reasoning_language stringclasses 1
value | developer stringclasses 1
value | user stringlengths 25 5.29k | analysis stringclasses 1
value | final stringlengths 3 1.47k | messages listlengths 3 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Well, we think this Court could give him some guidance to get through this -- this remedy confusion business.
Advocate: Certainly, I hope there wasn't.
I don't know.
I -- ... | Or you needed the rights of the federal statute? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: The --
Advocate: Your Honor, as I -- as I understand -- well, assuming relevance, I think there's a dispute as to whether these are especially relevant.
Advocate: As I und... | So, I would like to be shed on in reply to the questions I've put to you by another memorandum if that's okay, to be able to inquire (Inaudible) clean understanding, your brother in the position of this problem. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Under the --
Advocate: Your Honor, under the broad theory of Burton-Sutton, it would.
But under the particular facts of our case, that situation would be different from ou... | Well, the reason I was asking that was because the Government brief says, Treasury Regulations (Inaudible) were promulgated under Internal Revenue Code of 1939. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: I -- well, I -- I think I do now and I maybe, Your Honor, have it.
Well, now --
Advocate: Yes, sir.
Advocate: They did, Your Honor, but --
Advocate: Well, because the -- t... | (Voice Overlap) anything outside the record.
I just wondered if -- | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Expatriation, Mr. Justice.
Advocate: That has always been true, Mr. Justice.
That has been true.
That was true prior to the Expatriation Act of 1907.
It was true on the Ex... | I have to have a passport or some evidence that -- | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: That's right.
Advocate: That's right.
Advocate: No, but -- | They wouldn't dream of doing it. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Well --
Advocate: That is quite correct but that's not the situation here.
The -- the situation here, is a separate and distinct offense only which could have only have occurred here now.
I'd like -- I'd like, if I may, to take up the -- the issue, which is that of travel.
That's -- t... | What? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Yes, sir.
Advocate: No, sir.
Judge Hertz did not tell Mr. Schreiber who he was going to designate.
He just told Mr. Schreiber that he would appoint other counsel, period.
Advocate: In addition to himself.
Advocate: Correct, sir.
Advocate: That does appear in the record.
That's correct... | I got the impression, perhaps they're only (Inaudible) that there was testimony in the trial court before Judge Hertz in which there was oral testimony both by Mr. Schreiber and the judge himself, is that right? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: That -- yes, I do.
I do.
Advocate: Yes, sir.
And I say that 202 as -- as interpreted --
Advocate: -- by the Supreme Court of Louisiana says exactly that.
Advocate: Yes, sir.
It does.
And I -- and I suggest that the basis for the validity of that position is that Louisiana has a valid ... | For whatever kind of indictment? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Your Honor, I think that the Attorney General of New Hampshire is to be next.
Advocate: -- to Your Honor. | -- I didn't have your name here at the moment. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Yes, Your Honor.
Advocate: It has that ultimate effect.
Advocate: Well, whether it's a violation of the negligence or the effect of it --
Advocate: Oh, I'm sure it does.
Except on the most -- well, let's see if we went on a completely academic proposal to it that might be all right bu... | Yes. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: I should think it could, Your Honor.
Advocate: Well, that is an argument that is made and I'm -- I stated to the Court that I'm suggesting that that argument is a valid argument but I do not rely solely on it because I -- into your speaking of the enabling act which gives the -- the r... | But before you get to that, they must decide whether they have done and before you decide that they have done so, you want to take a long (Inaudible) in Sears Company would have to invade if the federal jurisdiction (Inaudible) | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: I'm reading from the Section --
Advocate: Page 36 of the King Packing brief.
That's the Section 4 I'm reading from.
These two briefs we -- we rather consolidate it so the terms that don't appear in -- in -- fall in the King -- in the summary brief, I'm afraid.
But they are on page 36 ... | Well, I suppose (Inaudible) if you're butcher, it's butchering and if you're a miner, it's mining and if you're in a chemical shop it's through your work of the chemical employer that's (Inaudible) | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Certainly.
Advocate: Yes, sir.
