Except for the extreme difference in size, the tibiotarsus of _Laornis_ is in many respects similar to that of _Presbyornis_ (Figure 8), especially in (1) the shape and position of the tubercle proximal to the external condyle; (2) the transverse pit in the intercondylar sulcus; and (3) the broad, shallow intercondylar sulcus as seen in distal view. It differs in a seemingly minor but quite characteristic feature, the large nutrient foramen situated in the groove for M. peroneus brevis (Figure 8_c_). This is absent in _Presbyornis_ but is present in both of the tibiotarsi from the Cretaceous of New Jersey in which that portion of the bone is preserved (the holotypes of Palaeotringa littoralis and _P. vagans_), as well as in a tibiotarsus (Science Museum of Minnesota P75.22.25) from the type-locality of _Dakotornis cooperi_ Erickson, 1975, that may be referable to that graculavid-like species. The foramen in the peroneus brevis groove may also be found in at least some specimens of Stercorariidae, which is partly what led Olson (1974) to suggest a relationship between _Laornis_ and the Lari. _Laornis_ appears to have been an extremely large member of the “transitional Charadriiformes,” though where its relationships may lie within that group cannot be determined. =Genus _Palaeotringa_ Marsh, 1870= Type-Species.--_Palaeotringa littoralis_ Marsh, 1870; by subsequent designation (Hay, 1902:527). Included Species.--_Palaeotringa littoralis_ Marsh, 1870, and _Palaeotringa vagans_ Marsh, 1872. =_Palaeotringa littoralis_ Marsh, 1870= Figure 7_l_ _Palaeotringa littoralis_ Marsh, 1870:208. Holotype.--Distal portion of left tibiotarsus lacking most of the inner condyle, YPM 830. Locality and Horizon.--Collected in the “middle marl beds” by Nicolas Wain from his marl pits near Hornerstown, New Jersey; Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian), either basal Hornerstown Formation or Navesink Formation. Measurements (in mm).--Depth through outer condyle 8.2; width of shaft just proximal to outer condyle 7.0. Comparisons.--This specimen and that of _P. vagans_ are too fragmentary for useful comparison. Both have the foramen in the groove for M. peroneus brevis, mentioned above. Their overall similarity to _Presbyornis_ and to charadriiform birds in general justifies retaining them with the other “graculavids” but other than this little else can be said. In size, _Palaeotringa littoralis_ would have been about equal to _Burhinus bistriatus vocifer_ and smaller than _Esacus magnirostris_. Hence it would seem to be too small to belong to the same species as _Graculavus velox_ and is definitely too large to be referable to _Telmatornis priscus_.