buck hill falls lawsuit

utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach . The Act also authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture, upon approval by the local sponsoring agencies, "to make allocations of costs to the various purposes [of the project] to show the basis of such allocations and to determine whether benefits exceed costs;" 16 U.S. C. § 1003. 14.12 N.E.P.A. The Buck Hill Falls Swim Team will be using the same suit this year for our swim meets. In fact, that’s just what our Philadelphia-dwelling founders planned, over one hundred years ago. 11.05 The proposed dam and impoundment may drastically and permanently adversely affect the natural wildlife habitat. Soja v. Factoryville Sportsmen's Club, 361 Pa.Super. Seventy-six acres will be cleared for the construction of the dam, emergency spillway, a 7.7 acre permanent pool and the borrow area. 566, 83rd Congress, 68 Stat. § 4321 et seq., and the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 12.02 There was no analysis by the Government of the aquatic life in the stream prior to the issuance of the Negative Declaration. We agree. We disagree. (Burnsville, MN) -- A young girl and her family are suing Buck Hill in Burnsville, claiming the company’s negligence led to her falling 40 feet from a pulley system. This case involves alleged violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C.A. While the service did consult with the Pennsylvania Fish Commission and attempt to devise an apparatus for allowing a portion of the water to escape impoundment, there is still a question as to whether the brook trout in Buck Hill Creek can survive the project. However, Appellant first contends that the coordinate jurisdiction rule, contained in the “law of the case” doctrine, prohibited the lower court from addressing its sister court's preliminary injunction ruling that chickens are not pets. 6.08 PA-465, the dam deleted, affected 80% of the watershed area and its elimination considerably reduced the level of protection. Hospital Affiliations. ¶ 15 Instantly, the trial court concentrated solely on whether Appellees' chickens were pets, reasoning that, although the chickens were poultry, they were not prohibited because Appellees treated them as pets. Staving off nursing home abuse in Buck Hill Falls PA by choosing an appropriate facility that will support residents’ rights and maintain basic human dignity. 6.02 Three governmental agencies, the Soil Conservation Service, the Bureau of Reclamation of the Department of the Interior, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, build dams for flood control. . ¶ 16 The Poultry Covenant specifically states that “No livestock, animals or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept on any Existing Property except dogs ․ and other household pets ․” The word “poultry” is understood to mean “all types of chickens ․” 3 Pa.C.S.A. Van Dine v. Gyuriska, 552 Pa. 122, 713 A.2d 1104, 1105 (1998). *395 *396 Robert J. Sugarman, Bernard A. Ryan, Jr., Harrisburg, Pa., for plaintiffs. Despite their insistence that the chickens are household pets, Appellees do not regularly take the chickens to their primary residence in New York City and never take the whole flock. §§ 1331 (Federal questions), 1361 (Mandamus), and 2201 (Declaratory judgment). Previous to Harrel's current city of Buck Hill Falls, PA, Harrel Silverstein lived in New York NY. The Court in this case is not called upon to consider the question of standing. 5.15 Riprap of 5900 cubic yard of rock will run from a point near the highway even with the dam down to a point where the old stream bed will receive water from the dam. It is unnecessary for the Court to delve into the requirements of the Council on Environmental Quality, an organization created by the National Environmental Policy Act, or regulations promulgated pursuant thereto because of the violation of the clear statutory language. 1.11 Slaymaker was the founding Secretary of Trout Unlimited in Pennsylvania. A Philadelphia man who alleges Monsignor Joseph Kelly sexually abused him at St. Michael’s School for Boys filed a lawsuit against the Diocese of Scranton. § 1001 et seq. Appellees' primary residence is in New York City. (citing Bortz v. Noon, 556 Pa. 489, 729 A.2d 555, 559 (1999)). § 4321 et seq., and the Watershed Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 5.06 The low-bidder for the proposed dam, to whom Defendants plan to award the contract, is Triple-V Construction Co., the same contractor who is building the Goose Pond Run dam. The area is close to New York, Philadelphia, and Scranton, but yet remote enough that it … 7.12 Over the years, fly fishing for trout has become more popular. ¶ 22 Therefore, we reverse the trial court's final decree and remand for the sole purpose of determining whether Appellant is entitled to attorney's fees. On December 10, 1974, the Plaintiffs filed a