00:30 - >>WELCOME TO

00:31 - COMMONWEALTH COURT AND THE UN

00:33 - VAN ARGUMENTS.

00:38 - FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T

00:40 - BEEN HERE BEFORE HAVEN'T BEEN

00:41 - HERE IN A WHILE JUST

00:43 - A REMINDER

00:45 - THE UNBOUND ARGUMENTS ALLOW 15

00:48 - MINUTES OF ARGUMENT

00:49 - PER SIDE. IF THERE'S MORE THAN

00:51 - ONE ATTORNEY IT'S GOING TO BE

00:53 - ARGUING PLEASE RANGE AND SPLIT

00:56 - YOUR TIME BEFORE YOU COME UP.

00:59 - THE OF HEALING PARTY IS

01:00 - ENTITLED

01:00 - TO REVIVAL. SO PLEASE ADVISE

01:03 - THE COURT IF YOU WISH TO

01:04 - RESERVE ANY REBUTTAL TIME

01:06 - BEFORE YOU BEGIN.

01:08 - AS YOU ALL KNOW THIS IS A HIGH

01:10 - COURT. AND

01:13 - 15 MINUTES, I KNOW IS NOT A LOT

01:15 - OF TIME TO BE ABLE TO

01:17 - FULLY EXPRESS ALL OF THE ISSUES

01:20 - AND PROVIDE EVERYTHING THAT YOU

01:21 - WANT

01:21 - TO SAY SO PLEASE GET RIGHT TO

01:24 - THE POINT AND WE WILL.

01:28 - UNDERSTAND YOU DON'T NEED TO.

01:31 - GIVE US ANY OF THE BACKGROUND.

01:35 - FIRST CASE ON OUR

01:36 - LIST IS THE OPEN PA SCHOOLS AT

01:39 - ALL PETITIONERS VERSUS THE

01:41 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AT ALL.

01:45 - PETITIONERS SEEK A DECLARATION

01:47 - FROM

01:47 - THIS COURT THAT THE DEPARTMENT

01:49 - OF EDUCATION'S GUIDANCE

01:51 - REGARDING THE 180 DAY MINIMUM

01:53 - NUMBER OF INSTRUCTION DAYS

01:55 - UNDER THE CONDITIONS CAUSED BY

01:57 - THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND

02:00 - ITS GUIDANCE REGARDING THE

02:02 - INSTRUCTIONAL MODELS USE DURING

02:04 - REMOTE LEARNING SOME AREAS ARE

02:06 - VOID UNDER THE PUBLIC

02:08 - SCHOOL CODE PETITIONER'S

02:10 - REQUEST THAT THE DEPARTMENT TO

02:11 - ISSUE NEW GUIDANCE

02:13 - STATING THAT ONLY IN-PERSON

02:15 - CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION SHELL

02:17 - COUNT TOWARDS THE MINIMUM

02:19 - 180 DAYS REQUIREMENT SAID FOR

02:22 - THE IN THE CODE. THE DEPARTMENT

02:24 - HAS FILED

02:25 - PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS. I'M

02:27 - DOING THAT PETITIONERS LACK

02:29 - STANDING BECAUSE THEY FAILED TO

02:30 - PLEAD FACTS TO ESTABLISH DIRECT

02:33 - IMMEDIATE AND

02:34 - SUBSTANTIAL INJURY. THEN IT

02:36 - DOES NOT HAVE THE POWER TO

02:37 - GRANT THE RELIEF REQUESTED

02:39 - BY PETITIONERS BECAUSE ONLY

02:41 - INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND

02:43 - NOT THE DEPARTMENT

02:44 - MAY DETERMINE THE FORM OF

02:46 - INSTRUCTION STUDENTS RECEIVE

02:48 - THAT THE RELIEF SOUGHT BY

02:50 - PETITIONERS IS BARRED BY THE

02:52 - DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.

02:54 - BUT THE PUBLIC SCHOOL CODE DOES

02:56 - NOT REQUIRE IN-PERSON

02:57 - INSTRUCTION DURING A PANDEMIC

03:00 - AND THAT IS INTERPRETATION OF

03:02 - THE PUBLIC SCHOOL CODE IS

03:03 - ENTITLED TO DEFERENCE.

03:08 - ARGUING TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE

03:10 - BALANCE.

03:13 - PETITIONERS OUR.

03:18 - ROUTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND

03:20 - COUNCIL FOR RESPONDED. OKAY

03:23 - WELCOME TO THE COURT.

03:26 - PLEASE. FISHING WE MAY BE GOOD.

03:31 - WELL ACTUALLY

03:32 - YOU NOT. WELL YES, THE EYE

03:35 - GIVEN PARTY KNOW PLEASE BEGIN

03:36 - YOUR THAT. FILE THE PRELIMINARY

03:39 - OBJECTIONS.

03:50 - AND TO REQUEST.

03:52 - 3 MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.

03:57 - >>THEY PLEASE THE COURT MY NAME

03:58 - IS WALTERS IN A LONG AND I

03:59 - REPRESENT THE PETITIONERS IN

04:00 - THIS CASE.

04:02 - THE PUBLIC SCHOOL CODE OF

04:03 - 1949 REQUIRES THAT SCHOOLS

04:06 - QUOTE SHALL BE KEPT OPEN

04:08 - CLOSE QUOTE FOR AT LEAST 180

04:11 - DAYS FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE

04:13 - I'M SORRY I THOUGHT.

04:16 - >>YOU'RE REPRESENTING THE

04:17 - PETITIONERS NOT RESPONDED WE'RE

04:19 - HERE FOR

04:20 - P O'S SO I KNEW REALLY WAIT

04:23 - BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE

04:25 - RESPONDING. AND THAT'S WHY YES

04:29 - HERE

04:29 - KIND OF SITTING THAT PLEASE AND

04:31 - THE PETITIONER IN THE CASE BUT

04:32 - THE RESPONDED ON THE

04:33 - PRELIMINARY EXACTLY ARE YOUR

04:35 - HONOR FOR THE THAT'S BY NO IT

04:36 - WAS MY CONFUSION SO WE'RE GOING

04:39 - TO ALLOW.

