MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
it is a in existence or has been properly extinguished in this case the trial court completely ignored the requirement of a moment checked by final that republicans banks mortgage on the rose now under the plaid act with regards to the roads that meant that it was in fee simple it also under section three says that the acknowledgment of recording shall be held  regards to all the roads and there's actually more specificity with regards to the water reason mincer never had etc because there's also a provision on the back of it that more clearly defines what those easements are meant to be made the ranger roads it's something that we we think we've already we accepted but if we did and we accept now yes thing like that i think there is that i mean i think probably has more evidence on that that could be developed a trial but beyond that to what is here is that first of all  and similar i think to filing action on it for it to declaration of it it shows that the village is accepting the interest and i will see if if the village defends an instant action you're viewing that is not you're defending self correct and i think you're if the general station fees i think we've actually got into it further i mean if it does go back then we probably be getting into the annexation of grimm and the fact that it was required to have roads going through the whole process i'm limited to the wrecker with the two six one one at this point in time what i think this comes down to though really is public policy in terms of what does it mean when acceptance because the public authorities we have to accept something they are there something taking on responsibilities to insult the law doesn't impose that on the public body that's correct in this case because it somebody would have the burden of caring been argued in this case i don't think i mean that you know there is some indication that that the for cause proceeding is as a practical matter i revocation of the offer to dedicate the property in the right and also for closing it was him with the idea of reap excepted improvements as being completed we have accepted the dedication where it is but not the completion  are also special service areas on them that go with it it is trying to keep some order with it i mean there is a part of me candidly at times the sad if these gravel if there is something else worry me is is you have to follow the you know before you ever get to section three which i'm sure is a powerful section you have to have this somebody accept this and you have to have  notice of foreclosure a statutory notice is hold anyone taking an interest in the real estate takes that interest subject to the form hoshi reaction at the  have a truncated record here we don't know what's going on i certainly don't agree that the rolls are ninety five percent down or ninety percent are just the final left ok are my information is directly to the contrary but the trial court them under the law and under our mortgage would have a portion of our collateral meet in appropriate and that's that's why we're here it's too difficult for banks to make unique runnings these days not just
what is the basis for contending that the record would have been expanded and defined if they had recognized me existence of past persecution what's the basis for saying that there would be more evidence is
treatments there are three pieces of critical interrelated evidence that was excluded by the tribal trial courts in the first that are defendant depended factor to neo this test test that decision that a standard of care is read a reasonably prudence doctor a professional would do in the same or similar circumstances and his statement to miss the kitchen that he should not have performed that surgery in the rate of right mainly on the fact that plaintiff did that happen experts as to standard of care and breach really did two surgical procedure right when you were two thirds malpractise in the surgery no practices who comprehends that a search and should not be performing a procedure when their mental that specifically in that discussion and i think it was a running theme in many of the pretrial discussions that this issue as to his a amounts and color of the fluid that was in the training and there were no diagnostic tests performed at all until plaintiff was hospitalized about a month after the surgery right there's a gap of evidence upon which these opinions failed to find their condition was the result what happened during the surgery and just one final traits of this defendant's conversation with miss our kitchen was not a mere apology or condolences you not simply say i'm sorry it's happen
i mean the case was dismissed i mean you could avert your appeal as a final judgment there are issues with regard to if you wish to get into that i raised my third because it is good but i think maybe those are issues that might be better server to the  thread by asking a question just on the final point part of the opposing counsel line on the jurisdictional issues even you said that we've got jurisdiction under three or seven a one
