00:42 - WE CAN DO THAT

00:46 - AS IS USUALLY THE CASE THESE

00:47 - ARE MOSTLY SINGLE

00:48 - ISSUE CASES WHICH WE SELECT IT

00:51 - REVIEW OUT OF.

00:54 - SEVERAL 1000 APPLICATIONS.

00:57 - WE'RE SO WE'RE FULLY CONVERSANT

00:59 - WITH THE ISSUE BEFORE THE

01:00 - COURT. AND THAT AWAY ENABLE US

01:03 - TO COME RIGHT TO THAT ISSUE

01:04 - COUNCIL CAN FOCUS YOUR

01:05 - ATTENTION ON THAT ISSUE.

01:07 - AND WE CAN KEEP THE LESS MOVING

01:10 - CALL THE FIRST CASE.

01:21 - A PHILADELPHIA POLICE OFFICER.

01:24 - OBSERVED A PALIN ADJUSTING

01:26 - WHAT APPEARED TO BE THE HANDLE

01:27 - OF A HANDGUN AND APPELLANTS

01:29 - WASTE THAT. THE

01:31 - OFFICER LOUD THE PALIN INTO A

01:33 - STORE THERE FOLLOWED AND THEN

01:35 - DO A STORE AND SO A HANDGUN ON

01:38 - IRAQ APPROACHES.

01:40 - THE PALIN DENIED THAT THE GUN

01:42 - WAS HEARS.

01:44 - THE PALACE CHARGED WITH

01:45 - CARRYING A CONCEALED A FIREARM

01:47 - WITHOUT A LICENSE

01:49 - PURSUANT TO SECTION 6 ONE OF 6

01:51 - OF THE CRIMINAL CODE.

01:53 - APPEAL WAS ALLOWED TO CONSIDER

01:55 - THE DEGREE OF CONCEALMENT

01:56 - AND NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH A

01:59 - PRIVATE FACIA CASE AND THE

02:01 - VIOLATION OF THAT SECTION.

02:06 - THANK YOU YOUR HONOR AND GOOD

02:07 - MORNING MAY PLEASE THE COURT.

02:09 - THE 2 ROUTES FROM A HALF MISTER

02:10 - MONTGOMERY.

02:12 - AS I THINK IT'S CLEAR THIS IS A

02:13 - SIMPLE MATTER OF STATUTORY

02:15 - CONSTRUCTION YEAR HONORS.

02:17 - THIS COURT HAS NEVER

02:18 - DEFINITIVELY CONSTRUED THE

02:20 - OPERATIVE LANGUAGE HERE IN

02:21 - SECTION 61 OF

02:22 - 6 SPECIFICALLY THE REQUIREMENT

02:24 - FOR CONVICTION THAT THE FIREARM

02:25 - BE CONCEALED ON OR ABOUT THE

02:26 - PERSON. THE ARGUMENT

02:29 - IS THAT UNDER THE SIMPLE PLAIN

02:31 - LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE.

02:33 - I SHOULD WIN BECAUSE CONCEALED.

02:39 - OPPOSING COUNSEL AN ISOLATED

02:40 - DIFFERENT DICTIONARIES.

02:42 - TO GIVE IT DEFINITION OF

02:44 - CONCEALED FRANKLY, I'M FINE

02:45 - RIGHT. THERE IS HIS IF YOU WANT

02:47 - YOUR MIND.

02:49 - MINE WAS ISOLATED FROM

02:50 - WEBSTER'S SOMETHING IS

02:51 - CONCEALED IF IT IS HIDDEN FROM

02:53 - VIEW.

02:54 - KAMEL CITED TO BLACK'S

02:55 - LAW DICTIONARY SOMETHING IS

02:57 - CONCEALED IF IT IS NOT VISIBLE

02:58 - BY ORDINARY OBSERVATION.

03:01 - I THINK EITHER WAY I WIN THIS

03:02 - CASE AGAIN FINE WITH EITHER OR

03:04 - BOTH DEFINITION. HERE THE GUN

03:07 - WAS NOT HIDDEN FROM VIEW THE

03:08 - OFFICER COULD SEE THAT HE

03:09 - HAPPENED TO BE DRIVING DOWN THE

03:10 - STREET, IT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY

03:12 - LOOKING FOR IT THERE'S NOT

03:14 - INVESTIGATING THIS AT ALL HE

03:15 - WAS BY HIS OWN TESTIMONY DISH

03:17 - DRIVING DOWN ON PATROL AND HE

03:19 - SAW THE HANDLE PET ROOTING FOR

03:20 - MY CLIENTS WAY SPENT.

03:22 - AND EVEN INTO THE COSMOS TO

03:23 - FINISH. I'M SORRY YOU THINK

03:25 - IT'S A QUESTION OF LAW OR IS IT

03:27 - A QUESTION OF FACT FOR JURY.

03:30 - AND THIS CASE IT'S A QUESTION

03:32 - OF LAW. I THINK THE DEFINITION

03:33 - OF CONCEALED HERE.

03:36 - IS AN OPEN QUESTION OF LAW FOR

03:37 - THIS COURT TO DECIDE. I THINK

03:40 - OBVIOUSLY THERE WHETHER

03:41 - THE FACTS MEET THE LEGAL

03:43 - STANDARD IS ALWAYS A MIXED

03:44 - QUESTION AFFECTS THEM ON ANY

03:45 - CRIMINAL CASE. BUT I THINK HERE

03:47 - AT THE DEFINITION OF CONCEALED

03:49 - IS A QUESTION OF LAW IT.

03:53 - THE FOLLOWING UP ON JUST

03:55 - YOUR QUESTIONS IF THE FACTS

03:57 - SUGGESTS.

04:01 - 10 TO CONCEAL AND A

04:03 - TINY BIT OF THE HANDLE THE GUN

04:06 - IS. IS A VISIBLE.

04:10 - IS SITUATION THAT BECAUSE

04:15 - THAT. TIME TO GET YOU GUYS.

04:17 - SO.

04:23 - THIS SIMPLE IS THAT DOES THAT

04:25 - THE BLEED OVER INTO A QUESTION

04:26 - OF FACT THE SESTAK A FACT

04:28 - FINDERS A ROLE.

04:32 - THANK YOU AND HAVE A COUPLE

04:34 - POINTS TO MAKING RESPONSE THAT

04:35 - FIRSTLY HERE THERE'S NO

04:37 - DISPUTED FACTS OBVIOUSLY WE

04:38 - JUST HAVE BECAUSE TO

04:39 - PRELIMINARY HEARING. WE HAVE

04:41 - THE TESTIMONY OF THE

04:41 - COMMONWEALTH'S WITNESSES AND

04:43 - THAT TESTIMONY THERE'S

04:44 - OBVIOUSLY BEING ACCEPTED AND

04:45 - THERE'S NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE

04:47 - FACTS ARE HERE SECONDLY.

04:50 - I THINK THE QUESTION WOULD BE

04:51 - NOT WHETHER A TINY PART WAS

04:53 - VISIBLE. BUT

04:54 - WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS HIDDEN

04:56 - FROM VIEW SUCH WAS IT SUCH THAT

04:57 - IT WASN'T VISIBLE BY

04:58 - ORDINARY OBSERVATION. IF ENOUGH

05:00 - FOR THE GUN WAS STICKING OUT

05:01 - THAT ANYONE COULD SEE IT AND

05:02 - IT'S A GUN IT'S NOT CAN SEE IF

05:03 - NOT IF ONLY A TINY PART IT'S

05:05 - NOT ENOUGH TO TELL WHAT IT AS

05:07 - IT IS CAN SEE.

05:18 - YES YOUR HONOR THAT'S EXACTLY

05:19 - MY POINT AND THAT'S WHAT.

05:26 - YES YOUR HONOR AND I THINK

05:27 - WE CAN THE COURT CAN TAKE NOTE

05:29 - OF THE

05:29 - FACT THAT YOU KNOW OF HANDLE

05:31 - THE HANDGUN IS SOMETHING THAT'S

05:32 - VISIBLE IN UNIQUE IT'S NOT

05:33 - SOMETHING YOU'RE GOING TO

05:34 - EASILY MISTAKE THE WHOLE HANDLE

05:35 - STICKING UP FOR SOMETHING ELSE

05:36 - IN HERE THAT'S EXACTLY

05:37 - WHAT HAPPENED.

05:38 - AND IT'S JUST NOT THAT SIMPLE

05:40 - SOON FOR SECOND THAT DEFENDANT

05:42 - HAS LONG. I THINK THEY CALL

05:44 - THEM SKINNY JEANS.

05:46 - AND THEREFORE THERE WHATEVER

05:48 - THE MATERIAL IS THE NEW SKIN

05:49 - TIGHT HAS THE WEAPON IN A

05:52 - FRONT POCKET COMPLETELY INSIDE

05:54 - THE POCKET BUT WITH THE OUTLINE

05:56 - COMPLETELY VISIBLE CONCEALED OR

05:58 - NOT CONCEALED.

06:00 - I WOULD ARGUE WANT YOUR HONOR

06:01 - THAT IT IS NOT BECAUSE IT IS

06:02 - VISIBLE BY ORDINARY OBSERVATION

06:03 - AT THAT POINT YOU CAN SEE IT'S

06:05 - NOT GET IN. YOU CAN SEE THAT

06:06 - IT'S THERE

06:06 - IT IS COVERED BUT IT IS NOT

06:08 - GOOD AND QUESTION JURY QUESTION

06:10 - OR NOT A

06:10 - JURY QUESTION. YOUR ARGUMENT IS

06:12 - NOT A JURY QUESTION YOUR

06:13 - ARGUMENT IS THAT.

06:17 - TO THE TRIAL COURT HAS

06:18 - DIRECTED VERDICT EXPOS.

06:22 - IN THIS CASE BECAUSE IT IS

06:24 - I THINK IN THIS CASE BECAUSE

06:25 - THE FACTS ARE SO CLEAR WAS

06:27 - IMMEDIATELY APPARENT THAT IT

06:28 - WAS A HANDGUN

06:28 - IN MY CLIENTS WAISTBAND YES, I

06:30 - DO THINK IT'S A QUESTION OF LAW

06:31 - AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS

06:32 - CONCEALED.

06:33 - I'M CITING THE EUROPEAN AND I

06:35 - THINK LAST QUESTION CONVERSELY

06:38 - YOUR ARGUMENT IS THAT IF IT'S

06:40 - SO CLEAR.

06:42 - THAT IS CONCEALED THAT IS

06:43 - COMPLETELY WITHIN THE POCKET OF

06:45 - A BAGGY JEANS THEN AGAIN

06:47 - THERE'S NOTHING FOR

06:48 - A JURY. YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS A

06:50 - PURE QUESTION OF LAW

06:51 - WHETHER SOMETHING IS CONCEALED

06:53 - ARE NOT CONCERNED THAT THAT

06:54 - THERE'S THERE'S NO FACT FACTUAL

06:56 - ISSUE TO BE DETERMINED THAT

06:59 - FAIR.

07:00 - YOUR MOTHER IS THE FACTUAL

07:01 - ISSUE TO BE DETERMINED OF

07:02 - WHETHER OR NOT IT'S HIDDEN AND

07:04 - IMMEDIATELY. THIS DOUBLE THAT'S

07:06 - A FACTUAL ISSUE HERE

07:08 - THERE'S NO DISPUTE ABOUT IT

07:09 - BECAUSE WE'RE AT THE PLUMBING

07:11 - ARE HEARING STAGE

07:12 - SHRINERS REMEMBER WE WANT THE

07:13 - PLUMBER HEARING IT WAS

07:14 - DISCHARGING THE COMMONWEALTH

07:15 - APPEAL. AND.

07:18 - SO THERE'S NO FACTUAL DISPUTE

07:19 - OBVIOUSLY THERE CAN BE FACTUAL

07:20 - DISPUTES A TRIAL ATTORNEY.

07:22 - BUT IF IT'S

07:23 - COMPLETELY CONCEALED IF YOU TO

07:25 - TAKE YOUR HONOR'S SECOND

07:26 - HYPOTHETICAL. IF YOU KNOW IT'S

07:28 - COMPLETELY CONCEALED AND HIDDEN

07:29 - FROM VIEW THE

07:30 - QUESTION IS NOT A JURY HAVE TO

07:32 - ACCEPT THAT FINDINGS OBVIOUSLY

07:33 - A JURY CAN ACCEPT OR REJECT ANY

07:35 - FACTS BUT WOULD IT BE

07:36 - SUFFICIENT FOR A CONVICTION.

07:38 - IF THE JURY DID EXCEPT THOSE

07:39 - FACTS. AND MY ANSWER WILL BE

07:41 - YES IF THE GUNS SO HIDDEN THAT

07:43 - YOU CAN'T SEE IT WORSE TELL

07:45 - WHAT IT IS

07:45 - AND THE JURY ACCEPT THAT FACT

07:47 - AND CAN FIX THAT WOULD BE

07:48 - SUFFICIENT I WOULD BE LOSING.

07:50 - BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE WE HAVE

07:51 - HERE.

07:53 - OKAY WE UNDERSTAND IT'S PRETTY

07:54 - SIMPLE AND YOUR ARGUMENT IS

07:56 - THAT.

07:58 - THIS THIS STATUTE DOESN'T SAY

07:59 - FULLY OR PARTIALLY CONCEALED.

08:01 - THIS IS CONCEALED, THAT'S

08:03 - CORRECT YOUR HONOR AND

08:04 - I WOULD WHEN MAKE JUST ONE

08:05 - ADDITIONAL POINT THAT EVEN IF

08:07 - THE COURT FINDS THAT THERE IS

08:08 - SOME AMBIGUITY IN THE STATUTE I

08:09 - STILL WIN BECAUSE THE ROLE WHEN

08:11 - IT THE ROLE OF LEVITY AS THIS

08:13 - COURT HAS REPEATEDLY HELD

08:14 - INCLUDING QUITE RECENTLY.

08:15 - SO RECENTLY I COULD MENTION OF

08:17 - THE BRIEF IN KABUL FIRST TO

08:18 - SHANE SMITH

08:19 - THAT ANYTIME THERE IS ANY

08:21 - AMBIGUITY IN THE PENAL STATUTE,

08:23 - THE STATUTE THAT DEFINES

08:24 - CRIMINAL CONDUCT THE BENEFIT

08:25 - THE DOUBT MUST GO TO THE

08:26 - DEFENDANT MUST ACT MUST BE

08:27 - STRICTLY CONSTRUED AND THAT

08:29 - THIS IS NOT ONLY JUST THE KIND

08:31 - OF CONSTRUCTION, ALTHOUGH IT IS

08:33 - NOT ONLY COMMAND OF THE STATURE

08:34 - CONSTRUCTION ACTIVE THOUGH

08:35 - AGAIN IT IS BUT IT'S AS I

08:37 - BELIEVE THIS COURT PUT IT

08:39 - ROOTED IN FUNDAMENTAL

08:39 - PRINCIPLES OF DUE PROCESS

08:42 - CRIMINAL STATUTES HAVE TO BE

08:43 - CONSTRUED STRICTLY ON THAT MAP.

08:45 - BUT AGAIN I GUESS ALL ROADS

08:46 - LEAD BACK TO THE

08:47 - SAME THING. IF IT'S A FACTUAL

08:49 - ISSUE THE ROLE ENTITY HAS LEFT

08:51 - NO NOTE NO ROLE IN THAT WE

08:53 - DON'T SAY TO THE JURY.

08:57 - CONSIDER THIS NARROWLY

08:59 - BECAUSE IT'S SAFE.

09:01 - RULE BECAUSE ROLAND THESE

09:02 - APPLICANT IN

09:03 - CRIMINAL LAW THAT'S A A A

09:05 - PRINCIPLE OF STATUTORY

09:06 - CONSTRUCTION, AS YOU SAID.

09:08 - SO AS I SAID I THINK.

09:10 - I GUESS I UNDERSTAND YOUR

09:12 - ARGUMENT BUT I THINK YOUR

09:13 - ARGUMENT IS THAT THIS IS A

09:14 - QUESTION PURELY OF LAW

09:18 - THAT THE LEGISLATURE MEAN

09:19 - COMPLETELY CONCEALED IN ANYBODY

09:21 - THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO FACTUAL

09:23 - CONTROVERSY AT ALL INSIDE THE

09:25 - CONSUMER NOT CONSENT THE CHILL.

09:28 - YOUR HONOR I I THINK THEY'RE

09:29 - INCONSISTENT WITH OUR CASE LAW

09:30 - BUT THAT'S WHY YOU'RE HERE.

09:32 - YES, YOUR HONOR I BUY MY

09:33 - RESPONSE WOULD BE THAT IT'S

09:35 - THE DEFINITION OF WHAT

09:36 - CONCEALED MEANS AND WHAT THE

09:37 - STATUTE MEANS TIP YOUR QUESTION

09:38 - OF LAW IN ANY CASE

09:40 - AND THEN YOU KNOW THE TRIAL

09:41 - COURT TO APPLY THE FACTS TO THE

09:42 - LAW.

09:44 - IT'S ALL ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE

09:46 - QUESTION.

09:48 - AND WE DIDN'T DO WE NOT.

09:51 - WE CAN IN OUR

09:52 - CASE LINE THAT WE RECENTLY

09:54 - DECIDED

09:55 - THE CASE WHERE WE STAND AT THE

09:58 - ON HERE IS OF WEAPONS.

10:05 - IT'S NOT EVIDENCE OF CRIMINAL

10:07 - ACTIVITY YOU NEED SOMETHING

10:08 - ELSE.

10:10 - YOU KNOW WHERE WE

10:11 - CREATED A SITUATION WHERE WE

10:13 - RECOGNIZE THAT INDIVIDUALS AND

10:20 - THEY CAN'T BE STOPPED JUST FOR

10:22 - THE MERE FACT THAT THEY HAVE TO

10:23 - HAND SOMETHING ELSE HAS BEEN

10:25 - GOING ON.

10:28 - SOMETHING

10:29 - MORE ICE A MATTER OF LAW.

10:33 - THE FIELD IS KIDS. I MEAN

10:48 - HE PUT 3 AMATEURS

10:50 - FIELD ACTUALLY.

10:54 - MASS THIS LAW WITH A LOT.

10:58 - DO YOU THINK YOU

10:59 - SCORED ABSOLUTELY HAS PUT

11:00 - PARAMETERS ON WHAT CONCEALED

11:01 - MEANS AND I THINK AND AGAIN

11:03 - CIRCLING BACK RESPONSES TO JUST

11:04 - TO SPARE THE BATS

11:05 - THAT THAT THAT DEFINITION OF

11:07 - CONCEALED AND WHAT IT MEANS IN

11:08 - THIS STATUTE IS UP YOUR

11:09 - QUESTION OF LAW AS FAR AS ITS

11:11 - RELATIONSHIP TO HICKS OBVIOUSLY

11:13 - THERE'S OTHER ISSUES AT PLAY

11:14 - THERE. PICKS IN PART TURNED ON

11:17 - THE FACT THAT

11:17 - IT IS LEGAL TO CARRY CONCEALED

11:19 - WEAPON IF YOU HAVE A LICENSE

11:20 - AND THAT OFFICER SEEING A

11:21 - PERSON WITH A WEAPON WITH NO

11:23 - FAMILY LICENSE OR NOT

11:24 - NECESSARILY.

11:40 - ABSOLUTELY AND

11:41 - IT'S IMPORTANT AND THE

11:42 - CIRCUMSPECT WITHOUT SAYING THAT

11:44 - THE RULE PLENITY IT'S IMPORTANT

11:45 - AND THIS COURT.

11:47 - THEY MADE A POINT OF THIS IN

11:48 - THE SMITH DECISION THIS

11:49 - PAST NOVEMBER THAT ORDINARY

11:51 - CITIZENS CAN KNOW WHAT THE LAW

11:52 - PROHIBITS AND WHAT DOESN'T.

11:54 - AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS

11:56 - FOR THE RULES LET IT BE THAT

11:57 - AGE A US CITIZEN SHOULD NOT

11:58 - HAVE TO GUESS

11:59 - WEATHER THEY'RE NOT HIS CONDUCT

12:01 - IS CRIMINAL WHETHER OR NOT HE'S

12:02 - A FELON IN THE SMITH CASES

12:04 - BECAUSE THE AD SCRATCHED SERIAL

12:06 - NUMBER THAT WAS NOT COMPLETELY

12:07 - OBLITERATED AND THIS COURT

12:09 - DECIDED THAT THAT THAT UNDER

12:11 - THE RULES LET IT BE THAT

12:11 - DIDN'T. RICE A LEVEL OF

12:13 - CRIMINAL CONDUCT. I THINK IT'S

12:14 - A VERY SIMILAR QUESTION HERE.

12:17 - THAT'S JUST JUST JUST TO

12:19 - FINISH IT THEY'RE ASKING US TO

12:21 - OVERRULE COMMONWEALTH VERSUS

12:23 - WILLIAMS

12:24 - 1975 CASE. AND I'M SCOTT ONE

12:28 - 1981 CASES THAT RIGHT.

12:30 - NO YOUR HONOR I'M NOT I DON'T

12:31 - I THINK WHAT I'M ARGUING IS

12:33 - COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH

12:34 - WILLIAMS AGAIN THAT'S SUPERIOR

12:36 - COURT CASE

12:37 - AS FAR AS SCOTT YOUR HONOR I'LL

12:38 - GO TO THAT FIRST BECAUSE THAT'S

12:39 - THIS COURT IN SCOTT THE ISSUE

12:42 - WAS PRIMARILY THE DEFENDER WAS

12:43 - PRIMARILY RAISING ISSUES OF

12:45 - CREDIBILITY, ACCORDING TO

12:46 - THE PAIN. WHICH THIS COURT MAKE

12:48 - SHORT WORK OF OBVIOUSLY SOME

12:49 - SUSPICIONS HERE IF YOU HAVE A

12:50 - CONVICTION YOU DON'T

12:52 - CONSIDER CREDIBILITY. THIS AD

12:54 - BUT AS FAR AS THE FACTS OF

12:55 - SCOTT THEY'RE DISTINGUISHABLE

12:56 - BECAUSE

12:56 - IN SCOTT. WE KNOW THE FACTS THE

12:59 - FEW SENSE OF THE OPINION.

13:00 - THEY SAY THE WITNESSES SAW THE

13:02 - DEFENDANT TAKE THE GUN OUT OF

13:04 - HIS WAISTBAND AND THEN SHIPPED

13:05 - THERE IS NO TESTIMONY THAT THE

13:06 - GUN WAS VISIBLE IN HIS

13:07 - WAISTBAND BEFORE TOOK IT OUT.

13:12 - WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A SITUATION

13:13 - SIMILAR TO THE SITUATION HERE.

13:16 - MAY WELL UP AND FULLY CONCEALED

13:17 - THERE AND IF THERE'S NO FACTS

13:18 - IT WASN'T SUFFICIENT TO THE

13:20 - CONVICTION REVIEW. ALTHOUGH

13:22 - DIFFERENCES TAKEN AWAY TO THE

13:23 - COMET.

13:25 - THE COURT IN EAST OVERALL SCOTT

13:27 - A RIGHT SCOTT WAS PRIMARILY

13:28 - ABOUT OTHER THINGS THIS COURT

13:29 - WAS NOT DID NOT SPEND ANY TIME

13:31 - IN SCOTT DEALING WITH WHAT

13:33 - COUNTS IS CONCEALED WHAT DOES

13:34 - NOT.

13:37 - OVERALL SCOTT IS NECESSARY.

13:39 - AND AGAIN AS FAR AS WILLIAMS

13:41 - AND OTHER SUPERIOR COURT CASES

13:43 - SUCH AS THE OTHER

13:46 - ONE BUTLER THAT HAVE BEEN

13:47 - RAISED. PREVIOUSLY THEY ARE.

13:51 - I'M NOT ASKING THAT WILL BE

13:53 - THAT A GUN BE COMPLETELY

13:54 - COVERED BUT THAT IT BE NOT

13:57 - VISIBLE TO ORDINARY

13:58 - OBSERVATION. I THINK THAT BEST

14:00 - CAN PORTS WITH WHAT CONCEALED

14:02 - MEANS PROVIDES A NICE BRIGHT

14:03 - LINE RULE AND GIVES A GOOD

14:05 - CLEAR DEFINITION. SO THAT

14:07 - PEOPLE IN THIS COMMONWEALTH CAN

14:08 - KNOW WHAT'S CRIMINAL WHAT'S

14:09 - NOT. THANK YOU WERE FROM THE

14:11 - COM. THANK YOU YOUR HONORS.

14:32 - GOOD MORNING, TO PLEASE THE

14:34 - COURT MATTHEW LA MONICA.

14:38 - NOW OUR POSITION IS.

14:41 - OUR POSITION IS OBVIOUSLY THAT

14:43 - ANY CONCEALMENT CAN BE.

14:44 - SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE

14:46 - ELEMENT OF CONCEALMENT

14:47 - IF OF COURSE IS SUPPORTED BY

14:49 - THE REQUISITE MEN'S RIGHT AND

14:51 - THAT.

14:58 - AND IS THERE ANY REASON

14:59 - THEY'RE NOT CAPABLE OF SAYING

15:00 - THAT.

15:01 - AND THEY'RE CERTAINLY CAPABLE

15:03 - OF WRITING WHAT THEY WRITE IN

15:04 - THE STATUTE. BUT THE TO

15:07 - US THAT THAT DECISION NOT TO TO

15:10 - FIND CONCEALMENT IN THE STATUTE

15:11 - AND NOT TO MODIFY THAT WORD

15:13 - THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN

15:14 - IT'S AMBIGUOUS THAT JUST MEANS

15:16 - IT'S MEANT TO BE A FACT

15:17 - INTENSIVE QUESTION AND THAT'S

15:19 - BEEN A

15:20 - THAT SPEND THE WAY IT'S BEEN

15:21 - FOR JURY A JURY TRIALS AND

15:23 - EVERY EVERY FACTUAL SCENARIO

15:26 - SEES A AND ALL OF THESE.

15:30 - AND SUPPOSE MOST OF IT.

15:32 - AS IS USUALLY

15:32 - THE CASE THIS DOWN IN YOUR

15:34 - POCKET AND NOBODY HERE CAN SEE

15:35 - IT AND THE TIP IS. OUT AS IS

15:39 - CUSTOM. CONCEALED OR NOT.

15:43 - THAT COULD CERTAINLY BE FOUND

15:44 - TO BE CONCEALED BY A FACT

15:46 - AND THAT'S A SCENARIO THAT

15:47 - WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT WHERE

15:48 - PEOPLE CAN CIRCUMVENT THE

15:50 - PURPOSE OF THE STATUTE

15:51 - JUST BY MAKING SOME PIECE OF

15:53 - THE RECOGNIZABLE JUST TO ONE

15:54 - PERSON AND THAT'S.

15:57 - AND STILL GOING TO BE NOBODY

15:59 - IN THIS ROOM THAT WOULD LOOK

16:00 - AT YOU AND SAY THAT YOUR POCKET

16:02 - SQUARES CONCEALED NOWHERE

16:04 - POCKETS WHERE THAT'S WHY THE

16:05 - WAR.

16:06 - WELL, OBVIOUSLY THE PURPOSE

16:07 - OF.

16:09 - OBSCURING PART OF THAT POCKET

16:10 - SQUARE IS DIFFERENT FROM THE

16:12 - PURPOSE OF STICKING A GUN IN

16:14 - YOUR WAIST IF THIS DEFENDANT.

16:16 - IT'S INTENDED

16:17 - TO ATTEMPT THE INTENT IS

16:19 - ABSOLUTELY IMPORTANT DISCERNING

16:23 - WHAT'S CRIMINAL FOR THIS

16:24 - STATUTE.

16:27 - IF THIS DEFENDANT WANTED TO

16:28 - OPEN CARRY HIS GUN THAT MAY NOT

16:30 - BE A GOOD IDEA IN PHILADELPHIA,

16:31 - BUT HE CERTAINLY COULD HAVE HIS

16:33 - ACTIONS ABSOLUTELY INDICATE AN

16:35 - INTENT TO OBSCURE I WANT TO GET

16:38 - TOO MUCH INTO THE FACTS OF

16:39 - THIS CASE THESE ARE JUST A

16:40 - START YOU KNOW YOU CAN FINISH I

16:42 - WANT TO GET TOO MUCH INTO THE

16:43 - FACTS OF THIS CASE, BUT ALL WE

16:44 - HAVE IN THIS LIMITED A

16:46 - PRELIMINARY HEARING RECORD IS

16:47 - ONE OFFICER. REALLY QUITE

16:50 - OBSERVANT LEE ASTUTELY

16:51 - OBSERVING JUST A PIECE OF A

16:53 - GUN. A GUN IN THE WAISTBAND HE

16:55 - SAID IT WAS NOT FULLY VISIBLE.

16:57 - IT WAS PARTIALLY OBVIOUSLY

16:58 - CONCEALED BY THE PANTS

17:00 - THE OFFICERS GENTLY RECOGNIZE

17:01 - WHAT HE SAID HE BELIEVED TO BE

17:03 - THE DEFENDANT MESSING WITH THE

17:04 - HANDLE

17:04 - THE GUN. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE AND

17:06 - HE SAID THAT WAS BASED ON HIS

17:07 - EXPERIENCE AS A POLICE OFFICER.

17:09 - SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK

17:11 - AT THIS AND THE STANDARD THAT

17:12 - WE POSITIVE IN OUR BRIEF IS NOT

17:15 - VISIBLE WHY ORDINARY

17:15 - OBSERVATION THAT'S AN

17:17 - OBJECTIVE STANDARD THAT'S

17:18 - IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THIS FROM

17:19 - THE POINT OF VIEW OF NOT

17:20 - NECESSARILY A POLICE OFFICER

17:22 - JUST ONE WITNESS WHO CLINCHED A

17:24 - GUN THAT'S A LOOK AT IT FROM

17:25 - THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE PUBLIC

17:27 - FROM THE STATUTE IS DESIGNED

17:28 - TO PROTECT.

17:29 - THE COUNCIL ON STARTED TO

17:30 - HAVE A QUESTION I MEANT FINISH

17:31 - YOUR SENTENCE NOT FINISHER

17:34 - THAT'S OKAY HAHA IN

17:37 - RESPONSE TO.

