cause regulation not applying to the sixteen deadline it is the department of labor has repeatedly at least three times since the two thousand amendments reviewed the regulations and has never gotten rid of the good cause exception and never


have considered that a change in the law i don't think that's necessarily true there's not necessarily a lot of legislative history that gives us guidance as to what congress was thinking exactly when it and acted the two thousand and nine men


support in illinois law for this rule neither the appellate court nor the defendant has been able to identify any illinois precedent for the checklist there are no prior illinois cases that exclude a video recording simply because the proponent cannot satisfy


burden is always on the proponent of evidence of the evidence to prove by a preponderance that the evidence is authentic in other words that it is what the proponent claims so there's two mutually exclusive possibilities either the evidence is real it's


was a theory he said thirty seconds is missing maybe someone deleted it well that's possible but there was no evidence to support it in the trial court looked at that very carefully the trial court reviewed the tape and it grilled detective and then about how the


some contractors with samit lien waivers and the contractors would promptly be paid the amount still contractors relied on this procedure material men relied on this procedure owners relied on


respect to third party rights the the statute defines who a contract or is it defines what work is lien a bill it defines and tells you what notices are required what filings are required in a more importantly i think


petition i can get it i think it should have been under like every other criminal proceeding under illinois law it should been considered by the prosecutor that allegation should have been vetted reviewed and then they did then they determine


revoke probation where they exercise their discretion and choose to do so this gives the state's attorney the opportunity to represent the people by presenting evidence calling witnesses and giving the trial court


anticipating that is not my first question your honor but that question was never resolved in the trial court it's pretty clear that plant a five year that he was put under arrest it's also clear that there was testimony by one of the supervisors think was from polo that he


conduct was the damage that's the plaintiff's argument right but the as far as the issue of whether livia did he's out anyway right that's right that's right but as to whether for one of six be applies it does depend on low status whether he was


support that reading the foreman of sixty refers to injuries inflicted by an escape or escaping prisoner so we wouldn't apply because if the police officer says hit someone you know although the escaping prisoners escape would definitely be a cause it wouldn't


illinois is touched by and perceives the proper administration of justice in this state accordingly on behalf of john and brian i


written decision did not say but the only time due process does or doesn't require a showing as a matter of proof actual prejudice is when we have an extreme case that's not


so when we get into this discussion about do you have to show actual bias you have to show actual prejudice respectfully according to the capital and decision that's no longer necessary


is that if it isn't a slap something to be just as easily to say this isn't to continue on yes


driving out of his lane of traffic into oncoming traffic and colliding head on with the victims i was both the fuck for cause of the accident and the end the legal cause because that manner of driving


he tells what should be included in a contract terms such as the commencement and completion date a payment schedule none of that was given to our client there was no written agreement at any time to the homeowner during the


or did he not know until now the homeowner according to the complaint the homeowner had the architect go back and do vast changes in the plans there were new plans and specifications this was a huge increase


take a very big risk in not asking those questions a risk that they may have to try that case again in the next year or two and i think that is enough of an incentive aside from the fact that they're being called out and said you


found that the defendant does have that right that an attorney must be able to observe the witness during the identification process is it matter whether or not the state's attorney was present at the time of


legal custody over over the offender in fact all of the cases that defendant has cited both for and against this position all assume that the department gives credit for the defendant's first day of legal custody in the department


it said this also that the state said this and the brief that well it just follows as the night the day that if that's the first day of his sentence then they're going to credit him with that sentence but it doesn't follow and you know he's dead and the fender is going to spend part


seven b to any extent that it is we believe that if you read the statute as a whole both sentences read together and the specific the more specific sentence is obviously sentence to the trial court is supposed to give this credit we believe that the rules


person or


is that the item a video a a an audio tape was tendered one day before the fatal stipulation was entered with the court which ultimately convicted mr quinn down and i would seriously question was that


what this statute says is going to bring you down a little lower because you can't levy more than you appropriated and then your appropriation you can appropriate for them out to get out there where you where you think it is necessary for the next letter


existence at the time that defendant had originally propounded this issue something unavailable to him that's not what he's arguing with respect to culpable negligence and rest judicata


that every time a quarter announces a ruling it doesn't amount to a new rule of constitutional criminal procedure or to me that sometimes in moving


with which is the standard for modifying a child support obligation mr baumgartner however the record does show there is the transcript of the hearing on that petition the record i'm sorry offhand i don't have the page numbers for


as as you point out earlier can't even enter into a contract he can't drive a car he's supposed to be the one to look at the statute and say oh wait a minute i'm and that's another point he was entitled to a hearing there's no is why is this different people


a waiver of their right to appear at trial this court has also examined the legislative history of the statute and declare that the primary person purpose is to prevent bail jumping and to promote


not affect this court's interpretation of whether the admonishment requirement has been has been satisfied and people restore honor the state asked very similarly as as they did here for an exception to be


the court has repeatedly held and condon and embroiled in an luster that substantial compliance with this particular statute is sufficient so this isn't a situation where the court has to you


officer gets that yes no mark no no reason for the border patrol officer to continue with additional questions and that gets next file which is probably what happened here ok so basically agree with that but


years of college tuition so five thousand dollars pesos three hundred dollars not merit that might not seem like much to us perhaps but in mexico and might be a large amount of money and perhaps that is part of the explanation for the link the science and relatedly


and that's consistent with the palace or garcia case that stated that if it's an extremely large amount of money for a robbery or a financial crime it might qualify but here there's just nothing


published yet at the time that f a a even issued its decision here so they didn't know if for when these projects were what occur they didn't have the type of information about things like the number of


i think those two concepts almost merge in this area i want to distinguish community because i think i think that case is extremely similar to this one and there's no reason to


its cost being recovered through those long term contracts the principle problem in this case is that the premise for the agency's decision that hourly service had actually become a cheaper substitute for a long term firm service


possibly be able to assume or possibly not that he took those factors into account but it's not terribly clear on the record i would agree but also the government doesn't


appreciate that i think i'm up for the challenge of if the court will allow me to walk through some of this and obvious if you have any questions feel free but and what i will do is i will start with the two areas that your honor said focused on specifically in common comments to appellant counsel


originally the deal with set up from the beginning that miss that yes you would deposit the money into venables trust account that was what mr stratus told mr burns from the beginning and it was to be escrowed the money comes in on


system but if we want to go a rule that i don't think we could do that unless we pass through a question of whether or not he's actually not credible because that's another thing in the records i think we'd have to go further and actually find clear


under the statute you're attacking the constitutionality of section six zero six nine in so far as it deems lawyers to


i'm so if we were to find he should have been found credible but we're not yet convinced yet i'm not saying you're right or wrong we're not quite there on the other part of the case then yours will be and we should wish you well i'm not saying that i'm trying to think through the


criteria to qualify as a watershed rule are very stringent as defense counsel admits st infringement the rule must seriously diminish the likelihood of obtaining an accurate conviction and nd the rule must alter our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements essential to a fair proceeding


demonstrated only for the general possibility of torture and quote and so he didn't meet the burden to show that he personally would be subjected to torture by


trivial whether her son was six months or three years of age or one of the violent incidents since and she explained there were so many incidences that happened that i can't remember and i says i think it was you know he was of two thousand and three or two thousand and four


idea that that's a reasonable inference here that this was the st time he downloaded child pornography and the reason for that is his own statement about when he began downloading child pornography the bookmarks again that's at five hundred and sixty two and five


are there but i think there is evidence that he has extensive knowledge of the bit torrent network and how his computer files work and i think the fact that it may be difficult for him to access them she does


ordinary intelligence notice that what they were doing their conduct was criminal and requiring him to hire an expert or go to the core and in this case the landowners had to have their own maps drawn to


quickly and then reserve my last few minutes it had to fit into one of the categories and the rd twenty eight dollars and we argued at trial this was another water as it had maps for ten years which required a commerce element that couldn't be proven here but all the


is that there is no real expectation that it could fall through so it seems to me there is some ambiguity there and


even the district court acknowledged that the police had discretion and that it wasn't a mandatory arrest warrant situation and that's what e r three hundred and twenty dollars so as far as the strife and the calculus between you know i think that there's a tendency


exclusively for the jury to assess and the jury is a lie detector and the court failed to consider evidence in the record that contradicted this conclusion as in tests or became bruff fail to come to consider the


