MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
and the upcoming year christmas may christmas break amid winter recess a spring recess in the summer break that gave mr content a toll i believe seven of those moments in which he would see the minor child this is and the visitation time you don't want to go slowly down the quantity of time but also with the quality of the time the father's point that as this case is allowing there will be funding to pay their employees at the time of the trial her paystub was introduced into evidence and at that point in time she was on track to be just a little over twenty seven thousand dollars for two thousand and eleven her income from new york is what is where wage in new york is that deborah good the job or the interview that she had with i going sure the starting salary was going to be twenty nine thousand dollars she had more benefits that would be available through that job there is also more room for advancement there is no room for her to do with the center of illinois because of her education she didn't have the necessary policy cations to move into supervisors i w legwork she also looked into the schools in new york and her friends connected her with parents whose children actually attended small dr alan interest associate talk to those parents whose children were attending that school second interview and that was the weekend trying she did look for jobs in this area she is five or over thirty jobs in the southern illinois area she looked at retail she looked to social services  school is seeded the majority of the state levels in the most the areas of the test they were suitable after school care for the child either at school or also through the town site they had their own after school from school and the how often the child can come back here to visit i don't think that the quality of the relationship that the minor child has is allah and his extended family on the other all of these factors and considering all the evidence that the trial court was correct in grades in the room there is nothing to show that kate is not willing to oscar and help her serve the minor child
for violating a border protection because there was no proof you trial that there was an order texture and in fact at the time of the alleged offense at trial the state tender heard to the court an emergency order of protection now going to consider it for the facts but because this allows us to interpret the evidence that already insisted at trial meaning the distance between two points where the people had given the street names but not the actual amount of feet the indication was that he did not call to file that file is not given to him by the state and that's why we have we don't have a case here where the court refused to take some judicial course of the thing that was properly before it because it was who's right and exactly and that's again why i think there's too little one which says absolutely courts can take judicial and in fact they have to take traditional notice of these kind of files where the accuracy is not court to now consider it for the first time on appeal in deciding  finished happened ishall it's unclear in the us whether the court was talking about a continuing x party it stops right there but with certainty is that there's a continuation of the hearing on the next part of the order and what happened here was that when everybody showed up it only reviewed these ten or documents it didn't list the documents that were handed over but he did not explicitly say that these are the only documents that i considered and also considered the arguments of counsel here and the agreements and what was august seventh two thousand and thirteen original emergency order of protection because she was served notice with that three days later what did the conversation with those officers lead to the votes that took place on
to me that they they were saying and maybe i'm wrong and will fix it here if i am that there are the contracts were each of the invoices that were tendered and paid but something was added to it after the discussions and that was what was called the fuel charge an energy charge a surcharge it was several different names and i guess the gist of their argument is as i saw it was pay so clearly they have the option the knowledge and abilities who have been chosen and in fact as we point out of our lives that all three of them post hiring lawyers to sue us continue to do business with us and pay for whoever adelphia whoever happens to be who goes to the heritage and says we need this work done and these do it let's talk about it is there a document that is so mind that so what you're telling us if they had actually said instead of fuel surcharge additional profit we wouldn't be here for at least not on this issue with what do you make of the fact that if people are negotiating this away or if they talk i have a question for three fire says they're hot why do we have three classes what's their purpose i think it could have been one class there is no problem with requests and they are protected with two others i mean is that a legitimate  what's wrong with three classes if this is a matter of it's supposed to be a matter of convenience for all the supposed to be a matter of efficiency for all so if we designate three classes and one of them really isn't a solid class we still have to have we can still go forward and we're not stuck with ending this nature litigation with a five hundred dollars question so i think let's start with what i think thought what what your goal was well what are you asking for well what if one is one of our options ok traffic court these three classes make no sense we agree with you there is a correctly is that churn monthly daily quarterly well i don't know her so based but you'll take the feed here given to you by the department of transportation in this period because that's when the
motorcycle to go into the me so without any fact finding here how can you say this truck did not cause the rocks to go into the i don't know if you don't know about the reporting  insurance company
the scope to sort the allegations are there what are the fiction issues to resolve all you're saying we might have something you want to be hearing to find out if we get something we're sort of getting stick a little bit
in that case the supreme court of arizona very clearly separate the fact that this fear of the ability to offer in the future isn't astri has an answer in over the years is in most situations a jury question he has his optimism if you were watching this program today he would come in and help the court that he wants to go back to work and practice practice practice he's a very very hardworking guy and he's not doing this because he's made a choice to nearly wasn't really well it was about a year roughly to go back to the insurance company and ask for more insurance benefits here in your career he had opened up his office he had moved back to he's saying that but how is that put him on notice that now there is an issue as to whether for all time now for that particular period but for all time he is way that you're response was i'm just was just following the instructions of tom joyner corner now that's quite contrary to a finding of whatever he's telling the company representative told me some stuff and by not by says i've been totally disabled since february of ninety six forward included this august august here with a waiver yesterday so the company at that time knew that he was had not at least when he filled the company that really good lawyers that are mediators are the best they have ever encountered and i've seen them settle some cases that you wouldn't believe us if we told you so if you think there's any opening at all you can always go back to the
