|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ten Model Cases Involving State Compensation and Judicial Relief by the People's Courts Published by the Supreme People's Court | | 最高人民法院发布10起人民法院国家赔偿和司法救助典型案例 |
| (December 19, 2019) | | （2019年12月19日） |
| Table of Contents | | 目 录 |
| Model Cases Involving State Compensation Reflecting Protection of Property Rights | | 体现产权保护的国家赔偿典型案例 |
| 1. Case Involving Xu Wandou's Application for State Compensation for Illegal Sealing up and Freezing by Heping Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Shenyang City | | 1.徐万斗申请沈阳市公安局和平分局违法查封、冻结国家赔偿案 |
| 2. Case Involving the Application of Beijing Bit Times Technology Co., Ltd. for State Compensation for Illegal Criminal Impoundment by the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District, Changsha City, Hunan Province | | 2.北京比特时代科技有限公司申请湖南省长沙市望城区公安局刑事违法扣押国家赔偿案 |
| 3. Case Involving the Application of Chongqing Yingguang Real Estate Agency Co., Ltd. for State Compensation for Illegal Sealing up by the Jiulongpo Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Chongqing Municipality | | 3.重庆英广房地产经纪有限公司申请重庆市公安局九龙坡区分局违法查封国家赔偿案 |
| 4. Case Involving the Application of Luzhou Tianxin Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. and Wei Zhenguo for State Compensation for Illegal Criminal Recovery by the People's Procuratorate of Luzhou City | | 4.泸州天新电子科技公司、魏振国申请泸州市人民检察院刑事违法追缴国家赔偿案 |
| 5. Case Involving Sun Xiqing's Application for State Compensation for Innocence upon Retrial by the People's Court of the High-tech Industrial Development Zone, Weifang City, Shandong Province | | 5.孙夕庆申请山东省潍坊高新技术产业开发区人民法院重审无罪国家赔偿案 |
| Model Cases Involving Judicial Relief Reflecting Concerns for People's Livelihood | | 体现民生关怀的司法救助典型案例 |
| 6. Case Involving Wu Zhenyong's Application for Judicial Relief to Criminal Victims | | 6.吴振永申请刑事被害人司法救助案 |
| 7. Case Involving Wang Sufang's Application for Judicial Relief to Criminal Victims | | 7.王素芳申请刑事被害人司法救助案 |
| 8. Case Involving Wang Zhongyou's Application for Judicial Relief in Civil Tort Dispute | | 8.汪忠友申请民事侵权纠纷司法救助案 |
| 9. Case Involving Wu Bo's Application for Judicial Relief in Civil Tort Dispute | | 9.吴波申请民事侵权纠纷司法救助案 |
| 10. Case Involving the Applications of Zhang Guoliang and Other 25 Persons for Judicial Relief in Civil Tort Dispute | | 10.张国良等26人申请民事侵权纠纷司法救助案 |
| Model Cases Involving State Compensation Reflecting Protection of Property Rights | | 体现产权保护的国家赔偿典型案例 |
| 1. Case Involving Xu Wandou's Application for State Compensation for Illegal Sealing up and Freezing by the Heping Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Shenyang City | | 1.徐万斗申请沈阳市公安局和平分局违法查封、冻结国家赔偿案 |
| Basic Facts | | 基本案情 |
| On December 5, 2012, the People's Court of Heping District, Shenyang City entered a criminal judgment (No. 683 [2012], First, Criminal Division, Heping) that for committing the crime of illegal collection of public deposits, Xu Wandou should be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of four years and a fine of CNY200,000 should be imposed, which should be turned over to the state treasury; the property involved and the illicit income recovered and impounded by the investigation organ should be returned to investors according to the law. The Intermediate People's Court of Shenyang City affirmed the original judgment in the trial of second instance. On July 19, 2013, the People's Court of Heping District, Shenyang City entered a criminal ruling (No. 683 [2012], First, Criminal Division, Heping), determined that the relevant property was funds for illegal fund-raising or property purchased with the funds illegally raised, and ruled that such determined property