be not english speakers because i think the the potential confusion for the reasons that you talked about are the greatest in those kinds of cases i would demand something more than just the rule level with it's


have wayne county not ataman area and monroe county not ataman area right next to each other and everybody back in the office just generally refers to that big old area not ataman area but when you're testing going forward to see if they come into attainment


this material we would like the opportunity to use classics wells free of record regulation that means that e p a also has shaped the competitive environment in which we're operating and our ally on the savoring


morning i plan to focus on the sufficiency of the evidence argument and i also wanted to briefly address the role for sixteen c claim and specifically addressed the effect of the illinois supreme court's decision in people first as health there's no


recall violation into a gambling operation so why should i and basically what you're saying in your case is that the recall violation both standing to the plaintiffs


actually change in the ordinance the two thousand and five packs ruling would have to have an impact from that point for it's clear the city council if they did and the department of revenue if they wanted to miss to reinterpret


it makes logical sense it's supported by what dr cohen is saying it's even supported by walk and what doctor deny him is saying to an extent to the extent that he's willing to admit yes falling backwards like this and reaching out and grabbing with your


conscious disregard how annoying that one handed spat utter indifference or a conscious disregard for the safety of others absolutely how can you have an inspection system and actually go out to a hands on inspection document that inspection on a regular basis


that the earliest that the department had concluded there i think was six months that means that the employer had been found to not have been engaged in a substantial normal operation for six months and it wasn't until after the six month period that somebody had said hey


cases again that we've seen have to do with there's a case on file the parties are separated the fellow goes to vegas there are no documents i only give seen anything or any court of review has seen anything quite like this where the parties are still living together


that's again that's really talking about the merits of the case which we didn't get to and our position simply is you know there was a capital call it was for valid business reason there's no dispute there was a need for money there there are demand is that just because we deserted


which we found later but and but i don't think i think the whole purpose of this act justice coming to him is to ensure that there is a correction of the wrong


why he didn't do she said in april of two thousand and eight you were supposed to submit your time records and i don't even titian and you didn't do it don't we still mr lang go


we know the children are there we know the dog with her everybody says that according to the miner and according to general thing john then turns to his son and says take the dog and go in the back yard he's creating this zone of safety in the backyard there's a stack


at the actions of mr griffin i'm going to take my children because i don't and them around the police while they're looking for patrick eat the children don't know anything about patrick and what he did away from the home i'm going to take my dog which is a big dog and i'm going to put him in


this area to make everybody say and to keep my children away from these police who are going to be searching the house i think looking at that a reasonable jury can say ok i'm giving you permission to go into the backyard and in fact if you


write you know printed mr griffin stamp his might be a little different he didn't have to go to counseling you know he did have all these problems that took years to work through but you know it's the kid here that kind of gets ripped off by an improper jury instruction


no party has a right to obstruct the jury on issues that raise c c's in this is clearly raised as it was raised during the proceedings during the jury instruction conference in my motion for judgment that was painting a verdict fagin reminded the court that i


clear of an area with just a steel asked a question of on that was the communication between the front door and officer we said i just wanted to make it clear that there wasn't first of all there wasn't a plan about a hand route the plan was for bite to go in the backyard and


you know sort of adopt your approach to this case and use it to expand what you might otherwise have gotten to work been able to demonstrate a little stronger had you


right the jury decided that thirty five percent of the two point seven million would pay thirty five percent of the total liability and that they never knew the number two point seven but thirty five percent of the two point seven million would be the


church i agree more important to me is i grant she needs to show a risk i strenuously dispute that the case should be found compensable on the basis that she had


feeling drug addict under the auspices of a psychometrist writing for pain medication the only support for that position that you just stated is your third independent medical medical examiner right the first two


that a contractor is not entirely free to do the work in his own way we're peaking once is a pleading that makes that says sold so before you're ready you're only being held we're looking for liability against you


points to a number of factors but the underlying plaintiff doesn't point to any of those factors and unless he does and until he does there is no cover complaint and there is no allegation that culti is liable for someone else's negligence certainly not it's liable for the


is what purpose could someone have in pushing her off the train if it wasn't in fact more likely to have been a negligent pushing because the individuals may be taking too


trying to retain substitute counsel and he's only allowed to make so many phone calls for so many minutes per month he has to work with family members and friends to try to find someone out here in chicago i mean he's up in wisconsin


to try to find someone who can represent him in a matter here as substitute counsel and you know as soon as we got the call an edge or is from my firm decided that we would take the case we want i immediately called to see how we could go about becoming


no if the defendant arrived there at sixty or thereabouts and mr court you know gives a statement at six thirty am implicating the defendant that could be so you're talking about an arrest having occurred prior to that


that's really the point but what if the complaint itself is opposed to the contract which are arguably would include information that could could be read to include information we could never possibly absolutely confidential but the complaint


so bottles talks about cases where won't exactly what they talked about in their case where a patient went to see a doctor in indiana and that patient received medical services in indiana and then subsequently developed a


per two years before that since one nine hundred ninety six based on not only his own his own doctor but the responders so position so that's not supported by the record also that the respondent i mean scuse me the


don't that's that's what we're here for third and finally i want to go to the trial or concerning you mean testimony because it does time into the second issue concerning the four fourteen liability we submit


all arguments is a privilege not a right we are grateful for the opportunity to address the court today and for all the reasons in our brief we ask you to dismiss you know just no setting the verdict for remand for a new trial thank you very


out and the cases is still monumentally overwhelming on all the other charges there were i think they went to charlie recently for forty one counts or they started with forty one they went with twenty three the


sixty eight days later or two hundred twelve days later feel what it is but why should one why should the rule be so harsh the rule isn't that harsh your honor this is an adversarial system and both


again you are it just depends on is it's a does the factual situation presented is it more like ten where there's as a story or davis where there's a series of criminal acts that are independent and overt or whether it's a simultaneous


it it's not a question of rewriting anything if we were trying to rewrite or change the contract i think questions of consideration would come in but they don't and then in this aspect that we believe on behalf of by what judge canard


some allegations s to retention of control even though the theory a spouse under that leading would still be direct liability there would be a step in the right direction i can't say


one more exceptions to the general rule without giving either the issue or dirty sure any kind of definitive answer to how we how you would handle this problem when you were both a victim of the third party


nowhere was more persuasive to the dryer a fact that this job was something he was people who will do it should have taken that position let me for argument's sake acquiescent that the problem is even if he has to come


no right to deny him access to counsel but that the questions asked were more than just general questions because the police were asking him basically what happened the stay where were your kids the stay what about your car things that ended up connecting him to this fast alibi


prejudice and it argued that one of its affirmative defenses should be that the case should be dismissed on an affirmative defense as a matter of law and that it said in its pleading that in the


happened in the past ok so you appeal to the arbitration act or that that's a good point and what your second answer the second answer has to do with it almost demonstrates the nature of the agreement the occurrences that you're talking about the claims that you're talking about those would all


traveling employee to category the title is an exception not the standard traveling employees or hers pacific people that are granted an exception that they are required to travel away from home i just want to


make any finding that that testimony that there was a mistake that it was not credible but i would suggest trying under cross appeal to the bronx state sever that they have a repeal of with a ruling with respect to successor


abandonment so to the extent that back we need to focus on what happened the unrefuted testimony is a painter and counsels thank you both the case will be taken under advisement


judgment i apologize i wish i would have written this down on the record before hand but we had attached a copy of the real estate agreement a copy of the mortgage a copy of


he's in a sense the officers are creating their own criminal activity on the part of the defendant by having the subject of fear of safety so that they have a right now to to perform that path if the defendant have pulled out a gun and


that's an open question i think that's exactly what the d n a testing goes to in this case because this story is contesting that the results of the d n a testing would not be materially relevant but it it absolutely would be materially


was able to talk about again evidence in the colors that mr gladstone or kiki were wearing there was nothing strategic about that it was very clear and came out during the state's case in chief that he's a latin count


reasons there's been another dozen cases since the creighton university case in the seventh circuit but more importantly for purposes of this appeal of the cross appeal is that there's no precedent suggesting that any sort of different educational


and you have to look at what the ross court said specifically have to look at what he was like during the training his receptiveness his attentiveness his ability to absorb it that's his mind at the time of the training and you've got to get into his mind at


the effort he put forth has to do with what is true of abilities in two thousand and four when he was seeking benefits when he was receiving benefits his exams were consistent the treating doctors the treating therapist noted in consistencies


