MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
arrested for the murder isn't case kind of what we have to do with it going to turn on whether there was a search where there was qualified immunity when there was a parents already here so these facts make any difference  unconstitutional and he was coerced into a relationally like that depending on the purpose for which the information asop what is the right way to think about is categorical since it could be obtained without one for some purposes you just have no reasonable expectation of privacy because it be anybody trying to get it for any p will be true for everyone all your claims will be right up with us if it's an interesting question whether or not you had a reason why duration of privacy in these records as opposed to clearly did not that it's not only sounds constitutional rights to search for to get these sorts of records right because of a circumstance in which he was under threat of termination if you didn't hand it over it simply can't be consentual we're not making that argument in syria in  about whether there was concern well then i am going to argue that given the consequences of failure to comply including the loss of benefits to i'm sick of doing administrative searches i'm just nosy and i'd like to see what's in your house or fire if you don't let me welcome there so he says well i don't use any of your find i'd rather not judgment purposes from this consent argument or from be authorised lawyer argument to the substance of what the chief wanted more than that was violating his constitutional rights whether it was like a search of the house or was something different  relates to our a lot of the issues that there's this issue about consent there's the issue about whether it's a reasonable expectation of privacy let's say we we thought i thought that some of these questions are not entirely clear and suppose i also saw off it's kind of a big deal to resolve all things so i will often times when it's not entirely clear we can argument that the reason you have qualify them is because the various of these things are not nearly as stablish in the brief we do things around the first thing this court has to decide is whether or not there was a search second thing this court has to decide is whether or not the search is reasonable and all of those but even if it is a search it's resume place i submit a rule twenty eight j letter with just the citation to that case no argument just just so that we have it on if no of the questions off but i would thank you thank you both
look to the statements on the back of the label and there are several cases around the country and williams to add to so that say consumer is not expected to look for the back of a label to verify bided statements on the front of the label are actually true supports that from right and your honor here again you are saying that not only do we think that statement is false which is pretty dumb person to pick debate but it is also misleading and i think good example of the difference here between the types of your supports health but you can't say it prevents disease and it is even though they say it might be appropriate and we classify it as a structure function claim and claim that says promote something health regulates so that they would take eighty nine days or something off the market that's not necessarily true the discipline does not regulate supplements they regulate drugs and there has to be a new drug application for something that comes out like an aspirin or something like that
information to share with you on that and i can and so you got a problem and the people suffer
glory and actually if i may just begin by giving the court piece of information that may help alleviate some of the concerns that makes you think that you brought this type of case ensure that mr and never happen because ninety nine percent or so of cases brought by insurance companies in segregation matters are in fact named in the name of the insured and the obvious reason is that the insurance company generally doesn't like disagreement on what happened and the critical issues getting rise to these causes fashion and i would like to spend a bit of time on the contract claims that in this case were dismissed by the district court judge so not raised by either of the parties point i mean that that's a very good point your honor and i think that actually goes to the heart of this case alpha it was not on notice they didn't know they have failed because of course they wouldn't hide the ball and something is wrong with a case like that and so and the the logic behind that is it's indisputable a that he ensure it always has a right of action against the party causing their loss regardless of payment by the carrier whether in the there's any doubt that end under washington law which i think still that cheers to very much the common law of equitable position that the insured remains the real party in interest if i could addr first of all the test on the motion for reconsideration is abuse of discretion in considering a motion that is just favors the authority to resign it was not authority that had been decided in the intervening for the whole reason that i did not find under the facts as presented on the motion of the facts of the case that it was necessary to reach these contractual arguments and regardless of whether i make the argument or are also a fail to make the argument that the point is they they still had a base of suits either ask for summary judgment for the nonmoving party to tell the it despite any failure to for the moving party to proof the breach of contract claims they made an argument in their response and case law very close