should be recovered according to the law, turned over to the Leading Group Office for Disposal of Illegally Raised Funds in Shenyang City, and returned to investors according to the law. In the course of investigation of this case, besides sealing up and freezing the property that should be legally recovered in the criminal ruling (No. 683 [2012], First, Criminal Division, Heping), the Heping Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Shenyang City (hereinafter referred to as the “Heping Branch”) also sealed up four house properties and three insurance contracts of China Life Insurance (Group) Company not within the scope of property that should be recovered according to the aforesaid criminal judgment and ruling. The insurance rights and interests and fruits of one insurance contract were frozen by the People's Court of Heping District, Shenyang City on August 31, 2018 on the basis of the warrant of seizure (No. 683 [2012], First, Criminal Division, Heping). After being released upon completion of his sentence, Xu Wandou filed an application for criminal compensation with the Heping Branch. | | 2012年12月5日，沈阳市和平区人民法院作出（2012）和刑初字第683号刑事判决，以徐万斗犯非法吸收公众存款罪，判处有期徒刑四年，并处罚金人民币20万元，上缴国库；侦查机关追缴扣押的涉案财产及违法所得，依法返还投资者。沈阳市中级人民法院二审维持原判。2013年7月19日，沈阳市和平区人民法院作出（2012）和刑初字第683号刑事裁定，认定有关资产属于非法集资款或用非法集资款购买的资产，裁定将认定的资产依法追缴，并交付给沈阳市处置非法集资领导小组办公室，依法返还投资者。沈阳市和平区公安分局（以下简称和平公安分局）在该案侦查过程中，除查封、冻结（2012）和刑初字第683号刑事裁定中依法追缴的财产外，还查封了前述刑事判决、裁定追缴财产范围以外的4套房产和中国人寿保险公司的3份保险合同。其中的一份保险合同于2018年8月31日被沈阳市和平区人民法院以（2012）和刑初字第683号查封令冻结了保单权益及孳息。徐万斗刑满释放后，向和平公安分局申请刑事赔偿。 |
| Judgment | | 裁判结果 |
| The Compensation Committee of the Intermediate People's Court of Shenyang City held upon trial that: In this case, the penalty imposed on Xu Wandou and the property that should be legally recovered in the case involving illegal collection of public deposits have been completed. The four house properties and three insurance contracts Xu Wandou claimed to be returned were not within the scope of the effective criminal judgment. In addition, the Heping Branch failed to prove that the properties were illegal gains or property that should be returned to victims. Accordingly, the investigation organ continued to seize and impound house properties and insurance contracts beyond the scope as determined in the effective judgment, which lacked legal basis and fell under the circumstances of property torts, and the measures of seizure and freezing should be lifted according to the law. Since one insurance contract invovled has been frozen by the People's Court of Heping District, Shenyang City, the relevant matters of such contract should be solved by seeking other legal approach and they were not handled in this case. It was thus decided that the Heping Branch did not lift the seizure and freezing of the four house properties and two insurance contracts not within the scope of recovered property according to the criminal judgment and ruling. | | 沈阳市中级人民法院赔偿委员会经审理认为，本案中，徐万斗非法吸收公众存款一案所判处的刑罚及依法追缴财产已执行完毕。徐万斗要求返还的4套房产及3份保险合同均不在刑事生效刑事裁决范围内。且和平公安分局不能证明该财产属于违法所得或者应当返还被害人的财产。据此，侦查机关在生效裁决确定范围以外继续查封、扣押的房产及保险合同，没有合法依据，属于侵犯财产权的情形，应依法解除查封、冻结措施。因案涉的一份保险合同现已被沈阳市和平区人民法院冻结，故对该合同相关事宜，应另循法律途径解决，本案不予处理。遂决定由和平公安分局对不在刑事判决、裁定追缴财产范围内的4套房产以及两份保险合同予以解除查封、冻结。 |
| Significance | | 典型意义 |