hasn't reached then and only comes that hands at one point well it would end when the employer reaches them in mind which in this case is in january two thousand and eight and the evidence then makes it that the wage differential is


saying is a mentally ill and mentally ill a man who was unfit to practice law the mistake that it's find that they take up the mantle and represent murder defendants there's no slippery slope here there's no danger that that you were creating a


authority the discretion it's a separate issue a trial court has the authority to give the suit was filed the instruction versus the defendant's right to have that instruction tendered they are different and the illinois supreme court has spoken that the tracker


out that's the point of electing the board of education that's the point of giving them the policy making authority you know if the public is not happy with the way the schools are going to be run they elect a new board and the board does what it based public wants it


at some point that miss wing asked her for a stool to sit down sometimes that's the extent of it and when you you feed into they add or add to they have the fact that she had had ongoing back problems in one nine hundred ninety


it was transferred by a local rule two to down to the downtown of the first municipal district as provided by rule et that point there was litigation and


thirteen college contributions to different petitions


tactical reasons that they didn't want to be in a position where they had both claim scope with a clear head entire section of bits of the opinion dedicated to this issue because it clearly held that both of them could have gone to the jury now not in the majority case


the bottom of their pontoons were not in them that is that is certainly a fact and i'm not running away from the effect at all nor my running away from proximate cause i'm just pointing out that in the crowd towards you with this she never reached they had we have plenty of


them to do our duty as i said before is in loco parentis it would be an extraordinary parent even if they knew that their teenager was prone to sneak out or had snuck out before to stay up all night and watch them that would be extraordinary


in which case she also did not mention the instant lawsuit or three forty one meeting of creditors she was specifically asked point blank whether or not she had any assets other than the assets that were listed in her schedules she stated no


by especially not taking into consideration both the police record by the investigating officer or his deposition testimony regarding that report he trial court appeared to find if you obviously needed quote firsthand knowledge


works for the village of going to you and he has no pekin a very interested in the cause of action he doesn't take any money he's a salaried employee and no allegation of any personal interest has ever been made about him and to the extent that


indicated that you know this it's only in the narrative section of the report that officer sandow indicated that i misspoke when violated attraction that's not true if you


of way again the acceptance issue is not before this court that was something that was determined on the motion to dismiss not properly appealed but even if this court finds that it is before it the case law is clear


a conviction that was a pain you during a fair trial with what the supreme court d'angelo johnson's case not closely balanced evidence the defendant has failed to meet the required showing of a substantial showing of


executives at here on were making so in other words you know we've alleged that the directors are being paid by executives and they're saying no no no that's only if you look at the base salaries if you look at the equity based compensation then you know there's and it's not even close well the equity based compensation in


in addition to the arbitrator's exceeding their jurisdictional limits the arbitrator's also committed gross errors of fact and law on the face of the award when it made warded the sub


and there were no there was no adamant on it the healey case says that if heidi's entitled to rely on the existing code at least until there's an amendment


really it is best advice thing is really did say it's a it's a reliance doctrine as far as i can tell that it's reasonable for me to rely on burbank zoning if it's a permitted use for me to build the three things so on the i've got the architectural plans i'm


she i'm trying i'm sorry doctor responds well it's pretty strong she was really backing up and talking on the cell phone at the same time yes you would have to question it he doesn't say i'm literally i changed my mind no but it's in the the other


agreement it was dealt with by this court in the case of belgium and the status that court found that it did not and they did so based on the following reasons they noted the presumption in favor of the policy i should say favoring


through five or claims for arising from employment activities and an l l c operating room and they would apply regardless of whether mr gilmore was a member or employee of a trading firm or any other type of firm under rule six hundred there are three


within the borders of a county this is a superior interpretation because it dances the legislative intent of fostering greater cooperation in the purpose of establishing more cohesion in law enforcement now this


is that if the if the issues seem to tilt in a certain iraq of the court will go a long way towards


you know i think those i'm talking about a separate portion of analyzing this and that is the activity involved are should we just ignore it


the intent of the contract broad language and section a requirement of the trade off for patrician in return for no strike is that all disputes can be arbitrated that would include disputes over retiree benefits and tell me you


her deposition that she that she did have wind of an article and she forwarded that article to her attorneys i don't know how we go from that to attorneys you're saying because the court also determined that


hearing once the hearing is held but you're basically saying that there is there's nothing that can possibly p produced at the hearing that could impact the liability of the lawyers as opposed to the


one of the things that she's accused of not doing was implementing a program that wasn't funded until thirty seven days after she took office right to the bird the c e o do not seek removal for failure to implement the sepah which you could have done eight


appointed and then he get to the hearing and there's a motion to dismiss the hearing based on the fact that things were not done the proper way and this hearing officer does the hearing the way he wants to do it and he's


court's decision tonight a motion to compel arbitration of the dispute between mr force from mr jones to controlling members of an illinois limited liability company the dispute is the court knows is over the


isn't that what they're suggesting and and is there something in the statements or even adding in the context that you're arguing that would make that impossible i said


view that there are speaking to in essence the entire presentation that record you had that everything that we put forward with with rare exception was the testimony of the actual decision maker as to what he


right that's the second statement you made it was the only vehicle available here so there were these two ideas that would be an irrelevance almost because it would only be relevant if you would now say well i thought at the last


whether error occurred and here i did but i say then you have to decide whether that error whether this error amounted to the denial of a fundamental right so that in fact that


happened at the station which is within me up your view of promotion as it's written


of providing insurance to investors to protect them against the trials and tribulations of a free market in which some of the players are less than


c versus as a case there was nothing at the scene where there was anything that came out what came out in the d c versus essay case was he was where the admissions or statements by the person in treatment while before the accident that they had suicidal ideations


not ultimately the no taking incident is sufficient to support the jurors removal it definitely was sufficient to support the opening of some sort of inquiry because the court needed to find out what was happening what was being taking the part of the reason why there are questions about


potentially going on one is whether the juror is making an assessment of the evidence the other is whether the jurors willing to engage with the other jurors and i think your argument seems to be that


this was a nefarious conspiracy that trans transpired of the course of years and here's the various things that they did in coordinated fashion it's no surprise that they would also have a coordinated outlook on how to defend themselves in the event that their actions were


the rights of the individual to return with the rights of all the other defendants in your argument argument in this case that your clients outburst had prejudicial impact on all the other defendants


friends lawyers three times tried to correct this because they knew how prejudicial this was going to be the government part every time and it is not an answer now for them to admit it and say well that while there was no prejudice this jury was told that these


now we're going to go out tell every web page and the entire world you have to put tags on the web page we know that there's pages that don't have injectable content there's plain static pages that are downloaded so this is going to send that clean page without the additional injectable content


to release that information the harm done you can't cram it back into the privilege is the crime of whether this privilege had been waived already they came up on a very discreet question of whether you can


i couldn't quite figure out how to deal with this with our light most favorable context of looking at evidence at this point when you have i'm right first of all that all the jury had to find was that of those tons and tons and tons at


the impact would be and the district court here immediately said it was a single remark at the end of a very long trial that had focused exclusively on a drug conspiracy as had the summation and that the jury cannot


think i suggest that if there's cocaine being transported or produced in the eastern part of colombia that percentage goes up even and word of tons and tons and tons and tons and tons and produce over years and years and years and years and years and we just


from two other agents i think the first one was medina the second was dire and this happened out of the presence of the jury where they explained what was going on and agent in new york had a photo array created


i'm going to give the instruction to disregard i have the exact language here but he says i'm going to tell the jury to ignore the defendant's statement that he was mentioned and the defense said thank you at that point if they thought there was some other instruction that was going to cure


and i believe it was just silverman's case in connecticut i mean the fact that it says the secretary satisfaction in that case it was department of interior i believe does not mean that the secretary gets full discretion i think if it's the interest of justice that would be a


palin's proposed claim constructions but the existence of a computer fallen bottom in this pattern is clearly supported by the intrinsic record and the prosecution history likewise the appellate the district court sanctions rowlings


construction documents i had connection with this case and all the other young cases i filed claim trucks from this case from other cases licensing letters discovery responses in fact that's how they found that discovery response that they took the


is that that change or not that all of the was made in the course of this petition not not at the beginning of the year but it was made the change was made when they got to wyoming's petition so the petitions that he had evaluated before which which again were for


privacy interests and information they have voluntarily conveyed to a third party and that is i think different from any way that i mean the reason that smith works is because it draws that very clear line that says


