MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
composition and delivery of official that the premier's established religion religion broadly speaking is it that they are sectarian i think those two i know that many cases of talked about a separate test for sectarian
and that is basically for i mean you know there is no explanation before the court as to why this case was filed live for befor produce the original diamonds as opposed to copy the original documents because of their parents reflect the presence of authenticity of ancient ness of credibility to a cur piping and so forth appear to be what they are intended and presented for and that is to show a recognition by illinois central in illinois with other and this court and many other courts have said many times that the circuit court may not be reversed unless it acted arbitrarily without employing conscious judgement and an exceeded the court and say that illinois had no connection to this case when the defendant has collected eight years of evidence historical evidence of his knowledge its use it's a basement of asbestos and to some extent its safety rules and it even possesses as best as products that that call from it's very very silly all of this is in st clair county illinois it's all there and if any of this is needed in a trial it's right there at the same convenience argument flip of ways on this it's all five miles from the court now that's why i took the photographs and put them into the records so that yes we knew this and yes we really didn't do anything about and his testimony is critical to the plaintiff case and judge alito rightly recognized that i can help mr burton either through rule two thirty person whose name was disclosed and discovered responds in its motion but it did not provide this court with a description of the relevance of their evidence to the extent that we've provided this court with the prior testimony  this poor standard of review this poor is with all due respect is not here to answer the question is this fair this court is here to answer the question to judge alito abused his discretion denying the of my answer to their petition and that is they filed this motion and let it sit for thirteen months did nothing make no effort whatsoever to bring it for hearings just let it sit in a trial for thirteen games like this case was pending in mississippi for forty years that two thousand and six and here it is to doubt the a lot of the reason it is here in two thousand love this because they showed too dismissive wait three more years and then
there's a little song kathy mclean wro hand and ok actually want more and then we're going to take a short break we'll be back write gospel they were behind it and they changed the name to happy days the easy ear is about drinking and barhopping today we're going to be doing cathy
do you mean the check that again seventeen under all the way to the states i really have a feeling that this might be had a nice day peterson has one fifty seven thirty six six twenty four
very very even team i think i heard off with the three porn or doesn't go rolled down and tied up to jay normally does a pretty good job of keeping the ball above our head which makes it hard for a small player to tire of those trying to drive to the and you're driving around a shot and it's no good call for trouble one point four seconds for the warriors to get the ball down toward and get a shot at pretty much going to have to shoot from on where they are and they did all that one of the things that it is apparent in looking at the scores through row the playoffs is that the teams do not score as many points in the tournament as they do in the regular season no go rebound and it goes off number twenty seven on landry i believe in the three be playing and playing well enough to be in control kind of decided that the term for tonight's game should be now there are three left it is central catholic waiting to play it one of these two teams and they started out or is made to pay need to make sure they're travelling towards the bowl when they catch it that's it and the press has been taken off by th at the line for a one shot after making the who the hard way to make a three  and we had a foul on put her foot in the lane and so she is getting another shot she was getting rid of walkout but  reasons for that as i pointed out earlier and we'll take a break and be back for the nd half it took the time oh so they're down to two timeouts belmont still has their five each team as one falls in the period  andover doesn't seem to have a specific three point shooter has a couple of players that and put the ball up beyond the what some accuracy but they don't have a particular design which will play into the hands of belmont was pass good strong play christian forum be as good as and she's strong as a player but a minute wait a minute one can't make those kind of mistakes you cannot make those kind of mistakes gets to play central tennessee or some time on saturday when all of the delusion finals will be held for thirty two and one belmont will be playing in the division two boys to point drive to the center of the lane and put it in in my bird dog and bringing the ball on a good passes they need to make good passes i  and they did unfortunately time out so they're down to three timeouts but they have fifty six seconds to go have a nine point lead and that's a means that the warriors will need to score or thirty three point plays w times without belmont scoring although i guess you could have a four point play couldn't she you had a somebody gets filed on a three point attempt that goes in and you could have a full point play and then you would  within three again so you could do it with but that would require belmont to make a mistake and follow somebody who was shooting up by a throwing up a three pointer but the noose gets tighter  little by landry and the coach takes is final timeout and they move within five with twenty seconds to go taking several minutes to play the last fifty seconds here by somebody i'm sure and the ball is out of bounds a i'm sorry she gets two because that was the ten
