MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
with a little background here by the team so this is the north division one and we have the north andover as a twelve seed entering the tournament and belmont is a four seed entering the tournament stick skills excellent past month and over and north andover coming up with the ball recovery there from working the ball up there nice look there from number three sarah bagley of  sophomore morgan chase was working up the right side and sophomore jordan  at the end of doing a great job here executing a fast return from the middle to the way back up to the middle just under seventeen minutes of play here it is north reading ball interception from the scarlet knights so we're just hitting the ten minute mark here in the first half of play so for anyone just joining us our current score it remains belmont ball great shot there and it will remain down here but once julia chase great pass looking for that long ball the clock running down here in the first half around six and a half minutes left north and oversight in on the right both teams showing up here clearly wanting to win  great interception there from chloe brown ten seconds to go zero zero zero and we'll be back in about five minutes for the second half and welcome back here to the second half of pla north division field hockey state championship round one and the winner of this game  belmont very power quick transition from george over to sideline pass there from emory up to jordan jordan to bridget strong pass to controversy on the call out there but looking to capitalize on the top opportunity seventy seven definitely a matter here and durant says we have left us players on the field and looks we have a corner here for in julia chasing the ball down number ten gardner every look and work that ball into the circle so anyone just joining we are in the first overtime fifteen minutes under the overtime seventy seven by down to three and a half minutes left here and we have a controversy on this call here
where just a representative sign it with known cation on the no that there is a representative and in that case which is the case we have here the congress and the c provide that the representative is liable on the instrument unless you can prove that your original parties did not intend the representative to be liable on that instrument of ability by the application to use it for some reason the bank says you can't look behind her for some reason back with any authority says that as a mater of th occur based on side agreements in the work force so that's the sad thing is one of the things we're here to discuss is whether there should be a men alive and in response to
one i bought yeah yeah
these convictions the evidence just doesn't support question was in there and now also the event it is brother michael had been at a party dressed in the jaws of mormon at a party was some other friends you said they ran into some another group of people that they had animosity with question  answer yes that's correct weston and so a fight broke out between those two groups of people question where there was a question from the witnesses yes and then the question is and when he and did he tell you whether he and his brother were in that fight yes and he says yes he said they were both a part of that fight and that and then question and then did he tell you what happen after the fight got started the answer he said that they had they were fighting one hundred percent beyond a reasonable doubt so so to prove without authority of law and then you're in your part of a fight with guns drawn in the shots fired there's a question about w
to go to college on a scholarship playing basketball it was a young black man frank a gentle person and i contend that he's an innocent person today as he was at the  testimony christi reported where she said that you know were going through door in the kitchen looking for a latex whil not quite sure that it's the ballistics evidence in this case that's absolutely critical but christian mccormack is not believable witness because she was trying to protect herself joel nelson and her which she says of where testimony with the witness it would have exploded in her face so might this raising the possibility that there was a second weapon that was being the mini work team she was trying to create reasonable raises freestanding claim of innocence and does not raise that as an issue before the court therefore it is way important rule three forty one week seven and also any information that had been returned to the states trannies office for her examination until january twenty seventh and at that point two days later as soon as she possibly could she'd see only the evidence  fired from the fourteen many many fourteen but right that that belong to us at once so she knew all three of those things in there that most of the projectiles had been fired from a weapon that was  then as as far as her act at the scene during jury selection will she was not just sitting on her hand she was happy she asked lots of questions she exercised poor men trees she exercised severus challenges for  they heard anything about the case that they would be willing to put it aside and judge the case by the evidence presented so there's nothing to show in the record that there was no impartial conviction it was it's the defendant's burden to show that there was actual prejudice and that he couldn't do that and he never did it he doesn't have an affidavit of mcdaniel and there's nothing in the record that she might have to use that  this post conviction proceeding that he makes about what council should have asked various pretention jurors it turns out in fact those questions were asked either by prosecution or by the judge so why should she police she was did that even though when she knew that crime had been committed and they'd call you know sure ground street caught with the cell phone she didn't call nine one one even though she knew people  injured she didn't go to the police the next morning either but the police came to her and when they came she didn't tell the truth because it came out during cross them if she was trying to rape her son and crying
