MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
legal so so when does the theater have an obligation to raise the house lights is it a minute before the end of the film when people start walking out if it's a bad film and people are leaving or does the theater have an obligation or duty to raise lights when people start moving all the i i'm a little frustrated with apple not because this thing the facts is in my opinion hopefully and yet but you're representing to this even before you get started mr compton i'm really disappointed in the quality of the brief that this court got me and i'm hoping my class will maybe cause you to do a little better job next time as i as i read your brief i understand that you're not claiming there is disputed facts that would negate the court's ruling on summary judgment you are challenging the court's ruling as a matter of law that there is no duty to raise the houselights until after the credits are done  wants to leave but i'm guessing there's a contractual obligation for them theater to play that movie until the end if the theater to raise those house lights and nobody can leave the credit i'm guessing there would be a breach of some part of me being that with a company that provides a movie the fact that people do get up where the employees do come in when the lights are down i don't feel to see all that needs a duty to raise the lights because people choose to move before the credits are over is there a one of the elements of duty is foreseeability reasonable foreseeability so we would be looking at factors that might suggest what's reasonably foreseeable and as
inherently a crime involving moral turpitude because of the peculiar dangers that may be involved in the thefts however a matter of them a board decision that's direct them point and at that recently has been cited to by the district court and long be i good law and in fact responded does not contest that this remains good law and the reason for this is that there may be nothing inherently in moral based violence or just prayed and simply breaking and entering  the record of conviction and although the immigration judge did so the board did not uphold them on that point so the fact of the matter is that this court reviews only the final administrative decision and that is the  to be but now there's an additional requirement of two years of after having been lawfully admitted in some status so the difference really is not that great  imputed to a child here the term status is not really defined in the act but it's common legal meaning is one of standing state or condition and both congress and the courts of recognize the particular vulnerability of children in the immigration removal statute was an act of to authorize the attorney general to forgive the immigration consequences of criminal conduct in specific cases where where precise statutory criteria are m originated as stated narrow for relief for aliens who are not subject to deportation if they remain in the united states but if they leave and then try to come back again they will be excluded and she  the board session is not expressed they refer to modify categorical approach or discuss the underlying cleave remain or anything like that however i mean that the case comes to the board in the context of an appeal raising specific issues manner or not and whether that parent later files and pursues an application congress recognizes that children are not usually responsible for their own awful status in this country section eighty nine b three of the act
farley as a fundamentals effect which inherently results in a consistent carriage of justice articulated another way the standard is whether the violation of the statute or rule rule occurred in the context of other aggravating circumstances the dressing room is outside just outside thank you very much i'm sorry you know that's
ally don't i say with all sincerity some time you forget about time and you really forget about many things that surround you l r you're only thing of that moment are things that you have dreamed about now they are beginning to happen and you're a part of that you one of the persons that's making it happen we want to really follow the stories that we're always charging buying on credit i myself used to go into the stores maybe buy three kinds of meat and we would take the news and wait and see how much he overcharged his main reason for wanting to start up and some were buying  there so that welfare clients for not have to go back buying food on time because we found that one of kind when it more food for ten dollars when she went to pay her bill the ville had gone up five dollars versus our main purpose of feeding these people for a whole month so that when they got the checks on the first of the month that they wouldn't have to go back into debt trying to stop this trying to stop th this committee in the past month has raised to my knowledge several thousand dollars to provide free food for the welfare recipients  pipes really brought the committee more closer together i always felt i was no one to someone that wants to come in and like to talk to the mothers of to be sort of careful of what they say because these women aren't just and a month later here we were getting money from some of the same people wanting to buy and it really gave me really did something made me feel very good you know had people really wanted to come across that the parents of today do not make a way for the children of tomorrow and they'll be winding up in the same fix that we're in now and my main purpose is so that they may not have to go on welfare rolls