instructed that in ten in one incident the harris incident could be used to prove intent in the other incidents and the nd issue is that what happens here is that the c


i don't i don't think that it's in any characteristic right we stuck to go back to those three elements which we do need to belittle particularly and social distinctions so i don't think that that would defeat the social group if you allowed it


interpreter he didn't have any question about what was happening during the interview he signed that the statement at the end he swore to the accuracy of the contents there can be i mean it's a reliable document on top of that from government wasn't


that his brother was being abused or allegedly arrested and beaten when he whether his wife was in the room when police came in and allegedly verbal abuse them in between his arrests and prod underactive my wife was there every time


states wind blows that would create a real chaotic scheme and while i certainly chip of the point that the scheme now is very complex and often creates differences between states the notion that should be made


immigration judges determination that her situation is most aligned with two and that was a situation where someone was detained for three days based on their religion and that was not to be persecution


organization i have to emphasize that these are individual relatives who were mad that their relative was being mistreated records state that yet the record states that it was his children or if you don't have a get out of the record state that they were mad because she put him in


know the answer about so i understand i think i think the charges made a good point that you don't the b i a and this posture does not get to you i must say unless they go out and say they don't get this at the say we don't


should we assigned to that if any your honor the standard for mental competency are the same the government's brief i think actually does an excellent job of explaining how those two are relevant and m a m it is a requirement for all


victims when we say the moral turpitude generic definition is societal degradation societal damage that mean we're still say there has to be human victims in a sense what is the society if not these human victims that it


beyond the age of six and throughout his you and adolescence that resulted in him approaching a stressful situations with a kind of combat readiness and explosiveness that quick provided support


the result of mr jones's mental illnesses biological environmental social and other compromising factors culminated in at the time of the murders and impairment and danny's ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct


caesar i would your honor i would your honor ok that's all i have now already so i think ultimately the information from those records is is somewhat ambiguous obviously he suffered some kind of an incident but it's unclear he states it was a mugging


that he would face general persecution because he was gay the claim was that he would face persecution from his father he had based persecution in the past from his father because he was impure right yeah so there was plenty of evidence of past persecution by the father


oh are you saying that the word aggregate has to be used i don't think the word aggregate would have to be used but i think the b s a would have to say it is not more likely than not that he would suffer torture from any of these sources or any of the sources


claim it becomes clear that she was not closely tied to ripping winners she claimed the hill was motivated to harm her family members because of their p s business she expressed least in their family was not an enemy of the cartel and when


trust document in our case there's no document in our case that requires that legitimately requires payment of these pension contributions other than r c respondents one in the in the trial below and george


need to solve that the other three i'm not i don't believe you are your honor for the very simple reason that this case again presents a common law attack on a congressionally created


that the common law this is a common law doctrine order to in order sort of take apart what's happening under state law and that this is the only case in which it's within entirely federal law applicable i think that that's not accurate i mean the cases


trial but what i mean here the government subpoenaed the witness they tried to communicate with him through his attorney they sent process letter to the witness in mexico my understanding is the


a fair adjudicator under but under rule forty three though you don't think there's a problem with doing that you know the government's position is that rule forty three clearly applies to jury verdicts but not necessarily to bench findings


understood that a former gang member come be persecuted a person that is going to be perceived as a possible gang member and is going to have an impure a gang membership


hersh the th circuit case said that you know a party had to write presumably to raise constitutional issues


the hospital but he wasn't admitted that doesn't make any sense well even if even if you accept the fact that he was in surgery some several hours later i didn't search but yes but that is that does not constitute an admission under intel


no we we do argue that they were a party because of the unique relationship between the two between the relator and the united states recognized in fact this court has even stated that in a false claims act case that


case and it is this court held in bowen's over all congressional purpose does not ask and answer the very question what asks and answers the venue question is the place where


his request so it seems to us that is prompt as a matter of law but if you disagree with that then you have to reverse the district court's decision that american violated the statute by not employing general hard to no position at all on the st day and then figure out the right position


is prior to the flight director jerry shaw jerry shaw said well what would you do and he said it oh i don't know but why don't you just treat me like every other pilot treat me like every other pilot that's all he said so she didn't


insist on it but but your honour's to your point about the reading the newspaper that's exactly what happened on january twenty six let's look to see what happened then he gets the job he gets reemployed and guess what he's not fine for three weeks


he's at home waiting trainee but he's on the payroll he's got medical benefits and that's the point when and because it's winter i can't help myself but you know what's the issue here the issue is do we keep the federal out in the cold


her vernacular supervisor her not a legal supervisor not advance supervisor yes i've not advancer she told her supervisor she thought she was doing exactly the right thing and the person right


to report this right of way right those were the words and she did the sexual assault yes ok and when the employer didn't find out about it link us was shown the door right i mean they got rid of them right


prior misdemeanor conviction of domestic violence he didn't have he was on the state status so the government agrees it can't meet its burden there so the only way for the enhancement to apply is for the government had to show that when he left the


in this settlement agreement and it permeates everything because they have no cases not where a court found where choice was given to class members what they wanted and the court said it's because class


as to the tortious interference cline and the unfair and deceptive trade practices climb now whether it was raised as to the breach of contract and the good faith claim that goes to our way of argument so in the st instance


prevailing parties are those that meet the catalyst theory here in the east shifting statute that you're aware of that puts three of these categories together like this one i'm not aware of any no here are you know


months at least several months how many are several i think this was in november i think the harassment started in january so that's whatever the math is nine months but the problem here is not what the company did before


argument to a jury but if your client testifies to this to what he didn't his deposition on the stand i think i certainly think you have a jury question well you can talk about context or you want well


i can understand the idea because ice is probably not manufactured in west virginia it's broadly on primarily across the border but if it's not i saw it as lower quality methamphetamine that it may well have been made in west virginia right that's why i'm struggling


o when he was caught and so this is what you know if you look at the vinson opinion that's what judge schroeder he said you know what mike jensen said might be a different situation absent the right to to change the payments up until they're paid arguably mr vinson


held statements by employees that an employee can rely on the power point is nothing more than a legal conclusion that isn't binding on this quarter d and the other court it's effect if you read the


in the power point it won't be can was one of them it means in the industry don't you think the person who commissioned salesperson to me that means can i mean there is no limit to what you


clear and can close it i agree it is a heightened standard i believe the case for west virginia marshal versus


shaw inquiry if you would it is never going to be a plot again now that seven has been amended to require consideration of corroborating evidence is that i mean this is sort of a one off case in


optimism that the company's management had throughout the course of the last year so i think that the judge trying to was correct in truly chilling the case there are some some plants that are not crops but


and what was going on and why they thought the stock dropped and you will find they say the stock dropped because they were having problems in volume because they didn't have enough people or in recruiting because they hadn't


i would submit that it's a pure legal issue that can be decided on what's on the record but there are things that aren't in the record the record is a little murky on some facts or some things that are disputed by generous well well the actual testimony of the


which you what it was the manner in which it was done made it constitution so there's four factors under the under the bell factors and of the last one is was it justified or not and and you can so


fact in elliot versus airily the court said that you can rely on such a report over treating physicians reports but your comment about not contacting or not speaking with the claimants doctors that's not the fault of dr


it almost ninety percent or more correct yes or less what senator lisa and i'll give the example that i think about is taking up tickets at a movie theater you sit there you take it i mean i don't know i assume that's never taken up tickets at a movie theater wrestling


and if the court thought it should be under the barry case and other decisions there's only one thing the court should have done and that's remained so if this court thinks that there was an issue what this court


of protections that are granted under the constitution to criminal proceedings just in case it comes up to get back to judge court of arms when in terms of the discretion once you are


that there is jurisdiction here just for purposes then you can go back if you think it's critical to your case here just say there's no jurisdiction proceed if you think you can win with out saying there's no jurisdiction there percy and i


serious bodily harm you would be specific about it it would be the subject of a single complaint that wouldn't be in the complaints spread all over the landscape your honor i believe that the


st crowded out somebody who is filing thirty now you know you have to consider other people so we completely agree with that i would just notice i went back and looked through some of his


thousand and eleven the jury was presented with overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt including testimony from customers recorded telephone calls and text messages obtained from the phones they shared among themselves controlled purchases


service you've done a fine job


supreme court did in one thousand nine hundred and seventy three and mourning the family publication where they said that rules issued by an agency based on implicit rule making delegation must be reasonably related to the purpose of the


