at the third. Gompers was elected chairman of FOTLU's executive committee (making him the de facto president) in 1883, but even he did not attend that meeting. The federation's membership hovered around 25,000, and FOTLU organized almost no members and issued no charters to new unions.

The federation made some effort to win passage of favorable legislation, but no unified plan of action took place. FOTLU did help defeat a federal bill which would have declared seamen's unions to be mutinies. But the organization was far more successful on the state level, where it won passage of legislation outlawing cigar-making in tenement houses, prohibitions on child labor under those under the age of 12, compulsory education and prohibitions on prison labor.

Meanwhile, the Knights of Labor were growing tremendously in the 1884-85 period. A series of successful strikes swept the country, affecting textile workers, plumbers, bricklayers, stove molders, stonecutters, carpet weavers, shoemakers, glass molders and coal miners. The Knights struck the Union Pacific Railway, forcing the company to rescind a 10 percent wage cut in 1884 and another 10 percent wage reduction the company tried to introduce the following year. In July 1885, the Knights had 104,000 members; by July 1886, they had 703,000 members.

But FOTLU stagnated. Its membership was so low that it was forced change its policy and admit women and girls as members in 1882. Few joined.

1882 was also the year that FOTLU adopted a proposal to establish a national Labor Day holiday on the first Monday in September. It was one of its few successes. (A federal bill ordering observance of Labor Day was introduced in the U.S. Congress in 1894, and the bill was enacted into law and signed by President Grover Cleveland on June 28 of that year.)

At its October 1884 convention, FOTLU attempted to reinvigorate itself by adopting a resolution again pushing for establishment of the eight-hour day. Peter J. McGuire, president of the Carpenters union, proposed a resolution—which FOTLU adopted—which required that, if national legislation adopting an eight-hour day was not forthcoming by May 1, 1886, the federation would call a general strike. The leadership of the Knights secretly issued a statement advising its members not to participate in the fight for the eight-hour day, but members of the Knights of Labor overwhelmingly supported the proposal and made plans to support the federation in its May Day strike. Preparations were most advanced in Chicago.

In March 1886, the Knights of Labor struck the Union Pacific and Missouri Pacific railroads. The Great Southwest Railroad Strike of 1886 idled 200,000 rail workers. But by the beginning of the summer of 1886, the strike was beginning to collapse—and it was taking the Knights with it.

FOTLU was also in crisis. The Knights of Labor had actively undermined FOTLU and raided its unions during the previous five years. The Knights had provided scab workers to employers during strikes called by FOTLU unions. The Knights had publicly denounced FOTLU initiatives, legislative proposals and organizing efforts. Now the Knights began to support a breakaway group of radical cigar-makers known as the Progressive Cigar-makers' Union. With their base in Chicago, the Progressive Cigar-makers advocated open rebellion against the capitalist system. The local central labor body, the Amalgamated Trades and Labor Assembly, fought the Progressive Cigar-makers bitterly for the allegiances of the Chicago's unions. The Knights openly supported the Progressive Cigar-makers against CMIU, enraging Gompers.

In the midst of the battle among the Progressive Cigar-makers, CMIU and the Amalgamated Trades, the May 1, 1886 deadline came and with it the general strike. During a peaceful labor rally protesting police violence against strikers in Chicago on May 4, a bomb was set off—killing one policeman immediately (seven others later died of their injuries. In what later became known as the Haymarket Riot, police opened fire on the crowd. Another 11 people were killed, and dozens more wounded. A large number of the unions participating in the strike on May 4 were FOTLU locals. A political backlash against the American labor movement erupted nationwide.

