MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
good morning writers playing basketball again four we have a circumstance here with there's a definite contractual right to attorneys fees for the privilege of earth we have a circumstance where the first appellate court opinion here reversed the judgment favor of the plaintiffs in against the started if you look at the opinion it selectively quoted a portion of the three sixty ninety days the second clause of it and then proceeded to use that language to analyze whether in the rougher pace or just like here there was a reversal without supreme court rule that was the basis for how they got there so if you know as my point says well they got the result right well sure he likes the results but if the result is stems from a wrong reading of the law even if you can make inequities argument when it's always been it isn't even the case and begin you know the a poker just knows what's going on in the sense of what the parties host appeal strategy is going to be or what their plans going to be the l trial for has to be dealt with even if it's reversed outright but again the the appellate in that case should request three man because they know they've got this feeling they're getting if he doesn't i say they have a far better argument that there's something though in all those other cases it was basically the same situation a reversal led to a party not being able to do something in the trial court after the reversal concept of how do we reconcile the ability to afford restitution with a rule that says when it's reversed you can't do anything else has to do anything if my cl that had nothing to do with the turnings fees for the prevailing party and didn't have to consider attorneys fees for the not revealing party even though it might have been proven there was part of the answer f
your recapture remains what's wrong with that decision well the the only practical effect to this decision would be you know returning the property to his pri owner and unwinding over the mortgages and deciding what the value of the new improvements that are situated on the premises there weren't there because of the at the end of the day damages would be for the wrong that was committed in the us a room committed because there was evidence presented even more substantial in the trial room here and the title so why are you asking for a fee titled interest because my client hid country interest in the property and also hid interest in a partnership that was the stalest for the of the partnership agreement whatever it was that there was a breach of the interest that you hello or mr post what were the monetary damages i can tell you that i wrote the petitioner in this case and it was our position in these our position then because we didn't receive notice and this well as some of the other petitioners who received in our position your honor is there since the property the net effect of the tax the order by the judge under me and his to could give a clear title to property that they never hear clear title to that the measure of damages should have been the fair market value of the property it was our position that it shouldn't in the fair market value of the property as of november first two thousand when it still could have because he did it he can get the property back for the title because everybody agreed that that can happen and honor the clear trust and big on the mortgage holder of bud first appeal didn't don't really see the last case he can't see none of this makes any sense to me frankly to redeem the property had you been given notice or to reduce the taxes paid to taxes retain property how do either of those two interests him in do with what the th market value is unless you first going to determination as to what the value of your recapture agreement is either through stipulation on trial with the parties with whom your client or predecessor but it's my position your honor they're the measure the proper relief in this case with respect to what the issues have been preserved throughout my years in this case was termination
now difference here is that the defendant has not asked us for such a brand that been prepared what the contention  automobiles and stuff like that but they got him for malpractise too and they think that there would be i know i don't i should give you a copy of this but number two on this medical malpractise in iraq authorities to point describ and you put all your eggs in one basket as they say how you did not ask the judge to say let me do this before trial and i'll be able to do it i imagine who did you have if you have but now we're sitting here with the dismissal with prejudice just and for better or worse that's over here and quite frankly if it hadn't come up this way he never privilege log the answer to the interactive story give it to judge young and say you read you can see this is my work product that's why i die i can't give it to the other side but judge young doesn't write down all he knows if you said it's  to telling him why you rely on here's a document i'm not going to wind up with an important document are how i'm going to use it or how i'm going to cross examine but here's the document is it your been a process how you're going to use it
to we need to be able to read
request revolving something to do with either this disturbance are that and so he's he's in the in the course of doing police work he's and that would that be considered executing are in force in the law if they are asked to leave i have a private property by the person has the authority to determine whether or not they want him to remain  effect i think we have first minute protection within certain limits to harm the well except in this particular instance then the pizza hut manager or whoever asks the turning to leave or not serving customers in the back my client was previously offered i believe she said to the so from it's so it's not like they were told to leave it and didn't leave the first time they at the same time as mike and i see didn't see him touch the door so is it fair to say that it would be speculat a component of this have to be that the officer was aware that she was even holding on to the door problem yes and what proof do you have of that she she wasn't looking his way how do we know that there are some attorneys there and she's trying to talk to them and she's told them to leave and they will leave and she indicated that she was to have someone come down right away she doesn't say tomorrow she doesn't say so if you look at the case law in executing force and the law this is not a case where he just wasn't uniform and responded to or transferred to prison he didn't do it or had to have some conscious disregard or or consciously knew that he had heard or with one care for the plane that is here now that the testimony is that th there are people who had clear view of jackson that have testified that he was nowhere near that so there is no conscious disregard of the conscious component is not here he testified in his deposition establish a reasonable foreseeability for the purpose of proving the existence of a legal duty it's not sufficient to show that occurrence was conceivable or very possible not quibble too much about that but you know on either two six one five two six one night oh well pleaded factual allegations are taken as true one could certainly argue that the allegation that he was not execu
