MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
abstract and now what's your point there's no presumption of non disability and then what's your point what's to come right for the ninety two to ninety four time period there's no there's no getting around the administrative law judges indulge in statement that you know i'm not going to hold hold that state agency decision against her obviously didn't say those words she could so that  the nih all in other words saying that she could still perform her past relevant work that this considerations as not apply that consistently because they're identical and the first and last decision involve problems with repetitive neck movements and there's  reasonable proposition i don't know that repetitive movement of the neck is irrelevant to the house relevant work either the point being that the question that  do light work or if she could do life work and can she do or past relevant work leaving or are you saying that there is no evidence that she did she couldn't do  questions i guess i didn't come here with something out of the dictionary occupational titles saying that's the case i don't obviously believe that those are the only three relevant factors like we're of the evidence he found that she had not come forward with any evidence showing a change in her condition and she essentially remained pretty stable and the finding of light work  that the claimant could perform her past all of that work is that a jewelry store manager or i think a supervisor which was actually the job a job that she was not performing at the time of her injury she was performing the job of four so she was still well social security deans and the regulations closely approaching advanced age  one twelve of the transcript where her jewelry store manager work is described as she herself describes it  heaviest weight lifted twenty pounds frequently lifted less than ten pounds and a combination of walking standing it sitting sitting five hours standing three hours walking one hour  although the a l j in one thousand nine hundred two thousand that she could perform her past relevant work as it's generally performed in the national connelly this is certainly additional substantial evidence that she could ever form that job and she herself described it unless sherman responding a little further to the question of doctors supporting minutes sherman for instance if you look at dr grossman and at page one thousand and eight or the transcript he calls the step away from them i can read it although i left my transcript open to it the same thing happens with respect to only even worse really within the psychiatric arena that
if the younger people were getting curfews for committee assignments eleven the resumes showing the committee assignments are excluded from consideration at all this in fact is the younger defendant the plaintiff has raised as evidence of age discrimination have anything to do with age the focus it appears is on the issue of qualifications as justice souter pointed out and if you look at the questions they all ask there were not written applications it was a it was a letter of interest and resume which i believe were submitted to the to the panel but every so every single point that the plaintiff raises as being something that favored younger people just has no this is not a battle in deciding who was the best supervisor how many committees the person sat on and i also would point out that the the allegation that young people were served disproportionately on committees is just not borne out by the facts if you look at the the information in the appendix the the breakdown for committee assignments was i the people but it came to the point that if he has his supervisor said well you're caught up on your paperwork you can still earn your compensatory time but we have these examinations that need to be done for five hours of your time so that's the first one that he was being if he wanted to earn compensatory time he had to do an examination or two for five hours the second part of and our response to that is that certainly not a material adverse action even if you're applying a a looser definition his or her choosing if it's reasonable and then the employer has met its the second part of the religious discrimination claim has to do with the scheduling and in turn party on a date that coincided with  holiday first not material adverse action second if the plaintiff was upset about that and felt that it should be accommodated he could have just said could you please put it on another date rather he waited five days after being notified of the of the date and simply said i'm sorry i won't be able to attend so there is a case like that that not being invited to not being having something scheduled on a religious holiday is not  material the adverse action there's no suggestion that this was some crucial thing that that was that dr delimeters career would rise or fall i'm attending this welcome party for the student interns anything else thank you thank you
fine east is pennsylvania down from the take the rigors of the allegheny down from minnesota twenty five hundred miles the mississippi river runs to the go carrying every drop  carrying all the rivers that run down two thirds the continent the mississippi runs to the gulf of mexico down the missouri three thousand miles from the rockies down the ohio thousand miles from the allegheny down the arkansas fifteen hundred miles from the great divi we fought a war that was a double tragedy the tragedy of land twice in p
in order for them to continue to prosecute the adversary proceeding in the bankruptcy case they had to continue to maintain the viability of the action that was pending in the state court case they couldn't just let that go away even though the only concern was that they established not just charge ability claim in the bankruptcy where the assets were and where the debtor was actually able to be brought in and questioned examined the judgment could be  or it didn't matter what happened in the state court proceeding what's the opposite proceeding with family file it just was important wasn't it that at the time the obvious or proceeding the bankruptcy case was while there was still probable claim in the state court if you commence something timely and then the bankruptcy proceeding commences you can't let the state for proceeding go away you will have to maintain it you have to tell the judge whatever you have to tell them you
and with that
to this letter but this letter should also be understood as some type of informal claim for a ninety five and ninety six issue and then that would loses me is that there's a reference to agreed upon adjustments created by the passive activity loss carryforwards and passive activity credit carryforwards and to me i read that as not as a challenge to what happened in ninety five ninety six but it's it's an agreement as to how the government treated those passive losses and credits in ninety five ninety six and so therefore this letter doesn't seem to call out a challenge to you how the i r s has been analyzing ninety that right here right now you are disputing something that happened in ninety five or ninety six i think the it is the way in which an actor will offset occurs which is january they make the payment january sixth and then they follow up with a letter that provides these taxes and here's the mechanism for which the refunds sold me i think the question you're
