MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
worthwhile or something it is not fair for a city to take a roadway from a developer where the roadway itself is a giant impervious surface and where does the water from the roadway go will i really well considering that the remedy of raising the burden which he could easily done very little money i learned years ago that is not going to solve the problem that a lot of the condo owners that's going to solve the problem solve problem for my  so we were in a tricorder inforcing against age and now they did not post a bond that was the monetary issue but there was also the end of the mission they were ordered to perform an injunction and they did not and it was brought to everyone's attention frankly by the city what the facts are the facts are still the same the reality we never thought so we never had a hearing on the wall with a ready beat and by the way it's not really the plaintiff's obligation to tell the city how the soul it's flooding problem that it causes that we prove it causes is there a problem to do that but we hired it here and spent over ten thousand dollars that will not be reimbursed to my clients since that isn't due to burst or is our why did we do that because we really want to know how to solve the problem
to treat them as separate entities and once you've already done with i d c and the court said you couldn't get an accounting of i d c as profits which would have been a form of rental payment so now you've got this action against clambake so i'm not sure how you that same location with great success with the if you need to find there was a corporate transaction or transition find you benefited from the goodwill that they generate on not smug people land and i've demonstrated that my handy location location location location that that location is a perfect spot and that building is a perfect spot for a very successful business i can charge these bankruptcy judge  that and the judge and the judge was pretty familiar with economic issues is sitting there saying is that fair should they maybe did some more and he says no that's enough one you're saying when he said grounds that was a factual mistake you want us to find that that national mistake was material wasn't harmless and therefore infected his ultimate conclusion that would mean that reid do would judge smith said that would mean what i've gained and lost from the transaction because it wants to compare what you've gained and lost in the decide on a fair adjustment between the two it doesn't care who i paid the money to i paid it out so i  difference because reasonable assumption that conducting a very successful business at a location for a year may run against the value you have the burden of proof what evidence is they contradict that for example if you have a real estate appraiser who says this is now worth one million dollars
understand is why knowing that the that the witness had nothing guilty to attempted murder was going to help make that very clear it was a tricky theory the state makes a significant point that it was a fraud to catholics and the state actually asked for jail time at the time of the plea so how does that
explanation you know the other side travel there and was waiting for you if the weather cleared don't you think you have to explain better why you can't work harder to get your client there are twenty four here whether the record had any further explanation of the on availab mr raymond wrongdoing an incident where she believes mr penning laid his hand on her shoulder even in that incident on that particular occasion yawners when crist at a deposition she wouldn't it support in prince that she told raylan about the incident then just couldn't recall exactly what she told her about the incident included yawner but i want to mention that one of the reasons why did this report  incidents you want as it should be pointed out that this is not a situation where mrs lopez was unaware or shining a buck planing in fact she had she admitted that she was well aware of will cool's internal complaint procedure you'll see that on pages one hundred and seventy two thousand one hundred and seventy one of the records and in fact long before her allegations of sexual harassment she had a personality conflict with the female team provide any specific testimony to the fact that she had actually complained about our midst mr penang sexually harassed or armed under those circumstances your honor  burlington northern because that standard that you discordant from hughes came before burlington northern and isn't it the case that burlington northern changed the standard  an threat that would have been an empty threat and she knew it in any event he she also admitted that he actually took her to h r on that particular incident she also knew that there were multiple ways that she could complain to  was unwilling to met two critical dates which is why everything got compressed in the the disk the december january your are two to two schedule these depositions and then on top of that when we did to make ravel much time does he have any time then i wasn't given days until november but in a not working again we both could have been more diligent but it went both ways if you look at the the joint motion that was drafted by the defense on the again the fans come to wrote that we acted diligently in order to get the extension he wanted and he said that multiple attempts anyway the event that was filed by the fence kind of that we were working together and we were both busy