and others have a grass is not involved number one an arbitration clause imposed on an employee as a condition of employment and likewise does not involve an arbitration clause involving a civil rights claim or a jury trial has been waived cruelty which was the burden hill that has to be cornered by both the district court and mr heigham and is that they have to show with positive assurance that this agreement is not even susceptible to interpretation that company's papers are you presented with a provision that needs to be interpreted construed or apply if you're not and b if you take a close look at the complaint that appears to be based almost if not entirely primarily upon representation of those that were made  i think the substance of the complaint if you read the complaint appears to be from reading it that he was promised certain things or only and he received certain representation is in writing about what a start it would be they sound to me if you look at the complaint come completely extra and outside of the circuit self it's only if you take those representation and make those a political that you would then have to go to the plan for this mechanical calculation so i think there is really you have been pointed to nothing there's nothing  record that indicates a provision that has to be construed by an arbitrator something talking about application i mean damage calculation but even if we were to agree that maybe that reading might be a better interpretation than the one that we've put forward or maybe it's even the best interpretation that's not really the role of the district court or this court at this level to determine whether this is subject you have to be able to say with positive assurance resolving all doubts that there is no doubt that this was meant to be excluded and i believe that that's a very difficult to say given the fact that this agreement says that any disputes are go about having this resolved in the midst of him being a witness for the litigation but we have talked about it briefly and you know i'm one of those people it's always up for i'm trying to get case is resolved
perhaps stress and work and one of the things that it does is it talks about the differences just supervision and part of what it talks about  court doesn't have any more questions on that issue i would say that it does say as to whether or not this was harmful and as i said the district court had to make its own findings to find that it was her last that is does mention that she would require some limitations in interacting with others in the workplace and there was more i think a general restriction and i think that that encompasses supervisors in there but i think as we know in our brief and i think that circumstance where she was wholly unable to do so is simply not relevant and i think it's also given it is it isn't that the concern that ail j didn't find that she did occasionally work with the supervisor only found that he could occasionally work with her coworker know the agents are to finding those include restrictions to casual contact with the public coworkers and supervisors ok and so that's what the energy found but i think beyond looking at the ruins recognized by the agency and by this court and and looking at the social requirements for all these occupations in a field he as we know in our brief this report points out none of these jobs require any talking and most only occasional think that's not the circumstance present in your yard because nobody can nobody is disputing that she couldn't interact occasionally the supervisor miss hart of not challenge the yogis evaluation of the psychiatric impairment so there's no disputing that she could interact on  question here and while we we can speculate about what may or may not happen the question is still whether we have substantial evidence of forces on disability finding and if you look at the vocational expert's response of testimony to the hypothetical noted significant and dramatic improvement in the rest with the word symptoms and they no claim of ability to perform a wide range of of activities including travelling to the hawaii travelling to the mainland performing short inside and outside the house and because those
my name is stephanie sigmund and i'm here on behalf of the government at the outset i want to focus on some of the issues that were mentioned by it helen's counsel that were actually on the stake and in the description of sorry two hundred twenty four where he's asked how long the iran was continuing their nuclear weapon development and that was not based on just his own knowledge but was based upon reports of the international atomic energy been secretly developing it for now a nuclear centrifuge facility that was designed for one purpose and one purpose alone and that was for the development of nuclear weapons not purchase nuclear energy but for the sophisticated because he did not remove the serial numbers the us manufacture serial numbers on the pressure transducers now this fact the fact of the rule of the serial numbers was something that mr chang government indicated that when the parts were exported from the united states to the people's republic of china before going on through on mr chang would go into the free trade zone o because of the instructions that they discuss it would be they didn't want to get caught so they don't want to have a huge number of x number of exports and quantity any single export and then the the export scheme was highly our medical center futures and if that wasn't necessarily a nuclear centrifuge with regards to the other dependent it was mentioned he did not know who had any knowledge of the parts going t he didn't know that they went to an authorized and losers in the people's republic of china but he did not intend any knowledge and the record is clear that any part is going to iran that was taken sped was something that chang did know as well as really and and how easily he knew about with who the end user was and again the key to this case is very weak it's outside the heartland of the cases that the two the five