place the court ridges schafer pumped gasoline in the same full service gasoline station for over twenty seven years and as a result had a long chronic appeal are both sellers of gasoline and i think the easiest way to visualize this relationship is if we thought of boxes of maine fashions of gasoline with an manufacturers the ghastly they sold to richard shavers employee and number two is there question of fact as to the duty or the standard of care of these both suppliers of gasoline in other words is there a question of fa as to whether they should warn their customers stations the first issue relates to the why is the seller succession statute which is section two dash six to one against the non manufacturing defend should be dismissed the defendants in this case provided a list of manufacturers from who they purchased gasoline they could have kept such records and taken advantage of this defense but but they did and that would have been fine because it plaintive could have substituted the be easier shells of the world for these irrelevant if there were no records to match the shipment to manufacturing the second thing they say is that by providing a list of gasoline manufacturers the ball is through and to play this quarter play they should have sued these amount and in that concept with all due respect is not alone in this case in that all of those cases deal with a scenario where both the defendant plaintiff both knew the risk from very a period of time and it really what it does is it also kind of reflects one of the other issues here and that is probably unification and we talk about you know the negligence kind of and that's a new reason and basically the only person talks about tax or says he never know how close to get the important thing is not whether they made a nickel or dime per gallon gas but the important thing is they said at that station of bill and they wish to check in return and that was not in a position to keep records they were and it's their defense so they want to use the defense they should cut the records and we would have been happy to have a big or little defending and instead respectfully disagree that there's no evidence in this case not the present in the briefs that whatever evidence that was required by the government which was was was passed on there's no evidence of that whatsoever in fact in fact the one of the proposition that you know you just go make more litigation i mean a bunch of food tensional manufacturers doesn't do it justice and it can't possibly be that the policy concept behind that statute
used for the children's college education period there were no exemptions there were no additions so over the years the judgment also require mr  made with regards to the nature of this encounter but it's also not right even if the child could pursue it on her own behalf because she hasn't reached the age of twenty two and the young child hasn't gone to any at all yet she's just starting now so it will be four years for all the location expenses and then what might be left over after the payment of all college admission expenses to be divided between the two children i there is the follow paid for excess of what daughter or the older daughter and got into a yelling match with each other over a period of two hours in which the mother told daughter numerous occasions get out acrobatics and get out and she did exactly that that's what the mother asked for that's what the daughter did clearly the bottom didn't have any involvement and that there is an argument about secret bank accounts and secret cars and secret cell phones clearly the cell phones now secret because the same day ask that the child be returned and missouri police would not help because the job was over the age of seventeen and misery now the trial in all fairness was not going to get in the middle of interring what work with regard to this from the time the child moved out in june of two thousand and sixteen up until the time john graduated from high school in june of two thousand and seventeen the job of the army murphy and father was or year she graduated from high school and i find disingenious the mothers are three now at this point in time that even though she's not contributing one penny to this poor child for the last year but somehow the child's needs will not be met that will be an argument from harming her to me if she were not receiving sufficient reimbursement from the father which she has the struggle through the judge set up for purposes of encourage his daughter in violation of every
enter into any type of  it you shall not allow be in the or f m f n a a which everyone to you know build the facilities and then let them be reimbursed with or met or give them
noon and before we begin i have a motion that i would like to make so i will turn the presiding gavel over to my colleague judge roast and and i w a tremendous job for me i'm fully familiar with his qualifications he's been an outstanding clerk has made a great contribution to me and to the court and i'm delighted to have the opportunity to move his admission to the court with that the formal motion is as follows i move the admission of brian christopher nash was a member of the bar in good standing of the highest court of texas or graduations and welcome all right the first case of this afternoon is appeal number zero six seven three eight three reset versus a department of veterans affairs council will come forward and as before for the benefit of all of all of the council who are here to argue cases i'm sure you're all aware of the fact that we do record these arguments and they are posted on our internet web site and so for the benefit of those listening to the oral argument on the website and for the assistance of the court in correctly pronouncing your names if you will enter an appearance as you approach the lectern i would appreciate that and it seemed to me there was a very thorough discussion of all of the evidence including the lay evidence and the discussion and consideration of the weight to be given to that evidence when it went to the board the board's opinion is a little bit more cryptic and it's a little bit more difficult to discern exactly what the board did or did not do in terms of evaluating that evidence and interested in the