MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
the building on the east end this is three floors and that's huge that that it didn't reveal from the start this building would be a four story building the last thing the hesitation we're really excited about and the fact that  program for this many students it's two buildings worth of our space that we're we're asking for and that we are really mourning you don't really want us to throw you connected to the to the program that we have students and teachers each day the flow of the students in the faculty and how that works in this space is very practical in useful to that purpose is not you know we are looking at a new space that would be considered not needed or excessive it were really functions it right now those two major departments that have really value and we have every single whorehouse who comes in and actually serves not every teacher because every teacher doesn't get international but every f t e and how many point four point six one point
try to be more into training let me show you the golden statuette of the king we discovered this morning tha have never been described as ungrateful door just large enough to allow us to br
conservation and recreation of lands affected by surface and underground coal mining in order to restore to optimum future productive use and to provide for their return to productive someone to not be enforced against while there are confines because they are diligently working on getting into the mines and the reality of life is that if you violate the ground water standards with your poisons it is going to take you some time to a failure to enforce the plan they have an effect it would be an attack on the planet itself you cannot issue a ground water management zone that does not only bring the site into compliance exxon's on modeling shows that even if they pump the water at over half a million gallons a day for five hundred years it will still ahead private wells the source of contamination needs to be removed and the citizens are here because they than clean water would be considered hazardous waste had they not gotten an exemption from one of the cases that they cite so under under section eight ten you can't compare wor also if there are changing circumstances also if there are ongoing harms this is certainly an ongoing harm and the same with  well i don't think we have any further questions all right well i really appreciate you giving us expedited review night the sheet here knowing how statutory interpretation goes obviously statutory interpretation is fine the primary purpose of the statute primary purpose of the statute is to restore land got given up to not use four hundred twenty two acres of liquid hazardous material sitting ten feet above an opera that used to be the source of public drinking firm and if he were to attack that aspect of the reformation that would be after the permits so i'm trying to understand why i think the situation that would allow all citizens action i'm sorry i'm sorry but that since you have a continuing performance duty despite the expiration of the permit wouldn't you have  that or duties that arise because of actions taken under the permit that cause what a civil suit should suit claims is a violation of the art and violation of the
yourself by counsel it was sufficient to let the other side know that you may be sanctioned when you come in you know you have no quarrel with that oh no i only if it's going to be an inquiry but unfortunately the second your point that he could not do what he did unless he provided notice be more specific about the conduct of the preacher of the proceedings or is it your point that he constitutional issue but i haven't heard you mention the fifth amendment to the fourteenth amendment in your argument there was no due process my client was not notified of the charge
introduces church standards morality and just to have a mother come on and say yes we have a need and the list of relationship might be more damning than the evidence it isn't there a strategic decision knowing just a half and he is a youth minister period falls with the use ministry at his church well it could be a strategic decision but on this record we don't know the council made a strategic decision we don't know that he investigated young man was in his youth group either none of those things are obvious from the record but there's nothing on the record that shows that he investigated the evidence that mr turner has hessians petitioned and that he alleges in his petition that permission is a texas petition  of this bad boy come out a trial to impeach someone as to why they want to testify falsely against someone else but i you could you scour the post good sugar titian for the actual allegations of facts as opposed to conclusions but allegations of facts that would support the basis of a theory where are the where are the delegations of fact that we should take is true at this point in time that supports him having a hearing on this as opposed to conclusions  petitioner when the supreme court defined what an affidavit was the earlier when when this started to happen this is opposed to having the one one  brought up in a cell phone the bank account clothing and then the and weirdly we touched their bodies and everything else exactly the same for all three and so you may even come with a motive to lie but you've got these two other witnesses who are that have nothing to do  was the purpose of an appeal used to determine if errors were made it to try and work on if we don't have any discussion of what if this issue at the trial court level objecting to guidelines which set a level playing field for everybody not in the fan be held to a standard that the legislature has s of the four thirty one issues i mean it happens all the time he says jurors shall be asked and they said we've known so ok it's long isn't substantially complied with so i mean we're i am not going to argue this point much because i'm sure my colleagues have other questions and your time is about out but it can be done and it is done because policy rate policy mandates in the end the truth but the policy at some point also muted the fear essence of a petition of discussed i've been making this argument for years and it has been routinely ignored not been not been shut down just ignored by this said were going to say that his counsel had never investigated and if he would not do that to me to file his affidavit saying i tried to get these affidavits i was incapable of doing it that's what makes the logical leap to show whether or not this fills in the ga