combination singing paper doll the delta rhythm boy or i said i'm no friend not a short together we can do a scene from your picture for me and my gal jack i don't remember any part in that picture that said oh sure you do you know the man you're in love with yes i know but that was cited by gene kelly and he's only twenty eight years old what difference five or six years i can make up to look as old as him but you don't want that no you don't want to score the important things of life for this i went to bed early last have made the state of illinois everlastingly think that was a spot to spring for limits of the wilderness of luxury for the great american abraham lincoln spent his childhood yet in addition to being the home of history making cooperation of the hollywood victory committee another male call will be coming your way the next time you hear
you need to know that it was their residence by number one and then he could determine how long the other person who targeted third person had lived there and he could determine how you know how much actually she had to the rest of the rest of the residents past when the control the target third person had in that home and where she can see her her height the drugs and there's no i understand as a matter of fact i don't believe the third person was ever arrested was not supported by any president it's not supported by common sense and should not be established by this court the facts of the case are well briefed the record is obviously very complete the this was not a search for a particular individual and that the items evidence in the crime could be hidden anywhere in the house to do with the appellant has suggested and find out who lives there and who has control over such  strafford anything for their own i would like to point out i asked to mr oakes argument regarding that you would have to interview the residents of the home to find who live there this is a small town bishop california and so maybe he might have asked the deputy to bring in more information as to who they live there and how long she had she lived there and whether i was a true residents he would ask the deputy to provide him with more information believe he should have read the search warrant and based on that i understand when they entered the home they were told that the search warrant was invalid and at that point he should have questioned the other officers whether or not it was
you have to have a lot of patience to read this crappy dialogue and they're already choosing up sides for the next one who christ very comes again th let me tell you a story from tolstoy it seems that a rich man encountered a peasant working in the fields and he was so contented with this humble job that it made the rich man curious he asked him what would you do if you notice to morrow  e son of a tad why did you tell your mother you why didn't you tell your mother he was coming home frankly i  oh god oh yes so would you like a demonstration oh sure i  pardon me my mistake
mental health counseling and required to complete sexual worked under counseling within the st year of her twenty years of supervised release a petition to revoke  guidelines have always been guidelines i mean there are statements where we want to call them voluntarily there for the judge's edification and judge harden makes the decision that a twenty four month client understood the distinction and i don't think that she does i mean another one she got a benefit from what the district not that he was out there you know being sent across but she she got a benefit and he was making an assessment of mental health diagnosis based on the comments some of the comments of the court that it was as it was being used against my client the court and knowledge the mental health issues that she had only twenty years term of supervised release for a very serious offense in terms of protection of the public in a need to supervise up person and the district court recognized that and quite frankly said you statement that he could not to paraphrase determining what sort of probation officer or team of probation officers it would be required to supervise
michael conway that term and for the plane to balance if i may i'd like to start with a brief timeline how we got here because you'll see it in the papers we really feel like we were blindsided here  this case originally was filed in state court it was removed by counsel for the defendant it was then the subject of motion dismissed on jurisdiction grounds defendant wade the right to protect the allegations on any sort of court heard the appeal remanded it based on the conclusion that there was air we then went to work on trying to begin discovery we had a pretrial conference  at that point the defendant had fired his counsel judge torres asked that i get the defendant in touch with her by e mail she took the extraordinary steps of trying to talk to him by repacking conclusions of law on the issue of damages not a liability the response was that we had actually given evidence of damages in specific amounts but that he was not going on the grounds that were here on appeal on judge torres invited us to point to the record that we did specifically point all the factual aspects of the record not just in the complaint which was to be taken in the light most favorable to us especially since judgment or been granted liability but also the transcript where i was able to get testimony from the defendant in a state court case below where he admitted to what we point out the papers that we did provide adequate allegations to support the liability but we do believe them as over reach because the measure was not charged with finding anything but liability but only conclusion statement said you know if there's any question about liability let us prove it up so you had the opportunity we didn't get the opportunity because she said no she said no we're not going to let you file an american plane or come in and show me why there is evidence here but we did put the evidence released we highlighted the evidence in the record for her anyway in the objections that we filed and we said and she ignored that instead of doing as you know review she ignor that this in the evidence shows clearly that there is sufficient evidence but if there was any question we should have gotten right to ripley i mean let's face it if if if the message here is that all you have to do when is not show up nobody's ever to show up in court and the play will always lose i mean our client was was one of the defendant was given every opportunity that showed up the defendant had counseling the senate was contacted by the judge said please show up didn't show up i waive my right to defend everything was then i should have been found against him and was in a default judgment and yet somehow that was all ignored and
