MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
sold and transferred very commonly and routinely by lenders and financial institutions and in order for the financial institutions to transfer loans it's always indorsed in blank because it's very paper just by  the argument that fannie mae did not own the loan back in two thousand and four by the time two thousand eight hundred came along and he made it a big deal so what i'm saying is it really comes down to respect a bit and purchase the property would be void that's part of the whole quiet title action  good afternoon your honor may it please the court christina miller on behalf of fannie mae the district court did correctly grant the motion to dismiss under the doctrine of claim for clues  and it certainly could have as the court noted affirmative defenses and counter claims filed on behalf of fannie mae and the federal housing finance agency in the prior quiet title valid lien a valid incumbrance upon title to the property and that jimmy jack purchased the property subject to the deed of trust so again looking back and looking at the seminal case from the same claim for relief they're trying to undermine the prior district courts and judgement in favor of fannie mae by realistic casing under is simply a new theory that looks for the exact same claim for relief there's issue that this hypothetical creates in that yes hypothetically fannie mae could have sold the loan at some point in time prior to proceeding with foreclosure but that is not i think if if the allegation was that fannie mae at or close before and had sold along before foreclosure that could have been brought during the foreclosure proceedings i think so i'm not sure that helps them i think his argument is that something could have happened since the whether jimmy jack trusts was entitled to take ownership of the property free and clear that he trusts so it's simply a nd attempt to undermine and reverse that prior quiet title ruling and you're honest this brings me back into then the issue that we have with subject matter jurisdiction right now in that when that foreclosure sale happens and the record is void of any temporary restraining order or other attempts to enjoin the foreclosure so the foreclosure rightfully fits proceeded back in august of two thousand and eighteen and when the foreclosure proceeded as a matter of law j foreclosure which is what they're kind of trying to do and so that's the challenge i'm having with your mood or your stiction argument is you're sort of you're asking us to assume the very things that jimmy jack is asking us to decide and i understand that that the law was not complied with it's simply a speculative argument without a single shred of evidence of which i'll submit to this court there is none if that was i would presume to me jack would have produced it in response of the net so even if the court found that the move argument is that's a put to the side and decided that claim preclusion doesn't apply the district court still reached the correct
our position to judge still bill's decision was correct as it was wrong for her to rule as a matter of law could not prove causation in this case you have to look at the following facts still city's procedures this case is student cities procedures require staff members of the president and excursion or sponsor fifteen minutes before the event occurs to do certain things one assist with crowd students and that's what they told the parents that they would do in their promotion literature this issue of causation creates a question of fact for the jury to decide we never had an opportunity to name the legal
that's the evidence the record look at it is the statement from the organization the screens for somali immigrants refugees they asked them what tribe he was and you said he was bound to there's nothing in the statement that would indicate that they did any independent evaluation of that others and except his statement my understanding is that this went bay area somali community so as we carry a conversation with mr hugh gang starting mispronounce at the beginning and ask the following questions to ascertain that  she found was specifically page seventy one she addressed that she could not find that he was a member of the band through clan and without membership in the band to claim he cannot establish that any harm would be on account page in mind that you're relying on to get page seventy one of the administrative records it would be page fifteen of the immigration judge decision it's the third  about the man or aspect of the idea is holding but you say basically it doesn't make any difference because the i j a found declined to make a finding that he has established membership know persecuted minority the band not withstanding she didn't make an explicit credibility crying she said she refused to find affirmatively that he was a member of the band because he did not challenge in the big guy over here you're saying that she carried in refusing to find him a member of the van to we don't get into the manner alternative fraudulent documents
much as conceded that the answer to that is that it was not contrary supreme court precedent that there is no such precedent upon which she relied and whether he conceded or not the fact is that if we look at the opening brief there is no reference to any supreme court precedent that would remotely address the situation and it which include there is no reference to a style versus mcguire the case which i cited in the ads during breaks there is no supreme court evidence evidence of the defendant's fascination with knives evidence of the defendant's statements such as death and mine things that had you know virtually nothing to do with guilt or innocence of the charge defense that is a radically different but your honor this actually brings up another point you were earlier raised and that has to do with the way in which this claim was presented below and that is that is that the court's one evaluating this and at the state court level we're not addressing there is a throwaway reference in a knife on a previous occasion and initiated a confrontation under circumstances efficiently similar to go to the jury on the question of whether it was relevant to his intent on the night of the murder and in addition to