04:42 - DEPARTMENT TO FILE THE

04:43 - PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS.

04:45 - 2 1ST BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOU

04:48 - HAVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF WITH

04:51 - WOMEN AREA JUNCTIONS SO YOU

04:53 - WILL GO FIRST AND THEN. WE WILL

04:56 - HEAR FROM THE PETITIONERS THANK

04:58 - YOU YOUR HONOR MAY PLEASE

04:59 - THE COURT.

05:00 - >>ALEXANDER A CORN A DEPUTY

05:02 - ATTORNEY GENERAL ON BEHALF OF

05:03 - RESPONDENT SECRETARY OF

05:04 - EDUCATION, I'M A RESERVED BUT 3

05:06 - MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL. YOU MAY

05:08 - AND

05:10 - THANK YOU AND THANK YOU YOUR

05:12 - HONOR FOR THAT HELPFUL

05:13 - INTRODUCTION I WAS GOING TO

05:14 - REPEAT THE POINTS YOU'RE A

05:15 - SMALL JUST JUMP RIGHT IN AND

05:16 - ADDRESS THE 4 A REASONS

05:18 - THAT BUT THE DEPARTMENT

05:20 - BELIEVES THE PETITION SHOULD BE

05:21 - DISMISSED IN THIS CASE,

05:23 - WE'LL START WITH THE FIRST

05:24 - REASON WHICH IS THE FACT THE

05:26 - PETITIONERS LACKED STANDING.

05:30 - THE ONLY

05:31 - ALLEGATION MADE BY PETITIONERS

05:33 - THAT THEIR CHILDREN HAVE

05:34 - SUFFERED ALLEGEDLY SUFFERED

05:36 - PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE. THAT

05:39 - ALLEGATION WITHOUT MORE IS

05:41 - INSUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH

05:43 - STANDING BECAUSE IT DOESN'T

05:44 - SHOW A DIRECT IMMEDIATE AND

05:46 - SUBSTANTIAL INJURY.

05:49 - THERE MUST BE IF THIS COURT BUT

05:51 - HELD ITS EARLIER ORDER

05:52 - SUSTAINING THE EARLIER FILED

05:54 - PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS. THERE

05:56 - MUST BE IT'S WITH SUFFICIENT

05:58 - FACTUAL DETAILS. THE WORD

06:00 - PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE WITHOUT

06:02 - MORE DO NOT QUALIFY.

06:05 - >>SO YOU'RE LOOKING FOR ACTUAL

06:06 - NAMES OF

06:07 - THE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL WHO'S

06:09 - BEEN DIAGNOSED WITH A SPECIFIC

06:11 - PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY, NO YOUR

06:13 - HONOR THAT MAYBE SOME

06:14 - DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THE

06:15 - INJURIES ARE.

06:18 - >>WOULD BE PERHAPS

06:19 - AN EXAMPLE. OUR VIEW IS THAT

06:22 - THE WORD PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE

06:24 - ON THEIR OWN SIMPLY DON'T

06:26 - PROVIDE THE REQUISITE FACTUAL

06:28 - SUPPORT IF THEY DID

06:30 - ANY PETITION OR BREACH OF

06:31 - CONTRACT ACTION WHATEVER IT IS

06:32 - CAN JUST SAY YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY

06:34 - SUFFERED PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE

06:35 - FROM THE ALLEGED ACTS AND THAT

06:37 - WOULD THEN ESTABLISH INJURY

06:38 - THAT WOULD BE MUCH LEFT

06:39 - STANDING AT ALL WHAT WHAT WHAT

06:41 - MORE IS NEEDED.

06:43 - AGAIN PERHAPS A DESCRIPTION OF

06:45 - WHAT THE PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE

06:47 - IS PERHAPS

06:48 - DESCRIPTION LINKING SPECIFIC

06:51 - PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE TO THE

06:56 - >>GUIDANCE THAT

06:56 - WAS ISSUED SOMETHING WITH WITH

06:59 - WITH JUST MORE FACTUAL DEEM AT

07:01 - A DETAILED AND THEN THE WORDS

07:03 - ITSELF IN THE WORDS LIKE A LOT

07:04 - OF DAMAGE ON THEIR OWN. BUT

07:06 - THAT IS NOT WHAT WE HAVE

07:07 - DISCOVERING.

07:09 - WELL YOUR HONOR STANDING AS A

07:10 - THRESHOLD ISSUE SO TO THE

07:11 - EXTENT THAT PETITIONER BELIEVE

07:13 - THAT THERE WAS NEEDED TO HAVE

07:14 - SOME DISCOVERY. I THINK

07:15 - THE HEAT THERE WAS AMPLE TIME

07:17 - TO DO THAT THERE WAS NO REQUEST

07:18 - FOR DISCOVERY ON

07:19 - THIS POINT AND IT'S IT'S

07:20 - ACTUALLY PETITIONERS BURDEN TO

07:22 - MAKE THE REQUISITE ACTIVE AT

07:23 - ALLEGATIONS IN THE

07:24 - FIRST INSTANCE WARD STATE WHAT

07:26 - DISCOVERIES NEEDED THAT THAT

07:27 - THEY COULD SUBSTANTIATE

07:28 - ESTABLISH THE ALLEGATIONS TO

07:30 - MORE OF AN ALLEGATION TO THE

07:32 - EFFECT

07:33 - OF THEM. DEPRESSION WAS

07:35 - SUFFERED AS A RESULT OF SO MANY

07:37 - DAYS LOST AND THAT COULD BE AN

07:40 - EXAMPLE THE HONOR AGAIN I

07:42 - HAVEN'T SEEN IT SO IT'S IT'S

07:43 - TOUGH FOR ME TO SAY THAT BUT

07:44 - THAT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING THAT

07:45 - WOULD BE MORE TO GET THAT

07:47 - CONNECTS IT TO THE LAST I THINK

07:49 - THAT'S CORRECT.

07:50 - >>COUNCILS IT IS IT ENOUGH TO

07:52 - HER THAT

07:54 - THEY HAVE STANDING BECAUSE THEY

07:55 - ARE THE PARENTS OF

07:55 - THE CHILDREN. WE'RE

07:57 - PARTICIPATING IN THIS KIND OF A

07:59 - PROGRAM AND WE ARE BEING DENIED

08:02 - THE RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR IN

08:04 - SCHOOL EDUCATION.

