MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
had a policy in the hospital of the event i believe the record that there was the policy of doing a search before someone was admitted to the behavioral health unit but not the hospital so record supports the lack of a duty here because a lot of foreseeability you're right can however you can raise a new mission on appeal we can affirm my name basis but how how is it that you can argue on appeal
involves very complicated issues but the arching and important issue in this case has to police targeted or understood with the weakness of the compas case this is a case where and  before the jury and no instruction had been provided with regard to that guilty plea and that the prosecutor's closing argument continue to question and highlight that er decided it was certainly argued that the felony murder rule was that the instructions were unfair to the defendant because they were protective of his right to have proved beyond a reasonable doubt whether it was our need to that level that that when they two will get to see the boy you just said as an actor which part of that that the felony murder rule as it has adopted in massachusetts was unconstitutional for this the violation of due process intimately intertwined that you can't look at one without the other not have it at the time he wanted time to do you research commonwealth was the killings at the time that controlled whether or not the judge did not and they don't play counsel objected to the way and i urge the court to go back and read that part of the transcript so you can see what the trump instruction is about  to the judge identifies exhibit march number date and if the instruction that the commonwealth has and nobody who witnesses telling the truth there is an objection to that instruction page a on the jury is instructed about this agreement the first part is what i just laid out to you the second part is that the end of the trial and then the jet age if i can just bring your attention to you want to disagree with how the district court characterized it but i urge you to go and look at the instruction as a whole and you will see that instruction does play with so you know what felony murder is the intent is substitute for the armed robbery  theory of the case is not the correct way and right now if you meet the facts according to the history scene i don't think that it needs i think that you are substituting your version of the fact out and he gives you all the theories of why he became a victim just just to give you an example to the victims a drug dealer and we know that he's not going to go to the police because he's here illegally
to secure a full time position in surgical and a comic pathology which means that ing out actual cancer cases and making notes of other diseases under the microscope for which i train for many years i currently oversee sexually transmitted disease  r planned parenthood actually but i'm not actually practicing the pathology that i spent most of my training doing this is a managerial position and because of what these actions by russia  depositions so that only gave me two months to deliver subpoenas and only three weeks for the deposition then it's unfortunate the judge the judge back cast away before she passed away she had written an the basically just missed it within a month and a half after waiting eight years to have a jury trial i feel that i have a right to a jury trial this is what i had asked for its part of the bill of rights in the th amendment i wanted to refute certain information about why i left a persistent when exposed position because of the separation agreement which i felt feel is chilling retaliatory animosity he knew that i had reported him for sexual harassment and he never said that the currently got he quit after two months he never told anybody who was in the agreement that they were sent and then left because the merger from my salary then when i just covered that they provided emilie was in fact the next point person she disappeared for four months of maternity leave she didn't notify anyone there are  he claims i never got any contract from any employer that i left a little twelve employers but i did get a contract through the temp agency comp help to work in our climate is constantly broke and then they rescinded as soon as they start credentialing me and then the last point i want to make is that they claim ramos claims that three months of presenting for temp additions is ok and justifiable but it isn't if at the time position and you're covering a community hospital where there's one pathologist who gets that they need to bring somebody in quickly it's a one no evidence properly or rockets that any employer average sleep was influenced by depended on hospitals reporting practices or by anything user dependent did instead should beds argument from prior counsel as to what her title should have been demanding that it be changed but i'm going to go to public health law hospitals cannot arbitrarily or a whim change its health care professionals
decided or this was three or four action appeal was decided on a motion to dismiss and to six fifteen of the code civil procedure there seems to be some type of a question as to whether what the is that what that case stands for doesn't stand for the proposition that the landlord is not liable by injuries caused by a kid getting dangerous or defective condition on the premises least to a tenant and under the ten the property and in this case there was no your promise to reimbursed for repairing the property get a correction really but we took the position the was the undertaking now isn't it correct that the condition preceding to that reimbursement was never completed that is the fence was never repaired so that the application of the landlord to determination that you want to try for food instead this count get dismissed best very problematic when you start blending factual questions with questions from all and then you start it's close to one of the points that you were making fun you were talking about the general negligence analysis and urged us to use it and then you said that you felt that the landlord fell within the category of relationships