fire fire fire employees or be sausan if a mistake or error was made in the processing of a homestead exemption the power is powerless to correct them if the county disagreed with the decision a particular decision in assessor and the rest of the department exclusive jurisdiction over the homestead exemption application and that there the inspector general's attempt to investigate possible just from some of the post some of your own words back to your problem very familiar with them but i think they're important well with consistently recognize that the home rule provisions of the only constitution are intended to eliminate fault moral provided by the constitution all rule humans may exercise kind current with the state any own will power that's not specifically limited or declared not a care or concern of the county of which he is an officer we are his argument is the one we've already come up with i've already dealt with that he's so separate from the power that extra territor an argument that we have as we have seen that runs hair on it a section for he of the constitution runs into that constitutional wall that's the second thing wrong with the
quickly this was the site of the university station where you again this was an actual slightly looked at the mean time we just kind of some of the facts from one project was being reviewed just to give some parameters what we're really looking for new revenue it had that initial estimate of how many children may come to the source so we have talked about how the money starts coming in we need to be careful that we have funds set aside to handle those direct costs so i guess we have an influx of  the ratio of that of our staff to population but you know there are some that assume we mention west and i mean foxboro and frankly his is also quite similar i mean that's what you know where we find similarities with find differences for example there are shared station so we tried to break that out in terms of space again in terms of who's in the building and who's out i mean again that becomes tricky because yes we're out on patrol but we process arrests in the station we process reports stations so  you know during the day there are more officers in the station because you have admin staff you have the court prosecutor and so forth who's in court with them back and he does double duty given tosser again some of those become rather amorphous really there's no jobs that exist really i mean other than say you know the records clerk for instance where you can say well she's never going to be off the street she's always going to be inside but the police officers you know that's going to vary they may spend an entire shift in the station if they're working on a sexual assault case from the ship before they may be on the road the higher percentage of the ship that they're going to call to call as we see decrease calling so i mean we can certainly look at anything but that's just some of the challenges in there around that the number of people that are looking to use it for the future as a model for other towns to go up right now we have an opportunity to really step up to the front of the plate and with this project and the state will be giving us money to go for products
simultaneous right i don't know what to say about that i just think given that over half the town residents use the schools i argue that we as a resident where they want that they would commit more away with that all right thank you master this discipline or anything like that it just started off because i want to do this one simple thing i want to make something that was fun for myself and my sisters and i wrote this little program and then basically just had a little detour and i wanted to learn something new o and i know it can be intimidating a lot of things are intimidating but you know what it is a lot of the kind of people do is actually a fairly simple it's it's more about the process of breaking down problems then you know your multiplication tables of you because you have to be genius or eat even if you want to become a race car driver played baseball or you know build a house and all of these things have been turned upside down my software but it is you know computers are everywhere you want to work in agriculture do you want to work in entertainment do you want to work in many factory you know it's just all over and
can tell you but i don't know if she worked for me some of the time the rest of the time much more on find somebody else and ask them i'll tell you this if i don't hear what i want to hear from you i'm going to bust you just as heavy as i can  just as it came about a week ago nobody knows where she went something on the way down to is there anything else you want to tell me i don't want you wandering around where i don't want to argue with you all right you didn't answer the question i can move out go someplace else what's wrong i think i'll go for a ride if you know and he stayed up there for about fifteen minutes and then he come out again and then the other girl laura she came back at two o'clock and then a little while later you two guys turn well did you see him no i didn't see him i went out he followed me what's going on mick i told you to stay home you don't tell me ok let me talk to him because i'm interested in you and it's only natural to want to know what it's about people one is going to be involved with don't you think i don't do this nothing we all have to pay for the important moments in life tell me about yourself what about your parents do you believe in god i just i want to hold on doesn't that feel i can't explain it it's nothing it's just a feeling i have right now i can't get out to meet with anybody who could meet me you know he i never really had any sort of a friendship with a woman in my life we met almost a year ago things are pretty bad i already had one breakdown i was on  way to another this guy was when i was very involved with him but it was a very nice   looked up she was there she'd seen the whole thing and she came out she talked to me changed to that was happening to me i didn't have to tell her anything just understood it all she took me back to your apartment to make coffee and we talked know could you identify the guy that was  you is everyone in position please and three others didn't want to to help
them and that may or may not be the case that may or may not be fine but what about a proof of service on your petition for modification there's just absolutely no indication know the parties agreed that extraordinary circumstances would have to exist they really would only mr guys and you could modify the remains and the supreme court is cited in the  time the score owner reversed home mr guy's he's affiliated with his wife's business but he independently develops his own business he's responsible for his own business expenses and his fair share of the general  expenses that was his testimony after the first remained and this court found be credible all that happened different the third time around is that the numbers were actually plug notably mr geithner couldn't explain as to how the accountant or his wife got to the numbers they were charged against his gross income or his group's relatives in order to get to his magic portion which means he's also paying for portion of his own match which is the obligation of the employer to the federal government as well as his men working matches so security medicare so all the other ways health insurance for all the demonstrate that the expenses that are deducted from his gross income were reasonable necessary for the production of income he didn't even know how those numbers were gotten to he testified that he has no idea what the input was he had no  expenses or debts incurred that relate to the production of income if you're going to claim those expenses it's necessary that you present the evidence that those are in fact real necessary that their debts they never he never opener it is the credibility of the industry and she thought he was going to open up all these doors to the extent that he does all those things i think that a reasonable  thousand dollars and he was trying to cheat margaret finian and were buying one thousand dollars a month in child support when he had absolutely no history of doing anything of that of either one of those measures