08:06 - >>I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IN

08:08 - ITSELF IS ENOUGH TO BE THERE

08:09 - BECAUSE THIS COURT

08:10 - HELD PREVIOUSLY.

08:13 - >>THE THERE IS NO RIGHT TO

08:16 - IN-SCHOOL EDUCATION THAT THE

08:17 - STATUTE SAYS THE ISSUE ISN'T

08:19 - THAT LEGAL QUESTION THOUGH AS

08:21 - TO WHETHER THE STATUTE PROVIDES

08:23 - FOR THEM.

08:24 - >>AGAIN I THINK YOUR HONOR

08:25 - THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING

08:27 - THAT THE COURT SAID IS THIS

08:28 - MORE ABOUT WHETHER THEY'RE

08:28 - STANDING TO SEEK A PRELIMINARY

08:30 - INJUNCTION. THE THRESHOLD ISSUE

08:33 - OF STANDING ON THE MERITS

08:34 - IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT THE

08:36 - STATUE HAS BEEN SATISFIED THERE

08:37 - ACTUALLY HAS TO BE AN

08:38 - ALLEGATION OF INJURY WHICH IS

08:39 - WHAT THIS COURT SAID PREVIOUSLY

08:41 - SO I DON'T THINK THAT THE

08:45 - FAILURE.

08:46 - TO TO COMPLY WITH THE STATUTE

08:48 - IS ENOUGH ON ITS OWN TO

08:49 - ESTABLISH STANDING IN THIS

08:50 - CASE.

08:53 - IF I MAY TO ADDRESS THE SECOND

08:54 - POINT WHICH IS ALSO A RELATED

08:56 - AND ON THE ISSUE OF STANDING

08:58 - WHICH IS THE ISSUE OF

08:59 - ADDRESS ABILITY. AS WELL AS THE

09:02 - FACT THAT THIS COURT LACKS

09:03 - SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

09:04 - BECAUSE PETITIONERS HAVE FAILED

09:05 - TO NAME A

09:06 - NECESSARY PARTIES. ON THE ISSUE

09:09 - OF REMDESIVIR ADDRESS ABILITY

09:10 - PETITIONERS ARE ONLY

09:11 - CHALLENGING GUIDANCE ISSUED BY

09:13 - PD.

09:16 - THERE IS NO ALLEGATION IN THE

09:17 - PETITION. THAT IS THAT GUIDANCE

09:20 - THAT HAS LED SPECIFICALLY TO

09:22 - REMOTE LEARNING IN FACT AS FAR

09:25 - AS WE'RE AWARE I AND THERE'S

09:27 - CERTAINLY NO ALLEGATION

09:28 - THAT THERE ARE ANY REMOTE

09:30 - LEARNING CURRENTLY TAKING PLACE

09:32 - AT THE SCHOOLS WHERE

09:33 - PETITIONERS CHILDREN ATTEND

09:34 - SCHOOL. IN FACT

09:37 - THE MOST RECENT GUIDANCE FROM

09:38 - PDE JUST INCORPORATES BY

09:40 - REFERENCE. THE CDC'S GUIDANCE.

09:43 - SO

09:44 - IF THIS COURT WERE TO ISSUE A

09:45 - DECLARATION, IT'S VERY UNCLEAR

09:47 - WHAT EXACTLY PETITIONERS ARE

09:49 - SEEKING

09:49 - TO NULLIFY AND HOW THAT WOULD

09:51 - HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE GROUND

09:52 - WITH RESPECT TO THE EDUCATION

09:54 - THAT ARE THE INSTRUCTION LOOK

09:56 - AT WHAT CONTROLS THE SCHOOL

09:57 - CODE WHERE THE DEPARTMENT'S

09:59 - POLICY. I YOUR HONOR IT'S

10:01 - UNCLEAR WHY THE PETITION.

10:03 - THEY'RE ONLY CHALLENGING THE

10:04 - DEPARTMENT'S POLICY BUT THERE'S

10:05 - NO ALLEGATION IN THE PETITION

10:07 - LINKING NO NO FACTUAL

10:09 - ALLEGATIONS THE PETITION

10:10 - LINKING THAT POLICY TO WHAT HAS

10:12 - ACTUALLY HAPPENED. THE PETITION

10:14 - IS IS RATHER VAGUE IT JUST I

10:16 - THINK THERE'S ONE SENTENCE THAT

10:17 - SAYS BUT ISSUES OF

10:18 - SCHOOLCHILDREN PETITIONS ARE

10:20 - PARENTS

10:20 - OF CHILDREN, WHOM ARE BETTER

10:22 - HAVE RECEIVED REMOTE LEARNING

10:24 - AT SOME POINT IN TIME. AS FAR

10:27 - AS WE'RE AWARE THAT THAT'S NO

10:29 - LONGER THE CASE. IT'S

10:31 - VERY UNCLEAR. IF THIS COURT

10:33 - WERE TO ISSUE A DECLARATION

10:34 - WHAT EFFECT IF ANY

10:36 - THAT WOULD HAVE ON THE

10:37 - INSTRUCTION THAT THE CHART THAT

10:39 - THE PETITIONER CHILDREN

10:40 - CURRENTLY RECEIVING OF COURSE

10:41 - THEY'RE NOT SEEKING TO JUST NOT

10:43 - SEEKING DAMAGES IN THIS CASE

10:44 - THEY'RE SEEKING ONLY.

