MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
which nine hundred fifty one c specifically says it does not modify repeal or fat the certain labor statute including the national labor relations act the national labor and held that when something arguably forms with the will of the national labor relations that it cannot be the subject of a hobbs apts claim now we're not making the jurisdictional argument here but are saying that in this case there was an issue with picketing and picketing that is exactly the type of protected activity that process that does not reach show that if they do that they do excuse me the date i did not believe that they had a claim or for who would look at the thirteen point five letter that mr schneider cited when you look at the open discussions with the security guard the western waterfront hotel and question is not if they hire someone if they hired someone already then is it and wants it unnecessary and superfluous when they realize they've already hired someone who is a reasonable to conclude the ven were referring to the national labor relations act one could say that it basically incorporates the national labor relations act in terms of defining what would be unwarranted unnecessary and superfluous because it w that the national they were built that does not deem to be an unfair labor practice so it's not unfair labor practice then how can it possibly be the basis for a criminal conviction i would like to turn for a concept prosecution has to be that the alleged victim was giving up something that was transferred property through threats that introduced consent clear that in an attempt to extort peace it is not relevant the government does not need to show that the defendant actually obtained the poverty rate where the government has to show is an attempt to generate fear in the victim when i grew to be evidence what i made out of that is a punch in the face in a bar in a chest bomb and someone grabbing someone's arm have i missed any of what you refer to as the violence years of time in the system of the governments come up with that it talks about assault in theory and violence i find it hard to maintain any gathering of eight hundred people over time perhaps at i think as a matter of strictly looking at the elements of the offense i think there's a fair question about whether that would be brought in terms of looking lining up the facts against  thank you for this very briefly i just want to know that there was some discussion amen during the earlier before and during our initial argument on strike this is really over in terms of the record say taishan about the response to the question about end i agree is a little different from the others but i think it's interfering in ways that nevertheless demonstrate that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction first of all it's there w
to be a suspect of a crime that is very serious squad car yet leave her own personal car an hour away in plain why was she has abandoned her vehicle and he only get the only answer that i think is that these officers i was directly or don't believe it would be in everybody's best interest that there would be conflicting opinions from his word but you can still learn that he his and i believe th all the difference in the world ye
law he did not use the terms of the alleged identity that victims set forth in counts two and three of indictment second his count one conviction must be reversed i prejudicial variance and the failure to give a specific unanimity instruction that mr miller was alleged to have made a fast statement on may thirtieth two thousand and seven but the guy asserted at trial but mr miller made fast statements in six different ways on with mr miller and fellowship investors at five for sure that their names are used when mr merrill took a certain act that he saw in one piece of paper a resolution saying that these individuals did something that they in scrutiny at the trial transcript to see what the testimony is about right mr miller actually said as the transcript if you look at the government's claims which is that they are representations were made to joe stack our first bank said well maybe maybe he used these individuals names in the course of this contact supreme court has made it clear that one way for purposes of criminal ability had a statute what it means to you is something saying the same thing that's the individuals in the partnership that we see as a separate entity it's not like a partnership in that sense it is a separate entity  where you do have permission to use the name you're using it and there's really no authority either way is there a rule of construction that we should use which would favor the defendant
was written there were many more organizations out there than there are right now and he's really trying to get anyone to make sure that people were on organizations that we near were enough to actually put forward a member that individual people or has an at large member just by approaching the mayor and council so there's provisions in there for individuals really are members of any of these associations to get their partition which is a patient as well and that was you know that was one of the things problems with black participation offers everyone wanted to be involved everyone wanted to have people and no one was us and look at we're in a stations that have a lot of members and they're really participating in terms of nominating members every time another member left because that was no other issue people would leave the board in wouldn't be nominated by that makes them much more inclusive and stronger for this legislation
keep the internet vibrant marketplace that it is
yes why is it that independent of the track let's call it which was split say over here is the petition to vacate probation with the understanding our jurisdiction comes from the supreme court ruled essentially how can this court change that process and if it's a supreme court rule because he said that they are you could you know this court could establish some sort of a procedure or ask for notification or do something here and it should be i would say and not just a phone call from the clerk to the to the truck or to should be an established procedure sure that there are or or other things that can be done so that by the same token the ninety day requirement for the reviews of fitness is a legislative a mandate easy solution with the lack of rules either from the legislature or the supreme court and not having an obligation on any parties or the court to communicate with one another  is an interesting is if this court had found that appear obviously that frankly can change in a very short amount of time and here it was within ninety days of the finding of unfairness he was restored to finance so that it is a very sensitive area that in waiting for the appeal he could be unfit again as soon as counsel mentioned it does become a cycle that nobody can move forward and again he has there are as comes a point out there are methods by which you can get rid of the appeal but nobody actually has an obligation to do so once the finding of fitness priests the restoration of fitness been made so without any obligation there are going to may not be any communication with this court for a year while the defendant sitting around fit and notwithstanding the supreme court that that's not correct i'm not asking for the courage i'm just at the bord situation because obviously because i'll shots this is not a unique situation that in this as far as this defendant particular