Advocate: I don't think so --
Advocate: But it does --
Advocate: And equally in the Natural Gas Act, but Mr. Justice Frankfurter, as I understand it, the word contract is nowhere used by an expressed phrase in the Interstate Commerce Act, it arose by thi... | Why?
Obligation under the contracts? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Well, there -- there was -- the Government did raise the issue of whether du Pont had assembled a great body of patent which serve to block the cellophane industry.
The facts are very complex.
The Court --
Advocate: We're not pressing that point.
So that the only -- only patent is use... | So therefore -- | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: I would answer -- yes sir.
Advocate: I would answer by referring, if you will, Mr. Justice Harlan, to page 120 and this is from the argument to the jury.
And I will be -- given with your permission and patience to read it because it is -- it's rather lengthy.
I knew it because I think... | And one more thing, and that the charges as it's present was not given because he is open to the judgment as the charge probably because a certain (Inaudible) to the record, to the evidence hasn't gone forward and partly because it embraces both questions of law and questions of fact. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Oh, well I --
Advocate: I would just going to add that following your thought, Mr. Justice Black that we have in the interpretation of the Act, the question as to whether Congress ever intended this Act to apply to a state when they provided this enforcement measures.
And one of which... | Let's take a -- let's take the matter of wages. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: I think, Your Honor, that the juror's understanding of what was told him even though he might be wrong is what you have to take.
And I'm perfectly -- I think it would be a... | Something as vague as that? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Included both, but the part which I quoted was not in reference to the unfair labor practice provisions but in reference to Section 301.
Advocate: Maybe if I'm specific about that.
Advocate: That is correct.
But -- the -- the -- that is dealt within a separate section of the report.
T... | You can't say everything in a sentence or in a paragraph.
And we've heard they'd argued and quite corrected that you must take the Taft-Hartley Act as an entire brief.
It's from that, that it is suggested you draw the basis of law.
What I'm now suggesting is the report which you read, the extract which you read dealt w... | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Well, there, Justice Black, it's admitted that there has not been one agreement entered into under Section 10 (a) because of its qualifying provisions.
Advocate: The provi... | Can you always tell what the area is? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Except an insurance company gets paid.
And why I say that the employer here is paying, he's paying for services rendered in the past or induced to be rendered in the futur... | You say 23 Mr. Zarky? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Referring to the question of violation, -- mention one of the brief matter, which is the Court's findings in this case on the fact of violation which is setout pages 706 to 707 of the record.
And the Court there found that the defendant had failed to establish its contention that the ... | Now, Mr. Friedman, something more than the specific steps is contemplated, is it not?
By reasonable efforts? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: That's right.
In the finding of guilty, I don't think there's any equivocation about that.
Advocate: That's right.
Advocate: Thank you, sir.
Advocate: That's right, Your H... | The design delay. | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. | Case Information Summary:
Known Outcome (for context): The case was ultimately decided in favor of the Petitioner.
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Yes.
Advocate: Yes.
He -- he said --
Advocate: Yes.
Well, so that we --
Advocate: Well, I didn't say that the response proved it.
I merely said that -- that after the init... | On the face of it | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: No, they do not, Your Honor.
I tried to get that --
Advocate: No, Your Honor.
I will say this; Judge Schnackenberg who was the Circuit Judge who presided in this case below was -- happened to have been the speaker of the House of -- in the House of the Illinois legislature when this s... | Is this under Public Utility Regulation Act? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... | |
English | You are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand. |
Oral Argument History:
Advocate: Well, Your Honor, I -- I think there's no question in this -- in this case that debt became worthless, because as I say on December 2nd, 1948, when it was paid it had been -- it had worth for 11 months and 2 days of that year, and it became worthless on December 2nd.
And the statute s... | Then before -- if you acquire it, the guarantor comes in when there's still a chance of getting something that in the next few month, a chance (Inaudible) completely, could that be in or out in the case? | [
{
"content": "reasoning language: English\n\nYou are a Supreme Court Justice who will ask a question. You are provided with previous conversations from the Oral Argument. Continue the line of questioning or raise another constitutional issue related to the case at hand.",
"role": "system"
},
{
"cont... |
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio
README.md exists but content is empty.
- Downloads last month
- 9