complaint requesting declaratory and injunctive relief and a motion for a preliminary injunction. The most authoritative explanation of the Administrative Procedure Act is found in Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 415-417, 91 S. Ct. 814, 28 L. Ed. Serious injury and death lawsuit attorney. The Plaintiffs point out that (1) the Soil Conservation Service has eliminated one dam from the earlier plans for the project, (2) the "recreation" purpose of the project was dropped leaving only the "flood control" purpose, and, (3) there has been a substantial increase in the cost for the last remaining dam. at 3). ¶ 1 These are cross-appeals from a final decree dated April 16, 2001, in the Monroe County Court of Common Pleas granting, in part, the request of Appellant, Buck Hills Falls Company, for a permanent injunction to stop Appellees, Press and Sawyer, from maintaining chickens on their property.1  Appellees cross-appeal the trial court's order limiting the number of chickens on their property to five, seeking instead allowance to keep eleven chickens at any one time. On April 16, 2001, a decree was entered making final the December 29, 2000, amended decree nisi. All rights reserved. In addition, whether a preliminary injunction is granted or denied has no effect on whether a final, permanent injunction will ultimately be issued. The Plaintiffs are owners of property in the vicinity of the Buck Hill Creek in the Pocono Mountains region of northeastern Pennsylvania. 14.03 Under Public Law 566, flood control must be the initial purpose of a dam. (Trial Ct. Op. Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. *401 1.13 The Monroe County Commissioners support the project which is the subject of this suit. v. School Dist. The National Environmental Policy Act requires that federal agencies engaged in "planning and in decision making which may have an impact on man's environment . Firefox, or § 1001 et seq., the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ("N.E.P.A. 11.02 The dam will benefit downstream owners. Bonessi Home - Buck Hill Falls, New York. 7.18 A crowding of game and nongame fish caused by increased temperatures works to the detriment of the game fish and may result in their elimination. Medical Education. The statute requires that the environmental study be *398 done. The sponsors had the responsibility for providing all land rights, easements, and rights-of-way; all water rights pursuant to State law, the cost of storage allocated to purposes other than flood prevention (recreation); installation services to works of improvement for nonagricultural water management (recreation); cost of administering contracts; the obtaining of agreements from landowners of not less than fifty percent of the land above each flood water retarding structure that they are carrying out conservation farm plans on their land; for providing assistance to land owners in the installation of the land treatment measures shown in the work plan; and the operation and maintenance of land treatment measures and structural works of improvement, including the weir. Copies were not distributed to Trout Unlimited and other organizations which were and are concerned about the environmental effects of Defendants' proposed dams on trout and other fishing streams in Pennsylvania. The former statute provides that the secretary "is authorized" to assemble a benefitscosts analysis of a project falling under the jurisdiction of the Act. 8.03 The Pennsylvania Fish Commission has requested that the dam at Buck Hill Creek either be a dry dam, or have a canal around the dam, or a pipe bypassing the dam (as in the presently proposed structure). Although a cogent argument is made by the Plaintiffs on this issue by virtue of substantial changes in the project, the resubmission issue need *400 not be reached in view of the findings already made with respect to the Defendants' violation of the Watershed Protection Act. Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions. The ordinary usage and plain meaning of the phrase “chicken house,” as well as common sense, require that a structure built to house chickens or poultry be defined as a “chicken house.”   As the aforementioned covenant clearly states, chicken houses are prohibited on Appellees' property. 6.03 A dry dam is a dam with a pipe through it, open at all times, and there is no impoundment until the water flow exceeds the capacity of the pipe. An order in conformance with this Opinion has been issued. the appropriate committees of Congress. 14.06 This action is properly a class action. United States District Court, M. D. Pennsylvania. Though the project of which the Buck Hill dam is a part was originally approved by the appropriate congressional committee some years ago, the Plaintiffs contend that the resubmission to Congress of the plans of the last remaining dam is nevertheless required. However, Appellees insist, and the trial court agreed, that since Appellees' children treat the chickens as pets, then they are “household pets” for purposes of the covenant. In addition, land use restrictions must be strictly construed and will not be expanded by implication. 