MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
was there was no contract at all between artist and g m what would your client position be even other than fraud in the in the fact of what i'm just amazed that there was no understanding incredible huge heavy hauling and it was i understand i'm simply saying that your client knew that general motors was the ultimate user of the service that it was a few with this it would be two signatures but you've got a whole choice of law issue here is which state law flies if you're going to apply stave off whereas with the interstate commerce commission you're talking about nationwide otherwise why do you in your case though if if the if the statute applies at all and there is no right being the statue of limitations would likewise apply to because you would lose right
freezer lot of the congestion and if we can reduce some of that i'm basing land uses so that people drive a little bit less or their trips are shorter so some communities of do go miles to get interviews where everybody has to drive five miles to get a gallon will versus the only way to the other half are on the major streets in most communities eighty percent or so of the crashes are on the streets so you have a really unusually high number of crashes on the local streets and part of that is because there is not an action people and they are one way to get in and get out so what they tend to and what they found is where there's connections the fire traps there are more than one route to get through an incident multiple routes to get there that they can serve for as many people with the fire station does where there are a lot of  very experienced bicyclist in the get out there and a murky road and they're not worried about the eighty thousand e mails a day in your other people that are are very cautious and maybe buy if they really feel comfortable on the trail or on the one street but they're not going to buy somewhere else when you look at several businesses rather than having to get in your car and go from store to store to store that will help reduce congestion get everybody out walking with a bit more so i think there's a lot of advantages to it when we're looking at sidewalks again connecting you wonder where people want to walk to at the intersections partly i think from signal timing partly because they're such a high left turn demanded uses of so much of the green time so what are some innovative intersections you could look at well one it's pretty common now around the country except in pennsylvania a few other states can be a little difficult so there's different kinds of designs to make it easier for gas trains to cross a roundabout by giving them away from the intersection so you know that the town center here around five might have been an interesting option and it would be a lot easier probably for t intersections this is want to saw this out in utah but one of the reasons you have congested is the time given the left turn so traffic engineers were always looking for ways to get a left turn around the intersection so this is one hybrid of the different ways to do it by doing a l turn out of the intersection so here's a case where the left turn rather than making the left or to the inner and you go half the intersection and you make a u turn and you come back to the intersection to meet your agent so you put that type of facility and it increases th you double the number of driveways you double the number of crashes if you double the number of driveways on jeff city is still there provide reasonable access to look at are there ways we can minimize county driveways there are these get a connection between the gas station the shafts and the next time you come in or something or the shopping center you close the driveway this closes the intersection and ideally there's redevelopment you have to work your taxes system in terms of preventing problems
factors there from what you could bring some sort of analysis to this problem from which you could figure out what the rules really are the problem really here is that there's there's no nothing really set forth that time period in terms of the docket which you are happy for you i think we show about fifteen efforts on our part to have the district judge take up covered in the briefs are you have to say more about it well let me tell you my problem i'm a little confused actually it seems to me that here you're saying that this court's two thousand and mandate did not give good interest back to this court so then you went back to the court of appeals to the two thousand one panel and moved to amend the mandate to quote allow the district court to consider silver stages motion for court to address prejudgment interest and get here and say you've already decided if that was your position why did you take up the district court said an appeal and just say this the court was wrong in saying that it issues that's the reason i believe that applied that's the reason i suppose i haven't really featured it but nonetheless even if you soon you're right those reasons are still been rejected by this court and how would it be fair for my class to be denied rendered and in the verdict no with your judgment entered that's correct it was not reserved i mean it was reserved to the district judge and i know i know but was through judgment entered for pre judgment interest or not and the first from yeah yeah this was no that it was reasonable what is her standard of revealing what's our stance with you i'm saying before you even get to that what you have to do is take a look at the statute and get away from the decision or the assumption it's made by the district court judge let's take a look when we take a look at what's allowed we see that damages are allowed we see that community damages are allowed we see that extraordinary relief such as injunction is allowed but we don't have anything here relating to prejudgment interest by way of example when you ask is statute doesn't provide any interest next thing that we have to do with taking a look at this following along with the court let's take a look at the different factors that the court is able to look at once it enforcement of an agreement between the parties exactly and so we still left with the fact that we're not talking about the kind of parties in a diversity case we're talking about f h a case there's nothing in here five years and then it's reduced to the value of the day of the hearing in court just before the entry of the birth and the entry of the judge to take a look at this case also and see how it was tried initially reduced to present value as of the date of the crime frankly is that true as a matter of fact the state of california and the developers actually get some money from a management fee that spread out over fifty five year project life then reduce the present value but the bulk of their fees if you well actually came from syndication fees and i understand your argument that when she said that's enough she didn't give you the proper reason legally to say that