10:46 - PERSPECTIVE EXCUSE ME AND

10:48 - INJUNCTIVE IN THAT TYPE OF

10:50 - RELIEF AND A DECLARATORY

10:52 - JUDGMENT. SO IT'S VERY UNCLEAR

10:54 - HOW THE RELIEF THEY'RE SINKING

10:55 - WOULD HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE

10:57 - ELECTION ON THE INJURY, THE

10:58 - ELECTION. AND THE

11:00 - RELATED POINT THE THAT THE

11:03 - SCHOOL

11:05 - THAT OF THE SCHOOLS THAT

11:07 - PETITIONERS CHILDREN ATTEND ARE

11:10 - NECESSARY PARTIES

11:11 - BECAUSE IT IS ONLY THE SCHOOL

11:13 - DISTRICTS WHO CAN ACTUALLY

11:14 - PROVIDE THE RELIEF THE

11:15 - PETITIONERS ARE SEEKING SEE

11:17 - WITH THEM TO JOIN 500 SCHOOL

11:18 - DISTRICTS. YOUR HONOR WE WOULD

11:20 - SAY THAT THE VERY LEAST THEY

11:21 - HAVE TO JOIN THE SCHOOL

11:22 - DISTRICTS THAT THEIR CHILDREN

11:23 - ATTEND.

11:25 - THEY DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF

11:26 - THEY'VE SPECIFIED THAT THE

11:27 - PETITION. I DON'T BELIEVE SO I

11:29 - THINK THEY'D THEY'D PREVIOUSLY

11:30 - THE FIRST TIME

11:31 - TO JOIN HANDFUL OF SCHOOL

11:34 - DISTRICTS THAT THEIR TEACHERS

11:35 - AND IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT THEIR

11:36 - STUDENTS ATTEND. AND ALL

11:38 - SCHOOLS DON'T THOSE SCHOOL

11:39 - DISTRICTS HAVE TO FOLLOW WHAT

11:41 - THE DEPARTMENT ISSUES.

11:43 - YOUR HONOR THERE'S NO

11:44 - ALLEGATION THAT PETITION.

11:45 - NO FACTUAL ALLEGATION THAT

11:46 - THAT'S THE CASE AND IT IS

11:48 - GUIDANCE.

11:52 - THE GUIDANCE

11:52 - SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT THE

11:53 - THAT THE DECISION TO ADOPT

11:55 - REMOTE LEARNING IS A LOCAL THE

11:57 - DECISION.

11:58 - SO IT'S NOT CLEAR THAT I DON'T

12:00 - KNOW SINCE WHEN A SCHOOL

12:01 - DISTRICT CAN JUST DECIDE WHAT

12:03 - IT WANTS TO DO AND THERE'S

12:04 - SOMETHING IN THE SCHOOL CODE

12:05 - AND THEN THERE'S SOMETHING THAT

12:06 - THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF ISSUES.

12:08 - >>THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN ITSELF

12:09 - DOES GO. WELL WE'RE NOT KIND OF

12:11 - FOLLOW THIS.

12:13 - >>WELL, I MEAN THEY MANDATED BY

12:15 - LAWN.

12:16 - AND THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS

12:18 - SPOKEN ON WHAT THE LAW IS AND

12:20 - THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE MANDATED TO

12:21 - DO IT AT THE POLLEN THAT THE

12:22 - DEPARTMENT COMES OUT IN ISSUES

12:24 - OF POLICY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT

12:26 - CAN JUST SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO

12:27 - FOLLOW IT. WELL I THINK THERE

12:28 - ARE SEVERAL.

12:29 - >>POINTS. THEY ARE NOT LIKE TO

12:30 - TRY TO IMPACT

12:31 - THE FIRST POINT IS IT IS

12:32 - RESPECTFULLY IT'S NOT A POLICY

12:33 - IT

12:34 - IS GUIDANCE. AND AGAIN. THE

12:36 - MOST RECENT GUIDANCE WITHIN ONE

12:37 - IS WHAT AUTHORITY DOES IT.

12:39 - THE DEPARTMENT COME OUT AND

12:40 - THEY'RE FROZEN DECIDE WHETHER

12:42 - ITS GUIDANCE OR WHETHER IT'S A

12:43 - POLICY AND DO WE HAVE TO FOLLOW

12:45 - IT. WE DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW IT

12:47 - AND SHOULD WE ALL GO BACK TO

12:48 - THE SCHOOL CODE WHICH IS THE

12:50 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY IS THE ONE

12:51 - THAT MAKES

12:51 - THE LAWS AND THE DEPARTMENT IS

12:53 - THE ONE TO ADMINISTER THOSE

12:55 - LAWS WILL YOUR HONOR RESPECT

12:56 - AND THE ISSUE OF THE SCHOOL

12:57 - CODE THIS COURT HAS SAID

12:59 - QUOTING RUBY NORTH CAMBRIA

13:01 - SCHOOL DISTRICT. 3 O 9 A SECOND

13:04 - 1, 7, 5,

13:05 - THAT THE STATUTE DOES NOT HAVE

13:07 - THE FORCE DESCRIBED TO THEM BY

13:09 - THEIR OPPONENTS. AND I'M

13:11 - QUOTING THE LEGISLATORS

13:13 - DIRECTION THAT SCHOOL SHOULD BE

13:14 - KEPT OPEN 180 DAYS.

13:16 - OF COURSE

13:17 - MEANS THE SCHOOL BOARD SHOULD

13:18 - SCHEDULE AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE

13:20 - FOR SCHOOL SESSIONS OF THIS

13:21 - DURATION HERE IS THE KEY BOARDS

13:23 - ARE NOT HOWEVER

13:25 - THEREBY REQUIRED TO DO EITHER

13:27 - THE IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE

13:28 - IMPRACTICAL THE CIRCUMSTANCES

13:30 - NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL.

13:31 - IT DOESN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION.

13:33 - WELL, YOU'RE YOU'RE YOU'RE

13:34 - SAYING THAT ITS GUIDANCE SO

13:36 - THEY WANT TO FOLLOW WITH THAT

13:37 - COULD FALL WOULD IF THEY DON'T

13:39 - WANT TO FOLLOW IT. THEY DON'T

13:40 - HAVE TO FOLLOW IT.

13:41 - >>AND THEN BUT THEN YOU GOING

13:42 - BACK TO SAYING THAT EVERYTHING

13:44 - IS UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL

13:46 - DISTRICT AND THAT'S JUST NOT

13:47 - HOW IT WORKS. I MEAN

13:48 - WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ALL

13:49 - THESE DIFFERENT RULES AND

13:51 - REGULATIONS FOR ALL THESE

13:52 - DIFFERENT SCHOOL DISTRICTS

13:53 - THROUGHOUT THE COMMONWEALTH AND

13:54 - THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE BEEN

13:55 - AN EVIL EYE ON EVEN EDUCATIONAL

13:57 - SYSTEM.