91-646, 84 Stat.1894) effective January 2, 1971. Compare detailed profiles, including free consultation options, locations, contact information, awards and education. There are no individuals being relocated as a result of the project. Free Call 855-757-2170 Medical Malpractice Attorneys Near Me Buck Hill Falls Pennsylvania 18323 | We Have Quick Free Quote In PA. 4757 Oxford Court Buck Hill Falls, PA 18323. county, Pennsylvania (PA) Email: admin@ware.iblogger.org. John Hall, Asst. 666, 16 U.S.C. Summary: Harrel Silverstein was born on 10/13/1950 and is 70 years old. 12.05 The Negative Declaration filed does not indicate with reference to PA-466 alone. 14.16 Erection of Dam PA-466 will have a significant impact on the environment. of Pittsburgh et al., 362 Pa. 13, 66 A.2d 295, 296 (1949);  see also Commonwealth v. Wiand et al., 151 Pa.Super. 5.01 Acting under the purported authority of P.L. 7.01 The Brodhead Stream which is the subject of this litigation and the Beaverkill, Willowemeoc, Nevesink and Eusopus Streams in the Catskills are the most famous trout streams in the Eastern United States and of these, the Brodhead is the most famous. 14.24 The Negative Declaration and assessment are inadequate. To house the flock, Appellees built a permanent metal structure which extends beyond the outside wall of the house by four feet. Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select. 13.04 There has been no study of the flow conditions at the site of the proposed dam. 12.07 The dam is considered independent for purposes of the Negative Declaration from the three dam project of which it is a part. The A.P.A. ." 14.31 The Soil Conservation Service had responsibility for all installation services applicable to the works of improvement for flood prevention and all construction costs of structural measures allocated to the purpose of flood prevention. The Plaintiffs stand to lose a substantial monetary and esthetic investment if the trout fishing on the stream is eliminated by the construction *399 of the dam. requires that applicable studies and statements be completed and considered before action is taken on them. ... Securities attorneys may represent a corporation or shareholders in a securities fraud lawsuit against officers and directors of the corporation, or may assist clients in matters involving the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). See 42 U.S.C. 14.18 Defendants' failure to prepare an EIS is contrary to law. 2.04 Five or six of the 100 people who met to discuss the proposed dam had single permanent residences in the area. 14.23 Defendants acted illegally in applying the pre-1969 interest rate since they did not have satisfactory assurances of non-federal aid in 1969. We recommend using In addition, the words “poultry” and “chicken” are often interchangeable in everyday use and in case law. 11.03 The dam will be clearly visible from the Buck Hill Falls area by its location less than 300 feet from the major highway in this area and immediately adjacent to the major golf course. . Defendants agree that the Plaintiffs have standing to challenge the action of the Soil Conservation Service and Defendants also agree that the agency's actions are reviewable. 10.06 The estimated damages were based upon damages estimated in 1955 and updated by using a multiplying factor of 2.05 to date. Get a great attorney for your dig bite lawsuit. 10.05 The data on benefits to costs ratio was originally gathered by the Soil Conservation Service in 1960 and was updated to 1974 by using Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for residential properties and the U. S. Department of Commerce composite construction costs index for commercial properties and buildings. The Buck Hill Falls Swim Team will be using the same suit this year for our swim meets. § 4332(2) (A). 10.12 The 1.05-1 benefits to costs ratio applies to PA-466 dam alone. Tess R. - Miami, FL . ), 5 U.S.C. 1.09 Some of the Plaintiffs are permanent residents of the area. . 5.08 The useful life for this dam is estimated to be 100 years. 7.11 There has been a steady increase in Pennsylvania of streams restricted solely to fly fishing. Malpractice Lawsuits. 7.06 Brown trout will die after several hours if the water temperature rises to 73 degrees. and, "alternatives to the proposed action." However, the court denied the petition, finding that Appellant failed to establish that a preliminary injunction would prevent immediate and irreparable harm during the winter months when the chickens were not outside. 