collected under just a reasonable rate and again the passage that i just prefer this court to from the proposition makes clear that it's just a reasonable rate as one of the matches revenues operating expenses and rate base over a consistent time period and that's what the commission fail so i believe that the in the  when they were cut in the reform there is no question that those are pretty expensive should have been there this case is different in the sense that here everybody agrees kind of should be able to recover its rate base and the question is how to value that rate base for purposes of furious with the appropriate refund should real period that we're focused on and the question is what was the value of cummins rate base or not you're it and how does that compare to to the the the original case that was considered by the commission back whether they were of the same sort of mismatching that you have in this case i think you're right it was
so we'll see what happens but i just want to share that with  when we when we talk about facilities really the building around as well as the hard stuff that stuff that doesn't move very quickly that's the stuff that we're talking about real person job taking this stuff and going to you to electronics to do this and to be not graduated last year yet he got so into this that he went and bought these ships in the wires and you get what he's doing here he's actually adding this like a hundred kids taking right you know that's almost half of the class so you can clearly not just cherry pick it up i think the big jug this year was probably because we did our job last year and over fifty percent of the kids are taken with this year this in response to the perception people are trying to get  i think the time to work with us but i also think we need to be realistic and i think we're going to have a little more flexibility i just think it's a conversation like i just i would
then the king case was on appeal and december taken you're going to hear all kinds of discussion there was plenty of it in front of judge stack about all of this who's going behind who's back undercut who if there was a as to the bottle they wanted hardly something to be proud no trophies are given for that except that they want six hundred thousand fifty thousand dollars for nothing and wiped out oh i didn't think we were really going to do that i thought we were going to argue a stack there's a report proceedings to file and it ask you to read character because what happens in that case is the judge at least and says we are here they sign durance because they are a bill review and auditing company they like to make themself out as oh well we're just a network and we never promised anybody any the truth of the matter is the bill they get two hundred fifty that their contract those insurance companies require the insurance companies to accept their recommendations not get a nice ninety five percent of the time that's how they get judge police and ask them if there was a settlement they said you want me to answer that he told them no i don't think it's appropriate for me to hear that now that is how to correct representation of no it's not no that is  g all ice after we had already had to meet him where he wanted to set up an initial meeting and at the initial meeting he wanted food pay or council who are all part of any discussions with him on settlement we never elicited i think i heard in opening remarks that we had proposed to present herself to him fishing absolutely no fishing was being done the next thing that happens time then we then we proceeded from there on what i'd like to do is just remind her that this is up here and the test is whether or not he's discretion court her testimony and she backed it in waiting credibility witnesses and so there is a definite that should be afforded the trial but the task before this court here is companies and and so when that proceeded through the approval process up there and then through him hello process i think that ran off at the end of two thousand and seven maybe it was really two we're they are going to pursue this case as a potential representative of lines and so so but but it's an individual plan until there are going to be a class representative kno never are even though they didn't but the p p o reductions were even though they had a contract upon which first health compensation was based requiring them to know they never offered it to the court because just that was making me the plaintiff i mean what's going on here how could you enter into a state of zero or the in which you give one hundred one point two five million dollars to somebody else when you know exactly who the plaintiffs are you can give the individual notice and you know exactly how much it was taken and why didn't the trial or simply say how much did you take from that simple question
void orders and number three the department of human rights and human rights commission clearly violated their own stated policy within that and or the sexual harassment employment and higher education to prevent sexual harassment you know and sexual harassment in higher education ok says nothing about
student sign some kind of the form or something in order to get the life insurance benefits i believe he did and did he know that the attorney's going to be sending that form to get in for him or how did that come about the mothe to get back to my question about what we look it's a last chance case instructions on that even  spend those resources in order to do that but the state through the attorney general will do that when there is information that they have well if so innocently so in practice every inmate doesn't pay hillsborough and we found out that this was a very unique situation in the fact that i think there was only one other inmate that they ever took their money and that what i understood and jennifer of course we caught up in this a lot with a lot of time travel everything else we decided to take the case for every ten or fifteen thousand out and we told her she this case by mr stewart was june fifth two thousand full time are this is clearly more than two years and of course we read the