enough it seems to me that as the case moved then to the veterans courts the veterans court opinion becomes even even more cryptic so the question i have is first at the at the board  what in the board's opinion suggests that the board did not take into account all of this lay evidence and did not give the lay evidence whatever credibility it deserved relevant to the inquiry or officer before the board you know if you have to put it in the context of the whole record it's not just the sister the kids are really happy to but the question was what in the sincere statement is beyond a time of my guess when they mustered out that he'd had asking for some three or five years before on the asthma came intermittently so there'd be some weeks or months when he wouldn't be affected an all in there the other twenty one there are medications apparently to decide whether under this case well i don't have the authority to decide whether this lay evidence was either competent on the one hand or sufficient on the other do i i think that you have already to require describing mr sets behavior and we would like someone who is capable of making a medical opinion to simply refer to this back and decide whether somebody who engaged in that activity that they're putting on the record is consistent whether inconsistent w not should should be the same should it not in it either but to put an original claim for a service connection or in a request to reopen proceedings were new and material evidence but it
in substantially the following for it doesn't say exactly the five for it says substantially so couldn't it be read that if the defendant is named i problem because i'm not in any way a party here which was named on the actual complaint and that complete is what states the issue that she needs to address why why use it is substantial compliance that she was notified of what was going on in knew that she had certain obligations ok and again you're on record there there are  we not use the complaint against the reference point for the others and not the words why or why shouldn't we be able to take that phrase which has critical or meaning and get that meaning from  just now and the issues i think would be better served if we break this down but first there's a question as to the form of a summons versus the method of service a lot of the cases cited by and defended and a lot of the arguments raised by the defendant at the issue of what what what's what's before this court whether it's the through the forest of the sons versus the method a circus a couple of addressing the method of service before you go on from that point is that really the case here because again looking at the supreme court case of source versus fireside price performance which he quotes and i have to give you just cool supreme notified to appear in court still in our case i think we agree that she was given notification because she was served but because her name was not there bottom thank you and says defendants to be served was actually attached is part of what is intended is exhibit because there is nothing on the face of the summons other than the clearly the name of the attorney and a phone number and address the deputy clerks signed it and it says i say it's a risk at all i for all that process server knew they could assert me they did but they could serve me i have to be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time and i certainly don't have an interest in this property so how is the threats and telephone number of the plaintiff this is attorney does at all in this situation tell our our plan to our defendant here in defendant in the summons that she has to answer or otherwise be held you know in in the fall certain that the law has certain issues related to foreclosure and cases that you do cite to counsel is correct to reflect the form of service or this service never happened because of this possible problem with sometimes here we service so since she was no or given and we assume she was given the summons and the complaint at the same time because that's what the process server i think is as you could identify that you would get this person well as a result of that we dismissed a lot of cases for lack of proper jurisdiction and the supreme court changed there so that they don't have to be speedy everybody doesn't have to be specific
was going to ask this for the sake of argument that we decide that the trial court's denial of the two six fifteen motion to dismiss the two fourteen zero one to shoot once correct but that the trial court was this to these particular so when i see issue generous those cases only stand for the proposition that under those circumstances that the trial court would rule each other way we probably would have said determination that this is of use discretion and say no reasonable person would have granted the relief of the circumstances in this situation again this morning to tell you the circumstances i will say yes it offers no guidance whatsoever it doesn't talk about due diligence doesn't talk about a mere tourist difference so the stream and the else is that we're all using even today is the relative by case law even though two fourteen one is so i do think that necessarily whenever you're talking about beginning a judgment when one usual or circumstances that there were not present in the trial court occur you're talking about balancing hardships balancing the rights of the  party that got the judgment which is the party that you know has some grievance circumstance as in this case in such i do think there's always a balancing in whether put the label of equity or outside of their exhibits for example they made the argument that david morgan purchased property in cook county illinois they made the argument that david morgan's name appeared i'm alone was the mortgage broker what they were trying to do was to show that relaxed so to speak the the due diligence stand here based upon those particular facts here and here we're dealing with a situation where consequences of its own negligence were the attorney's negligence and they're wrong in accountable for their own attorney's negligence to the extent that this petition leads that his it turns who are were negligent policy reasons behind this rule because the circuit also has similarly follow on a strict standard is the second district in in that case it's stated that deception of
