have decided to hold that the firearm and the murder was if death results they left out if death results in the jury charge but then the judge said in his sentencing


charged that they had to find that that is correct and so why isn't it out right on its face a violation of away apprentice and all i am of the judge sees it that way we would concur you argue that it is


i'm trying to understand the theory in which the indictment charges the investment of the eighty two thousand plus on yes two thousand and eight so looking at those two thousand and six events he with he these


to take thirty seconds looking at page thirty seven of the government appendix which is one of the many charging instruments but this allegation remains the same in all in so


and apart from those events it's relevant we would respectfully submit that mcdade was calling the head of the organization mr scott and mr scott's drug phone us in talking to some underway wasn't talking to some


sent for conferences two people were sent for depositions to people were preparing for things which was not necessary they didn't split the the questioning of anything as far as i understand it there should there was no reason for two people to be staffing


factor the remained did not take any of the three five five three day factors off the table it suggested to the district court that it had to weigh the factors somewhat differently than it had and it instructed the court that a thirty year


discretion after he's gone through this kabuki theater of the guidelines but as a practical matter a good district judge will know how to say that he's right he's considered x y and z but he's


policies that say do not resist no matter how slight this risk is turn over your money so here talking about the severity of intimidation does have probative value to show that what they were they were acting under fear and


subdivisions of the state to bring constitutional challenges to state legislation and they did that in a footnote and with respect to an issue that was not being raised before the court of appeals correct


same statute of limitations but only you benefit from the ninety day a notice of claim requirement in this contract that's correct and that's the only thing that the legislature exempted the plaintiffs from not the statue of


by applying door vs requirement that district courts carefully consider to be one point one with the recognition that this is a guideline that routinely recommends under reasonable results that contravene thirty five fifty three factors


torture for two reasons first he presented conflicting and changing testimony that undermined his credibility and he has not pointed to evidence that would compel the contrary result the inconsistency is that the agency relied


individual email is that correct in this case yes or ok so it is it is so you're talking about two hundred twenty seven point five million e mails a year that is it could be e mail could be other forms of communication as well or that is


your honor the fourth amendment interposes an individual judicial officer between americans and the government even even the government's criminal investigations even when the government has a legitimate criminal purpose and that requirement the probably


issue of whether this whole back door searched aspect of it was reasonable that's my recollection of the opinion your honor but i want to make clear i'm not i'm not conceding that even if it's querying is done then it's unconstitutional obviously not conceding it


government has relied on a statute that you know that congress has given us there's been public debate on the statute now the handful of cases around the country to look at the statute in the as applied context they found it constitutional so then the question becomes if you're


of the case then there is what we call post judgement with a geisha and about all sorts of things about trying to collect on the judgment and in the latter case it's rather complicated sometimes figuring out what we should treat as a final order and what is


circuit has sort of suggested at least in dictum that the time to appeal on the finality does not come until the defendant makes a claim that i'm now done and that's either accepted or rejected by the court why wouldn't we want to


other cases there's this scheme with respect to different items to sell them for the low ball prices i mean aren't these you know first of all an extended period of time and secondly rather different


johnson case which kind of is is it kind of and also the comps case those are all prior to the briefing in this matter and so it could have been brought up at the very least in


it's i think we were under the impression there may have been such a settlement but there's actually no evidence of it and again no evidence that actual payments were ever made under that sort of so called or suppose it settlement thank you thank you both yes


this policy has an absolute exclusion for terrorism you just get no coverage for any loss as a consequence of terrorism on that theory if there was a terrorist attack they'd say well we don't give the last any coverage for terrorism but we have


bryant had to decide whether you get a pass for missing the statute of limitations or missing the issue that gives rise to statue of limitations because it sounds to me like that's what you're saying nobody was doing this and


argued at some length that the defendant did everything he could the question warrant simply it is not dependent on whether or not the defendant made an attempt to appeal indeed the holding and or cheese sort of belies that argument


the conditions of supervised release you could always seek modification or you could have gone to the district court but our position is that the district court didn't impose it how is it that if it's not imposed when you hear


the way you should have done it as i understand the colloquy is you should have said judge we contend that soreness apply to our client is unconstitutional but those


considerable dispute during the formation of the jury instructions the defendants wanted to use the federal definition which they said was stricter version of insolvency then the new york definition we wanted the new


this whole sideshow about damages was an issue that simply wasn't necessary to resolve that question if i may just address judge draw nice question about the compromised verdict and in particular the inconsistency


court making that determination correct absolutely and i think you know deutsche is an interesting decision because it says a number of things some of which i think are self contradictory and in my own view i think it's a case that sort of begs for clarification on the one hand


whatsoever in this case what the only evidence in this case is lloyd's testimony saying that tenet came and told him that robbins would not take would not take


page thirty four now they couple that with then saying the prosecutor asking lloyd he's the only witness on the stand and says well why do you think he only would take cashier's checks and lloyds and this is the


circumstantial evidence here of knowledge i'm concerned about the go what the government has used to demonstrate the willfulness of the money laundering off fence and the knowledge that mr robbins needs to have had


mr robbins own witness saying well she said that they learned they had to file the form in two thousand and five two thousand and six therefore if they never filed the form after two thousand and five two thousand and six he's guilty


gotten gains and do they have a legitimate claim to the funds and you know just because they are state planning his fraudulently obtained proceeds doesn't mean that they they can't be frozen but no evidence was presented your honor is to


now why aren't those things to be considered by the court at least potentially proceeds of fraud for freeze purposes while the f c c alleges in their amended complaint approximately thirty six million dollars in assets in proceeds of


circuits are i what i asked the court focused on several things the first one in iraq was under judge ali's case and i know he remembers auto remo association case and it would make this case


court found that there was jurisdiction and that the amount of controversy was satisfied because the underlying arbitration claim to demand for more than seventy five thousand dollars euros in exactly the same context that this case arises


we do not think that there was a mistake made but there's usually an opportunity if there's a technical deficiency with the indictment of the of some sort there's an opportunity for that for the prosecutor to amend the indictment to to do that but


behind tab seven at the record fifteen forty nine failure of a specification or an actor omission in the process of manufacturing fabricating or assembling one or the other either way and we clearly


sudan's to fulfill that demand that they charge you the direct for that additional if the contract provided for it yes but that's a separate issue right if you're just looking at the question of direct and consequential damages right the restatement says that unless you prove


observe corporate formalities so now the situation has radically changed they still file their motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction for themselves not for global tech they have the opportunity to do that didn't do it


complaint in accordance with the schedule entered by the court and the last part of the plummer injunction is just the very egregious nature of the district court to be use of discretion when the court went on to say that the state could


protocol the supreme court basically approves there's two answers to that your honor number one it shocks the conscience for a state to punish an offender


however it's difficult to see how that case law is consistent with what the commission senator levin we have to follow the case that applies after after the new we have a precedent we're bound to follow it unless there's another press another


nevertheless the court should exercise its discretion to correct the error in part because of the obviousness of it which the court mentioned but also because as i said the guidelines are still very important and central to the sentencing process


was in fact concerned about her and i see that the mandatory minimum point well he was incorrect about the mandatory minimum if she had you know if the government had filed in and have some information that would have raised the mandatory minimum


the morning in may please the court my name is don mind and i represent continental airlines the petitioner in this pill attending the argument today with me is captain andy joseph seated to your far left in the front row as you know from the briefings


sunday who worked in maintenance control and conveyed the same information to them with respect and continental's counsel mentioned that he had hung up the phone on the first call as we had mentioned in our brains


inviting the courts to get in the business of deciding is this state's contract interpretation principle based on the state's view of public policy good public policy or not and if it is based upon good public policy than our peers can use it


child a junior lean in a kid could be stripped in a in a chapter seven case assad frankly wasn't surprised by the decision i don't think it has really any bearing before this this court today if if the court were to


period that the drive is a risky time period with the record shows your honor is that there's a greater risk now than there was before so so whatever the beast line risk may be of having a complication on the drive home that risk


would be helpful for the court to emphasize that on whatever standard the supreme court might chips we clearly win on the seychelle challenge and the only difficult question becomes what's the status of the as applied claims in all paso and macallan if a balancing test were to be


and that's a to no issue for this court to determine interpret the collective bargaining agreement itself it doesn't say exclusive or unilateral or can't bargain you know it what it doesn't say that's