we to know that that's the case that it was insane investigation and i think it was actually the this is not just my new show that it goes to the way you framed the question at the trial how do you how do we know that the younger seizure was something that took place in the course of the show and sold an investigation there are some tests and the only reason that i would  you say that the fact that big you took a gun like even an hour before well over two weeks before that is not the gun that was found on the property is somehow relevant to the shooting  information about the seizure of the of the gun that you should have been allowed to do that and you worked if that is the if that's the this piece but i took it from your last comment but you're saying you're somehow deprived of the opportunity to pursue your theory pursued your theory just not with the evidence you would have liked is that correct there's  us the question did you recover any black pelican during the course of the robbery yes or no the court says did you then you can explain telling the witness with this response non purposes of argument only to give you that it might be different gun ok just set that aside i'm absolutely title one second he's been evasive and started messing around on the stand to smack him smack him hard with the police officer department today let's let's take it as as as a given that the district court made a decision that the gun for that purpose was irrelevant i'm trying to steer you back to the point  a case in which we have to figure out what was presented to the district court judge and if the district court judge rose reasonably under the impression that it was a case about relevance he can't really be faulted for making a judgement about rel court when you say there's there's no justification for what happened here how about dead the district court judge here a good sidebar understands you to be making this ruling based on bad but you get them to believe that they're wrong and based on a police report that describes an entirely different god than the one that's in evidence in front of them that's what i take mr quinn to be saying what i
of berkeley well those of you who are newcomers just let me say that our motto always has been and always will be i will be mine in a healthy body this god given country that you see around you one night of the trip will be spent in canada change everyone down to like tell and he wants to know when he can have at least the first act of the operator just as soon as i get an idea until in that i wish you'd let me see it when the prisoner and if you do i want to grab it for you with you wherever you go is good when you're glad and when you're sad now what is it i didn't think of that before i did  basically enjoy running john good n that we all leave together in the morning will leave in the morning must you always  with didn't write about humans with this
part of the face of our music festival you should know that this is the twenty fourth year at this county's existence and the twenty fourth anniversary of reclaiming this piece of property as a park for our community after the l elementary school it was all about a few good neighbors with a good idea and one person in particular who really should be thanked for twenty four years of music and good times for the town and that's tom the old
as we move forward observe and question
the the the
this new contract that argument i would say that the record is clear and undisputed that the parties usually work out a supplemental an alternative method of leaving his discharge but a lot of the city ordinance order from the board thank you thank you
that responsibility talking about the history of the case upon the completion plane destruction instead of us and said here's a proposed elation as a defense attorney be told that the case should be over just reading distinction between on the one hand excuse about needing plain terms and on the other hand disputes about claims and the court found that case that is first and foremost a dispute about claims in this situation i believe is first and foremost commonly used by those that designed devices there are well known throughout the industry they have a common understanding and in this case you have something that it is very easy it is not typical case where the patent
all oh and things of that sort oh yes they come in with the wrong suit on if you didn't want them and the director doesn't know the story from one thing to the other in your head all i see you just have to know everything post it must be a very personal thing to work in pictures would you mind putting down the prices and giving me a few notes all right thank you thank you wait a minute well never mind just now along for that's right what the way watch a lover as far as you've washed the dishes you know any other funny jokes everybody and  protect yourself at all times and not hitting in the you said you're going to tell me something grow old like mom and always be unhappy and discontented and complaining all the time to something more to life than just that nice saying things in good taste you see what i mean don't you go y forget does not even do you do you can you imagine me wanting a hundred and fifty thousand dollars that's what you get if you're harsh with their race i'm going to take a trip around the world and maybe i'll buy an interesting sound brokerage house and this is my family that's going to be someday then and i'm going to get married it's mine