17:39 - JUSTICE FARES HYPOTHETICAL

17:41 - QUESTION YOUR COLLEAGUE

17:43 - INDICATED THAT GONE IN A

17:47 - POCKET OF TIGHT FITTING

17:49 - SKINNY JEANS, WHICH WAS

17:51 - COMPLETELY IN THE POCKET

17:53 - WITHOUT THE

17:53 - HANDLE SHOWING. BUT WAS A DEN A

17:56 - FINE DOUBLE AS A CON WAS

17:58 - NOT CONCEALED WHAT WOULD YOU

18:00 - SAY ABOUT THAT HYPOTHETICAL.

18:02 - GRAY THAT'S ABSOLUTELY A

18:04 - PROBLEMATIC SCENARIO WITH

18:05 - DEFENDANTS POSITION.

18:08 - BACK.

18:09 - THAT IS ABSOLUTELY A QUESTION

18:10 - OF FACTS WHERE WE CAN ASSUME AS

18:12 - A MATTER OF LAW THAT BACK ON

18:13 - HIS

18:13 - NOT CONCEALED.

18:14 - JUST BECAUSE AS WE KNOW

18:16 - POLICE OFFICERS CAN RECOGNIZE

18:18 - IMMEDIATELY. SAY OPPOSING THE

18:19 - PANTS ARE THE OUTLINE OF A GUN.

18:21 - THEY CAN IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE

18:22 - THAT THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY

18:23 - MEAN AS A MATTER OF LAW

18:25 - THAT THE PUBLIC IS ON NOTICE

18:26 - THAT THAT PERSON IS CARRYING A

18:27 - GUN THAT PART OF THE PURPOSE OF

18:29 - THE STATUTE. YES ARE YOU ASKING

18:31 - US TO ADOPT JUDGE MOULTON'S

18:32 - OPINION IN SCOTT TOO.

18:35 - YES, SCOTT SCOTT WHICH STOOD

18:37 - FOR THAT THE CONTENTION

18:39 - ESSENTIALLY THAT A DESIGN AT

18:41 - LEAST THESE ACT RECKLESSLY FOR

18:42 - THE STATUTE WHERE MENS REA

18:43 - IS IN. EXPLICITLY SET OUT IN

18:46 - THE STATUTE AND THAT'S VERY

18:47 - IMPORTANT. BECAUSE

18:50 - IF THERE IS ANY DOUBT ABOUT

18:52 - OUR POSITION. MAYBE MAYBE IT'S

18:55 - MIGHT SEEM TOO EASY TO

18:57 - A JUSTICE TO SATISFY THE ACTIVE

19:00 - CONCEALMENT THAT'S WHAT WE'VE

19:01 - OUT PUNISHMENT OF NOT CRIMINAL

19:03 - BEHAVIOR OF UNINTENTIONAL

19:06 - CONCEALMENT LIKE IT'S GOT TO

19:08 - IN THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS

19:10 - CARRYING A GUN

19:11 - IN IT AND A HOLSTER OUTSIDE OF

19:13 - HIS WAISTBAND IT WAS A CLASSIC

19:14 - A OPEN CARRY

19:16 - SITUATION AND HIS CONTENTION ON

19:18 - APPEAL

19:19 - WAS THAT HE HAD TAKEN OFFICE

19:21 - WHICH ARE I THINK AND UH AN

19:23 - ARTICLE OF CLOTHING FELL OVER.

19:25 - SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO

19:26 - AVOID HERE WHICH IS THE

19:27 - PUNISHMENT OF AN INTENTIONAL

19:28 - CONDUCT. WHERE WE OBVIOUSLY

19:31 - HAVE AS A 10 TO CONCEAL OR THE

19:34 - A CERTAINLY IN FRONT OF THE

19:36 - INTENT TO CONCEAL.

19:38 - THAT MEANS TO GO TO A JURY AND

19:39 - THAT'S THE IMPORTANCE OF

19:40 - PROCEDURAL POSTURE. THIS CASE

19:42 - HAS A PRELIMINARY HEARING.

19:44 - IT IS CERTAINLY REASONABLE

19:46 - INFERENCE HERE THAT THE GENERAL

19:48 - PUBLIC WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON

19:50 - NOTICE THAT THIS GUN WAS A

19:52 - BEING CARRIED BY THIS DEFENDANT

19:54 - IN PUBLIC IN A CONVENIENCE

19:55 - STORE.

19:56 - COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO THE

19:57 - INTENT TO QUESTION. AND THIS IS

19:59 - A QUESTION I NEVER THOUGHT I'D

20:01 - THE ASKING IN COURT. PLUS THE

20:04 - FACT THAT THE.

20:06 - GUN ENDED UP AT THE POTATOES

20:09 - RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE OF THE

20:10 - INTENT OF THE DEFENSE.

20:13 - THAT'S CERTAINLY RELEVANT.

20:15 - TO HIS MENS REA OF CONCEALMENT

20:18 - I'M OBVIOUSLY IT'S OUT OF HIS

20:20 - POSSESSION AT THAT POINT.

20:22 - BUT IT'S TIME TO TO HIDE THE

20:23 - GUN IN THE PIT.

20:24 - THAT'S IT TENDED TO HIDE.

20:26 - HIS ACTIONS UPON SEEING WHEN HE

20:29 - WAS IN POSSESSION OF THE GUN

20:30 - AFTER LEADING POSSESSION OF

20:31 - THE GUN. ARE CERTAINLY RELEVANT

20:32 - TO WHETHER HE MEANT TO CONCEAL

20:34 - IT. SO BASED ON THAT

20:37 - THERE CERTAINLY REASONABLE

20:39 - INFERENCE THAT THAT WAS

20:41 - CONCEALED IN THAT HE MEANT TO

20:42 - CONCEAL IT. WE CAN SAY AS A

20:43 - MATTER OF LAW THAT JUST BECAUSE

20:46 - ONE OFFICER CAUGHT A GLIMPSE OF

20:47 - THIS GUN BAN

20:49 - REALLY IT THE ASTUTE LEE AND

20:51 - DID A GOOD INVESTIGATION DID A

20:52 - PROPER INVESTIGATION SAW CLIPS

20:54 - OF

20:54 - THIS GUN. DID HIS DUE DILIGENCE

20:58 - SAW SOME SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY

20:59 - EVENTUALLY STOP TO DEFEND INTO

21:01 - PLACE CARRYING AN ILLEGAL

21:02 - FIREARM I WANT TO IS THESE

21:05 - TRACK OF THE FACT THAT THIS WAS

21:06 - GOOD POLICE INVESTIGATION.

21:08 - I DON'T WANT A GOOD

21:09 - INVESTIGATION TO BE DISCOURAGED

21:11 - WHERE POLICE SIMPLY CAN'T ACT

21:13 - JUST BECAUSE THEY CLINCHED A

21:14 - GUN THAT ESSENTIALLY MAKES A

21:16 - SESSION ON

21:17 - THE FORCE THAT MAKES IT ONLY

21:19 - ENFORCEABLE WHEN THE GUN IS

21:20 - COMPLETELY INVISIBLE LET'S THE

21:21 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY SAYS

21:23 - WHAT THEY.

21:24 - I MEAN IF

21:27 - WELL IN OTHER WORDS THEY

21:28 - COULD SAVE IT IF YOU NEED TO

21:30 - APPLY THE LAW THEY WRITTEN.

21:32 - EVEN IF IT MEANS CONSEQUENCES

21:35 - WHICH WE WOULDN'T WANT ISN'T

21:36 - THAT RIGHT.

21:36 - WELL OUR POSITION IS THAT

21:37 - THE.

21:39 - JUST BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T MODIFY

21:40 - THE WERE CONCEALED DOESN'T MEAN

21:42 - IT'S AMBIGUOUS THAT JUST MEANS

21:44 - THAT IT'S FACT INTENSIVE

21:45 - QUESTION THAT COMES DOWN TO

21:46 - THAT A MILLION DIFFERENT

21:47 - CIRCUMSTANCES IN EACH

21:49 - KNOW TOO NO NO TO THESE CASES

21:51 - ARE GOING TO BE THE SAME THIS

21:52 - IS VERY CIRCUMSTANTIAL VERY

21:53 - FACT INTENSIVE. IT DEPENDS ON.

21:56 - WHAT THE PERSON IS WEARING

21:58 - WHERE THEY ARE

21:58 - WHAT TIME OF DAY IT IS WHAT

22:00 - KIND OF GUN IT WHO IS OBSERVING

22:02 - THEM. THAT COULD DEPEND ON A

22:04 - WHOLE NUMBER OF THINGS

22:05 - AND THAT INDICATES INTENT BY

22:07 - THE LEGISLATURE TO LEAVE THIS A

22:08 - P A

22:08 - FACTUAL DETERMINATION, WHETHER

22:10 - GUNS CONCEALED LOT WHY HIS

22:13 - COUNCIL I'M I'M STRUGGLING WITH

22:15 - WHERE YOU'RE GETTING THE INTENT

22:16 - OF THE LEGISLATURE, THEY SAID 2

22:18 - THINGS.

22:19 - YOU CAN OPENLY CARRY IF YOU

22:20 - HAVE A LICENSE.

22:23 - CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON.

22:26 - PARTIALLY OPEN

22:27 - CARRY THEY DIDN'T SAY PARTIALLY

22:29 - CONCEALED IT SEEMS TO ME THAT

22:31 - THEY CREATED A

22:32 - TRUE DICHOTOMY HAS HOW THEY

22:35 - VIEW THE ON MANNER IN I CAN CAN

22:39 - CAN BE. WELL I HANDLED.

22:42 - WE CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THE

22:44 - REASONING IN COMMONWEALTH

22:45 - VERSUS BUTLER THAT LEGISLATIVE

22:46 - INTENT SHOULD NOT BE FORWARDED

22:48 - BY CONSTRUCTION WHICH IS

22:49 - UNREASONABLY RIGID

22:50 - AND INFLEXIBLE THE RULE STRICT

22:51 - CONSTRUCTION, DEFINITIVE

22:53 - SIGHTINGS NOT REQUIRE THAT THE

22:54 - WORDS OF CRIMINAL STATUTE MUST

22:55 - BE GIVEN THEIR NERIS MEETING

22:57 - WHERE THEY LEGISLATE

22:57 - INTENTIONALLY DISREGARDED THERE

22:59 - ARE PRESUMPTIONS IN THE STATURE

23:01 - CONSTRUCTION ACT.

23:03 - THAT THE GENERAL

23:04 - ASSEMBLY DONE INTEND THE RESULT

23:06 - AS ABSURD IMPOSSIBLE. THE

23:07 - EXECUTION ARE REASONABLE THE

23:09 - INTENSE FOR THE ENTIRE STATUTE

23:10 - TO BE EFFECTIVE IN CERTAIN

23:11 - THAT'S WHY THIS TIES IN WITH

23:13 - THE PURPOSE OF THE STATUTE AND

23:15 - THE ENFORCEABILITY OF THE

23:16 - STATUE BECAUSE WE'RE GLEANING

23:18 - THAT THE LEGISLATURE WOULD NOT

23:19 - INTENDED FOR THIS STATUTE TO

23:21 - ONLY BE ENFORCEABLE WHEN POLICE

23:24 - CANNOT ACT

23:25 - CAN IT'S ONLY EFFECTIVE WHEN

23:27 - ESSENTIALLY IT'S NOT ENFORCE A

23:28 - NO-FLY DOING THAT.

23:29 - IF I'M SORRY TRY THIS CASE.

23:34 - BASKETBALL ARENA AND WE HAD 10

23:38 - JURIES IN THE STANDS. WATCHING

23:41 - AND LISTENING. IN

23:42 - 5 SAID CONCEALED, 5 SAID NOT

23:45 - CONCEALED, WOULD YOU BE OK WITH

23:47 - IT.

23:49 - SINCE IT DEPENDS ON THE

23:50 - CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASES.

23:53 - WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT A JURY

23:55 - MUST FIND THE DEFENDANT GUILTY.

23:57 - WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT A

23:58 - DEFENDANT IS AUTOMATICALLY

23:59 - GUILTY OF ANY PART OF HIS GUNS

24:00 - CONCEALED. IT'S A FACTUAL

24:02 - DETERMINATION FOR THEM TO MAKE.

24:04 - IF THEY FIND HIM NOT GUILTY SO

24:06 - BE IT. BUT

24:08 - AGAIN THAT'S TAKE THAT OUT

24:10 - OF THE HANDS OF THE JURY THAT

24:12 - THE DEMARCATION IS OBVIOUS HERE

24:14 - YOU VIEW IT AS A PURE FACTS.

24:16 - THE ACTUAL QUESTION.

24:18 - THE DEFENSE FUSE IT IS A LEGAL

24:19 - QUESTION OF STATUTORY

24:20 - INTERPRETATION.

24:21 - IT SAYS CONCEALED MEANS

24:23 - CONCEALED IN DOESN'T MEAN

24:25 - PARTIALLY CONCEALED.

24:26 - I SUPPOSE S-AND-P OVERUSING

24:27 - IS AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD OR NOT

24:29 - DOES AWAY WITH THE OBSERVATION.

24:30 - SO IT'S NOT ARBITRARY. WE ARE

24:33 - LOOKING AT THIS FROM THE POINT

24:34 - OF VIEW

24:34 - OF OF THE PUBLIC THAT MAKES IT

24:37 - THE OBJECT YOU JUST ARGUED.

24:42 - STREET LEVEL ADJUDICATION

24:44 - YOU'VE BEEN ARGUING.

24:47 - ROBUST DISCRETION IN THE IN THE

24:49 - OFFICER ON THE STREET.

24:51 - WHICH SEEMS TO ME WHICH IS A

24:53 - REASONABLE ARGUMENT WHETHER YOU

24:54 - WIN OR LOSE THAT. IT'S HOT IT'S

24:56 - IT IT'S OBVIOUSLY SUBJECT AND

24:58 - NOW YOU'RE TELLING US YOU WANT

25:04 - IT

25:05 - SEEMS THAT IT'S JUST DIFFERENT

25:07 - RESULT WITH LOW PERHAPS I

25:08 - MISSPOKE WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT

25:09 - IS FOR THE JURY.

25:11 - TO DETERMINE WHETHER GUN IS

25:12 - VISIBLE BY ORDINARY OBSERVATION

25:14 - AND ORDINARY OBSERVATION.

25:16 - THAT ESSENTIALLY THE STATUTE IN

25:19 - THE FEW OF THE PUBLIC NOT

25:21 - NECESSARILY JUST ONE PERSON,

25:23 - BUT IT IS CERTAINLY FOR THE

25:24 - JURY TO DETERMINE BASED ON THE

25:26 - STANDARD THAT WE'VE SUPPORTS

25:28 - THAT. WHETHER GUN IS VISIBLE BY

25:30 - ORDINARY OBSERVATION. I'M JUST

25:32 - SAYING ORDINARY OBSERVATION IS

25:34 - MORE OR LESS A FOR LACK OF

25:36 - BETTER TERM THE OBJECTIVE

25:37 - STANDARD BECAUSE IT AVOIDS A

25:39 - COMPLETE ARBITRARY RESULTS.

26:15 - AND GOOD MORNING. MISTER

26:18 - AT THE CON

26:19 - INCORPORATED IS A NEW JERSEY

26:21 - BASED COMPANY THAT DEVELOPED

26:22 - PRODUCED AND DISTRIBUTED.

26:25 - PRO DEATH. A MEDICAL PRODUCT

26:27 - USING MASH.

26:30 - HAPPILY IN INDIANA RESIDENTS

26:32 - SUFFERED COMPLICATIONS FROM

26:33 - THAT PRO LEFT HIM.

26:36 - SHE SUED AT THE CON

26:37 - IN PENNSYLVANIA, ASSERTING

26:40 - JURISDICTION UNDER THE STATE

26:41 - LONG

26:42 - ARMS STATUTE WHICH ALLOWS AN

26:44 - ACTION AGAINST A NON RESIDENT

26:46 - DEFENDANT IN PENNSYLVANIA UNDER

26:48 - CERTAIN CONDITIONS.

26:51 - SUPERIOR COURT CONCLUDED THAT

26:52 - JURISDICTION WAS PROPER IN

26:54 - PENNSYLVANIA.

26:55 - FOCUSING PRIMARILY ON AT THE

26:57 - CONCH CLOSE SUPERVISION.

26:59 - THE MEASURE PRODUCTION IN THIS

27:01 - STATE.

27:04 - THAT THE KIND OF YOUR CLIENT

27:06 - THIS CHALLENGING THIS

27:07 - INCLUDING.

27:11 - MORNING THANKSGIVING MORNING.

27:12 - THERE ARE SOME MAY IT PLEASE

27:13 - THE COURT TO RUN.

27:14 - I'M AND KATE OLDER DAVIS.

27:18 - THE UPTICK ON DEFENDANTS.

27:21 - WHETHER A PENNSYLVANIA COURT

27:23 - HAS SPECIFIC JURISDICTION.

27:25 - OVER AND NOW THE STATE DEFECT

27:27 - AND AT THE CON, NEW

27:29 - JERSEY COMPANY. WHEN SUED BY AN

27:32 - OUT OF STATE PLAINTIFF. A

27:33 - STOLEN. HOME STATE SCHOOLS.

27:38 - IN THE FIRST INSTANCE

27:40 - DETERMINED

27:41 - BY WHETHER THE REQUIREMENTS OF

27:43 - THE LARGE STATUTE ON THAT AND

27:44 - IN THE SECOND INSTANCE. WEATHER

27:47 - THE DUE

27:49 - PROCESS CLAUSE EXCEEDED OR

27:53 - NOT EXCEEDED THAT THE DUE

27:55 - PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE UNITED

27:56 - STATES CONSTITUTION.

27:58 - BUT THE ALARM STATUTE IS OF

28:00 - COURSE A THRESHOLD QUESTION

28:02 - BECAUSE OF THE LONG ARM STATUE

28:03 - REQUIREMENTS ARE

28:04 - NOT MET. THIS COURT NEED NOT GO

28:06 - ON TO CONSIDER THE CUTS TO SHUL

28:08 - QUESTIONS THAT

28:09 - ARE RAISED. MOST RECENTLY IN

28:12 - THE BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB CASE

28:16 - A RACE OR 2

28:17 - IT HAS TO BE A MESS CASE FOR

28:19 - EASE OF UNDERSTANDING BUT IT'S

28:21 - A THAT DECISION BY THE UNITED

28:23 - STATES SUPREME COURT AND IN

28:24 - 2017 ALSO BEARS ON ON THIS

28:28 - ISSUE. THE COURT

28:30 - THE YEAR HONORS ARE VERY

28:31 - FAMILIAR WITH THE STRUCTURE OF

28:33 - THE. OF THE WALL ARMSTEAD TERM

28:36 - IN ESSENTIALLY THERE ARE

28:37 - 3 SUBSECTIONS THAT FIRST 2

28:40 - SUBSECTIONS SPECIFY WHEN

28:43 - JURISDICTION OVER AND AND NOW

28:45 - THE STATE DEFENDANT CAN

28:46 - BE HAD. AND THEN THE 3RD

28:49 - SUBSECTION WHICH IRAN IS

28:51 - REFERRED TO IN THE GRANT OF

28:53 - ELLICOTT HER SUBSECTION C.

28:58 - THE CIRCUMSTANCES

29:00 - UNDER WHICH. NOW THE STATE

29:02 - DEFENDANT CAN BE SUBJECT TO

29:04 - JURISDICTION OF PENNSYLVANIA

29:06 - AND THAT SUBSECTION IS ENTITLED

29:08 - SCOPE OF JURISDICTION THAT

29:10 - AND IT PROVIDES THAT THERE IS

29:12 - SPECIFIC JURISDICTION OVER NOW

29:14 - THAT'S A DEFENDANT THE

29:15 - ONLY OVER CAUSES OF ACTION

29:18 - WHICH

29:18 - ARE CLAIMS THAT ARISE FROM THE

29:21 - ACTIVITIES OF THE DEFENDANT IN

29:23 - THE

29:23 - 4 STATES. NOW THERE ARE SOME

29:25 - IMPORTANT LANGUAGE IN THERE IS

29:26 - SET.

29:28 - IT IS A CLAIM ANALYSIS AND

29:30 - OF COURSE AND EMS THE SUPREME

29:32 - COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SAID

29:33 - YES, IT IS A CLAIM BY CLAIM TO

29:35 - ASSIST COUNSEL KATE KELLY PROBE

29:37 - THAT FOR A MOMENT, THE CASE.

29:39 - YOU JUST.

29:40 - THE FERRY. QUICKLY WHEN OVER

29:43 - WHAT I THINK IS OBVIOUSLY

29:45 - ESSENTIAL PART OF THIS CASE.

29:47 - YOU JUST EQUATED KINDS OF

29:49 - ACTION WITH CLAIMS

29:51 - FOR LIGHT THE BRISTOL-MYERS

29:53 - COURT USE 2.

29:55 - CLAIMS KIND OF ACTION THEY USE

29:58 - ALL OF THOSE WORDS WITHIN THE

30:00 - CONTEXT OF THE OPINION SO WHAT

30:03 - AGAIN.

30:08 - PLANE BECAUSE OF HIGH FASHION.

30:15 - AND THE BMS CASE. THIS

30:18 - SUPREME COURT. THE CENTRAL USE

30:20 - CLAIMS AND CAUSES OF ACTION AS

30:22 - THAT'S INTERCHANGEABLE AND

30:24 - SUIT.

30:31 - THERE IS A I AGREE THERE'S A

30:33 - LOT OF LOOSE LANGUAGE AND THAT

30:34 - THE AS CASE AND I AM GOING TO

30:35 - COME TO THAT BUT I THINK I

30:37 - THINK FAIRLY DESCRIBED.

30:40 - IN STATUTORY LANGUAGE, A CAUSE

30:42 - OF ACTION IS CLAIM, BUT THAT

30:44 - THE KEY THE KEY POINT HERE IS

30:47 - THAT

30:49 - THAT ONLY WHETHER YOU CALL A

30:51 - CAUSE OF ACTION OR A CLAIM THAT

30:52 - HAS TO ARISE.

30:54 - IT HAS RICE FROM THE ACTIVITIES

30:57 - OF THE DEFENDANT IN THE

30:58 - FOREIGN STATE. THE ARISE FROM

30:59 - LANG WHICH IS ACTUALLY MORE

31:01 - LIMITED EVEN THEN THAT LANGUAGE

31:03 - AS YOUR HONOR KNOWS AND THE

31:04 - BMS CASE BECAUSE BMS THEY SAY A

31:07 - RISE OUT OF OR RELATE TO AND I

31:09 - GOT TO COME TO THAT IN A

31:10 - MINUTE. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT TO

31:12 - SEE WHETHER IT EVER RISES OUT

31:14 - OF IT AND THAT FACT A SUPERIOR

31:16 - COURT RECITES THE STANDARD

31:17 - CORRECTLY. IT'S IT'S AS

31:20 - EXACTLY THAT THE PANEL SAYS

31:22 - WEATHER DOESN'T ARISE OUT OF

31:23 - THE ACTIVITIES OF ETHICON IN

31:25 - THE FOREIGN STATE. BUT THEN IT

31:27 - DOESN'T APPLY IT APART AND

31:29 - INSTEAD IT COMES TO AROUND TO

31:31 - SAY WELL. WE FIND THAT

31:34 - THAT THEY THE CLAIMS THE CAUSE

31:36 - OF ACTION ARE AFFILIATED,

31:38 - AFFILIATED WITH THE ACTIVITIES

31:41 - OF THE DEFENDANT IN THE 4TH

31:43 - STATE AND AS THIS COURT HAS

31:44 - SAID MANY TIMES WORDS MATTER

31:47 - WORDS MATTER IT'S NOT WHETHER

31:49 - IT'S AFFILIATED AND THE

31:50 - PLAINTIFF SEXUALLY CONFUSED AND

31:52 - EVEN MORE IN THEIR BRIEF THEY

31:54 - SAY THE QUESTION IS WHETHER

31:56 - THE LAWSUIT. IT'S AFFILIATED

31:58 - WITH THE ACTIVITIES OF THE

31:59 - DEFENDANT IN THE 4 STAFF SO

32:02 - WHAT'S WRONG

32:02 - WITH THAT.

32:03 - AND I'M I'M REALLY YOU KNOW

32:05 - QUITE UP IN THE AIR ON THIS.

32:09 - YOU HAD TO RAISE

32:11 - THIS ISSUE OF PERSONAL

32:13 - JURISDICTION ON PRELIMINARY

32:15 - OBJECTIONS.

32:18 - POINT

32:18 - IN TIME. THERE WERE CLAIMS PLAN

32:22 - DIED THAT DID NOT REACHED THE

32:25 - TRIAL STAGE OF THE CASE.

32:29 - THERE IS A

32:29 - MANUFACTURING DEFECT, IT'S AND

32:32 - IT'S EVERY CLOSELY THE IN

32:35 - YOUR BRIEF. I THINK YOU MAY BE

32:38 - ABLE TO CONCEDE

32:39 - THAT POSSIBLY POSSIBLY FOR

32:41 - MANUFACTURING DEFECT CASE.

32:45 - THE MANUFACTURE

32:47 - OF THE MASH PURSUING TO

32:51 - OF YOUR CLIENT AND THE OTHER

32:53 - THINGS YOU CAN'T

32:54 - INTO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN

32:55 - SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THAT

32:57 - MANUFACTURING DEFECT CASE.

33:00 - ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT.

33:04 - TYPE OF JURISDICTION IS

33:06 - PERSONAL JURISDICTION IS A

33:07 - MOVING TARGET. YOU MAY HAVE TO

33:10 - GET THE BEGINNING OF THE CASE

33:11 - WHERE OUR LIVE TELLS YOU IT HAS

33:13 - TO BE CASTED BUT AS THE TRIAL

33:15 - GOES ON THE PERSONAL JERSEY.

33:21 - I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION

33:22 - FULLY A AND A

33:24 - YES THERE WAS VERY BRIEFLY

33:26 - INITIALLY A MANUFACTURING

33:28 - DEFECT CLAIM THAT GOT DISMISSED

33:30 - ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN.

33:31 - IN FACT IT'S CURIOUS THAT AND

33:33 - WHEN IT WAS DISMISSED. THE

33:35 - TRIAL COURT ALSO SAID

33:38 - THERE IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO THE

33:40 - TRIAL COURT TO BE A DESIGN

33:41 - DEFECT CLAIM EITHER, BUT IT WAS

33:43 - DISMISSED AND.

33:46 - AND THE ANSWER IS YES TO YOUR

33:47 - QUESTION BECAUSE UNDER B M S

33:51 - AND I BELIEVE UNDER THE LOGO

33:52 - START STATUTE. IT IS A CLAIM BY

33:55 - CLAIM ANALYSIS AND THE ONLY

33:56 - CLAIMS HERE THERE'S NO

33:58 - MANUFACTURING DEFECT CLAIM LEFT

34:00 - IN THIS CASE AND I I

34:02 - I ACTUALLY DON'T THINK THERE

34:03 - COULD

34:04 - HAVE BEEN COULD THEY COULD

34:05 - SUSTAIN A MANUFACTURING DEFECT

34:07 - THAT COMPORT.

34:08 - HOW DOES THAT COMPORT WITH

34:10 - THE PROCEDURES UNDER WHICH

34:12 - WE'VE HISTORICALLY WORK

34:13 - TWITCH'S AN ISSUE SUCH

34:16 - AS SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

34:18 - THAT WILL TERMINATE CASE.

34:22 - PAST THE RAYS TAMPA LIMON AREA

34:24 - ACTIONS. SO THAT THE COURTS

34:27 - DON'T WASTE

34:28 - THE TIME AND ENERGY IN THE

34:31 - PARTY STONE WASTE THE RESOURCES

34:34 - TO TRY A CASE IF THERE IS SNOW.

34:37 - JURISDICTION. SO ARE YOU

34:39 - SUGGESTING THAT MAYBE

34:41 - IT IT SHOULDN'T BE RACE TIME

34:42 - CONDEMNING THEIR ACTIONS THAT

34:43 - ASIRI ITEM I TYPE OF SIDE

34:47 - ISSUES THAT IS THAT WHAT YOU IS

34:49 - THAT HOW YOU SEE BRISTOL

34:52 - WORKING.

34:53 - WELL, YOUR HONOR I'D SAY 2

34:54 - THINGS ABOUT THAT ONE IS

34:55 - CERTAINLY THE COURT DOESN'T

34:57 - WANT TO COUNTENANCE A SITUATION

34:59 - WHERE PLAINTIFF WILL COME IN

35:00 - KNOW THAT THE PLAINTIFF HAS A

35:02 - SPECIFIC JURISDICTIONAL PROBLEM

35:04 - PUT IN A CLAIM THAT

35:06 - LIKE LIKE A MANUFACTURING

35:08 - DEFECT CALLING WHEN THERE IS NO

35:10 - MANUFACTURING DEFECT AND THEIR

35:12 - FIGHT CIRCUMVENT THE THE.

35:17 - THE STATUTE STABLE THE LONG ARM

35:19 - STATUTE, I MEAN I I THINK

35:21 - THAT WOULD THAT WOULD CERTAINLY

35:22 - NOT FACE SOME TIED AT IF YOU

35:24 - LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED HERE.

35:27 - THE. THIS IS

35:29 - A CLAIM FOR

35:31 - SPECIFIC. A SPECIFIC PROBLEM IN

35:35 - THE DESIGN. THE PORE SIZE OF

35:38 - THE MASH AND THE WEIGHT OF

35:40 - THE MATCH. AND THE QUESTION IS

35:42 - THE WEAR WHERE WAS THAT

35:44 - THE SITE WHERE DOES THAT WORD

35:47 - OF THAT DESIGN TAKE PLACE THAT

35:48 - IT LIKES THOSE DOCUMENTS SENT

35:50 - TO DO IT.

35:53 - AND I'LL TALK

35:54 - ABOUT DOCTOR WAS SAID TNC CAN

35:56 - AS WELL BECAUSE BOTH ARE.

35:58 - DOCTOR WAS SAID HE

35:59 - WAS A CLINICAL INVESTIGATOR,

36:02 - ONE OF I THINK 10 OR 12

36:04 - CLINICAL INVESTIGATORS ARE OUT

36:06 - AROUND THE COUNTRY WHO WERE

36:08 - DOING SAFETY AND EFFICACY

36:09 - STUDIES FOR THIS PRODUCT.

36:12 - NOW HE'S A SURGEON AT SAINT

36:14 - LUKE'S HOSPITAL IN ALLENTOWN

36:16 - COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT FROM AT

36:18 - THE CON AND HE.