and i hope that grandfather would not stating he had a very affectionate nature and always been is a hot day talk more english than the americans fear i hope not he mustn't be spoiled by all these wonderful changes my grandpa must be a very good man well well well well thank you very much well hates me so much that he separating me from my boy i have to live your missi i kept wondering what you would look like if you could be anything that my father oh and that my while i don't think you are very disappointed i propose well no of course you would enjoy the way our grandfather know even his kind great friend he was the best friend i had except e the kindest man i ever heard or if you're always thinking of other people making them happy and years such a good earl he reminds me of you is a universal favorite where reminds me of you think of that now is no one is or only a little while and pleased to meet you i'm  but if you women who wouldn't i'll finish and wish i'm not really any more and i i'm grown up i think that's all because i'm not very good at making speeches but i must say that and they much obliged to you for knocking my b
why do hope it is over you will be careful who you would not let it run away with you or anything  is a hot day that there's another advantage of being in there some of them have a great deal of money that's a good thing to have i wish i had a great deal of money real  fear i hope not he mustn't be spoiled by all these wonderful changes my grandpa must be a very good man well well cruel thing i've ever had to do we're not going to  i just remembered you might not like to hear about the declaration of independence i forgot you were need from the get you were a student here oh no i'm an american you are english the father was an englishman i was born in him they oh years such a good earl he reminds me of you is a universal favorite where reminds me of you think of that now is no one is or only a little while and pleased to meet you i'm  but if you women who wouldn't i'll finish and wish i'm grown up i think that's all because i'm not very good at making speeches but i must say that and they much obliged to you for knocking my b
this is the world beneath the scene beautiful mysterious and for the most part unexplored by man these are the waters of the gulf of mexico off the west coast of this is a sponge for a special breed of man dedicated to the most dangerous of all occupation you spend your money you go girl  going to see next time we go out we're going to come home with a full load he's right where we're going  plagues like that conks englishmen whatever you call them he say nah we are going to pick the glazers but mike if they catch us they're not going to go why do you with you marry me i don't know if i said yes i feel no if i said no i feel yes i don't know what to say but maybe if i get acquainted with lots and lots of boys it would help me make up my mind you know what do i but i think i'm too young don't you think so  the matter with the x i misdoubt and went to three classes that's a pretty name young greek looks at a pretty girl gets hot blood what's on your mind break what's on my mind sponges what do you think how you fooled us we weren't going we work and you take everything away but no hard feelings the whole bunch of you must be crazy coming here you know i'll call still about greek woman to tell you how u anybody ever tell you a pretty oh no and one day when you are not looking you promised you gave me your word and i know how you will die best way you're going to stay here this holly is that he's dead take it on faith i'm going to find out who did it i'm going to get our sponges back i tell you know you're coming with us started because you eat this you'll find out why they call it call awfully worried about you we all were you don't belong here you belong home problems here you've gone here so what's the matter with me oh don't be angry county you love my tony yeah i do i like you you good who like to know if you love and you don't let him do this every time he goes out you're going to die every night you wait all by yourself like i would you're going to be scared like me you see my face he listened to you you tell him no sure you're scared i'm scared too but you can't be scared all your life we've got a boat we're going to work that's what you want as a mom or do you want to sit around the house hanging my head he has to do what he wants to do can't you understand i can't tell him what to do nobody can you might as well make up your mind mama when we go right away we'll start regular tomorrow oh momo talk to me hot what you want me to say kind well say something nice honey like like when we got to eat honey i forget based on how much money  you'll never forget the
of those messages and came away saying the problem here is that mr walton he was not communicating which led mrs walt need to leave messages where she would y you know into the manner as to you know promote a relationship between the mother and the child you know going into it well it wasn't just the baby sitting was it i mean based on all the testimony as a whole including i think you know don't have a grave here i don't know one of a lot has been made about the fact that the mother wanted to come to a house and babysit for however many minutes or half hour and yet it seemed like joint custody which says that if they judge a judge can consider joint custody and he must first request a joint parenting agreement but it was not produced he can