| In the course of investigation, it is not inappropriate for the investigation organ to take such measures as seizure and freezing of the property invovled; however, after the defendant has been convicted and sentenced by the people's court and the property invovled has been clearly determined, the public authority should dispose of the property involved in a timely manner. If the sealing-up and freezing of the property invovled that is not determined in the effective criminal judgment continue, state compensation may arise. This is a model case involving compensation for illegal criminal sealing-up and freezing. It has significance in the following aspects: the trial of a state compensation case has safeguarded the lawful property rights of the enterprise and persons involved according to the law, legally and strictly regulated the disposal of the property involved, handled the “relationship between officials and common people” by the rule-of-law thinking and manner, and reconciled the conflicts between public power and private right. On the one hand, the damaged private rights have been relieved and on the other hand, a reversed reference standard has been raised for the public authority to legally and properly exercise their functions. In the meantime, this case has some demonstration effects in the handling of similar cases. | | 侦查机关在侦查过程中，对涉案财物采取扣押、冻结措施并无不当，但在被告人已被人民法院定罪量刑，且对涉案财物已作出明确认定之后，公权力机关应对涉案财物及时作出相应处置。如对生效刑事裁判未予认定的涉案财物继续查封、冻结，则有可能发生国家赔偿。本案即是一起典型的刑事违法扣押、冻结赔偿案件，其典型意义在于，通过国家赔偿案件的审理，依法维护涉案企业和人员的合法产权，依法严格规范涉案财产的处置，以法治思维、法治方式处理“官民关系”、调和公权力和私权利冲突，一方面救济了受损的合法产权，一方面也对于公权力机关依法正当行使职权，提出了反向的参照标准，对于同类案件的处理具有示范作用。 |
| (Provided by the Higher People's Court of Liaoning Province) | | （辽宁省高级人民法院提供） |
| 2. Case Involving the Application of Beijing Bit Times Technology Co., Ltd. for State Compensation for Illegal Criminal Impoundment by the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District, Changsha City, Hunan Province | | 2.北京比特时代科技有限公司申请湖南省长沙市望城区公安局刑事违法扣押国家赔偿案 |
| Basic Facts | | 基本案情 |
| Beijing Bit Times Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Bit Company”) was formed in June 2000. During the period from April 2004 to November 2006 when Qu Tieliang served as the chairman of the board and general manager of the Company, Bit Company independently developed such software as Lottery Big Winner, Double Ball Big Winner, 3D Big Winner, and Football Lottery Big Winner and provided services for lottery ticket buyers. On May 18, 2007, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District, Changsha City, Hunan Province (hereinafter referred to as the “Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District”) placed a case on file for investigation on the ground that Qu Tieliang was suspected of illegal operation. Afterwards, it impounded four host computers, six servers, one notebook computer, 12 bank cards and account books, and meeting minutes books and ordered Bit Company to remit CNY273,200 to the account of the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District for temporary impoundment. On June 1, Qu Tieliang was subject to criminal detention. On June 28, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District requested the procuratorial organ for approving the arrest of Qu Tieliang and the procuratorial organ made a decision on not approving the arrest. On July 7, Qu Tieliang was released on bail pending trial. From July 6, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District successively returned the impounded property to Bit Company. During the period from August 9 to November 6, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District returned six servers, one notebook computer, and 12 bank cards to Bit Company. On April 23, 2008, the People's Procuratorate of Wangcheng District approved the arrest of Qu Tieliang on the ground that he was suspected of committing the crime of illegal operation and on April 25, it executed the arrest. Since Qu Tieliang had a heart disease, the People's Procuratorate of Wangcheng District approved to grant him bail pending trial on April 30. On November 18, 2010, the People's