you do agree that the a g s interpretation of that phrase particular social group warrants chevron deference


other than the evidence in the record is one they she didn't call the police or make an attempt and to the conditions we cited in honduras and they address both those issues that's the only evidence that was in there and


the relationship so this doesn't judge you're correct that she was able to leave the relationship enough is not a member of a group of women in a relationship that they're unable to leave


decisions that have dealt with fugitive tolling that it has been challenged and it really but yes there is some circuit case law on this and they all use a standard roughly like this and none of them uses the standard you're proposing yours is narrower than what any other circuit uses that's fair enough and it's


with respect to the nd amount of complaint mr miller attaches his e e o c file in an effort to bolster his claims and so at that point it became an issue of us trying to rebut those claims in the point out that look this is not a


would be impromptu as defendant fernandez said ten years earlier when they started the company they knew that they had to distinguish the tech i counted and i cited them in the brief four separate times where analysts ascii tech related questions


issues there is the city was never faced with a scenario where someone had been cleared to return to work on multiple occasions did not want to to the point of actually admitting he did not want to return as a police officer


judge was concerned about what the videotape should miss callaway of course attended video visitation for about ninety minutes that entire period of time there was video surveillance with two camera views a view of


she's already been through a criminal screening tests and you subject her to that type of intrusive search the most i think any i'm not speaking on behalf of women but i speak on behalf of them and i know i


these five facts provided particular suspicion as to miss callaway talbert history of smuggling tobacco and nothing to do with her low key didn't say even teleports last name just travis is moving that doesn't even


affiliation as a motive for crimes in this case so in short there was really no evidence that there is a line of identification was based on the charge to all we have is the is the fact


which is why our rules provide that that in the excerpts that you are responsible for filing you are to give us copies of what we need so that when we are in our in our offices there are three of us we can we can we can see what it is you are lying and we don't


think that that conclusion this course made it into packer's that's binding on federal a b s review of the question on the question of its admissibility and of course that doesn't resolve the constitutional question there still is


and if we consider the purpose of the underlying acts to provide medically necessary services to the poor and disabled people who otherwise aren't going to get them that seems to me i don't want to make it this and with tear jerking argument but that seems to need to be a relatively decent goal now the


showed the farmers did no more here than assert its legal position reasonably and in good faith however because other evidence in the record would have supported a finding of bad faith the supreme court affirmed the bad


and put himself before the jury and hear what the people did was not the petitioner in front of the jury iranian slee and with great prejudice of the petitioner and the court clearly held


know i believe what the district court did was they brought this epic life's argument so what so they paid for this policy and they paid the one point five percent and has some


very well kept and the average which i don't think we can all minister of mr savior there is an average charge of one point five percent in the industry which we are applying to you in order to shift a cost to the company to


and giving that person and one other person an opportunity to be hurt is not a prejudice element there's no good cause requirement headwall in the analysis but you know that is constitutional concern of taking somebody's property and bringing


required to look at the prejudice to either party if they're waived if he's not required to make he and they've if not maybe then as he is that not improper inquiry


to them not indirectly but directly to them as a result of the illegal activity but the third thing is is that as we said in our brief if there was any question and we don't think that there was but if there's any question about the proper


assume that it's duty had no information or request or facts which put it on notice further accommodation might need to be explored in this particular case i want to point out that at the


six four i believe you either have to show that you have actual damages or that you are the person entitle to the funds and they can't show that in either instance because union bank always was the person in title to the


may or may not be relevant we can't help you don't know what charges are but let's assume for the sake of argument that those rights are somehow relevant without regard to the first amendment issue and and i don't understand why that doesn't constitute


especially construction cases which indicates that determining congress intent is paramount i think it's clear that neither does not mandate that check kiting schemes are no longer actionable


wire funds not after he went to dallas because he pressed the press wire remarks to do it back america refused to do it they just didn't back and at that point in response to my


people who are not wholly employees to bring it back into the fashionable concept we have here now let's just run in there allegation that company employees heard the statement right but it wouldn't have to be on the premises my point i don't think the premises


fundamental reporting obligation those two are presented as either or you have an obligation to report if you either have knowledge of the back or if you have knowledge of the reasonable risk of harm we expect that we had the latter we and


injunction the court after ahead of enter the stipulation we wouldn't even be here because that wouldn't presumably you


the records of the department of corrections now there were a number of cases cited for the first number of statutes and for the first time dealing with clients i want to emphasize that there have been there's a number of arguments and evidence going the record that had


these credits that have been built up and he has to break in service now the plan says goes on to say well if you work five hundred one more hours


think they put on a very good case at all


as any other part of property in the law recognizes it as i think we have to look one of the factors we have to look at is whether or not the market is harmed i think in looking at that we have to determine whether or not a market would still exist after this product has


oh i understand that but my problem is suppose i go with you i get on the train with the end and i go with you i accept that the previous accrued interest was put in a box not to be opened


been the books is a page for the note and it used to be owed to the related taxpayer and then when the note was acquired by the unrelated taxpayer i just wrote something at the


exclude personal injury absolutely no one suing for personal injury in this i'm thinking that the wrongs in this case they seem to fit right squarely into false arrest and false imprisonment so why isn't that a personal injury case


here's here's my problem with both your your argument i read nine hundred sixty four c and i'm trying to fit it into the kind of personal injury toward a


contrary cold finality


find it was not and explain why it was so you need to tell us why they were wrong ok that's what i'll do the interests first of all at the point it's her and when and the settlement agreement


officer that she took the items that part is not true well in it's not true where is the evidence that it that she asserts that it's not true or what let's why do you say it's not true because when i submitted the supplemental that's excerpts of record i


detainer the issuance of the commission's nineteen ninety nine supplemental violator warrants bar the expiration of the remainder of the special for one term and preserve the commission's jurisdiction to revoke walters mandatory release


voter verify to make sure that the ballot is that voter has asked is actually


explodes and in the california union the city and then very carefully review rammer and the other decisions and they note that these cases are not dealing with an allegation or underlying facts of continuous injury to


the fact that no objection has been filed should not be construed that acknowledgement by the debtor that those claims are without dispute so for the purposes of this push to be we're not going to make them go through the burden of now filing objections to the


half three million dollars in sales of that product it looks like a very safe thing for us to merge the two together we would then be able to enhance our r mycoskie unfortunately they they had a manufacturing


right benefits already get the money the money they got the money because they were doing a good job for the corporation and the corporation was making money and it was paying these people more money


crime to someone who was likely to report him to the police and send him a prison seems to me that the difficulty is that we don't we haven't really had something in this context that's a private to an


and that there's a lot more to be told we think dr styler that we've alleged and not with our current complaint but if you're going to consider these if you know other words if that's what this case is all about with the defendants are putting


necessary to establish the claim that is a process contemplated by quid for this robbery once the plaintiff has a suspicion of wrongdoing and therefore an incentive to sue she must decide whether to file suit or sit on her right so long as a


you know never was really anybody's fault it was just i mean you may have known you know exactly what you intended but the judge may not have been thinking about section one hundred fifty one and at the time that he signed the i don't know they didn't raise the issue


of a foreign sovereign and therefore i am ordering that entity dismiss that question is clearly not before this court because b c hydro elected not to appeal from the district court's decision not to


saying they were not entitled to that in federal court they got that determination as part of jurisdictional findings now could judge wally have reached out and dismissed the claims against b p and walk on the merits


objections to that that's waived if there are any first amendment concerns that the injunction gives rise to i don't think so for the reasons that we've already brief but basically it's because there are adequate alternative avenues of communication because the way to


description was that it was near it was i believe seventy acres more a last below highway eighty near canton plain your mind in that was much more of the description it was very descriptive and it was it gave and


because of its mathematical certainty over a period of time and it becomes greater and greater concern as to how that d n a evidence will be used


something so i make sure that it gets reported there and then taken out and put in this if possible way but what about when your home itself can drive income for you so for all the people out there who don't consider themselves to be big real estate investors but they buy


indiscernible externally yes and i also have a better awareness of what triggers me to eat ok so for example i do


the competence you know that also has kind of always been up there but more confidence you know like i said i was i'm fifty so i wanted to build up to this big gigantic milestone year that i plan to


the ninety's when we were doing it there were others doing it but it wasn't so pervasive right the language wasn't there but it intuitively made sense we need to be able to communicate together so that this is more efficient and it was fun friends