In the wake of the Haymarket Riot, FOTLU proposed on April 25, 1886, that a truce be established between the Knights and the federation. A letter signed by McGuire of the Carpenters; Adolph Strasser, president of CMIU; Josiah B. Dyer, general secretary of the Granite Cutters; P.J. Fitzpatrick, president of the Iron Molder's Union of North America; and W.H. Foster, secretary of FOTLU, called for a meeting to be held on May 18, 1886 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Labor peace was the public purpose of the Philadelphia meeting. But Gompers and the meeting convenors planned to use the meeting to swing union support toward an entirely new labor federation. Gompers believed that the Knights were threatening the very existence of craft unionism, and their radical attitudes were likely to bring the wrath of governmental authority down on the labor movement in the wake of the Haymarket Riot.

Twenty delegates representing more than 365,000 workers met in Philadelphia. The delegates proposed that the Knights 'agree that they would not initiate into the Order any trade union member without the permission of his union, or any other wage earner who worked for less than the prescribed wage scale of his craft, and they were also called upon to revoke the charter of any local assembly organized by workers in a trade where there was already a national union.'

At first blush, it seemed ridiculous that the Knights would agree to the proposal. The Knights were powerful, FOTLU was weak and the Knights were dismantling the federation seemingly at will. But the situation was more complex than that. A number of former FOTLU craft unions had affiliated with the Knights, and they formed a powerful and cohesive clique within the labor organization. Additionally, many of these unions had been raided by other labor organizations belonging to the Knights, or had their job actions broken by scab workers belonging to the Knights. These unions were now ready to undercut the Knights in the Philadelphia negotiations. At the same time, some important Knight leaders had quietly approached Grand Master Workman Terence V. Powderly, and convinced him of that many of FOTLU's grievances were justified. Additionally, the collapse of the Southwest rail strike was putting pressure on Powderly to seek breathing room.

Powderly not only agreed to the terms proposed by FOTLU, he left the Philadelphia meeting pledging to bring the proposal before a special convention of the Knights which would meet in Cleveland, Ohio on May 24, 1886. But delegates to the Cleveland convention, dominated by anti-craft union activists, never permitted the agreement to come up for discussion. Instead, delegates passed a resolution ordering Powderly to defend the organization at all costs and expel any member who did not support the Knights.

## Formation of the American Federation of Labor

Negotiations between the two organizations continued for four months. Powderly pledged not to interfere in FOTLU affairs. But craft union members of the Knights were incensed at the treatment their fellow Knights had given them in Cleveland, and they continued to undermine the organization's leadership from within.

The regular General Assembly of the Knights of Labor met in Richmond, Virginia in October 1886. Once more, Powderly was unable to bring the Philadelphia agreement up for debate or a vote. Anti-craft union delegates passed a resolution ordering all members of the Cigar-Makers' International Union to leave that organization and join the Progressive Cigar-makers or forfeit their membership in the Knights. Another resolution set up new national assemblies of craft union members, a direct challenge to FOTLU's international unions.

The action of the Knights spurred the craft unions into action. McGuire, Strasser, Dyer, Fitzpatrick and Foster issued a national to all craft trade unions to hold a national conference in Columbus, Ohio on December 8, 1886. Forty-two delegates from 25 labor organizations, 13 national unions and 12 local unions and city labor councils assembled in Columbus.

Gompers and the FOTLU executive board held their convention at the same time. Gompers and the executive committee congratulated the 20 FOTLU delegates on the organization's success in advocating for an eight-hour day. Then the organization dissolved itself. It turned over its treasury of $248.97 and all its property to the other delegates.

The other delegates then declared themselves to be the American Federation of Labor. Although many at the time argued that FOTLU merged with the AFL, the AFL was in fact a continuation of the FOTLU.