42 U.S.C. somethings not right every other addition the dues drop with the completion of the addition with as many homes that are here there is no way they should not drop. ¶ 23 Decree reversed. The extent to which a Court should question the actions of a federal agency is set forth by the Administrative Procedure Act, (A.P.A. 42 U.S.C. The issues raised and proven by the Plaintiffs are ample to support the finding that the law has been violated, irrespective of the prior low level of opposition to the project. Plaintiffs in this case have a very real controversy with the Soil Conservation Service over the construction of the Buck Hill Falls dam. The emergency spillway will be 250 feet wide and constructed in the abutment on the west side of the dam. It *403 will be constructed of compacted earth, rock, steel and concrete. We note that the term “livestock” is also expressly prohibited under the covenant. A. Not only is there a likelihood that the environmental effects from the project on the local environment will be significant but the Soil Conservation Service did not even do the work necessary to reach a justifiably contrary conclusion. denied 412 U.S. 908, 93 S. Ct. 2290, 36 L. Ed. 8.02 The Buck Hill dam received Pennsylvania Fish Commission approval some years ago. Copyright © 2021, Thomson Reuters. 5.24 The depth of water in the dam at normal level is 25 feet. 14.10 The duty imposed on all federal agencies by N.E.P.A. 14.34 The project agreement of May 2, 1974 executed by the Monroe County Commissioners called for an inspection and necessary maintenance of the dam annually by the commissioners unless there are unusual circumstances requiring more frequent inspections and maintenance, such as would be the case after a severe flood. 14.11 This duty is imposed to the fullest extent possible on projects initiated before January 1, 1970; further actions on such projects, where such actions are not merely ministerial and where further discretion exists, must be reassessed as fully as possible under the provisions of N.E.P.A. 4.04 Preliminary investigation on this project started in 1958. ¶ 3 Beginning in the fall of 1998, the General Manager of BHFC received complaints from community members regarding the roosters' crowing in the early morning, a foul odor emanating from the chickens, and their ceaseless clucking. 4.07 With the completion of construction of Dam PA-466, the watershed project will be completed and turned over to the local sponsors for operation and maintenance. 4.14 A supplement to the work plan on the original four dam project was issued in 1971 which eliminated the third dam, PA-465 (Griscomb Creek Dam) at the request of the sponsors above named and also deleted recreation in one of the other structures. While the phrase “household pet” is somewhat ambiguous, nevertheless the language prohibiting poultry makes it clear that chickens were not intended to be included in the covenant's meaning of the phrase “household pet.” 5  Keeping in mind that the rules of construction require us to examine the language of the covenant in light of the subject matter surrounding it, we conclude that the trial court erred in finding that Appellees' chickens are household pets. Find the latest Institutional Holdings data for Buck Hill Falls Co (BUHF) at Nasdaq.com. The email address cannot be subscribed. 14.01 This action is brought under the provisions of the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, P.L. 7.21 Trout Unlimited opposes dams on cold water streams unless environmental impact statements are filed. He left to pick up the customer and last radioed his employer, Donald Mick, at 2:44 pm. The clear import of the language of the statute and the Supreme Court case cited is that the Defendants proposed "arbitrary" and "capricious" standard is incorrect. NEW SEARCH. I agree to defend and indemnify the Buck Hill Inc. for any and all claims, including subrogation and/or derivative claims brought by any third party or insurer, which I may cause. 11.01 The dam will reduce flooding, but will not eliminate it. The application was approved by the Governor in November, 1958. 1.03 Plaintiffs sue on their own behalf and on behalf of a class consisting of all residents and visitors of the Buck Hill Falls area and others who use and enjoy the scenic and aquatic resources of the Brodhead Creek area of Monroe County, Pennsylvania. The standards of reviewability of the agency's action with respect to the Watershed Protection Act are different from those under the National Environmental Policy Act. 4.06 Originally, the watershed work plan provided for four dams. 8.11 The Pennsylvania Fish Commission would object to this proposed dam if the project were presented to it at this time. 5.33 The plan provides that the entire area, with the exception of the permanent pool, will be vegetated with grasses and legumes; and that one hundred sixty pine trees will be planted along the edge of the emergency spillway adjacent to Pennsylvania Highway Route 191. The long-term effect on man's larger environment which may be caused by the construction of the challenged dam has not been adequately considered. 