to what i don't think so your honor because i don't i think the factual record as it has has really been wrung out in a summary judgment motion any other facts have not been proven there is not a record to support them there are some interesting conjectures or conjectures or whatever else but i just don't think there are other facts or support somewhat allstate now says are factual disputes for example they in their briefing throughout all status regularly raise the flag that tells painting was actually an employee of devon hughes and there's absolutely nothing in the record to support have positions and so that it can't it can't be it any issue of material factors or no facts there and several great i think the other issue they've raised in the briefing about warnings about turning the lights off and on i think that the fact of the record show that any warning given had to do with electrical issues that devon hughes was not aware of that masking
so yes i think it's a great idea let's get it started i will go but i will go to the kitchen and we will we're going to start cooking or work as a yes we can do or not just the time after a long week of work to get a plate rest for mexican families saturdays and sundays are the days to visit the farmer's markets and fill the pantry up with fruits and vegetables of the season the word in the towel the language of the aztecs means open air market in the last ten years o enjoy a lunch or dinner with the traditional food offered by walking restaurants this tradition dates back to the time of the aztecs when the community met in the markets to buy exchange products even gossip a little small restaurants open early in the morning to begin preparing the delicious dishes drinks and desserts that will be consumed through the day tacos in case of the us are some of the dishes that are most prominent in the well the hungry customers have a nice variety of dishes to enjoy nothing compares to eating a case of the a delight for children and adults case of p s are considered the queen of tissues at the base of the as our twenty is bent in the shape of a crescent moon most of the time are stuffed with cheese there are multiple variations has as they used to be said tait on the pan or fried the filling can be chicken potatoes meat mushrooms and even flowers in the case of the it is fun and simple and you just need to add some salsa some sour cream or lettuce because if given the chance minds will do great things federal student aid proud sponsor the american mind learn more about money for college  anaphylaxis can happen when someone comes into contact with their allergic triggers it could happen anywhere any time to have to do all you can to learn the signs and symptoms and know which allergens to avoid know your goal by being prepared and learn what judd and i love my dog but disasters like hurricanes and floods and tornadoes can only parents and other animals injured abandoned or lost american humane association
is it legally sufficient to put your client on notice and it would be jury understand he's charged with aiding in a betting taylor jumping over a bridge well i would argue just because of the armed bank robbery under twenty one thirteen and for carrying using a firearm during prime of violence the jury instructed to convict him of carrying and using but the district court judge impose a ten year sentence for discharge which he he admitted on direct appeal the issue was not race so the contest of this case came up in a twenty two fifty five when the issue was could this defend demonstrate cause of prejudice to overcome procedural fault and what the panel decided was that yes there was cause as a result of a late overturning heris that actual prejudice was t back and look at the trial after one if i could just one final question how do you get around on playing maybe that maybe just answer my question but how do you get around caught could be more politely put in this that the government is trying after the fact to correct its bad drafting of an indictment where it failed to charge brandishing and now it wants to bootstrap some vague language from  say or it's not great it's sufficient charge brandishing all bad discussion is by the word right which is academic yes ok briefly on around and call people see names while you're threatening how that seems like an extraordinarily we grab you to get on your argument is substantial rights were affected in the light of this record
maybe in exchange you can help us we gave you twenty minutes which is done by the critics office and some mysterious system that we can never figure out if there's very little to do apparently with the length of time that the case methamphetamine involved i think one of the that's correct and what are we talking about because they have capacity if that's the way they have well but she's got that quantity so she's capable and she's willing what's left exactly what in the record i should make my question clear you know we're supposed to review based on the record a factual finding which was of the nature that says the valor departure is justified because of the terrible conditions  what in the record is there documenting the terrible conditions i don't know again i'm not asking for a generalized conclusory statement as to what was bad what in the record supports the propositions you're offering to the court your honor what was the form of to the court and she sent a declaration or something commission set up certain rules for departing from the sounds that are supposed to be given us to a certain thing by the various numbers and really fit into the picture of what they're going to sentence a person to depending on his activities and what they have found does the government object below to the there are two different points one is whether it's appropriate to depart for this reason and to extent of the courts here could you tell me i think each of those where the government's objection  case they didn't establish that the conditions were bad enough ok your answer to their contention that the conditions were