of the record in this case that that was the purpose of the releases all claims no and on no arising out of their participation in the firm saw the whole purpose of the belief was to protect continue to practice together for several months after that date and if you look at minus exhibit number thirty four and thirty four any which were recovered to me let me ask a quick question about the release what does it mean for possums to sign a release during a time when there's a lawsuit on file against brennan for breach of fiduciary duty having to do with the connors contract everybody knew about that time so it is not reasonable diligence for him to fail to follow investigate and not realize he could not reasonably rely if there was a statement by different statement that there was no
but if i get from behind here you might not be able to he director and say that can compromise your environment absolutely what did you see that a bad that  i am just so im rests with you there were some other yes about that's what we're talking about anyone else yes there you have there you have it there you have it somebody else hands here yes sen you have your cake and eat it too then who knows any other questions
point zero two four six eight which has meant strict liability definition no one reasonably dangerous and then there's a dash and says risk utility test designed effects yes right now  clear could conceivably have been describing in this case your our use of the word condition as opposed to a reasonably dangerous again actually that's the confusion into it as the suggestion made in the brief  recently dangerous they would have to know the aspects of their risk utility test with a not the jury did they ever hear those aspects let me ask your first question what's your method improve are you relying on the consumer institution  and travels through the house and indeed they make an argument that you have to consider the entire system and it was inappropriate sounes take this to the jury just on the water heater  fifty the testimony is quite clear you have to use it t m p if you read spanning for to what you said of course that's just a matter of physics because you're going to need two different temperatures going exactly the same time there is some
to operate a lot of the circuit wish could be somewhere down the line in the system itself so in response to the argument we pointed out that the applicant did not use any
last meeting i want to do they had a representative from the board of water supply doing a presentation on their rate structure there their distribution infrastructure kind of their philosophy on how the
be your honor if you look on yes first of all the answer that question is it says that let me look at the body of supreme court cases that starts with his life and now on your honor on the government i think you can find i definitely i think machine you can find is that he exercised his discretion by taking into account the the ease of the work
they were going to
to the same conclusion because i think that the
thank you for coming down once again this is whe crazy right now we're going to something really special right now ok a while back we had the chance of opening up at the top fear for a gentleman by the name of chubby checker knows his name childish name chubby checker tell each other it's almost like  either apollo best to me in the bell my recreation department i now pronounce you husband you know you can't do this why only on wednesdays this is when i joined i want to be a big favor ok a real big favor have a this about about three o'clock in the morning is not right but if you pass now at the fact there's a lot of you people will be watching this one cable that's right i want to point out something very special that the now i just to show you that we're not a bunch of the full moon we do something really special is a great song we started doing now last year year before the sun was done by the moody blues and my favorite
first thing i'd like to mention you know i mean it took this case because this is a former chief of police or was fascinated by it when i was a young chief police some thirty and the state's attorney's office basically said we're looking for and i said justice the state's attorney basically said what's that and nothing ever happens to the civil service commission but i was terminated from my employment as chief of police and as a result of that life goes on i became a lawyer so my past experience cause me the safest for the second reason i took it was fascinating fascinating in the sense that you have a chief of police running a prostitution ri they gave enough hearing by filing charges a complaint with the police committing a special prosecutor there was a court reporter present even one the whole subject to cross examination it was direct in cross examination and then were finally some facts finally into the facts by the police committee which is made up of three trustees of the  sure without hearing oh well if that was truly a war the record shows that there was what is called the formal interrogation on the terms of the uniform peace officers discipline  react in that formal interrogation the transcript of which is in the record moffitt everything that occurred he said that you know he didn't lie there was no in this case the circuit c generally and then add on with the actions and by having the actions and doing what they did that takes him out of the category in terms of what will that's the position
the inventor torrid out of the dress and showed it to another member of the public the blick did appreciate that the dress course it was inventive vend he was bragging about it before fact that anybody necessarily appreciated but that invention was in public use the rationale being that you can take out of the public domain something that was already being used by the puppet whether or not they appreciate it if you get by this how  references don't have it ten the more attenuated other references also have to be wouldn't it be logically found in the same like intent category requirement which is a big leap for me you're trying to say because there were a few advertisements that put forth the happy life requirement at the end better school are supposed to have known that this was related to food and known that with enough particulary that they had tended to defraud the patent office by withholding that information with the terms of their knowledge seems like there's a about three very difficult hoops there for you to jump through with respect to their knowledge are did they have a goal about the et if they knew about the ed did they know enough about it to understand that withholding it was but for material three if they do when you split the time up i don't know how to do this but let's give mr serotonin extra three minutes if he needs to use it and we perhaps extend intent beyond to big corporations as a whole they certainly knew what they were doing did they have an obligation to convey that to the prosecuting attorney so that there would not be not separate the half life and the the other references to the with food references but just present a generic intent to the we don't think this is the reason it's happening quite to the contrary they were weaponized and this was the reason and in fact this would in its opinion specifically found there is no other explanation in the record for why that would happen now in the in issue of records and rest of us really to the argument that we didn't make these art was low guess we absolutely made these arguments below why don't we want to read it goes on to say defend it did not meet its burden of proving he was untruthful in saying he hadn't seen