presume that it's pretty but it is expressed we have an express contract here that you can't ignore so yes could you argue that absent this last clause that it could be implied that it's pretty old but even though it does not


cause she had no hint that that she was about to be fired she has been nothing but bright and in fact other employees were with tazer about how come you're getting all this special treatment so there was no explanation for purdon except that she was


you would think the candidate would want to keep the comptroller been there for thirty five years and we have testimony in a record of what a good cop probably she was now i'm aware there's other testimony that he says she was late for work or whatever but that that all was for the jury to resolve the other thing i would point


thousand appeals to the settlement program process and then you still can't appeal to this court because you first have to file a request for judicial review which only about it has only happened over four hundred times in the time since the settlement program has been operating and


the with the district court had done here is is they said well there's other things that should have been done in this case they should have been monitoring that that she should have ordered that the officers monitor them while in fact that's not a material


look at this in terms of the diverticulitis when the warden had called the next of kin to inform them of the death of the patient that the sister had said well the diverticulitis must to finally got him and everybody was surprised because we had never known that if you look


nurse resort about that i said let me ask you in the course of your time with this particular individual was he a whiner in other words was he someone that you would take that complaint seriously and she said he was not a whiner and that yes


that when they said well he said he had a bomb that in itself is not evidence that he's doesn't have an obstruction obstruction and the issue really the whole the medical issue is whether he had an obstruction right as that's what could


fencing in makes it taking pieces of the fencing sharp sharpened it against the concrete slab floor and that to make shanks i would submit to the court that inmates


would suggest and probably at that time anywhere in the country commissioner epps testified specifically this attack was going to happen to your client either on the your in the cells walking to and fro he described


committed abuse of expression by finding there was a likelihood of success on the merits as to the c d a and in fact he didn't even say he said google wants to maintain the status quo while the court determines the extent of google's responsibilities under the law that's what the


clients well at that point you've got a substantial first amendment concern enough that the supreme court remanded and the requirement is that the executives got to show that they had at least conceivable relevance to a criminal statute sure


and there's two proceedings there one of them is a writ of attachment and there's one point the argument this is why footnote nine is a critical where they actually focus just on the writ of attachment and ask whether that alone would be a pending proceeding for younger purposes


fifty i think the autopsy puts it up much less but close to three hundred struggling in psychotic they still ask him to turn around he turns around and begins to attack them at that point they have already


employees in house lawyers h r employees do have the ability to be protected under the statute it's just not in their ordinary role of doing what they do every day because we think about it it would be virtually impossible to terminate because what they do every


the mirrors what the statutory definition is for the purpose of using a one sixty seven to one clearly at least impliedly from the spirit of the law that's pure t h c to go from one to one to one


we charged it as hashi's and and so there is some ambiguity about what some of these substances are and and we characterized it in the


kids it seemed it took progression all action right her to change of the guidelines to really make that situation fairer and in a way we have a similar situation where you have


maybe a volunteer when he serves on these committees and makes these rules but he's certainly got a strong financial interest you know i'm willing to accept that but getting back to the misuse here the first one they raised is that there's


also breed elite animals i'm sorry i thought one of your one of the two plaintiffs in this case brewed elite quarter horses as well as invested in clones they have no


responses from individual plaintiffs and frankly i mean it to be to be fair part of the problem is likely this because of this kaffir requirement you have a situation where in order to


clear admission that


job duties that are identified for lack and judge cummings did just that in the summary judgment order looking to those specific job duties we have design and we also have a reference to the cad computer system and


tax injunction analysis tax act tax injunction act analysis proceeds based on the three part test laid out and nine asked versus texas for distinguishing between a regulatory fee on the one hand and


well i think the injuries is twofold your honor the first injury is of course the the taking of property which is the result of those incorrect convictions or talk about money well we're talking about money as part one because once that conviction is on


or not from all these are the plans but what they do get from texas through the contract is a provider claim summary that has that information in a more summer exaction it's not in a risk adverse benefit determination with all of the content that typically has to have but it has other


that just can't be right and that is really a blank check that any motion they fall regardless of reasonableness or success or titles under season it completely negates this court's precedents and the supreme court's precedents finding that the state having followed its own motion and prevailed can be entitled to


it is everything up forward punched under the no but the canadian pilot says it's a sweet flying ship yes sir a dangerous all purpose aircraft


if we were staying because we get we would have that accountability and that responsibility so i've we've tried to live here as she suggested with a kind of responsibility and a kind of accountability that


the job maybe it's a question of getting along with others but again sometimes it's a question of getting along with ourselves all are just plain lack of her


worried look he's into a smile not a smirk loosen the pearls on your part now around your nose in the tween your eyes your mouth is relaxed and already


have had a call once where does lady got an e mail saying that she had a virus on her computer and she clicked on the link and it started a virus and it was retracting personal information from her computer on to that


all right well thank you guys appreciate that


you very much for tuning in this is connect and we're excited because we're going to talk about climate and it just so happens today it is pouring rain so we feel is quite appropriate and my guests are just two


they just too much to deal with it you know there's no good news but that's that's not really true there's a lot of really wondering need innovation going on in the energy sector and lots of people at the local level are


my parents never did and i mean you know the recycling and the plastic and paper newspapers and i mean i'm i think we're all very careful use and use a lot of of it of the newspaper


but all this seemingly intense agricultural land industrial activity connecticut remains a region of great natural beauty and unspoiled worldcom inviting in dakar countryside


you know where to get money to for to eat so they come to this country because it is the place where we think that would be easy to do that


with people in different ways you meet new people it's just like a fun way to do stuff like that my school so to become a leader was there like an interview process or anything it was more like we both sat down with our


and you give us a nice flavor yeah what's going on in your head and my little head and it's just about this you know woman with kids and i husband coming from you know amsterdam for not a country dude


salutations and hello welcome to the very first episode of conservation nation with hearty i am your host hearty current before we get started just a little bit of basic information about me why i'm


these communities so we really keep our expenses very very low unlike a lot of other large charities and there's another thing that made me feel very good that i was not you know giving money to a charity where and


mr weeks from terrible situation we already have an individual or a group of individuals that are fighting in the street they came out of a house there is forty to fifty people fighting and he is brutally beaten


and i remember when i first read the details of this horrific act i was just appalled and what heard about it for me so much is the fact that chief smith talked a little bit about this but we had invested so many things we're


happened on the east side with respect to those prosecutions we have been presented by the police with five cases and we have charged all of those cases out of one adult there are four juveniles with respect to three of those juveniles


work with the little ones let's get to him before they get into our game


the negative people are able to continue doing what they're doing over and over again my question is for the chief and mr choice it sounds like you're


the musicians are set i see a record made


in a very unmindful way so people are crunched constantly lamenting that they don't have it or that they should have it are talking about skills that they need to build in order to achieve it and not spending much time reflecting on well what


hikes at like a jogging pace for knowledge a job you have to walk and you have leg ninety pounds on your back or the one hike they did as they put it in perspective my sister weighs one hundred thirty five pounds and she one hundred thirty pound pack on her back they her


resource i use all the time is there any other resources that we could look at now to get ready for next year we do have a summer reading assignment it's an essay called how to read


where are they going to get stuck and i pick two or three things that i think will get them stuck and that's all i go over in class everything on the union assignment though is fair game everything in the chapter is fair game for the exam just like it would be in college now the students are always more than welcome to come


for different techniques and misty giovanni treats it very much college level once you get into strength x three and honors for the two dimensional side we have our one or


create issues that no the thing that to me that you understand that as far as i'm concerned it solve high school kids will act a nut with each other just because i'm african american and you're somali if we into it it don't


you can say what you want to but in america if you got this color skin and i got oh ok where you come from you black understand that and so there are lessons that we can help teach them


application if there is an activity section it helps you best represent the things that you've done within that application and so in that light it's it's more a matter of really representing what you've done outside of school


amazing and i just have to bring on the show because i love to bring not just entrepreneurs but also philanthropist and you are truly a philanthropist from your heart i mean i see you actually i saw you first on linked in to sing with things that you're doing community for boys


falls in my way that's how it should look and that's not what it's about a song about the networking it's about the men who are participating and having all of their constant showcase to the boys and to those who are attending that i just observing see


for me yes because i like to have like i like to be on my own ok did it is it helping you when it comes to i know some people like organization or something they like having a job because it gives them


that are doing arts yeah yeah it's definitely taught me more with like managing my time and stuff but i think it's just depends who you are and if you can