if he it established that he asked for a direct appeal and he did not get the appeal they would not have to look to see what his underlying issues were and they would just reinstate his his appellate rights and bring the end of him back to move forward so i think it makes a difference as far as the district court's analysis they went to great pains to go through what issues he might have raised on direct appeal and now it was completely irrelevant to the prejudice on the district one standard in this type of a case almost to the last question needed to show was that he had timely made his request for a direct appeal that his counsel conceded he knew about this and he did not file the appeal he did not have to prove that he had any merits meritorious issues to raise on appeal or that he would talking about after discovered evidence that should p c r a i'm not aware of case law in pennsylvania that says he can do that my experience with the p c ari is when he's out of time he's out of time  at that point the only recourse he had was to come to the federal court and ask for this court to review the matter so i believe that your district court was absolutely correct in determining that the exhaustion w excused in this case because it was too late for him to go to state court and it's too late now for him to go back to state court let me ask you at the outset the are the reputable told you you really didn't make the argument before it appears that the matter is before us and it i was your judges to argue better facts on this case it is this it's up to you know i really wish i had a better case to be in front of the writers chris occluded attorney tells he was asked to take an appeal and quite frankly he didn't do it i'm not very happy about of my job judge the only argument regarding the equitable tolling that was specifically that we had made regarding the p c area act is argued that position is a window because it's it should appear at least clear from the record that he knew would be as of six months before the p c or a deadline expired in august of two thousand and three the piece here already had been problem being on his behalf state of pennsylvania state prisoner did not file a timely p c r a he cannot claim that it wasn't for out due to the end effectiveness of his attorney and not filing it so i don't believe he would be able to in this day in this instance say well i found out in two thousand and four that he didn't file it might have sixty days to file the petition now i think the after discovered evidence rule is actually something else you can use a claim that your attorney was ineffective for not filing and that's not considered in that provision that's the only reason i stood up otherwise they wouldn't have any other questions
don't have mentioned why the attorney handling the case that time did not show up in court but we have good cause to get we reinstated we believe because during the motion  with her well that's abuse of discretion if it were if you apply to abuse of discretion then we would i said be overturned on the fact that she did use the wrong standard when there really is no good reason for the continuance it's you know it's a matter of arguing the motion to reinstate so the injured worker can receive the benefit of the worker's compensation and as far as the good posts for having it reinstated the issue was brought up about fairness and equity to the respondent they have the same burden  i don't know i think he was he was referring to whether or not she wanted specific answers or the question was what information are is it you here and they've got to have a procedure to weed out stale cases they've gotta have rules they have rules they've got to have the ability to target apply those rules here is a all or case it was eight years old when it was missed it's twelve years old now they did this court that the supreme court has said over and over again laid out principles about how reinstatement surreal and by this court it's only turn around and they interpret something clearly erroneous arbitrary reasonable i think that if i can put it continuance this requires a showing of cause we have another rule that here several rules later that deals with with with reinstate it uses those words fairness and equity you must have grounds   to follow these cases i have to keep my eye on them i have to wonder where are those witnesses when i have to put this thing on will they be around are they good do they remember anything after eight years point out the record shows that when we first went in for the first hearing on reinstatement there were absolutely no grounds stated petition whatsoever arbitrator time had that it only happened two or three weeks before the murder only happened two or three weeks before they are are the petitioner was not incarcerated i'm of the dismiss whether or not more information was needed of one of you justices so so correct on exactly what's in the record about about she asked what what is it that you need