various federal actions taking to approve a single project need to have independent utility if they're to be looked at separately so if so for at least the federal actions in this case the easements


my name is michael graham here on the half of the federal minutes and with me counsel tables david coburn has counsel for the intervenors a lot to cover so i think maybe i'll start with with the connected


looking at oil spills in part because the only oil spills you would be concerned about would be those that would pollute waterways and so if there's like a pipeline going over one hundred miles a desert


says that's not the case with the major emitting facility so it seems to me it's difficult for me to understand how the


that issue and to ensure that the court recognizes that there is absolutely no information given a reason given to citation the record to a law that was just this court should do anything other than deny the petition for review with respect to the permit


watch with certainty on the top twenty eight and there is no evidence that that will happen no one knows certainly not mark what the intent of the first filer is so at a minimum apple texas looking at least a six month away in watching again what


circumstances where for example the department of appeals or you can review that request and either answer the appeal within a specified time frame or permit it to go forward but i'm not familiar with the situation and nor i think has


appeals that a l j level entity and what she says is we only get x million dollars per year and that's not enough for us to do our job the first the two responses i think the first is they get tens of millions of dollars a year to do


record reprimand and that also creates a same action defense that said even the inference of causation is not exist and here under breeden there can be no temporal proximity the whole inference created by


witness list provided the juror if you go through all the testimony judge picked up on the point that the only evidence that was submitted was his opinion


in the facts here you have a history oh activities of discrimination towards women going back involving this lady and of all these same people so when you get


applications while in her sworn testimony five such applications ok you may have stopped there because he then says d o t has no records of where a applying for vacancies before twenty twenty five and grade


defense and so it's starting with the premise that but for some explanation the action violates title seven johnson doesn't have that presumption and a year your argument i think


not mandatory and moreover we think that in context what congress was likely getting at was many of these metrics didn't even address on time performance at all but to the extent you could even and wouldn't make sense even to put into the contract


in the us any unruly if the surface owner doesn't enroll


compete japan canada and the rest not the commission is free to exercise its discretion and a few additional factors which could be relevant to the conditions of competition so long as it meets to requirements


exhaustion doctrine both to protect the authority of administrative agencies to announce its own rules and explain its reasoning and also to promote efficiency of judicial review and by you mean where you're referring to it a waiver or if i are


repetition does that double the amount of surveyor time in these dangerous areas it could but i would like to point out that these these circular surveys that the loop surveys at the survey has


explanation is that and she didn't know about it why not i have heard this is not on the record i heard these violations are hard to catch i don't recall that being on the record but


thrown away and that was well the petitioner's argument net them at least with respect to scrap tires and in use while there's a difference here because it's a


criteria but does not need processing which by the way he's frequently the case in sort of be interconnected petrochemical type facilities where you have pipes connecting various kinds of production units if there is no prior processing


give you a conditional permit or i'm not an official permit they're just saying it's not yours we'll give it to you previous sentence makes clear that they would tell you that there's no problem with navigation they would at least give you something that would be helpful to confirm that you have no navigational issues


underline the coastguards actions in those cases are not before this court and we don't know what in different circumstances the agency was considering you made an assertion in your response a brief that it always cases


it applies here you've raised a couple times what that this is one force but not national security but isn't that a isn't that either or not realistic in the way the f b i operates today


crawford and at the end of the day he found them overall to be very credible he found mr crawford to be absolutely unimpeachable in this fred ability and so at the end of the day he simply found zero intent and


now that's not being done here correct because you've waived some of that interest we have with some of boards wave of interest so only over the installment plan but and what do you agree with me that the


well when this case was taken up on appeal from the region to the general counsel here in washington d c but then after the general counsel approved the regional directors decision at that point the formal


seven anyway the issue of the national trade address was whether or not customs itself was miley's action corrected this non action as as action


scott reporting on cautions from peters township high school if a student has a concussion it is very important to make sure that they do not overwork themselves and give themselves give their brain time to heal they shouldn't return to participating in sports


saying you don't have to be perfect like perfection is not i mean you can mess up one day and like that's fine and everyone does i mean it's hard it's hard to stay focused on what


strawberries or things with dinner peels that's going to be the key investing in that produce i always say you know do you want one of the one of the key items that we have in the bush clinton says do you want you know just look at how you feel about food and


that to him but we could see things right away that weren't going to work for this dog and they really weren't they wanted more or less a status symbol and that's what we're finding with the little dogs it's the in thing it's the vogue thing to have a little dog like that


bat and in the term within about a week's time we all realize that he was deaf born deaf and he was born blind so he's a special needs guy he's very sweet he's very loving he's very smart savvy as i would call jesse and say a two month old


the quality and the benefit of them and so it's far more than just just coming usually i tell you my first experience with a chiropractor was pain so i didn't really think about going to chiropractor and so i had pain and then you go to a general


it's it changes the alignment of your musculature it changes the mind and the alignment of your spine so not being a chiropractor i don't do manipulation but there's a technique that i have that i in an instrument as well that i


mood as you know and i see the restriction that people put on place it's very difficult sometimes and it makes them either want to eat more or they give or so how do you deal with with working with people i think the


a little bit that you know doing the food sensitivity testing alone if you feel better and that answers that for you great it's not always the full answer for people which is why it's nice to add in other things or to compliment the treatment listing the naturopath or going in for other complimentary


and pompoms on his tail and things like that that that's going to be more work so it's it's going to be a little bit more so so pretty much mimics what a typical hearse along would be doing sure yeah so a little place i need to visit for myself


if the students are the patient this case then pops for a positive that he or she may have a mental health issue particularly depression then that triggers a referral to a psychologist so


the recipe is right in your packet yet and it's really really great and i mean you can garnish it with additional dried cranberries that you can chop it with just some fresh sage but it had fresh stage in the cooking too and it makes it feel like


fridge if you have room if you go through them quickly find put them in a cupboard away from sunlight you can even so six months in the fridge a year in the freezer if they smell rancid or they taste funny then


tons of benefits of dates what else did i want to mention about the cara powder if you're wondering what that is that i'm going to use today comes from a pot of a tree and it grows along the mediterranean sea


i'm going to add some maple syrup so we've already pre measured this so this is the maple syrup i think i this is a double batch that i'm making and then i'm going to put in the carrot


than honey so i'm putting in a little bit of maple syrup and then i have the juice of a line


something's happening to the polar bear is melting away two thirds of the world's bears will be gone by twenty fifty and the entire species could be


and here's another big fantasy we know that in this country one of the biggest drugs you know the staten drugs the cholesterol lowering drugs ok this is so important vitamin d is really not a vitamin c for all it's and it's a hormone it's


of the tooth in the inner pull of the tooth which has the nerves and the blood supply in the connective tissue all the things that make it an organ if you will they core out that nerve in blood supply and they literally take it


if an implant is done correctly with allowing good normal bone growth to come in four to five months you can have a very effective virtually non toxic substitute for your tooth but those are two big ifs because


well he didn't get his phenomenal results and he did get phenomenal results with diseases that as a board certified cardiologist an internist i didn't think could be improved upon and i saw what i consider to be medical miracles on a daily


but you need to evacuate their stomach it doesn't smell fall is a big difference between dejection and putrefaction so when you don't combine correctly you take something which is to do just a process from


have to make a suggestion to talk to a physician who most likely will be clueless but but right but we have to make that right ashton ok so then i see this was i'm not familiar with and it says have massage oil so what was special about this so the beauty


i better go out and buy a product to take away this breakout but really what you should be doing is reducing the number of products you're already using because generally what happens is people don't actually have sensitive skin they're just reacting to a product that has all these harsh chemicals in it and they just


lot of self work and i was very lucky that i fell into the books and fell into the speakers and writers that i had found but i think for a lot of kids would it be so much better if we could just teach them these skills in


and went into computers at first and after a couple of years kind of feel like i wasn't really don't want part it was you know nine eleven it happened and every day i'm reading all these stories about you know all the soldiers that are killed overseas aside or the other feel like i wasn't doing enough well i


problem with the soldiers were ghosts of what level of combat they're seeing you know the time out at sea or over in the desert or whatever the case may be spend the time away from family friends everything this familiar to them having to adapt to another


week that was something that has been in the hopper for a couple of years has a beautiful graphics it's very excessive also if you just get the u s d a dot gov it's the front thing on the website you just click on and you go to your vermont you can