Procuratorate of Wangcheng District made a decision on non-prosecution on the ground that the acts of Qu Tieliang did not constitute a crime. On December 8, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District returned the impounded four host computers to Bit Company and on December 23, it returned the temporarily impounded fund of CNY273,200 to Bit Company. In December 2011, Qu Tieliang and Bit Company filed an application for state compensation with the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District on the grounds that the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District erroneously detained and arrested Qu Tieliang and impounded Bit Company's property and personal property, causing losses. | | 北京比特时代科技有限公司（以下简称比特公司）于2000年6月成立。2004年4月至 2006年11月，曲铁良任比特公司董事长兼总经理期间，比特公司自主研发了《彩票大赢家》《双色球大赢家》《3D大赢家》《足彩大赢家》等分析软件，为彩民提供服务。2007年5月18日，湖南省长沙市望城区公安局（以下简称望城区公安局）以涉嫌非法经营对曲铁良立案侦查，后该局扣押了比特公司电脑主机4台、服务器6台、笔记本电脑1台、银行卡12张及账本、会议记录本等，责令比特公司汇款27．32万元至望城区公安局账户暂扣。6月1日，曲铁良被刑事拘留。6月28日，望城区公安局向检察机关提请批捕，检察机关作出不予批准逮捕的决定。7月7日，曲铁良被取保候审。从7月 6日起，望城区公安局陆续将扣押的财物退还比特公司。8月9日至11月6日期间，望城区公安局共退还比特公司服务器6台、笔记本电脑1台，银行卡12张。2008年4月23日，望城区检察院以曲铁良涉嫌非法经营罪对其批准逮捕，并于4月25日执行逮捕。因其患有心脏疾病，于4月30日经批准取保候审。2010年11月18日，望城区检察院认为曲铁良的行为不构成犯罪为由作出不起诉决定。12月8日，望城区公安局将扣押的电脑主机4台退还比特公司，同月23日将暂扣款 27.32万元退还比特公司。2011年12月，曲铁良、比特公司以望城区公安局错拘错捕、扣押公司及私人财产造成损失为由，向望城区公安局申请国家赔偿。 |
| Judgment | | 裁判结果 |
| The Compensation Committee of the Higher People's Court of Hunan Province held upon trial that: First, in the course of investigation, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District impounded host computers, servers, notebook computer, bank cards, cash, account books, and other articles of Bit Company used for operation, resulting in Bit Company's failure to operate and substantially causing Bit Company's suspension of production and operation. It should compensate Bit Company the house rent, the water and electricity charges, and salaries of left-behind employees on the basis of Bit Company's direct losses. Second, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District failed to produce evidenceproving that the computers could normally run at the time of return. Therefore, from the perspective of being in favor of the compensation claimant, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District should compensate Bit Company the expenses for computer maintenance and data recovery. Third, the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District impounded Bit Company's fund of CNY273,200 on May 31, 2007 and returned such fund on December 23, 2010, and it should pay the corresponding interest. Therefore, the Compensation Committee of the Higher People's Court of Hunan Province decided that the Public Security Bureau of Wangcheng District should pay Bit Company the house rent of CNY165,000, the electricity charge of CNY4,590.02, the economic compensation for employees of CNY80,000, the salaries of left-behind employees of CNY20,000, the expense for computer maintenance of CNY24,800, and the interest of the impounded fund of CNY14,593.43, CNY308,983.45 in total. | | 湖南省高级人民法院赔偿委员会经审理认为：第一，望城区公安局在侦查过程中，扣押了比特公司用于经营的电脑主机、服务器、笔记本电脑、银行卡、现金及帐本等物品，导致比特公司无法经营，实质上造成了比特公司的停产停业，应按照直接损失给予赔偿房屋租金、水电费、留守职工工资。第二，望城区公安局无法举证证明退还时电脑能正常使用，故从有利于赔偿请求人的角度出发，望城区公安局应赔偿比特公司电脑维修和数据恢复费用。第三，望城区公安局于2007年5月31日扣押比特公司27.32万元，于2010年12月23日退还，应支付相应利息。据此决定由望城区公安局赔偿比特公司房屋租金165000元、电费4590.02元、职工经济补偿80000元、留守职工工资20000元、电脑维修费24800元、被扣押款利息14593.43元，合计308983.45元。 |
| Significance | | 典型意义 |