everything short of telling him what time is going to testify and what he was going to be where he laid everything out and yet when it came to her she sees me so did it because of openings the jury basically been in informing the fans that th mean like yours is my spend here's what i ended up deciding in this case as i was going through it i think the answer strangely enough my eyes in what the standard review is and  events that caused the ultimate death of her ok the judge talked about an intervening factor i understand that but without the initial act with that was reckless of playing with her with the car if it weren't for bad he would have been in the situation where the video statement he said i just sort of you know just play in the parking lot it's telling you all not very eloquently that's telling you he was still in his mind playing with or now whether or not you know whether or not i believe that the second thing i want to bring up i keep hearing a distinction between accident and reckless and rightly whereas i think there are certainly cases or instances where there is a distinguishing mark between those two cases i point to will state doctors said something and that wasn't fables so maybe that was his trial strategy that's exactly what she told the jury that if you didn't call the witness because of what the state actor said then pick up that ball and run with it ladies and gentlemen of the jury i know i
for two thousand and fourteen proposed sale of property is fifty six thousand one hundred twenty three that is a projection based off of the number at the bottom which is reimbursements to city of schenectady sells property back to the city and the city sells it the amount that they sell for is just reduced from that amount and then it goes back into the demolition budget it's an accounting procedure the additional ten thousand dollars is  proposed anticipated sale of an additional piece of property and that will require any appraisal which is five hundred dollars in two thousand and fifteen intice a bidding sale of forty thousand which is not county any offsets to for demolitions that sale possibly bear it street if it doesn't happen in two thousand and fourteen with the associated appraisal he jumped back to twenty thirteen for know there i just want to make is that other operating revenues we've received one thousand six hundred twenty four that's a garnishment from the person that did started the fire at we d's which we're still paying off to the city was downtown opportunities truly you know other areas of the district so i just wanted to say a few words in support of that and also just say that once again this year coming up for small business saturday for the last several years we've film the differences are very
took it all at once as opposed to making a ruling on whether the contract was ambiguous and then if that's not ambiguous it would seem that no evidence comes in and there's that is where he indicates in the order that he denied motions for summary judgment because he found that a question of fact existed but then he went on to say that for purposes of the or he's not going to find a question of fact and then he relies on the fact that it seems like to enter in his ruling so if i'm having some difficulty and maybe you can help me reasonable conclusion even considering the inference against the unsure is that only one conclusion can be reached and that is that everybody knew
master copy of the jury instruction combined with a verdict form was sufficient to preserve this issue for appeal counsel or is there some other argument that you have yes no i  i'm making a master copy of the definitional instructions of the issues instructions i've got the verdict forms for everybody but i'm not giving me copies of the definitional of these instructions for presenting in such a way that the trial were won that there aren't any necessarily there are always certain necessary conditions beyond that for it's really a surrounding as you pointed out if no one's in the area if you're in the basement there by yourself your clients are yes apparently a lot of people and still can't believe based upon their distinguish the because of the because the killing preceded the predicate felony i mean we only have two victims yes there were four convictions so that's what i meant one and one crime chris votes if one of these convictions let's say the way these arguments fit together is that based on the first argument you give you want to get convictions with respect to mr morrow and the second army it's rid of the second one and then you have no convictions against  know i do apologize i don't misunderstand question two when i first read it the standard review here is abuse of discretion and washington deals specifically with a self defense rather than a lesser included  is a lesser included offense and struction your honor and use of discretion standard is appropriate here because you're looking at a question of fact of whether the evidence record to support the lesser included offense being given the people assert that the defendant in this case is not entitled to the reckless conduct instruction having just charge of a firearm is knowingly or intentionally discharging a firearm in the direction of another the people are you that is still in the direction that is the last known location of where the picture was firing in his direction even if it was that the