i'm going to quit my job and enjoy the money you're going to quit two jobs just when you're getting along so well i guess i'm going to quit my job and then come the typewriter ever since i got out of high school now i'm going to join myself i'm going to have a lot of there's only one thing missing there not forget i wonder where he went i'm not interested ok i got two hundred fifty i got you know i'm not her forty bucks is all i got and i don't like to give it up i don't like it either why should we give her five thousand  yes i've been hoping that you'd drop around all the money hard to blame you but the rest of the family said that night i spend a cent on myself any honest i have office bought a new car and always bought new clothes mom's bought new clothes and she's taken a bunch of treatments down that new hospital downtown it just looks like hundreds i i don't ever want to go home where you don't have to you can just stay here they are just as long as you live you mean surprised you have been over here
so if you would stand in raise your right hand
they know that if they take cash the result plan they certainly are unable to do they are but they have to then take into account and take care of the attorneys any it is true that we have a league worked hard to try to get the insurance companies to come together and agreed amongst themselves and some allocation that was satisfactory down that would also  there are over four hundred fifty pages of bills that are in the record for him and each one of those bills went to the insurance companies and to their lawyers they are entirely reasonable
reaction the allegations were all along the lines of my tears live village here i don't know if there was a you're saying you're you're a liability other in years so that you can't get it yeah i think i think that's also an interesting point there's an issue whether this was a release or whether this was a sas question of judgment however the twenty eight million dollars that paid it therefore paid no more than what it oh and therefore dragon fly says release embody as justice schmidt pointed out the satisfaction of the placement the operated as a release as a matter of all we didn't have to add some language to that to the satisfaction saying well you're honor and that draws the distinction between the two and in that case some are to this case there was no mention of a release as part of the satisfaction in the courts and it doesn't matter as a matter of normal you released one to  citation for the basis of the flood and the reason there is no record citation is because there is nothing in the record to support tying in time and time again dragon fly my one hundred percent we'll get back one is this admission of united more diligence it's admitted that it is wrong in the same look at the emissions i encourage you to look at the admissions that we set forth in satisfaction however at that point think so but trial you know  try to preserve their right to collect their five hundred thousand dollars with a still stay so
just thinks that it's a directory and beat up his girlfriend and he did it before this happened and he did this little girl's mother and he did the girlfriend and came after the little girl's mother he has documentation of the entire time frame so defendant did know all of them against him and that there simply wasn't much that the defendant did do to reflect this regardless
person to the natural person yet it doesn't apply in this case because for someone who isn't living in the the rental space well first off the there has to be you know with the personal residence see you involved for the coverage too to apply to those arguments they can't because the nature of the how could respond to that if there was a problem well i i think th basis for your request for one fifty five changing a person occupies it if it's mind stuff in some room or building isn't that how it's identified as my property as opposed to someone else in my crowd brain person occupied the person listen to sanctions here still give me an opportunity to sort of respond to that here your position is wrongful conviction means i eat it and that person without anything else that's the only thing that's covered here
they were farmers yesterday presumably they had enough wherewithal to provide the amount of grain contract in yes why would this not be a business decision as opposed to fraud demand higher price than the price and track and in fact subsequently sued to try to maintain a separate law students case work with they deemed to be the first reason is that the ten before they ever appeared in these contracts with us and if in fact it was a business decision then why do see if they want farmers known then the net would be pretty adamant that they had no intention dark capabilities of providing who is in the business of supplying information for the guidance of others in their business transactions makes negligence and again i guess the problem i have is what information talking about i don't break convention beginning can you go over that again wh not have called out of the chicago board of trade calls broker and said we need to sell futures for this particular type of grain in this particular wire to expire in this case they could have given any of that information representation thank you no intention to perform or with our pension reform by the allegations of this complaint itself it cannot be said that these the fans had no intention to perform at the time they made their promise to him and the reason for this is because by the allegations of the complaint itself the fans orally grew to deliver grain in the future at a certain price knowing that if the market went up they would not go but if the market went down they would deliver and in response to your question about examples in the