13:58 - >>WELL, YOUR HONOR, ESPECIALLY

13:59 - THE GUIDANCE

14:00 - IS PERMISSIVE IT'S NOT

14:02 - SOMETHING THAT SAYS SCHOOL

14:02 - DISTRICTS NECESSARILY HAVE TO

14:05 - DO SOMETHING IT'S

14:05 - A RECOMMENDATION FOR HOW TO

14:07 - CARRY OUT INSTRUCTION DURING A

14:09 - 10 LEAD TO DEADLY PANDEMIC WHEN

14:11 - THE ALTERNATIVE IS NO STRICT

14:12 - INSTRUCTION AT ALL.

14:13 - SO IT'S PERMISSIVE GUY IT'S NOT

14:15 - THERE'S NO THERE'S NOT A

14:16 - WRITTEN REQUIREMENT THAT SCHOOL

14:17 - DISTRICTS BUT COMPLY ITS

14:20 - GUIDANCE FOR HOW TO PROVIDE

14:21 - INSTRUCTIONS WHEN THE

14:22 - ALTERNATIVE IS NO INSTRUCTION

14:24 - WHICH THIS COURT HAS HELD

14:25 - IS PERMISSIBLE

14:26 - IN ACTION WITHIN WHAT WAS THE

14:28 - STATUTE ALLOWS FOR THE 180 DAY

14:31 - LANGUAGE IN THE STATUTE IS NOT

14:33 - SOME TYPE

14:34 - ABSOLUTE MANDATE TO TORY

14:36 - INFLEXIBLE. REQUIREMENT

14:39 - THAT YES THAT IS SOMETHING THE

14:40 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE TO

14:41 - SHOOT FOR AND HAVE TO AIM TO

14:43 - ACHIEVE OF COURSE, ABSOLUTELY I

14:45 - MEAN WHEN YOU HAVE TOO MANY

14:47 - SAYS YOU KNOW SNOW DAYS AND

14:48 - YOU'VE GONE.

14:49 - >>THE ON WHAT'S REQUIRED THEN

14:51 - THE STUDENTS STAY LONGER IN THE

14:52 - SUMMER TO MAKE UP FOR A

14:54 - 180 DAYS. THAT'S CORRECT YOUR

14:56 - HONOR BUT IN THIS CASE WHEN

14:57 - THERE'S A DEADLY PANDEMIC IT'S

14:58 - NOT TEMPORARY IN NATURE LIKE A

15:00 - FEW SNOW DAYS. THE ALTERNATIVE

15:02 - IS

15:02 - NO INSTRUCTION. SO IF NO

15:04 - INSTRUCTIONS FROM INSIDE THAT

15:06 - ISN'T THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE.

15:07 - WELL OR REQUIRING CHILDREN TO

15:09 - GO INITIALLY WHEN THE PANDEMIC

15:11 - WAS IT WAS WAS RAGING.

15:13 - AND PEOPLE WERE DYING IN GROSS

15:15 - NUMBERS TO REQUIRE CHILDREN TO

15:17 - ATTEND CLASSES IN PERSON, WHAT

15:19 - IS IT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE

15:20 - TALKING ABOUT WE'RE TALKING

15:21 - ABOUT A POLICY

15:22 - THE DISTRICT THAT THE

15:24 - DEPARTMENT ISSUED AND YOU'RE

15:25 - SAYING ITS GUIDANCE. THEY DON'T

15:26 - HAVE TO FOLLOW IT. YOUR HONOR,

15:28 - THE SPECIFIC POLICY SAYS THAT

15:31 - IT'S A PERMISSIVE POLICY.

15:33 - >>SO I'M I'M YEAH, THE

15:35 - GUIDANCE IS YOU KNOW THIS IS

15:37 - WHAT YOU CAN DO.

15:39 - >>DEPENDING ON THE SPECIFIC

15:40 - FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF YOUR

15:42 - SPECIFIC LOCALE I

15:44 - DON'T KNOW. I JUST SAY THAT YOU

15:46 - KNOW AGAIN IS PERMISSIVE SO

15:48 - IT'S IT'S THERE'S NO ALLEGATION

15:51 - THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE

15:52 - SCHOOL DISTRICT TO ANY SPECIFIC

15:53 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAD FOLLOWED

15:55 - SOME TYPE OF WAY. THE ONLY

15:56 - ALLEGATION IS THIS IS THE

15:58 - GUIDANCE AND OUR CHILDREN ARE

16:00 - RECEIVING REMOTE INSTRUCTION OR

16:01 - AT LEAST DID IN

16:01 - THE PAST. SO YOU KNOW I WOULD

16:05 - RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE THAT THIS

16:06 - IS SOME TYPE OF

16:07 - YOU KNOW POLICY THAT THAT IS

16:09 - ABSOLUTELY MANDATORY IN NATURE

16:11 - TO ADD TO THAT EXTENT COUNCIL

16:13 - MAY I ASK A QUESTION.

16:14 - >>I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SO

16:16 - WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT THE TIME

16:18 - BASICALLY WHEN AS YOU SAID

16:20 - WE'RE IN THE HEIGHT OF THE

16:21 - PANDEMIC AND THE MANDATE TO

16:24 - CLOSE SCHOOLS.