the first question really is divided into two parts whether the court was required to give reasons for its imposition of the sentence and later did so and i think to understand that first question you have to sort through the consider punishment right nancy looking for he says that he just turned eleven i cannot conclude that there is no possibility or not even that there is no probability that the appeal was old result in either a versatile or a reduce come out exactly the same way you may well be right about that it may be society now we're going to find out if there's a way that we can incorporate you include you back in society we're going to supervise you we're going to keep your short leash and if you if you can't make it then we're going to put you back in prison either to deter your because in  be considered but it's already been considered the original sense of proceeding so if you keep in mind during the violation proceeding the purpose of supervised release which is reintegration of already  the court from considering the punishment and not why do you think it listed the others and omitted fairly well to make sure that the court at least considers those certain factors even if it considered others that at least consider these factors did not in any way preclude district judges from considering other factors and thirty five fifty three requires the court to consider all of the following factors you know imposing a sentence as discordance where as the supreme court has considered numerous times including recently in punishment it sounds as if you want to punish the person you have to start a new suit and a new criminal contract that he can be thanks back to jail for violations of the tru what i don't know what is the difference between punishment my simple way of thinking that when a court order somebody to do something when a united states district court orders somebody to do something and they don't do it and you order them to do it again and they don't do it and you were them to do it a third time and they don't do it there ought to be a guidelines and under thirty five eighty three and thirty five fifty three to impose a sanction or a punishment for failing to do that so that they get the message that ok once you're done with this and you get out of hand then you here is not a guideline range but merely a policy statement and there are different and walk art of course came down when all of the guidelines were before books and the chapter two and three and in this particular case the district court did give reasons even before we went back on the bail hearing it gave much more in the way of reasoning and analysis and that reasoning analysis can be inferred based on quote specific reason for the position of a sentence different from that described in the party statement and that's ten years after lockers and that's exactly what happened here what we didn't get was a state a statement of the specific reason why
i ask you a question it may not bear disposition to this case but it sort of leaps out from the record what's the status of mary i was parents do we know so i don't know personally there are a couple of references in the record to how they were stopped by immigration and yet there are references about past encounters all i can tell from this record is that they're currently in the united states yes they're both present and los angeles with her u s citizen b i think i would have as i said though it is the best course case and pretty close to categorical terms in terms of physical abuse this is not a case that is anywhere near the border here what we have is is abuse that is used for eighteen months during that year and a half we know that mary ellen comes home from all every day years saying that her classmates are hitting her and eating her eyes you know th least one was whether or not the government was unwilling or unable to protect her the other was whether interim relocation was possible we can't make those finding we can't even we can't even look at the record and say gee the record compels that conclusion we are findings that must be made in the st instance by the agency so how can we don't remit one issue to two and i j so so why wouldn't we at least leave it open for the i j a to determine whether or not internal relocation were possible so i think there's also another way that we can grant relief which is to say that the i j a either applied the wrong legal standard or the client didn't consider certain evidence in front of him one thing to that regularly insulted bully but she is frequently physically assaulted at least on more than one occasion when he gets to the physical is all treated as it was only one incident well i think your hon doesn't seem to be different incidents because they had tried to talk to the teacher about the remedy them i think you're right in saying that this is sort of described in the court was the one that just stopping going to school but there well i'm sympathetic to the harm experiences work and war didn't rise to the level of persecution and then he says he addresses only this one instance i want to kazan she was pushing scratched her head will exercise our discretion to tell the agency that the person is eligible here the circumstances of which we might do so but there's no rule that we have to use so i think you're right that as a general matter it's a will be submitted on behalf of the court i thank mr fu for taking his case on pro bono i thank both council for their excellent org image and briefs and will call the next case on the calendar
