David F,

Whoa, sounds complicated, I guess you really need to know the SCX structure inside and out before you mess with it, so I think I'll try the 'safe route' just discussed going forward!

Thanks again.

>>
>>seems safer, and I will do this next time, or hopefully, not delete an object that is referenced in the de, prior to deleting the object itself!
>
>I'd go that route if I ever needed to do this.

>
>Ok the problem here is that the DE row knows that it is the parent to N rows of cursors (although the number stored is N+1 because it includes the DE row in the count). If you delete one of those you need to update the Reserved2 memo field.