Showing posts with label Defend. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Defend. Show all posts

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Stricker, Kelly on pace to defend Shark title

Steve Stricker and Jerry Kelly at the 2010 PGA Championship.

NAPLES, Fla. – Two very different teams played to their strengths to achieve the same results Friday in the first round of the Shark Shootout.

Steve Stricker and Jerry Kelly, the defending champions, and Dustin Johnson and Ian Poulter put up matching 9-under 63s in the modified alternate-shot format to take the lead at Tiburon Golf Club.

Stricker and Kelly have similar games, while Johnson hits massive drives and Poulter is more accurate off the tee. Johnson and Poulter also have an edge as far as rankings with both in the top 15 in the world, while Stricker and Kelly are good friends and know how to complement each other on the course.

“We’re still a great team and sometimes teams can support each other, and it can help an individual along, even though you’re playing your own ball,” Kelly said. “It’s still a team game.”

The 63s tied the mark for low score in the format in the tournament’s 10 years at Tiburon.

“I think it was a dream start, to be honest,” Poulter said.

The overall format record is a 57 by Fred Couples and Raymond Floyd in 1990 at Sherwood Country Club in California. The 12 teams playing in the tournament hosted by Greg Norman will play better ball Saturday, and a scramble on Sunday in the $3 million event.

Mark Calcavecchia and Jeff Overton, who grabbed the early lead with an eagle-birdie start, and Fred Funk and Kenny Perry were tied for third at 8 under. Justin Leonard and Scott Verplank were fifth at 6 under.

Members of those three teams in contention have good records in the event.

Calcavecchia, who is playing in his 17th Shootout, has won twice, and so has Perry. Leonard and Verplank lost in a playoff in 2006, and tied for second last year.

Norman and partner Matt Kuchar were last in the field after a 72.

Both of the first-round leaders stumbled down the stretch.

Sitting at 8 under through 11 holes, Johnson and Poulter bogeyed the par-3 12th, and despite the long-hitting Johnson, the duo parred both the par-5 14th and 17th.

“Parring the two par-5s was brutal,” Johnson said. “It was no fun. No. 14 was playing pretty tough, but No. 17 was playing fairly easy. We hit four pretty good shots and we made a 5.”

Poulter rued the failure to build on a strong start.

“It’s just a shame that we kind of parred two of the par-5s,” Poulter said. “I think we were really looking to take advantage of those, especially with Dustin’s length, and how we got off to a decent start.”

Stricker and Kelly were at 10 under through 15, then bogeyed the par-5 17th after Stricker knocked his second shot near the lip of a greenside bunker. Kelly was forced to play the ball directly to the left instead of straight at the pin, then barely got it out of the bunker. He missed a 10-footer for par. They missed the green at the last, but two-putted for par.

Johnson and Poulter both hit poor tee shots on the par-3 12th.

“I’m not taking the full blame on that one,” Poulter joked, although he did admit he may have jinxed them when he said then they had gotten off to a good start.

Still, they’re happy with where they’re at and confident heading into the final two rounds.

“Our game, I think, is very good for this format,” Poulter said. “Better ball (Saturday) gives us plenty of chances. I’m playing well. Dustin’s hitting it long and straight, and that’s dangerous.

“That’s also going to be very dangerous come Sunday in that scramble format. You’ve just got to keep hitting good golf shots. We’ve certainly done that today in this format, which is the trickiest of the three.”

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured site: So, Why is Wikileaks a Good Thing Again?.


View the original article here

Friday, October 29, 2010

Defend the complaints against Maricopa solicitors cost taxpayers over $ 1 million

by Yvonne Wingett - 27 October 2010 12 H.
The Arizona Republic

Maricopa County taxpayers have spent over $ 1 million dollars in the last three years to defend the lawyers against complaints about their ethical conduct, shows an analysis of the financial records of the Office of Attorney of the County Arizona Republic.

Most of the expenditure is linked to the complaints filed by the defendants or their lawyers against prosecutors counties daily.

But the costs are soared lately as County took charges for defending counsel against ethics complaints from controversial inquiries and criminal charges former county attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio filed against supervisors counties, judges and other officials.

Acting County Attorney Rick Romley said that invites likely cost monitoring enhanced billing involving complaints with the State Bar of Arizona, who conceded lawyers and monitors their conduct.

"Many of them are of extraordinary claims, and we are dealing with an unusual situation," said Romley."But the costs were exorbitants.Et they significantly affected my budget."When you start changing cost more at the bar of the complaints, it affects the ability to keep individuals and how make you the affaires.Vous not be able to hire an expert witness in a case.These costs cannot continue. ?

County Prosecutor's Office has hired outside counsel to represent employees on approximately 30 complaints since fiscal year 2008.Many of these complaints were filed against Thomas and totalled at least $538,000, according to data from the County Department of finance.

The County is in charge of defending counsel because the allegations took place while they were working for or on behalf, of comté.Dans instances, bills continue to mount, with the tab associated with the County of long years feud that has less than 5.6 million.

About a quarter of $ 1 million comes from an ethics investigation former Assistant County Prosecutor Lisa Aubuchon, was Thomas' lead attorney in many cases what is called corruption against comté.Le County officials paid $263,000 in its defence, "far beyond all costs" in the past, the Bureau has paid to defend a prosecutor against a complaint bar, said Carol McFadden, the executive chef for Romley.

"It is too - we have never had this happen before", said McFadden. "The Office has always taken a position that we pay for bar complaints for solicitors where someone has filed a complaint to the exercise of their average fonctions.La (defence) cost $35,000.?

Aubuchon in part because the frais.Romley fired Romley defence team refuses to pay an invoice $64,682.50 for approximately 342 hours worked by five lawyers and a paralegal August and September for $96,141 Bill that includes $25,875 for expenses to experts.

Aubuchon, told the Republic may file a notice of claim - a precursor to an action for justice - to the cuisson.Elle already filed a notice of 10 million claim against County officials stating that they coordinated to spread its reputation and destroy its carrière.Romley said that he fired Aubuchon on his behaviour related to corruption cases.

Mark Goldman, lawyer who represented Aubuchon, defended the costs to represent them, taking into account of the "scope and extent of the investigation" it pointed out that a lawyer hired and paid by Romley to examine invoices approved Aubuchon defence each invoice until recently without problems.

"Compare Aubuchon bar investigation (of which there are several) to any investigation of a Maricopa County Attorney in the past is to compare an atomic bomb to a weapon of cap," Goldman wrote a long statement.

In a letter to counsel Tuesday, Aubuchon requested that Goldman, Wilenchik & Bartness p.c., be reinstated his lawyer Office.

"Because of the complexity and nature without previous screening survey, it is impossible that another law firm can get up to speed enough quickly to properly defend me," Aubuchon wrote a legal Ethicist and counsel appointed by Romley to manage conflict.

County officials, meanwhile, said that aubuchon can be held responsible for costs if it is established that it had acted contrary to ethics or criminally.

Journalist Matt Dempsey has contributed to this article.

This entry transmitted via the service for full-text RSS - if this is your content and you read on someone to another site, please read our FAQ page fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Article five filters features: After Hiroshima - non-rapport Cancer Catastrophe of Fallujah.


View the original article here