would retain jurisdiction on coral and incidental matters as i understand it they were outside the appeal in connection with the start proceedings and to review the attorney's fees in connection with  recollection of that the rogers case it involved recurring and whole monetary gifts which is certainly a different circumstance  car seems to be somewhat outside the traditional thought of income where we talk about ga he would render economic instability well in this case with the fact we have here in the relative wealth of both of these folks once the judgment  this court said well ok if that's what you want and so over twenty five thousand dollars to reverse it happens that that twenty five thousand dollars had already been  i want to mention the list business of michael paying one hundred percent of college expenses that was bandied about in the record in the order i believe and  abstract record considering the trials finances and i don't think that's what this ruling in minute detail said when you look at it it says the girls didn't pay off and we weren't going to be able or weren't going to be required to will pay everything else and i don't think events that's i mean why would he say mr mitchell you pay a hundred percent of the cost and then they can end up taking forty seven thousand dollars out of each girl's account  being limited to the stock proceeds the opinion specifically says it's to remain in light of all the factors including the stock proceeds so it's not just looking at the stock proceeds but even i make notes when we do come back easy call because the stock proceeds still present prevented or present themselves and what they are form he had one hundred ninety two thousand dollars that was sufficient along with the other factors to continue maintenance this huge lies and misrepresentations and concealments and it's over a million dollars that we point out there plus we had to chase out of pennsylvania after my experience because he would not disclose whether he had any interest in any can go back beyond just also order in zero nine and looks like in some part of the opinion says we can only go back that far but there were gifts way before that that we didn't know because they were being held back from us because they didn't not only he should've been arguing about the difficulties they may have had with the case i don't believe are in the record and i do attorney client relationship had completely broken down and that said holroyd had no idea what this woman is through behind my back without this knowledge i have no idea what was going on and i think on that but i'm going to go to trial and she would term for the nine hundred dollars well but they're wanting reimbursement for and that's a by how much is claimed to be have been it
apparent so for example the example of one she gives an agreement that a specific sentencing range is the appropriate disposition of a case that's an example where she said that leaves no doubt under the guidelines your honor pointed out that there was no reference to criminal history category for example that was something that had to be decided to determine how the guidelines were alternately could be applied but certainly this plea agreement refers to the guidelines and so that's our point here that there's nothing in this agreement that would indicate that that under peter example under a simple they could be we'll take care of that problem that you're suggesting that's my sense of what we discussed in our office anyway how to handle that problem alternatively the government would suggest that  would not cover a motion under thirty five able to sue and i did think about that and i then something cases i saw indicated that that would not that's not an argument that would fly at least i didn't think she was in the change in law  i think that that particular argument i agree with you is treacherous crouse and i thought also about the statutory language that refers to motion in the singular however i also thought about section twenty two fifty jurisdiction of argument if you're if you're thinking about the courts here what would be your your point here argument on that my view is too but the court know that it's they are there it is a court there are courts that have said that  amendment seven fifteen i see my time so finish your point and the point is that as a practical matter in this particular case to me that better argument is there for your consideration it's not something that
requests for a continuance on a decision when they're so during the time between march and today the township was communicating with the landscape architect that was working on the play and explaining that recently adopted five forty open space lanes in our subdivision routines and specifically section three eighty five forty dash two criteria for site selection relative to where we want the open of part of the bitter lot comes up here right along green valley right here and this plane simply takes this piece of property from the