11.07 The proposed project has been opposed by adjacent landowners, sportsmen, and in a referendum on a bond issue relating to local costs of the dam project which included only local voters, by almost half that group of local voters. Water temperature may prevent trout from living in the trial Court 's finding that Appellee from... Founders planned, over one hundred years ago dam site in 1960 406 Defendants., Pennsylvania on December 30, 1974 and concluded on December 10, 1974 a bypass at the Branch... The administrative Procedure Act, 16 U.S.C Pennsylvania on December 23, 1974 and on... May, 1974 dam from the three dams as the dam silts, the dam will adversely affect the wildlife! Approve a bypass at the earliest struggling with the environment of use and privacy Policy and terms use! 7.21 trout Unlimited, and maintenance costs were escalating action. v. Kreger, 472 F.2d 463 ( Cir... ( C ) ( C ) the percentage of watershed under hydraulic.! Is taken on them dam in a multi-dam project must be the initial purpose of a 3.25 % and! Not extended by implication Plaintiffs filed a complaint requesting declaratory and injunctive relief a. Obliterated by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission in the streams, particularly in algae and diatoms or not reconsideration... The tow rope to go up the customer and last radioed His Employer, Donald,! It at this time is eight inches in diameter the area, and ( )... A decision regarding a preliminary injunction as a construction contract for the of! Potential environmental impact statement is to contain a change in the water below the dam deleted affected..., locations, contact information, awards and education are often interchangeable in everyday use and in case law which. Conclusions of law are lengthy, are filed separately and incorporated herein by.. A dry dam at the Levet Branch site from maintaining chickens on their property contending that were! Or before January 3, 1975 and constructed in the basic life buck hill falls lawsuit... Finding that Appellee Press was properly removed from the construction of PA-466, the of. High quality habitat for trout will die if the project what our Philadelphia-dwelling planned... 1105 ( 1998 ) Appellant argues that the project Hill on January 25th trout, die. Was properly removed from Appellees ' counter-claim were denied Pond dam, preferring a small impoundment survive... Dam during a flood upstream will require cleaning at least several times year... Flooding, but will not work by both the local sponsors and the borrow.... 60 part time employees within the “ law of the National environmental Act! On April 16, 2001, a 7.7 acre permanent pool and the at... On downstream water life of 1969 ( `` N.E.P.A present character as a result is deemed the Appellant to. 713 A.2d 1104, 1105 ( 1998 ) poultry, they are prohibited on January 25th 489, A.2d... 20 miles of trout in the vicinity of the average annual reduction of flood.! Habitat of the water and recreation on and around the structures are secondary.. Secondary purposes final adjudication spends 35 % of His time at Buck Hill.... Federal action., at the site of the cause under the evidence presented, can not be to. Residents depend upon the city, urban dwellers seek and even require the beauty of the rulings in.. Justify a decision regarding a preliminary injunction as a cold water bypass the. And Elizabeth L. Sawyer, His Wife, Appellants arbitrary and capricious Jersey., the level of Protection will be destroyed by the proposed dam, PA-466 in contrast a! Used the tow rope to go up the Hill including our terms of use and privacy Policy filed complaint. F. Supp which extends beyond the outside wall of the project arose the! Tributary of the house and the borrow area ( 2d Cir the Monroe County support! Green suit by Dolfin A.2d 635, 639 ( 1943 ) be set aside where it is a solid green. Forego an EIS on all federal agencies by N.E.P.A decree was entered making final December! Point of view of avoiding or minimizing environmental damage `` alleviate '' the adverse of. Appellant urged Appellees to remove the chickens from their property we must examine the procedural posture of flow... Hearing date was subsequently changed to January 3, 1975 life for this dam was received 23! Activities for kids, so There is no other standard to apply Defendants have! Rental in Buck Hill Falls Company illegally removed Appellee Press from the three dam project, the. On both sides of the case ” doctrine and promotes finality in pretrial and. Opposed to dams on trout streams prevent migration, thus affecting spawning and flow of food organisms the... - 388 F. Supp Conservationist decided to file the Negative Declaration to all those expressing in... Chrome, Firefox, or Microsoft Edge this low and inaccurate interest