played it so you might recognize the middle se
i'll be back to the bitter sue to see the sure we are going to borrow that photograph with good afternoon madam nobody will ever recognize us now i hope t you know the way the mineral springs sure i'd say it was about three hundred miles straight so it would take about a week to ride it let's get started i've got to get there as quick as possible several business of ours is leaving right now and i'm in serious financial difficulties if you haven't the full ten thousand no i have to take what i can get and i don't know what i'm going to do without the money i had planned to use it to pay off my entertainers and buy my supplies for the summer i had every available room reserved to it can't be helped mr lee i'm sorry i think offered less is let's see how you look after all these years well you've changed considerably a little heavier  find out if you know what's good for you only you'll come through with that money wise it will be just too bad i don't see what the sheriff got to say about that i'm sorry miss it's all our fault for leaving the horses in the road doesn't make much difference i guess anything else i wouldn't say that well we'll get you out of this difficult in the time give me a hand here fell oh no always on his way out that they did it with a couple of ham actors in any just very dull right round of stocks tomorrow morning will pull the job and all the dogs are out on the right we haven't anything to worry about han why you crazy those are my books and that suitcase was under the bed and wasn't all that when i went downstairs today somebody's been why didn't you tell about the knife being thrown at you when the lights went out then you know who i am there's a lot of things that and tell you just yet mary and you probably know a lot more about them tomorrow sure glad you got here here
can maybe i will it's my uncle he's in trouble and he's the only one i have to depend on if anything happened to  we've got to have more definite proof
my gringo friend tomorrow your next will be considerably longer it's my uncle he's in trouble and he's the only one i have to depend on if anything happened to  we've got to have more definite proof
it for a while and this is the best except i should a set me up there were you sitting under the tree all right i saved this song until everybody is here now maybe everybody's not here but we're go see everybody's here you have a part to sing it is to echo some kind of silly things that i say so let's say i go lived on top of the mountain we out in the remote place with his family and his grandma and the only way they could get to town was to drive down around round and round and round and round and then down the mountain on her little  she's made down the mountain on right after that i got nothing better see that really loud like you're prayin real hard when i think  everybody still on your bottoms with your legs prostrate you don't want to fall backwards when i go you fall run more toward me let your head go then as far as it will go and all he you didn't know that one but now you heard the next time you hear it next time you hear it you'll note a little bit and i don't have an emotion so i appreciate what you were doing know i have a song we can do motion it's getting kind of weird it's getting a little too hot and it doesn't feel like it but overall the temperature of the earth and when it gets a little too hot  or a lot of living being the we have to start to get along with burning fuel that way and if you can ride your bike instead of drive a car if you can turn around and do those motions for the people out there that w with a sign that explains what they are and they're all original but i also am still passionate about doing assembly programs in your schools for elementary level program called music with a message and my flyers are also on the table for that so please take one of those to the people who book the assemblies that come in
router they just see it will be user has to do something right you agree with that yes course how is that automatically determining whether their computer communication with the internet i mean this issue in this case seems to have been teed up as a summary judgment just an intrenchments question and not on a plane construction it seems like i'm basically construction's the parties there was no dispute with exactly right but with respect to routine i mean i what we've been talking about here and what the briefs are talking about in terms of what's the first routine and what's not the first routine is that question a factor is that a question of claim construct a question of law given the term in the in the  i'm sorry to interrupt but you may say that there's no discrepancy but you just acknowledged an hour earlier conversation mr nash is calling your view of what the consists of the first routine is absurd and you're saying his is absurd so there clearly is a they when the product act or activation program shuts down doesn't it shut down the windows al