16:26 - CAME FROM THE GOVERNOR CORRECT

16:28 - THAT'S CORRECT OKAY AND DURING

16:30 - THAT TIME. IT WAS THE

16:31 - FLEXIBILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL

16:34 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT WOULD

16:36 - HAVE. THAT THAT WENT INTO

16:38 - ACTION SO TO SPEAK AND

16:41 - THIS TYPE OF INSTRUCTION

16:42 - WAS OFFERED AS OPPOSED TO

16:44 - HAVING THE SCHOOLS CLOSED AND

16:46 - THE CHILDREN NOT RECEIVED ANY

16:48 - EDUCATION DURING THAT TIME, I'M

16:49 - STARTING TO GET EXACTLY CORRECT

16:51 - OKAY THANK YOU AND THAT THAT IS

16:55 - >>CONSISTENT THAT WITH WITH

16:57 - WITH THIS COURT HELD IN ROUTE

16:58 - SO AGAIN IF THE ONLY

17:00 - ALTERNATIVE FOR FEASIBLE WHAT

17:02 - SORT OF WHAT WAS TO CLOSE

17:03 - SCHOOLS AND HAVE LIMITED OR NO

17:05 - INSTRUCTION. IT'S CERTAINLY

17:08 - WITHIN THE DIRECT

17:09 - THAT DISCRETION OF SCHOOL

17:11 - DISTRICTS TO OFFER A VIRTUAL

17:13 - INSTRUCTION AND THAT'S THE

17:14 - ALTERNATIVE AND THEN THE

17:15 - QUESTION AS WELL SO GUIDANCE BY

17:19 - DEFINITION TO ME MATT HER MISS

17:21 - OF GUIDANCE BEING PERMISSIVE.

17:24 - >>IS THERE A SITUATION WHERE

17:25 - THE LAW WOULD SAY THAT GUIDANCE

17:27 - IS MANDATORY AND IF YOU CAN

17:29 - THINK OF A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE

17:31 - THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

17:34 - >>I CAN IMAGINE, YEAH THAT

17:35 - THERE COULD BUT IN TERMS OF AN

17:37 - EXAMPLE PERHAPS YOU KNOW IF

17:40 - THIS WERE THAT YOU KNOW SCHOOL

17:42 - DISTRICTS ARE REQUIRED TO OFFER

17:44 - REMOTE CONSTRUCTION THAT IS

17:47 - IT GUIDANCE.

17:48 - >>IN THAT INSTANCE, AN ARGUMENT

17:49 - COULD BE MADE

17:50 - THAT THAT'S BINDING AND THE

17:52 - LANGUAGE IN THAT INSTANCE WOULD

17:53 - BE DIFFERENT THAT'S NOT WHAT

17:55 - WHAT WHAT HAPPENED HERE.

17:56 - AND THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT WHAT

17:57 - EXISTS CURRENTLY BUT IF IF IF

18:00 - IF IF THERE WERE TO JUST THE

18:02 - RISING HERE, YOU KNOW SOME TYPE

18:04 - OF LANGUAGE THAT WAS YOU KNOW

18:06 - MANDATORY IN NATURE TO THAT

18:08 - EXTENT THEN THEN AND THERE ARE

18:10 - CONSEQUENCES STEMMING FROM IT

18:11 - THEN I I THINK THERE'S AN

18:13 - ARGUMENT THAT.

18:15 - COULD BE SOMETHING MORE THAN

18:16 - JUST CUTS. AND I THINK YOU

18:19 - DIFFERENT.

18:21 - >>WHEN WERE YOU WHEN YOU HAVE

18:24 - TO JUST WAS GOING TO ASK YOU

18:25 - THANK YOU.

18:28 - FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTIONAL DAYS,

18:30 - THERE ARE 2 PROVISIONS THERE

18:32 - THAT TALK ABOUT.

18:34 - APPLIES WHEN A SCHOOL BUILDING

18:35 - IS PREVENTED FROM OPENING.

18:39 - AND UNDER FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION

18:40 - DAY PREVENTS A SCHOOL BUILDING

18:42 - FROM OPENING DUE TO ANY OF THE

18:43 - FOLLOWING ONE IS A DISEASE

18:45 - EPIDEMIC. HOW DO

18:47 - WE JUDGE WEATHER PREVENTED A

18:50 - SCHOOL BUILDING FROM BEING OPEN

18:51 - ASIDE FROM THE FACT OF WEATHER.

18:53 - IF THE BUILDING IS NOT OPEN OUR

18:55 - STUDENTS. RECEIVING THERE

18:59 - THERE. THEY'RE MANDATORY

19:00 - EDUCATION, BUT HOW DO WE DECIDE

19:02 - IF IT'S IT

19:05 - PREVENTING THE SCHOOL FROM

19:07 - OPENING WHEN OTHER SCHOOLS WERE

19:09 - IN

19:09 - FACT OPEN. DURING THAT SAME

19:11 - TIME PERIOD OUTSIDE OF WHEN

19:13 - THERE WAS A MANDATORY A MANDATE

19:15 - TO CLOSE

19:15 - THE SCHOOLS.

19:16 - >>I YOUR YOUR HONOR IT ALL IF

19:19 - HOPEFULLY THIS WILL ANSWER THE

19:20 - QUESTION IF NOT PLEASE PLEASE

19:21 - LET ME KNOW, BUT I THINK 15 '06

19:23 - THAT THE FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION A

19:25 - PROVISION THAT YOU'RE READING.

19:27 - REAL IT DEALS WITH TEMPORARY

19:29 - DISRUPTIONS SO TO THE

19:31 - EXTENT THAT THERE IS YOU KNOW

19:33 - THE SNOW DAY OR MORE REGIONAL,

19:35 - YOU KNOW FLU OUTBREAK OR

19:36 - SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAS A

19:37 - TEMPORARY DISRUPTION. THAT'S

19:40 - WHEN 15 '06 COMES

19:41 - INTO PLAY. THERE'S INDICATION

19:45 - THE 15 '06 WAS SOMEHOW MEANT

19:47 - TO OVERRIDE.

19:48 - >>WHOLESALE YOU'RE GETTING INTO

19:50 - THE WHOLE QUESTION OF WHAT'S

19:51 - TEMPORARY IS TEMPORARY A MONTH

19:53 - 2

19:55 - A YEAR. TO THERE'S NO

19:57 - DEFINITION THAT'S CORRECT THE

19:58 - SCHOOL CODE SO

20:00 - WELL THAT DIDN'T ANSWER THE

20:01 - QUESTION. BUT I WANT TO BELIEVE

20:02 - ARE THE TIME

20:03 - FACTOR SO

20:04 - MAYBE AS WE ONE MORE QUESTION

20:08 - IS WHEN IT CLARIFIED THAT THE

20:09 - TIME PAIR WERE TALKING ABOUT.

20:11 - >>IS NOT DOING THAT TIME PERIOD

20:13 - WITH THE GOVERNOR MANDATED THAT

20:15 - EVERYTHING IS SHUT DOWN.