using drugs it doesn't matter whether he did using so there or whether his bar is working with him during the days as if he was using drugs that doesn't matter what he's charged with is making man using it there is no doubt that matter is being made at the defendant's house this was a house in the home and and i think that's a significant fact that we need to presumably yours and that only case here this was his case i think another thing i need to find out right now is that for three days here's another thing that i think is really important the defendant and his mother his mother who i'm sure would do anything she could to help him out her son house at seven o'clock so even from the first monday of the defendant even from the past money his mother the defendant was there for three hours before the police foster parents and i believe but for the but there's no indication she was offered a deal i think one thing we need to remember about yes he certainly didn't want to be on the stand there's no doubt about that
there was a still in there somewhere i haven't seen it for years i don't know if they're still there now there was a stone right around this area so
issue well i really they're not getting their plan correctly because they have actually read up on the on the federal regulations in their own plan it made it so that they have to consider factors such as the seriousness of the case  could consider the circumstances and the housing authority argues repeatedly in there pretty fatally but it is a mandatory determination where they don't have to consider the circumstances because a misreading of the plain language of their own plan so  because she missed two appointments she was going to private information which she indicated are february eighth when she contacted the housing authority only one week after the second missed appointment and said that she explained her circumstances and said that she was sorry for missing the appointment and left her phone documents that were submitted to show why she didn't show up and that's it all go to the to whether or not she would even qualify for a discretionary termination as opposed to want to show signs of discretion and ther which you follow the fall has even this discretionary little discretion are in place and if you were to if you were to deem those two provisions within section twelve to be to be in concert with the more it also says in your honor that the hearing officer has considered the entire around this case yes and the hearing officer has made certain finding to the fact in order to make those findings of fact any officer would have had to consider  in ministry of land the house again three states they will consider the following factors when making his decision to terminate assistance including the seriousness of the keys especially when there spect to how it would affect other residents filling the time since the violation
the respondents valuation our concern with that is in the ruling the court never took into any consideration didn't make any finding one way or the other concerning the  loan we refer to it as a transfer happened i think it's clear that this patient the ability of the respondent to collect that back from her brother on the testimony was he told her that he probably would never pay it back fixtures that they're fixed on the property the closest we get to that yes there's a concrete pad in front of the grain that no indication that it can't be moved away as they were brought on that doesn't doesn't go to the nature of america versus non rural of the struggle now or destruction been moved back to or something at certain time back if they had been on the residence for a number ok where they then and there is no particular showing from the course just positions that while it may be difficult basically five hundred dollars that the books find it would be unable to do so or her financial position would be in such a situation that she would be put in dire straits the baseline is all parties pay their own families fees there's nothing here showing that she's unable to do so she has adequate income and therefore we would ask maintenance attorney fees and whatnot and i was very impressed with with the detail in which he gave it and i hope that you aren't fit in this case there were five issues raised on the oh i'm going to go with those one by one on the first testimony about a fairy house whether it was a gift or not it was just moved from one place to was not what the judge noted was that these two buildings had been on american resident property for years and years and years and his very f in this particular case in substance mr dozer are you that well i've got less than paul if you really look at the facts of the case with two important addition there was about an equal division of the american state by  that's a fifty thousand dollars win when you add those back to the lead with american with the division was approximately fifty fifty by the prophet who no reasonable person of god that you substantially more than my client he was awarded the assets which you know so when when they exist i don't have anything left over to play with in business before he did not there's nothing that i see in the intelligence brief in this case to indicate otherwise he just makes general arguments that i think that it's just not fair at this level that argument without a citation the record should that we ask the court to breaking down in july two thousand based on the written agreement
and home health medicare for medicare purposes you know stop walking and get a certificate or need or are the right to provide services it's very highly regulated and ordered to be approved to provide medical services us show the company they follow the patient and maybe they do that back and forth and then end up working for both companies so what what percentage of the work done by my  people who are in that situation who are just working for both companies and if the manager or the is black managing both of them is moving employees from one the same work weeks problem that i'm having is the summary judgment issue and questions of material fact and and i gather from what we hear in presentation that there are hundreds of birds allegations which which need to be resolved by the finder of fact and obviously that would defeat summary judgment you may very particular allegations or rather this particular statements in the declaration there was no point in it deceiving that on anyone medical or alternatively have actually denied company and each of them have four employees who work for both companies so you have eight employees who have that kind of overlap that will be far different case for question of whether it's one and if i were to try this case i think i would want to know the whole picture what's the percentage of workers that are going back and forth that i frequent is that if it if it only happen provide the right service and maybe there are cases where they transfer the cry from a one to alternative because they want to qualify alternative for some certification by giving some experience whatever and in these cases where wouldn't write about that if it was a transfer between the company the two companies that were in the process of birthing seems like have a business sells can you tell tell me whether on this record we can week for the patients of bull then that employee less entitle to have all those hours worked during that work week aggregated and if those hours were in excess of forty hours in a work week that employee was entitle to overtime