influence with the judges with the sheriff and no one wants to bother to do anything about the abuse that he's doing to my disabled son it's very difficult situation to deal with when the man has so much power so it is different in a lot of situations i've near my i don't have any idea of any money that my son has right now currently he probably has zero and i'm not interested in that i just want to see my son i want to take care of him he's was applying for guardianship and we really didn't knowingly he's a distant relative of my former husband but he knew about the state that was going to get my son when my son found out he was applying for new chip pastes telling me mom i don't want him as a guardian so we went to the sheriff's department to look to talk to him and find out what he might want was plans were for brad here and have him get in touch with us to explain why he wanted guardianship of bread that never happened he began to threaten us because we were in a row his head went to superior to complain and he yes so i gave her a picture of my son and i gave her a copy of this affidavit and in the saturday then i say that  you don't know me you don't know you never met my son and yet you have enough concern for humanity that you down here you flew in to find l as much as you can about the situation predatory  effects only the muscle tissue tongue is a large muscle so when you meet someone with cerebral palsy and they communicate with you they always have a heavy tongue sound and but they're just at their cognitive level is  sky high and in many cases just take a look at to take a look at stephen hawking the businesses he looks like he's severely retarded any can't use his muscles in helping and when when i discovered this guardianship situation with my son in the news is that he was experienced i went to washington i talked to office i've been to the florida department of law enforcement and i just it's it's been years that i'm i will i thought i was doing this all by myself until i went on you tube and discovered all of the other people in the state of florida in the united states that were suffering the same kind of abuses so you know i appreciate all the people that have to take an interest in my experiences and recently within judge nancy allen personally took my documents up there and i went to evander who is the chair of the judicial qualifications committee i took my son's pitcher and i took my story about  security person that got guardianship of my son and i spoke to his secretary and jay that they would do it was a federal office and they wouldn't let me into the into his area i told my story and showed my pitch a tuesday edition assistant and she said well this needs to go back to the judicial qualifications committee it has to go through the channels
distribution is a little unusual in the sense that we have  our activity nodes was something that was so stressed as something we wanted to attain this part of the two thousand one vision and we're here he certainly would call row nineteen an be that as the the community grows and more rules and more infrastructure is added it's to make it that much more difficult to keep peace with on is not the township government's responsibility to do all these successful communities are those communities where government is in partnership with the private
because they didn't include the new and the statute with the statute of limitations so it was a misleading kind of situation but here there's nothing to miss mean i like that no no i'm just saying what is the law here it's not it's a prisoner wants access to legal material
court my name is bob henry i represent the three title insurance companies which are the appellant's in this action the trial court will enter two separate orders which together terminated this matter is that correct that's correct so really what it's all about is how to construe wardens from i believe williams is absolutely paramount here both the ninth circuit decision and the supreme court is in our sick went to the supreme court decision in williams paid the tax and sued for a return correct it was you offered to settle for fifty thousand nine hundred ninety seven that's correct that's correct and for a very good reason after all he has any case like this where rather than follow the procedure which congress provided somebody has paid the sanction suit for a refund and the court has i don't care if the district court i don't care if it's a small claims court if you have any case the says you can do it the way you've done rather than follow what congress provided no other action may be brought by such because their insurers would be hit for the tax their insurers on the the ones who would be liable for the tax because they are the owners of the property and as to which you exercise a lien i mean isn't th against the homeowner sort of into the williams pattern you have to both of these cases the way you have attempted to distinguish them is you have shown that there are some factual differences and there are but i do not understand why in terms of the rationale of either williams or doug e the b s m any of these factual distinctions are material it appears that the distinctions are like trying to distinguish one assault case from another on what about seventy four twenty six they say thirteen forty six is fine and these are the controlling supreme court and make circuits assertions so just tell me i  strictly construed in favor of the sovereign whether they have a liberal interpretation of the stature of the refund statute if there are two alternative constructions you have to go with the conservative construction of think i can just briefly emphasize the second leg of this case because to make clear that we wish to sue we are super refund was both part erroneous assessment and for erroneous collection and we anything that in the state has to pay in order to get to liquidate its assets is all the closing costs would be expenses of administration so everything falls in that category certainly certainly except money that went to the heirs residue that goes through the years i think the purpose of the congress has purpose here is to make sure that that it's that the property is not unfairly taxed twice in other words if a mortgage on the house has priority over the government's link likewise it's a closing cost to the tax thousand from the record we believe all of those at least arguably and of course we need to have a trial and have that careful tracing that's required but those certainly create an issue of fact as to whether or not