way that this was done by the district court was to curse find that the cases were related and then to apply to departures was wrong and that combination the court should reverse and send it back now what is the core good in finding that there was a relationship between the futures we  and as i read those guidelines she's going to be able to get within about two levels of where she wanted to go and so as a practical matter she could do pretty much the same thing you know me and you know two levels that they would come back and make it get longer prison term well i'm what i'm saying is it this response very covers any kind of behavior problems that these men may or may not of the suffering from and if you don't need to come up with some fictional idea that these are poor people from a poor country and that they somehow got the course already pointed out they have an order barred from this country and forcibly removed they have been told that they can i come back but there is no way they can come that i think they have been packed into for a pretty aggravated felony that conviction they say so the as well but i think in this case with regard to well i mean i think it's an interesting issue and i'd like the opportunity if we could some more i think this is this is not i mean i don't see how you've even have a double jeopardy argument if we're right and i think we are presence is required there may be interesting issues because that argument i guess would be present with the fact that i've been deported in order not to come back i think that the case law you know i wasn't prepared to discuss this something they're we don't have the thing i mean and it could analysis it may have been altered forever so this isn't a case that we necessarily need to use to educate judges or anybody else because we're simply in a different world now that's my question charge people with a conspiracy to possess or possession you've got to show that they somehow can't confirm at least constructive possession and that would be extremely difficult in a case of that nature you wrote in your open
sparks and i have known each other for forty years we worked for eternity brothers at arizona state university and he was the participant in my wedding thirty nine years ago we haven't had a lot of contact since that  percent of their life and sustenance to one where it had to be primarily and so by their late teens eighties they were farming nine thousand six hundred acres r in the record in this case that there has been no major fish kills which is what this report relies on to effect a bald eagle that there will be a major first kill there's no evidence in a case that's ever happened  i draw down the reservoir below seventy five thousand acre feet apply here because the preacher trust occurred then and the day to day operations of the reservoir that would result in any draw down do not create a new individualized harm under the continuing claims doctrine but well the after the there were the united states reclamation so seventy five thousand acre feet and goes to a specific contour mark on the side of the lake so there was that evidence in
feels for several reasons if they are going to impose a legitimate term like that under the constitution it's still yes to pass constitutional muster and it still has to be having a rational relationship medical office i agree that that would be a legitimate objective when this referendum didn't do that for three reasons first of all the cherry picked the offices here it says ok if you tell consecutive terms as alderman you can't run to the voters and the election so therefore it should be very catered and it should not be used in the future as an impediment to borrow candidates from getting from office if they have at least with respect to the service
three different reasons why he didn't register i mean at first he said he had and that thing must have lost it or something then he said something about that the officer signed over his other
felony convictions not them out on his side and withholding so do you agree that he doesn't have a chance for asylum or withholding he's got to prevail on catch if we get to that yes your honor citizenship the government argues that a thirteen year old threat is too remote to be taken seriously today there are several reasons why they are wrong st this was an extremely serious threat the l a p d knew the danger medical or something where but he's still not he's not in the hole right that's correct your honor that he was in a protective custody for just about a month but he was not in general population view but entirety of his prison that's correct your honor the only threat was in two thousand and eight but i would remind the court that mr wilder is not afraid of that and that will harm him in the united states because he has proof that the u s government even when he was in jail would end  protect him but in el salvador he want to have that same protection i want to see identified even after getting the threat he still continued to identify as thirteen didn't he and he got more tattoos i understand you're developing the occurrences in the american prisons but what is your evidence of past persecution in el salvador is an international criminal organization with more than thirty five thousand dollars members in el salvador we have record testimony that as soon as an m x thirteen game member is removed the game called back to the united states to learn about him diminish over time in rodriguez will an arrow the th circuit rejected a similar remoteness claim made by the government when it asserted that mexican cartels must have lost interest in a drug dealer who had been imprisoned in the most difficult thing that you have to read back from the government's perspective what they are very sorry to the government of the government the government that ok so if if he had filed when he was seventeen you would be comfortable with the fact that that would show his intent and that we could decide the case but you're saying i mean our after he was eighteen and we know that it was been granted till he was twenty one so if he filed after if he filed after he was eighteen are there other ways that he can show the him more likely to be tortured or not and then also given that the i c found the petitioner to be credible why shouldn't we give the kids his testimony about his fear of being felt by members of his former gang so i would like you to address i had asked your colleague what the government's position was on should know and that he our situation because i have not seen it in the record