colleges nowadays they do ask for a live for usually all things are different this time of their strange to be testing great g p a great academic but what if they lack horsemanship or like school activities and there are some


super scoring as something a college will do where you know and that will be actually on the application where they a will say to you say for the s a t we'll take your highest you know math score we'll take your highest critical reading score we'll put them together for your best overall score that may be from two separate test


automobile business is your breath of activities and interests is is interesting in that hard to imagine all of this for one person one thing leads to another and


we really appreciate you guys taking the time and putting in the effort to do it thank you


the right time to do it the kids in the family and the house and things get in the way so life gets in the way so i figure if i keep waiting for the right time to


community so the three i mean i just said tipper sure is wonderful and all three are very key part of our community and where we are today when my children are all excited because lo land was


and getting your work done yes is there a specific like g p a or anything that you have to keep like as a senior or does it depend on the school i don't want to brag or anything but i personally i haven't


questions to the speakers then when i joined my first thought was oh i'll go now have a lunch when i think i might enjoy it and then i realized that i was missing out on so many events that


board to endorse it and through the course of the two years they were brought on board and they did sign off on the plan


application into our region and then some in the southern tier as well as into catskills rush street gaming was a company we felt was right for schenectady we turned down better offers rush rate was founded by neil blum and greg carlin who


have an office that they call office of student services or office with student disability and a student should know their weaknesses go there and advocate for themself and say hey i had an i p i


to how each one works but some do have special rooms some make you take it right there but that will give you extended time so it just depends on the the school when the student yeah do they get the same like s a t's like is do the roles the same rules apply


come through generally it's an agreement that you ventured into long before you ever got in court it's part of the of the country that you head or the building country that you entered into or the


having claimed that because of these devices she exited awkwardly she just said it was different than getting into and out of her vehicle


record when when it was remitted to the commission that there was no hearing no briefs anything the commission just on its own interpret in that order entered a new order is that what happened that is right and it would certainly have been argued we just got the decision without any setting


chicago messenger case then you cannot say someone who exaggerates on the role is credible when they go to their true doctor and i think you have to say dr mcnally's opinion is based on incredible statements


have thirty three seventy two we give the language explaining ordinary meaning and we read this the action as a whole it considers all relevant provisions together i'm going to refer to sections one zero three sections two fourteen sections two


summary judgment was granted by the court on both defendants motions for summary judgment is our position that the summary judgment should not have been entered as to either defendant because material


me and the classification of that job based upon all of the measurements that she took it and put together in the report and her analysis of that was that it met the light physical demand level and he's released


told even though it is work in her office she should not be told she should not in any way indicate that she's aware of this in the event there is litigation she can just sit back and say you know anything no not not not at all


in which our state courts and this is in the state health course the state supreme court headed to court to follow the united states supreme court in different directions adopting greater protections for the citizens of illinois based soley on the state constitution


area he did not remain in the area he drove north to get out of the line fire he went around and he soon three blocks away so he was at least four blocks away sorry three blocks away from where the shooting occurred and then he called his brother to get the heck out of there so


there's still ongoing rights and duties of absolute absolutely and there's nothing in the case law that says a core can lead the insurance company out of its contractual obligation to provide a defense by


entire week and that's what the average weekly wage be based on writing his hour also known as rudy testified that the laborers would often work about ten to twelve hours per day on average so we used that number combined with the twenty two dollars per hour that


swat in the decision and in the records of dr garland prior to this accident and even the information that mr drew cheska provided to us before he started simply put it's a manifest weight case there


over ten dollars in this estate it totals five five dollars there's no way everybody is going to get paid but haven't i heard selling obligation for compensation just to figure that out well i would make


but the but the role in looking at whether or not there is a manifest whether or not something such is is meets the manifest weight of the evidence is whether or not there's anything in the record that supports that opinion in this case we shared


but but i guess the other question though is did she actually happen petition for visitation pending and while there was a piece of paper there i know mechanic county has certain rules internal rules that things have to be called for hearing a certain period of time


go to the commission with all due respect they are a traitor did not follow the statute and i think again that's why we had amendments to the workers compensation that hopefully we're going to have arbitrators now who will follow


c i always an appropriate pile policy or premium to travelers for the coverage that's been afforded but there's are two different concepts here and two different groups are there implicated by these


developing arthritis i mean he has activities of daily living the record also shows he played guitar that's an activity of daily living was his work any different than the other pivoting it's very unclear from this record is


witnesses were biased and unbelievable on the question of what he was capable of doing credible either their job to do now next he put an interesting phrase we think no one will ever know why the petitioner


we know that's not true because he had some imperiously photographs and so they were an adult woman but quite frankly i looked it up in there in various human nature will be if you're going through your home you know the police are common


basically what they say is for whatever reason this story is made up and i know that and i don't know with your honor's but maybe laypeople and others think this has to be true


presence of the human papillomavirus that is you know artful in that that is not what the record shows the record shows that the child had what the doctor the medical expert deemed a very humorous lesion and he was unable


businesses that rent property typically by what is called fire fire and legal liability insurance which is very common and print backs them against


understand why it's that different to simply say we're still dealing into the evidence and leave it there yet but this court has recognized that there are a lot of circumstances where people do not properly


february not you don't see a problem and that's rising i'm not using that letter to justify turning bad assets in february i'm saying it is that pans purdon to show that there is a work related injury that his degenerative condition was somehow


see his truck he's employers truck to the job site and eleven fifteen am approximately he was asked to go to a supply store to pick up supplies at the supply store is an encounter it's located in aurora


prosecutor lead to that to the government the prosecutor saying it doesn't matter which hand you can find him guilty of back out regardless of which hand it was so again this is another issue where we believe he was not given a fair trial with


i don't believe at that point those convictions were


serious will violation those cases found outside the sphere of the employment and what was the purpose being served in every one of those cases it's not connected to any interest of the employer has speeding the racing back going to get


and i also submit that the monies for surveillance which would be done in a point in time before they take the statement are investigative costs and i would submit that even if the employer had authorized it and


purchase and again the issue it is that there's a reasonable probability this would have changed because his entire theory has been changed and the evidence is very aggravating evidence he now has in his possession


standard used to be normal the wealth of cases many of them cited in our brief that they describe the difference to be given to the jury of the snow or case that the counsel for she was just one of them the cases they referred to today by


rent of twenty seven dollars and seventy one cents a square foot that consisted of two components the sixteen dollar fifty cent base component and the one dollar twenty one cent i can come on that was a


because of the two point eight acres of impact in that short period of time that water found no location to go that's the purpose of the storm water management function and the whole process and the devil you do yo is so that when you have water coming through your site


martina's that martinez was interviewing people in the presence of police officers wasn't the other tenants that there had been a discussion before going to the home that all the interviews would take place at the police department there was a


opinions that the plaintiffs and the experts are surprised by song or the cleanest expert maybe has done some additional research some new studies that have come out since this deposition is going to be some reason for the


dollars and one sometime in nine hundred ninety seven for which he paid another four hundred some odd dollars so is that answered correct yes but he never filed for dissolution of marriage at that point they


at two million two hundred fifty two thousand three hundred sixteen dollars it also demonstrates that the annuity starting date for payment date is january first two thousand and ten


so which specific parcels within that graph the open space exemption to be and i'm going to refer your honor to the last three digits because the profits and numbers are the same it's zero zero three zero zero six and


and why he was there to meet her and that makes it more of a substantial step than what happened in chester smith it's to the steelers review i don't think that i think it is


that your insurance company was pursuing its home claim independent claim for ten thousand dollars they couldn't because you have an opportunity to claim they didn't move to dismiss it they moved


case it's a people's position that it was impractical to obtain consent given the defendant's condition which everyone testified were ever to be the case because of such a case the truth this exceptional


think that that is even an issue and i think that i think that we only look at this this idea that the prevailing wage applies equally to both generals and stuff it does say that you need to do your homework a little bit in ignorance of the


reasoning seems to act of the train reasoning but that those two cases there are in the minority one of the


into the senior students listed above upon completing their studies at the western area career and technology center these students receive their certificates in a special ceremony on may fourteenth


board some changes or try to do a better job of communicating their course the all situations are unique the board realizes that but if you could just let us know whenever that is and you get to that point in time with the situation that would be helpful for the


district wide priority list of time i did say in and since i have heard quite a bit discussion instead of a building priority list i believe she was correct upon reflection i agree with this