## Leadership

### Secretaries

1881: William H. Foster 1883: Frank Keyes Foster 1884: Gabriel Edmonston 1885: William H. Foster 1886: John S. Kirchner

### Presidents

1881: Richard Powers 1882: Samuel Gompers 1883: Patrick H. McLogan 1884: William McClelland 1885: Samuel Gompers

### Treasurers

1881: Alexander C. Rankin 1882: Robert Howard 1885: Gabriel Edmonston  1. Barcousky, Len (August 9, 2009). "Eyewitness 1881: Gompers helps workers of the U.S. unite". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
2. Foner, 1947, p. 504.
3. Foner, 1947, p. 514-15.
4. Foner, 1947, p. 515.
5. Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 140.
6. Foner, 1947, p. 517-18.
7. Weir, Robert E. *Knights Unhorsed: Internal Conflict in a Gilded Age Social Movement.* Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2000. p. 51; Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 147.
8. Rayback, p. 157.
9. Foner, 1947, p. 519.
10. Foner, 1947, p. 519; Rayback, p. 157.
11. Foner, 1947, p. 520.
12. Foner, 1947, p. 520; Rayback, p. 157; Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 146.
13. Quoted in Foner, 1947, p. 520-21.
14. Foner, 1947, p. 521-23; Rayback, p. 157.
15. Foner, 1947, p. 524.
16. Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 146; Rayback, p. 158.
17. Foner, 1955, p. 94.
18. Green, p. 98.
19. Rayback, p. 160-162.
20. Foner, 1955, p. 96-97. Peter J. McGuire, president of the Carpenters union, had proposed the first Monday in September as Labor Day in 1882, and the date had been observed by the Central Labor Union of New York City.
21. Rayback, p. 164; Foner, 1995, p. 99, 101.
22. Rayback, p. 175; Foner, 1955, p. 132.
23. Foner, 1955, p. 132.
24. Green, p. 164; Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 146.
25. Foner, 1955, p. 136.
26. Rayback, p. 175-76; Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 147-48.
27. Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 147.
28. Rayback, p. 176-77; Foner, 1955, p. 138-39.
29. Foner, 1955, p. 137, 139.
30. Foner, 1955, p. 140.
31. Rayback, p. 177; Foner, 1955, p. 140-41; Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 148.
32. Rayback, p. 177; Foner, 1955, p. 142.
33. Dubofsky and Dulles, p. 148; Foner, 1955, p. 142.
34. *American Federation of Labor: History, Encyclopedia, Reference Book*. Washington DC: American Federation of Labor. 1919.
* Commons, John R., et al. *History of Labour in the United States.* Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan Co., 1918. ISBN 1-893122-75-1
* Dubofsky, Melvyn and Dulles, Foster Rhea. *Labor in America: A History.* 6th ed. Wheeling, IL: Harlan Davidson, Inc., 1999. ISBN 0-88295-979-4
* Foner, Philip. *History of the Labor Movement in the United States. Vol. 1: From Colonial Times to the Founding of the American Federation of Labor.* New York: International Publishers, 1947. ISBN 0-7178-0089-X
* Foner, Philip. *History of the Labor Movement in the United States. Vol. 2: From the Founding of the A.F. of L. to the Emergence of American Imperialism.* New York: International Publishers, 1955. ISBN 0-7178-0092-X
* Green, James. *Death in the Haymarket.* New York: Pantheon Books, 2006. ISBN 0-375-42237-4
* Mandel, Bernard. *Samuel Gompers: A Biography.* Yellow Springs, OH: Antioch Press, 1963. ISBN 0-87338-084-3
* Rayback, Joseph G. *A History of American Labor.* Rev. and exp. ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Oc., Inc., 1966. ISBN 0-02-925850-2

## InfoBox

Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions
| Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions of the United States and Canada | |
| --- | --- |
|
| Merged into | American Federation of Labor |
| Founded | November 15, 1881 |
| Dissolved | December 8, 1886 |
| Location |  |
| Key people | Samuel Gompers, Chair, Executive Committee |


title: Campbell's Island State Memorial

abstract: Campbell's Island State Memorial is a granite monument that marks the site of a day-long battle on July 19, 1814 during the War of 1812 on Campbell's Island, Illinois. Dedicated in 1908, the monument is maintained by the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency as a national historic site. The monument was restored in 2018. The rededication ceremony was postponed for two years due to flooding, and took place in September 2020.

text:
# Campbell's Island State Memorial

**Campbell's Island State Memorial** is a granite monument that marks the site of a day-long battle on July 19, 1814 during the War of 1812 on Campbell's Island, Illinois. Dedicated in 1908, the monument is maintained by the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency as a national historic site.