what did you have a mentor growing up and if so can you tell us a little bit about your experience i have a couple i mean as you know the my story you know i was diagnosed with terminal asthma and allergies and just


would say is probably the first time that i actually directed wanted four years ago we did feller on the roof i was the first time i've ever directed anything and i was scared to death and the fact


that it just it came together the way it did there was such a wonderful experience last year the spring musical tarzan directed by race a grimace had one of the most elaborate sets the triples


a couple weeks ago on sunday november fourth most of the country gained an extra hour of sleep as the clocks returned back an hour due to daylight savings time reporter jordan collins has more on this change it's that time of year again


in the television and communication fields if you're interested in watching the morning announcements visit youtube dot com and search p t h s period one media the peters township high school offers language


topical treatments and face masks although some people suffer from more severe acne who then turned to medication from a local dermatologist my doctor prescribed me accutane i experience skin itching


and they could use an extra hand now every state offers free or low cost health insurance for your sports hero or budding artist kids up to age nineteen can get checkups doctor and dentist


joining tech you become part of the tech family our members are a very tight knit group and they enjoy spending time with each other going to the movies going bowling being in tech you get to work with


started more than ten years ago in peter's township and it's still a vital part of the community this has been headlines i'm already current and i'm listening and thanks for watching


untreated hearing loss can keep your loved ones from enjoying what they cherish most here don't let that happen but speak up about hearing loss you'll be glad you did


as you know the quitman is very portable so we're able to bring our technicians and equipment weather was so we go anywhere from washington to shady side and then our clinics in basle park that we partner with different n d s chiropractors


titles will hold up correct so for the audience a tiger is the antibodies after vaccination and you know i'm not a big proponent of vaccination in the way i feel in those dogs are vaccinated and the time of the young those titers those antibodies and


really all space and time are lost yes you know i mean so it's an amazing thing to feel to not have to be worried about time and that's an interesting interesting to come in to contact with somebody that


animal friends has a benefit every year black tie benefit that's our main benefit and that's what time of the year every year well it changes a little bit this year it was in september but this has been very it's months the website always has


focus because that's the only way we're going to solve this problem is by reducing the population so general public can bring their dog or cat in and have them taken care of it's mostly yes but it's mostly for economically


living in this area are food and security food and security has negative effects on education children's mental and thank yourself as is david tennant reporting from pyrrus township high school


years and these are really hard to work you know there are a lot of different ways to help kids and help individuals communicate and really the goal is when


change was made at the last minute the parties had had a charging conference the day before when the erroneous language was not at issue petitioner had never asked for the exceeding authorized access language to be included in the instruction we had proposed three different sets of jury


apply if you look at the court's analysis in one of the heaviest cases which was drawn on by the other day versus mcdonough case the court emphasized that it's holding was valid there at because in part there was no rule to the contrary here you have it a rule to the contrary


cases because those are really about the context he makes another argument about when we don't think when is a kind of all season pass for ignoring rule fifty two b and then finally with respect to in error we think there are two overriding arguments the first one is


may please the court the government began at step two of chevron but i would submit that this case can and should be resolved at step one the government is asking this court to read the statute in a highly disfavor third way such that it is not


reasons st it's exceedingly important that the assigner stoppel issue which is the threshold question it's going to open up or close a complicated question about validity and involves experts in litigation and all sorts of other costly


the disadvantage of the side the large purchasers to the disadvantage of the individual inventors that's that's exactly right i think one of the things that makes reliance so important is that it ensures that there's a kind of something


stoppel bars a signers from later challenging the validity of the assigned patent rights just want to get your reaction to that yeah i think my principal reaction to that is for nearly thirty years there was no case the client side or stoffel courts had said it was dead


the bargain in this case included mr tripp call us co inventors expressly selling the rights to future patent applications the parties valued those rights based on the understanding that responded with secure whatever claims the patent office would allow in


said that scott it undermined the basis for patton the stoppel even more than westinghouse had read westinghouse as undermining the basis for past stoppel the world has changed greatly since that justice prior pointed


assigned or is stuck with and that just doesn't make any sense you know scott allowed scott paper allowed a part of an asinine or to say that the patent that what he was doing was outside of the scope of patent protection


what we're trying to do is to ensure that they get to keep the substantial value of what we sold them but no more and to the extent that there's any concern about real of mischievous behavior by a sign or us equitable stoffel


case came to the court this is a hot pursuit as the court has used that phrase in its cases and the difficulty again is it is in santana where the court said that that hot pursuit was present when somebody took a couple steps backward on her front


the phrase a state law enforcement officers pursued the petitioner the court below tell only he met a reasonable person mr wise position would have seen the police lights and


rule whether the police officer whether reasonable police officer could have understood the suspect to be fleeing as opposed to just going about his business not seeing the police officer and moving into the house or out of just there and i think that's a limit on the hot


enough to trigger a hot pursuit does a suspect have to be aware of it or reasonably perceived to be aware of it does the officer have to witness the crime there be any number of other case specific questions on which circuit splits could already be seen to be peripheral aiding in the


s recipients t p s offers temporary protection against removal during a crisis and it preserves the existing opportunities of previously had not admitted non immigrants to adjust their status but u s c s reasonably determined that congress


explore them with you one use you argue that we could just say in some least reasonable your interpretation is at least reasonable and not on in the us fully foreclosed nd options we can just say that your interpretation is the better one


states are red flag laws and involuntary commitment laws and there are red flag was in many states that allow warrants where guns were taking guns from people is necessary because they pose a risk of harm to themselves or others and those


in circumstances so i think that likely would satisfy the th amendment but the framework that i would use the think about that is that the social worker is making a determination of


following this person to the hospital and justice


team spirit mutual support they may have to accept limitations on their speech that couldn't be imposed on in the workplace generally for example if i well let me let me ask let me squeeze in one other question real quick when


did when you had had disappointing games and as i did when i had disappointing races and that didn't violate any of the rules and that's the end of the matter because they have not sought any with you about so in a separate case you might take up the


environment and what constitutes the school environment what would be wrong with saying that the school environment exists when the student is relating it not just a supervisor and i mean that's narrow what about when the student is relating to the school and the student's capacity as a


review of whether the government has proven to defendant's guilt through sufficient evidence at his trial and rd it provides a clear line to the appellate court that avoids future litigation over what information not introduced


step to the defendant comes in and says i have proof that it didn't in this case because it's so generic you agree i assume that a judge could in appropriate circumstances find that that nd reduction by the defendant


including the fact that the common sense can come in outside of expert reports you know the added i just am a little bit suspicious that you really all agree on everything i


only five cases plaintiffs have used the inflation maintenance theory to make it very difficult to rebut that presumption because that there are a prohibited defendant from showing that a statement had no price impact at the time it was made the court of appeals holdings on the two


words including all kinds of things i'm tempted to say anything under the sun that isn't quite true good all kinds of technical things perimeter protection using dykes you know collection of lead shade how do i know whether a state has


the way you talk about amateurism it's sounds awfully high minded but there's another way to think about what's going on here and that's that schools that are naturally competitors as to athletes have


goes to here but let me just say that we think that board of regents is eighty six dollars is thirty seven years old but we think that the observation that the court made in board of regents about


over and over again that those types of non economic interests are not cognizable under the antitrust laws the court shouldn't be in the business of trying to evaluate whether there are other socially important ideals to be promoted or other things to consider that don't


i think it's a very important phrase your honor that is the broadest possible temporal language and it is inconsistent we think with any understanding a sub paragraph be that treats it as transitional or temporary or designed


and the underlying purpose it indicates would be served by kicking out a small refinery from eligibility for exemption because in one early year of the program it was able to comply without hardship and i understand your argument today to be focusing


this different provision and that's why they authorized them to seek relief at any time based on hardship thank you counsel of the cases submitted


because the federal government has indicated that there is no further requirement for individuals to purchase health insurance at least at the highest levels of the executive branch that a signal was sent out to the country


position that the reason why that's not a bare procedural violation as opposed to something else you didn't give an example but something you say would be trivial is it because of the end of it being inherently shocking and confusing like the th circuit said is that what distinguishes


this federal policy that produces the presumption that you rely on it's a good question justice alito and i'm not sure that the court has ever spoken to it so let me offer a potential explanation as you rightly


world how people draft these contracts what they expect my understanding was that the question of who decides arbiter ability the who decides question is almost never divided between a court and an