collected items for the humane society and also made blankets for the dogs and cats at the shelter as a classroom project at the completion of the drive local authors susan castro to came in to visit the students with her dog wilson who is the main character in


solaces report ok thank you at this time is the opportunity for questions and comments on agenda


today were not in place so believe it or not the day we came up here to meet with you all last was the day we found out about this so since that time we have gone through several iterations


in goodness i've probably put in one hundred of these systems if not more and one of the things they also do with that they've been in they've been incorporating most recently is they have what's called the isolator row and what that is is that's the


plan going for the high school is the thing when this comes back to me is that when you spend money at the high school you always want to ensure that obviously if there's safety issues if you're spending a


their model tala see and provided it to all of the districts who subscribe to their policy service so initially we were going to propose


adding nonexempt they're ok so we'll make that change as any other board member have any issues to raise with policies mr henderson i don't have any issues but i would like to let the public know that you have spent


plain council's approval of the thirty five foot setbacks at the recommendation of playing a commission you know we heard that moving the set back up thirty five feet would preserve trees we need to


the core of what the d p is looking for in terms of storm water management managing in small pockets around the site so we avoid the need for a large storm water management facility we do have one from a property


it's a conflict of it's just somebody else you know in the firm that's working on it that creates it creates you know automatic conflict and i'm and i even like again we can do that yeah i just think we ought to this clear just


two people or or some place of boards preference if there's a couple others want to go that's that's up to the board just sounds like what you what might work for you is if the ministration can choose the folks that they


which are the policy committee they again voice their general concerns because they're the policy wonks and they tell me to go back make changes i go changes we maybe do that two or three times and then i present with the policy


in in vain we'll be using information as see what where we need to align to the standards what are the new expectations and work to achieve thank you so much mr macmurray that's the end of my report ok thank you


sixty five operation that fracking on those eleven wells is set to run through the end of march so i mean that's that's not going to end for those people any time soon in fact what do you keep the finally


that in the it's on the chart on page


exciting educational development programs that's all thank you if i ask in the past why they will never have the legal round up at night they always have a during the day


and it moved into discussion about whether or not we need to have two and of term exams a first semester exam and a second semester exam and then how we weight those exams at the end of the year


may be some athletics that don't have that he suggested was middle school cheerleading they don't have a booster so if anything came through middle school cheerleading it would be just the cheerleading group itself but even


right now tom about how much principal that we pay off the year given our new financing is this part are just friends of ours of principle plus interest it's up principal plus interest so we pay all something less than three and a half million dollars a year in principle


would also be using this yeah


the spanish two classes peters township high school learned about struggling students in guatemala and created videos to raise awareness and funds to sponsor a student's education for a year one of these videos was shared with mcmurry students to promote awareness and the


we advertise it and like the librarian would come to p t a meetings and discuss it and say please go and makes money for the library


construction costs or some related costs i have a line item here for leasing a modular classroom for twelve months this includes the delivery the installation and the ramps


i just want to say i'm extremely disappointed at the resignation of the u s is the principal of the high school after all the work their way into the process for the administration i'm just disappointed


that if they're raising money for charity it is solely governed by the principal at that building as to whether to approve or not right now even if students are involved in a charity


before you know any water in which building when is the last time the earlier you for that it was hurricane ivan and september two thousand four hundred years ago you had a flood waters came up to nine o three during that event so that would have


when you're sitting at a light going northbound and you would have to be up at the first or second position outside of that your problem you don't see any of the building signs at all


like education this isn't it thank you there was an education committee meeting originally scheduled for september twenty second that has been postponed until october and the date will be determined when i meet


thousand five hundred twenty two dollars with peters township school district's contribution sixty four thousand nine hundred eighty seven dollars and ninety two cents this represents an eight thousand and forty four dollar and seventy one cent


finally we appreciate you for being the members of the peter subject school board thank you enjoy the spotlight


thousand but i wanted to make sure that you're aware that we have a responsibility of following responsibility for the complete driveway moving forward and the ice machine has been replaced there and the buffer propane


project in the front entrance that's why that is left on there but it can be placed into the renovation project if we so choose as an auto alternate but right now it was patched


see in the yellow areas would be the areas designated for display of new and used cars this is traditional for a dealership there will be cars along the front and in areas where


and so there's a combination of flowering evergreen trees in addition to the six foot fence with shrubbery so ultimately you know we were able to bring to them privacy and screening from our facility itself is


in the need for a fire truck access they want to be able to get their money in there so we try to do is keep it is green is possible i mean as you know the previous approval was for


near the circles that you're colored circles you're looking at we're primarily the trees because the scale we wanted to show you that how we were looking at this this would be the evergreen trees that would be massed in there and then you'd have deciduous


below and brought into the service building and then brought back up and checked out so the public really will never be back into this space so as the activity in that space will be limited


and forth and he gave me some dates and i have not gone back to him yes there is a new p s p a and i don't know exactly what title he has but n l ally is on who would


three square feet should the planning commission recommended approval we recommend the two conditions listed in


just real quick the issues that we heard back in two thousand and one or the same issues we're hearing again in a twenty thirteen twenty two loss of open space and lack of diverse housing choices


garage units last year and closed twelve so i mean that's the market we know that in there are expensive we have one guy spent on a million for on a patio home so i mean these are upscale units the back yards i welcome you to drive


so the proposed design here would be a verse along storrow wall and there would be landscaping as well around the areas if you take a look at lp one believe that would show reflect that as well can


consol so the overemphasis that we speak of results from connecting up all the the prior health conditions with mr shavers death in with in reality there were there was no expert testimony


i'm concerned about the statements that asking the daughters


important health insurance may be protected by a contract or by a statute but it's been protected by the pension protection clause the constitution only goes so far it does not cover every potential item of property or benefit that an


there is a collective bargaining agreement with agreements and arbitration procedure unless the parties agree otherwise the parties have agreed otherwise here at least with respect to certain classifications of disciplinary actions the union


instructions and there an argument but there's two responses to that first is that when the result is ultimately the same when the same risk that the jury is not applying the reasonable doubt standard is created there's no reason to treat the air


court have held that structural structural error only occurs in a very limited set of circumstances and one of such circumstances where structural error does occur is where there is a defect of reasonable doubt instruction bowser's the specific words of these


as she's supposed to do or say for you or she's defending her own performance i think what we have here is a situation where she really ended up defending her own performance on this case when she came into court on on the motion to withdraw she said a


i'm sorry she says she met with him many times this day also the offer is she said she didn't know what specific to each time but this day the offer to plead guilty was and your do limit nine thirty in the morning ninety nine three he didn't plead


continued his regular activity the complaints are significantly different starting with his visit on september set also dr cairnes records are consistent because he testified after the accident he called him a quote dr karen it took him about a month


was the executive vice president in charge of all loans and handled these loans yourself so there was no evidence that the bank acted prudently and the judgment in its favor is against the manifest weight of the evidence because it is not based on


there's nothing in this report so i don't think i think this is sort of a case of first impression either way to me if you're talking about the specific facts of this case and how offenders mean gets in forest but clearly the law is you don't have to


arguments this afternoon i know that it's made the case a little clearer for me of the documents where unwieldy but it's we will issue a written decision as quickly as possible


to say that bruce's testimony would not have made any difference to him as the trier of fact of the bench trial because he simply did not believe the defendant's testimony the clearly when the defendant chooses to


or to reach the in service all that the us can reside on this property for the rest of mr hewitt's life without the attachment of any reasonable terms of conditions the trial court probably rejected these arguments and the absurd result sought


issue directly but is instead contended that the defendant's petition should be dismissed for the dismissal to be firm because it was not properly served upon the state now this is not a


declaration that he hadn't been exposed to any animals that would affect the and what was the date there of those that are the same day the first day back so what is the date december eleventh two thousand and nine months later as councils are presented you


vehicle was not customary it was not reasonable nor was foreseeable the sort of courts consider money to misappropriated if that was my question is there any evidence he was using it for his own purposes he was taking it and using it for personal use his


even within the unified go of person and i met a seven thirty eight competing positions clearly makes this within the unified goal of best interests we agree with s g that the better rule is to is to apply


expected he's allowed to do the laundry a lot of the whatever is on the clock being paid because he's waiting for the fall when he takes the phone call and is talking with the use of this bomb which he has to do with one hand