time we try to say that the inflation input was the top our cylinder he said and arrows insistence that inconsistent with this claim construction he had construed the claim to require to nineteen but we don't even need to go there because if you look at the language of the claim the night itself it cannot read on figures two and three why can it not read because one of the  been well let me tell you why i disagree that the the district the district court continually goes before the jury and inside wars construed the claimant in the market ruling with the language you just referred to which is very broad he put it was lost in that language he put a gloss on language both with all of evidentiary rulings some of which were heard by the g three explains what he meant by those words and when he you can only read his words in connection with what is on page eighteen of our blue brief as meaning he was saying it couldn't be elaboration or alteration that could just wing it that what is your problem with when i arrived at my problem is that you cannot read those claims in a mac you you must read those claims in light of what our position on that is very simply obsessive complex with complete but doesn't notice it's substantial when it's under low pressure conditions and i can imagine that when you're then it's completely dry or the probably right two aspects to this one is indefinite in this which you're addressing i'm not and no it doesn't seem indefinite at all it seems like the substantial is under low pressure conditions th completed following in life and there to different times and different situation and it seems like the claim completely definite your honor the district court interpreted words complete which is the issue in this case what is complete pages to the sixth grade you will see that in the in your shot of the jury the judge was saying don't have that about the outer toe outer cylinder i have already said construe the claims to the contrary what the jury was hearing was
liability which is defined in this policy one out of four amount of principal some actually paid or payable in cash in the settlement or satisfaction of a claim for which the insured is liable this isn't a low of course  that's what i relied on your graph i verified does the class please do not have to establish liability or damages in an adversarial trial to obtain a judgement for the defendant to pay the judgment as a condition of proving coverage and judged its water say there is absolute even if it's watering down the whole post settlement proceeding was about coverage and the parties were maybe dressing retreat that's what the case was supposed to been about and that's indeed what the case was about s insurers for c v s could be liable based on c v s is liability but there isn't any liability it's fundamentally unprecedented as i say i'm still trying to figure out what is the purpose of the assign liability that's what a liability fixing disputes for it happened here retract was determined to be responsible on the settlement agreement c b s was not counsel says a settlement can't impose liability because of the case began can't say i'm not going to pay it's normal for an insurer insured to pay a settlement costs so long as it will lead to insurable claim that's what happened here again there's a fight over whether there is coverage bankruptcy provision of the policy which doesn't these say a bankruptcy doesn't relieve the insurer of its duty to have a liability but there we are right back at the ironclad rule that decides this case there has to normal proceeding it's the very proceeding that happened here i can't say it enough times it's what happened here retract an old day off and it up on money paid on their behalf by the insurance that's the way it's supposed to work at the same time s fighting denying any substantive liability and refused to be part of it and the plate this in order to obtain and reach a comprehensive global agreement accepted and agreed  would not be declared liable that the essential predicate for recovery under its worth and it didn't happen here are the questions as to the balance of my time thank you very much i think both sides for your
only thing said that there was the petition to rescind and you know it was only in the dui case the notation was made that he failed to hear maybe that would make a difference i don't know but that's what i'm trying to find out it's difficult to tell
evidence present trial that would allow gradually or it just find the defendant guilty of that but not in residential burglary i was late mr smith did show that he committed that because he confessed to that in the presence of the jury however he explained that his testimony on would be sufficient for the juries have found he didn't communicate that into purgatory but there were also other problems with the state's evidence including the fact that there was problems with and i the residence earlier there's case law that says that the injuries not properly instructed on the war are that he is entitle to reversal and in this case mr smith is entitled to a reversal because by by the very nature of the air door just prior to the defendant apprehension the complaint home had been granted that he testified that just hours before the defendant apprehension he had left it resident yeah so that's the kind of just discuss it now people over and often does indicate that the that the jury probably should have been instructed on that this lesser offense by the state does not believe that it's revers answer smoking crack and everything you know question smoking crack somebody was smoking crack in there answer yes ma'am question how do you know that answer because they left the crack pipe and stuff in the house defending han was one witness who said that he saw mr smith putting his head in and out the back door over this witness who also had a conviction for residential burglary lively response on the stand he first told the state that as soon as he saw someone booking his head out of the window he called and we won but in fact in cross examination even if he did he didn't call nine one one and then the but he didn't call him one of those he was too busy running to the complainant workplace to tell him that someone
judge said oops i discovered this mandatory natural life now you get mandatory natural life and in that case this court in a pinion by justice where concurrent by just scolding her she said when a defense has been advise