floor my foot is touching the floor your honor that is still almost a point blank range from the person you're shooting one of my first lessons when i was eleven when i bought my first gun was my dad taking me out she braidwood to fire  plastic milk gallon filled with water and this to me about five feet away and said ok she did that now you know but how bends when you shoot a gun it's something you don't intend to shoot so i always take that into consideration here you  counsel over requesting this and struction because it had been considered specifically by the judge below the people to not raise the forfeiture issue because they are not  the specific issue and the people believe they rely on the cases that most closely addressed the language the similar present tense language and the part of the felony murder statute i'm such various people he had just he had the intention to harm the patrons of the bar and more as death occurred as part of that still basically you're
you well let me ask you
could not have understood that this meant that there was prohibited from leaving the room it was simply to reassure the respondent that his father was going to remain there and again it would be ironic if this statement which was meant to be reassuring stated that the reasonable person standard should be modified only where the dots are either knew or should have known of the personal characteristics of the interviewee in this case rather did not know of any intellectual disability believe without regard to his subjective belief or it's characteristic of limited intellectual ability for somebody they know what they're doing she
anybody wanna comment on that
identified by the experts that we consulted with after the district were dismissed the case for a lack of being more specific in the st instance so these are not alternative or contrary theories these are all been identified as independent enough the result of that was that these hands these exhibitors tents were completely unusable people did not come in and people left and people got sick so they were not commercially usable at all so in the complaint freezes knew about the forecast no steps at all to modify any of the equipment which are several of the allegations it took no steps at all to supply even read it i mean the possible what the reading this really was a way of reading this is that you're claiming a failure of service that is a failure to provide the v air conditioning the appropriate air conditioning particularly given the heat wave and that that stop this event really taking place in the way that your client wanted to take place i think that with drivers yes you know i guess what i'm trying to distinguish is the it so this is not a situation where you simply get them to just say it will not lead him to say it was just too hot and so we will be there for fail there needs to be some factual connection where it gets them the basis  i just want to make sure that i understand because i know i always have a concern that will latest being diluted and that the federal courts are making a little harder to get past a motion to dismiss so if the complaint had in a more elaborate factual way stated what the commercial reasonable or the commercially freeze could have done and should have done and they didn't do it and listed those things that it should have done under whatever the standard is with that had been enough or does it have to specifically  with there be a claim there if the air conditioning failed so the question directly completely wasn't running at all so to me system in light of those conditions that is reasonable under the circumstances or at least a jury question that the paragraph twenty two sea breeze knew about the oppressive heat with in the tents and took no action to correct
full payment of all man's that were made it has to be in good faith and then acceptance and negotiation of the check up with no notice of the condition under which the check was tendered looking for a and then was for everything this gentleman had extremely serious injuries as a result of that obviously the vast majority of the problem was right there just for the film this thing about the medical and but this was a part of that arise and this is exactly what happened in this particular case this according satisfaction defense which was brought up over three years after the check was cashed is just the last bit ad hoc attempt to try to get out of paying of the should be made  we just relied upon mr summers off because of all the liens best the problem here the problem here is that the defendant it be relied upon someone other than the person they were supposedly settling the claim with lady nor the caller profession responsibility and just went ahead and parties in for that for that reason alone important satisfaction difference fails now we also believe that there was no woman no dispute with respect to the amount at issue now counsel sa well after its customer doesn't practice it afterwards so times needs are negotiated again there was no we were counsel of record in the case there was no contact with us and there was nothing in the record over it almost a year maybe more before their first case was dismissed that we had cashed the check had a raise had the first case that could have all been dealt with at this appellate court when the first appeal it was not raised in therefore to make sure that this is since it had been taking so long to hit such a maybe tortured past whatever we want to call it the it was over once and for all could make sense even though it's custom and practice that maybe you should follow up on