20:17 - THAT'S CORRECT JOHN THAT WAS

20:18 - AFTER IT WAS AFTER THE GOVERNOR

20:20 - HAS LIVED

20:21 - AT THAT THE CANDIDATES I WANT

20:23 - TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE ALL THE

20:24 - SAME AGE ABOUT WHAT THE

20:25 - TIMEFRAME IS AND YOU DON'T

20:27 - FIGHT IT. DOUG TALENT IS SAYING

20:29 - ALL OF

20:29 - THE GOVERNOR. SO THAT WE'RE

20:31 - SHUTTING EVERYTHING DOWN THAT'S

20:32 - NOT THE TIME PERIOD THAT WE'RE

20:33 - TALKING ABOUT NO YOUR HONOR

20:34 - THAT'S THAT'S CORRECT. THANK

20:36 - YOU. YES. THANK YOU.

20:46 - THERE ARE OTHERS, I LIKED IT.

20:48 - WHEN QUESTIONED THE 3 MINUTES

20:49 - FOR REBUTTAL WITH ME AND SAID

20:51 - YOU'RE NOT YOU DON'T GET

20:53 - REBUTTAL. THEY DON'T GET

20:54 - RESULTS ARE YOU OKAY, THANK YOU

20:57 - CROSS OKAY.

20:57 - >>THEY PLEAS COURT MY NAME IS

20:58 - WALTERS IN LONG, I REPRESENT

21:00 - THE PETITIONERS WE HAVE THE

21:01 - COMMONWEALTH CONCEDING THAT THE

21:03 - PUBLIC SCHOOL CODE AND SECTION

21:05 - 15 DASH

21:06 - 15 OH ONE REQUIRES THAT

21:08 - SCHOOLS QUOTE SHALL BE KEPT

21:10 - OPEN FOR AT LEAST 180 DAYS FOR

21:12 - PURPOSE OF INSTRUCTION.

21:14 - IT ALSO REQUIRES SCHOOL

21:15 - DISTRICTS THE SCHOOL CODE DOES

21:16 - TO PROVIDE 900 HOURS AT LEAST

21:18 - OF INSTRUCTION DURING THOSE

21:20 - DAYS.

21:21 - WANT TO DRILL DOWN ON WHAT THE

21:22 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S

21:24 - POLICY IS IT MAINTAINS A POLICY

21:27 - RIGHT NOW THAT IS IN EFFECT

21:29 - THAT WOULD PERMIT ANY SCHOOL

21:30 - DISTRICT TO FEEL THAT

21:32 - 180 DAY REQUIREMENT TO FULLY

21:35 - REMOTE INSTRUCTION

21:37 - ZOOM INSTRUCTION IN-PERSON

21:38 - INSTRUCTION OR A COMBINATION OF

21:40 - THE 2 WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE.

21:43 - AND WITHOUT REASON. THEY ALSO

21:45 - COUNCIL, I'M SORRY BUT JUST 2.

21:48 - >>CLARIFY THEN YOUR LOOKING

21:50 - FOR FORWARD. WE'RE LOOKING

21:52 - RELIEF AS OF NOW WHERE WHENEVER

21:55 - THE COURT WOULD

21:55 - RULE THAT THE DEPARTMENT NOT BE

21:58 - ALLOWED TO DOUBLE GAME IS.

22:04 - POLICY CORRECT, CORRECT CORRECT

22:06 - YOUR HONOR WE'RE ASKING FOR

22:07 - APPROPRIATE PROSPECTIVE REALLY

22:09 - DECLARATORY RELIEF ARE THESE

22:11 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT ARE.

22:13 - >>INVOLVED YEAR THE.

22:17 - AND IS IT ONLY REALLY FOR THE

22:18 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT ARE.

22:22 - THESE CHILDREN ARE

22:24 - ARE ATTENDING. WE KNOW THAT WE

22:26 - THE HARM IS I THINK IT'S HARM

22:28 - TO THESE CHILDREN CORRECT HARM

22:29 - TO THESE CHILDREN IT HARMS THE

22:31 - PARENTS RIGHTS TO SEND THEIR

22:32 - CHILDREN AND HAVE THE RIGHT FOR

22:33 - AN IN-PERSON EDUCATION, SO ARE

22:34 - THOSE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, USING

22:38 - REMOTE, LEARNING

22:40 - CAROLEE TODAY. I AM NOT AWARE

22:42 - OF WHAT SCHOOL JURORS ARE

22:43 - REMOTE, BUT THEY HAVE THE

22:44 - AUTHORITY TO

22:44 - DO SO.

22:45 - >>ONE OF JUST PIVOT BACK REAL

22:47 - QUICK ON THE WHAT I WHAT WITH

22:50 - THE INJURIES AND B.

22:52 - >>THE THREAT, THE IMMINENT

22:53 - THREAT OF HARM YOUR HONOR.

22:55 - >>AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE

22:56 - ONLY A FEW WEEKS AGO THE

22:57 - COMMONWEALTH'S LARGEST TEACHERS

22:58 - UNION THREATENED TO GO FULLY

23:01 - REMOTE IF CERTAIN DEMANDS

23:02 - WEREN'T MET THAT THREAT WAS

23:05 - MADE POSSIBLE BY THE EXISTENCE

23:07 - OF THIS POLICY,

23:08 - THEIR ABILITY TO DECLARE THAT

23:09 - WE'RE GOING FULLY REMOTE AND

23:12 - WITHOUT JEOPARDIZING MEETING AT

23:15 - 180 DAY SCHOOL CALENDAR IS MADE

23:16 - POSSIBLE BY THE POLICIES WHILE

23:18 - I DON'T I'M NOT AWARE OF IT

23:19 - ACTUALLY CARING THERE IS A

23:21 - THREAT AND ONGOING THREAT THAT

23:22 - MAY OCCUR JUST RECENTLY HAD A

23:24 - VERY DIRECT THEN THERE'S JUST

23:29 - >>DON'T YOU NEED IT TO ACTUALLY

23:30 - BE HAPPENING AND THEN TO

23:31 - ASSOCIATE THAT TO AN INDIVIDUAL

23:33 - WHO HAS BEEN HARMED IN A

23:34 - SPECIFIC WAY.