| In the handling of a criminal case, although the judicial organ has the right to take such compulsory measures as seizing, impounding, and freezing the property involved, it should simultaneously pay attention to protecting other lawful rights and interests of the enterprise involved or criminal suspect and avoid any additional loss to the enterprise or persons invovled in cases due to improper measures. It is clearly emphasized in the Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Improving the Property Rights Protection System and Lawfully Protecting Property Rights that “If it is indeed necessary to adopt such measures as seizure, impoundment, and freezing, such measures shall be taken in strict accordance with statutory procedures, and the negative impact on the normal production and operations of enterprises shall be minimized.” It is also specified in the Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Fully Maximizing the Functions of Trials and Effectively Strengthening the Judicial Protection of Property Rights that the judicial policies for the protection of property rights should be accurately comprehended and strictly implemented, and compulsory measures and measures of seizure, impoundment, and freezing should be prudently taken according to the law so as to minimize the adverse impact on the normal production and business operation of enterprises. Therefore, in the handling of various action cases, we should call for judicial balance in legitimate and impartial case-handling and prudent protection of property rights. In this case, the public security organ improperly took compulsory measures and seized equipment and articles used by the enterprise for operation, resulting in the enterprise's failure to operate and causing the relevant losses. Therefore, the procuratorial organ should assume the corresponding compensatory liability. The trial ideas and application of law in this case have some demonstration effects on cases involving protection of property rights. | | 司法机关在刑事案件办理过程中，虽有权利对涉案财产采取查封扣押冻结等强制措施，但也应同时注意对涉案企业或者犯罪嫌疑人的其他合法权益予以保护，避免由于措施的不当导致涉案企业、人员造成额外的损失。《中共中央 国务院关于完善产权保护制度依法保护产权的意见》中明确强调，确需采取查封、扣押、冻结措施的，要严格按照法定程序进行，最大限度降低对企业正常生产经营活动的不利影响。《最高人民法院关于充分发挥审判职能作用切实加强产权司法保护的意见》亦明确指出，应准确把握、严格执行产权保护的司法政策，依法慎用强制措施和查封、扣押、冻结措施，最大限度降低对企业正常生产经营活动的不利影响。因此，在各类诉讼案件的办理过程中，要提倡做到依法公正办案和审慎保护产权的司法执法平衡。本案中，公安机关采取强制措施不当，对企业用于经营的设备等物品予以查封，导致企业无法经营，并造成相关损失，应承担相应的赔偿责任。本案的审理思路和法律适用，对于产权保护类案件，具有一定的示范作用。 |
| (Provided by the Higher People's Court of Hunan Province) | | （湖南省高级人民法院提供） |
| 3. Case Involving the Application of Chongqing Yingguang Real Estate Agency Co., Ltd. for State Compensation for Illegal Seizure by Jiulongpo Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Chongqing Municipality | | 3.重庆英广房地产经纪有限公司申请重庆市公安局九龙坡区分局违法查封国家赔偿案 |
| Basic Facts | | 基本案情 |
| On July 1, 2011, Chongqing Yingguang Real Estate Agency Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Yingguang Company”) separately signed the House Leasing Contracts with Chongqing Dingli Maoye Automobile Rental Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Dingli Company”) and Guangdong Bangjia Health Industry Supermarket Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Bangjia Company”) and leased the underground floor and the first floor of a commercial building in Jiulongpo District to the aforesaid companies. Since the two companies were suspected of engaging in illegal collection of public deposits, on May 15, 2012, the Jiulongpo Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Chongqing Municipality (hereinafter referred to as the “Jiulongpo Branch”) decided to place the case on file for investigation, investigated the relevant persons involved on the same day, and impounded the two companies' articles and vehicles invovled in the rented venues on the scene. Because it was inappropriate to move the articles invovled, the Jiulongpo Branch