The monument was restored in 2018. The rededication ceremony was postponed for two years due to flooding, and took place in September 2020.

41°32′18″N 90°26′12″W / 41.5384°N 90.4366°W / 41.5384; -90.4366

## InfoBox

Campbell's Island State Memorial
| Campbell's Island State Memorial, 2018 | |
| --- | --- |
|  | |
| Location | 124 Island Ave, East Moline, Illinois 61244 |
| Designer | Albert Louis Van der Berghen |
| Material | Granite |
| Height | 35 feet (11 m) |
| Dedicated date | 1908 |
| Dedicated to | Battle of Rock Island Rapids |
| Website | Official website |


title: Josh Beekman

abstract: Josh Beekman is currently the Director of Football Initiatives at Boston College and a former guard in the National Football League (NFL). He played high school football in his hometown of Amsterdam, New York. He played college football at Boston College. Beekman was selected by the Chicago Bears in the fourth round of the 2007 NFL draft and spent three seasons with the team. He was a member of the Florida Tuskers of the United Football League (UFL) and the Indianapolis Colts following his tenure with the Bears. Beekman signed with the Jacksonville Jaguars on August 12, 2012 and he was on the active roster at the beginning of the season. He was released on September 12, 2012.

text:
# Josh Beekman

**Josh Beekman** (born June 30, 1983) is currently the Director of Football Initiatives at Boston College and a former guard in the National Football League (NFL). He played high school football in his hometown of Amsterdam, New York. He played college football at Boston College. Beekman was selected by the Chicago Bears in the fourth round of the 2007 NFL draft and spent three seasons with the team. He was a member of the Florida Tuskers of the United Football League (UFL) and the Indianapolis Colts following his tenure with the Bears.

Beekman signed with the Jacksonville Jaguars on August 12, 2012 and he was on the active roster at the beginning of the season. He was released on September 12, 2012.

## College career

Beekman was a decorated offensive guard for Boston College from 2002 to 2006 and he started 37 straight games for the Eagles from 2004 to 2006. As a senior team captain, Beekman earned Associated Press First-team All-America honors and he was also the receipt of the 2006 Jacobs Blocking Trophy for the most valuable blocker in the Atlantic Coast Conference, where he was First-team All-Conference in 2006.

He won the 2006 Scanlan Award an award given by the Boston College Varsity Club Award to the senior football player outstanding in scholarship, leadership, and athletic ability.

Off the field, Beekman also played an active role in the community and often attended charity events during his college tenure.

## Professional career

Pre-draft measurables
| Height | Weight | Arm length | Hand span | 40-yard dash | 10-yard split | 20-yard split | 20-yard shuttle | Three-cone drill | Vertical jump | Broad jump | Bench press |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 6 ft 1+58 in
(1.87 m) | 313 lb
(142 kg) | 32+12 in
(0.83 m) | 9+12 in
(0.24 m) | 5.43 s | 1.86 s | 3.06 s | 4.81 s | 8.24 s | 25.5 in
(0.65 m) | 7 ft 9 in
(2.36 m) | 24 reps |
| All values from NFL Combine | | | | | | | | | | | | |

### Chicago Bears

Beekman was drafted by the Chicago Bears in the fourth round (130th overall) of the 2007 NFL draft and went on to play three years for the Bears where he started 20 games in total.

In 2008, Beekman started all 16 regular season games at left guard and he was one of the members of the Bears offensive line that had the same 5 starters for the entire season, one of just 6 teams in the NFL to accomplish that feat in that year.

### Florida Tuskers

After being released by the Chicago Bears in September 2010, Beekman became a member of the Florida Tuskers of the United Football League and the Tuskers played in the 2010 UFL Championship Game.