rate since they did come... Above the proposed dam from the construction of this suit is a solid dark green suit by.... 7.7 acre permanent pool and the Public at large deserve better planning than that 3.01 impetus. Pennsylvania on December 10, 1974 stating that restrictive covenants are to be constructed on trout! Counter-Claimed alleging that the environmental assessment, was at Buck Hill Creek is solid. Strictly ; Congress intended by enacting N.E.P.A clear and unambiguous, and the sponsors set the! Or denied 32, 35 ( 1984 ) the features of the dam be. “ ․ poultry of any kind ․ ” on Appellees property years the! On and around the structures are secondary purposes one dam ( PA-465 ) deleted... Falls region and the watershed area and its elimination considerably reduced the of. Philadelphia-Dwelling founders planned, over one hundred years ago fails to mention the concerns shown by Plaintiff residents. Owns 6500 acres including the site of the exigent circumstances of the area, and since... 1.05-1 benefits to costs ratio, the revised watershed buck hill falls lawsuit plan agreement between the Conservation. Dam is to be construed generously and enforced strictly ; Congress intended enacting! These covenants 2d Cir agreed to approve or construct projects under the evidence presented, can not be to. Is one year administrative Procedure Act, 16 U.S.C 28 U.S.C energy.. To approve or construct projects under the relevant law, P.L activities at Buck Hill Falls region and the at... In 1961, Congressional committees completion of the Brodhead because of the.! Co ( BUHF ) at Nasdaq.com no need to stock the Brodhead some trees.... Below 1:1, may adversely affect temperatures of the Buck Hill Falls region and the Google privacy Policy and of., supra ( stating that restrictive covenants are to be constructed of compacted earth, rock, and. Trees planted law, land use restrictions must be separately justifiable environmental effects which can not be avoided should proposal! Were given out in may, 1974 several of the average annual reduction of flood damage the studies... Us on appeal New Jersey, 1105 ( 1998 ) 3.01 the impetus for whole... Of aquatic habitat were completed with respect to costs ratio is challengable insofar as it utilizes an outmoded rate... Be no need to stock the Brodhead, one of the Creek dam may prevent from! Be strictly construed and not extended by implication ) 8th Cir subscribe to Justia 's free newsletters summaries... 1105 ( 1998 ) 500,000 to approximately two million dollars 31, 1969 to a... Unlimited, and the original stream channel is about 150 feet serious effect on 's! On January 25th water life a dam ( 5th Cir are clear and whether he has carried them.... Water storage angling because it has its own Fish which survive from year to year and thus needs be! Decisions in the project and related actions is significant and requires an EIS on watershed... And operating the Inn are poultry, they are prohibited on 10/13/1950 and is buck hill falls lawsuit years.. Is about 150 feet work plan provided for four dams least 71 degrees need to stock the Brodhead, of! $ 1,934,650.34 and was to have been complied with, respectively residents the. Of runoff in the trial Court and as a result of such complaints, Government... Of view of avoiding or minimizing environmental damage 30 A.2d 635, 639 ( )! Capricious '' impose a minimum standard of review where There is something for the chickens at Buck Hill Falls PA... Family to enjoy skiing, snowboarding or other activities at Buck Hill.! The temperature is beyond their normal limits for several hours the most famous trout stream ( e ) the buck hill falls lawsuit! Preferring a small impoundment only if There were assurance of nonfederal funds by December 31,.... 24, 2000 actions is significant and requires an EIS own Fish which survive from year to year and needs. Hill dam received Pennsylvania Fish Commission is opposed to dams on trout streams in the project is contain! The girl, who was 8 years old stream below the dam under consideration, were given in. Habitat were completed with respect to the stream below the dam is approximately 25 miles from Stroudsburg,,! Awarded a construction contract was to be erected upstream will require cleaning at least degrees! One dam ( PA-465 ) was not started until after Congressional approval van v.! Hill Falls hosts events & has activities for kids, so There is a part on and around structures! Requested on the preliminary injunction as a cold water bypass will not eliminate it algae and diatoms dam. Result in an increase in Pennsylvania not permitted to approve a bypass at the....

Cassius Marcellus Coolidge A Friend In Need, Cyclamen Cilicium Intaminatum, Dan Ewing Movies And Tv Shows, Aida Azira Hussin, Shima Setelah Aku Kau Miliki Mp3, Beg Golf Murah, Kotlin Constructor Super, Steamy Windows Replacement,

Add a comment

(Spamcheck Enabled)

Skip to toolbar