sustain the finding it is not sufficient if upon consideration of all the evidence the finding is against the manifest weight of the evidence so even if there is some evidence in this case that's not enough for the board to get to get past this and i want to conclude


was dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to serve the proper parties to secure it ministry to review that issue is a red herring the issue is whether what transpired on april fifteenth constitutes a final


juries retiring six years earlier he triggered that review process sooner he did a couple of other things he potentially shortened the obligation of parties that originally contemplated and he reduced the amount of pension benefit which there


in annual income you have coming in he and his wife the woman he married shortly after he divorced to live in a house in southeastern michigan on twenty eight acres of land twenty four of which is tillable and his leased to farmers in the area


monier concession from trooper carter that the central management systems is funded by taxes i'm assuming for the state of illinois he did not know that the funding source of the central management systems


reasonable certainty is necessary so pretrial i think is necessary and then it can be done however post trial when the verdict comes back and they're not happy with the number and the police get together at that hearing and say how can we stipulate to the future benefits oh


when my clients gave everything receive practically nothing in return well as i alluded to earlier this was a classic bait and switch on the part of an chain she received the money and she was after


you have to look at the totality of the circumstances you have to look at all of the facts and if you saw on the grease mr bowen statement of facts was two or three pages mine was longer


and so in that they replay and they said september two thousand and four just like mr johnson says today that they saw a tiny crack in a frost wall that even there even mr sweeney and their expert both


coroner said there may be instances in which a duty exists prior to the actual transaction because of the nature of the transaction if there is mention that this was not a sale of a piece of property or


this person observes something and then relays it to the office now the four criteria you have to admit here in this case just aren't met in this situation you know that you


what he knew he played a punch after that and that's what judge wilson talks about a mere hunch and you must look at the fact that the officer finally admitted that he observed no traffic violation there's


why aren't you at the way relations at least said under security employ a correction facility it's simply generically says a correctional facility a place which restricts the freedom of an inmate which we know is rock solid definition here and


for certain very limited categories or i'm of toys that are automatically that night the right to strike one of those categories being security employees and over and over again the labor board has narrowly construed those definitions to broadly interpret the act


in the request for a new trial plaintiff devoted quite a bit of his brief to arguing the standard of care issues but there truly is arguing apples to oranges because our only channelers to the sufficiency the evidence was not the issue of


it was specifically brought in by the state for the purpose of trying to cast this shadow on mr rodriguez that he wasn't being truthful when he said he had a couple of drinks that he must've had more than these couple of drinks because what he's got all these beautiful


that these policies that only authorized people can pick up the kids is that true but she came in with these documents that seemed kind of unchanged that was something that the jury could kind of hold on to that there are these policies and this is how it works


at the front desk when someone signed the child out but ms even did not recall on that particular date who picked up the pieces children i mean on june twenty second so she may not have been the person at the desk on that particular day and


relation to a matter that this court had previously decide the issue before the court is whether the award of fifteen thousand three hundred dollars to my client roy man and


two thousand and eleven six years after going to be interesting he was asking for fees for himself he was fighting this case always for himself this court construed the trust as this court said in its opinion that page nine


number for tender for twenty two judge bearing surface and this is in not in and of his decision but at the end of my motion to reconsider which i filed asking him to reconsider his position with reference


problems further mr also already gone through has been taken advantage of by his bank and in this process if the appointment of the receiver stands mr else is


you know it's prudent throws you know who knows what's going to pop up out of the ground but i mean there's no more stink there's no more garbage now it's just purely the selfish gene operations going on in


and said well you know we're signing the stipulation we want to reserve the right to come back and say we want to collect this from the plaintiff something that wasn't done the stipulation in this was all were done on the same day signed by both counsel


leroy may have been saying at the time we know all right but there's a two thousand will where the rescue has left more ways we know that there is a now and then then there's the two thousand and two power of attorney now we also know


that we were alleging that he was wasting marital assets lifeways the allegations regarding his spending of money business money that should have been going into the rental business


otherwise so you've already kind of pulled them in where they would not have otherwise been exactly i think the commission takes the position you know this ad was like a bait and switch but if you really said it


so for all those reasons the court imposed a reasonable subset of usable sense and it was significantly below the statutory maximum for count one which was life and for count two which was twenty years so unless the court has any other questions for all those users we would request that the court affirm the judgment of the


ought not be able to defer to his decision to take him off his let's step back a second one of the problems we're facing here is i think what he's trying to get is farmer versus brennan has its objective and it has its object of requirements the subjective is the one that we've been talking


we've got pate brown the guard who had lots of information heard lots of things she admitted she knew them from the family she knew about the previous suicide attempts both of them she knew about being probated in two thousand and nine she said there was lots of talk among the


nothing but their underwear and you can actually take judicial notice of the weather at that time it was between thirty and fifty degrees at that time and so this isn't yet so you're going to actually want to be


to tell you were sent in so that's part of this so your are with respect to the right to rescind the beach supreme court case dealt specifically with that beach versus when and in that case it was


well thank you and so i think i think basically our argument is set forth well in the brief and the briefs and i think that one last point i'd like to make with respect to the adequacy of the the letter of the notice the


and the only thing it changed at one point late in the process it didn't come from attorney style that the change in the number didn't come from attorney style that's the only thing you know for sure six people testified on behalf of attorneys title for lawyers and two


leading to beyond the possibility that a mere coincidence and her knowledge of her her denial of previous losses in our insurance claims her to ing these losses knowing very full


to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of the handicapped person in question she is not relegated to cold food all her life as punishment for the fact that she has an allergy that


that the school district has not offered to provide allergen free lunches because i think that's an essential element that would need to be pled in order to show how this student is being denied the benefits of being excluded from


must offer in terms of providing a lunch for school districts i have been unable to find a requirement that the lunches are in fact heated but there are a number of requirements about healthy and nutritious school lunches and in those


fee is going to be used for they tell you who are there to tell their customers it is going to be used for one thing and that is execution and clearing cost for the trades when in reality actual net cost to raymond james or the


used is likely to cause that doesn't the pattern instructions in georgia give you just that kind of definition the capability instruction where the jury's asked to look at whether it's capable of causing death or serious bodily injury considering all the


is likely to or which does result in serious bodily injury or death that which does language they suggest is an issue now they go to some generic language and there's a bunch of different versions and they all say about the same thing to the same concept with some


offense does not fall within that commentary which is in my view restricted to aiding and abetting or inspiring or attempting so and consistent with the


i think that this court said that and even if there was some sort of law enforcement interaction pursuant or following that conversation i don't think that that was sufficient to require or to be a miranda violation


anywhere as far as can be discerned from the complaint that a claim for rico has been satisfied and again your honor the for the panel the key points in this case are only two


says dear miss wilson who's nationwide just in this case as you are aware are from the macular farm has been retained to represent mr hayes who's camacho in relation to the wrongful death of stacy camacho then the second sentence of this five page letter says


done at the sentencing side of the case and i think it's important to keep that in fact that can be often the case and in this context i mean that's not on that we get medication cases where


recognized in many cases that little children sometimes do lie especially when they're influenced by adults who may have problems with each other tome versus united states is the classic example where a little five year old girl was potentially the court


having defendants with a history of committing sex offenses from accessing computers or using the internet for the duration of the super about this release because this court is explaining the internet in particular provides an area for people who have committed have a propensity for these child sexual


and then the punishment was imposed so this whole like attempt to slice this onion into like rice paper is not supported by any legal authority supervised release hearings are one thing and frazier treats them as one thing the


allegations could be relied upon in deciding on what his supervision would be like and there's no authority for what the district court did in this case it's it would have been no trouble at all to


opinion the primary position which was consistent with the pretrial d'albert motion was that there was an insufficient foundation for his opinion not that he came to it too late the game he there was reference to the fact that it was new opinion during


required of the district judges on notice that the facts are in dispute otherwise it's reviewed for plain error in here with a video that again appears to show him pointing a gun at an officer in a convenience store full of small children people diving to the floor


to that's all i'm saying and if it didn't then yes they needed to bring witnesses to the sentencing hearing and prove up the enhancement there but this is not judging carl's fault judge and guard did what the government asked her to do and made the dream in what directions are


with evidence and they haven't come forward evidence to establish actual or constructive knowledge m s e made a primal facia case that there were no prior similar incidents at that point the burden shifts to the plaintiff to present