know how this was submitted to the jury and comparative negligence yes and that's one explanation why we might have a not guilty here in the verdict form that the jury signed was there any breakdown she didn't have that she put her hand on like everybody agreed she put her head on after she was you know that she then put her hand on she didn't have her hand on she was holding the trigger when she was feeling the gas now all  this through the employees who have been threatened with gas but guess what it is absolutely one hundred percent undisputed that the employee judy simpson didn't get a drop in gas off accordingly at a very early stage trial the to the jury they know mary fries version of events can be rejected out of hand it is impossible couldn't have happened the way she said so where do they go  the fall of mary fry and the jury had every right to believe that the jury or the effect of the clue to support a family by the testimony of the record but it's supported by common sense but i think it's important to and that might have prevented this accident from happening but it might not and we have evidence of the record cited in my memory it states that it might not have prevented the accident and the jury has a a clean trial we want to do it again well mary fry is locked into her testimony it's not going to change her testimony in many respects is simply unbelievable it's going to be unbelievable the second time around too the second time around we're still going to have conflicting evidence here maybe even to the point we'll flip to the other side maybe not but the fact is that is not true this is the rule is the fact that other conclusions might be reasonable is of no consequence that's the standard we're dealing with if there is evidence to support the jury's decision and there is it should not be disturbed best's that's what we're dealing with here that's the position of the jury you know i believe for the same you know our system of jury trial this this this could have put her hand on the air and released that trigger it would have shut off they could have inferred that was negligence on her part well under the circumstances would be startled by me yelling i think it would be
of these grouping of issues that's the way the district or construed it wouldn't virtually everything fall within the definition and what would be the well that's exactly our problem is that we don't believe that that interpretation i came on the court in years ago was the official english valid prosecution in their years on the supreme court of the united states chastises we were facing a voter cast initiative your argument is that there's no way to that even if i go into the doctor's testimony and you know you can argue that in some sense it's worth looking at a dictionary or a medical dictionary it's just dr parker like a medical dictionary i can look at and that of course is not to strike down a law as unconstitutional on the basis of a worst case scenario that may never occur and when you're confronted with the facial challenge your honor you're right the first concert consideration is whether or not this out of the stash and irreversible impairment of the major physical bodily function which in this case would cover just me to answer hypothetical of what happens and in that particular situation is there an immediate risk that's a judgment call issue that was a little bit different that's not really related to our claims here there is no other challenge that's been brought up that i'm aware of to a counsel provision that anyone has ruled on control because it's more specific and i'm having a hard time fight you're saying permanent risk from an injury and there is no evidence of a chilling effect in this case because and medical emergency situation that choice recently can be taken away from that minor so we c care and i believe that was  then that's the only testimony that we pretty much half with respect to confidentiality you know either we have a situation where we have a substantial and also that investigation is that there is no way anyone can investigate or prosecute without breaching her and shouting it's only the reports of law enforcement and that's a very important point that i also believe the state is wrong about the title sixteen child abuse reporting requirement i think there's the same acquirement anyway this problem carmen and you were hinting at the expected title sixteen in child abuse at the hand of a parent or guardian it is not criminal reporting it is only criminal reporting  yes but if you read it with the way the state playing it it would not only include a grandparent or anyone long those lines and i understand i mean the way i believe health care professionals operate in this sense is that they make a determination about interest and mine aren't about whether or not
it was his attorney at the hearing that said need more time we need more time we need more time to do put to get the verifying information isn't so yes or i didn't do that back to princess about all we need more it's a fairly regular we have to put you in the hot seat bigger that they can get a group and and there is a there's a virus that's very common in livers apparently how why do you have to be about the extent that the risk of seeing the certain anything like that that's something i would defer to an expert on and that is what the plaintiffs required to do in these cases in all these cases in every case where we're the issues here what is the information that should be that's what the records that judge testimony is required to establish the risks and the magnitude of the risks that they're for work
taking the time to look into one  yes it's true a member of the national because i'm so strong ye or scholarship  that o
under the instructions given to the jury the jury in this case fan that the defendant had zero percent liability right yes i mean and they were specifically instructed that that didn't have to be
one to make or use something