placed such articles in the venues rented by the two companies. From May 22, 2013, the Jiulongpo Branch placed the vacated materials in the parking space of Yingguang Company and Chongqing Yacheng House Sale Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Yacheng Company”). During the period when the Jiulongpo Branch used the property of Yingguang Company and Yingguang Company, such losses as property management fees, parking space fees, and water and electricity charges arose. Since the Jiulongpo Branch separately issued decisions on the applications filed by Yingguang Company and Yingguang Company and it was inconvenient to calculate the losses, as agreed by Yingguang Company and Yingguang Company through consultation, Yingguang Company enjoyed the sole right to claim for such losses. Therefore, Yingguang Company filed an application with the Fifth Intermediate People's Court of Chongqing Municipality that the Jiulongpo Branch should pay compensation for losses. | | 2011年7月1日，重庆英广房地产经纪有限公司（以下简称英广公司）分别与重庆鼎利茂业汽车租赁有限公司（以下简称鼎利公司）、广东邦家健康产业超市有限公司（以下简称邦家公司）签订《房屋租赁合同》，将九龙坡区某商业用房负一层、一层出租给前述两公司。因两公司涉嫌非法吸收公众存款，重庆市公安局九龙坡区分局（以下简称九龙坡区公安局）于2012年5月15日决定立案侦查，同日对相关涉案人员进行查处，并对该两公司相关承租场地内的涉案物品及车辆进行就地扣押。因涉案物品不宜移动，九龙坡区公安局将其置于该两公司承租场地内。自2013年5月22日起，九龙坡区公安局将腾退的物资置于英广公司、重庆亚城房屋销售有限公司（以下简称亚城公司）车位内。九龙坡区公安局在使用英广公司、亚城公司物业期间，造成物业管理费、车位租金、水电费等损失。因九龙坡区公安局分别对英广公司、亚城公司的申请作出决定，对其损失不便计算，后经英广公司、亚城公司协商同意，将此部分损失的主张权利单独归为英广公司享有。英广公司遂向重庆市第五中级人民法院申请九龙坡区公安局赔偿损失。 |
| Judgment | | 裁判结果 |
The Compensation Committee of the Fifth Intermediate People's Court of Chongqing Municipality held upon trial that: After deciding to placing the case involving Dingli Company and Bangjia Company on file for investigation, the Jiulongpo Branch impounded the articles and vehicles invovled of the aforesaid companies in the relevant venues rented by them and placed such articles and vehicles in the said venues. Although the Jiulongpo Branch did not seize the aforesaid property, it objectively occupied such property. After ascertaining that Yingguang Company was not invovled in the criminal case, the Jiulongpo Branch still failed to transfer the property invovled to Yingguang Company in a timely manner, which caused losses to Yingguang Company, and it should assume the liability for state compensation. Therefore, the Fifth Intermediate People's Court of Chongqing Municipality decided that the Jiulongpo Branch should compensate Yingguang Company CNY1,083,300.
．．．．．． | | 重庆市第五中级人民法院赔偿委员会经审理认为，九龙坡区公安局在决定对鼎利公司、邦家公司立案侦查后，对上述公司相关承租场地内的涉案物品及车辆进行就地扣押，并将其置于承租场地内的保管，虽然九龙坡区公安局未对上述物业进行查封，但客观上占用该物业，且在查明英广公司与刑事案件无关的情况下，未及时将案涉物业移交给英广公司，给英广公司造成损失，应当承担国家赔偿责任。据此决定由九龙坡区公安局赔偿英广公司1083300元。
．．．．．． |
|
Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.
1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.
2. Binding to the account with access to this database.
3. Apply for a trial account.
4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【￥1100.00】 for your single purchase. | |
您好：您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录，进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息；如您还不是我们 的英文用户；您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买，支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content
found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright
owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.
Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations
of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language
versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly
or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.
We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve
the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
|
|
|
|
|
|