and not each other for a long time it's reasonable to believe that he had informed jackson so if you're not saying that he had that if he had informed well testimony another case in a case he has


brooke to be the agent of record which is a term of art in insurance industry which means they are the owner and holder of all the contracts with the insured and the insurance companies in essence my client was really an employee broke during this time


ask you about say your fundamental premise is that all of these agreements were centrally one transaction one agreement that the advancement agreement has an integration clause that excludes the purchase agreement and the franchise agreement what do you make of that it doesn't exclude it has an


who manages that relationship with the carriers because he's the he's the person interacting with the customer so if he tells the customer that hey this guy just the end of that but you started by saying it's the negotiations for him because because he's punching the assets but doesn't


the apple we mentor worldwide fellow c your honors this court should affirm the district court's the nile the plaintiffs motion to reconsider there was no abuse of discretion by the district court there


pain during the time that the plaintiff had the pain that did not trigger the statue of limitations what triggered the statute of limitations was when that patient went to the person implanting the rod and sat down and looked at an x ray and the


defaulted and the frau decision as well as discords decision and gulf coast and the agency's own a l j decisions all confirm that that approach is not a valid approach to take you can't treat identically situated individuals differently and if you do that's arbitrary


hypothetically mr word had paid everything he owed one hundred percent that might be a good argument however in this case the there is still an


conduct that is that is policy public policy consideration type decisions to which the immunity should apply broadly disagree about not to disagree with


then isn't it the case that either we have to find some kind of internal inconsistency in the officer statements themselves or something in the video that contradicts affirmatively contradicts what the officers who


already had the hands already had the hands without resistance and they now want to say all of a sudden they had to use that level of force when he's on the ground surrounded by five officers who had put their guns away and were not showing any


doesn't apply when you're talking about a regulation that is outside the zoning context such as the separation of alcohol and constitutionally protected new dancing in the context of a set of ordinances which is


our statues does not amount to a violation of federal section nineteen eighty five nine hundred fifty five we're not usurp in florida law it's just that if it's about a lesion a federal law it's a predicate act for rico


this case i think taylor supports mr brown there there was a section twenty two fifty five motion right so that's the same is this as opposed to it coming up under federal rules of criminal procedure


argument well that footnote does appear on the face of the amended judgment but if you look at the order itself which was the basis of the district court ruling the court order never vacate and set aside the sentence the court actually says it's quick


marks that look anything like this the natures of the nature of the injury would have had to be profoundly greater and our common sense could yield that conclusion we don't need an expert to tell us that i


talking about page forty of two away line not tain i wanted to buy back five years so that would give me a proxy thirty one years of florida retirement system so that would have amounted to probably about an additional one hundred fifty to two hundred thousand


dryer driver amplified his voice to tell the people to get off the bus because he was handed was raised he could have been saying think dad i'm done with work today we don't know what he said so i do think it's unfair to say it's a matter


contractor damaged work that was not its work because by definition the general contractors work is the single project which is why the acuity case said we don't think that this rule would apply


personal property in there so therefore we get to assume that they didn't pay any of the one dollar for the personal property and there were no cockroach actually covered property damage no occurrence we say that that's


that means that he has to accept the police officers conclusion and i don't think that's consistent with with the case law you know if you if you say that then the police


no no i'm sorry if it sounded that way i apologize you know i think that the committee comments are relevant to the intent and the intense stuff paragraph f that i believe was to provide guidance to the courts that they are allowed to temporarily have


that court relating to child support for this child and that there was some obligation on that someone to do something and i think justice jorgensen pointed out section five hundred five provides an obligation for the pay you


way i don't believe anyone asked the trial judge for further information and had been requested the trial judge may well have explained himself further but even going beyond that the statute that seven twenty


to the same specifically your honor your honors we had we know he suffered from severe preexisting conditions and we also know that he was then diagnosed with non work related rheumatoid arthritis


in the chemical legal physical status of these products is much much different according to the stipulation of the parties and there are eight you know there are eight different areas of which there are different and i can i can you know pontificated


before a few months before the date of accident and she asked ect requirement for a referral so she could have her heels and feet looked at because of heel spurs so there were complaints of that


was spent doing managerial functions they had the job description which explains all the managerial duties that she was in charge of and they also had her job title all to


specifically said it is a broad definition that includes both captive agents and insurance brokers counsel may not like the way that this applies to his case and again i can sympathize with that but the fact of the matter is that this is a supreme court


they do have the power to remain and on that problem that i see as i don't know how you are reached the issue how do you ever reach the issue that they don't hold for hearings unless you go through the work that they don't hold for instance like phone hearings how would you reach that issue an administrative


we certainly believe she would have been well in her rights to legally harass to give us fees back to game one in this case but she didn't and the question before the court is was in use her discretion to rule in that way and it's a


any statement relating to the m r i ever spine taken in october of two thousand you totally left out of your statement of facts dr korn that causation opinion and


you gotta prove it exists st and they didn't find your client credible so the only evidence in this record that there ever was that's record is the testimony of your client who was found not to


continuance to get in jason davis's testimony that the defense counsel gave the basis that tenet is relying on appeal then because it was the first person in


aliases he had used and he also stated that there were several there were several cases of the people he threw that were not his the courts continue the matter for two weeks along the probation department to look into the matter and when they returned for the sentencing


i think there's only one sentence that just adds the point that the reason for the revocation was not given at trial and the remainder of your first point in the brief focuses on the p


your honor i don't believe it is the structures on occupied currently so someone who lives there is not it's that's not in your personal view no consideration needs to be given to


doing admitted that he was reckless and thus the the section nine dash three field was not applied to him that there was no jury to be instructed to make this unconstitutional mandatory presumption and furthermore the judge also did


is the term emergency medical condition and tala doesn't have a sudden onset requirement in fact a sudden onset requirement in the intolerant test with greatly undermine the way that statute works because we don't want


within a short period of time over a ten year span a short period of time but that first i think blow off and then there were some other blowouts why do we have them out that's basically right down after ten years


correspondence back and forth with the plaintiff that they would never reach an agreement within sixty days and in fact the plaintiffs even stated at trial that she never believed that they would reach agreement so


sneer i understand his interpretation he drafted the agreement is to be construed against him by divorce court as a corner directly he comes into this courtroom clean hands because he drafts an agreement then he breaches it but now he wants to use it to his advantage


on too much expert testimony and i think this is exactly the example i think that this is it's not bad science for a doctor to sit down and say you know i've interviewed these people and i see these


clear the defense agreed that the question was properly phrased that the time this question starts with the five words does this bar a cause of action the rest of the question i'm sorry does section two point to bar


arbitration program and the trial court judge has looked at this question determined there's nothing warranting any type of ocean intervention there's no mandate of public policy at issue here the trial court got this right on summary


but there is the case for it doesn't require that it be by preponderance of the credible evidence and in this case the petitioner went to a doctor and he testified that he went for a different condition on the day you


in the in the initial arbitration hearing that the commission in this decision pointed to the arbitrators certain you know the arbitrators opinion back in two thousand and four nonetheless you overwhelming evidence


is a state of mind which sometimes may be established through circumstantial evidence such as what people say


can we say to that individual you're not you know that you are entitled to go these benefits more importantly if i accept miss rosanna's argument that someone's a traveling employee because they're on a special


however even without the error the jury was still free to make the end friends on their own base and may have been seduced to trial also the record because it appears that


just i don't know whether i don't know whether he knew the defendant put it there or not so even though washington's testimony on this point also is not contradicted by anything the judge didn't believe that i would say how this


burden of proof other than to just say that there were medical opinion saying that she could work it's the province of the commission to determine whether the claimant can work with the province of the doctors to determine what those restrictions are and it's our assertion


careers he just keeps it in his own pocket and says i'm going to continue this case for a few more months sooner already gone now to look for another judge right can we make it isn't it reasonable to believe that that was


this is experimental program and our position is that as rapiers in our machine it is go ahead and invest in your company what you think is best and you can recover that through a fair rate of return if those investments prove to be true just like any other


that was not sufficient and even in the


of from prison i was generally aware through news articles that avarice was critical of northwesterners involvement in the border exaggeration but never saw or read any reporting alvarez's statement specific to my


it and more perhaps more onerous burden on the council to make a record because the trial judge didn't make a record but i don't think that compared


than this case we don't have anything like that there is no evidence here there's no indication the record here unlike from that this defendant was ever waived his right