life and he got the maximum his attorney did not even argue that the maximum was not warranted in this case when he was not the shooter and the shooter the shooting was accidental my client nothing happened and subsequent motion he asked the court specifically to just charge the attorney and to return this file the court after several more months but finally on april twenty when he actually got the file but he filed his state has conviction petition four and a half months later there's three critical time periods in this case and i really want to focus on the first one but let me just outline what they are lot of the time because of behavioral problems he has a real trouble getting access to legal help and then without his file that of course all compounded i would argue that it is more compelling than that's and and the issue there was regarding violating her legal and ethical duty is to return the client the file to the client and also not prejudice the client after the representation is over secondly and somewhat similar to spitz inspection i believe that there for more than or about nine months this time should not be against my client who is diligently trying to do what he needs to do to file a federal suit and he is petition so most mr wallace might be might be borderline i'm not sure exactly what borderline means but i don't think borderline means that one cannot file a federal hate his petition on time and once again the pending for several months and it's past history so it's not something is going to make up currently but not having the trial itself does not prevent one from filing a petition or the form itself out readily available  file that with the court is something i didn't do at a later date but he did it late he didn't need to file before hand to file the petition he would've been allowed to amend the petitions to flush it out but he didn't need to get the initial filing completed so to file the petition that said i think my rights were violated i'm not sure in what respect or what action in the state trial court but nonetheless when i asked for relief under the federal statute that would find these are grounds to justify equitable telling if there's going to be an evidence you tearing down paul well i think it should be sort of along the lines of a court ordered speech in which as you know maybe the district court should now look at whether the time you know whether on
another favorite spot to take them is washington d c and my theme i say one of the best times to go cherry blossom time with all the buildings and monuments were given a the spot i like especially the go it's not running no matter how often you go from the moment you step on the ground you actually feel the presence of washington the house and grounds look today exactly as they did when george and martha live bay it's like a feller said once days americans say think ever have is the biggest or the longest or that tallest and it usually is i think some of us brag much more co  i'm really not interested in what he d you i don't know why but i sure seem to rub you the wrong way if i said anything wrong i'm downright regretful i tell you one thing i've seen a lot of like i can help you with this part where following the old oregon trail people say it's the most picturesque seventy miles of highway in the united states and i hit this track try no i'm almost a girl staying in spokane  made reservations for us we like to stop overnight and travel data you see so much more that way more we go to canada i can hardly wait by the united states before you send me a wait wait wait a minute you don't get away from me again but how did you come on let's get outta here where we can talk i have to watch my english now that i'm an a schoolteacher and it isn't the biggest in the world but it's on my you there to help me it's getting a lot bigger but what about my teaching my masters degree you can teach me from now on honey and you won't have to write a theme we're going to live one just as soon as we can get a license i mean married and you can talk you were telling her about i'm sure i did even better was another postcard from niagara falls down and they were on the way home
is a young man from bangladesh who was brought over to be a domestic servant when he arrived he was never paid he was threatened abused and essentially trapped inside of an apartment for eighteen months you've won yeah was one that the question i suppose is whether there's anything left for the people who are here today to appeal even if you are completely wrong but your description of what happened suppose i only wrong and the percent of the actual damages makes damages triple damages which is certainly unusual why should it be then that you can collect liquidated damages both on the federal statute and on the states your honor as judge stein observed there has been a split among the district courts in this circuit on this issue i am asking yes your honor the fair labor standards act is long been viewed the liquidated damages provision under that act has long been viewed as a form of pre judgment interest where is the district courts in this circuit have been divided as to whether the new york labor law liquidated damages serve the same purpose which was i'm sorry it's an interesting question that's on resolved and i agree with all of that but is it before us it's absolutely not before this court your honor both because it was not preserved because the argument was not made before the district court and because the argument is not been presented in the appellate brief here and this court has consistently applied both those rules to pro se litigants to the extent the court honor because it's waived and what's left well your honor the only issue before this court was the award of damages from september twenty sixth that award is reviewed for clear error and to the extent  punitive damages involved for abuse of discretion judge stein at the district court level bend over backwards to ensure a fair process for these appellants they began to be notified in
nationality and occupation another basis of all religious improvements in
specifically prohibit that to be counted against him in terms of the sentence imposed in order to get to the drug trafficking sixteen and twelve levels there has to be a sentence imposed our position is court conviction qualifies as a felony drug trafficking offense under the guidelines and whether the twelve when he asked which was imposed by the district court was harassed the government's position that the record clearly shows that the a defendant who supplied documentation to the court in its habits attachments to their objections to the pre sentence report and the court had before it the court indictment which is that you are for the state plea before the district court and as part of the record at u r twelve the p s r clarify what the restitution was regarding and the government's position not it was and i believe the indictment is clear that it contains in the charge what amounts to what's called the sale of a narcotic drug and that includes activities that don't amount to drug trafficking under this court's precedent in addition despite the