and so you're saying yess you can't follow through so you either stressing out to take care of all the gases or you don't follow through right and that starts to erode trust you're not reliability and you don't feel good you know i feeling guilty


so we're actually talking a very grounded language it doesn't mean there aren't feelings in there but there are somehow they're grounded it came from a lot of the work out of mit with the dialogue project some people might remember peter


aside but as an immigrant how did you find success and how do you define it because i think success merlin is invented is individually defined absolutely i want to hear your story my story was i


here i felt it a good cause actually i retired about a year and a half ago when i was looking for volunteer opportunities and i heard about this actually through a bike shop local bike shops i forgot to check it out came here and i enjoy it and i try to come here


said to get there you look like you about thirty so why why mental health you know it's funny i didn't really seek out mental health but what i found was that my friends and family


hard is that how hard is that it's very hard dr joye and i mean the world we live in now it's pretty complicated we've got social media we've got the political issue like going on exactly what you could talk about it yeah well i mean


what i wanted and what was really going on ok so how long did it take you to figure that out it took years ok yeah it really took years to figure it out again because i think sometimes we feel like if we


costs in state are exceptionally high and so we've identified over time and i've been doing the supply as to the catacombs risa people who really need help in subsidizing those the end user so and that's the problem the swell as we've been


which typically again people look over and say safety and they really don't take it to heart with everything going on all the time we need to know well people really don't think but until there's something horrific that


on anything people label is right that you know people because it prevents people from coming in however i do say that addiction is a disease and it's a disease because it follows the american medical associations definition of a disease which is it's


no you know we used to say back in the eighty's no one will ever get addicted to cocaine really oh yeah oh my god i know cocaine was an addictive first of all it was so expensive no would have that kind of money but we all


unbelievable so when someone comes in your office and you're assessing them kind of thing like we're really lucky today because we're able to listen to your side it's almost like you know you're coming in and i'm listening to you explain all these things that you do


are in charge so what keeps you motivated because i know that i was given this journey to really help and guide other people do you go so you so you know your purpose then it is absolutely my problem


image for delivery company i was in fashion i was p r for fashion and i done a lot of things for different companies and he said you should you should do fashion should be your collection i said come on get out of here said yes mom i'm going to


rita saxophonists who did did the band at the uptown theater he's dealing with some legal problems with some songs that he wrote and he's not getting some money for what he had written so we set him up with an entertainment lawyer that's part of


as you can see my marriage was never a great marriage realizing these things as they come along along with other things and this was my opportunity to try to come out myself as an individual again and move out of the business and eventually move out of that marriage


special in christine's going to do but let's talk about your message first i would tell the viewers really get honest with yourself and get quiet unplug from at all these distractions sit with


expense of your own office you know silex very professional exactly you know so that can be a great strategy depending on the business doesn't work for every business but depending on the type of business could be really effective


what's so beautiful people oh welcome to the dr joy show your prescription for total wellness and i'm your host dr joy ok so you can see here that we are going to eat on the dr joy show but before we get study you know what we


tax on those millionaires not making it a higher burden for those million or so that they might not have to leave leave also exactly so what do we end up with in the eleventh hour we ended up with a smattering of both and a little more ok you know there was a there was an increase in the corporate business


know hey we want everybody to be a member right but nonmembers of course are welcome but members the quest is less you know for them to come we want men we want women of every level because the idea here at this event is here from the top so that you can be informed on how you get


is a perfect position for balance this too also relaxes the nervous system and as you can see she's pretty relaxed and also develops concentration coronation and balance so gives you deep


so this is the cognitive diet show you know state you and there will be more experts and more topics will cover in the future but at the end of the day remember to cognitive diet lifestyle sure wants you to be happy to be


instilled we hear what our parents and our teachers tell us and that's gospel so that's four years and older yeah right right four years and younger so our great masters jesus christ buddha and


that i talk about in the book that you can come from that abuse where you i didn't even know what i was enduring you can come from the what would be viewed as the bottom of the barrel and rise up


it and then you did another through them a gram and it showed the correct balance that she should be in and she actually attained that correct and very interesting lee i had another woman who was very much like this she had an abnormal study we talked about diet lifestyle and she came back three


he went for oscar first and so and everyone thought that he was being for hardy and why you you know you could work with anybody why yes picking this guy up off the trash and you know


in school say hey listen you can still do this on your own right and we're going to give you ten free lessons over the summer to get good started to get to hope that it was the music to grab them and they would continue and so we've been doing now for this to be our


to me his somebody has said they want to call me nobody called me and and that very night i got a call so that was a coincidence that fun so i came back three months later i get a part and then i get to see the phone cause i'm like it's pretty cool


this what would you say to viewers for example you know i phones or fall how are people going to disengage from their i phone for five days you know i mean we're talking about five minutes we're constantly checking e mail or phone and you know and that also sends that message to the brain


not or in your policy before you get there before you sign on the line and start paying premiums absolutely but many policies are purchased through employers and employers h r departments don't know what are in these policies and to make them more


and bradstreet is the oldest business data collecting company in america since the eight lately can hundreds what is their purpose their purpose is to report your business credit now where do they make money because i'm always of the


going on is just learning there's just i mean it's that's why i love jazz so much it's just there's so many things that are it's infinite there to learn you know just different ways of voicing chords and and playing certain lines and just coming up with different types of like


somehow a lot of people can't you know and then they wind up giving up on music just because of that yeah i don't believe in all of that verbal abuse that you are bringing out the best in them i think you can bring out the best without all of that other garbage and you know i think


written and i don't want to be directed by anybody and so but i love i love playing clarinet and i had switched to saxophone my senior year but so i was playing both but clarinet was i could carry in the natural


the whole you know what a great big or is or thing go in and they left this house which had been boarded up for two it's been boarded up for twenty years now and we're finally getting a chance to to start fixing up the friends


that's awesome and you know will put some identification on there so people can find out where the you know where the foundation is and the price and you have a website obviously and do you have it i guess people can donate to the


that from that what i i think in two thousand and thirteen ok and i was part of the initial it was just about five people who launched the bucks county playhouse the revival anyway so i was you know working very hard on different community outreach and tactics and press


thing though you told me that the you're designing an award no yes or tell us about that this is really cool yes so it's funny i'm in my theater experience here i was you know doing professional stage production shots doing news shots for the


on a name this little boy and i could not pick that book up for year because within the whole year i was looking for a name and i couldn't go further and so i found his name and i finally found his name and i was able to


you got really good he lied well i'm scared about you you know that you know that whether that means you know seriously like you're healthy and so nutrition and the workout and the hydration and the relaxing and going out in


created a precedent even though it wasn't from this court it was from other district courts but i said the high desert was crazy i buying and your honor said no it's not binding and you said to the lower court that you have to the


think you probably understand our point but this is just an extension of the freeze of these categorizations if this order were vacated the freeze lapsed that wouldn't rewrite the rules it would simply go back through


say the tanker vessels agreement covers present tense some but not all u s vessels managed by the look that sounds to me like you're saying


not intended for this information to be released publicly in the final pool at j one hundred and nineteen the intent of these requirements is to ensure that local emergency responders and emergency response planning officials have access to sufficient information


given to the tribunal and that was testimony resulted in this amount of damages being awarded in connection with the appropriation of particular asset that was among other assets that works for a period and the


your side said if we chose not to send evidence to the article to the district court we were very explicit express about what we were asking for in the district court we were asking for a week to present the evidence we're not saying we were presenting the evidence we wanted


no means perfect there is as this court recognized in its two thousand and five settling devotional claim is decision necessary in precision because we have this mismatch between trying to replicate a relative marketplace on the one hand and a compulsory licensing scheme on the


that so i'm not in your reply brief you argue that


different people people who handle simple wills charge maybe a fixed and relatively modest fee or a relatively modest per hour free people who deal with complex class actions charge higher


that they applied to complex that are litigation in d c the district court tried to apply that same presumption to the usa airlines matrix and in the process jumped


and that's why i started with the growing consensus that the usa the new us cell matrix is better than the alternatives that we've had before there is a growing consensus developing in the district where that would be disrupted were this court to say that you'll never say the same thing about the


happened how many cases come from jurisdictions that we know charge less there's no reason that a consensus is the way we're going to resolve this question we actually need a matrix


general portion is extremely important in this case the administrative judge found and i quote no information in the record and no evidence in the record of animus or any retaliatory motive on the part of