these particular individuals who was actually a full time student who usually ministers and think that he might have worked needy nine hours per week was not qualified as he was clearly employed by the but they're questioning is look they don't have proof that he had tax records if you doesn't have tax records he can prove he was working thirty five hours and that he was paid well there seems to be an either or a problem with contemporary records of the resolder for the purpose of carry on the vocation well your honor i mean you're a judge you i mean that's your vocation your honor and my vocation is an attorney and when i'm not doing i mean i can be doing something else but i'm not you have to be entering s best for the purpose of carrying on the vocation and nothing else and i don't want you on welfare or working as a lawyer or some other way or some in some other position that would require the labor department to certify you as a worker and the task of the district law justifies the presumption that the beneficiary is derived is even coming through other employment and neither of these options the strongly conducive to petitioners overall credibility for the above reasons if you haven't established that it was a full time paid minister however what that comes to her primary and she saying that only financial records could be a primary evidence however primary evidence also includes articles of incorporation the articles incorporation show that he was connected with them from the very beginning and that he was going to be the books for a couple of years he's been paying rice been paid by somebody else and they're simply saying here as far as i read it you haven't satisfied your burden of showing that he wasn't being paid by somebody else to do all this confusion you say it was off the books well you think
time the track stuff scooter being hauled around by a disabled person or a wheelchair being hauled around by the same person or somebody who's going in and and rented a trailer for example all these things have certain the visibility of the license plate and th couldn't clearly see the registration you can clearly see the digits of the letters or the numbers on the on the laser and plate and you also couldn't clearly see while driving which state the license plate was from know actually made a pleading to the legislature to make this statute a little bit more clear and now we have clarity they removed the last plea earth of a sickly covers and lastly covers from that area in the statute and we see that it's any obstruction and i would consider this to be an obstruction to anyone in need of viewing the defendant's license plate  their opposing counsel referred to criminalize normal behavior you know that several port in illinois may have cited a license plate lean too dirty and that showing that on it's so dirty in fact that it looks like a lace in sleep isn't there an officers pulling over people for that or that so much snow accumulation that that the interstate is a pipeline for moving drugs yes he had a series of receipts from from hotels and in food restaurant showing that he had traveled across country and it was highly unlikely that he was going to go to connecticut and term right back around to head back to california on a rental car that he's not even registered
site about two and a half blocks in a matter and that they started with a safe at six thirty in the morning one of the exhibits is documentation concerning to do his connection and it got to the point where mr gill it was frustrating and made a decision to take a break he took a break about nine thirty he went back to living together at the time of the sex and they shared apartment they testified that they didn't really notice anything about it but remember we're not dealing with alcohol we're dealing case everyone in that case all the painter said although he tested positive for alcohol she was able to function they noticed that i think i'm usual about her function but the court relied weren't working with him alongside him through the whole course of the day the intent of the safety meeting and you tell me that you're attending the state the twelve other people and you're watching what the other person is how  said you know mr hart i can't tell if some i don't know if someone talk ok i can't strike you how they appear mr edwards best the question he said the person was lucky out ok that of those people could actually describe what someone is physical appearances i'm hopin when you look at the paro case everyone testify that that person's appearance was fine they looked at the experts testimony there is no conflicting testimony here there's no was able to more his job five or six times over and was under six times i believe that he used poor judgment in trying to catch this falling object the expert testified that it was either the influence that was the cause they relied on the expert and i court should rely on the expert testimony i get the only expert testimony i can have the only explanation for his thought he did that job from january to may without probable he  ruled that we're going to accept medical evidence over that of live witnesses because some of them left except the supreme court said in reviewing that the evidence in the case of bar could conceivably support a variety of inferences and we will have substitute our judgment for the commission merely because we might have brought different inferences from the same record and i think that's the case here mr hall testif someone would have got it's the poor judgment it's the use of cocaine and it sends a bad message you're saying it's ok for somebody to show up from work this regard the rules put everybody else in danger
identification of the risk right here the arbitrator found a sensible neutral risk commission determined dad and step this was a personal the general public is exposed to the general public suggest to me that that would be more in keeping with riser pipe in houses and offices in places that the general public is standards which were definitely workplace