complaint of the farmer performing there are rules they did they did perform on written contracts and even on unruly contracts that even when the plane has song intention to perform when he promises a future action he can still be held liable for fraud and that is going to open up the floodgates for fraud cases for fraud which are really breach of contract in grain transactions where your client though has the knowledge of knowing that they've got their brain sold a certain price and they have a contract to sell it to the grain elevator for that so that does provide them with some protection does not that's why you theory because the point that had not left that kind of relationship that kind of relationship is not left here nor could it be since these are two versions back in one of the u c c with adverse interest in addition even if there was a duty misrepresentation is in the business of supplying information for the guidance of others in their business transactions the defendants are not in the business and byways can see that there are only a certain
what you're saying is they can't stop the patient from releasing the records if that's what the patient wants to do normally normally wire on your boat but that but the issue is if the patient didn't authorize it in the patient doesn't want to
about the attorneys there in this particular case i am returning the contract for twenty five percent if i were really in this case i still get twenty five percent the way that it lays it out is fifty seven thousand dollars of the one hundred twenty five thousand go straight to the employer and satisfaction of the subrogation when the employee is entitle t fifty seven thousand dollars he doesn't have a right to the employer with a lien on that money house for right that money because they have received fifty seven thousand dollars the state recognize that they should do so they that's just the reality of practicing along you and that was states shall pay such attorney it's nice but first carlton would pay this to his client but there's nothing the bourse a very much less ridiculous attorney to do the same if reason it doesn't answer any thinks of ok well suppose we just say the employer can do it himself that's true problem is back to the ethical problem the employer  nature and extent of it and the employer will want to get it really doesn't care if it's any more or the employee always sanders and he is just i want my money the employer on the other hand will want to minimize the context of the amendments will make it clear what is going on the supreme court is out so here's the legislative and down side of not page fourteen of my very reno versus maryland and it says recovery is less than the lane because the employee didn't get anything and you remember my sample lean six thousand problem that that also i want to address is possibility of two three if you use the method that it has been approved in the cases i've
therefore i will be dealing just with issue one in my reasonable suspicion is facts which taken together lead an officer to reasonably to conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be in the book and that the defendant might be because the crowd w appropriate standard now there are three factors which should be considered together to establish the reason for the decision in this case and the reason i emphasize that word together is that it doesn't appear sales drives he was the director of the special unit called wave working against violent elements which was established to deal with the violence in the metro east area he testified the police officer didn't have personal knowledge that the fence pace was not in some horrible parking pace that he didn't have personal knowledge that walking into the store was an attempt to distance himself from the police w personal knowledge is not required as morris says the police do not have the imperial studies about suspicious behavior and they cannot and they can be made but he has extensive experience and training in this area and he's heard this sound many times and rely on his training experience he said that he could supplying either a reasonable suspicion or probable cause so therefore let me ask you you can't have paragraph eight in the courts order in the finding section that you just referred to is the course saying that officer the course concluded i sure wish the court would have clearly stated i don't find the officers testimony credible as to that point but instead uses the verbiage that you use cannot be relied upon by the court as a reasonable suspicion nor probable cause w i guess you're the one to see it going down one of the flushing sound so the only thing in the restaurant was a metal something on the floor well if he were to sit down how was it sound made did did somebody in there drop something counsel for the defendant but he said something about that this paragraph was the third basis for that and there were she was writing a reasonable suspicion is that paragraph and what say we conclude that she found the office testimony not to be credible on the issue and looking at the other factors that you're talking about here there is nothing in this order that appears that this crowd or any credence to the hot spot gave any credence to the authors experience and training
and i
situation where discovery is limited when you've got a basic suit on now that can be shown by documentary evidence and his wife leader be resolved in
constitutional violation their hands to band aid a factual finding as to who approached who and who initiated the negotiations in the second stage because that happened prior to the dentist you sure you're right this there to testify person as far as regional systems how did how did the defense counsel do on cross examining the former prosecutor how did defense counsel do