fortunate that while i was in the hospital a lady came in and help i think people should be able to go to a hospital or the doctors at any down time for health care i don't think in this day and age people should have to die from something that there's and i think doctors when they come out of medical school if it's free they should go into the rural areas where there's not enough doctors and practice for x number of years like in the turns and then they can go know we're doing a lot of work monitoring what's happening in washington and monitoring what protections we might need to put into place if there were changes to the or to look for some curious to hear but i'm here really to listen to our elders want to hear their voices and hear their concerns me answer any questions they might house with him and also to reassure them that we're going to fight for them to continue to get their benefits and their health care to thank you for your attention the reason that we respond to speak with you today is that there is a serious threat that many of us are under and it is i think a serious threat for seniors especially of cuts to medicaid and medicare  republican attacks on health care and we passed on success in pushing him to take a stronger stance and stand up for the health of the miners we don't want to just stand here and talk at you the whole time mostly what we want to do was to be able to listen and hear stories and experiences of the people in this room and learn from you as to what benefits you gotten from the current health care wants to expand actually doubling the number of people who can access the centers for their care which provide low cost primary care services ways it would see that we could help our health care be cheaper is to make it cheaper for the actors to me harm doctors and maybe we should never work and as a nation who are sponsor to feel like it's a freebie and it's our handout and oh you don't deserve this you should be happy with whatever you get and that's not true we paid into it absolutely right i think the and composer also would be under threat if there are two major cuts yes that would be one of the challenges is the reason for mine is gabled cover as many people with medicaid as we do is because we get funding from the federal that i think that people stay involved is really crucial one thing i want to mention the widow of pass out is we just have a pretty simple a health care cards where we're collecting stories from folks which can be used she will pressure governor scott and legislators to help move forward with state wide programs like universal primary care and just to figure out how we can actually toward a more universal accessible health care system in the state of vermont where it's there is more politically possible here than at the national picture so i would love to have anyone who has a story they want to share actually put it down on one of these cards and we can follow up and continue the conversation of good morning ising to protect what we do h
digitally exercise their right of access so that in fact it never got beyond the point that would be true keith if the fifteen magazines had been sitting in message to suits and any of the fifteen thousand paid subscribers had a right to go to massachusetts and get it here exercise the opportunity to get it and isn't isn't that number one a distinction from keep and  keep there was a presumption that there were readers however here that presumption has been rebutted with the actual evidence in the record what about the first the earliest email to two subscribe to the new site or as i understand it your client was unable to say that they did not open their emails correct your honor because that data tracking that was implemented by the deal only started reduce those those to recipients of an insider may have actually read that simply isn't here and so i would argue that they've weighed that argument but i don't think also it needs a prime minister showing a factual readership as i would argue not your honor i feel like there has to be some threshold as this is as is your honor there needs to be a material connection it's not simply an an open door there needs to be a material connection should be able to go there where they have an ability to stay that claim the record here also makes it clear that they are from the outset when these articles were published in december twenty third seen in early twenty fourteen that they were published they were the focus of their finra action in arizona yet they chose to take action against the defendants for intervening no most three years which i think supports as circumstantial pending claim in arizona then you get into the stall factor this is as to where is the interest of new hampshire and the interest of new hampshire is zilch if you know based on the evidence that we have  support a finding of personal jurisdiction on our defendants we believe that the decision was correct and should be affirmed i'm happy to address any other questions from the bench we've exhausted our question
and so it was a corporation was withheld from them i don't know i want to know what property the complaint identifies that they were the owners of probably all of it no novel so it's my refracted so which property is the individual to individual places that the brothers what property is that they're identifying with was if if the municipality improperly retained your or the property of the corporation that corporation would have a claim under this contract