### Indianapolis Colts

Beekman was signed by the Indianapolis Colts in August 2011. He was released before the beginning of the season.

### Jacksonville Jaguars

Beekman was signed by the Jacksonville Jaguars in August 2012. He was on the active roster at the beginning of the season, but was released on September 12, 2012.

## Coaching career

Beekman was an intern strength and conditioning coach at Boston College from January to May 2011.

Beekman joined Eastern Kentucky University football staff in the spring of 2012 as the graduate assistant offensive line coach and spent the offseason at EKU. He also had an internship with the Miami Dolphins in June 2012.

In Spring 2013, Beekman was hired by head coach Ron Turner to be Florida International University's graduate assistant offensive line coach.

In March 2016, Beekman was hired by head coach Paul Price to be Concord University's offensive line coach. In 2016, as his first year of being the offensive line coach, two offensive linemen of Concord University, Coleman Osborne and Paul Smith, were named to the first-team of the All-MEC Team.

## Personal life

Beekman graduated from Boston College with a bachelor's degree in history and a master's degree in administrative studies. He also obtained a master's degree in sports management from Florida International University while he worked there as a football GA.

Beekman is a devout Christian. He and his wife were married since 2009.

## InfoBox

Josh Beekman
| Current position | |
| --- | --- |
| Title | Director of Football Initiatives |
| Team | Boston College |
| Conference | Atlantic Coast Conference |
| Biographical details | |
| Born | (1983-06-30) June 30, 1983
Amsterdam, New York, U.S. |
| Alma mater | Boston College |
| Playing career | |
| 2003–06 | Boston College |
| 2007–10 | Chicago Bears |
| 2010 | Florida Tuskers |
| 2011 | Indianapolis Colts (offseason/practice only) |
| 2012 | Jacksonville Jaguars |
|  | |
| Position(s) | Offensive lineman |
| Coaching career (HC unless noted) | |
| 2012 | Eastern Kentucky (GA) (offseason) |
| 2013–2015 | FIU (GA) |
| 2016 | Concord (OL) |
| 2017 | Garden City (OL) |
|  | |
| Accomplishments and honors | |
| Awards | |
|  | |
|  | |
|  | |


title: Filipino Chinese cuisine

abstract: Filipino Chinese cuisine is a style of Filipino cuisine influenced by Chinese cuisine historically brought to the Philippines by Chinese Filipinos, starting with the Sangley Chinese and their Chinese mestizo descendants and modern descendants in the Chinese Filipino community of the Philippines. It is characterized as a fusion of Fujian/Hokkien cuisine and Cantonese cuisine adapted over the centuries to Filipino cuisine to suit the general Filipino palate/taste.

text:
# Filipino Chinese cuisine

**Filipino Chinese cuisine** is a style of Filipino cuisine influenced by Chinese cuisine historically brought to the Philippines by Chinese Filipinos, starting with the Sangley Chinese and their Chinese mestizo descendants and modern descendants in the Chinese Filipino community of the Philippines. It is characterized as a fusion of Fujian/Hokkien cuisine and Cantonese cuisine adapted over the centuries to Filipino cuisine to suit the general Filipino palate/taste.

## History

Filipino cuisine is influenced principally by China and Spain have been integrated with pre-colonial indigenous Filipino cooking practices.

In the Philippines, trade with China started in the 11th century, as documents show, but undocumented trade may have started as many as two centuries earlier. Trade pottery excavated in Laguna province, for example, includes pieces dating to the Tang dynasty (AD 618 - 907). Chinese traders supplied the silk sent to Mexico and Spain in the Manila galleon trade. In return, they took back products of field, forest (such as beeswax, rattan) and sea (such as, *beche de mer*).