going back into the country perhaps under the mistaken belief that he had permission to do so which of course is not a defense that there is no sort of commissions entry into the united states so there really wasn't anything to corroborate his admission that he was born in mexico other than a mexican passport that was issued in los angeles by the mexican consulate there the next issue is whether or not  the united states from the base illustration based on the fact that there has but was actually issued in los angeles and i think we can only speculate that being a number of reasons why someone who was in the united states would want a that the passport and issued prior to that in los angeles here i think probably the most essential and important issue we have before the court important any alien convicted in arizona a chart of us is whether or not that's a crime of violence and or guidelines please the court my name is jeffery jacobs and i represent the united states in this case the district court did not clearly error when i found that the defendant did not qualify for a two level reduction for acceptance of responsibility in this case the court correctly concluded the defendant's prior conviction for child abuse in arizona was a crime of violence he correctly found that there was sufficient evidence to deny the world twenty nine motion and it also did not abuse its discretion in allowing the parties to brief the to issue two of the issues before the court right now accept the responsibility and whether or not the defendant's prior child abuse conviction qualifies as a crime of violence i want to addressed one of the questions that  effects he has to essentially give a forthright admission to each and every element of the offense it appears that because the burden is on the defense in this case to show that he accepted responsibility that essentially he was looking for journal cation he wants to argue that he was portraying essentially if you look at this he's portraying an image for the jury sure i was yes i am a mexican citizen but i consider there's a difference between what the united states has to prove that the defendant is an alien that he was deported to deported from the united states and that he illegally enter without permission from the united states government that's what the united states has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant has something different to show with the acceptance of responsibility the burden is on the defendant show that he accepted responsibility the district court noted that it has found that in certain circumstances the application i was very clear in rare circumstances depending tend put the government with the burden of trial and still accept responsibility show genuine contrition where he's trying to preserve  didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt but neither expected responsibility for each and every element to the crime and did so with a forthright admission as your argument that if you go to trial and g we've got credit for some things responsibility if you say and convince the judge you know i really did something wrong i profoundly regret it i'm sorry for
this is your home room and you official class be sure to get here on time each morning we have opening exercises and hear news of important school events i'll be glad to help you with any problems you may need in school judy that's right we go to a different teacher for every subject your mathematics teacher is mrs jackson in room three o seven your social studies teacher mrs ryan will meet you in room two fifteen mr stone is your science teacher and his room is three ninet this is your music teacher she is in the room one seventeen the boys will have health education with mr robert and the girls will have mrs williams for health education most of you will learn to type electricity shop will help you to understand the application of electricity in our industrial world that's a signal to get ready for passing closure notebooks the boys were lined up in front on the side project and to think critically the humanities as well as the physical sciences in the junior high school program under the name social studies students learn ideas and facts important industry geography did democracy grow in the new world but there's no studies where the pupils are prepared questions on this typical unit designed to give them an appreciation of their american heritage th questions came up in an earlier lesson and after studying their textbooks the class secretary writes the questions as a basis for class work social studies taken by every information for the committee report this practice should help them to from lifelong habit of turning to books for any information they need the children are trained to use the school library and to consult with the school librarian in their search for knowledge the children are also directed to the local public library and the girls and transportation bring the most distant countries ever closer to what analogy of geography becomes increasingly important children are taught how to use maps and globe how to develop map reading skills to think and to retain geographical information other big changes are occurring in teaching foreign languages in the junior high school many students now begin languages in the other begin foreign languages in the one here listening and speaking really high school teachers are trained in special subject areas so that each one can get expert help in every part of the curriculum this expert teacher of home economics is helping her class to pair th field as in all of the subjects it is important to plan efficiently everyone has a better appetite when he sits down to eat in a clean pleasant setting the food is so good that the cooks enjoy it to learning about the materials and steps needed to make different kinds of objects is related to the complex world of work in our business an industrial society the boys with the plastic print electric w many lifelong habits and many careers get started in the projects and discussions conducted in the practical hot zone of the junior high school