36:21 - CONDUCTED ONLY

36:22 - 2 STUDIES BEFORE 2005 WHEN THE

36:26 - PRODUCT ON THE MARKET.

36:28 - SO ONCE A PRODUCT ON THE MARKET

36:29 - THE DESIGN WAS STOPPED. NEITHER

36:32 - OF THOSE 2 STUDIES

36:33 - WERE COMPLETED BY THE TIME THE

36:35 - PRODUCT ONE OF THE MARKET AND

36:36 - THERE'S NOT A SHRED OF EVIDENCE

36:38 - IT'S NOT THE SLIGHTEST BIT OF

36:40 - EVIDENCE THAT ANYTHING THAT

36:42 - DOCTOR WAS SAID HE DID

36:43 - HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE

36:45 - DESIGN OF THE PEOPLE WHO

36:46 - DESIGNED IT IN NEW JERSEY.

36:48 - NOT YOU KNOW KIND OF HAD THE

36:50 - BURDEN HERE. IT

36:51 - YOU KNOW WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE

36:53 - DEFENDANT COMES FORWARD WITH

36:54 - AFFIDAVITS THE BURDEN SHIFTS TO

36:56 - THE PLAINTIFF UNDER THE URBAN

36:57 - PARTNERS CASE TO ESTABLISH

36:59 - SPECIFIC JURISDICTION.

37:02 - A DOCTOR WHO SAID HE HAD

37:03 - NOTHING TO DO WITH THE THE

37:04 - ULTIMATE TO SIGN ANOTHER DID

37:06 - SEE CAMP BECAUSE MISTER MISTER

37:08 - I'M JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON

37:10 - JUSTICE WECHT.

37:13 - AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO

37:14 - READ THIS RECORD

37:15 - WHICH TIME DOES NOT PERMIT US

37:16 - TO READ THIS RECORD PRIOR TO OR

37:18 - ARGUMENT AND I'M SURE IT'S A

37:20 - THE LUMINOUS RECORD. BUT IT'S

37:22 - STRANGE CREDIBILITY THAT

37:24 - THE MANUFACTURER OF THIS MESSY

37:27 - CAM.

37:28 - AND THE.

37:30 - TESTER OF THIS MESS IN PART

37:32 - DOCTOR LISANTI.

37:34 - HAD IT DID

37:35 - NOT COMMENT ON THE DESIGN AND

37:38 - WHETHER IT WAS WORKING IN NOT

37:40 - HOW IT PERHAPS WOULD BE

37:41 - ENHANCED OR NOT NANCE.

37:44 - AS AS PART OF WHAT THEY DID I

37:46 - MEAN

37:46 - THEY DIDN'T MANUFACTURE IT IN

37:49 - AND AND IF THEY THOUGHT IT WAS

37:51 - NOT GOING TO WORKS NOT INFORM

37:54 - THAT'S THE CAUSE. THEY DIDN'T

37:55 - TESTED. AND NOT REPORT THE

37:58 - RESULTS OF THE TEST.

37:59 - SO THAT SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU'VE

38:01 - GOT TO CUT WITH A REALLY SHARP

38:03 - KNIFE TO SAY THEY

38:05 - MANUFACTURE THAT BUT THEY

38:06 - DIDN'T COMMENT ON THAT SIDE.

38:08 - THEY TESTED AND ESPECIALLY THAT

38:10 - SECOND AND WHY ARE YOU TESTING

38:12 - ITS NOT TO COMMENT ON SITE.

38:15 - SEVERAL POINTS THAT.

38:18 - AND LOOK AGAIN AT

38:19 - ALL OF THAT SUBJECT REALLY NICE

38:21 - RECORD TO SEE THAT PLANE.

38:22 - BUT IT'S FACT INTENSIVE IN THAT

38:23 - REGARD, BUT IF YOU LOOK

38:25 - AT WHAT, HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS

38:27 - WITH THEM AND WITH HOW THIS

38:28 - THIS MESH PRODUCTS MADE.

38:31 - AT THE KAHN IN NEW JERSEY TAKES

38:33 - PUBLIC. PROPYLENE.

38:37 - AND SENDS THEM TO AT THE CON IN

38:39 - GEORGIA.

38:41 - ETHICON IN GEORGIA NEXT ROUTES

38:43 - THEM INTO FILAMENTS AND SEN

38:45 - 7, 2, C CAN IN PENNSYLVANIA A

38:49 - BUCKS COUNTY COMPANY. AND SEE

38:51 - CAN.

38:53 - HAS ALSO WORKS FOR OTHER

38:55 - COMPANIES SAY OF A CONTRACT

38:56 - WITH THAT THE CURRENT THEY MEAN

38:58 - IT THE FILAMENT AND TO BALK

39:00 - SHEETS OF MASH THAT'S THEIR

39:02 - JOBS

39:03 - STRICTLY AND ACCORDANCE WITH

39:06 - THE SPECIFICATIONS GIVEN THE

39:07 - DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS GIVEN

39:10 - THEM TO BUY BY ETHICON THIS IS

39:12 - A DESIGN DEFECT CASE. THEY THEN

39:15 - SEND IT BACK TO GEORGIA.

39:17 - WHICH AND AND IT GOES BACK TO

39:19 - AT THE CON IN GEORGIA WERE CUT

39:21 - CUT TO THE SHEETS AND THEN SET

39:23 - AT THE KAHN IN NEW JERSEY.

39:25 - SO ALL THAT C CAN CAUSE IS

39:29 - THERE THERE ARE A COMPONENT

39:31 - PART MANUFACTURE THEY.

39:33 - THEY HAVE A CONTRACT TO FOLLOW

39:35 - LITERALLY SPECIFICALLY THE A

39:38 - RIGID SPECIFICATIONS THAT ARE

39:39 - GIVEN TO HIM AND THAT'S WHAT

39:41 - THE RECORD

39:41 - WILL SHOW I DON'T EVEN THINK

39:43 - IT'S IN DISPUTE. I DON'T THINK

39:44 - THOSE FACTS ARE GOING TO SHOW

39:45 - IT IN DISPUTE. DOCTOR WAS

39:47 - SAID T AS I

39:49 - SAID I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY YOUR

39:50 - HONOR SEVERAL WHY JOEY DOING

39:53 - STUDIES IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO

39:54 - LISTEN TO WHAT

39:55 - HE SAID. BUT THERE'S NO

39:57 - EVIDENCE THAT ANYTHING THAT HE

39:58 - DID AFFECTED THE DESIGN.

40:01 - NONE THAT THERE HAS YOU HAVE TO

40:03 - HAVE THE BURDEN YOU HAVE TO

40:05 - LINK IT UP YOU HAVE TO HAVE A

40:06 - CONTACT THERE THERE'S JUST NO

40:08 - EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD THAT

40:10 - THAT

40:11 - THAT IT THAT THEY DID THAT TO

40:14 - HIM WAS THAT A LOT OF MONEY.

40:17 - WELL.

40:19 - IT MAY HAVE BEEN THAT AFTER THE

40:21 - PRODUCT WHEN IT MAY HAVE BEEN

40:22 - AND I REALLY DON'T KNOW THIS

40:24 - JUSTICE JUST AS WELL BUT

40:25 - IT MAY HAVE BEEN THAT AFTER THE

40:27 - PRODUCT THAT PUT ON THE MARKET

40:28 - THEY LOOKED AT WHATEVER OF

40:30 - THE RIVER REPORT WAS FROM

40:32 - DOCTOR WHO SENT A AND THE OTHER

40:34 - 8 OR 9 CLINICAL INVESTIGATORS.

40:37 - BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE

40:37 - RECORD US THAT LIKE THIS.

40:41 - I ASKED THEM SUPPOSING.

40:44 - THE VIRTUE OF TALK TO 70'S

40:48 - OR OR SOMETHING THAT

40:49 - HE CAN'T YOU YOU HAD A RECORDS

40:53 - FISHING TOO.

40:55 - STAYING SPECIFIC IN

40:57 - PERCENT ON FIRST ACTION ON

40:59 - FAVOR THE WAR ON THAT CLAIM BUT

41:01 - NOT ON THE SIDE EFFECT OF WHAT

41:04 - WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE

41:05 - DISPOSITION. OF THOSE CLAIMS

41:08 - FOR TRIAL.

41:09 - WELL AS YOUR HONOR KNOWS THAT

41:10 - SPIRIT COURT NEVER LOOKED AT

41:12 - THE FAIR TO WARN CLAIM FOR I

41:13 - DON'T KNOW WHY BUT THEY NEVER

41:14 - TOOK THAT UP SO WE DON'T HAVE

41:16 - ANYTHING FROM THE SPIRIT

41:17 - RECORD ON ON THE FAIR TO WARN

41:19 - CLAIM I WOULD EXPECT THAT.

41:24 - I WOULD EXPECT THERE WOULD BE

41:25 - THEN JURISDICTION OVER THE FAIR

41:27 - TO WARN CLAIM, BUT I DON'T

41:28 - THINK IT I DON'T THINK PENDANT

41:29 - JURISDICTION WOULD APPLY OVER

41:31 - THE DESIGN DEFECT CLAIM THAT I

41:33 - THINK THAT'S THAT'S THE THAT

41:35 - THE SHORT ANSWER AT ONE OF THE

41:36 - COURT.

41:37 - BEFORE YOU MOVE FINE.

41:39 - IS IT YOUR CLIENT'S POSITION

41:41 - THAT WE SHADE

41:43 - CONSIDER THE DOCUMENTS SENT

41:45 - CASE THE TESTIMONY OR NOT OR

41:47 - THE EVIDENCE REGARDING.

41:49 - HIT THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT

41:52 - THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS

41:53 - STAGE. WHAT WHAT YOUR POSITION

41:55 - ON THAT.

41:55 - I YOUR HONOR

41:59 - THAT SINCE THE

42:00 - SUPERIOR COURT TOOK UP DOCTOR

42:02 - WAS SENT IS A.

42:06 - THAT EMERGED AT

42:07 - THE TRIAL. WITH REGARD TO

42:09 - DOCTOR WAS SENT TO

42:12 - THAT THIS COURT WILL LOOK AT

42:13 - THAT BUT I I ACTUALLY DO YOU

42:15 - THINK WE I QUESTIONED, I MEAN

42:17 - I'M TRYING TO LOOK FOR SOME

42:18 - CONSISTENCY THERE.

42:19 - THEY'RE EITHER PERSONAL

42:21 - JURISDICTION IS A MOVING TARGET

42:23 - OR IT'S NOT

42:24 - I MEAN IF IT'S A MOVING TARGET

42:26 - THEN OBVIOUSLY TESTIMONY THAT

42:27 - COMES FORTH THE TRIAL THAT

42:29 - WASN'T AVAILABLE AT THE

42:30 - PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS STATE

42:32 - SHOULD BE CONSIDERED

42:33 - AND IF IT'S NOT A MOVING TARGET

42:35 - THAN THIS TESTIMONY WOULD NOT

42:37 - BE PART OF OUR CONSIDERATION OF

42:39 - WHETHER OR NOT THEIR WAYS.

42:41 - JURISDICTION.

42:44 - AND I THINK

42:45 - SAY THE RECORD AT THE PLUMBER

42:47 - DAY INJUNCTIONS STAGE A MEME ON

42:49 - SORRY DAY OF ACTION STAGE.

42:52 - IS THAT IS THE CORRECT RECORD

42:54 - TO LOOK AT.

42:56 - BUT I I'M NOT

42:58 - AT ALL CONCERNED ABOUT LOOKING

43:00 - AT DOCTOR WAS SET TO

43:01 - CAUSE THE ICE I SAY THEY USE AI

43:04 - TO MAKE YOUR NEXT COUNCIL I

43:06 - MEAN AND BELIEVE ME I THINK

43:08 - IT'S YOU KNOW ANGELS DANCING 9

43:10 - HAD REPENTED TO SOME EXTENT

43:11 - BUT. YES WHAT WE DO IS LOOK AT

43:15 - THEIR RECORD. AT THE

43:17 - TIME OF THE PRELIMINARY

43:18 - OBJECTIONS, THEN WHAT WE'RE

43:20 - DOING IS TESTING THE THE

43:23 - COMPLAINT. WE'RE TESTING THE

43:26 - COMPLAINT AND WHAT EVER

43:27 - ABUNDANT EVIDENCE YOU ALL PUT

43:30 - TOGETHER DURING THE DISCOVERY

43:32 - AND ITS JURISDICTION ISSUE.

43:34 - SO HE'S OUT WAYS THAT WHAT WE

43:36 - SHOULD BE DOING. I THINK

43:39 - WHAT YOU WHAT YOU DO IS.

43:47 - PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS STAGE.

43:51 - I THINK THE PRELIMINARY

43:52 - OBJECTIONS STATES HAS THE RIGHT

43:54 - PLACE TO LOOK AT IT.

43:56 - BUT I ALSO THINK THAT.

43:59 - THEY CLAIM IS MADE LIKE

44:00 - THIS MANUFACTURING

44:02 - A MANUFACTURING DEFECT CLAIM

44:04 - THAT IT'S TOTALLY NOT

44:06 - SUSTAINABLE THAT THE COURT

44:09 - SHOULD NOT LOOK AT AT A

44:10 - MANUFACTURING DEFECT CLAIM THAT

44:12 - WAS OBVIOUSLY.

44:15 - NOT WELL PLANNED, I MEAN THAT

44:16 - WAS IT WAS DEFECTIVE ON

44:18 - ITS FACE.

44:20 - EXPLAIN TO ME AS A PRACTICAL

44:22 - MATTER, I'M JUST TRYING TO

44:23 - UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WORKS.

44:25 - IF THERE IS PRODUCTS A PRODUCT

44:29 - LIABILITY LAWSUIT

44:30 - AND THEY'RE LEGITIMATELY ARE

44:32 - MULTIPLE COUNTS FOR

44:34 - DESIGN DEFECT. MANUFACTURING

44:37 - DEFECT FAILURE TO WARN. AND

44:39 - THERE IS A DIFFERENT

44:41 - JURISDICTIONAL ANALYSIS FOR

44:44 - EACH.

44:45 - WITH RESPECT TO WHAT THE

44:46 - ROLE WAS OF THE COMPANY OR

44:49 - INDIVIDUAL WHO BROUGHT THAT

44:50 - CONTACT

44:51 - TO PENNSYLVANIA. HOW THEN DOES

44:55 - THE CASE PROCEED UNDER YOUR

44:56 - THEORY. BUT YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT

44:58 - THAT AND WHERE.

45:03 - I THINK YOU HAVE TO GO BACK

45:05 - TO THAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE

45:06 - STATUTE.

45:08 - YOU KNOW THAT THE LANGUAGE OF

45:10 - THE STATUTE AND THE LANGUAGE OF

45:12 - PMS WHAT I DO WANT TO MENTION

45:14 - BE A MESS FOR A MINUTE BECAUSE.

45:17 - THE BIG BMS ADDS ANOTHER

45:19 - COMPONENT TO WHAT THIS COURT

45:21 - SHOULD LOOK AT

45:22 - WHICH IS WHETHER PENNSYLVANIA

45:24 - HAS A REGULATORY INTEREST IN

45:26 - ADJUDICATING THIS DISPUTE AND

45:30 - AGAIN DISCOURAGED SOURCE PEWTER

45:32 - THIS COUNTS OF

45:33 - THIS COMPLAINT.

45:34 - WELL THIS COMPLAINT. THIS

45:35 - LAWSUIT DOES PENNSYLVANIA HAVE

45:37 - A REGULATORY INTEREST AND

45:39 - BUT IN MY HYPOTHETICAL THE

45:40 - LAWSUIT HAS 3, 5, COUNTS

45:43 - RIGHT BUT WHAT I'M WHAT I'M

45:45 - SAYING IS THAT.

45:47 - UNDER BMS ONE OF THE

45:49 - CONSIDERATIONS WAS.

45:52 - DOES DOES THE STATE OF

45:54 - CALIFORNIA HAVE A REGULATORY

45:56 - INTEREST OVER.

45:58 - THE A CASE BROUGHT BY AN OUT OF

46:00 - STATE PLAINTIFF BASED ON.

46:02 - NOW THOSE STATE PLAINTIFFS WHOA

46:04 - STATE LAWS.

46:08 - BMS ANALYSIS

46:10 - WAS THAT.

46:12 - A CALIFORNIA DID NOT HAVE A

46:14 - REGULATORY INTERESTED IN

46:16 - WHICH WAS IMPORTANT TO THE DUE

46:17 - PROCESS QUESTION.

46:19 - THE LIMITATIONS IMPOSED BY THE

46:21 - DUE PROCESS CLAUSE THAT AND I

46:23 - THINK IT'S INSTRUCTIVE WHAT I

46:25 - DID THERE BECAUSE

46:26 - IT SAID WHY DOESN'T CALIFORNIA

46:28 - HAVE A REGULATORY INTEREST AND

46:30 - THE ANSWER WAS WELL YOU HAVE AN

46:32 - OUT OF STATE THE PLAINTIFF.

46:34 - THAT'S A START

46:35 - SAME HERE. AND NOW THE STATE

46:37 - PLAINTIFFS

46:38 - SUING IT. HERE YOU HAVE AN OUT

46:40 - OF STATE PLAINTIFFS SUING UNDER

46:41 - THE STATUTORY PRODUCTS

46:43 - LIABILITY OF ALL OF INDIANA.

46:45 - AND THEN YOU HAVE HERE THEY

46:48 - SAID THEN THE

46:49 - CALIFORNIA CASE, THE PLAYERS

46:51 - WERE UNINJURED CALIFORNIA.

46:54 - THEY SAID THE PLAINTIFFS DIDN'T

46:55 - RECEIVE TREATMENT

46:56 - IN CALIFORNIA SAYING THAT ARE

46:58 - MISTER ON AND I DON'T WANT TO

46:59 - INTERRUPT I JUST CAUGHT BUT TO

47:01 - PUT FOCUS IN.

47:02 - THUS THE STUFF WAS

47:04 - MANUFACTURED HERE IN

47:05 - TESTED HERE.

47:07 - COMPLETELY AN IMPORTANT

47:09 - ADDITIONAL FACTS FROM

47:10 - BRISTOL-MYERS.

47:14 - BUT IF I COULD JUST FINISH

47:16 - WHERE I WAS WHY WAS.

47:18 - PENNSYLVANIA HAS A

47:20 - REGULATORY INTEREST IN

47:21 - PROTECTING ITS

47:22 - CITIZENS CENT FROM IN YOU KNOW

47:24 - IN CLAIMS OF INJURY THAT SPAIN

47:26 - HAS SET

47:27 - REGULATORY INTERESTS AND

47:29 - PENNSYLVANIA HAS AN INTEREST

47:31 - AND.

47:32 - AND MINISTERING IN INTERPRETING

47:34 - AND ENFORCING THE LAWS OF

47:36 - PENNSYLVANIA.

47:38 - WHEN YOU HAVE AN

47:39 - INDIANA PLAINTIFF SUING UNDER

47:41 - IN INDIANA STATUTE FOR INJURIES

47:43 - SUSTAINED IN INDIANA FOR WHICH

47:45 - SHE WAS TREATED IN INDIA.

47:48 - IT'S HARD

47:48 - TO SEE WHAT PAIN. THE

47:50 - PLAINTIFFS REGULATE WHAT

47:52 - PENNSYLVANIA'S REGULATORY

47:53 - INTEREST SAYS IN THAT DISPUTE

47:56 - AND ON THE OTHER HAND

47:57 - PRINCIPLES OF FEDERALISM WHAT

48:00 - WOULD INSTRUCT THAT INDIANA HAS

48:03 - AN INTEREST HERE.

48:05 - NEW JERSEY HAVE AN INTEREST

48:06 - HERE AND THE PLAINTIFFS CAN SUE

48:08 - IN INDIA AND THEY CAN SUE IN

48:10 - NEW JERSEY.

48:13 - BUT IT'S THE CASE GOES FORWARD

48:14 - OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE INDIANA

48:16 - PORTS DON'T GET

48:17 - THAT OPPORTUNITY THAT NEW

48:19 - JERSEY COURTS DON'T GET THAT

48:20 - OPPORTUNITY WE GET THE

48:22 - WEEKEND OF. I WAS GOING TO SAY

48:24 - STUFF WITH INTER PUTTING

48:26 - THE PENCE THE INDIANA PRODUCTS

48:28 - LIABILITY OUR PORTS

48:31 - BUT A VERY HARD TO SEE WHAT THE

48:32 - REGULATORY INTEREST ISN'T

48:34 - HAVING PENNSYLVANIA ADJUDICATE

48:35 - THIS UNDER

48:37 - THE DOES UNDER THE

48:38 - CONSIDERATIONS ANNOUNCED IN B M

48:40 - S FROM THE COUNCIL.

48:42 - FOR SOMEONE TO BRISTOL MYERS

48:45 - BASED UPON WHAT JUSTICE PANTER

48:46 - SAID WOULD YOU NOT CONCLUDE

48:48 - THAT THOSE CONTACTS MEET THE

48:50 - DEFINITION OF AN AFFILIATION

48:52 - SUCH THAT PENNSYLVANIA, THIS IS

48:54 - THE

48:54 - APPROPRIATE FORM.

48:55 - BUT YOU KNOW HER FIRST OF ALL

48:57 - I DON'T THINK THE TEST IS

48:58 - AFFILIATION I THINK THE

49:00 - EVEN UNDER BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB

49:01 - THAT ARISE OUT OF HER

49:03 - RELATE TO NOT NOT AFFILIATION

49:06 - AND I DON'T THINK WHEN YOU LOOK

49:07 - AT AL

49:08 - THEY APPLIED THAT ARISE OUT OF

49:10 - RELATE TO TEST IT IN THE

49:12 - CONTEXT OF

49:12 - THE FACTS THEY WOULD COME OUT

49:15 - AND SAY NO IT DOESN'T ARISE OUT

49:17 - OF RHYTHM. ASHLEY I THINK THIS

49:19 - COURT KNOWS THAT THE UNITED

49:21 - STATES SUPREME COURT HAS

49:22 - GRANTED SEARCH DRE.

49:25 - AND A CASE OF A THAT WILL BE

49:27 - ARGUED ON APRIL 28TH. SO THERE

49:29 - SHOULD BE A DECISION ON JUNE

49:30 - 30TH ON WHETHER THEY GET A RISE

49:33 - OUT OVER 8 MAY 2 LANGUAGE CAN

49:35 - BE A MESS INCLUDES A CLAUSE

49:36 - STATION ASPECT THAT HAS TO

49:38 - ACTUALLY CAUSE.

49:39 - THE FEE A FEE.

49:41 - THE CLAIM. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR

49:43 - QUESTION JUSTICE DAUGHERTY I

49:45 - DON'T THINK. I DON'T THINK THE

49:48 - ACTIONS OF C CAN. AND KNITTING

49:50 - THAT MASH PURSUANT TO

49:53 - SPECIFICATIONS.

49:55 - I JUST DOING WHAT THE

49:57 - CONTRACT SAYS. SO I DON'T THINK

49:59 - IT COMES IN WITH A 100 MILES OF

50:03 - BEING OF SATISFYING THE A

50:06 - THE THE LONG ARM STATUE

50:08 - OF OF A CAUSE OF ACTION OR

50:11 - A CLAIM ARISING

50:13 - OUT OF THE DEFENDANTS

50:15 - ACTIVITIES THAT DESIGN TOOK

50:17 - PLACE IN NEW JERSEY THAT DESIGN

50:19 - WAS PORE SIZE

50:20 - AND WAIT. SOMEBODY IN NEW

50:22 - JERSEY CAME UP WITH PORE SIZE

50:24 - AND WEIGHT THE PEOPLE AT SEA

50:26 - CAN'T JUST NIPPED SEND IT BACK

50:28 - TO GEORGIA. THEY DIDN'T THEY

50:29 - DIDN'T COME UP WITH PORE SIZE

50:31 - OF IT THE LATEST. I'M SORRY

50:34 - DOWN. I DID YOU COMPLETE

50:37 - YOUR ANSWER.

50:39 - BEFORE BEFORE YOU SIT DOWN I

50:41 - WANTED TO BRING YOU BACK TO

50:42 - WHERE YOU STARTED OR ARGUMENTS

50:44 - ALWAYS TAKE ON A LIFE OF THEIR

50:45 - OWN LOOKING AT OUR LONG ARMS

50:47 - STATUTE. I FOUND IT DIFFICULT

50:50 - TO INTERPRET AND AGAIN I DIDN'T

50:51 - HAVE TIME TO GO DO IN TENTS

50:53 - RESEARCH INTO IT

50:56 - COSBY SAYS

50:58 - YOU WE GET JURISDICTION UNDER

51:00 - THE MOST MINIMUM CONTACTS

51:01 - CONSISTENT WITH THE DUE PROCESS

51:03 - CLAUSE.

51:04 - AND THEN CLOUDS C.

51:05 - ARE YOU REALLY NARROWS THAT

51:08 - AND YET THEIR CLAWS BNC THE

51:10 - SAME STATUTE IT GIVE ANY

51:11 - INSIGHT ON THE RELATIONSHIP THE

51:14 - WITH THE LEGISLATURE INTENDED

51:16 - TO WHEN IT PUT CLAUSE BN AIR

51:18 - AND SAID.

51:19 - THE GREATEST POSSIBLE

51:21 - JURISDICTION AND THEN PUT SEE

51:23 - AND THEY'RE IN SAID. FORMS THE

51:25 - BASIS OF ARE THE OTHER CLAIMS

51:27 - ASSERTED AGAINST THEM.

51:29 - I THINK I THINK YOU GOT IT

51:31 - EXACTLY RIGHT I THINK SAYS IF

51:33 - YOU DID BUSINESS IN THE STATE

51:35 - THAT SETS UP THAT GET YOU PART

51:38 - OF THE WAY THERE BE SAYS

51:39 - AND WE'RE GOING TO PERMIT

51:40 - JURISDICTION OVER NOW THE STATE

51:42 - DEFENDANT TO THE FULLEST EXTENT

51:43 - PERMITTED BY THE DUE PROCESS

51:45 - CLAUSE WHICH IS WHAT THE BMS

51:47 - DECISION WAS ALL ABOUT WHAT IS

51:48 - THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE DUE

51:49 - PROCESS CLAUSE AND THEN SEE

51:51 - COMES BACK AND SAYS AND USES

51:53 - THE WORD ONLY HOWEVER UNDER

51:55 - SCOPE OF JURISDICTION ONLY THE

51:57 - CLAIMS THAT A RISE OUT OF.

52:00 - THE DEFENDANTS ACTIVITIES IN

52:01 - THE STATE WILL SUBJECT WILL

52:03 - PERMIT. A SPECIFIC

52:05 - JURISDICTIONAL TOO TO GROUND

52:08 - AND SO I I THINK

52:10 - IF THE THAT THE TENSION THERE'S

52:12 - A TENSION THERE I AGREE JUSTICE

52:14 - FAIR THAT THE HAY AND THEY SAY

52:16 - YES AND THEN CEASE AS WELL ONLY

52:19 - IN THESE IN THESE

52:20 - CIRCUMSTANCES. I WANT TO JUST

52:22 - SAY ONE OTHER WORD OUT WITH

52:24 - LADY

52:25 - ON THAT.

52:25 - WE'RE COMING DOWN THE STRETCH

52:27 - TO ALL OF US ALL TAKE 2 MINUTES

52:29 - OR LAST.

52:30 - I PROMISE TO JUSTICE CENTER.

52:32 - THERE IS AN ARGUMENT THEY MADE.

52:34 - ABOUT A PATH.

52:35 - TOOK PLACE SOME YEARS AGO.

52:41 - COHEN BETTER WITH A NET CUT

52:43 - EMPLOYEE WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF A

52:45 - PRIAYA PREDECESSOR COMPANY TOO

52:48 - THIS COMPANY C CAN. HOWEVER.

52:53 - SPINSTER MIGHT MY FRIEND MISTER

52:55 - BECKER IS FOND OF SAYING TO ME.

52:57 - THEY NEVER A SIMPLE THOUGH THEY

52:59 - DIDN'T EVEN RAISE IT IN THE

53:00 - SUPERIOR COURT. THE RAISING IT

53:02 - FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE

53:04 - THIS COURT. AND I DON'T KNOW

53:06 - THAT THIS COURT TO ENTERTAIN SO

53:07 - THOSE KIND OF ARGUMENTS THAT

53:08 - ARE MADE FOR THE FIRST TIME AND

53:10 - THAT IN THE SUPREME COURT BUT

53:13 - AND ANY OF THAT THAT THERE IS

53:15 - NO CONNECTION THERE'S NO TYING

53:17 - IN OF THE PACK

53:19 - OF WHO CONTRIBUTED WHAT TO THIS

53:21 - PATENT FOR A HERNIA

53:22 - MESH APPLICATIONS SO I I WOULD

53:25 - SAY THAT YOU'RE A NURSE SHOULD

53:27 - NOT BETTER TEAM THAT HE CAN I

53:28 - JUST ASK GOING ADDITIONAL

53:30 - QUESTION.

53:32 - IN YOUR VIEW

53:34 - IS THE BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB

53:36 - CASE A SEA CHANGE OR IS IT AS

53:39 - JUSTICE ALITO SAID

53:41 - JUST DELTA PINE THE

53:43 - LONGSTANDING CASE LAW THE

53:45 - COURT.

53:46 - IT SAYS AT THE VERY BEGINNING

53:48 - US COURT KNOWS YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY

53:50 - READ IT. MANY TIMES

53:52 - SO THE BEGINNING THAT ALL WE'RE

53:53 - DOING IS APPLYING SETTLED LAW.

53:58 - BUT I THINK THE ANALYSIS OF

54:00 - THE FACTS AND HOW THEY APPLY.

54:04 - THEY THE LANGUAGE OF THE RISING

54:06 - OUT OF RELATED TO IS ACTUALLY

54:09 - SOMETHING THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN

54:11 - IN THE CASE WELL BEFORE SO

54:13 - I THINK WHAT THAT DOES IS IT

54:14 - GIVES LIFE TO

54:16 - WHAT IT MEANT BY ARISING OUT OF

54:18 - OR RELATED TO

54:20 - WHEN YOU. WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT

54:21 - IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND

54:23 - THEN THERE'S THE REASON I ASKED

54:24 - THE QUESTION IS AT THE

54:25 - PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS THAT

54:27 - WERE FILED FOR AN EYE ON A.

54:29 - COUNT BY COUNT BASIS.