distinct actual one for labor practices so for example in this case the border vanity includes distinct remedial components to both in this case either one would be sufficient for most of the remedy which is making all the


which it is undisputed happened in this case it's not the board's burden to show that there was a binding established packrat past practice preventing you know lateral action by the employer because the fundamental you want to change doctrine is that employers


run the step that can't be exactly right to the extent is treated the amended complaint as if it had been filed i'm so glad i


petition that there's no jurisdictional issue if we determine from this whole series of events of their intent was displayed then there's no jurisdictional issue if if this court determines that you can infer their intent from


there's a desire to keep the criminal investigation confidential and that might be in on another or some of the concerns that occur that have occurred and where you have the target of a civil investigation


that is reflected with a three million dollars figure so basis of seven hundred million dollars but a capital account of three million dollars and that's because that three million


indicated i'm going to address all sixty three but obviously also here to field any specific questions you have about the may row sixty three dollars requires two things basic things one that the judge be sufficiently familiar with the record and


the court should hold the line on focus and say and and it and stick with the view that if you have a legitimate non tax business purpose that is enough to avoid this very harsh medicine shamming archon there are no further question


indemnification part of it applies to third party arrangements and part of it only applies to first right yes i mean i don't think there's any magic to the use of the word indemnification that obviously has a tendency to be connote in terms of third parties right typically


dispute between them relating to arising out of or relating to this agreement or the breach europe section seven clearly related to breach as between the parties section six


circumstances i think it reflects a lack of confidence in the arguments that derive from the contract and from the evidence in this case the second of all i take her argument to conceded that indemnification can include first party


not adopting an official binding interpretation of the regulation it was just saying right now we're going to do what we did last year and it kept saying that we're going to do what we did last year it in the twenty one thousand dollars remaining as well so i think that this is on the


that year if it then continues the approach the subsequent year that triggers that a new well i see what you are saying and i actually disagree with that premise ok but i will point the court i think that you know if you did establish your interpretation before


fuel that actually needs the requirements to qualify under the statute so the registration requirement is how e p a insurers that renewable you know it's been made from the crop of renewable biomass using the proper


american petroleum institute and mineral energy i'm elizabeth dawson and light of the court's discussion with the advocates today regarding jurisdiction and time in the us to hear biofuels petitioner's arguments we would simply encourage the courts to


equivalent for some sort of purpose you know it's a statutory interpretation we look at whether we're mean whether we're just proportionately means and we say well it turns out these concepts may have on admitting this delta will help to explain why the commission hasn't just


income they received from their profession and two federal judges removed that successfully to federal court on the theory that the statute i'm sorry the ordinance made it unlawful for them to engage in their profession without


and ten there were some of the payments for disability were won some payments they were make up payments in that period that then became monthly afterwards and i was a reason why some of that was in amounts that weren't


held that notwithstanding amerada hess and notwithstanding your first principles arguments to us that signing the new york


common in midwestern river rivers of the same size dammed or when dams and that there wasn't any need


argument and when you cite city of coma that doesn't tell me you're making that argument and when you are raising this issue in the context of whether this additional record can be made part of the


where and in fact are we got a look at the effect on the species here and that's when you all come in and what you're analyzing is not the original license you're analyzing whether the proposed agency action which is st


differing missions of the agencies which as i said i don't think is really true but now they are telling the court that but now we're on track you know we're going to overcome these we're going to we got together we talked about it we're going to work it out and why some why shouldn't we critically


will be done the plan that they have has already slipped you know there are two parts where they were supposed to have come up with a voluntary agreement for public comment


this feels a bit like alternate reality this is not a case where these folks sat in scotland on their computer looked at a few things and went and built their business this is a case where


can i read again this is going for plan in the brief to us in the brief in the prior case the statute allows states limited measure of discretion over the ocean eligibility in that state agencies may choose


that says that


the litigation has been pending for very long time but the commission's position on the tax allowance did not was clearly that there was that the tax


is any other pipeline that the balance was subject to reconciliation it was subject to the same prohibition on collecting a return on cost free capital and just like any other pipeline with an overfunded balance for canisters diction over those rates as


highly unusual all of those words those don't seem to me to apply in the same way i understand maybe this isn't garden variety but there is a broad spectrum between garden variety on one side and


running of interest from the date of judgment you know what about it is an argument that it's just inherent in the concept of interest which is which would be judged griffiths textual hook right interest is


can't put this information on the receipt so you don't have to worry about safeguarding the piece of paper you can be swapping with whatever if you run into someone who doesn't do that you lost the right to use locking so to speak to lay it were over


wasn't one of those changes that occurred changing in december to not having macro pay but having the joint venture put paid having the obligation be the venture itself the that is true that the at in


citizen and matter of public concern and that speak to the fact that there was a union officer i don't think that the fact that he was a union officer played any role whatsoever there was so you


among themselves the exclusion of minority board members affiliated with the public school the so called public school faction they were courting one themselves the exclusion of of black board members who'd been supported by the white slating


argue that because he wasn't obtaining government employment the liberty interest claim did not apply but in fact the courts as far as i'm aware uniformly hold that being an independent contractor is


complaints that she made and their decision making the decision making is st search and you know that sorry supervisors to not discipline them for the challenge conduct and to not even


motion and remand for further factual development if necessary however we believe that this record is sufficient demonstrate that ms governor would not be likely to succeed on her st amendment clean under the law as it is now but


exercise that authority of today reducing the effect of sentencing mr rose would have to serve how he's how do you reconcile the different court's invitation to be u s attorney


congress chose not to make this these new mandatory minimums retroactive and this was not the u s attorney's decision ketek can i ask you getting back to your question asked in council and i think you can be asked


perhaps something that's required we in the hypothetical you've described your honor i believe that is the case because as i understand the hypothetical you've described a situation where they are demoted without any present motion


can you hear me thank you for your honour's counseling may please the court for over forty years and with full knowledge and acquiescence of the us department of education the state of connecticut has terminated special education


sought to do during the discovery it was the st anyone had heard of it and i understand what he's the point he's trying to make what i can say is this st of all states could not do i think what you suggest because there are procedures in


think that that is not a gross violation it shows that connecticut has for over forty years taken a very wise approach to the best way to deal with students who have not been able to graduate and are aging out


certainly the reason my client brought a lawsuit is because he was fired i mean we certainly do think that the pre term ation conduct was discriminatory but yes the the the obviously you know the firing is the most you know the starkest


separate from the adjudicative process at my p d and us as these are individuals who work under the commissioner and then they make our recommendation to commissioner kelly what she then accepted on this point so


respond that's one of a number of things that lead the court to find that there have been active concert and so just to take a few different things that your honor had mentioned we became aware during the


after the order has been in place and what what case possibly says that that you got material lawfully but you can later be enjoined from from the making it public most of the cases are about


this is a not usual scheme that goes from start to finish to do with the c c or b could not do and the been the reason why this case is special is because we have these officers whose rights will be irreparably harmed if this is released


disposition that permitted that allowed the continued operation of the quitman because that's exactly what happened the purpose of the amendment was to was to determine the


death from covert nineteen and that this court should be left with a definite and firm conviction that the district court clearly committed the mistake in finding that the risk of mr robertson's flight outweighs the risk of death or other


the nd which i'll refer to as the the infringement modifier is that there has been there with respect to those claims there has to be a patent infringement claim the could reasonably be asserted supposed to come and again listing is mandatory these are


writing by by the patent holder the patent office decides what inventions are properly claimed within the patent and the fact is that these patents in pain both types of claims and so and judge coach decision did not


that it is it is an agreement isn't forcible even if the risk is found to be unintentional inadvertent that's the very nature of the concept that if someone is so


important here because the dependent make a great deal out of the possibility of the store agent assisting the person st of all if the story gets going to assist the person in the car has no a brand markings the agent would have to go through the to


notice and a simple inquiry you know it's really out of the blue recall the cut the alleged contact here also which is it was a phone call you know out of the blue we never nobody saw the person just a


that my client's engaging in constitutionally protected speech and i may challenge it as i may find myself challenging at that future time but those are the circumstances we're under right now are more dire the government shutting my like


then visit the warehouse in premiere and interviews interrogates we say other employees get their contact information bill or that and keeps track of the routes and manages routes for caliber so he comes from a


