Problem: Jack Vettriano Prints<br>My niece was a big fan of Jack Vettriano fan. She put several framed prints up on her wall. She moved recently to a new apartment. There were no Vettriano prints in the new place. I found out her son had destroyed them in a fit of anger.

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "The niece was living with her aunt before moving"?

A: It's impossible to say

Problem: But the retired teacher comes down on the other side of an emotional debate about whether Estonia, Sweden and Finland should spend the $70 million needed to raise the Estonia and the estimated 800 bodies entombed inside.

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "debate about whether Estonia, Sweden and Finland should spend the $92 million needed to raise the Estonia"?

A: No

Problem: Well, my intention would be to enter an order that is a wrap-around order, if you will, that is, in effect, a re-reconsideration of the order on the depositions but also speaks to the trial testimony in chief. And it will be abbreviated because of the time constraints on me, but we'll issue it forthwith, and it will indicate that you're going to -- they're going to sit for depositions under those circumstances.

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "Someone will be called for a deposition"?

A:
Yes