with a problem that is not at all your fault it's our fault because we didn't anyway it's our responsibility i won't say fault because we didn't grow across the room but because we didn't grab the cross


deal so it's not your position that it's possible to incorporate the aaa rules by reference but still through the context of the language in the provision not intend simply by reference by


because they could say it's not right yet the other side has an even asked for their bond premium because they're supposed to do that in the district court but i'm also not sure when we would have done that we could have done it in our marriage briefing but our ability to done it when the bill of


for example and thirty nine dollars ve that the costs are tax in the district court must the appellate court says otherwise it says full stop the district court is responsible for these costs well maybe that the thirty nine dollars is talking about something different so if you read it against


dollars is in this court's rule which has been the model for circuit courts and then for rule thirty nine that we see all these cases we cite in our in our brief where is a matter of history it's clear that the


incidental effect of it and here are suit is aimed at the notice that is the thing that's being challenged in the thing we want the enforcement to be enjoyed for we did not ask for an injunction related to tattletales we didn't challenge the tax penalty so no tax penalties are pending or


notice invalid and a declaration that penalties can be assessed against you i don't see how you get around our cases daily after cancer and several other cases


given that it was produced by the ash are going to be an automatic and illegal automatic dialing service when the only people they are calling are people who haven't paid their bill now it's another thing if they


rather than going to trial to resolve factual disputes the district court would still be in the summary judgment of needing to rule on summary judgment


you should look at which party it uses the evidence but but that so statement was dictum because it's said that it didn't have to be the case didn't turn on that


past the typical in smuggling cases in the alien was still there and i i think both parties looked for cases sort of more of this sting tight and really medina was all that i was able to find and


good morning they please the court my name is darien coleman and i represent the city of marshall defendants in the civil action the plaintiffs two appeal points for issues pertaining to the denial claim


that happens it's a matter of course it's a matter of course it's a matter of coughing up of just you know observation common sense police officers you know someone medical assistance if there's a medical need they arrest you


present a relative but converting education marijuana they seem to outline the relative hong in kimbrough what the supreme court in the court was doing was comparing one ratio for one drug to another ratio for another drug and


which was early on in the implementation of twenty twelve daca there are bring forth other evidence in the district court made a finding that the seven it's credible and that evidence is not or did you stand silent on the dhaka the answer is yes there was


of this case or do we just or do we analyze the standing and the other factors just as they come or is there is separate just disability that we have to do in the first


mean there is discretion am i correct in describing the relief given in the sort of ok why not here ok so this is a very big question in the d c circuit as to whether you've made


a very extensive discussion kobe in that in the judge's ruling the pages attend sixty six and sixty seven the record is a very extensive discussion judge people reviewed the entire history of a case and made his determination to reject the motion in the context of that entire case


explained the statute allows a merchant to quote offer a cash this customer at a discount close quote but forbids the imposition of a mathematically equivalent quote surcharge on a credit card customer what


in the course of this argument and good first address the errors made by the district court and granted summary judgment and then to the extent my time permits move to the discovery errors here as shown by our


did in concert with others correct well your honor there are there are a number of requirements and this is actually one of the most i'm not saying that's the only requirement i'm saying that that's what we're looking at correct but i think you have to look at all of the


is preempted by the federal arbitration act as interpreted by the united states supreme court most recently in the concepcion and marmont health care decisions we also have an issue about the misinterpretation of


in writing that's not because looked at in the abstract under mississippi law you would need to have it in writing if because they're not in the business of transferring that much money


court did wade in your honor but they but the state court weighed them in the absence of due process of law that would have allowed those experts opinions to


there is substantial evidence in the record that would support to try to state courts conclusion that this was not the result of an inherent intellectual disability and there's


assets within the bankruptcy state so for example the traditional homestead exemption requires a home to be in this state the traditional exemption for a car requires a vehicle to be in the estate this is different because this is linux's making is


then things broke down and they had to go get this replacement tuck and they had to take four point eight million and the judge gives him that back let's say that judgment gets paid now instead of having and they got it from point a to


rescind a resignation at a possible position either accept the rescission and hope for no lawsuit or don't and lap and allow the lawsuit to proceed and we think that that is a false choice that is a policy


case whether you're looking at williams whether you're looking at whether you're looking at seniors that what a reasonable attorney would take from those to a rest in combination with the fact that the two other brothers were in custody at that exact same time is if


it was eleven hours there's a meagre time when you talk about a cattle case with the information had they had that information that the father had been arrested they might have inquired further about that i think a reasonable attorney would ask follow up questions


and the counsel for discovery communications made an appearance at the hearing and were the objections to the sale were arc and that's what's a tab and what were those objections i mean how did


interpreted it broadly and said that the petition must be read to mean coverage but now since you missed the deadline it's in your interest not to have coverage on that original petition we the interpretation in your favor means something different what is it that lead to different interpretations which would have


policy which was a technology professional ability policy there worse are certain breaches of contract that are in fact covered under this policy and


clearly are several areas of agreement between the partners all the parties both agree that the first policy the two thousand and eleven policy does not cover this loss given the timing of the notice and


and here's why i think you do care about whether texas public policy is pro consumer when it comes to insurance companies and insurance the mere fact that it can be read which i even disagree with but the mere fact that it can be


something more than rational basis for a view in windsor the court looked was able to look at the structure of the law what does it do it's an unusual deviation from the norm for


called quote the usual tradition of recognizing and accepting state definitions of marriage i think he did say that and i think he was talking about the fact that it's always ok for states to extend rights to people to


grounds i think the point to take from that is that that windsor and other cases may show that there's a trajectory that the law is moving in a certain direction but it's not there yet and then


disregard for safety requirements designed to help prevent injury and death on the job does not equate to an employer and here i'm quoting specifically and willfully causing the worker to enter harms way facing virtually certain serious injury or death


be admitted at the time that he's an eligible for it for being admitted


where the concept of the simulation of a simulation was used in this particular context she cited may have been in the i'm sure it was in the breeze to salt stole jack's cell jack you want to mention do you have any comment i think that that case involves rescission i don't think it touches


language the circumstance when you have the bargaining party choose not to exercise it to change the terms of the agreement when you could grab the pen when you could negotiate that there should be no distinction with that provision from a provision where you may change the


there you should have done this in your rules and that didn't seem like just as an argument just as in any other rules your honor i do believe that this court does enforce rules especially rules on replied well assuming that we didn't agree with that can you get to your


nine that those things occurred had the receiver on february nineteenth through the initial receivership order had the right to vote allen stanford shares of stock in stanford financial group


sexual contact with somebody is innocent unless it was without that person's permission thus there has to be amends written greyer requiring mens rea or requirement on the permission element this was reaffirmed the united states versus excitement video


court's attention to the government's brief page twenty one at footnote eight they also say the statute twenty four twenty three and that's a statute that deals with transporting minors for the purpose of prostitution in interstate commerce


the modernization movement that consent is not the absence and but the presence of yes that isn't in the statute and i firmly believe or actually even that that we have to uphold the law as it's written and this statute it does take


force is years we don't have to look at the conduct of the victim because we don't want a victim to have to injure herself in order to later say it was great but i think we have to push that aside when it's not a worse case because we're not those


if the court finds that the evidence presented was legally insufficient to not support judge o'connor's the night asked to remain and allow us to continue on with washington get another by now because


status is in the room mr mitchell's not in the room it's not a protected activity that's involved nobody was a target in that activity the front of the last incident again was performance related it was mr


your argument is the reason that the a minit doesn't step in to to displace the other language that's involved in the sales agreement because the amendment is not the sales agreement the sales agreement stays


then all we're talking about a started four thousand dollars in attorney's fees at that point i think you're right then if we're stuck with that in that's where you go i think we're stuck with the thirty four thousand dollars but i think we then had a right to challenge anything beyond that which we did


of existing tipping court precedent three wryly could could or should have anticipated that i'm not getting a warrant was going to be unconstitutional it seems to me a nice comparison


was offered the job and he turned it down because he thought that he would be retaliated against on the ship as to the grievance i only saw the


times in your brief and here when i read it i was somewhat surprised that you arguing the district court found the district court found rather than the test of this is a material fact in dispute and maybe you would take exception with our wording


a fact finder needs to look at that and what and see whether or not that's the case whether or not should be opened there is also a subsequent favorable decision that was given to ms domingo's but in that favorable decision how


there's this time period that needs to be addressed by the court or by the l j and the only way for that to happen is for the court to remain and otherwise the court is left in the position of trying to figure out what the onset date is itself which i