Evidence of Chinese influence in Philippine food is easy to find, since the names are an obvious clue. *Pansit*, noodles flavored with seafood and/or meat and/or vegetables, for example, comes from the Hokkien *piān-ê-si̍t* (Chinese: 便ê食; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: *piān-ê-si̍t* or Chinese: 便食; pinyin: *biàn shí*), meaning something that is conveniently cooked. Modern day pansit, however, is not limited only to noodle dishes that are stir fried or sauteed, but also those shaken in hot water and flavored with a sauce (*pansit luglog*) or served with broth (*mami*, *lomi*). The term includes food that is not noodle shaped, but is of the same flour-water recipe, such as *pansit molo* (pork filled wontons in a soup).

Early Chinese traders, wishing for the food of their homeland, may have made noodles in their temporary Philippine homes, using ingredients locally available. Further adaptation would occur in the different towns and regions. Thus Malabon, a fishing town in Metro Manila, has developed the *pansit Malabon*, which features oyster, shrimp and squid. While in Lucban, Quezon, which is deeply inland and far from the sea has *pansit Lucban* or *pansit habhab*, which is prepared with some meat and vegetables.

With *lumpia*, the Chinese eggroll which now has been incorporated into Philippine cuisine, even when it was still called *lumpiang Shanghai* (indicating frying and a pork filling). Serving meat and/or vegetable in an edible wrapper is a Chinese technique now found in all of Southeast Asia in variations peculiar to each culture. The Filipino version has meat, fish, vegetables, heart of palm and combinations thereof, served fresh or fried or even bare.

The Chinese influence goes deep into Philippine cooking, and way beyond food names and restaurant fare. The use of soy sauce and other soybean products (*tokwa*, *tahuri*, *miso*, *tausi*, *taho*) is Chinese, as is the use of such vegetables as *petsay* (Chinese cabbage), *toge* (mung bean sprout), *mustasa* (pickled mustard greens). Many cooking implements still bear their original Chinese name, like *sian-se* or turner. The Filipino *carajay* (spelled the Spanish way) is actually the Chinese wok.

The cooking process for Chinese Filipino cuisine also derives from Chinese methods. *Pesa* is Hokkien for "plain boiled" (Chinese: 白煠; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: *pe̍h-sa̍h*) and is used only in reference to the cooking of fish, the complete term being peq+sa+hi, the last morpheme meaning fish. In Tagalog, it can mean both fish (*pesang dalag*) and chicken (*pesang manok*). As well, foods such as *pata tim* and *pato tim* refer to the braising technique (Chinese:  or  or ; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: *tīm*) used in Chinese cooking.

Since most of the early Chinese traders and settlers in the country were from the Fujian province, it is Fujian/Hokkien food that is most widespread in influence. However, since restaurant food is often Cantonese, most of the Chinese restaurants in the country would serve both cuisines. Other styles of Chinese cuisine are available though in the minority.

When the Spaniards came, the food influences they brought were from both Spain and Mexico, as it was through the vice-royalty of New Spain that the Philippines were governed. When restaurants were established in the 19th century, Chinese food became a staple of the panciterias (noodle houses), with the food given Spanish names. "*Comida China*" (the Spanish term for "Chinese food") includes *arroz caldo* (rice and chicken gruel), and *morisqueta tostada* (fried rice).

## Examples of Filipino dishes derived from Chinese cuisine

1. Doreen Fernandez. "What is Filipino Food?". Archived from the original on July 16, 2008. Retrieved May 22, 2006.


abstract: Fire Station No. 30, Engine Company No. 30 is a historic fire station and engine company in the South Los Angeles area of Los Angeles, California. Built in 1913, its white firemen served a predominantly white neighborhood. The demographics became more mixed in the 1920s, and in 1924 the firehouse was segregated. By 1930 the neighborhood was predominately black. Only Black firemen served here until 1956, when the department was integrated. Now the neighborhood is predominantly Hispanic. Closed in 1980, the building was adapted for use as the African American Firefighter Museum (AAFFM). The AAFFM features vintage fire equipment and apparatus, memorabilia, histories and photos of pioneering African-American firefighters in Los Angeles. Other displays include photos, artifacts and memorabilia of African American firefighters, officers and historical women fire service professionals from around the country. The Museum is open to the public and is strictly volunteer and donation driven.

text:
# Fire Station No. 30, Engine Company No. 30

**Fire Station No. 30, Engine Company No. 30** is a historic fire station and engine company in the South Los Angeles area of Los Angeles, California. Built in 1913, its white firemen served a predominantly white neighborhood.