the statements that statement that you've honed in on was it was a preface if you will to the nearer to portion of this complaint that she filed first we don't know if it was ever so many days to any other agencies and that's i don't believe so and it's because seven seven five zero unity doesn't hinge on an analysis of every individual remark in a complaint it's the entirety of the complaint without regard for subject matter or each individual to the extent become a point trying to assert liability against my client for alleging an authorized practice of law but we can't get out of the cheney's fully because of the notion that oh well she didn't find her comment correct well it would be getting to the point of how we meet the standards for a little three year wait because that kind of goes to that to get an answer in the affirmative to the certified question which is what we're seeking that will wra limitation to confidentiality is is clear and therefore if there are abuses a something that really is not pleasant to or maybe not even true it's not going to get out well you know we haven't had a case or seen a case where somebody could say well wait a second you've you've gone beyond the professional round you've gone beyond if you see we have something in my judicial or my legal capacity sorry i didn't make that clear area i thought that the answer we have is no it doesn't provide you with absolute immunity and i was very confused by time any person who submitted claim to the client protection program or who communicates a complaint concerning an attorney or allegations regarding the unauthorized practice of law or to the attorney communications work might be granted immunity provided in fact this rule shall apply only to those communications made by such persons to the attorney registration and disciplinary commission its administrative staff investigators and members of its
and specification i don't think in any of those instances that there are there are two issues this is something the district court ultimately concluded what is that it's not security against that freeze and use anywhere other than in claim makes it clearer that this is not permanent i think in the context of this patent it does make it more clear because it's a use of the word security that also includes that her position secured against her in the context of plame said what the patent says is a vertical pitch adjustment rod secured against her movement and then goes on to say with respect to the bracket mountains so there is this notion of a relational aspect it's not the district court's ruling said i think that this can be a permanent state or temporary state and i believe that that is the fundamental problem of why district court then didn't give the inventor the full scope patent that's what he said about that relationship honor i think the judge decided against this for a couple of reasons that i'm completely contradict what claims construction is supposed to entailed i think the judge was  the defendants at the first hearing suggested that you don't how will somebody suggested no evidence in the record whatsoever how would somebody skilled in the art know how to make this invention if there wasn't  that that's what that really meant but then the judge went on to say and again quoting on that basis it does not cover any just rock that moves vertically relative to the bracket mountain means after the devices assemble i in this is just the tip of the the record iceberg because i think when you read that here a transcript in it's clear to me that the judge kept going to be used to guys in here this construction i believe what he's doing is actually reading on the he was device and i again i don't i think that was the result of the the sort of prolonged procedural history and the defendant's repeated attempts to the methodology employed by the district court was so at odds with what this court has pronounced over and over again you mentioned the delay it because the number two thousand and four is a long way from march two thousand and nine you think the result in this case was affected by that but i do not i think that unfortunately the first hearing sult in a ruling that was then carried her through march nineteenth two thousand and nine i did i don't think the district
in april few thousand five and at that point if the waiver did occur at that point there aren't that it was too late in essence day there had been because sixty days to elapse quite some time ago secondly prior discussion spare were two points filed on september eleventh two thousand those were dismissed proper pursuant to our fair dimples award on april twenty fifth two thousand and five date heard be filed with the petition to reinstate because there is a delay of almost twenty three months there which can result in control prejudice to the employer at the bank when the matter was dismissed of course twenty five zero five the record indicates that on four eight zero five i did write a letter to the commission asked the matter be continued again that letter did not make it to the judge  booklet i would like to address the second issue regarding the medical evidence and the l five s one fact to me that occurred in two thousand and five there is an diagnosed with in june of two thousand and five when the petitioner returned to dr phil and he indicated he was having an increase in low back pain and now the symptoms of change the right side the symptoms that dr  further states that the petitioner indicated that his symptoms are on the left side if that time and in june of two thousand and five dr crowing noted that there had been on june twenty ninth two in our position that yes dr wang's i mean in making ninety eight indicated that the petitioner had a one bar strain and that he could be released to return to work their record indicates that he did have ongoing problems for back pain consistent with some permanent parts of the stability associated with the lumbar strain and our position that that's the manifest the what manifests weight of the evidence in the face and one b i would like to indicate that the petitioner counsel had every opportunity to include evidence regarding the oral stipulation including an affidavit documenting the conversation that you could have presented