54:37 - SO I I GET

54:38 - TIME OI I GET THE POINT

54:41 - THAT OUT SO IN THAT SO WHY DO

54:43 - YOU GET THE BENEFIT BRISTOL

54:46 - MYERS SQUIBB I MEAN IF IT

54:48 - IS A THE CHANGE IN THE LAW.

54:51 - THE PROCEDURAL IN NATURE, WHY

54:53 - WHY WOULD THAT CASE APPLY TO

54:56 - THIS SITUATION WHERE PRONE TO

54:58 - INFECTIONS OR DECIDED THE CASE

55:00 - WAS TRIED AND HERE

55:01 - WE ARE.

55:01 - WELL THE SUPREME COURT SAYS

55:03 - THAT IT'S THAT IT'S JUST

55:05 - SIMPLY RESIGNING, SETTLED LAW

55:08 - AS 100 KNOWS, BUT I THINK I

55:10 - THINK THAT THE THE TEACHING OF

55:13 - IT IN TERMS OF THE LANGUAGE.

55:17 - IS IS SOMETHING THAT.

55:19 - OBVIOUSLY IS OF INTEREST TO TO

55:22 - EVERYONE BECAUSE THEY JUST

55:23 - GRANTED. SO SHE ARRIETA LOOK AT

55:25 - WHAT THAT MEANS

55:26 - SO I AND HOPEFULLY THEY'LL GIVE

55:29 - US ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE I JUST

55:31 - ASKED THE QUESTION BECAUSE THE

55:32 - PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS.

55:34 - WE'RE NOT FILED. THE STATE

55:35 - LINE A CLAIM BY CLAIM AND NOW

55:37 - ASSESS AND HERE WE ARE.

55:40 - I'M DOING A PARSING THAT JUST

55:43 - NEVER TOOK PLACE. I

55:45 - THINK THAT THEY

55:47 - SHOULD DECIDE THAT BY JUNE 30TH

55:48 - THAT THEY FOLLOWED THEIR USUAL

55:50 - PROCEDURE AND.

55:51 - AT THAT POINT IN TIME YEAR

55:53 - HONORS HERE MAY NOT WANT

55:54 - SUPPLEMENTAL. BRIEF A LOT ON

55:55 - THIS QUESTION ABOUT WHAT

55:57 - THEY'RE LOOKING AT CARS A SHUNT

55:58 - I MEAN OBVIOUSLY THERE

55:59 - CAUSATION ISSUE IS WHETHER OR

56:01 - NOT THERE WAS A PERSON WHO IS

56:03 - INJURY CAUSED BY WHATEVER

56:05 - IT IS AND IN ONE CASE A CAUSE

56:07 - OF ACTION IS A CAUSE OF

56:08 - ACTION FOR PERSONAL INJURIES,

56:10 - RIGHT AT A PLASTICS TRUMP WAS

56:12 - THAT THAT INGESTION OF THE

56:14 - PRIVATE DRUG WHICH WAS BY A

56:17 - NEW JERSEY. I MEAN I'M SORRY IN

56:19 - NEW YORK COMPANY PISTOL MYERS

56:20 - SQUIBB AND THE.

56:23 - THE ARGUMENT THAT WAS MADE

56:25 - THERE WAS THAT THEY HAD A

56:26 - DISTRIBUTOR, A CALIFORNIA

56:28 - DISTRIBUTOR DISTRIBUTING THE

56:29 - JOKE IN CALIFORNIA. AND THE

56:31 - COURT SAID THEY'RE THAT A GIFT

56:34 - THEY YOU KNOW

56:35 - THEY THINK THE INVOLVEMENT OF A

56:37 - 3RD PARTY DISTRIBUTORS JUSTICE

56:39 - TO ATTENUATED

56:40 - AND I WOULD SAY THE SAME THING

56:41 - ABOUT SICK AND THAT WAS THE 3RD

56:43 - PART, IT'S ITS

56:45 - ITS ACTIVITIES JUST NOT

56:47 - SUFFICIENT. THANK

56:50 - THANKING OURS.

57:06 - MISTER CHIEF JUSTICE MAY IT

57:07 - PLEASE THE COURT ON SHIP BACK

57:09 - ARE HERE FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.

57:10 - PATRICIA HAMMONDS.

57:12 - THE ONLY THING THAT REDUCE YOUR

57:14 - CO-COUNSEL ALTHOUGH MY

57:15 - APOLOGIES AND WITH THE COUNSEL

57:17 - TABLE AS MY COLLEAGUE AND

57:18 - FRIEND ON JULY DOCTOR. THANK

57:20 - YOU.

57:26 - THE ONLY

57:27 - THING NOVEL ABOUT THE

57:29 - BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB CASE IS

57:30 - THE FACT THAT IT INVOLVED A

57:32 - PHARMACEUTICAL, THE UNITED

57:33 - STATES SUPREME COURT HAS

57:34 - DECIDED MANY CASES INVOLVING

57:36 - PERSONAL JURISDICTION.

57:39 - THIS WAS TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE

57:40 - FIRST TIME THE SUPREME COURT

57:41 - HAD ADDRESSED.

57:43 - SOMETHING THAT SOMETHING IN THE

57:46 - PHARMACEUTICAL ROUND.

57:47 - AND THE FACTS OF THAT CASE AS

57:50 - THIS TIME

57:50 - AS DISCUSSED INVOLVE THE

57:52 - SCENARIO WHERE WHERE THE

57:53 - CALIFORNIA COURTS HAD HAS FOUND

57:56 - THE EXISTENCE OF JURISDICTION.

57:59 - IN A CONTEXT WHERE THE

58:01 - DEFENDANT IN THAT CASE HAD DONE

58:03 - NOTHING IN THE STATE

58:04 - OF CALIFORNIA RELEVANT TO THE

58:07 - ISSUES IN THAT LAWSUIT.

58:10 - THE MYERS SQUIBB CASE ITSELF.

58:13 - JUSTICE TANI YOU AS

58:14 - YOU MENTIONED SAYS THAT THE

58:16 - COURT IS MERELY APPLYING ITS

58:17 - SETTLED PRINCIPLES AND INDEED

58:18 - THAT IS WHAT THE COURT IS

58:19 - DOING.

58:22 - WELL THAT THAT IS NOT WHAT

58:23 - JUSTICE SAID THE MAYOR HAD TO

58:24 - SAY, BUT LET ME TO OBSERVE THAT

58:26 - SHE WAS IN DISSENT.

58:29 - YOU DIDN'T SEE HIM. THE

58:32 - ELEVATION OF THEM.

58:34 - AND IT WAS A PRINCIPAL

58:36 - IN THE END THIS TO BE A SEA

58:38 - CHANGE NOT WITHSTANDING JUSTICE

58:39 - LEADERS PRADA STATION THE

58:41 - CULTURE THAT FEDERALISM

58:42 - PRINCIPAL ACTUALLY GOES BACK TO

58:43 - WORLD LIKE THAT BECAUSE BACKS

58:45 - THE 1980'S. SO IT'S NOT A A

58:47 - CREATION OF.

58:48 - THEY SHUN OF THAT PRIVACY.

58:57 - DID HE NOT PROTEST TOO MUCH

58:59 - THAT IT WAS A THERE'S NOTHING

59:01 - TO SEE HERE. LET'S JUST MOVE

59:02 - ALONG.

59:03 - I I I DON'T I

59:05 - DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER TO

59:06 - THAT QUESTION. I KNOW THAT THE

59:07 - THE CONCEPT OF

59:08 - DUE PROCESS.

59:09 - AS MODERATING PRINCIPLES OF

59:11 - INTERSTATE FEDERALISM BY

59:12 - PROTECTING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF

59:14 - THE OF THE OF OF

59:15 - THE STATES

59:16 - IS IS IS IS NOT A IS NOT IN ANY

59:20 - WAY A NEW CONCEPT AND ARE DUE

59:21 - PROCESS. JURISPRUDENCE I

59:22 - UNDERSTAND THE POINT YOU'RE

59:24 - MAKING AND IT CERTAINLY WAS

59:26 - FEATURED IN THE ME IN THE BMS

59:28 - DECISION.

59:31 - IS NOT AND IS NOT AND WAS NOT

59:33 - DESCRIBED BY JUSTICE ALITO AS

59:35 - PROVIDING KIND OF INDEPENDENT

59:37 - OR SERIAL BASIS FOR ANALYZING

59:39 - THE ISSUE OF SPECIFIC

59:40 - JURISDICTION. WHAT JUSTICE

59:41 - ALITO DID THERE AS AS WHAT THE

59:43 - SUPREME COURT DID IN IN THE

59:44 - WORLD WHY THE WHATS AND VERSUS

59:46 - A I SAID WAS LIKE WEATHER AND

59:49 - THE VOLKSWAGEN CASE. BACK IN

59:52 - 1980 WAS TO DESCRIBE THE DUE

59:55 - PROCESS CLAUSE AS THE SERVANT

59:57 - OF THE DOCTRINE OF

59:57 - 039 INTERSTATE FEDERALISM BY

01:00 - 03.429 PROVIDING A A MECHANISM TO

01:00 - 04.980 ENSURE THAT A STATE

01:00 - 08.540 DID NOT EXERCISE SOVEREIGNTY

01:00 - 11.689 OVER A DISPUTE TO THE DETRIMENT

01:00 - 13.650 OF ANOTHER STATE. WHERE

01:00 - 16.730 WHERE WHERE PROPERLY BELONGS

01:00 - 18.650 AND DUE PROCESS THEN.

01:00 - 20.849 UNDER THE BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB

01:00 - 22.209 CASE HAS UNDER MANY CASES

01:00 - 24.449 BEFORE IT DEVOLVES INTO A

01:00 - 25.699 DISCUSSION AROUND VARIOUS

01:00 - 26.260 WORDS,

01:00 - 29.329 WORDS LIKE ARISE AND ARE DUE TO

01:00 - 31.069 DO DOES THE LAWSUIT DOES

01:00 - 33.469 THE SUIT. RISE FROM EXCUSE ME

01:00 - 34.629 IT'S NOT A RISE AND OR DOES THE

01:00 - 36.519 SUIT ARISE FROM OR

01:00 - 38.969 RELATE TO THE DEFENDANTS

01:00 - 40.360 CONTACTS IN THE FORUM

01:00 - 41.919 IN OTHER WORDS JUSTICE

01:00 - 43.529 DAUGHERTY AS THE COURT SAID IN

01:00 - 44.969 BMS AND HAS SAID IN OTHER

01:00 - 46.970 PLACES IN OTHER WORDS.

01:00 - 50.079 THE COURT ASKS WHETHER THERE IS

01:00 - 51.150 AN AFFILIATION

01:00 - 54.429 BETWEEN THE BETWEEN THE LAWSUIT

01:00 - 55.789 AND THE DEFENDANTS CONTACTS AND

01:00 - 57.769 THE FORUM. THE THOSE

01:00 - 59.129 FORMULATIONS ARE IN DIFFERENT

01:00 - 01.829 PLACES BUT ONE IS THAT IS THE

01:01 - 03.239 WORD AFFILIATION IS USED BY THE

01:01 - 04.299 SUPREME COURT AS

01:01 - 06.049 PROVIDING PERSPECTIVE ON THE

01:01 - 07.499 FORMULATION ARISE FROM OR

01:01 - 08.809 RELATE TO SAID THOUGH THE WAY

01:01 - 10.619 THAT CONSTRUCT WORKS AS WE HAVE

01:01 - 11.579 A CONCEPT OF INTEREST AND

01:01 - 13.439 FEDERALISM DUE PROCESS IS THE

01:01 - 14.379 SERVANT OF INTERSTATE

01:01 - 15.939 FEDERALISM AND THE SETTLED

01:01 - 16.969 PRINCIPLES AND THAT WAS THE

01:01 - 18.639 WORDS USED BY THE SUPREME COURT

01:01 - 20.209 TO SETTLE PRINCIPLES OF THE

01:01 - 22.169 SUPREME COURT RESPECTING THE

01:01 - 23.749 PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT OF

01:01 - 25.319 SPECIFIC JURISDICTION IS TO

01:01 - 27.430 EXAMINE WHETHER THE LAWSUIT

01:01 - 30.089 ARISES FROM OR RELATES TO AND

01:01 - 31.990 IF I MAY OR IS AFFILIATED WITH

01:01 - 34.449 THE DEFENDANTS CONTACTS IN

01:01 - 36.289 THE FORM. LET ME SAY I'M GOING

01:01 - 38.270 TO SEND US YOUR BACK OR THE 40

01:01 - 39.099 I JUST WANT TO

01:01 - 39.780 MAKE SURE.

01:01 - 42.279 YOU'VE USED THE TERM ARISE

01:01 - 44.329 FROM CONTINUOUSLY YES THAT'S

01:01 - 46.009 THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT'S IN

01:01 - 48.209 SUBSECTION C OF OUR LONG LONG

01:01 - 50.270 ARMS STATUTE, IT IS THE VIEW

01:01 - 52.959 BRISTOL-MYERS AND SECTION SEE

01:01 - 54.549 THE LONG ARM STATUTE IS CODE

01:01 - 57.299 CAMERAS. SO THE BRISTOL MYERS

01:01 - 59.319 DID NOT CREATE MUCH RIPPLE IN

01:01 - 00.479 PENNSYLVANIA BECAUSE OUR

01:02 - 01.679 LEGISLATURE HAS ALREADY SAID

01:02 - 01.910 IT.

01:02 - 03.059 AND SO I HADN'T THOUGHT ABOUT

01:02 - 05.139 IT IN THOSE TERMS TO TO THINK

01:02 - 06.899 ABOUT TO MATCH UP OR STILL

01:02 - 08.519 MYERS OR THAT FORMULATION OF

01:02 - 09.609 THE DUE PROCESS TUR'S PRINCE

01:02 - 11.879 TOO SUBSECTION C DIRECTLY BUT

01:02 - 12.380 WHAT.

01:02 - 15.339 FUNDAMENTALLY I AGREE WITH

01:02 - 16.999 YOUR PROPOSITION AND THE REASON

01:02 - 17.819 THAT I AGREE WITH THAT AS A

01:02 - 18.619 MATTER OF STATUTORY

01:02 - 20.590 CONSTRUCTION, IS BECAUSE.

01:02 - 22.949 WE HAVE IN OUR LONG ARM STATUTE

01:02 - 25.759 SECTION 533020 TO BE WHICH

01:02 - 26.610 SAYS THAT.

01:02 - 29.589 SO THEY DON'T CHARACTERIZE

01:02 - 32.119 PARAPHRASE THAT THE

01:02 - 34.459 PENNSYLVANIA COURTS. ARE

01:02 - 35.869 AUTHORIZED TO EXERCISE

01:02 - 37.969 JURISDICTION. QUOTE TO THE

01:02 - 39.299 FULLEST EXTENT ALLOWED UNDER

01:02 - 40.199 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE

01:02 - 42.389 UNITED STATES AND MAYBE BASED

01:02 - 43.659 ON THE MOST A MINIMUM CONTACTS

01:02 - 44.849 WITH THIS COMMONWEALTH ALLOWED

01:02 - 45.979 UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE

01:02 - 46.820 UNITED STATES.

01:02 - 49.709 SO THAT IS THAT IS THE

01:02 - 50.639 DIRECTION OF THE GENERAL

01:02 - 51.349 ASSEMBLY TO

01:02 - 53.149 AUTHORIZE A THE SPECIFIC

01:02 - 54.309 JURISDICTION HERE UNDER THE

01:02 - 56.149 LONG-TERM STATUTE. ABSOLUTELY

01:02 - 57.850 TO THE FULLEST TO THE MAXIMUM

01:02 - 59.939 AND DEGREE AUTHORIZED BY THE

01:02 - 02.439 CONSTITUTION. SECTION SEE I

01:03 - 04.919 AGREE USES THE WORDS ARISE FROM

01:03 - 05.420 IT DOESN'T

01:03 - 07.409 ADD THE WORD OR RELATE TO

01:03 - 08.469 DOESN'T USE THE WORD OR

01:03 - 09.850 AFFILIATE. BUT

01:03 - 11.509 ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF

01:03 - 12.699 SUBSECTION B I THINK AS A

01:03 - 13.499 MATTER OF STATUTORY

01:03 - 14.329 CONSTRUCTION UNDER THE

01:03 - 15.619 STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION ACT IT

01:03 - 16.930 WAS PRETTY IT WOULD BE PROPER

01:03 - 19.209 TO READ SUBSECTION C AS

01:03 - 21.760 CONSISTENT WITH SUBSECTION B

01:03 - 23.919 AND CERTAINLY CONSISTENT WITH

01:03 - 25.759 WITH FACT DUE PROCESS USED TO

01:03 - 28.239 BE TO THAT'S FOR IT I THINK

01:03 - 29.639 IT'S A UNIFORM STATUTE OTHER

01:03 - 30.679 STATES THAT ARE

01:03 - 33.019 COMMON LANGUAGE. IT I DO AGREE,

01:03 - 34.199 IT'S NOT UNCOMMON. BUT IT'S NOT

01:03 - 35.279 THAT IT'S BUT NOT EVERY STATE

01:03 - 36.859 HAS IT IN SOME STATES HAVE MORE

01:03 - 39.029 ERRORS THE EDGES. WE WANT

01:03 - 41.629 PENNSYLVANIA RIGHT. TO BE ABLE

01:03 - 42.360 TO SUE.

01:03 - 45.649 I CORPORATIONS THAT WHEN WE'RE

01:03 - 46.809 LOOKING AT IT TO THE FULLEST

01:03 - 47.990 EXTENT WE CAN GIVE THEM.

01:03 - 50.560 THAT ABILITY THAT CORRECT.

01:03 - 53.859 IT IS I MEAN CORRECT THAT

01:03 - 55.699 KIRK PENNSYLVANIA HAVE THE

01:03 - 57.559 BENEFIT OF THE STATUTE. RIGHT

01:03 - 59.050 IT'S ALSO CORRECT

01:04 - 02.509 THE STATUTE. I'M IS NOT ON ITS

01:04 - 03.639 FACE LIMITED TO PENNSYLVANIA

01:04 - 04.520 RESIDENTS RIGHT THING.

01:04 - 05.769 THEY DID THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE

01:04 - 06.999 COMMONWEALTH IS AS THE GENERAL

01:04 - 08.000 ASSEMBLY AUTHORIZED.

01:04 - 12.000 WE WANT OUR RESIDENTS TO HAVE.

01:04 - 14.320 FORCED TO EXTENT.

01:04 - 16.139 THE POST ABILITY WE CAN

01:04 - 18.389 GET THAT OKAY TO TO

01:04 - 19.999 TO HAVE JURISDICTION IN OUR

01:04 - 22.369 COURSE FOR WRONGS DONE THAT TO

01:04 - 23.300 PENNSYLVANIA RIGHT.

01:04 - 25.009 WELL I I WILL I WILL AGREE

01:04 - 26.549 WITH THAT PROPOSITION YOUR

01:04 - 28.189 HONOR I'M WITHOUT IN ANY WAY

01:04 - 30.239 CONCEDING THAT OF COURSE THAT

01:04 - 31.119 THE LONG ARM STATUTE IS

01:04 - 32.690 CONFINED TO THE BENEFIT.

01:04 - 36.249 YES, IT. YET THIS LANGUAGE.

01:04 - 39.109 YES HAHA YES, IT IS IT IT IS A

01:04 - 40.889 IT IS A MAXIMALIST OF YOU OF

01:04 - 43.449 DUE PROCESS. THE JURISDICTION

01:04 - 43.930 SAYING

01:04 - 45.799 WE WANT OUR RESIDENTS THAT

01:04 - 47.359 EVERY BENEFIT WE CAN GET THAT

01:04 - 49.180 BUT IT HAS TO BE CONSISTENT.

01:04 - 51.420 THE DUE PROCESS CLAP ABSOLUTELY

01:04 - 53.169 ABSOLUTELY NO NOTHING NOTHING

01:04 - 55.610 MORE. BUT NOTHING LESS THEN THE

01:04 - 58.449 A POSITION TO FORD AS AS

01:04 - 59.679 DESCRIBED BY THE SUPREME COURT

01:04 - 01.299 WITH RESPECT TO SPECIFIC

01:05 - 02.449 JURISDICTION AND IF WE THEN

01:05 - 03.579 CONSIDER THE RECORD IN THIS

01:05 - 07.150 CASE. AND LET ME SAY. HIGH.

01:05 - 08.470 HAVE

01:05 - 10.640 ARGUED AND WILL ARGUE TO TODAY

01:05 - 12.029 THAT YOU SHOULD AFFIRM ON THE

01:05 - 13.180 MERITS ON THE RECORD.

01:05 - 15.789 RELATIVE TO THE DUE PROCESS

01:05 - 16.990 ANALYSIS IN THE LONG TERM

01:05 - 18.389 ANALYSIS BUT THERE'S ALSO A

01:05 - 19.169 VERY IMPORTANT WAY FOR

01:05 - 20.749 ARGUMENT. THE JUSTICE TANI WHO

01:05 - 21.669 RELATES TO YOUR POINT ABOUT

01:05 - 23.799 PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS. BUT I I

01:05 - 24.939 I WANT TO KNOW AND I WANT TO

01:05 - 26.719 GET TO BUT I WANT FOR NOW TO

01:05 - 30.119 SAY THAT. INTERVIEW OF

01:05 - 32.879 THE FORMULATION AS AS DESCRIBED

01:05 - 34.349 IN THE BMS DECISION WHERE WE

01:05 - 36.879 ASK WHAT THE THE DEFENDANT'S

01:05 - 37.409 ACTIONS IN

01:05 - 39.589 THE FORUMS HUGHEY FORGIVE RICE

01:05 - 41.910 TO RELATE TO THE LAWSUIT

01:05 - 43.709 AGAINST THIS RECORD. THE ANSWER

01:05 - 45.799 TO THE QUESTION IS JURISDICTION

01:05 - 47.920 PROPERLY. ASSESS A.

01:05 - 51.539 ASSERTED IN THIS CASE. THE

01:05 - 53.540 ANSWER UNEQUIVOCALLY IS YES,

01:05 - 54.849 AND THE REASON THE ANSWER ON A

01:05 - 56.449 CRITICALLY IS YES, NOT BECAUSE

01:05 - 57.829 OF ME AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF

01:05 - 00.299 YOU. IT'S BECAUSE THE ETHICON

01:06 - 01.019 CORPORATION

01:06 - 03.089 HAS CHOSEN THE ETHICON

01:06 - 04.349 CORPORATION HAS CHOSEN IF

01:06 - 05.199 THERE'S ANY STEAM TO THIS

01:06 - 07.519 ARGUMENT IS CHOICE. THEY

01:06 - 09.489 HAVE CHOSEN TO CONDUCT

01:06 - 11.189 BUSINESS. IN THE COMMONWEALTH

01:06 - 13.059 OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR A PERIOD

01:06 - 14.419 WITH RESPECT TO SEE CAN'T GOING

01:06 - 16.229 BACK TO 1972 AND PERHAPS

01:06 - 17.110 EARLIER THAN THAT.

01:06 - 19.839 WITH RESPECT TO THAT TO

01:06 - 20.999 THE VERY MEASURES THAT ARE AT

01:06 - 22.489 ISSUE IN THIS LITIGATION GOING

01:06 - 24.089 BACK TO 2000 WHEN THE

01:06 - 26.399 VERY PATENTS. WE AND THAT IS A

01:06 - 27.429 POINT THAT WAS ARGUED IN THE

01:06 - 28.599 SUPREME COURT. IT WAS ARGUED IN

01:06 - 29.299 THE TRIAL COURT ON

01:06 - 30.919 RECONSIDERATION IT'S BEEN PART

01:06 - 32.159 OF THIS LITIGATION FOR A LONG

01:06 - 34.309 TIME, THE JERRY PATTON'S THAT

01:06 - 35.429 UNDERLIE THE MATCH THAT WAS

01:06 - 36.890 IMPLANTED INTO PATRICIA HAMMONS

01:06 - 37.200 WERE

01:06 - 40.699 JOINTLY SUBMITTED JOINTLY A

01:06 - 41.729 SUBMITTED I GUESS THAT'S THE

01:06 - 44.899 WORD BY NANCY CAN'T EMPLOYEES

01:06 - 46.419 WORKING TOGETHER UNDER A JOINT

01:06 - 47.779 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT UNDER

01:06 - 49.069 WHICH THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

01:06 - 51.269 WAS ASSIGNED BY SEA CAN'T TO

01:06 - 53.930 ETHICON ETHICON HAS.

01:06 - 56.479 SAID IN AN AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY

01:06 - 57.849 ETHICON EMPLOYEES AND THERE ARE

01:06 - 59.289 ALSO AFFIDAVIT SPICY CAN

01:06 - 01.529 EMPLOYEES MAKING CLEAR TO THE

01:07 - 03.109 POINT THAT MR. HAIM WAS

01:07 - 04.909 MAKING EARLIER THAT ETHICON

01:07 - 07.069 OWNS POLYPROPYLENE ETHICON

01:07 - 08.699 EXTRAS TO POLYPROPYLENE INTO

01:07 - 09.969 THE FORM OF THE FILAMENT WHICH

01:07 - 11.859 WRAPS IN A SCHOOL LIKE FISHING

01:07 - 14.099 LINE OR THREAD. IT TRANSPORTS

01:07 - 15.269 THE SCHOOLS OF A

01:07 - 18.169 FISHING LINE TO A BUCKS COUNTY

01:07 - 20.099 FACILITY ON BASE. HE CAN'T IT

01:07 - 21.899 TELLS HE CAN'T WHAT TO DO IT

01:07 - 23.290 TELLS THEM EXACTLY WHAT TO DO.

01:07 - 24.050 EVERY

01:07 - 26.449 SPECIFICATION THE THE WEAVING

01:07 - 28.629 PATTERN THE THE FINAL PRODUCT

01:07 - 28.930 EVERY

01:07 - 30.649 PHYSICAL CONDITION IS CREATED

01:07 - 32.019 AT ETHICON STEER ACTION AND

01:07 - 33.639 CONTROL THE PRESIDENT AND

01:07 - 34.889 PENNSYLVANIA AGAINST YOUR

01:07 - 35.530 ARGUMENT.

01:07 - 37.609 I MEAN INTUITIVELY AND I

01:07 - 38.609 ASKED MISTER HAIM THIS

01:07 - 39.530 INTUITIVELY.

01:07 - 42.569 ONE OF OUR CORPORATE CITIZENS

01:07 - 44.739 MANUFACTURES THIS ONE OF OUR

01:07 - 46.569 INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS IN HIS

01:07 - 49.239 OFFICIAL CAPACITY PASS THIS ONE

01:07 - 50.099 WOULD THINK WE HAVE

01:07 - 52.540 JURISDICTION THAT MR. HAIM SAYS

01:07 - 53.949 WHAT YOU'RE SAYING NOW WHICH IS

01:07 - 55.479 WHY INTERRUPTED YOU HE'S

01:07 - 57.609 SAYING YES, ONE OF OUR CITIZENS

01:07 - 59.430 MANUFACTURED IT. BUT

01:07 - 01.409 IN DESIGN, THE

01:08 - 04.149 DESIGN IS PRECISELY DONE IN NEW

01:08 - 06.909 JERSEY IN THE MANUFACTURERS A

01:08 - 09.009 BUNCH OF ROBOTS THAT DO NOTHING

01:08 - 11.319 BUT CUE UP THE PRODUCT FROM

01:08 - 12.000 THAT DESIGN.

01:08 - 14.299 THAT IS THAT IS I UNDERSTAND

01:08 - 15.739 THAT'S THAT'S THAT THAT'S THE

01:08 - 16.969 PERSPECTIVE THAT MR. HAIM AN

01:08 - 17.680 OFFER TO YOU

01:08 - 19.330 BUT THAT IS NOT THE PERSPECTIVE

01:08 - 22.079 WITH LOWS FROM THAT IS NOT THE

01:08 - 23.089 PERSPECTIVE THAT FLOWS FROM

01:08 - 23.250 THIS

01:08 - 25.749 EVIDENCE BECAUSE BECAUSE AT THE

01:08 - 26.929 CON TRICK FOR A COUPLE OF

01:08 - 28.339 REASONS AND LET ME GET BACK TO

01:08 - 29.749 THAT ARE FRAMED THIS IN TERMS

01:08 - 31.779 OF THE RECORD ETHICON WOMEN'S

01:08 - 32.590 THE POLYPROPYLENE.

01:08 - 35.939 THIS IS NOT LIKE I'M ORDERING A

01:08 - 36.420 BATH MAT

01:08 - 38.169 ON AMAZON. AND IT SHOWS UP AT

01:08 - 39.229 MY DOOR AND AGO THAT'S GREAT A

01:08 - 41.159 COMMENT AFTER THAT THIS IS NOT

01:08 - 42.349 LIKE I ORDER A BOX

01:08 - 44.399 OF NAILS FROM A SUPPLIER AND IT

01:08 - 45.429 AND IT SHOWS UP AT MY

01:08 - 47.799 FACTORY DOOR. THIS IS A THIS IS

01:08 - 49.399 PROPERTY OWNED BY ETHICON THE

01:08 - 51.459 POLYPROPYLENE ITSELF IS OWNED

01:08 - 53.449 BY ETHICON ETHICON FASHION'S IT

01:08 - 55.259 INTO PELLETS ETHICON EXTRUDED

01:08 - 56.619 INTO THE INTO THE FORM OF

01:08 - 58.459 FILAMENT ETHICON BRINGS ITS

01:08 - 00.619 PROPERTY TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF

01:09 - 02.339 PENNSYLVANIA AND DIRECTS A

01:09 - 04.099 PROCESS. THE TO

01:09 - 06.799 BE PERFORMED ON ON THE THE

01:09 - 08.129 FILAMENT WHICH IS IN THE NATURE

01:09 - 09.679 OF LEAVING THE POLYPROPYLENE IN

01:09 - 11.239 THE FORM OF FILAMENT INTO

01:09 - 12.809 POLYPROPYLENE NOW IN THE FORM

01:09 - 15.039 OF MASH THAT PROCESS WHICH

01:09 - 16.649 ETHICON DIRECTS TO BE DONE ON

01:09 - 18.209 ITS PROPERTY. IN THE

01:09 - 19.429 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

01:09 - 20.129 YES AT THE SEA

01:09 - 21.859 CAN FACILITY SUBJECT TO ITS

01:09 - 22.779 DIRECTION CONTROL AND

01:09 - 24.659 SPECIFICATION IS THE VERY

01:09 - 26.839 PROCESS THAT CREATES THE

01:09 - 28.359 PHYSICAL CONDITIONS. THE CREASE

01:09 - 29.510 THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

01:09 - 31.909 THAT THAT WHEN IMPLANTED INTO

01:09 - 33.189 PATRICIA HAMMONDS AND FRANKLY,

01:09 - 34.229 HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF OTHER

01:09 - 35.659 WOMEN HAVE CAUSED THE

01:09 - 37.549 PHYSICAL INJURIES. THAT GAVE

01:09 - 39.129 THAT GIVE RISE THAT GAVE RISE

01:09 - 40.699 TO MISS HAMMOND SAYS CASE OUR

01:09 - 42.280 SHOWS OR YES, SAYING THAT

01:09 - 43.310 APARTMENT FOR A P.