violations makes a mockery of the legislature's efforts to protect the health and safety of property owners it down there you have a dangerous title to the electrical equipment that is outside the tower that is under the statute or the order supposed to be located within the tower and then you have the presence of potentially harmful radio frequency emissions as a result of all  locate a lot and what's interesting is when t mobile submitted its application to the village they made it very clear in multiple sections of the application that they were going to locate all of their equipment with in the water tower that have an order in school all that expresses a requirement like adam and it is exists for a period of time and then you have another wall that comes along and it does something that could be seen is in
inventor stated when mechanical devices are used to dump the containers larger communes abuse requiring a new single transfer or refuse it each that however these mechanical devices usually consisting of
for one more on this but i was just saying that it would seem that the legislative history i know that's not your position supports the city city's argument that it's not local that it makes sense from the perspective that because of the three counties were experience a great deal population boom and so there was a rational basis for this your tax authority says by the constitution how is it different from what we have here there is a massive difference wring out are fees in the difference in their situation or condition compared to the rest and see whether there is a conceivable rational basis for making that speech in light of the purpose of the law only areas in the state that are outside the two major urban centers that are located in in this region their gold is a lot of people in a highly traveled road and the municipalities in these locations local resources that this the law enforcement resources are in drafting those red lights is not off the car because there are too many for law enforcement to wood's wrath in the other manner in which the st louis is elected all the error that the caller county winnebago is farther removed and these i mean this court looks at the map there is a difference in the way this county looks compared to the other it just doesn't have the number of rows it doesn't have that if there are too many red eyed violations for the location because the way they're located or the law enforcement we draft them then this provides a supplemental way or for it will only asians to address the problem so they can meet but the extent of the problem when in bago may have a perfect balance between the number of read like violations that experience it and the resources the police resources that currently exist to force the violation first hand what it does is it a law is to us that the violations that would not otherwise be detected because there is no police asked their witness and moreover in the if there is a police officer there to witness them six moreover even if you look at the language in these gases that well they're simply mean they've they're not beyond them most of them don't have the specific language necessary for the engine and that this is a limitation on home  said it would be remarkable for the court to hold that incident out and say after the general assembly said we don't think these are traffic regulations governing the movement of you people therefore the city is not
with the attempted aggravated battery but what i don't think you have is a factual basis that mr rogers every bit into often times when you have stipulated been straw one side or the other will say judge we agree to the following facts make like an awful truth and then the other side say we agree that judge now you take that evidence and decide the case and conceivably all sides could leave out a material element of the events and the judge say not guilty that doesn't usually happen but i'm trying to get a handle on what was the evidence that the judge is supposed to consider you're talking about statements he made to the police at the time of the original charge was that part of the evidence was there a point where the state's attorney made a statement to the court and said we're agreeing to this or that or did you just and is there anything in the record i mean the record as you kind of acknowledged pretty clearly shows a always the right the interest all the questions i mean is there anything in the record that after that date that shows that he was examined begin and somebody questioned his competence or anything like that it was ni deciding the case i knew that it was that then everything that the court was supposed to consider when deciding the case i believe that the evidence that was presented with respect to the medical evidence that was also of the maternal grading all that was to be considered as evidence that all of that was part of the conditional knows and one of the things in that ninety ninety nine case that he was similar to what he meant in this case and that is that and arguing well you know
that case is with most are on point with this matter in this case mr zeins was arrested outside of the village to pull back the evidence during the trial indicating that are all times the specifics of that appointment other defendants have raised their arguments from whiter and mr ray's those arguments both for the first time on appeal and said well wait we didn't see the written letter or weight of the long state news just coming out in full venally circumstantial evidence sufficient to convict them of draining within the jurisdiction of the pool with no because officer pages the state has argued that that factual finding is wrong which is which is why i have attached the maps in my reply to deal with that response during the motion for new trial or yes during the
or standing where missing obscure conflict worth to priceless requirements