here there are insufficient facts pleaded as to a relationship that would create a duty to disclose could you do that please you're addressing your question to i'm sorry


complaint to try to get the records from miss batchelor she gave gave us most of the records but she did not give us the records that showed that


lie that was not true and again miss peters i had called the superintendent and it and also said that my client had moved out of her home which is also false clearly you're not quite


difficult even if he has really an impossible if he is not released given the current climate additionally mr kelly has been the subject of an unprovoked attack while incarcerated at


to accommodate those requests and again i would point out your honor that given the fact that no trial is currently scheduled and the fact that the defendant currently has


we're not going to let you do it because there had been under way now we're not if you don't believe it was to morocco in his reply brief midsomer conti says that the decisions that you referred to of other judges in the western district


certain cases it's not clear what cases those are and certain cases there's a new test and that new test not require a balancing of the heart but that's not correct we know from this circuit's


their to their business operations on and it can't be that that just ends up in a and in a wash and i think that that courts including this court have had validly considered likely to success and thinking about how that balance of harm


case i mean you have a moon all you nuts case the issue with that is twofold one i would argue that it can big us because the st paragraph which deliberately removed the term loan from the identical provision


indorsement was intended to in effect plug a gap where students on a bus were injured and this is where i think it high i can highlight it that it makes sense if a bus company that


allegations of sexual impropriety against faculty just the same as it does students and in fact the investigators invoke policy six point four if they did so in email they did so in the final report that


your honor that neither the complaint nor the the record indicates one way or the other but what we know from the email from capital one close in his accounts is that capital one viewed the why overdraft line of credit as part of the


so for all of these reasons we do request that that the case be remanded is that began you know mr solomon believes he's been labeled the world's a sexual predator and he has groped to understand why and we don't think that it is asking this court


there's some more serious problem with your response it's one thing to tell discord at a pretrial service is refusing to do something it's quite different to say that they don't have the capability of doing


to indicate that a mortgage loan servicer has an obligation to mitigate losses on its faults and mortgage loans otherwise last medication accordingly not only was the district court's holding


only entity that was that had the power and the ability to record the mortgage loan instruments and it was auckland themselves who indicated that they would not be able to implement the


the the st issue which i'd like to address is regarding the failure to record the title on documents as is noted in the record this i quit and had been working on the


by its very terms the order was applicable only to the pretrial stages of the litigation and would be reconsidered upon commencement of the trial now in this case the protective


country i don't i don't understand how that wouldn't be true here i mean this is at this democratic national convention the choice of a vice presidential nominee maybe nominally or at the threshold be in the


and cars i mean employers who are tenant activities inside the shipyard to openly and notoriously discriminate against the handicapped because they cannot get to their work now we've got


by the defendant there needs to still the tate the criminal activity where the rape victim was forced to accompany him and forced to carry the drugs on his person or her person at the direction


them or for that matter force the state to to make them go certainly with regards to prison inmates those kinds of things are commonly done by agreement between the state


those particular words and i want to clarify that that's not what we alleged if you look at page at paragraph ninety three of the complaint which is in the excerpts of record of pages sixty eight and sixty nine you'll see that those


so the last sentence is merely a clarification of an implementation in other words you can't just go on the internet without obviously first having a computer monitor c p u and perhaps some other devices


transaction was impossible it was impossible to undo it and therefore we had to live with the consequences of it and seek the remedies in the form of concepts like fraud and conversion fraudulent conveyance but if you're looking at a


becomes mooted by the supreme court in california and this court but don't we have a unique situation here where the now the questions that the court below the district court's decision reached a different issue and why should we vacate that


there just is no realistic possibility of this having a precludes an effect in the future it would have to be another case where plaintiffs sue the judicial council over these ethics standards and these


as as three circuits have have found and the court should should remember that the district court's opinion had adverse rulings against against plaintiffs


where the insured and uninsured have certain responsibility this case the insured having reimbursed on these recoveries and i understand your argument if you have massive preemption and we're not going to i'm just wondering if that


government's case the tester is not saying all of this is a case where the only strong evidence was the cooperation witness the defense attorney saying look my client was scared out of his mind because he got in here and he saw that video he saw himself on it


distributed the drugs he also had a telephone number listed in his name at that address and perhaps more importantly the agent indicated that his training and experience showed that drug traffickers are people in the business of distributing drugs commonly retain


really not in the record is the only point but they're looking at the captain's conduct what this court needs to look at and what the limitation act looks that is the owner's content i think it would be a


objection at the time the sentencing but what's more is that if there's an examination of the factual bases there's also an examination that the united states did not respond during the objection process the


development of the record then how can this core properly rule your honour's if there are rules and guidelines provisions which describe a dispute resolution process and there are if the district courts rely on that process to explain and


of the first thing that's wrong with that is that while mr pfeiffer just testified that in certain cases imprimis premiums can be increased there was no testimony in this case that they were in fact increased and the court noted that in his


in the mandatory language and again based upon the plain understand plain meaning of the term is authorized the fact that the congress didn't include that propositional phrase this that make this mandatory


and constant objections and demanded a ruling on a roll thirty two which never happened here the government did not highly objection to the pre sentence report writers draft report the government did not file an objection to my sentencing


particular enhancement the fact that one of these students was an emancipated minor in no way diminishes that teacher student relationship in fact this girl in all of those girls were particularly


under either standard under either provision and we've got to be careful not to go right into that statute that if the judge finds there substantial assistance then he must down


maybe something was wrong the stickers in the name of cindy converse the driver cindy there's obviously a female name the driver's a male it's a logical place we're ok we have an expired plate let's


the order that's production i think that's not proper you need to look at the evidence and seen in plain view of one further point on my frank's motion and that is there is a serious problem with the transcript in the chain


i've done is in my brief i am spending an awful lot of time on the effective assistance of counsel argument and a lot of the argument is predicated upon the


be the subject of cross examination is instead of the matter that a judge should do a totally unrealistic burden on the defendant i mean it's just drawing attention to all of the documents that the plaintiffs


the merits claim being denied the continuance it should be looked at as a concert context will feature to my entire argument here the government wanted to move forward and then when the government stood up and


changes if you look at the scope changes lest it runs from page thirty six to play sixty nine it has over nine hundred something islands of which the ones we're talking about are only a very few


but perhaps the best example is if an if the c g attorney filed a financial statement requesting payment to a court court look at it


has spelled out he doesn't get any more more than that you know because if he wanted more than that there obviously way someone making who has a three million dollars package can negotiate to get a five million dollar package


he did i think clear of some of the factual issues but some of them i think for main problematic one is it is a disputed fact what was said in the meeting when he was terminated mr libeling claims that he didn't terminate him


say well this is clearly not probable cause and therefore you know it doesn't matter what if you're a gas then there is the gray area in between and then there's an area that is clearly proper for


what the documents are because the declaration of david mcmakin provides no limitations to what they are it's just speculation and guesswork to try to determine what it is that those documents show and and it's


record to my knowledge and i recall nothing on the record saying how often they meet monthly as was insinuated the fact is they may quarterly that's not in the record either but they don't meet monthly i don't think that's in the record the way they do function is they


keep her from testifying and he's not talking about anybody if law enforcement comes around not talk about anybody he's talking about anything that rolls on kathy the logical inference to be drawn from this is that he was


any defense no matter what evidence he has to support it what does that do for the rules that basically permit the trial court to exclude from the evidence arguments on


nation yes in fact this is the earliest i'm not in the same i'm sorry so direct relief against the nation i don't think any direct really to start as a practical matter the relief will affect the nation but i don't think they're seeking any order that would run


can flip this and say well we know that the tribe if we did this on its own building its own conference center doing its own mining could have preferential treatment for the crime but it's not


nothing about illness d eighteen addresses illness and in the event of illness call and say he has to give back the guaranteed compensation which is what paragraph eight two covers thank you i don't


and directed entry of judgment four of the the cellar on earth that reversed the verdict and it was a the action was by the seller for the purchase price


in january of two thousand and the and then again going to fact until december of two thousand but this is what they said when an amendment such as the amendments to rule seven or three over rules prior


because he had already been working at kroger then his move from the c e o of fred meyer to the vice chairman of the board and c e o of the kroger company which is a three times larger company after the merger would be considered a subsequent bonafide


prevail on the first issue that of coverage we need to show three things we need to show advertising activity we need to show allegations that raise the potential for liability arising out of one of the enumerated offenses in this case