i understand he has several cases pending in several different trial circuit courts and that's could easily be an issue again so i think here it does need to be something out there that addresses the restoration of fitness because it is such a  timely matter and unfortunately everybody is kind of caught in a catch twenty two while an appeal is hanging around and if nobody's taking action on that and nobody's nobody's communicating between the courts we're stuck in what tourney to syria right now these are your options he's not asking for an attorney to say these are your options he's not going to know this i'm curious if the judge really has an obligation to see these are your options i am not aware of any room requiring him to judge and there's there's no rule requiring the state to do that and to go forward and say ok we found him fish let's make sure we get th that you folks didn't hear yesterday we go back to you maybe some standard of best practices should somebody ever look to use their standard out there now the best practices and what to do in this case where should they should everybody are saying didn't have jurisdiction to do anything if the defendant did ask would that change anything thank you thank you very much you know the first question mis
which is your interpretation of the word foreigner and your interpretation of the word foreigner allows for more than one foreigner is that your act no we don't believe so at all the interpret there are hundred thirty three acre large area of one corporate area that is outside the corporate boundaries that's not american that i've made that's a stipulated argument that the village of canton hills made in the case below as the record shows they stipulated was a place that you can look by looking to any sation law yes and say she's done by the government so to speak disconnection is an action that can be against the government but not necessarily the disconnection statute also provides for or to try to graft something on the statue when this court has looked at in other cases the long row case for instance which was mentioned earlier in the book and it said if you're on there or will allow a continuous perfect square or a rectangle they nonetheless say what is the border what is the fringe what is the outside when the case is moved to bass what is lacking here is any attachment of this disconnection area so th collapse the forest the sooner or later with an artificial barrier and ignore it and what is there isn't anything in the disconnect stant to think talks about continuity artificial barriers so  to determine the rest of the issues it's my understanding the record i suppose will lead you that this is the only issue presented to the court and at that time there were no other issues everything else with all the other disconnection aspects were said i understand
the third concert of the richmond brown church bicentennial committee these concerts are presented as a fundraiser to help support the activities of the bicentennial committee including gala well i should say gala of full weekend of events this coming up in august and we thank you for your contributions there's a basket outside the concerts are by donation and we really want to thank you for your generosity it makes our celebration all possible thank you for coming tonight i hope you really are looking forward to this as much as i am we have a group of dancers from heather morris school of dance heather has her cards house and i just want to mention that she has been a great asset to richmond with dance classes in richmond and all around chittenden county and her dancers tonight are some folks from richmond and and heather teaches dance in both the irish tradition and the scottish and what it was just explained to me is the difference between the two is that irish dancers have their arms at the down front and center to enjoy this so i want to welcome heather morse and afterwards we're going to have the swing peepers for a little music with that thank you very much open before we start i just also want to point out the members of the brown church bicentennial committee if all of you could wave and so that we know who the committee members are they have worked very hard and tim in particular to put on this series of cancers and it's been great fun great group of people to work with i just want to recognize them and it's making richmond all the warmer place so with that heather we're going to have the music of the swing peepers i want to take this opportunity to think buttered noodles butter noodles is sponsoring tonight's concert a dance so big thank you for our sponsor  and also i want to let all of you guys know that you are going to be on television and them c t v mansfield community television is going to be broadcasting the concert and tonight stance and so be sure to go to their web site and you'll be able to click on and watch the full footage film footage so with that i'd like to welcome the welcome the swing papers
think that illinois is a particular focus for that particular product but in this instance we know we created the teacher who created the system created a basically a process of contacting people in every state in the same way what it does only electronically albeit perhaps you know you know seconds and obligation to now and transfer that information to you who have agreed to purchase it in the terms of the trip you're purchasing everything th is that we have to look at the former correct when we're talking about the minimum contents and purposeful avail sure no one else is there and then you talked about the whole process privacy of personal jurisdiction on the movements of a website without requiring some level of interactivity between the defendant and consumers in the form state would create almost universal person enters the action because of the virtually unlimited were you can pay to have just about anything you want you can look for shapes sizes and colors in different things determine which one you want and then have to ship to your house in our situation the consumer can pick out a contractor nor can the jurisdiction here me was not because they were shipping cigarettes into your annoyed but because they feel to comply with the regard reporting requirements and accordingly goes on to say th number who provide good reviews directly to the provider's office and then to some point later in time through some software that my client purchases this help wichita kansas they take a look at those phone jurisdiction because i have no way of knowing prior without you discover how many of these mentors and how many of these these contradiction with the scope is within the state almost i would suspect if i did have that access to that information of greater argument to
you i agree with