other apartment and he happened to be in a neighbor's apartment this is stretching things with surrounded by all these drugs the fact that the gun was hidden that he didn't have immediate access to it if it was his


evidence that your client either pled guilty to point one or point five why isn't that clear and convincing evidence of these removable well the the proceedings below indicate the confusion here i know but you're now you're changing my hypothetical


mentions saying with the same plan but it also mentions the possibility of eliminating family coverage that's not a freeze from what happened in the past that's a a reduction in the benefits that were offered to the employees if this is this is or


about international law and you're making a different argument so i think i am you're i don't think that that's a fair reading of how the court in homs on the court in kiran really approach this the it's possible to say i think as you're on this question suggests that in


than perhaps i think that last paragraph would suggest but i but be that as it may i think if the court at the end again stepping back i think the real question for the court is if you think that the government has essentially forfeited


a definition of a service that included both information processing and transmission the f c c has gone back and they get confused about this in their own brief because they refer to the transmission component broadband internet access the definition of broadband internet access service


owner i think if you look at pages two ninety eight to ninety seven to two ninety eight of the supplemental appendix the district court there is saying that it had concluded that bad show


greater a greater quantity then a detectable amount of cocaine the jury verdict against evil and also suggest some confusion we know that the verdict form finds him guilty of


involved for five months from november of ninety three to april of ninety four and when that his foster was asked what kind of drug dealer basak was he said not too good and


proposed findings and


violations by the time we brought the lawsuit though they had started here in the ninety violations so the complaint only alleged twelve violations but the


is there is nothing to it as an obstacle to the suit going forward it just it doesn't really seem to comport with the statutory intensive that's what i'm looking for some sense of why does this statute in its


it talks about events such as all right it doesn't say limited exclusively to so this such as says to me well what else is covered


how insignificant and you that reporting could actually also impose not only a burden on the regulated community but also a burden on administrative fees me reviewing authorities especially those with


now sisters have a theory about why congress would want to do what they think it was doing even though it never said anything about it and this is their double regulation theory but first this is rigid revisit provision it's history sorry there's nothing on which is


population server the owner of the commission shall make all reasonable efforts to preserve as a february twenty second two thousand and twelve the coverage area and population survey of each broadcast television licensee period and then it says for purpose of determining the coverage area


like to clarify one point the fill in translators that assertion was speaking to are licensed under the same license as the main television station they are part of the same license what were the


position of the position they're taking now this is a joint appendix twelve thirty two and thirty three they greet with the interpretation the f c c advances they said quote congress does not protect translators in the same manner as full power and class a stations unquote and


and those cases your your argument is that we have to conclude that the minute there's an exchange about emotional and mental distress that necessarily that


been for the for the court to say you swore an oath to follow the law you were instructed to follow the law and i did that in the apple eval case from the th circuit go back


it to which is visiting websites and retrieving information service that capability which is what the commission is labeling transmission in its entirety is not transmission that is a combination of transmission and computer processing


occasions association case that we cite in pay i think on page thirty eight of our brief is that when there were capabilities that were supporting a normal telephone call like directory assistance or speed dialing where there'd be a database somewhere which would


the term in the statute that says that a telecommunications carrier can be subjected to common carriage only to the extent that it is providing telecommunications service and because the commission didn't reclassify that particular service to


could no longer withstand the uncertainty of kicking the can down the road we needed to solve these problems which we worked on for more than a year and the union in our view said no no no no


yes but no money twenty points and we were literally and i think it's a fair statement we were at a time even though our patients under contract i think it would be different if those shifts were laid up and they weren't going anywhere


articulated as a for general principle which often is enough and economics or does it actually cite some sort of experience that would back it up well we know in the record that there is increasing


it has to attain a certain amount of restrictions in order to attain the next and currently for ground level ozone pollution ninety to ninety four percent of the pollution that causes ours not attainment comes from out of state


will create a temptation to under invest in capacity the regular sort and therefore the number of emergencies will actually increase


premised on the idea that there's not going to be increased hours or increased pollution the rules premised on what's appropriate during an emergency it's a situation which is not disputed petitioners don't dispute that the two situations are indeed emergencies and that emergency engines of


as to where this charging station is allowed to be now your honor it's allowed to it's not allowed to be in the primaries cape way or in the crosscuts unless it's isolated


groups the two bloggers one of whom testifies against tobacco companies none of these people is a friend they all saw the conflict from their from this kind of thing from their access to our information and from the role they play as consultants


did you make a showing for is a summary judgment as to whether those trials involve menthol cigarettes that are coming forward or not doesn't have to be my miss asking whether you have you shown a willingness or cigarettes but the testimony about mentor


responsibility as an employee to recuse yourself if you think you have a conflict and you can go to your agency and try to get a waiver from a conflict


allegedly or agency records go on a private server others are being put on the agency's server that's not the picture that kissinger was talking about and so they didn't have to address the construct of control we're talking about whether the agency not situation can


go well just to be clear on what the pejoratives opinion said about discovered was they said if you wish you were subpoenaed to somebody and that person doesn't have the materials then that person does not have an obligation to go out to get the materials


rewards but that is why this is a it is a different financial arrangement but it is functionally equivalent to the to the relationship where the where the traditional relationship but


that painting the partners office what is the size of the project matter well the size of because that that is what that is what the that is what makes this a public work that is part of what makes this a public


already one hundred forty one it said that even in the last twelve years that the concept had expanded significantly and since then it is it is only it is expanded further but what i meant was the other problem which is that in the


think the opposite of what you think namely that they have to go to the board what about your own concession that the deal well clearly has jurisdiction here


others that have been built under land disposition agreements in which the district disposes of property that by statute has to be property no longer serving a public purpose if you go over to city center you do the fine restaurants and shop at the fine stores it's


opinions we determine disputes between parties of the parties to get this particular appeal are really the rights and the trustee the the the trustee files a global motion


the chief the relief they sought me that because one argument that mr clinton made in his brief that you had a window here i guess they're waiting for some administrative approvals


two million dollar settlement was as good as you could get my four success under the l b o action and how big the court what was the analysis as to whether there might be success


note that in continental one of the principle holds the bases for the equitable mutinous doctrine is to encourage reliance on on state confirmation orders and there's a


that in california police officers and paul officers don't even need reasonable suspicion to enter the home of a parolee and when you look at it in this context the supreme court has not answered the question as to whether the fourth amendment basically


true we also have a situation as our i'm just asking even if that's true how do you as a matter of law win by saying you know what on the qualified immunity


it's important to recognize the public policy underlying our setting which is that when you have a high level public employee who's charged with carrying out in this case after ackerman's direct is that's where you set aside some of your first and then responsibilities in waters that just isn't how to talk about


sense for the company there's also look the worker will make decisions in higher breaking officers about what makes sense from from other perspectives but again including as a matter of policy for the company but that goes still


that future claims for future conduct cannot be released the limitations period would be an issue for the class definition even if we had not included but it but it is in fact in the complaint do


point five adjustment either before the service or before an immigration judge i was totally convinced by the argument that the two year prohibition is necessarily inconsistent with one hundred eighty days


we believe that even on the plane reading got it we're covered because if you just apply the dictionary definitions and in this case this is why it's important that this court looks at the f c c the term sequential number generator sequence and number and


of the grand jury investigation not whether or not they my client remembered seeing larry langford davis at the hospital that night i think you could go on your good thinking that the government if we disagree with the district


code for bonded leather ok and the reason and the reason the case law is what it is is a parties engaged in this kind of code speak in a very insular hothouse of economic activity such as existed at the high point market they know what they're


certifications made by the foreign manufacturer supplier of the product you've got to verify it and you've got to comply with u s law and you're responsible for that you being the u s company so


good morning may it please the court richard malone on behalf of we're asking that the district court's judgment be affirmed in its entirety the case as to a comes down to two quotes that were given by a scientist


synthetic laminate products that was the issue that's why he was angry he was a letter man he felt that this was a misuse of the term and that and that but he called the arai a liar which it wasn't he recommended to diarra he himself that he used the term well


outside your own kill i don't believe it's clear whether the person calling just spoke with that level of detail but he did say that there was a man inside the home waving a gun around erratic


a process was not drafted with the bankruptcy policy in mind section eleven thirteen on the other hand was drafted very much with both labor and bankruptcy policy in mind and it is congress's conscious effort to accommodate giving the