better let's say if he asked for somebody other than dr witherspoon and didn't like his or her opinion put me down again and ask for another appointment where does a damn what i'm saying at the even if it was ongoing pattern that the goods actually seems to be getting worse instead of better if you look at his original offense which is bad enough is sexual contact
to counsel this is a case about removing a procedural bar to a successful post conviction petition and allowing a substantial claim to go forward under very narrow circumstances under the us supreme court cases of m were noise clan or old framework that's clearly under trivino because it's highly unlikely in a typical case the defendant will have a meaningful opportunity to raise a claim of ineffectiveness on direct appeal and that's what chris is claims of ineffective assistance could not have been brought on direct appeal because they were guarding matters that are outside of the appellate record namely conversations she had between her and her trial attorney and the advice that the that claim is raised based on the trial court's failure to conform and of informing him of a mandatory supervised release so there is a difference in the claims that each each of those defendants appeal and she raised these issues and they're for it should not be perceived really hard because she was an unsophisticated defendant now trying to my second point chris i can show invasion of thirty years and she was not informed of the day for day credits so hard time for that plea deal would have been fifteen years by going to trial she faced a minimum sentence of twenty years for murder israel's a fifteen message battery to for obstructing a peace officer there's no indication in the record that there is obstruction charges for based on dishonesty or false statement and second district in people versus freida they have found that there was those types of cases unless they involve dishonesty or false statements are not subject to impeachment so she couldn't as far as we know not even including the firing hansen that is alone enough to establish prejudice because again thirty years on home invasion at fifty percent a day for day credit would be fifteen years of hard time and murder without any
that's when i first called them i found those wires carried a message for anyone who'd listen this is a story of me on our farm my name's bob our place even the water had to be pumped by hand if we didn't have an electric wire in the home farm trying to raise chickens good enough to raid a forage club championship was one of the toughest jobs i ever tackled to use to get me down with the way my head away think like everything she did she had to do the hard way age old fashioned chain pump might be kind of picturesque the city folks visiting a day or so in the country when you have to depend on it for everything all year round is another story judy and i both went in town to central high to be specializing in home economics cooking and housekeeping his rallies are teachers and i mean they really have everything and th and i took my motor over to his house in town and sort of a workshop down the hours i couldn't wait to try it out with the roys men are installing a brand new automatic a quick water heater that same afternoon boy i would have given to see one of those going into our that afternoon i had my new motor i felt sort of like thomas edison or  the county fair that paul had everything judy and i want together and we had a lot of fun  judy one i thought it was well after all i felt it was sort of keeping it in the family first i had to hurry home and get my chores done if i was going  he had his own private office complete with shower ba you know our mother's kitchen really isn't very big but it's such an easy place to work and i was always thinking i'd like for my mother to have a kitchen like h i used to say would be the way i'd run my it seemed like every time i saw how easy it was for judy's mother duran her it made me realize more and more how far behind the times we were we had a lot of fun together in the party i don't think i'll ever forget  and driving home i began to hear those singing wire and i got to thinking and dreaming of all the things i could be to life how hard life was without i could see paul getting a new lease on life instead of going to bed with the chicken when he stopped to ask me what i was doing that was my chance to speak up i had all the facts and figures down in black and white i showed him how to farm could be electrified gradually and pa began to take some interest i showed him how we ought to begin with an automatic water pumping system for the house and farm how the average farm uses several hundred gallons of water a day  hey some of the things are pretty fancy but that water system really caught his eye when i showed him how electric milking and no cooling would help pay for other electrical appliance i proved that we could expand the farm with electrification would give us more production and more pro anyway it wasn't long before the power company was  new life was easier we were never happ be took the coming over more often than helping my folks couldn't believe it with our same old kitchen
read several times because her discovery had not been submitted to my office stipulation of these exhibits which arguably tended what was probably was involved in it and i guess my potential saving grace which quite having some equity given the facts would be that there was a stipulate exhibit
good i'm accompanied by my two good friends
so we don't