01:09 - 45.229 ARE YOU SAYING THEN THAT IT

01:09 - 47.419 DOESN'T MATTER WHICH COUNTS OF

01:09 - 49.039 THE COMPLAINT TO SURVIVE

01:09 - 51.530 WHETHER IT'S. MANUFACTURING.

01:09 - 54.709 CASE OR ARE A SIDE

01:09 - 55.460 EFFECT CASE.

01:09 - 57.869 WELL IF SO THE SHORT ANSWER

01:09 - 58.310 TO YOUR QUESTION

01:09 - 00.829 IS NO. IT IS THAT THEY'RE THE

01:10 - 02.519 BMS CASE ITSELF TALKED ABOUT

01:10 - 04.119 THE SUIT AND DARK DESEGREGATE

01:10 - 05.739 ITS MORE COMPLICATED AND DIDN'T

01:10 - 06.289 US AGGREGATE

01:10 - 08.819 INTO CLAIMS. AT THE SAME TIME

01:10 - 10.509 WE CAN'T ENVISION A SCENARIO WE

01:10 - 12.359 CAN ENVISION A LAWSUIT THAT HAS

01:10 - 13.170 A TORT CLAIM

01:10 - 14.609 THAT INVOLVES ONE NUCLEUS OF

01:10 - 16.329 FACT AND A DEFAMATION CLAIM

01:10 - 17.099 THAT OFFERS A COMPLETELY

01:10 - 18.749 DIFFERENT NUCLEUS OF FACT WHERE

01:10 - 18.910 WE

01:10 - 21.099 CAN ENVISION. DIFFERENT

01:10 - 22.779 JURISDICTIONAL ANALYSYS BEING

01:10 - 24.099 BEING UNDERTAKEN THIS OUT OF

01:10 - 25.929 THE SAME WITH THE PRODUCTS CASE

01:10 - 27.409 A PRODUCT LIABILITY CASE THAT

01:10 - 29.160 IS 3 LET ME FINISH THAT HAS

01:10 - 31.249 3 DIFFERENT COUNTS PERHAPS A

01:10 - 33.189 MANUFACTURING DEFECT, A DESIGN

01:10 - 35.010 DEFECT A FAILURE TO WARN COUNT.

01:10 - 36.489 IT IS CERTAINLY NOT THE

01:10 - 39.409 CASE HERE BECAUSE THE THIS CASE

01:10 - 41.219 INVOLVES A COMMON NUCLEUS OF

01:10 - 43.699 FACT. WHETHER WE'RE TALKING

01:10 - 45.829 ABOUT MANUFACTURING WARNINGS

01:10 - 48.340 DESIGN ALL OF IT. ALL OF IT

01:10 - 50.870 FLOWS WITH RESPECT TO SEE CAN'T

01:10 - 52.159 ALL OF IT FLOWS THROUGH THE

01:10 - 53.269 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

01:10 - 54.519 THROUGH ETHIC CONTACT TIFFANY'S

01:10 - 55.230 AND PENNSYLVANIA.

01:10 - 57.889 CAN FOOD PROCESSING THEM ASH

01:10 - 59.609 FROM THE FORM A FILAMENT INTO

01:10 - 00.520 THE FORM OF MASH

01:11 - 01.639 CREATING THE PHYSICAL

01:11 - 03.279 CONDITIONS THAT WENT UNPLANTED

01:11 - 04.719 AND TO PATRICIA HAMMONDS CAUSED

01:11 - 05.240 OR INJURY

01:11 - 07.909 AND CAUSED AND IN TURN GAVE

01:11 - 09.470 RISE LITERALLY GAVE RISE

01:11 - 11.809 TO THIS LAWSUIT BUT NOTHING TO

01:11 - 12.170 DO WITH

01:11 - 14.529 THE DESIGN THAT YOU SAID THAT

01:11 - 15.679 DOESN'T KNOW THAT THAT IS THAT

01:11 - 17.449 ALSO IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE THEY

01:11 - 18.750 THE EFFORT MUCH AT.

01:11 - 21.889 GO AHEAD AND TELL ME WHAT THEY

01:11 - 23.479 HAD TO DO IT AT THE FIRST OF

01:11 - 24.429 ALL AT THE COMMENTS YOU CAN

01:11 - 24.900 EMPLOYEES

01:11 - 26.849 TOGETHER DID. DIP AT THE

01:11 - 28.289 NATIONAL AND THERE IS IF YOU

01:11 - 29.980 LOOK AT A PAGE 7.40

01:11 - 31.999 TO 7.44 SEE IF THE REPRODUCE

01:11 - 33.269 RECORD YOU'LL SEE TESTIMONY BY

01:11 - 35.279 JAMES WILSON IN WHICH HE WHICH

01:11 - 36.829 HE AGREES THAT THOSE PATENTS

01:11 - 38.490 UNDERLIE THE PRO LEAN WHICH IS

01:11 - 39.899 THE PROWLING SUTURE WHICH IS

01:11 - 40.730 WOVEN INTO THE

01:11 - 42.019 WHICH IS WOVEN INTO THAT I

01:11 - 43.169 THOUGHT YOU'RE BETTER ANSWER

01:11 - 45.509 WAS IT DOESN'T MATTER. WELL AND

01:11 - 46.010 IT.

01:11 - 47.749 RIGHT IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE

01:11 - 49.689 IT'S ALL IT'S ALL A COMMON IT'S

01:11 - 51.259 ALL A COMMON NUCLEUS OF FACT,

01:11 - 52.819 ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU NOT ONLY

01:11 - 54.139 CONSIDERED THE SEA CAN STORY

01:11 - 54.350 WHERE

01:11 - 56.669 ETHICON IS IS A DIRECTING SEE

01:11 - 58.139 CAN'T WHICH INCLUDES EMAILS AND

01:11 - 59.759 PHONE CALLS THAT INCLUDE SITE

01:11 - 01.209 VISITS THIS IS A TOTAL

01:12 - 01.620 DIRECTION

01:12 - 03.089 AND CONTROL THIS IS A

01:12 - 04.629 PURPOSEFUL OF AILMENTS IF I MAY

01:12 - 05.889 USE THAT WORD. THIS IS A

01:12 - 07.039 PURPOSEFUL OF AILMENT OF THE

01:12 - 08.650 PRIVILEGE OF OF CONDUCTING

01:12 - 10.259 BUSINESS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF

01:12 - 11.899 PENNSYLVANIA, NOT RELATING TO

01:12 - 13.470 SOMETHING RANDOM OR FORTUITOUS

01:12 - 14.449 BUT RELATING TO THE

01:12 - 15.449 CONSTRUCTION OF THE VERY

01:12 - 16.960 PHYSICAL CONDITIONS THAT CREATE

01:12 - 19.149 CREATE INJURY AND CREATE

01:12 - 20.889 LAWSUIT AND THEN YOU LAY ON TOP

01:12 - 22.829 OF THAT THE FACT THAT ETHIC ON

01:12 - 25.219 HAD A LONGSTANDING RELATIONSHIP

01:12 - 26.239 WITH PENNSYLVANIA AROUND

01:12 - 28.099 CLINICAL TESTING. TESTING A

01:12 - 30.099 DATA COLLECTION DATA ANALYSIS

01:12 - 31.439 DOING MARKETING RESEARCH AND

01:12 - 32.519 YOU CAN EITHER STOP YOU FOR A

01:12 - 34.899 SECOND BECAUSE I'M LOST AND IN

01:12 - 35.439 YOUR CLOSE

01:12 - 37.539 TO DOT AND I'D PREFER NOT TO

01:12 - 38.920 VOTE THIS CASE LAST

01:12 - 43.250 DID IS IT YOUR POSITION.

01:12 - 44.550 THAT.

01:12 - 47.699 PART OF THIS MASH WAS OR THAT

01:12 - 48.830 THIS MESS WAS.

01:12 - 51.129 IN SOME FASHION DESIGN TO

01:12 - 53.449 PENNSYLVANIA. THE

01:12 - 55.590 RECORD REFLECTS THAT.

01:12 - 58.149 THAT AND THERE'S AN THERE'S

01:12 - 01.329 AN E-MAIL. IN THE RECORD AND TO

01:13 - 02.699 FORGIVE ME I DON'T HAVE THE

01:13 - 04.789 PAGE NUMBER OF THE E-MAIL THAT

01:13 - 07.319 ETHIC ON AND SEEK HAND HAD A

01:13 - 08.940 RELATIONSHIP THAT INVOLVED.

01:13 - 11.929 THE DESIGN OF TEXTILES WHICH IS

01:13 - 12.590 TO SAY

01:13 - 14.459 IN MORE BROADLY THAN THE FACT

01:13 - 15.319 THAT THEY PANNED TO THE MESH

01:13 - 16.459 TOGETHER BUT THEY WORKED

01:13 - 18.160 TOGETHER ON THE DESIGN OF

01:13 - 21.100 OF TEXTILES AND SO WHILE I WILL

01:13 - 23.630 AGREE THAT.

01:13 - 26.779 I THINK THE RECORD REFLECTS

01:13 - 28.199 THAT OUT SO YOU GET THE RECORD

01:13 - 29.789 RED LIGHT MOST FAVORABLE I

01:13 - 30.499 CERTAINLY TO

01:13 - 31.770 UNDEREMPLOYMENT REJECTION.

01:13 - 33.629 STANDARD SO I THINK THAT WE I

01:13 - 35.099 THINK IT TO THE DEGREE YOU HAVE

01:13 - 35.740 TO SHOW.

01:13 - 38.839 DESIGN FUNCTION WITH SEEK AND

01:13 - 40.359 IN PENNSYLVANIA. THE RECORD

01:13 - 42.289 DOES REFLECT THAT BUT I BUT I

01:13 - 43.659 DON'T BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE

01:13 - 45.019 EVEN NEED THAT EXPERIENCE TO

01:13 - 46.100 DIRECT THIS IS

01:13 - 48.249 THAT THE RECORD REFLECTS IS A

01:13 - 49.079 DESIGN DEFECT

01:13 - 49.880 IN PENNSYLVANIA.

01:13 - 52.069 AND BE ASSUMING ARGUE

01:13 - 54.340 ARGUMENT ARGUE WINDOW THAT IF

01:13 - 56.209 AS WE READ IT, WE CONCLUDE IT

01:13 - 58.220 DOES NOT YOU STILL PREVAIL

01:13 - 00.189 AND THAT IS SO TELL ME AGAIN

01:14 - 02.449 VERY SUCCINCTLY IF THERE'S NO

01:14 - 04.229 DESIGN DEFECT IT IS NO DESIGN

01:14 - 06.170 IN PENNSYLVANIA. WHY PREVAIL.

01:14 - 09.949 I PREVAIL BECAUSE OF THE DAY

01:14 - 12.459 THAT THE CLAIM BECAUSE I PREFER

01:14 - 15.070 DEATH FOR 2 REASONS, ONE THIS

01:14 - 15.910 THESE.

01:14 - 21.169 THIS MOTION TO DO THIS GLOBAL

01:14 - 23.569 MOTION TO DISMISS WAS FILED

01:14 - 25.059 AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF A

01:14 - 26.779 MASTER LONG FORM COMPLAINT THAT

01:14 - 29.609 CONTAINED. A NUMBER OF A NUMBER

01:14 - 30.920 OF DIFFERENT CLAIMS.

01:14 - 34.629 ALL OF WHICH ARISE FROM A COMET

01:14 - 37.020 NUCLEUS OF FACT ALL INVOLVING.

01:14 - 39.580 PERSONAL INJURY CAUSED

01:14 - 41.800 BY MASH THAT WAS.

01:14 - 44.119 WHOSE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES WERE

01:14 - 45.450 CONSTRUCTED IN PENNSYLVANIA.

01:14 - 47.770 THAT WAS TESTED IN PENNSYLVANIA

01:14 - 49.089 THAT WAS EVALUATED IN

01:14 - 50.679 PENNSYLVANIA. THAT WAS

01:14 - 53.810 ADVOCATED FOR. IN PENNSYLVANIA.

01:14 - 56.759 AND ALL OF WHICH OF WITH

01:14 - 57.969 RESPECT TO DEATH THE KHANS

01:14 - 59.169 ACTIVITIES IN PENNSYLVANIA

01:14 - 00.899 AMOUNTS TO RELATIONSHIP IT

01:15 - 03.049 AMOUNTS TO SHUN IT AMOUNTS TO

01:15 - 04.640 PURPOSEFUL OF AILMENT OF THE

01:15 - 05.829 PRIVILEGE OF CONDUCTING

01:15 - 07.009 BUSINESS IN THE COMMONWEALTH,

01:15 - 08.739 THE PRICE OF WHICH IS

01:15 - 10.169 THE EXERCISE OF SPECIFICS ARE

01:15 - 11.710 STUDENTS TO CHURCH JURISDICTION

01:15 - 13.669 WITH RESPECT TO A PERSONAL

01:15 - 16.229 INJURY CLAIM. REGARDING THE

01:15 - 17.379 VERY PHYSICAL CONDITIONS THAT

01:15 - 18.619 WERE CREATED IN PENNSYLVANIA,

01:15 - 19.849 THAT'S ONE REASON. BUT THE

01:15 - 21.060 SECOND REASON THAT I WIN

01:15 - 22.629 AND JUSTICE DONAHUE THIS IS TO

01:15 - 23.829 YOUR POINT ABOUT PRELIMINARY

01:15 - 25.549 OBJECTIONS. IS THAT

01:15 - 27.279 RESPECTFULLY ALL OF THIS IS

01:15 - 29.710 WAIVED. ALL OF THIS IS WAGED

01:15 - 32.379 BECAUSE. UNDER OUR LAW UNDER

01:15 - 33.429 CIVIL UNDERSTATE

01:15 - 35.599 PROCEDURAL RULE, 1028 UNDER

01:15 - 37.419 STATE PROCEDURAL RULE 1033

01:15 - 39.610 UNDERSTATE APPELLATE DECISIONS.

01:15 - 41.129 WE HAVE A BASIC PRINCIPLE OF

01:15 - 42.999 PENNSYLVANIA LAW THAT THE ISSUE

01:15 - 44.249 OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION MUST

01:15 - 45.879 BE RAISED BY A PRELIMINARY

01:15 - 48.279 OBJECTION. HERE THERE WAS THE

01:15 - 49.229 WAY THIS LITIGATION WAS

01:15 - 50.829 CONSTRUCTED. THERE WAS A MASTER

01:15 - 51.860 LONG FORM COMPLAINT.

01:15 - 53.109 THERE WAS A CASE MANAGEMENT

01:15 - 54.319 ORDER THAT PROVIDED FOR THE

01:15 - 55.839 FILING OF MASTER PRELIMINARY

01:15 - 57.669 OBJECTIONS. ETHICON FILED

01:15 - 58.989 MASTER PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS

01:15 - 59.490 RAISING.

01:16 - 01.919 PRIMARILY ISSUES OF

01:16 - 03.509 PENNSYLVANIA LAW WHICH FRANKLY

01:16 - 07.369 ONLY OF A SMALL NUMBER OF THE

01:16 - 09.369 OF THE LAWSUITS BECAUSE MANY OF

01:16 - 10.419 THEM DID INVOLVE OUT OF STATE

01:16 - 11.779 PLAINTIFFS. BUT ONE THING THEY

01:16 - 13.069 DID NOT TO IN THEIR PRELIMINARY

01:16 - 14.599 OBJECTIONS DID NOT DO IN THEIR

01:16 - 15.980 MASTER PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS

01:16 - 17.609 IS RAISE THE ISSUE OF PERSONAL

01:16 - 19.339 JURISDICTION. WHAT THEY DID

01:16 - 21.089 WHAT THEY DID EVENTUALLY FILE

01:16 - 22.909 AFTER PRELIMINARY LITTLE

01:16 - 25.589 PRIEST. LITIGATED AND

01:16 - 27.599 OVERRULED. AFTER

01:16 - 29.649 THAT POINT THEY FILED A MASTER

01:16 - 31.529 ANSWER AND YOU MATTER IN THEIR

01:16 - 33.140 MASTER ANSWER AND YOU MATTER

01:16 - 34.689 THEY RAISED SUCH ISSUES SUCH

01:16 - 36.659 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AS STATUTE

01:16 - 38.029 OF LIMITATIONS AND INHERENTLY K

01:16 - 39.659 SPECIFIC ISSUE AND THEY

01:16 - 41.769 ALSO SIGNIFICANTLY RAISE THE

01:16 - 43.260 ISSUE FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME

01:16 - 43.630 OF

01:16 - 45.379 PERSONAL JURISDICTION, PERSONAL

01:16 - 46.829 JURISDICTION UNDER OUR LAW

01:16 - 48.279 UNDER OUR STATE LAW IS NOT AN

01:16 - 49.979 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE. IT IS

01:16 - 51.559 SOMETHING THAT MUST BE DECIDED

01:16 - 53.170 EXCUSE ME IT MUST BE ADDRESSED

01:16 - 54.929 AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE MOMENT

01:16 - 56.159 IN THE CONTEXT OF A PLUM AN

01:16 - 58.389 AREA OBJECTION AND THAT DID NOT

01:16 - 00.199 HAPPEN. ETHICON COMES BEFORE

01:17 - 01.589 YOU SEEKING TO MAKE LITERALLY A

01:17 - 03.089 FEDERAL CASE AT THE

01:17 - 04.859 ISSUE OF OF OF PERSONAL

01:17 - 06.469 JURISDICTION, BUT THEY HAVE NOT

01:17 - 07.569 COMPLIED WITH THE BASIC

01:17 - 09.479 PREREQUISITE OF PENNSYLVANIA

01:17 - 11.649 LAW REGARDING HOW THE CHALLENGE

01:17 - 12.909 TO PERSONAL JURISDICTION IS

01:17 - 14.419 PROPERLY RIPENED AND LET ME

01:17 - 15.789 RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT THAT

01:17 - 16.580 REPRESENTS.

01:17 - 19.469 STATE LAW

01:17 - 21.559 PROCEDURAL BASIS FOR AFFIRMING

01:17 - 22.269 THE DECISION OF THE

01:17 - 23.899 SECURITY REPORT WITHOUT EVEN

01:17 - 25.139 GETTING TO THE DUE PROCESS

01:17 - 27.089 ISSUES OF PERSONAL MYERS SQUIBB

01:17 - 28.559 GRIND, I KNOW YOU'RE DONE IT,

01:17 - 29.719 BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND

01:17 - 31.079 PHILADELPHIA'S PRACTICE VERY

01:17 - 31.580 WELL.

01:17 - 34.469 AFTER THE MASTER COMPLAINT

01:17 - 36.269 MASRY ANSWERS. THIS IS AN

01:17 - 37.949 INDIVIDUALIZED COMPLAINT FILED

01:17 - 39.279 ON BEHALF OF HIS CLIENT IS THAT

01:17 - 41.970 CORRECT THERE WAS SO IF IT'S.

01:17 - 44.010 IN SHORT.

01:17 - 46.739 LET'S SAY YES WHAT ACTUALLY

01:17 - 48.319 HAPPENED HERE IS THIS THIS

01:17 - 49.819 LAWSUIT WAS FILED. IT WAS

01:17 - 50.889 REMOVED TO FEDERAL COURT IT WAS

01:17 - 52.050 REMANDED TO FEDERAL COURT.

01:17 - 54.739 AT THE TIME IT WAS REMANDED THE

01:17 - 55.659 MASTER PROGRAM HAS

01:17 - 57.429 BEEN CREATED THEN A SHORT FORM

01:17 - 58.519 COMPLAIN WHAT WE CALL A SHORT

01:17 - 00.109 FROM COMPLAINT AND WAS FIRED

01:18 - 01.389 SHORT FROM COMPLAINT IS ARE

01:18 - 02.409 SHORT FORMAL IN MARY

01:18 - 03.399 OBJECTIONS, THEY'RE OUT THERE

01:18 - 05.089 WAS IN FAIRNESS THERE WAS A

01:18 - 06.339 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION FILED AT

01:18 - 07.789 THAT TIME BUT NOT AT THE STAGE

01:18 - 09.139 OF A MASK, BUT NOT A TON BUT

01:18 - 10.459 NOT AND WITH RESPECT TO THE

01:18 - 11.819 MASTER PRELIMINARY JACKSON

01:18 - 12.649 WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT

01:18 - 14.539 THIS SO WE UNDERSTAND YOU CAN

01:18 - 15.710 TELL FROM OUR QUESTION TODAY.

01:18 - 17.360 THE NEW ONE SO.

01:19 - 30.159 AND GOOD MORNING MISTER

01:19 - 31.239 HAGGERTY THIS

01:19 - 34.039 CASE A INVOLVES REPLACEMENT

01:19 - 35.039 COST HOMEOWNERS

01:19 - 37.459 INSURANCE POLICY THAT PACE

01:19 - 38.809 COVER CLAIMS THAT THE ACTUAL

01:19 - 41.599 CASH VALUE OF THE LOSS. PRAYER

01:19 - 43.140 REPAIR A PLACEMENT.

01:19 - 45.649 ALTHOUGH ACTUAL CASH VALUE

01:19 - 47.259 GENERALLY INCLUDES THE COST OF

01:19 - 48.580 THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR.

01:19 - 51.649 THIS POLICY PROVIDES SUCH COSTS

01:19 - 54.019 ARE WITHHELD UNLESS AND UNTIL

01:19 - 55.460 THEY'RE PAID BY THE HOMEOWNER.

01:19 - 58.089 ACCORDINGLY AFTER APPELLANTS

01:19 - 59.409 SUBMITTED THEIR CLAIMS FOR

01:19 - 00.289 WATER DAMAGE TO

01:20 - 02.419 THEIR HOMES. THEY RECEIVED

01:20 - 04.369 ACTUAL CASH VALUE PAYMENTS

01:20 - 06.210 WHICH IN WHICH DID NOT INCLUDE

01:20 - 08.610 GENERAL CONTRACTOR COSTS.

01:20 - 10.250 IN

01:20 - 12.159 THIS APPEAL. THE BALANCE YOUR

01:20 - 13.889 CLIENTS CHALLENGE WITHHOLDING

01:20 - 16.279 OF SUCH COSTS DESPITE NOT

01:20 - 17.789 HAVING PAID A GENERAL

01:20 - 18.370 CONTRACTOR.

01:20 - 21.799 MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT JAMES

01:20 - 23.490 HAGGERTY FOR THE APPELLANTS.

01:20 - 25.789 WITH YOUR HONOR'S AT ISSUE IN

01:20 - 27.019 THIS CASE IS THE RATE OF

01:20 - 27.790 UNINSURED.

01:20 - 30.239 TO WITHHOLD GENERAL CONTRACTOR

01:20 - 31.580 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT.

01:20 - 33.949 MAKING PAYMENT OF ACTUAL CASH

01:20 - 35.769 VALUE UNDER REPLACEMENT COST

01:20 - 36.440 POLICY.

01:20 - 38.689 IN ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE IT'S

01:20 - 39.839 IMPORTANT UNDERSTAND CERTAIN

01:20 - 42.529 CONCEPTS UNDER THESE PROPERTY

01:20 - 43.089 REPLACEMENT

01:20 - 45.409 COST POLICIES. GENERALLY

01:20 - 46.969 PAYMENT UNDER THESE POLICIES

01:20 - 47.390 INVOLVES A

01:20 - 50.559 2 STEP PROCESS. ONE STATE LOSS

01:20 - 51.489 IS RECOGNIZES

01:20 - 53.749 BEING COVERED THE INSURER PAYS

01:20 - 56.239 ACTUAL CASH VALUE. ACTUAL CASH

01:20 - 58.389 VALUE WAS PAID. SO THAT

01:20 - 00.069 THE INSURED CAN BEGIN THE

01:21 - 01.919 REPAIR PROCESS. THE INSURED HAS

01:21 - 03.380 FUNDS TO DO THE REPAIRS.

01:21 - 06.279 ACTUAL CASH VALUE IS DEFINED IN

01:21 - 08.039 THIS POLICY AS

01:21 - 09.299 REPLACEMENT COSTS LESS

01:21 - 11.889 DEPRECIATION THAT'S ALSO BEEN

01:21 - 14.109 THE GENERALLY COMMONLY ACCEPTED

01:21 - 15.989 DEFINITION OF THAT TERM WITHIN

01:21 - 17.789 THE INDUSTRY AND IN PRIOR

01:21 - 19.480 SUPERIOR COURT CASES.

01:21 - 23.630 WHAT IS IT ABOUT.

01:21 - 26.890 WHAT IS IT ABOUT 5. HE DID IS

01:21 - 34.479 THEMSELVES IN AND OUT OF

01:21 - 34.980 COVERAGE.

01:21 - 38.329 5 THE 5 MAJOR US THAT THERE'S

01:21 - 39.979 A COUPLE ISSUES INVOLVING 5 THE

01:21 - 40.320 FIRST

01:21 - 42.399 OF ALL THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR

01:21 - 43.659 OPERATING PROFIT IS NOT IN

01:21 - 45.549 CONTENTION COST GENERAL

01:21 - 48.089 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT IS A REAL

01:21 - 50.119 DIRECT COST THE SAME AS AN

01:21 - 51.349 ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, A

01:21 - 53.189 PLUMBING CONTRACTOR IN FACT THE

01:21 - 54.959 COURT IN GILL VERMIN AND CHIEF

01:21 - 56.359 JUSTICE SAILORS ON THAT PANEL,

01:21 - 57.859 THE SECURITY COURT SAID THAT

01:21 - 59.749 VERY THING SAID THAT IT IS A

01:21 - 01.639 REAL COST NO DIFFERENT

01:22 - 04.579 THAN LABOR MATERIALS WOOD

01:22 - 06.070 NAILS, IT'S A REAL COST

01:22 - 09.119 SECONDLY 5 HE IS INTERNALLY

01:22 - 10.720 INCONSISTENT WITH 5 DAY.

01:22 - 12.680 IN IN THIS IN THIS

01:22 - 16.409 POLICY SPECIFICALLY STATES

01:22 - 16.950 THAT.

01:22 - 19.749 WE WILL SETTLE AT REPLACEMENT

01:22 - 20.450 COST.

01:22 - 22.119 WITHOUT THE AUCTION FOR

01:22 - 24.159 DEPRECIATION THAN GOES ON TO

01:22 - 26.059 SAY HOWEVER WHEN THE COST OF

01:22 - 27.440 REPAIRS IN EXCESS OF THE

01:22 - 30.999 $2,500. WE WILL PAY ACTUAL CASH

01:22 - 31.600 VALUE.

01:22 - 35.879 DEPRECIATION UNTIL REPAIRS ARE

01:22 - 36.380 MADE.

01:22 - 38.469 THAT MAKES SENSE IN THE BIG

01:22 - 39.779 SCHEME OF THINGS ABOUT HOW

01:22 - 40.950 THESE POLICIES WORK.

01:22 - 42.789 KEEP IN MIND. THIS

01:22 - 44.339 IS REPLACEMENT COST POLICY

01:22 - 46.019 REPLACEMENT COSTS IS TO RETURN

01:22 - 47.239 THE PROPERTY TO ITS PRE LAST

01:22 - 48.869 CONDITION. SO WE TAKE A 10

01:22 - 50.089 YEAR-OLD PROPERTY A 10 YEAR-OLD

01:22 - 51.260 PROPERTIES DAMAGED.

01:22 - 53.019 WE ARE NOW THAT WE HAVE THE

01:22 - 54.709 REPLACEMENT COST IS WHAT WE

01:22 - 56.899 PAID FOR THE ENSURE THAT WAS

01:22 - 58.359 LOOKING AT AND SAYING WELL IT

01:22 - 59.680 WAS A 10 YEAR-OLD PROPERTY.

01:23 - 01.769 I AM NOW GOING TO REPLACE IT

01:23 - 03.449 NOT WITH 10 YEAR-OLD WOOD AND

01:23 - 04.969 TIN YEAR-OLD MALES, I'M GOING

01:23 - 06.539 TO PUT NEW WOOD AND NAILS INTO

01:23 - 09.049 THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE ACTUAL

01:23 - 11.069 CASH VALUE. HIS REPLACEMENT

01:23 - 13.329 COST LESS DEPRECIATION SO WE

01:23 - 15.119 WILL PAY YOU. WE WILL PAY YOU

01:23 - 18.030 ACTUAL CASH VALUE WHEN UNTIL

01:23 - 19.999 YOU DO THE REPAIRS BECAUSE THEN

01:23 - 21.320 WHEN YOU DO THE REPAIRS.

01:23 - 22.879 THEN YOU HAVE INCURRED THIS

01:23 - 24.759 ADDITIONAL COST AND YOU THEN

01:23 - 26.240 CAN GET THE DEPRECIATION.

01:23 - 28.199 THAT MAKES SENSE. THERE'S NO

01:23 - 29.499 WINDFALL IF YOU CHOOSE THAT

01:23 - 30.419 YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE THE

01:23 - 32.179 REPAIRS. YOU GET THE VALUE OF

01:23 - 33.210 THE 10 YEAR-OLD PROPERTY.

01:23 - 35.330 IF YOU MAKE THE REPAIRS.

01:23 - 36.929 YOU HAVE TO RECRUIT PLACE WITH

01:23 - 38.269 NEW MATERIAL SO THEREFORE IT

01:23 - 40.379 COSTS MORE THERE'S NO WIND FOR

01:23 - 42.250 HERE. WHAT TRUCK IS DOING IS

01:23 - 44.599 TRUCK IN 5 HE ALTHOUGH AND THEY

01:23 - 46.699 SAY WE WILL DO IT ACCORDING TO

01:23 - 48.099 THE STANDARD PROCESS AND WE'LL

01:23 - 48.679 DO IT. ACCORDING TO

01:23 - 50.019 OUR DEFINITION AND THE

01:23 - 51.529 DEFINITION SECTION THE POLICY

01:23 - 52.330 DEFINES.