not any of the record that what i'm relying upon the the record facts but they're not disputed i'm relying all solely on mostly either undisputed facts in the record or miscast this is deposition testimony and saying that counsel mis represent the rector not at


consistently says i want to show off if i wanted to educate him and also i wanted to let everybody in the workplace know and educate them about morocco and in so she showed pictures of her cousins


now he is relegated to serving a small facility outside the geographic scope of the injunction the non compete and he serves only to be administrative folks at that facility a vastly different job she does


not delve into exactly what these opportunities were he heard no testimony from the representatives of the on the other side of the opportunity and took the word of mr howard who


the doctors to advise in favor of medical marijuana was speech that was content based that triggered it and it was you point based your honor just briefly the court below did not


clients that assures that they will have adequate representation the counseling codes require that they represent or what let me take it with to the district court said and i want to hear what you have to say about it because the district court said that in order to satisfy the injury prone to


record that she received money for these other things she did ellen's you from show that she was the right you know there's other people testify look she was getting paid for this again she claims it's just costs but again the jury was free to find you know which i the way they want it there if she was really the


least the question as to whether or not these two individuals would be on the ballot correct this case is not decided by august at all right now it's my understanding based on the district court's decision in the


know really i think it's going to go back it's going to go back for a motion to dismiss based on moot because the conditions that pertain to twenty day no longer protected so i don't think there's going to be a need for any discovery going back on the injunctive relief claim


are the financial responsibility laws of the state of new jersey for example having enough capital on hand and being authorized by the commissioner before they before they drive on the streets of new jersey and that's i think that's the


there is some way to determine eventually who the individuals are so you don't have to say it's mr x mr y but you have to find some you have to have some showing of proof that shows really am wrong with the way that this case is decided i mean it's not like marcus


both technically trafficking violations it's less than a gram of cocaine each time it's not a large scale you know we're not even talking about multiple grams never mind kilos which is what at least i think of when i think of trafficking as a serious word just give me was


the mall requires the state of west virginia when it come i axed money from misty sams for payment of this money to pay the federal government back its portion everybody's get spy


written directly to the warden and it talked about the fact that my client was staff and that he has not had any phone calls sure but you're not suggesting are you that that


counsel and and i'd like to get the words if i may


environment claim under l or how do you have sufficient notice to the employer and failure to act if you will your honor as


case i guess we can rely on just one reason for i had to give you a second reason would be because there wasn't really we didn't really know at that point that the court would rely on so many strong i wonder if i sort of just said one


strong and my second question goes back to the combination of certification remained calculus and that is does it make a difference that the issues here are if


during a game to staff members the n f l does not prohibit scouting in advance of teams it does not prohibit using binoculars to assess what the opposing coaches are calling it does not excess it is not


contracts for good good good faith contract these apps absolutely not because because when you're playing professional sports no one would and this comes to another aspect of these claims there could be no reasonable reliance on


york jets season ticket or the patriots well we pledge that they do by virtue of the revenue sharing contracts that all n f l teams half which hasn't been denied by our adversaries and their papers and that and that is that is the


policy or the guy nine protocol does not say these are disguised lines use a measure you must they are in fact there for the purpose of preventing what should have occur preventing what ultimately should not have occurred here and that was the following of the


be in effect or not would have a heavy impact on negotiating and on the chapter eleven plan that number one the appeal was it was a viable order it should be decided and number two he said i'm not going to send it back


argument are but your argument seems to be even if something is focused on property and even if the property report is one that they the producer of it extracts a promise recipient that it


which is that there's no question people who own property have him in a business going on property that people own property and not only that judgments and liens get attached a proper east because of


real state settlement act that is congress's regulating of title searches through that mechanism to zap zap have should that wait or think it all that congress has done something to regulate that piece


similar at all so that the retype the reports that are right there's no evidence of that that's that's not being responsive to my question and we've got limited time so i really want you to answer the specific question is he right or is he wrong in applying


times on the record that he wished to proceed with power under these circumstances the state appellate court's decision finding that petitioner was not deprived of his right to counsel of choice was more than reasonable under existing supreme court precedent


fact no less than twenty one times in her initial brief twelve times in the reply brief she wants this court to place great emphasis on this recommendation as evidence of the severity of her condition and she wants the support presume that


now you know common sense is ok well i can probably figure out if i consult the code and consult this and that but but a defendant's entitled to more than that i think i think they're entitled to a precise delineation of what


the next documents docket one ninety four dash two page one this is the class list the class council submitted to the court mr hagan minutes selected as a second class member on the list in place of a qualified event date class


judge dops those imposes these additional conditions i've never heard a district court make any reference to thirty five eighty three d and i didn't happen in these three cases nor have i ever heard of court consider thirty five fifty three a factors in relation to the imposition of a condition


with check boxes that include all of the proposed that the special and the standard conditions of release and the judge isn't permitted to check all of the conditions that he is he or she is


case the district court will presume that this service is valid and that presumption till there is conflicting evidence your honor the court's there says until there is


and again to say i'm just to remind the court that this is an abuse of discretion standard the district court did find valid service because it found valid service it's up to the district court and its discretion to determine whether or not to grant that motion to


opportunity for the circuit to bring home the reasoning that it set forth in maine and on how to how to analyze situations such as this or in the alternative adopt the reason that's becoming more and more


so i sent it back to to conduct that exploration and after conducting exploration in the courts determined that his testimony when true when explored under oath was that he had once made up a story that he and three other boys had driven to a gas station


sales are due made directly by the company so most class members email addresses and mailing addresses in this case will likely be available to the defendant when we send out a notice to us for the no we have not


i had a second class representative i mean if i thought that there was even a hint of impropriety about having mr levitt as a class rep i could have just dumped him i we had other people not only that i could have thrown a rock and gotten ten more because the class


negotiate i mean i'm paraphrasing now but when parties negotiate a resolution if you want to argue the merits here you're not getting my point thank you well respectfully runner i i am hopefully getting your point and i take it


the letter that he sent with his reply pro se brief makes clear that he was under the impression that the motion being taken with the case meant that that would get considered because he tells the


supplement to counsel's brief the clerk seems to accept it for filing in the state moved to strike it on the ground there's no hybrid representation and the state's motion was taken with the case and everything was in limbo and the


which explicitly states that the guarantee agency before it assesses collection costs needs to do the four things that are in the emirates and there and in a separate section that comes later which is sixty two for


class in their homes and simply fails to offer a community based alternative so have they ever i mean is it your view that when they were when your clients were under this a and b waiver that they were


don't we didn't say we should do it if it's impossible either you know i mean there's there's a an overall inquiry in the supreme court has been telling us be careful about classes you your in your honor if when the


brief and it says that a taking violates international law if it is done without proper payment of the proper adequate effective compensation required by international law war is arbitrary or discriminatory and they


compensation acts which the district court ruled were inadequate not available for obvious and understandable reasons and we're standing here twenty one years later that's unreasonable prolong it and i would direct the court to the hickenlooper


just compensation i believe that there is some income and burden i'm hungry in especially when it's undertaken that effort if it never took any effort and somebody went to court and tried maybe you could have an argument but here they've said this constitutes just


before the germans ever occupied it became greater hungary had to become greater hungary by gobbling up the surrounding portions in paragraph seventy seven through eighty eight of our amended complaint it outlines with great


with something well for me properly documented whenever it occurs right this is proper documentation and see if you think they're lying it is proper documentation and what we're asking is that the court give the facts to the plain language


information as is required to act as a pip broker in the mercantile exchange that evidence came in the form of of mr berg own testimony it was corroborated by his assistant to


standard and he says he's implying familiar rule fifty six principles to frame the analysis but he's not in any way handling this in fact it would be issues in fact that you'd have to worry about there


enter into a compact prohibiting that permits poker this is there are two two things there first of all chapter fourteen allows the governor to enter compaq's i understand that but you just said that the governor the governor couldn't in a


energy efficient refrigerators when you change from those refrigerants to alternative refrigerants you have to change the compressors the chillers all sorts of equipment in the in the piece of equipment which then raises the energy demand of that


duties and then i think the with i'm going to ask you on the the question of your first amendment claim yes or i went back


which include many jobs that this person can't perform well your honor at the vocational expert was responding to a hypothetical question that didn't involve the standing and some of the other thing but what


they're for the stop was illegal


motivations in responding to the letters and also shifting the burden of proof on whether or not the speech was something that the government could regulate and third the court applied the wrong standard for women or injunction disregarding the factors that are uniquely apple when first amendment cases