compassion for brian angel i've known brian a long time and i like brian those are relevant factors but just so you know there was no aggravation present at the sentencing hearing you are correct there are mitigating factors but i didn't know it's good then they talked about how brian had talked about how he had a compulsion and the purpose of the seven year sentence was to give him at it was fine with psycho i st psychologists and doctors to maybe address he said my sentence was out of compassion not just for the defendant but to send a message to the rest of the world that we don't accept this behavior this is an opportunity for ryan to obtain the assistance that he needs in a concentrated focused situation where he doesn't have distractions he doesn't have any thirteen year old girls or anybody else who's going to distract him he can get the help that is provided for free from b o c by psychiatry psychologist  true but here i want to just clarify just because he didn't get it are you serving that it's not in the record because i'm trying to figure out how it is not i was able to do it on my computer i was able to pull it off you know the  the court didn't even consider op three years six years anything below seven therefore when the court says that he's tainted by the nature of this offense that should we read any significance in the fact that the state requested five years or said seven years and that's not even enough with any of that except to the extent that it's argued that the court said it was tainted the court said the nature of the of this particular offense meant that she disagreed that seven years was eno moreover it sounds like although subject to how you interpret the cold record that the court said he was surprised and maybe not happy with the fact that the defendant was entitle to fifty to fi fifty good time given all that it stands to i think corroborate defense counsel's argument that this trial court because of this sex offense didn't consider
twenty two was simple and childlike she functioned at the lower end of adult normal range of intelligence prior she was only eighty two and while she graduated from high school she was in special education programs throughout and she it in this particular wording below but that's the argument that we have here
alleges that mr dixon ran into a cement her chest because he happened to be in a vehicle a fairly accident occurred does not mean that his injury was related to the vehicle but it was definitely related rules that facts here it goes more in favor of finding that there is no cause a connection here because again that's not related to the vehicle work after that work has been completed and then you defining completed work as when all the work called for in your contract and that has to be a reference to their delivery companies contract has been other issues but there you know that certainly the rationale behind that applies here
receive this economic development benefit like for example here in a rich probably very unlikely because you don't have for example the villas of a clue which is the village over you that congress has or has used different language for different statutes and the court to construe just the way which differently for example this court i believe it was in this case of literally construed language with an indian reservation to reservation property forty three u s c section sixteen thirteen title so we hand down the airports which airport is located is required to be conveyed to federal or state government or airport municipal corporation so frankly to talk it and that position of the court will is correct for the  show i think it does actually i think it's pretty clear that they are excluded all the way and within the exterior bad hundred of the indian reservation and even within the lower forty eight
where your question or reasonable was really he was there was only reasonable for him the bat the way he backed out without taking notice of the possible dangers behind all total once he got off the street quickly because he would get in trouble with his employer his boss found out he was on that street so clearly the evidence as that danger of unfair prejudice the balancing comes out in the circuit cour discretion in favor of exclusion in part because the thing that they were trying to use this evidence to prove that he had other choices there's a rollover other evidence available including out of toll roads on meth on the witness stand during his direct examination and one circles the floor and you get stuck in the face of all why is someone for a couple of minutes and we know he's parked there for a while he has a yes that's the first there's any explanation for why the circle and finally says that you can change the plaintiff's claim by adding elements of the issue here these twenty one instructions meet the sort of issue in the ordinary negligence cases always whether or not the defendant feel that your side is reasonable care and so the factual theories you know they offer ten they could have offered more they could have offered less twenty along as part of the pattern instructions says that we should reduce repetitious issues and that's what the circuit court did here in fact use only explanation for why he wants
the oral authorization to utilize let me let me ask you this the nine thousand some odd dollars that was it would seem to be the result of separate charges yes and so are we to look at each charge as a five hundred dollar and that means that if there's a leading object or something that it threw the promise or in this case mr green that would be an exception but what was the nature of the relationship was he like a sub contractor he was a not a roofer as i know that there was no facts that there was any relationship and the evidence brought out the trial and i love that mr green received no consideration of any form  every time the penske came in a call was made to mr green or only offer you think that can be an exception if there were that would be an exception yes mr green acknowledges that because eyes previously authorized the debt has to admit that he authorized it or it's got to be in writing so as harsh as that may seem it appears  at least custom and practice is out the window on these kinds of cases which i understand for a lumber company and then how this works probably would be very ridiculous because people come in they evidence of that and i only point that out with regard to the one exception surely ship which doesn't really apply anyway or of the leading object exception
still the cases in the nd here what i'm trying to what i'm trying to say to it is you know anytime someone has a car that has over a one hundred thousand miles well it's going to need so i mean it's just a matter of timing that the clock is ticking as we all know she attempted to schedule the vehicle for servicing she couldn't get service that day so she stopped using she sat using her vehicle and used the periods vehicle as a cadillac anyway and then she got in the accident with the parents of  because of the concern of the steering or the braking so for their reason the court found it was withdrawn from normal use and so she used the vehicle appeared to be a pull and so called was extended in the situation  doesn't provide it's a temporary cover in case of concern for driving or concern for the range of the vehicle or concern for the distance that you drive the vehicle that this now with the policy provides and is not with the  they expected to see and i think by the fact of there will be two cases knowing that this is a small risk and there is also no evidence that they did not assume this risk when they wrote these usefulness of something well again i mean you should the question here the torture policy is not appropriate to torture policy to try to find coverage just because something wears out over time that's a maintenance issue it's not damage no one