but i saw that i think the guy was i think in a sense yes but even beyond that with respect to the prior owners there is no evidence whatsoever i mean in order to prove adversity in that really  that the correct test for opening notorious is whether the humidity in the vicinity of the land of issue is or could be prized by defendant's possession and exclusive use and enjoyment again it's not the same judge of subjective knowledge of the owner it's not the go and you of for the search as they did actually in two thousand and eight and all they had was their engineer go out with a with a metal detector and found the water so so in this case particularly the existence of the harder it in this case it's not a rural it's not a wild land what we have here is a mess of an area in peoria which is found on one side by north university street which is heavily traveled around on other sides by major apartment complexes we haven't touched on yet is the experience and expertise of mr and bro as a real estate to him as a real estate expert and i think that was very important to judge judge sure also mr burrell is a licensed real estate broker she considers herself she admitted in her in her testimony that she's an expert in the buying and selling in a crazy a real estate which leads one to believe that she should have known leave the fact that the hundred was there she should have at least gone to investigate the existence of the water  think what you can assume your honor is that it was it was an adverse use one might just one might think that the water main would be moved but i want to merge with decided no we're going to stay here we have a right to be here and we're not going to move because it's expensive to move a water meter and we haven't introduced evidence in this case because that's the images that are not at issue at this point it's very expensive to move a water main so the nightmare committed conscious decision back in ninet not contact the utilities in connection with that case the conclusion of the court was that the utilities were known owners and therefore the quite title case did not apply to them and that that reasoning also makes no no logical sense can a lawsuit filed against the new owners constitute an objection to the presence of the court found that they were known as in by calling him the no no this is just logically inconsistent
there's a there's a difference i think between physically surrendering his license in the state saying that he's licensed has been suspended for purposes of the secretary of state continue to the future date there was no motion final rule motion filed or anything on the record indicates the state asked for leave on october twenty third to do that but in the course of the november tenth motion reconsider the prosecutor did need to bottom boxes and chaff and if you actually look at the summary suspension in this case it wasn't checked at the bottom there was no reference or offer to correct the date of the notice and as for the states argument that made the officer act the clerk of the circuit court the officer of the state it's a defect this one important point so the defect is there is a stable cover she asked him to and it properly and they do not go into suspension until something comes back properly in this case the secretary stated that catch starting in thirty days so i can cover the case before i go to town it's just a simple set period they have the course of how will that it's inappropriate period to give the date for the suspension to start that's the north sea received this in a warning
familiar with the city of decline i meant that the mayor but i've been down there this roadway main street runs through the middle of the city on each side of the main street are a little shops and u is the fact that there was a police officer james booker he was the chief of police of the city of the corps and he just happened to especially the question is this not the question the statement is this the city had to do the city was the engineers the city the city also had notice of this situation because in years past the same situation was happening this is a
no you don't ok right i kind of wish i had come to talk to mr dunn about is what happened here i mean which is essentially the fact is that the point to file a complaint against the defendant your ip our history in regards to of reach or a motion with the court rule is that the court was going to allow the motion with the understanding the plaintiff would be refiling him in the complaint and allow the plaintiff and bowen both parties technically not to proceed with discovery for ninety days in order to would say that's that's not entirely accurate i believe that we thought that there were additional facts because when we discussed it with the judge reversed the two six fifteen motion and i mean also we believe that the count the point that we filed it's our position that it did state a viable cause of action claim there was no reason to do that at that point i mean it was something where it wasn't just mr president i mean the case was the thing in our mind i mean we were given the opportunity to obtain additional information from the defendant in order to more so that is that is the way that we're looking at this is we believe we stated what we believe are sufficient facts to student cause of action however we would you know we believe that there are more facts out there that would allow us to see you more specifically state as a get into a fight with a coworker and like my boss comes to dissipate you're fired i know i got fired you know i mean i know what was going on i don't what happened i mean i think the most terminations are are pretty straightforward whereas i don't believe the facts in this case are straightforward a mean this was a situation where the gentleman were you know were seasonal employees but they were called back every single year and when when that the winter season they were for the part just so they work outside you know i mean when at the end of the season they will if i will see in the spring they call it in the spring you know when we start a fire what you're fighting over ok you know i mean to me i mean i don't think this is a typical you know situation where i mean you're looking at a situation where you know a person can sit there and and actually go into court and honestly plead hey i don't know what happened you know so i would i would say that you know i can't i mean i can't speak to don't know because we don't have the information i mean that's the one of the we're not denying that you know but it's up you know i mean i guess i'm just looking i believe that you know the intent of the trial court in this was to say ok let's do some discover this come back and there's  and we're asking that this court find that the
morning there will be a one mile race to children at ten o'clock and then it will commence over at the high school parking lots from ten to three and look to see everybody there so please do the best motivational will cooperate will work on th