to find the petitioner lacked credibility rather the government group presents matters of confusing irrelevancies in some cases court for my clients credibility regarding the ages of some of her five children and essence your honor so this amounts to quibbling as to whether one of those children was fourteen fifteen or sixteen years old it's very poor practice to make from lack of detail in the application a test of credibility and wiped out of life testimony and i wish you would not think that was much of a case that you want to contradictory her make you maybe you may argue that that that if you had been arrested you would have put it in the application but is that you can argue that it's contradictory to something in the application with the attitude of this immigration judge and the type of cross examination he put this woman to because she fled the country and left her children there he accused her of making her children slaves because they continued to live with the family she had worked for and they helped out a lot of the family paid she said for her trip was helping to raise the children and the children were helping the family he said she said how can he do that turn your children  hundred four three her five children were able to remain in ethiopia unharmed they like her should have had any access to information about her husband if the police were interested in that and four other relatives and her and her employer where she lived and worked and her husband visitor also have as to how to prepare one of these forms and and based on my experience with this client i come into it a lot later in the picture but with other clients as well they don't know that they're supposed to quote unquote throwing the whole kitchen s and in some instances in the case is where a female has been raped depending on her ethnic background or religion she is not portables conveying that to to anybody else or to the public mind here it not that she was wasted filling out a questionnaire that asked about her or any member of family been mistreated or threatened and after you have boxes to check it's a specify for each instance details ok answer those questions and the answer is please see attached an attached doesn't bog anything about her being arrested so she's not answering the question or not providing details she's asked for and i understand the limitations and and how these people are forced to deal with an alien system and they're not the ones actually preparing these affidavits and so forth but at some point you can't disregard the fact that someone comes up with testimony at a hearing that never about something dramatic that never appeared before some suspicion that maybe it's being pulled together at the hearing and didn't really happen right on your honor unfortunately i was not at the lower court hearing i only came in at this level but i will say again i unfortunately and i don't know how to delicately put this but the representation that my client received earlier on was less than ideal as she was represented by a lawyer who has subsequently resigned from the
point there's a difference between motion and an argument you can bring that you can bring a case in compassing motion and only argue would you think needs to be argued and the other side comes in and says wait a minute flowing to  property and therein lies the fundamental core holding in gentilly the core did not did not find the liability covered under the policy the court explicitly and with certainty explained and i quote possession of twenty seven automobiles and the profit to be made on those vehicles drip loken to answer your question there was no remained on the images in fact the trial court very clearly articulated what the damages work and i point the thousand dollars per vehicle and therefore determined that there were twenty seven different occurrences because i'm twenty seven different times the dealership parted with the car and so the damage award against the carrier plain reading of the policy reveals that gentilly means business personal property includes automobiles in its possession when they are help for sale there and lived by the district court granted summary judgment on this issue that fees use me is because it's not like the libby coverage this notion that a financial institution bond provides liability coverage is not the subject of substantial debate it's been addressed by the st circuit the st circuit the th circuit and the th circuit all of which agree uniformly that when you're dealing with a liability the financial institution doesn't apply that is picked up under a different coverage core had that coverage in this case they bought a the simple math of it is that they had two million eighty eight thousand dollars worth of settlements and they received who one million from excess up the simple math reveals that the eighty thousand dollars remaining what the subject of this  and sixty five now that case involved the very same language we're dealing with here a financial institution by the resulting directly standard and like the insurer does in this case the insured in the bank insured case a proximate the mere fact that you imply proximate causation doesn't automatically mean there is coverage for everything related to fraud in this case there was no heat from core these rd parties impacts that they suffered a institution bond does not cover liability now as to insuring clause one i just will make my comments brief because i think the district court got it squarely right we moved for summary judgment on the in prior d of the case gentle we need doesn't create a split of authority on this issue the only other point i'd like to make is on the retail ventures case i will note that it is also not a rd party last case that case all the cyber breach and coverage for costs incurred evidence i saw the cross reference to the indictment in the complaint i didn't see that you have a dents in the record were those direct solicitations were being made of customers or were there were inducements being made