similar here and it deals with their own the cost benefit analysis must be particularly when this is something that again i emphasize we're not talking about mere monetary fines with a


if we look at a qualified immunity issue restraint make that i think that the and really i want to talk a little and in the time i got about fourth amendment claim versus the fabricated evidence claim the two constitutional


was really a reason that they fired her and starting with miss stiegel for example and i've already mentioned this they are going will testify will she refused to move to another time


don't know that he was hampered from


quite frankly that there was nothing left every element of all of its case was effectively procedurally extinguished although further that all of it didn't contest that basis of the district court's decision in its appellate


target execu it is the supplier agreement that contains the insurance requirement section that target claims allows it to qualify as an additional insured on the


and target i do not know what the why we believe the district court's analysis of as far as the termination provision was it was erroneous


eight d that the suppliers to provide target with certificates of insurance concurrently with the execution of this agreement and upon each renewal of such policies which would seem to indicate a


stand please to quote this case presents in the brief many many issues and that the police were fairly largest box immigration cases are concerned but i would submit to the court that the resolution can be decided on a much


judge roemer did i answer your question i'm not sure if that's what you're getting ad or i'm left with the feeling that we just don't know i would agree that there are


trying i'm just trying to get a handle on these this interesting set of situations where the trial judge produces an award sometimes the trial judge will reduce an award because there's a


prisoner being a captive audience that he can't go anywhere else very sensually i mean to embellish your argument the parties assume i'm looking at one part of the judge's


illinois it's going to be two years in wisconsin's can be six years in other states is going to be whatever number of years so this sort of another question do you think the supreme court would borrow here from state law which would take you back into the line of cases that you're talking about or do you think


it is you know he was subject to the agreement i thought he was in subject to prepare for the sales quote is right well i think due to a couple of actions that the defendant said take it


other two significant issues both the statute i've already cited i'll just call to you i am statute and i the case of to preview which around nineteen ninety nine the case of the previous significant case in indiana and interpretating


the legal challenge that he is making to the determination of the part of homeland security is something that someone in his position could not be expected to or to q late as they were pro se detained and within a ten day


arrested who arrives at the jail must change into a jail uniform and the evidence from testimony of ceos of correctional officers at the jail is that they implement that policy by using force if someone comes in and doesn't want to change into a jail uniform they


she could have obtained that the judge could have clearly continued the case for the judy casement that remember your honour's disclose she was on represented she was never physically brought to the court here in chicago she was held in a jail in another state dodge county


risk that the rates are going to be increased now from the defendant's perspective the defendant may believe that rates may have to increase as well question is did the defendant make a misrepresentation about an intention to


a lie or a misunderstanding of the question is respond it was probably a misunderstanding that if the person has trouble with the english language or he doesn't it's just amazing how he flips back and forth and remember that judge


that were that were left by the parties of the district court but rather to have the record reflect what actually happened so there is no you know allusion in the district court about the fact that the executed form was actually presented at the time that the


for not for harming where is he now and for how long he was he's i'm not sure what what institution is in but he's in the bureau of prisons he's in custody of the of the court imposed two years of custody


think it was on the low end of six twelve seven thirteen something along those lines like lange came in the government wanted and essentially within the guidelines sentence my client asked for the low and if there wasn't back to violation the judge sent him off for two


control of the assets was getting control of them to put them in the joint accounts with right of survivorship so the fact that they're there the fraud it in large measure has already occurred at the time that that happens in march of two thousand and thirteen she also has mr ray


mr schmidt after he left the company was done by mr keenan and approximately seventeen percent by mr borsch or there's a suggestion that this was some sort of cover up but frankly there's


no substantial evidence supported are the limitations for three car to the flexion and rotation of the neck the unscheduled breaks throughout the workday as well as being off task for more than ten percent of the day the latter two have to do with


of an organization he doesn't know whether it's been classified as a terrorist organization if the if the name is public he will focus you know


under public scrutiny and it would further the goals of for a transparency to all citizens for its government actually what it was specifically does someone do with this information well first of all it furthers the aims of for you it allows


august twenty seventh so in sense he's taking advantage of what the district court offered but that goes off into the black hole and you know when he asks about it the court says oh you know you're too late you can't


that we have before is because we don't then you know then we're in a different standard of review and lots of other things that didn't work right so the way we brief the issue is that it was a bit of a very different


that there is a fence well there may be a fence there maybe a door that you have to go in to get to the elevator to go up right right is that a structure within the meeting with the meaning of tailor generic part


the record here and i say that mr cates did not credibly contradict ms lemons as to what happened because both to the police and then he admitted it in his own


yes in fact you can reconsider all these things you can take into consideration what i've done since the original sentencing but there was a lot of confusion about that obviously a lot of these things that the thompson supervised release case was about was about


especially trees which brings us back to the well but i think i'm the reason i'm pushing is because our as i see your case you please correct me if i'm wrong but your big complaint seems to be the decision of the u


she did the checks but forgot to log two and she admitted it during a deposition that she forgot to log in with respect to plaintiff mr harris's five disciplinary actions previous actions all of those were


why is this separate three hour period separately compensable it's all one detention i don't know why it would be separately compensable your client has already recovered from


is without without foundation we're going to do that as a way to keep control of the streets so the chances that any one individual would have to face an


get a b and c you will not get anything from the settlement i think the defendants as the proponents of the settlement had a duty to put in the notice a statement to that effect had a minimum


it was pretty heavy wasn't he he had pain from time to time and he had of fike it and i think he stopped the prescription for morphine a year before the accident and he testified that he never lost a day


students and bible college seminary so so even though they may not be fully degreed or are commissioned like the lutherans do they are within the heart of the free exercise protection we we


schools to say well you can teach this but you're not going to be able to get it and take a student loan with government guaranteed or whatever it is for that course but but the free exercise clause doesn't


exposure it does not have to be the cause but only needs to be a cause and i would take it a step further in the coward's case which was cited in a


at the time is a primary reason that courts apply the categorical approach in the first place in math the supreme court specifically mentioned this reason saying that a defendant may have no


since you don't know anything about who these people were or why they came to the conclusion that they wanted to go talk to the bar owner and say you had a gun because we really can't i mean actually x post we know he did have a gun but that's not the way we're supposed to


tried to text officer holmes he hasn't responded go find him and he asked for holds my name so the bouncer went out found officer holmes among those five or six officers holmes and comes back and meets with kyle peterson so holmes and peters


tent in there at all and as this court defined it in in edwards the court said it's best understood as providing two examples of an enclosed structure rather than creating two separate


period it issue the government highlights one time when it went up to sixty six percent which would be normal in terms of the ejection fraction finding however on that point out in that same test which was and twenty ten i believe it was in october two


indemnified there'd still be the same number of shares of stock outstanding other companies would have had just hardly a hundred cents on the dollar resolution of the bankruptcy your that's entirely correct your honor but what would have happened had glacial expat ahead of time is that evan


like you're trying to get this brady point across based on something that requires a couple of layers of speculation and that's what worries me about well that it's like my study


that is a present over capacity i urge the city to require the impact be on large developers to pay for the waste water treatment capacity that they will require and not


down one specific option that endor energy modeling is going to be based on you know the the the performance of the building envelope windows etc as well as the mechanical system other factors are


you and thank you for the presentation as many know i am a parent of a current high schooler and the need for a new high school does not escape me in any


the limits within our building dictate some of our curriculum our teachers should dictate our curriculum having classrooms that have the capacity to be flexible to have a socratic seminar to have a group assignment in order to achieve


you for the little nuggets that we're borrowing as we borrow them that as our referee choir's your approval for us to both apply for the loan as well as execute any loans so they'll be ample opportunity for you to check in on these commitments before you actually let us spend the money


to maximize height and in turn maximize loading so it's not as though the design that is completed is one in which it leaves potential for development on the


what could occur is there could be more office or more residential or more retail than might be expected but none of those are big drivers of loading unloading is just that an example would be


as jennifer koch when we met with the i t staff for the city read and various other parties so all of these different activities are happening in the design side and then


my question was next door l or square does have parking room but it's a different style structure building it's different because it's just residential it's wood from the third for a second floor so with a little


for me we can't wait for the federal government to sort this out and i believe that if we eliminate the insurance companies from this equation then we could get the equivalent of in all payer model


a very different point of view this is a really important issue for me having four children four young children two in school two entering the school system this this coming fall