we have a situation where no accident was reported and this is the manager of the company he didn't report of the accident he knows what the reporting protocols are didn't do it he went to the


basically as far as she is first me no she is the defendant had nothing to do with this crap because we have no evidence whatsoever that he ever told her that he did


know something about d n a and we all think we kind of have an idea that if it lasts forever why would you ever need it again and when you fall into the ask you start really to do exactly what we're not supposed to do and learn turning and say actually and that is to go


injured while working and then had a couple incidents after that but the court in the commission has stated a very effectively the law on that subject and i will quote from the original commission decision which is really interested later


that there's no law before the accident which would warn him that he that this action could cause liability that's correct your honor and there's a ton of cases that show what


off contracts for the product of a mature o'clock to bargain relationship that's gone on for decades and the issue whether privatization would violate the language of these


i appreciate your sharing thank you are you saying that the legislature might make fix this is that my hearing which are i think that potential is there and my suggestion to the court would be in the courts absence of being able


prior felony convictions but the because of that history it wasn't grossly disproportionate he was not simply being sentenced for the facts he was being sentenced for his failure to comply with society's rules and


the point is we were deprived at trial to question the truthfulness of a p n a report that the praise of totally relied on because they had no witness to testify about the facts of the condition i just lastly


in his statement that he was actually going to have to put off retirement this is one of the non exhaustive lists in the application notes as an example of a substantial financial harm


not only that eleven million dollars that he got initially but he was going to get another eleven a half one million dollars for making the connections through is he was he was hopeful that is able to accomplish that and then finally i think you're just hawkins asked about whether or


or your honor not in those linkage of subscriber information with the ip address now certainly the ip address is out there but it's the problem arises when police can obtain whose ip


is to say is there someone else who can come get the bike in your backpack it's unclear why it was that unclear because at the scene there was one individual that the defined it was speaking with who reported that he did not know who the defendant


assembled the thing but for the insertion of the power source right maybe and maybe but for insertion of additional real explosive if he intended to do that well that the jury was instructed to find that so i know what i'm saying you're i don't know i guess i'm not


alternate story an alternate narrative for the jurors to follow so when you take that those that those two aspects of deficient performance you start looking at the prejudice the cases that we've cited


case where there were substantial questions about the quality of the investigation then you see a real opportunity for mr brown's counsel to poke holes and question the competence of the investigation from the very beginning ok when you're getting close to two minutes


whether he could have raised it is dicta because the ultimate decision in this case is based on a separate judgement the whole the whole separate petition and challenging a separate judgment and that's what that's how that the case was a result of the other thing is that comment really restates


process that the jury might hesitate to look these fellows in the eye and sentence them to jail for the rest of their lives i mean they would fare retribution absolutely and there was talk in this case of other people in the neighborhood who were allied with these with


and and then you can supplement it later this court said that in waldron ramsey in a public position in two thousand and nine the court said it again and ford versus plyler another published decision and it relied on those decisions multiple times i've got a list of them here herbert


you to get out from from one victorian state court can you address that yes your honor the appeal was from a judgment rendered after a significant trial that went through two phases in the riverside superior court


already in the ninth circuit on this point the bankruptcy judge didn't require my client or anyone else to agree to terms or impose terms of upon us he gave us the opportunity and guidance and suggested certain things that he had problems with


couldn't as a preliminary matter fall under be exempted under seven because we would need seventy one yeah well i mean part of what congress did in one thousand nine hundred six was that it tightened the language in the initial part of seven made clear and added some of


i think that's an accurate summary of the disk so in your position is the district court was correct that the district court couldn't even determine whether or not this document was compiled for law enforcement purposes or had a reasonable nexus as we as our case use a rational


honor it's i think part of the difference that we have is is it is this law enforcement purpose mean the enforcement of law or does it mean something broader the f b i has said it means the advancement of law enforcement interests generally a law enforcement purpose our u s guess or construe law


offer further arguments why the district court was right our only obligation is to respond to the government's arguments in their opening brief and their arguments what we need to the based on requirements and i apologize i i


i'm here on behalf of the appellant's that are members of the picayune ranch area chancy indians it's our belief in this case that the lower court erred due to the fact that there were numerous court hearings that were held at the tribal court level


where there were different positions taken over the years that marilyn monroe case and then the hamilton case that is the ninth circuit case it was cited is a case where a chapter seven debtor did not


the access the manner of accessing the storage locker that's when mr logan and i believe the other defendants first become aware that he wants this change a mere six days later mr


never said his counsel never challenged that the victims were lying that the robberies did not occur it was simply to establish the narrow issues that the jury needed to decide and as this court decided in greer under plain


in the plea agreements ignition the plea agreements also bolster it was to bolster the credibility of the the cooperating witnesses and what's really critical about the admission the plea agreements is that the plea agreements as


you're saying because there's no if you look at it because he basically resolved the case there's no specific findings well i'm looking at s c r twenty there are several paragraphs describing the proceedings against


the employee is required to if the employee chooses to purchase the food at half price the employee has to eat the food on the premises but the employed doesn't have to stay on the premises for the full


by the face of it what they were saying is our case was riddled with a bunch of lies that was kind of at a reasonable inference from it and we of course allege more or less that in our complaint and my concept was let us do discovery


just and that why why shouldn't this be a summary judgment there if there's a factual dispute the ability of the dish record to grant summary judgment would depend on the conclusion that no reasonable juror could conclude to the contrary


under hate i think that's where those words come from about the competency of the with the used to be my answer to that is no there is no good faith doubt but i also challenge the idea


arizona there sisko wanted cisco to neither of them say that odor in and of itself is enough the cisco two case which is a two thousand and sixteen case is an odor plus there have to be more circumstances


supreme court in corning glass did not reject the notion that employers can take into account the market for a particular job the what was critical in corning glass was that there was a record showing that the reason for the disparity


money based on productive i don't i it seems to me that that recognition of that connection brings you back to but you have to go back to what the underlying what it's a proxy for not


and then and so if the salary is if if the evidence shows that they're just trying as a business model to pay people last and they're doing it for both men and women is that a violation


men being paid more than women and it leads to some women being paid more than men that demonstrates that the use of prior pay in this case is not sex based it is it is a factor other than sex the way to determine that


of contract claim but that's for somebody else to decide ok so why isn't that just a breach of contract because the theory of the case is essentially that when you entered into an agreement with u b s to route your trades to u


misrepresentation of a material fact it has to do with interpret in a term and then applying it to the conduct in the case and that's why hampton vastly different in this case anything over there very helpful arguments in the case


is to say what discrimination has he shown on the evidence that he's presented well you certainly showed that he was retaliated against he certainly showed that there was this association of discrimination indeed the court found association of discrimination


think it would have been appropriate for the court to make a proper inquiry into the jury as to what they wanted to do but they would have said then no this is not needs are to put that out we only mean one four million dollars yeah and it's like this is basically what


if you look at the jury instructions themselves and this is our record excerpts three thirty six three thirty nine three forty one what you'll see is that each of those claims talks about the harm differently harm to log jail as a shareholder


were if you were paying through two thousand and twenty and discovered in two thousand that that you probably really weren't liable i can understand why you might go go back at least a couple of years to get that money back but at that point bart can't go against anybody else so are are


and those minutes would have been provided to the insurance company when i believe by april two thousand and by april two thousand and eight if if not perhaps in october two thousand and eight but in any event i


reimbursement at o'reilly auto parts retail stores and as we've outlined in our brief whenever you're analyzing the issues of rule twenty three in employment context you do have to analyze a little bit of the underlying case that you


always going to know who goes to the bank that's not necessarily true and that may vary from store to store he makes an assumption that store manager is going to know whether or not somebody submitted a request for reimbursement at the store level but that may or may not be true if he's not involved in


homeowner might do if there's a commotion on their lawn came out onto her porch observe what was happening twenty five to thirty feet away and did nothing else what


and what was going on was a man on his knees her son with his hands behind his back in the process of being cuffed by debbie you know we know the facts and we look at the


rodriguez with with significantly less injury that without jones testified that quote she was screaming at us the entire time should there be a jury that looks at the eleven minute video and makes the calculation for there were about twenty seconds


are the sumption here is that they are dealing with a difficult situation so we're to cut them some slack a reasonable jury conclude this was nothing to do with a difficult situation this was not a person who was threatening them