l correct the early two p r i s were not modified by the subsequent decision well because they're related to different products and again they were three overlapping partners i don't know where those partners are that's never been and those were never provided to come to the government for purposes of determining whether there is substantially identical to the partners an issue i really don't example to the stand is indicating that some of the partners here are simply a different color or different supplier it certainly would have been just a simple for motorola to change the card number to suppliers reason is because sixteen twenty five c two despite what motorola has our view really refers to transactions meaning active activities related to actual entries indicated that was the basis for sixteen twenty five sick in there in their regulations and it details the takes of evidence that importer needs to demonstrate  to to establish the treatment of stanton's and the transactions and along the evidence that the person claiming the treatment has to show are being entry number or other customs assigned number the quantity and value action days covered by each carriers that through so clearly by asking for the quantity value merchandise covered by the transaction you're going to pick a ship entering over the points of entry the quantity we're talking about the issuance of the ruling we're talking about treated it's very confusing what they're arguing here and not over just a roll and admitted that they only have to do it will point to what they call transactions here i don't know that that's a pattern it doesn't matter because it's not a transaction that would give rise to a treatment and you a little confusing because i find the rules arguments very confusing of treatment customs consistently you find that determination a national basis as reflected in liquidations of entries or reconciliations or other customs and actions with respect to all or substantially all of that person's customs transactions involving materially identical facts and issues there's literally present to alternative arguments regarding this third prong first prospective transactions appear else don't deal with prospective activities they deal with and it's very big deal perspective that they don't deal with with activities that have occurred and
statement of consequences in beads for the same reason to hold something then a tree is that it protects it has or it has a protective effect for rights and here this provision is intended to protect taxpayer who needs to know review segments how to make a decision about whether they're reasonable or not this year and in paragraph two protests both of you which members usually on the receiving end of these of these challenges it's usually someone who's been denied any exemption they didn't do anything to try to get identif dead homestead property tax exemption is clearly within the subject matter jurisdiction of the department of revenue and statutory authority whether the acts of the agency are authorized by statute section eight thirty five case the issue raised the similar to the one raised here but the order entered by the state mining board didn't contain all the elements that the statute required it to contain and it could work out that while that may have been in a lot did not the best we both explained that one twenty which the district says they feel is a regulation of general application on its face it applies to hearings on
that wa
the oakland a's quickly i'm going to go through the field once again great prizes tonight the wicker park fifty two dollar gift certificate the two freddy's and the six six i'd say well where the huggies number three is tammy's whammy with ronnie caught so in the saddle number four's blabber mouth cold briggs all right blabber mouth number four number five is don't spank the monkey they really should put those people in jail mr crackers are tra pays to buy the best i got my sheet out will take nine players tonight across the board nine players across the board only the people who are in the winner's circle with the winning horse tonight when a fabulous visit the ladies room and then come see me nine hemorrhoids while the first two women to college very interesting one of them takes number one montezuma's revenge and now you take him write something funny about that i don't know i don't know what but  the hot diggity dog number or six reg one else ray why do you like hot diggity dog i'm just curious what was that man you gotta watch out man you stand out in the road how you don't wait a second i make it sixty days because he said something hey what's going on about number five don't spank your monkey man don't spank the monkey who's this this is greg from griffith greg you got number five don't juki i like the number one number two all would be just fine ok you got to give me the horse name you know what i i was working and talking to somebody else preaching and he's got you got to listen dave for highland you've got to listen because you're not going to college sneak by by giving me a number the whole idea is you think i sit around and think up all this stuff just for the heck of it i want to hear the horse name now here's the horses number one might assume is revenge number two is the penguin number three is tammy's whammy number four is blabber mouth the five horses don't spank the monkey number six is hot diggity dog mat number seven baby to move up number eight he likes don't spank the monkey another animal lover us ok stand by ok chris i got you don't spank the monkey that's how i spelled it christie with a k ok thanks hello crazy da you know i just found out today what's that great news you know that we're in iraq and we liberated them and all of our brave young men and women are paid the ultimate sacrifice yeah and we were supposed to get reimbursed with the oil guess who has the contract to pump all the oil out of iraq  spank the monkey number six hot diggity dog and number night him her eyes all closed up