Burden Of The Crown
One way in which leaders deal with the burden of anxiety is to shut themselves off to the pain of this burden, by instead doubling down on efficiency. Get things done, get them done quickly, get them done well. In fact, one client organisation I worked with referred to such a leader as A Man of Action. (And not in a good way.)
Burden of the Crown
The economic burden of lung cancer was examined with a retrospective case-control cohort study on a database containing inpatient, outpatient and drug claims for employees, dependents and retirees of multiple large US employers with wide geographic distribution. Patients were followed for maximum of 2 years from first cancer diagnosis until death, health benefits dis-enrollment or study end (31 December 2000). Compared with controls (subjects without any cancer), patients with lung cancer (n = 2040) had greater health care service utilization and costs for hospitalization, emergency room visits, outpatient office visits, radiology procedures, laboratory procedures and pharmacy-dispensed drugs (all P
A sinister evil has come to the peaceful kingdom of Keanor, a land of beauty, mystery and magic. The Palace lies in ruins as armies of malevolent warriors sweep through the countryside while the once-proud Imperial Guard cowers in fear. The citizens of Keanor flee their homes in terror, praying for the rise of the one true leader who, it was foretold, would lead them against the armies of darkness. Are you the hero they seek?Tzar puts you at the heart of the battle of good versus evil. Set in the real-time fantasy world of Keanor, where the sword is the law of the land, it is up to you to stop the armies of evil. Recruit, train and command vast armies of Knights and Archers, and build fantastic weapons to smash enemy defenses. Train your Wizards to unleash their arcane powers against your foes, or conjure mighty Dragons, Jinni, and Undead to do your bidding. Can you carry the burden of the crown?
The system uses computer-aided design, digital imaging, databases and in-office tooth-milling machines. The technology potentially can reduce the number of patient visits to the dentist and the total amount of time to produce, obtain and install a new crown.
In conventional dentistry, a patient needing a crown typically undergoes a numbing of the mouth then bites down on a gooey substance to help create the impression for the temporary and permanent crowns. The temporary is installed, and the impression is sent to an outside laboratory so the permanent crown can be milled.
King Hussein, today in this arid place, you bring to full flower the memory of the man who taught you to seek peace, your grandfather, King Abdullah. When he was martyred four decades ago, he left you with a great burden and a great dream. He believed that one day, on both sides of the River Jordan, Arab and Jew would live in peace. How bravely you have shouldered that burden and carried that dream. Now after so much danger and so much hardship, Your Majesty, your day has come. Truly, you have fulfilled your grandfather's legacy.
A "motion for summary judgment shall be granted if all of the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. In determining whether the papers show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact the court shall consider all of the evidence set forth in the papers, ... and all inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence ...." (Code Civ. Proc., 437c, subd. (c).) A defendant "has met his or her burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if that party has shown that one or more elements of the cause of action, even if not separately pleaded, cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to that cause of action. Once the defendant ... has met that burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff ... to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto...." (Id., subd. (o)(2).) fn. 4
" '[D]uty' is not an immutable fact of nature ' "but only an expression of the sum total of those considerations of policy which lead the law to say that the particular plaintiff is entitled to protection." ' (Dillon v. Legg (1968) 68 Cal. 2d 728, 734 ....)" (Ballard v. Uribe (1986) 41 Cal. 3d 564, 572, fn. 6 [224 Cal. Rptr. 664, 715 P.2d 624], italics added.) Some of the considerations [15 Cal. 4th 473] that courts have employed in various contexts to determine the existence and scope of duty are: "the foreseeability of harm to the plaintiff, the degree of certainty that the plaintiff suffered injury, the closeness of the connection between the defendant's conduct and the injury suffered, the moral blame attached to the defendant's conduct, the policy of preventing future harm, the extent of the burden to the defendant and consequences to the community of imposing a duty to exercise care with resulting liability for breach, and the availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk involved. (Cf. Schwartz v. Helms Bakery Ltd. [(1967)] 67 Cal. 2d 232, 237, fn. 3 ...; Wright v. Arcade School Dist. [(1964)] 230 Cal. App. 2d 272, 278 [40 Cal. Rptr. 812]; Raymond v. Paradise Unified School Dist. [(1963)] 218 Cal. App. 2d 1, 8 ....)" (Rowland v. Christian, supra, 69 Cal.2d at p. 113.)
Plaintiff proposes that defendant might have guarded against his injuries by employing various preventative measures-changing the hours of collection, temporarily "blocking off" the area with warning cones or tape, posting warning signs, providing riders with a schedule of collection times, or a combination of these methods. Like points could be raised with regard to most if not all of the cases discussed ante, part III.A, and yet the courts have declined to impose such conditions on the employment of similarly beneficial machines, because to do so unreasonably would impair the utility of those devices. We find no reason to doubt that defendant's garbage collection activity is a vital public service and a matter of high social utility. (See Lyman v. Village of Potsdam, supra, 127 N.E. 312, 314.) We perceive, and plaintiff offers, no basis for treating defendant's garbage collection truck differently from the various machines and devices discussed ante, part III.A, or for increasing the burden on machine operators over what was considered reasonable in an earlier age, when horse riding was more than a mere recreational activity.
The majority purport to justify their "social utility" exception by applying the factors we identified in Rowland v. Christian. Those factors include: (1) the foreseeability of harm to the plaintiff; (2) the degree of certainty that the plaintiff suffered injury; (3) the closeness of the connection between the defendant's conduct and the injury suffered; (4) the moral blame attached to the defendant's conduct; (5) the policy of preventing future harm and the extent of the burden to the defendant; (6) the consequences to the community of imposing a duty to exercise care; and (7) the availability and cost of insurance for the risk. (Rowland v. Christian, supra, 69 Cal.2d at p. 113.)
As to the first two of the foregoing considerations, the case must be remanded to the superior court. Crown has not carried its burden on summary judgment of establishing that there are no triable issues of material fact on these points.
A defendant moving for summary judgment must show either (1) "that one or more elements of the cause of action ... cannot be established" or (2) "that there is a complete defense to that cause of action." (Code Civ. Proc., 437c, subd. (o)(2).) Thus, "[t]he moving defendant bears the burden of proving the absence of any triable issue of material fact, even though the burden of proof as to a particular issue may be on the plaintiff at trial." (Sanchez v. Swinerton & Walberg Co. (1996) 47 Cal. App. 4th 1461, 1465 [55 Cal. Rptr. 2d 415].)
Under the 1992 and 1993 amendments of Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, a defendant moving for summary judgment may discharge its burden by furnishing either (1) affirmative evidence of the required facts or (2) discovery responses conceding that the plaintiff lacks evidence to establish an essential element of the plaintiff's case. (Lopez v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal. App. 4th 705, 713 [52 Cal. Rptr. 2d 821].) This does not mean, however, that "a moving defendant may shift the burden simply by suggesting the possibility that the plaintiff cannot prove its case." (Hagen v. Hickenbottom (1995) 41 Cal. App. 4th 168, 186 [48 Cal. Rptr. 2d 197].) Rather, "before the burden of producing even a prima facie case should be shifted to the plaintiff in advance of trial, a defendant who cannot negate an element of the plaintiff's case should be required to produce direct or circumstantial evidence that the plaintiff not only does not have but cannot reasonably expect to obtain a prima facie case." (Ibid.) 041b061a72