01:23 - 55.139 THE ACT THAT ACTUAL CASH

01:23 - 56.809 VALUE IS REPLACEMENT COST LESS

01:23 - 57.650 DEPRECIATION.

01:23 - 59.739 THEY SAY THAT'S HOW WE WILL PAY

01:23 - 01.939 IT IN 5 DAY THEN IN FIGHT THE

01:24 - 03.680 THEY SAY HOWEVER.

01:24 - 06.630 WE'RE ALSO GOING TO WITHHOLD

01:24 - 09.149 GENERAL CONTRACTOR. OVERHEAD

01:24 - 09.800 AND PROFIT.

01:24 - 13.059 SO THEY SNEAK IT IN BECAUSE

01:24 - 14.719 THAT 20% WE'RE GOING TO

01:24 - 16.399 WITHHOLD THERE'S NO REASON TO

01:24 - 17.080 WITHHOLD.

01:24 - 19.309 BUT THE COUNCIL BACK TO I

01:24 - 20.630 GUESS THIS WEX QUESTION.

01:24 - 23.859 IS THERE

01:24 - 25.969 SOME HIERARCHY OF INTERPRETING

01:24 - 27.540 INSURANCE CONTRACTS

01:24 - 29.659 WHERE THE SECTION THAT'S

01:24 - 31.689 CALLED THE COVERAGE TAKES

01:24 - 33.479 PRECEDENCE OVER ANYTHING THAT

01:24 - 34.230 FOLLOWS IT.

01:24 - 36.259 NOW NOW THAT THE THAT THE

01:24 - 37.869 POLICIES THAT THEY DO WITH THE

01:24 - 38.929 POLICIES THAT BE READ AS A

01:24 - 40.319 WHOLE BECAUSE IT'S INTERNALLY

01:24 - 42.499 INCONSISTENT. IT. IT'S IT'S NOT

01:24 - 44.250 UNLIKE THE SITUATION IN CAIN

01:24 - 45.719 WE'RE JUST AS TODD WROTE THE

01:24 - 47.210 OPINION FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT

01:24 - 48.439 WHEN THEY ANALYZED THE NUMBER

01:24 - 50.279 OF POLICIES AND THEY FOUND OUT

01:24 - 50.720 A NUMBER OF

01:24 - 52.119 THESE POLICIES WHERE THEY

01:24 - 54.229 SPECIFICALLY DEFINED THE TERMS

01:24 - 55.729 PROPERLY THAT

01:24 - 57.489 THEY COULD TAKE IN THAT CASE

01:24 - 58.499 INVOLVED WITH YOU CAN DEDUCT

01:24 - 00.959 DEPRECIATION HOWEVER, JUSTICE

01:25 - 02.299 TODD NOTED THAT THE

01:25 - 04.119 ERIE POLICY, THE ONE PART OF

01:25 - 06.630 THE POLICY SAID WE WILL

01:25 - 08.729 NOT TO DUCK DEPRECIATION THE

01:25 - 10.269 NEXT PART OF THE POLICY SAID WE

01:25 - 10.960 WANT TO TALK

01:25 - 13.089 DEPRECIATION AND SHE SAID THAT

01:25 - 14.259 IS AMBIGUOUS BECAUSE THAT

01:25 - 15.319 SUBJECT TO 2 DIFFERENT

01:25 - 16.030 MEANINGS.

01:25 - 20.359 BROUGHT TO

01:25 - 21.340 YOU RIGHT.

01:25 - 22.979 WHERE ELSE DOES THE POLICY

01:25 - 24.589 SAY THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU

01:25 - 26.369 THE CONTRACT OR FEES IN STEP

01:25 - 26.870 ONE.

01:25 - 29.710 THE RATING IN 5 A

01:25 - 31.199 5 THEY SAID WHEN THE COST TO

01:25 - 33.860 REPAIR IS MORE THAN $2,500.

01:25 - 35.739 WE WILL PAY NO MORE THAN ACTUAL

01:25 - 37.529 CASH VALUE OF THE LOSS UNTIL

01:25 - 38.859 THE ACTUAL REPAIR OR REPLACE

01:25 - 40.429 MS. DOT. AND THEN IN THE

01:25 - 41.669 DEFINITION SECTION

01:25 - 44.459 ON PAGE. WON 11 OF THE RECORD

01:25 - 46.739 DEFINITION ACTUAL CASH VALUE IS

01:25 - 49.319 DEFINED AS REPLACEMENT COST

01:25 - 51.019 LESS DEPRECIATION IT'S NOT THE

01:25 - 52.489 FIND HIS REPLACEMENT COST LESS

01:25 - 53.859 DEPRECIATION LESS GENERAL

01:25 - 55.260 CONTRACTOR OPERATING PROFIT

01:25 - 57.000 WHICH IS WHAT FIGHT HE SAYS

01:25 - 59.200 YOU'RE TAKING A A SPECIFIC.

01:26 - 02.469 A SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS IN 5

01:26 - 04.100 ME AND YOU'RE SAYING IT'S

01:26 - 06.799 TRUMP'S BY LAW SAYS YOU'RE A

01:26 - 09.320 RISING FROM LESS SPECIFIC

01:26 - 11.009 PROVISIONS WHICH DON'T REFER TO

01:26 - 12.529 CONTRACT, NO NOT AT ALL YOUR

01:26 - 13.390 HONOR, YOUR HONOR.

01:26 - 15.149 WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THESE

01:26 - 16.809 ARE INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT.

01:26 - 19.199 THESE ARE TEASER. PORTIONS OF

01:26 - 21.279 THE OF THE POLICY THAT CAN BE

01:26 - 24.039 TO 2 DIFFERENT THE TERMINATIONS

01:26 - 25.889 2 DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDINGS THEY

01:26 - 27.689 LEAD TO AN AMBIGUITY IF WE LOOK

01:26 - 30.349 AT 5 DAY 5 ACES IS

01:26 - 32.299 PROPERTY DAMAGE. THEN WE GO TO

01:26 - 33.589 FIGHT THE IS PERSONAL

01:26 - 35.589 PROPERTIES, THEN WE GET A 5 PCN

01:26 - 38.359 5 E THEY PUTTING AFTERWARDS IF

01:26 - 39.479 WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED TO RUN

01:26 - 41.339 UP A PROPERTY LOSSES. WE HAD

01:26 - 42.829 THIS ADDITIONAL SECTION 5 IT

01:26 - 45.019 SAYS ONE BY THE WAY WE'RE GOING

01:26 - 47.250 TO DEDUCT OVERHEAD AND PROFIT.

01:26 - 49.459 WHAT'S IN IT AND THAT'S A

01:26 - 51.339 REAL COST THEY THEY THEY THEY

01:26 - 52.580 COULD JUST EASILY PUT IN THERE.

01:26 - 53.979 ONE BY THE WAY WE'RE NOT GOING

01:26 - 55.089 TO PLAY FOR WE'RE NOT GOING TO

01:26 - 56.580 PAY FOR PLUMBING EXPENSES.

01:26 - 57.629 WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR

01:26 - 59.089 ROOFING MATERIALS AND TO DO THE

01:26 - 59.920 REPAIRS.

01:27 - 01.700 WHERE'S THE INCONSISTENCY

01:27 - 04.330 THEY DEFINED ACTUAL CASH VALUE.

01:27 - 07.039 THE EARLY AND THEN IN 5 YEARS

01:27 - 08.399 AND THINK EVERYBODY SAYING TO

01:27 - 09.820 YOU. THEY SAY

01:27 - 11.469 THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT

01:27 - 12.929 DEFINITION NO WE'RE NOT GOING

01:27 - 14.389 TO PAY IT UNLESS YOU ACTUALLY

01:27 - 14.900 EXPENDED.

01:27 - 16.509 THAT'S FOR IT FOR

01:27 - 17.279 DEPRECIATION

01:27 - 19.069 YOUR HONOR BUT THEY DON'T THE

01:27 - 20.089 DEFINITION DOESN'T FIT THE

01:27 - 21.709 DEFINITION IS ACTUAL CASH VALUE

01:27 - 22.849 IS REPLACEMENT COST LESS

01:27 - 24.770 DEPRECIATION WHICH WE ACCEPT

01:27 - 26.730 THE DEFINITION DOESN'T SAY

01:27 - 27.999 ACTUAL CASH VALUE IS

01:27 - 29.809 REPLACEMENT COST. LESS

01:27 - 32.009 DEPRECIATION LESS OVERHEAD AND

01:27 - 32.580 PROFIT.

01:27 - 41.679 FARMERS APPROACH THEN WHY

01:27 - 42.969 WOULD YOUR CLIENT JUST BE FREE

01:27 - 43.840 TO TAKE A WALK

01:27 - 45.509 AND GO TO WHERE THEY UNDERWRITE

01:27 - 47.039 DIFFERENTLY AND BUY ONE OF

01:27 - 49.619 THOSE IT WHY ISN'T THIS

01:27 - 51.999 LANGUAGE PROVIDE IT 2 STEPS, A

01:27 - 54.019 RED FLAG. THE FOR THE FOR

01:27 - 54.910 YOUR RITUALS.

01:27 - 56.159 BECAUSE MY CLIENTS ARE

01:27 - 58.059 HOMEOWNERS, YOUR HONOR OR WHO

01:27 - 59.389 HOMEOWNERS WHO BUY HOMEOWNERS

01:27 - 01.759 POLICY AND DON'T DRILL DOWN TO

01:28 - 02.849 LOOK THROUGH THE DIFFERENCE

01:28 - 03.350 BETWEEN.

01:28 - 05.859 AND NOW IT'S NOT THEIR PROBLEM

01:28 - 07.569 YOUR HONOR THAT NOT NOT WHEN

01:28 - 08.920 THAT WHEN THE INSURANCE COMPANY

01:28 - 10.829 SURREPTITIOUSLY SNEAKS IN THE

01:28 - 12.460 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT DEDUCTION

01:28 - 15.369 THAT IS A REAL COST TO THEM AS

01:28 - 17.509 A CREATES A DISINCENTIVE TO

01:28 - 18.799 REPAIR BECAUSE YOU HAVE ENOUGH

01:28 - 20.309 MONEY TO REPAIR TO REPAIR

01:28 - 22.309 YOUR PROPERTY THAT CERTAINLY

01:28 - 23.469 COULD THEY GO SOMEPLACE ELSE.

01:28 - 25.879 YES. IF THEY WERE AWARE OF

01:28 - 26.380 THIS.

01:28 - 29.069 I WOULD STAY WOULD STATE THAT

01:28 - 30.449 VERY FEW PEOPLE WOULD BE AWARE

01:28 - 31.949 OF THIS IN READING THE POLICY

01:28 - 34.429 1, 2, 3, OR 4 TIMES. YOU JUST

01:28 - 35.070 WOULDN'T SEE IT.

01:28 - 36.269 WE ALSO WANT TO KEEP IN MIND.

01:28 - 37.549 IT'S NOT JUST INTERNAL

01:28 - 39.130 INCONSISTENCY THE POLICY,

01:28 - 41.160 ALTHOUGH IN THE CAIN CASE.

01:28 - 43.599 JUSTICE TODD THEN JUDGE TODD

01:28 - 46.369 DID SAY THAT SHE DID NOT ACCEPT

01:28 - 47.910 THE THE DEFINITION

01:28 - 50.169 OF ACTUAL CASH VALUE IN THE

01:28 - 52.659 OLDER MAN AND ME. BUT THOSE

01:28 - 54.410 CASES STAND FOR THE PROPOSITION

01:28 - 55.920 IF ONE ACCEPTS THAT

01:28 - 58.079 THAT ACTUAL CASH VALUE ALLOWS

01:28 - 59.689 ONLY FOR DEPRECIATE BELIEF OR

01:28 - 00.940 DEDUCTION OF DEPRECIATION.

01:29 - 02.629 AND THAT'S WHAT KILLED HIM AND

01:29 - 03.659 SAYS IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEAT

01:29 - 05.589 CASE AND JUDGE WHO DOC AND HE

01:29 - 07.289 SAID HERE ARE THE TAKE AWAY

01:29 - 08.829 FROM GOVERNMENT AND THE FIRST

01:29 - 10.779 ONE IS THAT ACTUAL CASH VALUE

01:29 - 12.520 ONLY ALLOWS THE DEDUCTION

01:29 - 14.859 OF DEPRECIATION THEY PUT A

01:29 - 16.649 FOOTNOTE IN SA'S IN I'M AWARE

01:29 - 18.250 OF THE RECENT DECISION IN CAIN

01:29 - 20.429 BY JUSTICE TIED. BUT THAT

01:29 - 21.740 DOESN'T AFFECT MY DECISION.

01:29 - 24.979 SO WE HAVE WE HAVE 2 BASES IF

01:29 - 26.260 WE ACCEPT THE FACT THAT.

01:29 - 27.999 UNDER THE LAW ACTUAL

01:29 - 30.039 CASH VALUE ALLOWS ONLY FOR

01:29 - 32.129 DEDUCTION OF DEPRECIATION WE

01:29 - 33.289 CAN SAY THAT THAT'S THE LAW IN

01:29 - 34.599 PENNSYLVANIA AND THIS IS

01:29 - 35.630 CONTRARY TO THE LAW.

01:29 - 37.179 AND HOW CAN WE SAY THAT SINCE

01:29 - 39.069 IN EITHER OF THOSE CASES PLACE

01:29 - 40.890 THEIR PROVISION LIKE 5 E.

01:29 - 43.319 NOW THERE WAS NO FIGHTING

01:29 - 44.550 BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TRY AND

01:29 - 45.480 WELL THAT.

01:29 - 47.309 BUT IF THERE WAS A PROVISION

01:29 - 49.159 LIKE 5 EVEN MAYBE THE OUTCOME

01:29 - 50.200 WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT.

01:29 - 51.529 I DON'T THINK SO YOUR HONOR

01:29 - 52.949 BECAUSE THEY STAY ACCEPTED THE

01:29 - 54.589 DEFINITION SAYING THESE

01:29 - 55.879 POLICIES AGREE TO PAY ACTUAL

01:29 - 56.600 CASH VALUE.

01:29 - 58.769 AN ACTUAL CASH VALUE INTO THE

01:29 - 00.709 STEW 2 STEP PROCESS WHICH MAKES

01:30 - 02.629 SENSE. IF I'M REPAIRING A 10

01:30 - 03.959 YEAR-OLD PROPERTY WITH NEW

01:30 - 05.900 MATERIAL. I GET TO THAT

01:30 - 06.819 AND I GET TO DEDUCT

01:30 - 08.499 DEPRECIATION UNTIL YOU DO THE

01:30 - 10.609 REPAIRS WHY SHOULD I GET TO THE

01:30 - 13.329 DOCKET A REAL COST WHY SHOULD I

01:30 - 14.769 GET TO DEDUCT ELECTRICAL

01:30 - 16.460 CONTRACTOR EXPENSES.

01:30 - 21.599 THE 2 OF YOU REDUCE AS YOU

01:30 - 23.809 GET TO DEDUCT, I'M JOKING IT'S

01:30 - 25.509 ABOUT SIR ISSUES AND ALL THE

01:30 - 27.039 USUAL STUFF YOU TALK ABOUT

01:30 - 28.849 EVERYTHING THAT ARE DIRECTED TO

01:30 - 29.849 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND

01:30 - 31.600 INSURANCE COMMISSION THAT WILL.

01:30 - 34.589 BUT WE

01:30 - 36.249 DO HAVE FIRST OF ALL WE HAVE

01:30 - 37.369 THE ESTABLISHED LAW FIRM

01:30 - 38.529 DISAPPEARED ACCORDING TO LEARN

01:30 - 39.989 GURSKI SAYING WHAT IS ACTUAL

01:30 - 42.160 CASH VALUE. WE ALSO HAVE THE

01:30 - 44.409 INSURANCE LITTLE 1921 WHICH IS

01:30 - 45.639 WHEN FIRE POLICIES WHEN

01:30 - 46.619 POLICIES REALLY WRITTEN AS

01:30 - 49.289 FIRE POLICIES. NOW ONE RACES TO

01:30 - 50.629 FIRE POLICY. IT'S A GENERAL

01:30 - 52.419 HOMEOWNER'S POLICY AND THAT

01:30 - 54.169 POLICY ESTABLISHES CERTAIN

01:30 - 55.909 BASIC REQUISITES THAT ARE

01:30 - 57.449 REQUIRED IN AND STILL THE LAW

01:30 - 58.679 IN PENNSYLVANIA AND THAT

01:30 - 00.329 REQUIRES PAYMENT OF ACTUAL CASH

01:31 - 02.279 VALUE. THEN THE ISSUE

01:31 - 04.059 THEN BECOMES WHAT IS ACTUAL

01:31 - 05.429 CASH VALUE IN THE GENERALLY

01:31 - 08.029 ACCEPTED PROPOSITION IN CASE

01:31 - 10.749 LAW AND IN THE DEFINITION OF

01:31 - 12.759 THIS POLICY THIS POLICY SAYS

01:31 - 15.149 ACTUAL CASH VALUE IS

01:31 - 16.479 REPLACEMENT COST LESS

01:31 - 18.519 DEPRECIATION AND THEY SAY WE

01:31 - 20.590 WILL PAY THAT AND THEN THEY GO

01:31 - 22.209 THEY GET IT AND THEN THEY TAKE

01:31 - 23.450 IT AWAY IN A LATER SECTION.

01:31 - 26.499 IT'S AMBIGUOUS HOWEVER IT STILL

01:31 - 27.690 COMES DOWN TO THAT

01:31 - 29.969 WE CAN SAY AS A MATTER OF LAW

01:31 - 31.469 IN PENNSYLVANIA, ACTUAL CASH

01:31 - 33.689 VALUE ALLOWS ONLY FOR DEDUCTION

01:31 - 35.629 OF DEPRECIATION IT DOES NOT

01:31 - 37.279 ALLOW FOR DEDUCTION OF GENERAL

01:31 - 38.659 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT WHICH IS A

01:31 - 39.359 REAL EXPENSE IN

01:31 - 40.000 THIS CASE.

01:31 - 41.519 AND THAT'S THE SUPERIOR COURT

01:31 - 42.879 CASE BUT THAT YOUR LIFE AS A

01:31 - 44.449 SUPERIOR COURT CASE LAW EXACTLY

01:31 - 45.579 RIGHT ABOUT THE INSURANCE

01:31 - 47.130 DEPARTMENTS, HOMEOWNERS.

01:31 - 50.139 HER TO THE HOMEOWNER'S

01:31 - 51.769 GUIDE DOES EXACTLY THE SAME

01:31 - 52.369 THING YOU'RE UNDER THE

01:31 - 53.140 HOMEOWNER'S GUIDE.

01:31 - 55.499 TALKS ABOUT IT'S A GUY PUT

01:31 - 56.719 OUT BY THE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT

01:31 - 57.220 TO TRY

01:31 - 00.079 AND TEACH HOMEOWNERS HOW THESE

01:32 - 01.060 POLICIES WORK

01:32 - 02.559 AND THE HOMEOWNER'S GUIDE WHICH

01:32 - 03.779 IS INCLUDED IN OUR IN OUR

01:32 - 05.649 BRIEF MATERIALS, SPECIFICALLY

01:32 - 07.129 STICKS ADOPTS THE SAME

01:32 - 08.959 DEFINITIONS EXPLAINS THIS

01:32 - 11.299 SITUATION. REPLACEMENT COST

01:32 - 13.370 ACTUAL CASH VALUE DEPRECIATION

01:32 - 15.859 AND THAT YOU GET PAID ACTUAL

01:32 - 17.989 CASH VALUE. SO YOU CAN DO THE

01:32 - 20.019 REPAIRS TO YOUR HOME. IF YOU DO

01:32 - 21.339 THE REPAIRS YOU THEN GET TO THE

01:32 - 23.649 APPRECIATION. IF YOU CHOOSE NOT

01:32 - 25.439 TO DO THE REPAIRS. YOU GET THE

01:32 - 27.019 ACTUAL CASH VALUE, A NEW WAY TO

01:32 - 28.989 DEPRECIATION THERE'S NO REASON

01:32 - 30.949 WHY SHE ALSO WAVES. OVERHEAD

01:32 - 32.509 AND PROFIT ANY MORE THAN YOU

01:32 - 34.089 SHOULD WAVE. ELECTRICAL

01:32 - 35.849 CONTRACTORS, WE'RE PUTTING

01:32 - 37.000 CONTRACTORS.

01:32 - 39.590 AND

01:32 - 40.700 2 CASES WHERE.

01:32 - 42.409 THE WAY SAY THERE'S NO REASON

01:32 - 43.449 WHY ASKED WOULD

01:32 - 45.809 DO Y THERE'S NO REASON WHY IT

01:32 - 48.079 WOULD BE THAT PEOPLE MAKE DEALS

01:32 - 50.559 ALL THE TIME CONTRACT. THE

01:32 - 53.329 RIGHTS OF WAY IT SEEMS TO ME

01:32 - 55.769 YOU'RE MORE THAN THE REST ON ON

01:32 - 58.379 ON SOME IN VOCATION OF SOME

01:32 - 59.899 SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY OF THIS

01:32 - 01.250 COURT TO INTERVENE.

01:33 - 05.729 AND SAY WHAT'S FAIR WHERE THAT

01:33 - 06.540 STOPS.

01:33 - 09.849 IF WE INTERVENE IN THIS

01:33 - 11.949 CONTRACT, SAFE. NO IT'S JUST

01:33 - 14.599 NOT FAIR IS THERE ANY CONTRACT

01:33 - 16.069 IN THIS COMMONWEALTH SAY FOR

01:33 - 16.979 MORE INTERVENTION AND

01:33 - 17.950 SUPERVISION.

01:33 - 19.269 IT'S CONTRARY

01:33 - 21.379 TO LAW. IT'S CONTRARY TO THE

01:33 - 23.919 INSURANCE LAW 1921. IT'S

01:33 - 26.389 CONTRARY TO THE THE DEFINITIONS

01:33 - 28.379 IN THE POLICY ITSELF. IT'S

01:33 - 30.670 CONTRARY TO GENERALLY ACCEPTED

01:33 - 32.659 PROPOSITIONS FROM THE SUPERIOR

01:33 - 34.099 COURT THIS COURT HAS NOT RULED

01:33 - 35.729 UPON THAT IN IN

01:33 - 37.449 IN ME, THIS IS DIRECTLY

01:33 - 38.749 CONTRARY TO THESE PRIOR

01:33 - 39.519 PRONOUNCEMENTS OF

01:33 - 41.739 THOSE COURTS. THOSE COURTS SAY

01:33 - 44.159 WHEN YOU PAY 8 PROPERTY LOSS

01:33 - 45.880 AND REPLACEMENT COST POLICY.

01:33 - 47.640 YOU MAY ONLY DEDUCT

01:33 - 50.099 APPRECIATION. SO IT'S NOT JUST

01:33 - 51.789 A MATTER OF CONTRACT. IT'S A

01:33 - 53.760 MATTER OF ESTABLISHED PRECEDENT

01:33 - 55.519 IN PENNSYLVANIA. THE

01:33 - 57.679 LEGISLATURE HAS SPOKEN IN THE

01:33 - 00.999 INSURANCE ACT TO 21. THE COURTS

01:34 - 01.170 HAVE

01:34 - 03.319 INTERPRETED THAT RECOGNIZING

01:34 - 04.549 THAT THINGS HAVE CHANGED AND IT

01:34 - 05.919 RECENTLY WHEN THESE POLICIES

01:34 - 07.880 WERE WRITTEN REPLACEMENT COSTS.

01:34 - 09.639 AN ACTUAL CASH VALUE WERE

01:34 - 11.889 CONSIDERED THE SAME. BACK IN

01:34 - 13.879 THE EARLY DAYS IN THE 20'S AND

01:34 - 16.000 30'S. IT WAS LATER CASES

01:34 - 18.469 AS NOTED THE FETUS CASE IN SOME

01:34 - 19.659 OTHER CASES SAID WELL WAIT

01:34 - 21.449 A MINUTE THEY THEN STARTED TO

01:34 - 23.109 TO WRITE REPLACEMENT COST

01:34 - 25.149 POLICIES AND REPLACEMENT COST

01:34 - 27.009 POLICIES WERE WRITTEN THEN THIS

01:34 - 29.010 2 STEP PROCESS KING INTO EFFECT

01:34 - 30.759 BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS IT

01:34 - 32.479 PROTECTS THE ENSURE IF THE

01:34 - 34.339 ENSURE ARE I'M SELLING YOUR

01:34 - 35.800 REPLACEMENT COST POLICY.

01:34 - 37.129 BUT I'M NOT I'M PAYING YOU

01:34 - 38.279 REPLACEMENT COST BUT YOU'RE NOT

01:34 - 40.529 REPLACING. SO I WILL PAY YOU

01:34 - 41.880 ACTUAL CASH VALUE,

01:34 - 44.399 LESS DEPRECIATION IF YOU DO THE

01:34 - 45.790 REPAIRS ARE MADE WHOLE.

01:34 - 48.269 THE IDEA IS THAT YOU YOUR TO BE

01:34 - 49.870 MADE WHOLE IN THE SITUATION.

01:34 - 51.999 EVEN IF SOMEONE CHOOSES NOT TO

01:34 - 53.719 DO THE REPAIRS. THEY STILL ARE

01:34 - 55.660 ENTITLED TO ACTUAL CASH VALUE.

01:34 - 57.499 THE ACTUAL CASH VALUE INCLUDES

01:34 - 59.230 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT. NOW.

01:34 - 01.179 POINT THAT THAT'S THE IDEA

01:35 - 02.669 AND I I SAW ON YOUR PREACHED TO

01:35 - 03.809 ARGUE THERE'S A HIGHER PREMIUM

01:35 - 05.200 ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

01:35 - 06.939 THE PROBLEM IS FOR YOUR

01:35 - 08.479 CLIENTS, IT SEEMS TO ME THE

01:35 - 11.279 CARRIER DID SEE THIS. AND YOUR

01:35 - 13.290 CLIENTS THEY DID SNEAK IT IN

01:35 - 14.480 AND YOUR CLIENTS I GET

01:35 - 15.419 AND IT SEEMS TO ME YOU'RE

01:35 - 17.269 COMING TO US AND SAY DO THAT

01:35 - 19.549 BEFORE US IN GIVE US THE

01:35 - 21.390 BENEFIT OF WHAT WE USED TO HAVE

01:35 - 23.870 UNDER THE MOST.

01:35 - 26.419 WHAT I'M SAYING IS

01:35 - 28.669 IS THAT I'M ASKING THIS COURT

01:35 - 30.309 TO APPLY THE RULES OF

01:35 - 33.159 INTERPRETATION AS JUSTICE TIED

01:35 - 34.989 IT IN THE CAIN CASE AND WHEN

01:35 - 36.539 SHE LOOKED AT THE ERIE POLICY

01:35 - 38.149 AND SAID THE ERIE POLICY

01:35 - 40.679 HAS TO DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT

01:35 - 43.109 INTERPRETATIONS AND THEREFORE

01:35 - 44.580 SINCE THIS CAN BE INTERPRETED

01:35 - 47.800 SEPARATELY BY REASONABLE MINDS

01:35 - 49.159 WHERE THIS PART OF THE POLICY

01:35 - 51.079 SAYS WE'RE ONLY GOING TO DEDUCT

01:35 - 52.849 DEPRECIATION AND THIS PART OF

01:35 - 54.359 THE POLICY SAYS OH BY THE WAY

01:35 - 55.619 WE'RE ALSO GOING TO TALK THE

01:35 - 56.259 DUCK OVERHEAD

01:35 - 58.199 AND PROFIT. IT'S SUBJECT TO 2

01:35 - 59.419 INTERPRETATIONS AND ITS

01:35 - 01.330 AMBIGUOUS AND A MASSIVE COURT

01:36 - 02.830 NOT TO DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT

01:36 - 04.459 NOT TO DO ANYTHING THAT HASN'T

01:36 - 06.779 DONE IN HUNDREDS OF CASES WHERE

01:36 - 08.889 YOU HAVE A CONTRACT AND IS IT

01:36 - 11.119 IT IT CAN BE IT IS AMBIGUOUS

01:36 - 12.710 AND HAS INCONSISTENT TERMS.

01:36 - 14.609 IT MUST BE CONSTRUED AGAINST

01:36 - 16.179 THE DRAFT OR AND THE DRIFTERS

01:36 - 17.210 THE INSURANCE COMPANY.

01:36 - 18.959 FOR THAT REASON WE ARE

01:36 - 22.070 REQUESTING THAT THE A REVIEW.

01:36 - 24.369 THE THE DECISION

01:36 - 27.619 REVIEW THE INDECISION REVIEW

01:36 - 29.289 THE CANE DECISION OF OF

01:36 - 31.429 JUSTICE TODD AND THE INSURANCE

01:36 - 34.279 LOAD 1921 AND REVERSE THE

01:36 - 35.569 DECISION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

01:36 - 36.399 REMANDED FOR FURTHER

01:36 - 38.550 PROCEEDINGS. THANK YOU UH YEAH.

01:36 - 51.889 GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR

01:36 - 53.259 ROBERT L TUNE FOR TRUCK

01:36 - 54.959 INSURANCE EXCHANGE, MY FIRST

01:36 - 56.399 OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR BE SURE

01:36 - 57.519 BEFORE THIS COURT AND I'M

01:36 - 59.399 HONORED TO BE HERE TODAY, I'D

01:36 - 00.710 LIKE TO START WITH

01:37 - 02.799 THE ONE AND ONLY QUESTION WHICH

01:37 - 05.009 WAS FRAMED IN THE REQUEST

01:37 - 07.129 FOR APPEAL AND WHICH THIS COURT

01:37 - 09.449 ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALTERATION I

01:37 - 10.649 THINK IS IMPORTANT AND IT'S

01:37 - 12.549 BEEN MISTER THE ARGUMENTS SO

01:37 - 14.499 FAR. AND THE ONE AND ONLY

01:37 - 15.769 QUESTION IS COURT AGREED TO

01:37 - 17.489 TAKE WAS WHETHER OR NOT

01:37 - 18.779 SUPERIOR COURT SHOULD HAVE

01:37 - 19.979 DECLARED SECTION

01:37 - 22.929 5 B AN ENFORCEABLE ON THE BASIS

01:37 - 24.550 OF THE BINDING PRECEDENT OF THE

01:37 - 25.670 IN CASE

01:37 - 27.829 THAT'S THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT

01:37 - 29.409 THAT THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT'S

01:37 - 29.840 BEFORE THE

01:37 - 32.099 COURT TODAY SUPERIOR COURT SAID

01:37 - 33.809 NO IN SUPERIOR COURT DID NOT

01:37 - 34.310 ERR.