first and right now our harm reduction center safe recovery to fully operate would need about six hundred thousand dollars we could happen implement that in every single county and spend only half only half of what i have allocated out of tax and regulate


tonight as soon as possible we have a closing date of october fifth but this should be done pretty well ahead of up because other things connected


many people were going to be on line so a chance to see what was the action happening there and what were the trends and in particular i was thinking people were going to be wondering what i was going to do with this information to try to take the understanding that i was making out of the information and put it forth with the invitation to


corrections if they think that you've missed missed something along the way but one of the things i've been trying to figure out if i could give you any guidance around is how to manage that piece because it is a very complex thing you're trying to figure out and i do encourage you to take some time to digest and deliberate


ok and then any any questions that or things that you want to have there for us on the thirteenth we should be sending


next to other residential there's a number of potential buffers that are allowed by the byelaws when you are residential the residential when your residential to a street you are generally required to provide a street tree section as is already existing


no so public worse controls the right of way of the public streets we can't we view the d r v can't require anybody to do anything on a public street they can propose something on a public street like parking as


not allow that and so we do require the applicants to show us a lighting plan in this case exteriors lighting is really limited to lighting that area and the walkway adjacent to the building we're just seeing proposed use of existing parking lot lighting and


authorized by w d p six sixty three i forty two already moved at the wilson development review board having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required


very important aspect and should be considered however citizens opinions aren't always consistent with best design practices for safe roads i've listed the facts it's not my opinion the rumble strips are not at h


communities are combined into a single section titled features of ecological significance and this new section basically takes information from the


preferred strategy for the neighborhood residents that came to speak to us and we had had a very good turnout of so twenty five thirty people so it was a well attended meeting and we were we were impressed


driver making feel uncomfortable going too fast another quick curve extension just kind of narrow the road people told us that on occasions they would park on the street even though they have a two car driveway and


way to kind of put a river together have a how to classify these issues as they come up will be different responses that are appropriate for each issue so what we've done here to start is as rubric which defines different levels


we are using it and the promo strips are in there i wasn't aware of that i'm going to find out for sure not that i'm saying somebody isn't correct and i'm also going to find out why and if that's the case why they were put in a report that we were


statement from each candidate and then we'll go to a round robin question and answer where we'll ask each senator one question the other two will then have the opportunity to respond and we begin with senator chris pearson of burlington your opening statement


reports will be coming to us between october and november i am very interested in some of the information that we'll be getting from our mental health folks in the state as well


that works for regular vermont and for working families and this is the voice that i try to fight for day in day out my pillar and i hope people will support me they get thank you thank you to all of our candidates for joining us this evening and throughout these last three


potentially more of the world of the bond payment that hitting next year's tax rate what that stage in would look like if you do a comparison of option one of the two i think fairly easily in terms of what the stage tax impact would look


it passed which sure that would be another discussion all week and a half but assuming that we were it would delay implementation meaning that we're extending the number of years in which a valued


other side that people feel strongly about that there's a maybe a different holistic approach that takes place that leaves behind a stronger community but that's part of our go to it's not just political calculus in counting


order to file a corrected mylar there was no comment so is anyone willing to able to offer a motion on that consent agenda and second move


recreation architectural form and character review uses and density is one the planning commission is going to be really gauged in this and we are proposing


for those nights and that's one one night a month one of our one meeting a month now can we you know we talked a little about this but can we also include a standing item on the other meeting


back to the schedule because that's what the started this is just discussion that we are going to ask are you going to take this to contract you've got to do this relatively soon i'm assuming this is the schedule yeah i mean i know with that we might have the potential to accelerate but we also might


know additional meetings or whatever so i think that's an excellent point homework


and thank you to both our candidates as well running for reelection we wish them all best of luck a reminder that the primary is tuesday august fourteenth general election is less than a month away four months away


working with the four of us tonight ok we're on to public to be heard this is a time for the public to speak to the select board on topics that are not on tonight's agenda is there anyone here wishing to speech


basis and you know having the opportunity to work in different units got got me able to see how you know larger agencies are run also gave me an appreciation for smaller agencies too because there's a lot of advantages to working in a in an agency like ours


specifically for this so we'd have to find whatever additional funds from sperm some are there but it seems like to be a complete package it would make sense to include that so and then seeing how it's


director or the assistant you know town manager or it's of the it's another employee that the would be under the direction of the manager ok so right now the treasurer


patrols in three towns court security and drug payback stuff so that's pretty much what i've accomplished over the last thirty one years and i want to continue to do that for the next four i think we're lucky to have two such people point after this


and let the voters know and by the way i want to make sure that everyone realizes go out and vote but michael michael major what is give us a minute or so of your movement there thank you over my thirty


good point it is a little difficult and economic development or economic vitality is a it's a it's a challenging section to start with as well so we may leave these questions and some of this may just work itself out as we get further into the


twenty two for mr protest in other words it will take somebody we to actually sit down and write the program that would pull out the names and zip codes of people who took driver safety classes right answer know this report and then proceed over the


most exemplified by the nature of cross see a nation that defense counsel would conduct when the standard is free simple doubt as opposed to the cross


what she should ever get didn't accrue the transaction he could refuse to execute that deed his his name was still on the title of the property according to him are you aware of the burden of proof is relative to


saying just like we didn't in the elgin case the by the b because of the success or liability provisions the william ryan homes acquired properties subject


law for his or her own residential occupation is like a person only a single lot or as a developer may be purchasing the entire tract but in a case like this one where the developers have purchased less than the entire tract and considerably


his counsel couldn't really communicate with them and counsel says on the record i kind of thought maybe he could get it together as some point if we could work this out we may have to kind of information in this case about what defense counsel to


failures of the defense counsel to challenge these assumptions that were being made and you know resulted in the court just getting bombarded with one version of what this man's


straightforward clear it's on the big you it now here the trial judge sentenced defendant to twenty one years imprisonment immediately afterwards the trial court gave the sixty dollars piscean managements and nothing in dover


my lack of experience but i did say in criminal courtrooms for ten years i've never seen a sick so poor district to begin filed before the conclusion of the entire case i've never seen one filed


reliable because she gave the same version of that of events to multiple people there is a through line of truth to her statements the state presented evidence of the recency ever injuries given the fact that the photos to taken very shortly


over here all right mr mccoy can you hear me yes sorry about these little problems here mr mccloy the defendant was a resident of georgia


would have this court believe that the officer not only should investigate whether or not the gun was possessed legally but should have investigated in some way that how the bullet holes


cause the officer concerned the officers don't are required to ask questions before they place a defendant in coffee or or and or secure the weapon


individual from carrying a gun aguilar does not say that you cannot put reasonable for a good bishop is on that in georgia the reason the prohibition was that you are present prevented from carrying a


until various requirements are met including evaluation by a student athlete by either a medical doctor or an athletic trainer this is strikingly similar to the protocol that was in place at home high school in two thousand


a concussion all of the should have been a suspicion that they needed to take the next best athlete examined by the athletic trainer a medical director i'm sorry medical doctor and that's even underscored even more by the fact that the record


actually certified here but i'm i may ask you you you set out your promise and so my i may ask you to for the other side of that certainly and part of your question was today to use it for any purpose and i would say no


that the issue of required or the best answers are supported by expert opinions most likely from doctors


defense expert is testifying also in this case also testifying that it was his opinion that the call did not cause or contribute to either the surgery that my client hand or that are the pain she


entry was proper as well because there was no credibility waiting involved i think it counsel sort of way out of the wall correctly that own bank is entitle to rely on the way in trustee signature on a mortgage so


present something and here we have nothing to wipe it in i understand that this is questioning the record but in the end unless some issue is going to be a lie by the


of the fact that he knows but the place could burn down i mean even assuming he's not trying to intentionally burn the house down ok he's just trying to cover up that there his presence there by burning the papers in


response to that your honor is that we don't have to prove every step of the chain and that's why we give the present fish a case on the mortgage foreclosure law you just have to establish which we did we have a copy the no copy of the mortgage we allege the


at this charging the firearm which led to the jury's question seeking clarification about that term


because we are discussing personal jurisdiction it's necessarily a fact intensive discussion i'd like to just give a nutshell version of the events that brought us to this place today which is one who literally question certainly


record to review it please the court i'd like to take this time to respond to some new arguments that were raised by the state for the first time in its reply brief