with all respect there was  want the justices to consider what they're asking here they're asking this court to and grass statutory language on it would say quote for the purpose of interpret in this statu physical exam that leads to a court call in correct close quote diagnosis should be be deemed to be adequate physical exam and therefore no unity should be grant example the willis case and i know counsel says well this was not decided correctly but obviously we feel it was the sad correct i'm familiar with wells i was a public house rules so i dresse process but we have in this case the case before you took a patient in the past and you've seen quotes in the briefs of some of the state is it going to be mildly atypia moderate and what does the definition actually mean i just want to point out that the supreme court laid out the duck and the definition it's been referred to in some of these other cases is being taken from the supreme court's own language very quickly on the statue of limitations if i may dress that you know we have some key dates here on june twenty three two thousand is the date  reviews the slide and issues the report on june twenty seventh two thousand i'm december fifteenth two thousand she begins her treatment for cancer she's already sees a diagnosis and should be giving in treatment gathered records it's not disputed in the trial court she was gathering records december of two thousand and one and hired people who look at them but chose not to file an action and the states  two thousand with the cause of action the husband in this case i think would still be barred because he waited so long but the children i would be defending that under illinois law we can argue whether it's right or wrong that  would create all kinds of problems the supreme court talks about it would discourage settlements because then everybody would be reluctant to conclude conclude claims prior to somebodies that it would try to hold on and then issue there would be difficulties in identifying every potential beneficiary of a life person and securing releases from all of them and it goes on five more things but it also says and this is important is the supreme court roping proposed by plaintiff would ultimately result in a quote new super cause of action one that cannot be extinguished by settlement with an injured party during its lifetime cannot be extinguished by satisfying a judgement awarded to the injured party during his lifetime and cannot be defeated by a failure of the injured party to have brought suit within the statutory period during his  with respect to said or six when all five and six one is the legislature said in one of five we're immunizing failure to conduct a physical exam failure to conduct an adequate physic in section six one of sex or immunizing the diagnosis for the failure of the guy that immunizing processes were immunizing these particular
injury or some thing that doesn't seem to be supported by some contrary public policy and to me as a prosecutor case talked about the need particular  promise of the supreme court's rationale engraved appoint a special prosecutor so those are errors that are related to the grand jury and matters that occur before the grand jury and exposure public exposure of going there's a policy and a decision is behind the decision be said behind the grand jury act to protect the secrecy so the courts don't have to flush el every time well who is this going to harm that's not the point the point is they're exempt under the wall and you cannot this court was probably the loneliness it reaching that conclusion or the facts of change and i didn't see the change in facts or an argument that we were probably roman partners the same transactional cause of action and things that supposedly could have been wrong but weren't brought off which are not being brought up for the first time i wish when i should have been decided the first exhibit or the exhibit and type of thing occur was sufficient to indict your client how did was sufficient to constitute a record which was presented for purposes in a way it's to your advantage because if there is another proceeding it might be even more incriminating then what is contained in this particular document well the bor something's going to be review of it's already public record we don't get into it for public policy reasons that are clearly announced in in re point in the special prosecutor in as i said her decades this event along there was just there nder way he requested a copy of the grand jury transcript that resulted in his indictment in one c f thirteen fifty eight he was provided with a copy the transcript with mr carter's name on the front page same transcript he was given home based upon the documents that you've been handling then why isn't any failure to provide you with a
do nothing with the time they chose to do nothing in june or july of two thousand and eight there was a trial date pending this is now sub standard carrier i think it's safe to assume that american family followed the file there was another trial date that kinda went with some of the family sitting on the sidelines waiting for the case to disappear hooping that didn't have to come and defend that happened three times three trial was the statement that we were referring to in the original proceeding or in this proceeding about american tennis had reasonable know how whether or not the settlement was reasonable it would have to
five eleven eight
case what the inventor did here was simply to explain how this invention can work with reference to the specification earlier in the paper which is discussed in this page n technology that the technology using at least as described in the specification of using the sound system the acoustic system relies on the relatively slow speed of sound in the triangulation project distinguishing between the receipt of the of the signal and have defined standards correctly you could possibly do that with anything but the most extraordinarily sensitive instruments with respect up tacl given the very high rate of speed of light and color and everything else in the electromagnetic spectrum i mean isn't that really the difference in terms of how they function i think that's an accurate exposition  that the problem i have with the the the wave frankly prevents argument and i don't mean to prejudge how it ought to be a sense but just the way he way if you frame it is that to say that they're interchangeable i know you had a little difficulty to a piston engine because you could substitute one for the other republican right down into the engine compartment attaching to the to the differential and you and you're good to go why in this case do you think that what is it about the interchange ability someone invented a system that was much much better than either sound or the optical system and hadn't even been conceived at the time of the of the patent as long as it was available off the shelf modular and is it doing that options or stance with the same way i would answer that here under these facts yes as well yes let me ask the question this way then suppose that it were to be become clear that the sound based system couldn't get accuracy within more than a centimeter which obviously would be unacceptable for brain surgery when you want to be closer than that isin but that the up to go system could get down has to be not simply a reflective source of energy a source of energy which is being reflected from an object but had an origin somewhere else but rather the generator of energy correct one more question about the invention and this is the to me the question of equivalence kind of depends on what was really invented here is what will do we have an invention of a system of superimposition of images  do we have an invention of a system for locating different items and if it's the latter the equivalence argument becomes harder naked it's the former then the method of locating maybe comes to the city area to the real core of the super imposition of images of indications of over fifty six the m r i or c t scan and something that's going on on the operating table or in the case of the four fifty fo you say he had them i mean you mean do you mean for purposes of claim one via means plus function or in clean fourteen does that now talking about the four fifty four doesn't have all those the that limiting language if i recall