with back page dot com but that that decision was not going to be implemented until the end of july it was only after sheriff darts letter was sent that this decision for the one acquiring bank was escalated to being immediate and not a month hence and


point out that well dr mathews did in fact revoke the diagnosis of bipolar but what they neglect to mention is that he replaced it with a different a axis one diagnosis which was schizo affective disorder so that doesn't really help them dr mackey certainly didn't conclude that mr


legal based on the fact that they they really never had any evidence to support their of their findings and you agree that that decision is subject to review for abuse of discretion correct didn't


or my understanding of a lot of time with yes but in this case there was something that one of course what led to mcdonnell the very fact that chicago made it illegal to have a gun within city limits and at the time judge it was legal but the officer me more than


for people it's equally split between union and union and employment and the employer which means a stalemate situation can happen based on the allegations in the complaint the attached documents when


easy training now and she never said that to shontelle miller there's no evidence that this had no effect on her performance of course it had an effect on her performance met effect she is an experienced data processor who knew


well because this is the government's case your honor and they go i know that you're you're in a sense conceding that there might have been a period under which there would have been tangible evidence and that even


trust was saying collusion is a violation of federal wall and he problem i don't really understand that example just that's perfectly standard application of the sherman act ok i think this is maybe more akin to


lee to turn it off the trooper was standing next to the passenger side door instead of turning the car off the defend criminal defendant drove all and passes that passenger side door hit the state trooper in after


credibility to the point it's clearly a jury issue the issue yes there was other evidence related credibility but dished polygraph business what i'm really i suppose much really


contain a formaldehyde like such interest such as that released formaldehyde while at the same time the package and the marketing was there's no formaldehyde at this and so you could have people who purchased this


you'd give me you would like top three things that you think are wrong with this settlement structure that you would have thought in the end you're actually saying they just report abuse just discretion in not insisting on these things whatever they may be


in one case there was only one claim as your other sides of the rule applies there and then i thought i heard counsel for the first time even after the briefs dispute whether the parties actually agreed to


occasion are and whether the court does address them i mean to broadly ask a lawyer anything else and then call them to waive or if they say no i think


opinion was accorded little weight by the commission well i don't know that it's true the commission says in robson view any need treatment petition required after february fourteenth twenty away would be related to the n who progression of peers


had put in place he was called upon to provide an explanation he has a series of communications with j p morgan as to why it is that they're not able to do their job under the trust the green and it


his drafting of documents in material that would be abuse of discretion as to the question of wall as to the application of the attorney client privilege or an issue exception that would be reviewed to know so we have a wad of issues here and it starts


burden of proof or persuasion that the privilege which is supposed to conform within its narrowest possible limits here is either properly invoked or not at issue mr greenfields placed it at issue by changing his legal positions we


levy the property tax code only provides exhaustion of administrative remedies where an administrative remedy is provided for in the property tax code and mistreated remedies only apply with regard to objections to


i think it is because there's there's more facilities located in cook county than whiteside county for one you know waste management has more facilities here also when we talk about you know the issue of regulating the


side to agree i guess the only thing you could do was file in one thousand be one and get it decided but no one filed and i didn't get one here and really by the time that was at issue it was too late it really was too late because all the parties other than


you go to of lawyer on a prenuptial agreement then you should consider everything that could possibly affect whether or not the client should enter into it i don't think that's an reasonable number one and number two in the end it's


still going to have to be established by proof in a trial my complaint here would sustain i can't just walk in and say i went i have to have an expert to sustain justice that allegation


precisely for that reason and the state actually the judge didn't rule on it the state decided on their own that they were not going to present this as science and i couldn't find anywhere where they actually used the word of science and this is the analysts didn't use the word


dr nelson is a pinion was that he did not believe her current condition was related to the two thousand her work in two thousand and nine when he also did not believe her condition after june twenty eighth two thousand and seven was related


ruling should be upheld and bed it should be determined that the court did have jurisdiction over the trustee


worked in salon development and so it required them sometimes to dry twisted minds together but they both testified testified they didn't even work daily together this is


circumstances very different situation than horsing in our terms i want to talk just briefly about the libby that gail testimony because that third party plaintiff relies heavily on that testimony saying there's evidence of


reporting statements made someone words so how i was basically you're saying even though you're saying it's not being offered through well you're under eight zero one rule of evidence a one c hearsay is an out of court statement that is


testified under contradicted that he continued to have problems with his right knee throughout doesn't sixth two thousand and seven testified about contradiction the tried to seek medical attention in may two thousand and seven but see wouldn't allow


resolved we you know nothing about the terms of the agreement and we had statements from lacy that kelley tatts just addition so that he did not believe the case had been resolved that he thought he could still be charged with this and that's relevant


that the bottom line is that macy's pretrial statements were the strongest evidence against kelly and had the judge learned about the circumstances


that they told him that they would take care of the two one ounce cases if he would work for them that they gave him help on the two one ounce cases he never had to face trial or sentencing or


ok the information what's happening is that there is an approach that needs to be taken it needs to go in order and what counsel and judge for did is push it all together and make one decision none of the cases say that none of the cases this council


defendant has a bona fide belief that the items that he took were abandoned that negatives is the intent required to prove fast and thus also in court required to prove perjury here the


to be able to have it repaired this was on april twenty fourth close to the end of the month you know definit would have this quiet place a value on this woman's property a single street because it's not in pristine condition but the


ever ever tell anybody to pay for that surgeon based on that report now if every test that was done up until the time of dr pincer surgery for that post period tibial tendon showed it ten no


there was no test done for the defendant but he was very and there was


i don't pretend to know anything about the horse but i will say this i think the real issue is now what she got relative to what was there at that time as much as it was that overlooking the fact that the during the marriage


in light of the purpose of this section seventy one half exemption a reasonable standard for what it means to say that something is to a do this that document report as authority for a final


didn't appeal his guilty plea or try to withdraw it in any way in the opening brief the only issue he had was with this probation revocation and because he's already completely served the time on it you can leave that count as is i mean it would be


did this heavy work every day of his life whether he strained himself two weeks earlier and then you know fought through it and then you know whatever he did on that particular


is alleged to have been doing because he said he didn't do anything whatever the alleged to be doing what he had that could cause this injury or that couldn't cause this injury we don't have any medical testimony whatever either way


complaint sought relief of one month's rent which is a remedy provided for under the ordinance when a landlord violates section one hundred section one hundred of the section the ordinance the says the landlord before they enter


jury instruction conflicts and on second prong plainer in this case the closeness of the evidence and the extent to which these are two different chart crimes one of which was on charge certainly i meets that standard we


a court that's a different issue yeah well but i think it's really the same issue because what state farm's asking your honour's to do and why it it doesn't surprise me very much that no one else is really asked for this is to


that makes me think indiana just might be different i think the weight of the argument rather than let the short leg again which i think that there's a fundamental difference in risk it's back to what our supreme court has said


right and as part of the same fair share of the provides for the arbitration there is a waiver of bringing arbitration for a class action that is correct or rather ok so if


difference between the two the fact is that the two verdicts coming back as they dead this goes back to the the law regarding inconsistent verdicts and the fact that it's a proceed to take the finding of not guilty on one


excessive detail coupled with the way they consider jocko brightest says testimony judge folks consider jacobite as his testimony coupled with the fact that chink was deceased at the time i think really shows how harmless this


he would be receiving a raise i believe was from ten sixty one per hour to eleven zero seven zero mr young in his testimony agreed on the amount and he agreed on the date so if we think about that at us we have complete agreement on the date the


the case that we had ten years later there was no finding that that occurred those exhibits were admitted into evidence and state mr urso we are fifty fifty owners on the property we need some information so that we can


railway company i'd like ten minutes from my primary minister reserve good morning writers peter mcleod on behalf of quality terminal services i would imagine about ten minutes from my arguments


therefore this issue never gets hurt and mr mr duke's procedural due process is denied my well but it's here to this isn't your interregnum here this is you're not anywhere right now and so you've got to have


me that the vehicles were going closer to thirty miles an hour so there are basically this comes down to the fact that there are there is some evidence there is some basis for the jury to have concluded that


arguing in this case is that if i present my client presents to them a


i mean there is definitely no running at any point the officer gets out and then she up here with you can't tell whether she's moving in and faster pace or not i mean it is up to you know i don't know i'm not sure what it