01:37 - 37.619 IT'S VERY CLEAR IN THE IN CASE

01:37 - 38.929 THAT THE CASE HAS BEEN POINTED

01:37 - 41.139 OUT TODAY DEALT WITH THE POLICY

01:37 - 43.020 THAT DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT

01:37 - 44.739 GENERAL CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD AND

01:37 - 47.129 PROFIT. SO THE JOB OF SUPERIOR

01:37 - 47.820 COURT IN THE

01:37 - 50.909 IN CASE WAS TO CONSTRUE THE

01:37 - 52.520 INTENT OF THE PARTIES

01:37 - 54.399 IN A POLICY THAT SIMPLY WAS

01:37 - 57.159 SILENT ON THAT ISSUE SHIP IN

01:37 - 58.039 SUPERIOR COURT

01:37 - 00.249 SAID THAT IN FACT SUPERIOR

01:38 - 01.799 COURT WENT OUT OF ITS WAY TO

01:38 - 03.640 CRITICIZE ONE OF THE PARTIES

01:38 - 05.599 FOR WASTING A LOT OF TIME TO TO

01:38 - 06.209 RAISE PUBLIC

01:38 - 08.429 POLICY ISSUES IN SUPERIOR COURT

01:38 - 09.859 SAID THAT'S NOT IN FRONT OF US

01:38 - 11.399 WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US IS WHAT'S

01:38 - 12.870 THE INTENTION OF THE PARTIES

01:38 - 14.669 AND A POLICY THAT SILENT ON

01:38 - 16.509 THIS ISSUE SUPERIOR COURT

01:38 - 18.369 CONSTRUE THE INTENSE STATE

01:38 - 20.019 FORMS INTENT AND THEN THEY

01:38 - 21.030 ENDED THE DECISION.

01:38 - 24.559 THERE IS NO OVERARCHING RULE OF

01:38 - 27.639 THE IN CASE THAT APPLIES IN

01:38 - 30.389 ANOTHER CASE THAT IN EXPRESSLY

01:38 - 31.780 ADDRESSES THE ISSUE.

01:38 - 34.420 IN THIS CASE.

01:38 - 36.559 YOUR CLIENT OR AFTER THE

01:38 - 37.959 POLICIES TO BE CONSTRUED

01:38 - 40.009 AGAINST YOU AND I WANT TO KNOW

01:38 - 41.829 WHAT YOU MEANT BY UNLESS THE

01:38 - 43.809 LAW OF YOUR STATE REQUIRES WAS

01:38 - 46.069 MR. ABBOTT'S CLIENT EXPECTED

01:38 - 48.149 TO RESEARCH CASE LAW OF

01:38 - 50.339 PENNSYLVANIA TO FIGURE OUT WHAT

01:38 - 51.710 PENNSYLVANIA LAW REQUIRES

01:38 - 53.229 WHY DID YOU SUBMIT THAT

01:38 - 54.610 LANGUAGE TO THE COMMISSION.

01:38 - 57.399 THAT LANGUAGE YOUR HONOR I

01:38 - 58.359 BELIEVE THERE'S FIRST OF ALL

01:38 - 58.909 THERE'S NOTHING IN

01:38 - 00.709 THE RECORD ON FACTORS THAT

01:39 - 02.119 DISCOVERY TAKING US TO THE

01:39 - 04.249 REASON FOR IT SO I CAN SPEAK

01:39 - 05.450 ANYTHING THAT'S IN THE RECORD.

01:39 - 07.629 BUT THE GUILD

01:39 - 09.619 IRVING CASE BY THE TIME THIS

01:39 - 10.499 POLICY CAME

01:39 - 12.559 INTO EFFECT THE GOLDMAN CASE

01:39 - 14.699 HAS BEEN MISCONSTRUED BY COURT

01:39 - 16.210 AFTER COURT AFTER COURT.

01:39 - 17.859 THEY PUT A LONG FOOTNOTE IN

01:39 - 19.419 THEIR BRIEF IN WHICH THEY CITE

01:39 - 21.000 GILDER MEN ALL OVER THE COUNTRY

01:39 - 22.729 AND WE HAVE A LONG FOOTNOTE IN

01:39 - 24.569 OUR BRIEF IN WHICH WE SAY YOU

01:39 - 25.979 HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SITUATION

01:39 - 28.329 AND ALL THESE OTHER CASES ALL

01:39 - 29.209 THE COURTS IN THE

01:39 - 31.709 OTHER CASES, WE'RE DEALING WITH

01:39 - 33.719 POLICIES THAT AGAIN YOU KNOW

01:39 - 35.189 WE'RE WE'RE SILENT ON

01:39 - 37.769 THE LANGUAGE AND SO READING AND

01:39 - 39.970 A STATE AN OVERARCHING RULE,

01:39 - 41.449 THERE'S A LOT OF AUTHORITY THAT

01:39 - 43.299 DOES THAT AND THE AND TO AVOID

01:39 - 44.730 THAT WE PUT THE LANGUAGE AND.

01:39 - 56.489 BY PUTTING THAT CLAUSES

01:39 - 58.289 POLICY AND YOUR CLIENT NOT PUT

01:39 - 00.209 THAT CLAUSE OF THE POLICY AND

01:40 - 01.349 THE COMMISSIONER HAS APPROVED

01:40 - 01.950 IT.

01:40 - 04.189 THEN THEY WOULD HAVE THE

01:40 - 04.780 BURDEN.

01:40 - 06.709 PRESUMABLY OF SHOWING STATE

01:40 - 09.659 LAW THIS VIOLENT THAT YOU PUT

01:40 - 11.659 THIS LANGUAGE IT THEIR BUS

01:40 - 14.039 RESTING UPON BE INSURED THE

01:40 - 14.949 OBLIGATION TO

01:40 - 17.029 FIGURE OUT WHAT A LOT OF COURSE

01:40 - 18.519 THIS ISN'T THAT RIGHT. THERE IS

01:40 - 19.749 CERTAINLY A BIG UNITY IN THIS

01:40 - 20.570 CONTRACT.

01:40 - 26.189 IT IS NOT A CERTAIN AMBIGUITY

01:40 - 28.049 IN THE CONTRACT BECAUSE THAT

01:40 - 29.429 WELL THAT THERE THERE IS NO

01:40 - 31.719 LAW. I MEAN IT IN THERE THERE

01:40 - 33.009 THERE THERE'S NO LAW THAT CUT

01:40 - 34.989 THAT REQUIRES OTHERWISE BUT

01:40 - 36.669 THERE COULD BE THIS COURT COULD

01:40 - 37.730 SAY IT TODAY.

01:40 - 39.340 WELL JURORS IN THE STATE.

01:40 - 43.110 IN THIS AREA OF LAW

01:40 - 45.469 THIS AGREE OBVIOUSLY OR DON'T

01:40 - 45.830 KNOW

01:40 - 47.999 IT'S A WHAT A LOT OF THE STATE

01:40 - 49.159 THE CHOIRS AT LEAST UP UNTIL

01:40 - 49.840 THIS POINT.

01:40 - 53.339 THESE CLIENTS KNOW THAT

01:40 - 55.409 I'M CONTRACTING WHAT THAT THE

01:40 - 58.219 LAW PENNSYLVANIA REQUIRES WHY

01:40 - 59.589 ISN'T IT. THE CASE THAT YOUR

01:40 - 02.590 CLIENT FILED ITS OWN MILK HERE,

01:41 - 05.689 OR WHATEVER THE METAPHORS SO

01:41 - 07.899 ITS OWN PROBLEM INTO THE SOIL

01:41 - 08.830 OF THIS CASE.

01:41 - 11.799 IT S IT YOUR HONOR I DON'T

01:41 - 13.209 REALLY THINK THAT LANGUAGE IF

01:41 - 14.419 YOU TOOK THE LANGUAGE AND TOOK

01:41 - 15.759 THE LANGUAGE OUT IT'S STILL

01:41 - 17.239 SUBJECT TO WHAT THE LAW THE

01:41 - 18.390 STATE REQUIRES.

01:41 - 22.019 WHICH DOESN'T THAT

01:41 - 24.349 CREATE DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY IN

01:41 - 27.089 HIS CLIENT'S MIND. THAT SOWS

01:41 - 28.540 AND EVEN INTO THE CASE.

01:41 - 31.179 I ACTUALLY IT DOESN'T BECAUSE

01:41 - 32.139 YOU DIDN'T EVEN HEAR MISTER

01:41 - 33.659 HAGGERTY POINT TO THAT AND SAY

01:41 - 34.390 THAT IT DID.

01:41 - 38.409 OK BUT IT IT IT DOESN'T BECAUSE

01:41 - 39.539 IT'S REALLY MEANINGLESS.

01:41 - 40.759 IT'S A FAITH THAT IF A COURT

01:41 - 42.409 HAS SPOKEN AND SAID WE HAVE TO

01:41 - 43.589 DO THIS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT

01:41 - 44.670 YOUR POLICY SAID.

01:41 - 47.079 WELL WE'LL WILL FOLLOW THE

01:41 - 47.690 LAW.

01:41 - 48.859 AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER

01:41 - 50.209 WE HAD THAT LANGUAGE ENTER WE

01:41 - 51.490 ENTER OR WE DIDN'T

01:41 - 53.059 AND SO YOU KNOW SOMEBODY

01:41 - 55.030 READING ANY OF THESE PROVISIONS

01:41 - 56.719 NEVER KNOWS WHETHER IT'S

01:41 - 58.120 ENFORCEABLE OR IT ISN'T.

01:41 - 00.589 SO IF YOU TOOK THAT LANGUAGE

01:42 - 02.339 OUT AND WE HAD THAT PROVISION

01:42 - 04.179 IN WHEN THE HOMEOWNER BE IN THE

01:42 - 05.569 SAME POSITION THEY'RE GOING TO

01:42 - 06.979 BUY A POLICY AND IT'S GOING TO

01:42 - 10.029 SAY WELL I DON'T GET GOP UNLESS

01:42 - 10.690 I ENCOURAGED,

01:42 - 12.299 BUT IF THERE ARE SOME CASE LAW

01:42 - 13.309 OUT THERE THAT SAYS TO THE

01:42 - 15.459 CONTRARY WHEN THE ISSUE PULSE

01:42 - 16.829 UP GUESS WHAT THEY'RE NOT GOING

01:42 - 18.150 TO BE STUCK WITH THAT LANGUAGE.

01:42 - 19.909 SO WHAT DOES THAT PROVISION

01:42 - 21.750 ACTUALLY TELL A HOMEOWNER.

01:42 - 24.619 RESPECT CHARTER DOESN'T TELL

01:42 - 25.999 THEM ANYTHING BECAUSE INTEL

01:42 - 27.419 THERE'S INTEL THERE'S AN ISSUE

01:42 - 29.049 WHEN IT BUBBLES UP AND SOMEBODY

01:42 - 30.880 WITH SOUTH SOME CASE SOMEWHERE.

01:42 - 32.359 THEY PRESUMABLY THINK IT'S

01:42 - 34.589 ENFORCEABLE SO DOES THAT TELL

01:42 - 35.669 THEM THIS AND FORCIBLE

01:42 - 36.650 UNENFORCEABLE

01:42 - 38.329 REALLY DOESN'T IF THAT IF THAT

01:42 - 39.569 DOESN'T DO YOU KNOW IS ONE OF

01:42 - 40.479 MY PARTNERS WOULD SAY IT

01:42 - 42.239 DOESN'T DO THE END IT HAS NO

01:42 - 44.479 EFFECT REALLY DOES THAT MISTER

01:42 - 45.320 FELTON EVEN.

01:42 - 47.929 THAT APPOINT A NEW IT IS 11

01:42 - 48.840 TO GRAB IT.

01:42 - 50.949 EVEN IF YOU TOOK THE TIME WHICH

01:42 - 52.399 MOST PEOPLE THE MYSELF

01:42 - 54.759 INCLUDED 2 READ THE POLICY

01:42 - 56.380 DOESN'T TRY TO UNDERSTAND THEM.

01:42 - 58.530 A FEW DEGREES.

01:43 - 01.839 YOU COME FIRST TO THE TO THE

01:43 - 02.790 DEFAMATION.

01:43 - 06.549 ABC IS REASON REPLACEMENT COST

01:43 - 07.590 LESS DEPRECIATION

01:43 - 10.459 RIGHT YEAH, I MIGHT SAY TO

01:43 - 13.229 DEATH NOT LIKE TO HAVE. IF IF I

01:43 - 14.030 HAVE A LOSS.

01:43 - 16.919 GRANTED IF YOU GO FURTHER

01:43 - 18.619 THROUGH THE POSSE. THERE'S

01:43 - 20.219 ANOTHER DEPOSITION THAT TALKS

01:43 - 22.510 ABOUT THIS OTHER STEP THAT THE

01:43 - 24.509 THEY SURELY THESE 2 PROVISIONS

01:43 - 25.550 ARE INCONSISTENT.

01:43 - 27.019 WELL THEY'RE NOT YOUR HONOR

01:43 - 27.590 BECAUSE

01:43 - 29.799 QUESTION THE COURT IN THIS

01:43 - 31.709 ISSUE THIS CASE IS ABOUT WHAT

01:43 - 32.429 IS A HOMEOWNER

01:43 - 33.470 GET PAID.

01:43 - 35.169 WHY I DIDN'T LOOK AT THE

01:43 - 36.699 CASES LIKE JUST WORKS AND

01:43 - 38.259 PROVIDE HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE

01:43 - 40.789 POLICY. I'M MIKE. LOOK AT

01:43 - 41.530 THE POLICY.

01:43 - 43.639 WHILE YOU WOULD THINK BUT IT

01:43 - 45.319 BUT IF YOU LOOKED AT IT AND YOU

01:43 - 46.619 AND THE QUESTION THAT YOU HAD

01:43 - 48.019 IN YOUR MIND WHEN YOU LOOKED AT

01:43 - 50.099 IT IS WHAT A WHITE GET PAID

01:43 - 52.099 AND WHEN WHEN YOU READ THE

01:43 - 53.599 DEFINITION SECTION YOU WOULD

01:43 - 54.989 SAY TO YOURSELF THIS WAS

01:43 - 56.599 SAID BEFORE. WELL I READ IT

01:43 - 57.669 IT'S A DEFINITION, BUT IT

01:43 - 59.390 DOESN'T TELL ME HOW I GET PAID

01:43 - 01.419 AND MY MIND IS HOW DO I GET

01:44 - 02.949 PAID. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT

01:44 - 05.409 SECTION 5 THAT HEADED THIS IS

01:44 - 06.199 HOW WE SETTLE

01:44 - 09.009 COVERED CLAIMS. WELL OKAY

01:44 - 10.769 THAT'S THE ISSUE HOW DO I GET

01:44 - 12.809 PAID. AND WHEN YOU READ SECTION

01:44 - 15.789 5. IT IS AS CLEAR AS IT WAS TO

01:44 - 17.070 SUPERIOR COURT.

01:44 - 19.099 IF THE ISSUE IS WHEN DO I GET

01:44 - 21.379 GENERAL CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD AND

01:44 - 23.029 PROFIT. WE HAVE A SPECIFIC

01:44 - 24.689 PROVISION IN THERE THAT SAYS IT

01:44 - 26.269 BLACK AND WHITE YOU KNOW THIS

01:44 - 27.570 COURT HAS UPHELD

01:44 - 30.499 POLICIES WHERE A PROVISION LIKE

01:44 - 30.650 WE'RE

01:44 - 33.329 TALKING ABOUT IT'S VERY VERY

01:44 - 35.289 IT'S NOT IN THE POLICY IS IN

01:44 - 36.809 THIS ENDORSEMENT WHERE YOU HAVE

01:44 - 38.999 A POLICY AND YOU GET 800 PAGES

01:44 - 40.550 OF PAGE A

01:44 - 42.869 903 THAT'S WHERE IT APPEARS AND

01:44 - 44.889 THATS OK WE HAVE A GREAT ON THE

01:44 - 47.499 SAME PAGE. IT'S NOT VERY

01:44 - 49.229 THIS IS YOU KNOW I FIND

01:44 - 51.249 INSULTING THIS THIS NEFARIOUS

01:44 - 53.119 ALLEGATION OF US TRYING TO PLAY

01:44 - 53.770 GAMES AND

01:44 - 55.799 HYDE LANGUAGE, IT'S NOT IN AN

01:44 - 57.269 ENDORSEMENT IT'S RIGHT IN THE

01:44 - 58.960 POLICY, IT'S CRYSTAL CLEAR.

01:44 - 00.899 WELL AS YOU HAVE TO DO IS READ

01:45 - 01.400 IT.

01:45 - 12.960 THAT'S

01:45 - 14.729 ANOTHER FACT IT'S BEEN ALLEGED

01:45 - 15.929 BY THE PLAINTIFFS. THERE'S NO

01:45 - 17.049 NO YOUR HONOR THIS IS THE

01:45 - 19.259 POLICY WE OFFER SO THE NOTION

01:45 - 20.150 THAT WE OFFER

01:45 - 22.979 ADDITIONAL THE IMPLIED IN YOUR

01:45 - 24.599 QUESTION THAT THERE'S A LESSER

01:45 - 26.419 COVERAGE THAT WE WOULD HAVE

01:45 - 27.379 WITHOUT IT. THIS IS THE

01:45 - 28.540 COVERAGE WE OFFER

01:45 - 30.429 WE DON'T HAVE A LESSER POLICY

01:45 - 31.720 AND THEN WE CHARGE MORE MONEY.

01:45 - 44.350 WHEN YOU

01:45 - 45.599 SAY THE STANDARD THAT'S WHAT

01:45 - 46.919 MANY OTHER INSURANCE

01:45 - 49.049 COMPANIES OFFER THAT'S NOT THE

01:45 - 51.219 POLICY THAT WE CHOOSE TO OFFER

01:45 - 52.579 THAT'S NOT THE POLICY THAT THEY

01:45 - 53.690 ELECTED TO BUY.

01:45 - 55.220 WHAT

01:45 - 57.539 ABOUT THIS THE PRESIDENT YOU

01:45 - 58.779 ARE TRYING TO REDUCE POLICY YOU

01:45 - 00.179 SHOULD SET OVER FOR COVERED

01:46 - 02.450 LOSSES, EQUAL TO REPLACE A COST

01:46 - 03.599 WITHOUT THE DEDUCTION

01:46 - 05.669 FOR DEPRECIATION BUT NO MORE

01:46 - 07.069 THAN THE ACTUAL CASH VALUE THE

01:46 - 08.679 LAST UNTIL ACTUALLY REPAIRED OR

01:46 - 10.220 REPLACED IN IS ACCOMPLISHED

01:46 - 11.540 THAT'S THE THAT'S WHAT I WANT

01:46 - 14.079 SOME OF THAT CHECK. WHY WOULD

01:46 - 15.399 YOU TAKE OUT THE CONTRACTORS

01:46 - 16.420 EVER HAD UNDER THAT

01:46 - 17.150 THE LANGUAGE.

01:46 - 18.979 WELL FIRST OF ALL YOU YOU

01:46 - 20.709 READ OVER 3 WORDS WHICH MY

01:46 - 22.409 ADVERSARY IGNORES ARE HONORING

01:46 - 23.899 THOSE 3 WORDS WERE NO MORE

01:46 - 24.400 THAT.

01:46 - 27.109 OKAY SO WE WE WILL PAY NO MORE

01:46 - 29.189 THAN ACTUAL CASH VALUE. WELL,

01:46 - 30.299 WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU WHAT

01:46 - 31.889 THAT TELLS YOU IS YOU BETTER

01:46 - 33.040 READ THE WHOLE PROVISION

01:46 - 35.079 BECAUSE IT SAYS WE WILL PAY NO

01:46 - 36.849 MORE THAN AND SO WE SAY WE PAY

01:46 - 37.060 NO

01:46 - 39.149 MORE THAN WE GO AND WE SAY THEY

01:46 - 40.459 ARE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR

01:46 - 41.529 OVERHEAD PRIVATE RIGHT ON THE

01:46 - 43.409 NEXT AGE IS GOING TO BE WHEN

01:46 - 44.740 IT'S INCURRED IN PAY.

01:46 - 47.099 THEY ANSWER JUSTICE WEX COMMENT

01:46 - 48.799 EARLY AS ARE SOME REASON WHY WE

01:46 - 50.209 CAN'T DO THIS. THE

01:46 - 52.459 ANSWER'S NO THE FARBER CASE

01:46 - 53.959 SAID THAT IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE

01:46 - 56.079 DEFAULT RULES THAT THIS COURT

01:46 - 58.069 HAS STATED IF YOU DON'T LIKE TO

01:46 - 59.719 DEFAULT RULES AND A DEFAULT

01:46 - 01.939 RULE IN PENNSYLVANIA HAS NEVER

01:47 - 03.979 BEEN CHANGED THE DEFAULT RULE

01:47 - 06.229 IN PENNSYLVANIA IS THAT ACTUAL

01:47 - 07.929 CASH VALUE IS THE SAME AS

01:47 - 10.279 REPLACEMENT COST. THIS COURT

01:47 - 11.739 HAS NEVER SAID THAT THAT THAT

01:47 - 13.020 THE RULE IS ANY DIFFERENT

01:47 - 14.539 AND SO THIS NOTION THAT THERE'S

01:47 - 16.129 ALL THIS LAW OUT THERE THAT

01:47 - 17.419 SAYS OH THERE'S THIS

01:47 - 19.279 FUNDAMENTAL UNDERSTANDING AS TO

01:47 - 21.240 WHAT ACTUAL CASH VALUE SAID.

01:47 - 23.889 JUDGE JUSTICE OR THE JUDGE TODD

01:47 - 25.419 SAID IN THE KING CASE, NO THERE

01:47 - 27.489 ISN'T THAT LANGUAGE IN AND HIS

01:47 - 27.920 PURE

01:47 - 29.879 DECK TO AND SO IF YOU DON'T

01:47 - 31.659 LIKE THE DEFAULT RULES AND FAR

01:47 - 33.109 WORSE THAN FOLLOW WHAT THE 4

01:47 - 34.929 BRIC A SAYS IN CHANGE THE

01:47 - 36.829 LANGUAGE OR YOUR POLICY THAT'S

01:47 - 38.390 WHAT WE DID AND IT'S CLEAR.

01:47 - 41.419 BUT I SUGGEST THAT WITH RESPECT

01:47 - 42.909 TO THE QUESTION THAT IS BEFORE

01:47 - 44.889 THE COURT THERE'S A CONFUSION

01:47 - 46.229 HERE WHICH I HOPE THE COURT

01:47 - 48.219 ADDRESSES AS TO THE QUESTION

01:47 - 49.820 THAT THE COURT AGREED TO TAKE

01:47 - 51.279 AND WHAT WE HEARD ALL ABOUT

01:47 - 52.639 TODAY IS CONTRACTUALLY

01:47 - 54.209 AMBIGUITY THAT THAT'S A FACT

01:47 - 54.580 THAT'S A

01:47 - 56.769 FAIR POINT THEY YOU KNOW CAN

01:47 - 58.599 CONTRACTUAL AMBIGUITY IS NOT

01:47 - 00.479 BEFORE THIS COURT AND I SUGGEST

01:48 - 02.069 ON THAT YOUR HONOR AND YOU JUST

01:48 - 03.409 WROTE THE DECISION YOUR HONOR

01:48 - 03.610 IN THE

01:48 - 06.289 BRAKES CASE. AMBIGUITY IS A

01:48 - 08.159 SEPARATE DEFENSE IF WE HAVE AN

01:48 - 10.139 UNENFORCEABLE PROVISION THEY

01:48 - 12.249 WIN BUT SEPARATELY FROM THAT IF

01:48 - 14.429 IT'S AMBIGUOUS THEY WIN THAT IS

01:48 - 15.949 A SEPARATE ISSUE AND IN THE

01:48 - 17.669 BRAKES CASE IT WAS EXACTLY THE

01:48 - 18.430 SAME SAYING

01:48 - 20.919 SOUTHWESTERN RAISED A SEPARATE

01:48 - 21.559 DEFENSE

01:48 - 22.959 AND SAID WELL IF YOU DON'T LIKE

01:48 - 24.659 OUR RULE OF CAPTURE OR HUMAN

01:48 - 25.169 THEY WERE HERE

01:48 - 26.959 ARGUING ABOUT CAN YOU PLEASE

01:48 - 29.040 ADDRESS OUR TRESPASS DEFENSE

01:48 - 30.709 WHERE THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS

01:48 - 32.479 UNDERGROUND TRESPASS IN THE

01:48 - 34.039 COURT SAID THAT'S A REALLY

01:48 - 35.459 INTERESTING DEFENSE EXCEPT

01:48 - 36.829 GUESS WHAT THAT'S NOT THE

01:48 - 38.320 QUESTION THAT YOU FRAME.

01:48 - 44.309 THAT WE'RE NOT

01:48 - 45.879 DOING CONTRACT INTERPRETATION

01:48 - 47.009 THAT'S WHAT THIS CASE IS SO

01:48 - 48.339 THAT'S CORRECT EXCEPT THE

01:48 - 49.759 QUESTION IS WHETHER IT'S IN THE

01:48 - 51.779 LEGAL PROVISION UNDER THE

01:48 - 53.849 BINDING PRECEDENT OF AND YOU

01:48 - 55.459 CAN TURN GUILD REMAIN INSIDE

01:48 - 56.639 OUT THERE'S NO ISSUE IN

01:48 - 58.240 GUILDERLAND OF AMBIGUITY

01:48 - 00.339 UNTURNED ON A COMPLETELY

01:49 - 01.589 DIFFERENT QUESTION AND WHEN

01:49 - 03.589 PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD DOESN'T

01:49 - 05.469 CONTROL AND SO THEN ON THE

01:49 - 06.799 QUESTION THE COURT AGREED TO

01:49 - 08.590 TAKE THIS APPEALS OVER

01:49 - 10.519 BECAUSE THERE IS NO PLACE UNDER

01:49 - 11.719 GUILD ARE MEANT TO DO AN

01:49 - 14.659 AMBIGUITY ANALYSIS. ALL THAT HE

01:49 - 15.679 IS CAUGHT TRACK AND

01:49 - 16.400 WE DECIDE.

01:49 - 17.690 THAT IT'S IN BIG

01:49 - 20.799 THE STRATEGY WHEN YOU DON'T YOU

01:49 - 22.870 DON'T DENY THAT IS NOT A LOT.

01:49 - 25.679 IF YOU ARE READING AND YOU

01:49 - 26.889 WERE TO DECIDE THAT IT'S

01:49 - 28.410 COVERED BY THE APPEAL.

01:49 - 30.239 BUT I WOULD SAY THAT FOR YOU TO

01:49 - 32.269 ADDRESS AN ISSUE OF AMBIGUITY

01:49 - 34.309 YOUR YOUR ADDRESSING AN ISSUE

01:49 - 35.390 ON THIS APPEAL THAT

01:49 - 37.609 WAS IN IT'S NOT THE BASIS OF

01:49 - 39.179 THE PETITION. THAT'S NOT THE

01:49 - 40.609 BASIS OF THE QUESTION THAT WAS

01:49 - 41.929 FRAMED YOU CAN'T READ AN

01:49 - 43.799 AMBIGUITY QUESTION INTO THE

01:49 - 45.239 QUESTION THEY RODE IN YOU

01:49 - 47.169 AGREED TO ACCEPT I AGREE IT'S

01:49 - 48.450 AN INTERESTING QUESTION.

01:49 - 50.759 WE LITIGATED IN THE SUPERIOR

01:49 - 52.000 COURT AND I WON,

01:49 - 53.729 AND I WONDERED WHY THEY CHOSE

01:49 - 55.359 TO BRIEF THE QUESTION THEY DID

01:49 - 56.999 BUT I ONLY REPRESENT ONE SIDE

01:49 - 57.770 IN THE CASE.

01:49 - 59.709 SO THEY THEY THEY YOU KNOW THEY

01:49 - 02.089 SNUCK THAT ONE IN LIKE FRANKLY

01:50 - 03.099 THEY SNUCK A NUMBER OF

01:50 - 04.639 QUESTIONS IT HERE THIS

01:50 - 06.629 ISSUE OF WELL THEY

01:50 - 07.609 SHOULD WIN BIG THIS

01:50 - 09.299 DISINCENTIVE YOU HEARD THAT MY

01:50 - 10.959 ADVERSARY A WE CREATED THIS

01:50 - 12.939 DISINCENTIVE. WELL I CALL THAT

01:50 - 14.199 A BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD

01:50 - 16.089 PLACE ARGUMENT AS I POINT OUT

01:50 - 18.619 IN MY BRIEF. IT'S NEVER IT

01:50 - 20.279 WAS NOT IN THE TRIAL COURT

01:50 - 22.319 AT ALL THERE'S NOT A SINGLE

01:50 - 23.609 PLACE WHERE THEY WHERE THERE'S

01:50 - 25.029 ANY EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD

01:50 - 25.819 IDENTIFIED TO

01:50 - 27.769 SUPPORT IT. THESE COURTS RULES

01:50 - 28.979 ARE VERY CLEAR THAT WHEN YOU

01:50 - 30.319 WANT TO RAISE AN ISSUE YOU HAVE

01:50 - 32.049 TO IDENTIFY WHERE YOU PRESERVE

01:50 - 33.529 THAT. MISTER HAGGARD HAS BEEN

01:50 - 35.449 HERE 35 TIMES HE KNOWS THE

01:50 - 37.279 RULES. BUT THE BRIEF HE FILED

01:50 - 39.050 DOESN'T HAVE A SINGLE CITATION

01:50 - 41.209 TO WEAR THAT DISINCENTIVE ISSUE

01:50 - 42.799 COMES UP BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN

01:50 - 44.279 THE RECORD. IT'S MADE UP FOR

01:50 - 45.869 PURPOSES OF APPEAL, THE COURT

01:50 - 46.700 ORDER REJECTED.

01:50 - 48.549 THE SAME YOU KNOW WE HAVE AN

01:50 - 50.229 ISSUE OF PUBLIC POLICY THAT'S

01:50 - 51.490 ARGUED IN THE PAPERS

01:50 - 54.009 THAT'S AGAIN ALSO NOT AN ISSUE

01:50 - 54.920 THAT IS PRESERVED.