The demographics became more mixed in the 1920s, and in 1924 the firehouse was segregated. By 1930 the neighborhood was predominately black. Only Black firemen served here until 1956, when the department was integrated. Now the neighborhood is predominantly Hispanic.

Closed in 1980, the building was adapted for use as the **African American Firefighter Museum** (AAFFM). The AAFFM features vintage fire equipment and apparatus, memorabilia, histories and photos of pioneering African-American firefighters in Los Angeles. Other displays include photos, artifacts and memorabilia of African American firefighters, officers and historical women fire service professionals from around the country. The Museum is open to the public and is strictly volunteer and donation driven.

## History

The two-story structure was designed in the Prairie School style and was built in 1913.

The structure was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2009 pursuant to the registration requirements for fire stations set forth in a multiple property submission study, the African Americans in Los Angeles MPS. It was the first of two all-black segregated fire stations in Los Angeles. Fire Station No. 30, and its resident Engine Company No. 30, was segregated in 1924. It remained segregated until 1956, when the Los Angeles Fire Department was integrated. According to the registration form supporting the station's listing on the National Register, "All-black fire stations were simultaneous representations of racial segregation and sources of community pride."

Other buildings listed pursuant to the same *African Americans in Los Angeles MPS* include Fire Station No. 14 (the second all-black segregated fire station in Los Angeles), Angelus Funeral Home, Lincoln Theater, Second Baptist Church, 28th Street YMCA, Prince Hall Masonic Temple, 52nd Place Historic District, 27th Street Historic District.

## InfoBox

|  | |
| --- | --- |
| Fire Station No. 30–Engine Company No. 30 | |
| U.S. National Register of Historic Places | |
|  | |
| File:Fire Station No. 30, June 2011 | |
|  | |
| Location | 1401 S. Central Ave., South Los Angeles, California |
| Coordinates | 34°01′41.24″N 118°14′49.82″W / 34.0281222°N 118.2471722°W / 34.0281222; -118.2471722 |
| Architect | James Backus, Superintendent of Building, City of Los Angeles |
| Architectural style | Prairie School |
| NRHP reference No. | 09000148 |
| Added to NRHP | March 17, 2009 |


title: Fifty Eggs

abstract: Fifty Eggs is musician Dan Bern's second studio album, and follow up to his self-titled debut. It was produced by Ani DiFranco and released in 1998.

text:
# Fifty Eggs

Professional ratings
| Review scores | |
| --- | --- |
| Source | Rating |
| AllMusic |  |
| *Christgau's Consumer Guide* |  |
| *Entertainment Weekly* | B+ |

***Fifty Eggs*** is musician Dan Bern's second studio album, and follow up to his self-titled debut. It was produced by Ani DiFranco and released in 1998.

## Track listing

All tracks composed by Dan Bern

1. "Tiger Woods"
2. "One Thing Real"
3. "No Missing Link"
4. "Oh Sister"
5. "Cure for AIDS"
6. "Chick Singers"
7. "Different Worlds"
8. "Everybody's Baby"
9. "One Dance"
10. "Jesus Freak"
11. "Monica"
12. "Rolling Away"
13. "Suzanne" (hidden track)

## InfoBox

| Fifty Eggs | |
| --- | --- |
|  | |
| Studio album by Dan Bern | |
| Released | March 31, 1998 |
| Genre | Folk rock |
| Length | 50:20 |
| Label | Work/Sony |
| Producer | Ani DiFranco |
| Dan Bern chronology | |
| *Dan Bern*
(1997) ***Fifty Eggs***
(1998) *Smartie Mine*
(1999) | |