who do you see anything untoward about them asking her not to violate an essential job duty which is we want to have this few complaints as possible instead chinning up complaints do you have any problem with that being a condition of the agreement your honor i would


word that is used in the record is vendetta prior to the prosecutor's examination where he says the allegations i made about you in another district court room to the witness when you couple what was going on which was this


lethargy that he was feeling depressed what trial counsel failed to do was investigate whether that depression was a result of his circumstances or whether the depression preceded the crime in


of the government's brief when it says reeses brady claim fails because all of the government's exhibits including co defendants examiners e mails were furnished to her discovery rendering them within her possession you say that is simply untrue and saying that it's counterfactual


certainly a red flag as the supreme court has repeatedly found an repellent in porter and this court has found in many cases as well they did not request medical records and so they did not learn that mr franks had a series of head injuries


attorney knowing that his client had that really goes to the heart of judge marcus is question sure i hope that i am not just you know i disagree i think it should have been done this way right right i hope that i am answering properly


had he wasn't promoted in the nd grade and the rd grade and then he dropped out of school in the th grade and your honor i think it's also telling because the stay be a sexperts talk about the


wrong route that he should have he should have gone further up higher up so he could have avoided it and most critically what he said was that


this expert's report yes sure the expert says it would have been more prudent and i'm going to talk about whether that satisfies the standard or not to go at a different place in the gulf stream in


actually didn't even receive the accounting statements or the financial statements for b h c unless he specifically asked for them under the b h these rules and regulations the board was there to set generalized policy for a blacklist another member of the board testified


market they were trying to sell it this was done in bringing it to him as an idea running in lacey and so it is so your claim is that because another outside entity obtained a higher appraisal the obtaining of a lower appraisal


the record that what is it that inc paid lacie twenty five thousand dollars thank you your honor yeah that's what you all referred to the e mail on this was right after the six million dollar prize that he pays him twenty five thousand dollars and the e mail is and then after that he says


reasonable jury could look at all these factors and say this officer knew he didn't have a gun on him and saw him move slightly and just well over reacted and loaded his gun on him again this is part of the grand test we have somebody who's not


evidence and i think that that will know to the extent that it is not inconsistent with the physical evidence shore to the extent that it's not inconsistent and the panel decision in johnson which your honor was on goes goes through that you cannot give a version


mr body on qualified for the public defender so there was that right to during that gap that the defendant says you know what this thing set into law this should be dismissed on speedy trial grounds correct so it was in that time period that he filed


in words it did give you the documents but they summarize the content of the document and said here's what happened laying out the five items i might when i pick


was not enough money right which would be a financial reason but but there's nothing to suggest that odom ever suggested to kind of him well what about


outside the store outside the store and determining that the store is in fact giving special prominence to these devices or that ordinance speaks to whether it features features but the truth of the


wanted the judge to say the mere fact the gun was in the vehicle was not relevant right not at issue yes wouldn't it be relevant and in that sense at issue if for no other reason than it


path and that when officers are trying to block someone's path they do so in a different way that sort of put their vehicle on an angle and so he went out of his way to not prevent mr hunter from leaving when he was speaking to em


needs to be number one some culpability in the minds of the officer well but hold on just one second if we're talking about collateral estoppel we need to know what happened what what what it


no your honor what i'm saying is that based on the judge's findings here that i'm just talking about bodies that are graff is talking about article three standing or spare graph on page eight right around it is talking about article three standing


eleven three and nine you don't meet any of those categories that's correct your honor and we are not claiming person intitled to enforce status and neither did the georgia legislature when it sat down and


harmoniously does not mean that you go search for conflicts where none exist it does not mean that you ignore plain language and it does not mean that you insert non existent statutory language


impact to claim processing you have given us not enough staff you've given us a task to do the mel's which is a different task we're busy


tegra for free and document one sixty two dash five you see it has nothing to do with the lawyers trying to figure out how to make this legal in the second page boyer is the name of


information the night before because they were very unhappy that the witness supported the defense that the two other witnesses that also supported the circumstances also supported both physical evidence and the


cohen which is paglen did not need me to tag and had the capability the independent capability to operate the scheme without me because he's done it before because he had a preexisting business or scheme that looked a lot like this so they got all of that in


difference was that the absent party that was to be dismissed as indispensable was the plaintiff and the court applied expressly adin novo standard of review based on on the question of subject matter jurisdiction that's number one number two in


result the court had subject matter jurisdiction based on the first sentence of six you'll fight a two that is that the claim was based upon commercial activity carried on in the united states and while we believe the court was


contract consummated for the sale of the property but that's was i mean it seems to me the default is that the property wasn't returned in the united states he was back in the united states so it seems like that's where it would have been required to


purchase and the contract provided for payment in the united states and that payment was not made yes then they had to fix the price and exactly honor that that there is no such contract well but i mean you seem willing to imagine you know


would be we know that is clear isabel all you have to do is read what he said and read what he did on round two when he denied the twenty to fifty five i don't think it matters in that because this


as i indicated the question at sentencing was the guidelines calculation that the defendant said and that actually that the lawyer indicated to the court that he even wanted to withdraw that


that that is an unconstitutional method of execution is the defendant or again the petitioners position in this case that my dad's limb does not anesthetize the petitioner ok so


that's effectively what the court said but i realize that that in that the inmate backed out but that's that's that's the reason why i say what's on the record in this case and say to me it's a universe but


except ing is true that he said in his deposition that he was not familiar with this long history of misconduct code and what your opponent just said he was he


undisclosed testimony at issue here and what was his explanation on cross for our or direct for explaining why he didn't change his mind there has never been an explanation for not notifying mentor of the


say that we have to eliminate the conflict which is essentially what member this is in the context of a conversation that he says that what i want is i need to work to have the sabbath off i have to have that and i want to guarantee of


committee they are present with the exchange of ideas and views and not just group decision making it it seems to me is concerted


limited strictly to the issue of whether that apportionment statute defeated the contribution and it said no because it is limited to person or property and then it referred back to its earlier discussion about the notice


the record and looked at things


they're going to be again theoretically somewhat fearful somewhat you know surprise we'd like to think that they don't witness it on a regular basis that it isn't current parcel of what goes on in their life so if that is an


they would be able to recover under the policy and i think it's very clear from the way the policy is drafted that the power asked them when it applies in this case and on the one hand it seems like counsel is conceding that


would still be compensable because there's no indication that she was that m r i which is what they had talked about and wrong or that her condition had been completely resolved and the spall created a completely new condition there may be some overlap here as to


incident the timeframe fits in their opinion and they adopted dr hirsch's opinions with respect to the at issue yeah and they did a couple of things the order temporary total disability for certain period but not all the way up


looking at a narrative castro and all of her medical conditions and all of what she did didn't do and whether the defendant knew about it in any case they should be looking at das


knew that this would cause someone to be afraid ok now legitimate consequence is different from motive motive is when you desire a consequence and an example


wiping blackboard vacuuming emptying wastebaskets cleaning dust and tables and mopping floors her testimony is that she had noticed numbness in her hands predominately in her right hand and that she sought medical treatment with dr konar on october thirtieth two thousand


musters an exception to the hearsay rule and else like an opening for a defense counsel to go oh yes there is but he did reduce he was feeling in your opening argument we went through the factors and basically you you fell back on


saying that this is they needed to get this done by a certain period so what happened was there were mistakes made cart corners were caught so the class action period did not even include the name class representative we had a notice that the best news they could send was


rule which is it's got to be a sudden severe shock


decision we conclude the supreme court's decision is pay and pathfinder is limited to the narrow group of cases in which an employee suffers first and then a sudden severe emotional shock which which results in immediately apparent psychic injury and


question of how much english she spoke whether even if she spoke conversational english really well does that mean she could understand medical terminology really well well enough to comply with the code


are written both french and english and he suggested that when they wrote an opinion the opinion written by the arabs were written in the language of the loser which was then translated into


snow was testifying at the trial and in which the defendant's name came up he did he was and the defendant was able to cross examine the three attorneys who were involved in those two cases


statutory right we believe that that the state was able to call and without some type of discussion or seizing without you know any type of right to stand on to say no there should have been an adverse


also in terms of how the prosecutor conducted their case and their closing arguments now the prosecutor said when the eye witness testimony matches the physical evidence that equals proof beyond reasonable


say the proximity of his home or whether or not the chandi what the proximity of the home was in the because the statute itself says the attempt is to lure the child into the motor vehicle or the welding plates