01:50 - 57.100 YOU'VE HEARD REFERENCES TO THIS

01:50 - 58.820 1921 STATUTE

01:50 - 00.539 THAT WOULD REALLY SNEAKY

01:51 - 01.779 BECAUSE AS I POINT OUT IN

01:51 - 03.869 MY BRIEF WHEN MISTER

01:51 - 05.809 HAGGERTY OUR OARS OR HIS

01:51 - 07.729 COLLEAGUES FRAMED THE QUESTION

01:51 - 09.479 ON APPEAL. HE REWROTE THE

01:51 - 11.259 QUESTION ON APPEAL AND SNUCK IN

01:51 - 13.399 THAT STATUTORY GROUNDS. I MEAN

01:51 - 14.740 PLEASE YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

01:51 - 15.190 BUT IN

01:51 - 18.259 ANY EVENT THE STATUTORY GROUND

01:51 - 19.229 WHICH HE CONTINUES TO

01:51 - 21.919 ARGUE TODAY. WE CITE CASE AFTER

01:51 - 23.619 CASE AFTER CASE IN OUR BRIEF

01:51 - 26.419 THAT THIS 191.21 STATUTE DOES

01:51 - 28.169 NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF THE

01:51 - 30.110 TYPE OF POLICY WE HAVE HERE

01:51 - 32.029 WHICH IS A POLICY OF AN ALL

01:51 - 34.289 RISK TYPE AND SO ARGUING THAT

01:51 - 35.599 THAT PROVIDE SOME KIND OF A

01:51 - 37.439 STATUTORY BASIS FOR THIS

01:51 - 39.209 RULING. IT JUST DOESN'T GET HIM

01:51 - 41.479 ANYWHERE. WE TAKE YOUR POINT TO

01:51 - 42.499 TRY TO CONFINE IT

01:51 - 43.000 TO THE.

01:51 - 45.109 THE ISSUE UPON WHICH APPEAL

01:51 - 47.249 WAS ALLOWED. SO WE

01:51 - 48.050 UNDERSTAND YOUR.

01:51 - 50.089 OKAY AND SO ON AGAIN AND A

01:51 - 51.179 CONCLUSION ON THE SIMPLE

01:51 - 53.029 QUESTION OF GUILT OR MEN AND

01:51 - 54.759 DOESN'T CONTROL YEAR THAT'S THE

01:51 - 55.909 ISSUE THAT'S ONE FRONT IN FRONT

01:51 - 56.580 OF THE CASE,

01:51 - 58.069 THE CORPS WANTS TO TAKE OF THE

01:51 - 59.819 AMBIGUITY ARGUMENT, YOU KNOW WE

01:51 - 01.339 WE HAVE ARGUMENTS IN OUR BRIEF

01:52 - 02.950 I SHOULD WIN THAT IN ANY EVENT.

01:52 - 05.290 THANK YOU HONORS THE VERY MUCH.

01:53 - 40.259 I THINK WE'VE CALLED THE CASE

01:53 - 41.859 A FEW WANT TO STAND UP AND BE

01:53 - 42.870 ON YOUR ARGUMENT.

01:53 - 46.320 YOU CALL OCCASIONALLY RIGHT.

01:53 - 52.240 CAN BERNIE

01:53 - 54.349 WHEN NET WHEN HE WAS 8 YEARS

01:53 - 56.279 OLD PALACE JOB AND SEXUALLY

01:53 - 57.859 ASSAULTED BY CLASSMATES WHILE

01:53 - 58.580 AT SCHOOL.

01:53 - 01.189 MORE THAN 2 YEARS LATER THE

01:54 - 02.619 PALIN ABOUT PLANES WITH THE

01:54 - 04.349 PENNSYLVANIA, HUMAN RELATIONS

01:54 - 06.119 COMMISSION. WHICH WERE

01:54 - 07.660 DISMISSED AS ON TIME.

01:54 - 09.699 THE PALETTE AND FILED A

01:54 - 11.350 COMPLAINT IN THE TRIAL COURT

01:54 - 13.080 WHICH WAS ALSO DISMISSED.

01:54 - 15.349 SHOULD SHE FAIL TO EXHAUST OR

01:54 - 16.660 ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES.

01:54 - 18.800 BEFORE THIS COURT.

01:54 - 21.039 A PALLET MAINTAINS THAT THE

01:54 - 22.499 TYPE OR SHE CAN YOU LEAVE

01:54 - 23.989 BEFORE THE HUMAN RELATIONS

01:54 - 24.600 COMMISSION.

01:54 - 28.179 EXTENDED BASED UPON HER SONS

01:54 - 28.770 AGE.

01:54 - 36.579 GOOD AFTERNOON MAY PLEASE THE

01:54 - 37.330 COURTS.

01:54 - 40.279 MY NAME IS DAVID J BIRNEY AND

01:54 - 41.449 I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF

01:54 - 43.719 REPRESENTING THE COLBY ANDERSON

01:54 - 44.830 AND BE IN THIS MATTER.

01:54 - 48.620 OF MY

01:54 - 50.859 TIME TODAY. I LIKE TO LAY

01:54 - 52.519 OUT WHAT I BELIEVE IS A RATHER

01:54 - 54.630 STRAIGHTFORWARD WAY TO ANALYZE

01:54 - 56.249 THE MINORITY TOLLING PROVISIONS

01:54 - 57.330 THAT ARE IMPLICATED.

01:55 - 03.549 AND THE PURPOSE OF

01:55 - 05.109 PENNSYLVANIA'S MINORITY TOLLING

01:55 - 07.519 STATUTE GIVE CHILDREN THE SAME

01:55 - 07.790 RIGHTS

01:55 - 10.399 AS ADULTS TURN MEDIATE INJURIES

01:55 - 13.509 CAUSED BY 3RD PARTIES. IN THIS

01:55 - 15.040 CASE WE HAVE A MINOR AND B.

01:55 - 17.240 THIS

01:55 - 19.249 TRAFFIC INJURIES DUE TO

01:55 - 20.659 DISCRIMINATION THAT TOOK PLACE

01:55 - 21.190 AT A SCHOOL.

01:55 - 24.179 MINORITY TOLLING WAS

01:55 - 27.339 SPECIFICALLY DESIGNS TO ENSURE

01:55 - 29.220 THAT CHILDREN LIKE N D.

01:55 - 32.009 UNTIL THEY REACH THE AGE OF

01:55 - 34.170 LEGAL PAST THE AGE OF MAJORITY.

01:55 - 37.690 FILE THEIR OWN COMPLAINTS

01:55 - 38.979 BEFORE THE STATUTE OF

01:55 - 40.820 LIMITATIONS WOULD START TO ROT.

01:55 - 44.180 IF I MAKE I APOLOGIZE.

01:55 - 46.479 WORK DISCUSSED MINORITIES, A

01:55 - 47.390 COLLEAGUE STATUTE.

01:55 - 49.519 THE CHILD STILL A MINE

01:55 - 51.139 ARE CORRECT THAT IS CORRECT SO

01:55 - 52.609 HAPPENS THAT THE ISSUE OF THIS

01:55 - 54.349 IS HIS RIGHT TO EXERCISE AND

01:55 - 56.139 YOU CAN EXERCISE THAT RIGHT AND

01:55 - 58.099 IT CAN BE CHALLENGE 20 REACHES

01:55 - 59.639 THE AGE OF MAJORITY. WHY ARE

01:55 - 00.550 YOU ARGUING THAT

01:56 - 02.319 MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE'RE HERE

01:56 - 04.069 WITH REGARD TO MOTHER SPELL

01:56 - 05.829 YOUR TO FILE UNNECESSARY

01:56 - 07.860 ADMINISTRATIVE COME COMPLAINT.

01:56 - 09.350 SHARE

01:56 - 11.129 WITH ME WHY ARE YOU

01:56 - 12.889 BRINGING THE MINORITY TELLING

01:56 - 13.579 STATUTE TO

01:56 - 16.469 US TODAY WHEN IT IN FACT IS

01:56 - 17.759 PRESUMPTUOUS OF YOU BECAUSE HE

01:56 - 18.020 HAS A

01:56 - 18.800 REACH MAJORITY.

01:56 - 21.889 SO UNDER THE RELATIONS ACT IS

01:56 - 23.640 A 2 STEP PROCESS

01:56 - 26.249 FOR BEINGS FOR BEING ABLE TO

01:56 - 27.839 PERFECT YOUR CLAIM TO FILE A

01:56 - 29.000 STATE COMPLAINTS.

01:56 - 34.039 IS THE FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE

01:56 - 35.219 COMPLAINT WITH THE PENNSYLVANIA

01:56 - 35.970 RELATIONS ACT.

01:56 - 40.320 THE MINERS DON'T HAVE THE LEGAL

01:56 - 41.500 ASKED YOU TO DO THAT.

01:56 - 43.659 THEY ARE DEPENDENT ON THEIR

01:56 - 45.899 PARENTS TO DO THAT. IF THE

01:56 - 46.860 PARENT DOES NOT.

01:56 - 49.689 OR IF THE MINERS NOT ABLE TO

01:56 - 51.269 FIND IN ADULTS TO

01:56 - 52.619 FILE ON THEIR BEHALF SOME

01:56 - 55.149 CHILDREN DON'T HAVE IT. THEY'RE

01:56 - 57.189 UNABLE TO FIGHT FIND AN ADULT A

01:56 - 59.479 FILE ON THEIR BEHALF. THEY WILL

01:56 - 01.550 THEN BE PRECLUDED ARE BARRED

01:57 - 03.680 FROM LATER ON RINGING THERE

01:57 - 05.710 CAUSE OF ACTION IN STATE COURT

01:57 - 06.829 FOR A CLAIM UNDER THE

01:57 - 08.889 PENNSYLVANIA RELATIONS. SO IT

01:57 - 11.780 IS ACTUALLY CREW THE CALL FOR.

01:57 - 14.150 THE MINER IN THIS CASE.

01:57 - 17.139 TO ULTIMATELY BE ABLE TO BRING

01:57 - 19.449 HIS STATE COMPLAINTS TO

01:57 - 21.109 FIND THAT MINORITY TOLLING

01:57 - 23.549 APPLIES TO THE INITIAL FILING

01:57 - 24.350 OF THE PENNSYLVANIA,

01:57 - 26.909 HUMAN RELATIONS. ADMINISTRATIVE

01:57 - 28.229 COMPLEX SUCH A NEED TO GET THE

01:57 - 29.480 GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT.

01:57 - 31.339 TO ADDRESS THAT BY STATUTE

01:57 - 32.539 AND YOU KNOW DOWN BY THE

01:57 - 35.640 PRINCIPLE THAT A KIDS ACT OR

01:57 - 35.840 ARE

01:57 - 38.349 ACTED UPON THROUGH THE ADULTS

01:57 - 39.509 THAT ARE THE PARENTS

01:57 - 40.560 OR GUARDIANS.

01:57 - 42.459 WELL NO SO THE ISSUE BECOMES

01:57 - 44.019 WELL THERE ARE 2 ISSUES, THE

01:57 - 46.190 FIRST ISSUE IS WHETHER OR NOT

01:57 - 48.289 PENNSYLVANIA'S MINORITY TOLLING

01:57 - 51.519 STATUE APPLIES TO THE

01:57 - 52.889 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT THAT'S

01:57 - 55.490 BEEN SO WELL THE CASE SO.

01:57 - 57.869 EAST IS DISTINGUISHABLE IN A

01:57 - 59.010 NUMBER OF RESPECTS

01:57 - 00.499 AND FOR THAT REASON IT DOESN'T

01:58 - 01.669 CONTROL IN THIS PARTICULAR

01:58 - 02.170 MATTER.

01:58 - 05.819 SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHY EAST

01:58 - 06.909 DOESN'T CONTROL AND IT'S

01:58 - 07.720 DISTINGUISHABLE.

01:58 - 10.610 HE'S ONLY STANDS FOR

01:58 - 13.139 OPPOSITION. THAT MINORITY

01:58 - 15.619 TOLLING DOESN'T APPLY. TO A

01:58 - 18.329 MINISTRY TO COME. CLAIMS WHERE

01:58 - 18.600 THERE'S

01:58 - 21.279 NO SEPARATE AN INDEPENDENCE

01:58 - 22.729 RIGHT TO BRING CIVIL CAUSE OF

01:58 - 25.239 ACTION. AND TO UNDERSTAND THE

01:58 - 26.240 IMPORT OF THAT.

01:58 - 29.229 WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT EAST

01:58 - 31.099 INVOLVED A WORKERS COMPENSATION

01:58 - 33.780 CASE AND UNDER THE WORKERS

01:58 - 35.639 COMPENSATION STATUTE THAT WAS

01:58 - 36.949 PASSED BY THE PENNSYLVANIA

01:58 - 37.790 LEGISLATURE.

01:58 - 40.449 SPECIFICALLY THE PENNSYLVANIA

01:58 - 43.049 LEGISLATURE. IT'S THE

01:58 - 45.229 INDEPENDENT RIGHTS TO BRING A

01:58 - 46.040 CAUSE OF ACTION.

01:58 - 50.190 MAKES EAST. MUCH DIFFERENT

01:58 - 51.799 FROM THE SITUATION THAT WE HAVE

01:58 - 52.330 HERE.

01:58 - 56.409 OF THE MINORITY TOLLING

01:58 - 58.249 STATUTE. THE

01:58 - 00.030 CONDITION PRECEDENTS

01:59 - 01.969 FOR WHEN MINORITY TOE TO TOE

01:59 - 03.480 LING LOOK AT LAST MISTER BERNIE

01:59 - 04.919 I WANT TO TAKE

01:59 - 05.660 YOU BACK.

01:59 - 07.249 TO TEST THE STOCKINGS

01:59 - 11.299 QUESTION I'M A LITTLE HAVING A

01:59 - 11.980 LITTLE TROUBLE.

01:59 - 14.270 ARE YOU HERE TODAY.

01:59 - 17.740 ARGUING THAT THE SHELL

01:59 - 19.769 HAS LOST HIS CAUSE OF ACTION

01:59 - 21.999 BUT FOR THE MINORITY CALL YOUR

01:59 - 23.099 EQUITABLE TOLLING THAT IS

01:59 - 25.219 CORRECT WAR ARE OR ARE YOU HERE

01:59 - 26.529 I JUST WANT TO BE PRECISE ARE

01:59 - 26.690 YOU

01:59 - 29.159 HERE TODAY ARGUING ABOUT A

01:59 - 30.839 CAUSE OF ACTION THAT BELONGS TO

01:59 - 31.350 THE LAW.

01:59 - 33.710 NO WE'RE HERE TODAY.

01:59 - 37.150 SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THE MINOR

01:59 - 39.709 HAS LOST THE CAUSE OF ACTION BY

01:59 - 40.730 VIRTUE OF THE FACT.

01:59 - 43.219 THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN

01:59 - 44.669 RELATIONS AND MINISTRY OF

01:59 - 46.580 COMPLAINTS, IT WAS NOT.

01:59 - 49.529 WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE

01:59 - 51.329 CAUSE OF ACTION ACCRUE YOUR

01:59 - 52.829 YOUR POSITION I JUST WANT TO

01:59 - 55.149 LIKE NAIL THIS DOWN TIGHT YOUR

01:59 - 57.699 POSITION IS THAT THE ERROR BY

01:59 - 58.810 THIS APPEAR IN COURT.

02:00 - 02.589 COMMONWEALTH COURT AND AN

02:00 - 03.630 AIR BELOW.

02:00 - 05.379 IS THAT THEY CONSIDERED THE

02:00 - 07.039 CAUSE OF ACTION THE MOM'S NOT

02:00 - 07.700 THE CHILD'S.

02:00 - 11.119 IHSAN IS THAT THE

02:00 - 12.540 COMMONWEALTH COURT ERROR.

02:00 - 13.719 FINDING THAT

02:00 - 16.419 MINORITY TOLLING DOES NOT APPLY

02:00 - 17.589 TO THE FILING OF THE

02:00 - 18.789 ADMINISTRATIVE TO THE

02:00 - 21.549 PENNSYLVANIA. 2 MEN

02:00 - 22.380 RELATIONS ACT,

02:00 - 24.769 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS AND

02:00 - 26.349 THEREFORE BECAUSE THEY DID NOT

02:00 - 28.519 FIND SCHOOLING APPLY. THEY

02:00 - 29.250 FOUND.

02:00 - 32.829 WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO

02:00 - 34.429 ULTIMATELY BRING A CAUSE OF

02:00 - 35.849 ACTION UNDER THE PENNSYLVANIA

02:00 - 37.169 LAY SHUNS ACT WHICH IS WHAT WE

02:00 - 37.970 ULTIMATELY 5.

02:00 - 39.849 THROUGH BY TURNOUT KURDS IN

02:00 - 41.609 AND OUT WITH THE 14 OR 15

02:00 - 43.969 TODAY, 13. SO HE WAITS TO LOSE

02:00 - 46.770 18. AND MANY THOUSANDS 18.

02:00 - 49.280 YOU'RE CONCERNED THAT

02:00 - 51.679 YOU WOULD BE FACED WITH A RACE

02:00 - 52.650 TO THE CADA

02:00 - 54.259 CLAIM BECAUSE THIS CASE WAS

02:00 - 55.669 LITIGATED BECAUSE THIS IS ABOUT

02:00 - 56.720 HIM AND NOT HIS MOM.

02:00 - 59.329 IN FACT THE LOWER COURTS HAVE

02:00 - 00.010 HELD

02:01 - 02.649 THAT'S MINORITY TOLLING DOES

02:01 - 04.249 NOT APPLY TO THAT INITIAL

02:01 - 05.689 PREREQUISITE OF FILING THE

02:01 - 06.299 ADMINISTRATIVE

02:01 - 07.820 COMPLAINTS UNDERSTAND.

02:01 - 09.779 AND YOUR ARGUMENT IN IT SO IT

02:01 - 10.669 CAN TURN THE CORNER YOUR

02:01 - 12.999 ARGUMENT IS IF 55, MAYBE I'M

02:01 - 14.839 ANTICIPATING IT. THE BECAUSE

02:01 - 16.739 THIS IS AN ON RAMP TO CIVIL

02:01 - 18.259 COURT, IT'S DISTINGUISHABLE OR

02:01 - 20.009 SOMETHING LIKE WORKERS COMP

02:01 - 21.429 WHERE YOU NEVER GET TO A CIVIL

02:01 - 22.809 TRIAL COURT EVEN IF YOU GET TO

02:01 - 24.229 IT. COMMONWEALTH COURT IS AN

02:01 - 25.040 APPELLATE BODY.

02:01 - 27.319 CAN YOU I'M SORRY CAN YOU SAY

02:01 - 28.769 THAT AGAIN YOUR ARGUMENT I

02:01 - 30.330 THINK IS THAT THIS DOES.

02:01 - 32.909 ENTITLE THE INDIVIDUAL IS

02:01 - 34.049 ENTITLED TO BRING THE CIVIL

02:01 - 36.349 ACTION UNDER THE PENNSYLVANIA

02:01 - 39.259 LEGISLATIVE SCHEME. THE AVENUE

02:01 - 41.349 TO BRING THAT CIVIL ACTION IS

02:01 - 43.529 THE FIRST THE ADMINISTRATIVE

02:01 - 44.949 ACT THAT'S EXACTLY THAT THE

02:01 - 46.319 DISTINGUISHED MEANT BETWEEN

02:01 - 48.039 THIS CASE AND THE EAST CASE

02:01 - 49.070 WITH WORKERS COP.

02:01 - 49.990 SO THAT.

02:01 - 51.669 ASHLEY HOW WE DISTINGUISH I'D

02:01 - 52.929 LIKE TO UNPACK IT A LITTLE BIT

02:01 - 55.160 FOR THE FORT FORT JUST A SWEAT.

02:01 - 57.739 SO HIS QUESTION WAS HOW IS THIS

02:01 - 59.189 NOT ALREADY DECIDED BY USE THEM

02:01 - 00.430 WISELY IS NOT CONTROLLING.

02:02 - 03.399 IN EAST'S IT'S

02:02 - 04.769 REALLY IMPORTANT AGAIN TO KEEP

02:02 - 06.179 IN MIND THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH

02:02 - 07.989 A WORKERS COMPENSATION. A

02:02 - 10.310 STATUTE THAT POLISH THE RIGHTS

02:02 - 11.990 TO BRING A CIVIL ACTION

02:02 - 13.849 THAT WAS WHAT THE PENNSYLVANIA

02:02 - 15.510 LEGISLATURE HAD DECIDED TO DO.

02:02 - 17.570 IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST

02:02 - 20.229 SET OF THE MINORITY TOLLING

02:02 - 22.090 PROVISIONS THE VERY FIRST

02:02 - 24.000 CLAUSE OF THAT FIRST SENTENCE

02:02 - 26.260 SETS UP A CONDITION PRECEDENT

02:02 - 27.999 FOR WHEN MINORITY TOLLING CAN

02:02 - 28.700 EVEN APPLY.

02:02 - 31.099 THE FIRST SENTENCE, THE FIRST

02:02 - 32.399 CLAUSE OF THAT FIRST SENTENCE

02:02 - 35.629 SAYS IF AN INDIVIDUAL THIS

02:02 - 37.120 ENTITLE TO BRING A CIVIL.

02:02 - 41.499 TIME THE CAUSE OF ACTION

02:02 - 43.889 A CRUISE THE PERIOD OF MINORITY

02:02 - 45.379 SHALL NOT COUNTS TOWARD THAT

02:02 - 47.629 TIME PERIOD WITHIN WHICH THE

02:02 - 48.279 ACTION MUST

02:02 - 50.499 BECOME THAT'S SO AGAIN FOCUSING

02:02 - 52.179 ON THE FIRST CLAUSE THAT FIRST

02:02 - 52.570 SENTENCE

02:02 - 54.939 IT SAYS IF AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS

02:02 - 56.770 ENTITLED TO BRING A CIVIL ACT.

02:03 - 02.849 THEN WE WILL COUNT THAT LATER

02:03 - 05.980 TIME PERIOD. WELL, IN EAST'S

02:03 - 08.639 THE MINERS WAS NOT AN TITLES TO

02:03 - 09.720 BRING A CIVIL ACTION.

02:03 - 17.639 IF WE EVER SIDE OF

02:03 - 19.840 THE CASE WHERE WE SAID

02:03 - 23.170 THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING.

02:03 - 25.009 THERE IS

02:03 - 27.220 SUCH A HERE THE PHO C.

02:03 - 30.309 IS A CIVIL

02:03 - 32.409 ACTION ART THAT'S A

02:03 - 34.989 CIVIL ACTION. I MEAN CASE IN

02:03 - 36.469 COMMON LAW IN OUR JUDICIAL

02:03 - 39.499 SYSTEM. AND HASN'T THE GENERAL

02:03 - 42.009 ASSEMBLY TOLD US BY CREATING

02:03 - 45.009 THIS TO US OR IN THIS CASE THIS

02:03 - 47.689 CASE JUST YET THIS THAT YOU'RE

02:03 - 49.040 DIFFERENT YOU'RE IN IT

02:03 - 50.090 DIFFERENT BALL.

02:03 - 51.780 SO THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NOT

02:03 - 53.259 AND THE REASON WE KNOW THE

02:03 - 54.609 ANSWER TO THAT IS NO IS BECAUSE

02:03 - 56.200 WE LOOK AT THE SECOND SENTENCE.

02:03 - 57.559 THE MINORITY TOLLING

02:03 - 00.780 PROVISIONS. THE SECOND SET.

02:04 - 03.419 OF THE MINORITY TOLLING

02:04 - 04.170 PROVISION.

02:04 - 08.620 MEANING THE MINOR.

02:04 - 11.239 HAVE THE SAME TIME FOR

02:04 - 13.839 COMMENCING IN ACTION. AFTER

02:04 - 16.079 RETAINING MAJORITY. AS IS

02:04 - 16.950 ALLOWED TO OTHER.

02:04 - 21.929 FOR THE MINERS HAD THE SAME

02:04 - 22.960 AMOUNT OF TIME.

02:04 - 26.670 TO BRING A CAUSE OF ACTION.

02:04 - 32.039 THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR

02:04 - 33.149 FILING THE ADMINISTRATIVE

02:04 - 34.460 COMPLAINT BECAUSE IF WE DON'T.

02:04 - 39.219 WHO IS ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT

02:04 - 41.389 IS NOT TIMELY FILE. NOT ONLY

02:04 - 42.479 WILL YOU NOT HAVE THE SAME

02:04 - 44.420 AMOUNT OF TIME AS AN ADULT.

02:04 - 48.549 THE STRIPPER BECAUSE THEIR

02:04 - 51.159 CLAIM WILL BE BAR. AND SO IF I

02:04 - 53.760 MAY AND THAT SO FROM THAT SO.

02:04 - 56.499 HAPPENING BY VIRTUE OF THE

02:04 - 59.130 SECOND SET. THE SECOND SET.

02:05 - 03.920 THAT THE

02:05 - 06.459 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS HAS

02:05 - 07.100 TO BE TOLD.

02:05 - 11.709 TO THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THAT

02:05 - 14.139 MINORITY TOLD STOPPED START

02:05 - 14.690 JUSTICE.

02:05 - 22.390 FREE FOR YOUR AMICUS.

02:05 - 26.479 TALKS IN TERMS OF FAIRNESS

02:05 - 28.879 AND EQUITY AND I'M WONDERING TO

02:05 - 30.299 WHAT EXTENT YOU'RE ACTUALLY

02:05 - 31.759 MAKING A PUBLIC POLICY

02:05 - 32.450 ARGUMENT.

02:05 - 34.409 SO SO WE'RE NOT SO THIS

02:05 - 36.079 IS WHAT I BELIEVE THE SCHOOL

02:05 - 37.440 DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA.

02:05 - 40.749 AND I CAN ADDRESS THIS

02:05 - 41.940 INJUSTICE VERY SICK.

02:05 - 43.909 WE'RE NOT MAKING A PUBLIC

02:05 - 45.269 POLICY ARGUMENT WHAT WE'RE

02:05 - 46.849 DOING IS WE'RE MAKING IT EXTRA

02:05 - 47.350 LARGE.

02:05 - 49.399 IF YOU LOOK AT THE MINORITY

02:05 - 51.909 TOLLING STACHE THERE AND I AND

02:05 - 53.199 WE WENT OVER THIS WITH JUSTICE

02:05 - 54.499 WHACKED AND ALSO ADJUSTS TO

02:05 - 56.159 SPARE. THERE ARE

02:05 - 58.260 2 SENTENCES IN.

02:05 - 00.989 AND SO WE'RE MAKING A STRICTLY

02:06 - 03.099 TAX TO ARGUMENT AND WHAT WE'RE

02:06 - 05.350 ARGUING IS THAT SECOND SET.

02:06 - 09.349 MANDATES IN ORDER FOR THE

02:06 - 10.209 SECOND SENSE, THE

02:06 - 12.599 WHOLE TRIP THAT AN INDIVIDUAL

02:06 - 13.930 WILL HAVE THIS THAT MY NARWHAL

02:06 - 15.339 THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME AS AN

02:06 - 16.600 ADULT IN WHICH THE FIRE.

02:06 - 19.079 IN ORDER FOR THAT THE WHOLE

02:06 - 19.580 TRIP.

02:06 - 24.689 THE FILING OF THE

02:06 - 26.119 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT THAT

02:06 - 28.189 IS BASED. ON THE TEXT OF THE

02:06 - 28.880 STATUTE.

02:06 - 36.109 YOU TO IGNORE THAT THE TAX OF

02:06 - 37.409 THE PHRA IN FACT THERE'S A

02:06 - 39.439 SECOND PROVISION THAT WE RELY

02:06 - 40.299 ON IN THE PENNSYLVANIA

02:06 - 41.899 RELATIONS ACT BEFORE YOU GOING

02:06 - 43.509 TO THAT SHORT AND I GO BACK TO

02:06 - 44.809 THE FIRST SENTENCE AND THE

02:06 - 46.080 MINOR TOLLING YES.

02:06 - 49.059 IF AN INDIVIDUAL ENTITLED TO

02:06 - 50.330 BRING A SIMPLE

02:06 - 52.879 ACTION ISN'T AN EMANCIPATED

02:06 - 55.779 MINOR AT THE TIME THE CAUSE OF

02:06 - 57.110 ACTION A CRUISE.

02:06 - 59.639 THIS MINOR AT THE TIME THE

02:06 - 01.679 CAUSE OF ACTION THE CREW WAS

02:07 - 03.319 NOT ENTITLED TO FILE A CIVIL

02:07 - 04.899 ACTION. SO I

02:07 - 06.600 THINK FIT THE FIRST

02:07 - 08.859 SENTENCE IF IF YOU'RE GOING TO

02:07 - 09.819 PARSE IT THE WAY THAT YOU'RE

02:07 - 11.059 PARSING IT. I THINK THERE'S A

02:07 - 12.799 BROADER PROBLEM, BUT AT THE

02:07 - 14.099 TIME THE CAUSE OF ACTION THE

02:07 - 17.109 CREW. THIS YOUNG MAN HAD NO

02:07 - 18.719 ENTITLEMENT TO BRING A CIVIL

02:07 - 19.220 ACTION.

02:07 - 22.789 AND IT MEANT HE HAD TO FILE AN

02:07 - 24.730 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT.

02:07 - 28.750 A CIVIL

02:07 - 30.379 ACTION BECAUSE THE POINT AT

02:07 - 32.289 WHICH HE FACES DISCRIMINATION

02:07 - 33.899 SO BUT REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED

02:07 - 34.550 TO THIS CHILD.

02:07 - 36.029 I UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENED TO

02:07 - 37.139 HIM LET'S JUST GET DOWN TO THE

02:07 - 39.539 TIMING AT THE TIME DO WE AGREE

02:07 - 40.909 THAT HIS CAUSE OF ACTION

02:07 - 43.459 ACCRUED WHEN HE WAS BULLIED AND

02:07 - 45.279 MOLESTED THAT IS CORRECT OKAY

02:07 - 46.710 WELL THAT'S EXACT HIS

02:07 - 48.099 HIS CAUSE OF ACTION A CRUISE

02:07 - 49.519 WHEN HE'S BULLIED HARASSED AND

02:07 - 51.810 SAY HE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

02:07 - 54.819 THERE'S NOT HAVE AN ENTITLEMENT

02:07 - 55.579 TO FILE A

02:07 - 59.029 CIVIL ACTION PHRA HE