and then the second time he goes there's not going to be a third day if you wish to waste your time that's your business in the courts not going to waste any further time with additional hearing dates and then you were cut off in your cross for the court seemed to have quite a bit of information about the credit cards i think the credit card debt was fifty six thousand eight hundred twenty nine dollars and eight cents i felt she should bear the brunt of that bill advise endeavor i can't speculate on what was going through a buyer's mind but i would say that it's something that is of the master's degree and they don't find a
answer to that is correct so how do we get to doing exactly what you want us to do and then it is to say i guess there is you're saying there's been jurisdictional problems with respect to the whole new trial  reclaiming the mandate and explain its theory but from what we look at here we looked at what is the order on appeal that was reverse now under the post civil procedure any claim for a new trial as to the issue of medical negligence during the actual delivery trial they did that the very st paragraph of the three is is your jurisdictional argument based on the groups no jurisdiction in cr both of these questions is i think we're missing the point here we're we're here on a thirty five question right we've got a certified question and and to determine actually it was asking  say your clarification of what you did isn't correct so my question is how do we get to what i think everybody is interested in as to whether there should be a new trial or not whether there was jurisdiction based on the fact that that wasn't part of the appeal in fact even to a claim that they care about that issue or whatever you want so how do we get there get there with this when we asked the court to clarify what  they could have done that is it two on research further to raise those issues in the truck or allow the trial court in the st instance to resolve those issues and then in the event that the it's not resolved their satisfaction those issues would have been of raised in the st of litigated by both certain parties fully briefed and are as it is it was just pushed to the side they explicitly of the informed consent place we took that as a matter of course and we believe that we had every right to rely on these photos of procedure we had every right to of rely on the laws of waivers for terms of the parties asking you over to clarify suspicion we submit that there was only one reasonable clarification you could give which is that we meant to say of you didn't make a specific argument but with relief rather than saying your appeal was who you actually said was not based on me what why take the enormous risk of losing your opportunity to retry the professional negligence claim by declining the opportunity to contest the jury's verdict in the a poet because the issue at the time we were dealing was whether or not  what we do with the state by point well this case was tried the verdict this appeal is not based upon the verdict of the jury one this appeal reviews the trial court's order granting a partial directed verdict in favor of the defendants and the plaintiffs theory of negligence based upon the doctrine of informed consent why was the informed consent issue know what that presupposes that when it was sent back it was clear that you were getting a trial no however apparently but getting the survey question here more people than more persons view general mandates undermanned i think as it were has an opportunity to reaffirm basic principles of underlying the purpose of those from ocean and i think this court has to
in actually
protected and given her decor that was not done it could have various the solution to this situation would have been very simple you merely point a gardening line which is done you're you're the trustee says case and the  within seven days at the time he signed this or he was a party to or see if she agreed to the language about all property being transferred over to these banks so if they're looking for somebody
those cases call for a missed defendant's attempting to give a specific incidence in the evidence in this case we made no attempt to bring in any specific incident either before her accident or after the accident to cause any injury or the condition that he was complaining to the pla lost wages were the evidence was that mr pupil had a vacation planned the very next week after he saw the doctor for the so there was two weeks afterwards if you knew the man two weeks out of ninety after he was released and i believe this is the main basis for the jury is for mr campbell was released on july twenty sixth two thousand and twelve he concedes will work for almost a year into that po plaintiff's doctor in november of two thousand and twelve which is for months after the accident dr kenny does not take them off to work at that time he didn't see the doctor finder beginning in january i think of two thousand and thirteen in february two and there was no warning it may be wrong but how is that you propose different than general speculation since the doctor is there with no doctor that said that this is the car we didn't argue that it was because your honor
did we switch on your not away isn't there a distinction between this case and in re p m c and in rape dead yet in that in each of those cases the respondent whose colonel rights work was terminated was the alleged sex offender very broad language in the statute it is right language but she was never it was never required by court to admit that she was an accomplice or that she had knowledge of the acts were taking place at the time but recommendations fast include admission that that creates the same problem just later in the process is that she refused to acknowledge that the children had been the victim of any kind of domestic it's not just the sexual abuse but also to count three incident with the chains the mother
very small he and i already researcher and