23:36 - >>WELL YOUR HONOR WE WE MUST

23:38 - REMEMBER THAT WHEN THIS

23:39 - PETITION WAS FILED IN THE

23:40 - SUMMER OF

23:41 - 2020. SCHOOLS WERE CLOSED

23:44 - SCHOOLS WERE USING THE VIRTUAL

23:45 - POLICY IN STANDING IS FROM THE

23:48 - PETITIONERS PERSPECTIVE.

23:50 - IT IS VIEWED AS WHAT IS THE

23:51 - POINT AT THE TISCH

23:52 - UNDERSTANDING AT THE TIME IT IS

23:53 - FILED. THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT

23:56 - WITHDRAWN

23:56 - THE POLICY. DO YOU HAVE

23:58 - AUTHORITY FOR THAT PROPOSITION

24:00 - I COULD PROVIDE ANY BECAUSE I.

24:02 - >>MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT

24:05 - STANDING WOULD NEED TO BE

24:06 - PRESENT FOR THE ENTIRE TIME OF

24:09 - THE CASE OTHERWISE IT COULD.

24:13 - YOU KNOW WHO IT IS A TIME

24:14 - THAT THE RELIEF IS GIVEN YOU

24:16 - WOULD STILL NEED TO HAVE

24:17 - STANDING BY THINK YOUR YOUR

24:18 - HONOR THERE HASN'T BEEN AN

24:19 - ALLEGATION THAT THIS CASE HAS

24:20 - BEEN FILMING ARE OBJECTING TO

24:21 - THIS YOU YOUR HONOR WHICH I

24:23 - THINK IS WHEN YOUR HONOR'S

24:24 - TALKING ABOUT.

24:25 - >>THERE IS NO ALLEGATION THAT

24:26 - THIS CASE MOVED AND NEITHER

24:27 - COULD THE COMMONWEALTH TAKE

24:28 - THAT POSITION RIGHT NOW I WAS

24:29 - JUST QUESTIONING WHEN YOU SAID

24:31 - ALL THEY NEEDED TO HAVE WAS

24:32 - STANDING AT THE TIME THEY

24:33 - FILED IT.

24:34 - >>HEY LET'S SAY FOR ARGUMENT'S

24:36 - SAKE THAT YOU'RE

24:36 - CORRECT ABOUT THE FACTS THE

24:38 - NEED TO HAVE BEEN A BIRD AT THE

24:40 - TIME THAT YOU FILED. WHAT FACTS

24:43 - DID YOU EVER

24:44 - THAT WILL BE TO SPECIFICALLY OF

24:46 - THE INJURY RATHER THAN

24:47 - SOMETHING SPECULATIVE. YOU KNOW

24:49 - WHILE WE ALL UNDERSTAND THE

24:50 - CONCERN. WHAT ARE THE

24:52 - SPECIFIC INJURIES.

24:55 - >>THE AMENDED PETITION, YOUR

24:56 - HONOR AT THAT PARAGRAPH SAYS

24:58 - 6.33 WE POINT TO THE STATUTORY

25:00 - RIGHT THAT WE BELIEVE THAT

25:02 - THESE PARENTS HAVE TO HAVE AN

25:03 - IN-PERSON EDUCATION FOR THEIR

25:04 - CHILDREN. A VIOLATION OF

25:06 - STATUTORY RIGHT IS A CLEAR

25:07 - GROUNDS

25:08 - FOR STANDING. WE'VE ALSO PLEAD

25:10 - THE PSYCHOLOGICAL

25:11 - HARM THAT HAS BEFALLEN THE

25:13 - CHILDREN OF THE OF THESE

25:14 - PARENTS HERE AS WELL THAT THAT

25:15 - APPEARS THAT THE AMENDED

25:16 - PETITION A

25:17 - PARAGRAPH 34TH THIS ALLEGATION

25:19 - THAT THERE HAS TO BE IT FURTHER

25:21 - SPECIFICITY OF PLEADING BEHIND

25:23 - PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM HAS NO

25:25 - SUPPORT IN

25:25 - PENNSYLVANIA LAW THAT'S LIKE

25:27 - SAYING A PLAINTIFF IN A

25:28 - PERSONAL INJURY CASE THAT SAYS

25:30 - THEY SUFFERED

25:30 - EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, WE'RE SOFT

25:32 - TISSUE INJURY OR SOMETHING LIKE

25:34 - THAT HAS TO GET INTO SPECIFICS.

25:35 - WHAT WHAT KIND OF SOFT INJURY

25:37 - INJURED INJURY DO YOU HAVEN'T

25:38 - DONE IT THOUGH HAVE TO BE TIED.

25:41 - 2.

25:42 - >>THE HARM DOESN'T THAT YOU

25:43 - CAN'T JUST SAY PSYCHOLOGICAL

25:45 - HARM YOU HAVE TO SAY IT'S

25:46 - PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM THAT A RUSE

25:48 - FROM THIS IN

25:49 - SOME WAY.

25:50 - >>YOUR HONOR I THINK WE DO

25:51 - SUFFICIENTLY PLEADED THAT IN

25:52 - THE COMPLAINT THAT IT IS TIED

25:53 - TO IT AND THESE THESE THIS IS

25:55 - THE HARM THAT IS IMMEDIATE AND

25:56 - DIRECT FROM THIS POLICY.

25:58 - >>OKAY, SO IF WE'RE GOING TO

25:59 - TIE THE HARM I WANT TO GO BACK

26:01 - TO THIS CONCEPT OF GUIDANCE

26:03 - AND.

26:05 - I'M GOING TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE I

26:06 - JUST KEEP THINKING REPEATEDLY

26:08 - ABOUT THIS SCENE FROM A MOVIE

26:10 - IN PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN AND

26:11 - ELIZABETH SWANN STANDS ON

26:13 - THE CODE AND SHE SAYS I'M

26:14 - STANDING ON THE CODE OF PARLAY

26:16 - AND THEN THE PIRATES AS THE

26:18 - REALLY

26:18 - MORE GUIDELINES. SO IF IT'S

26:21 - MORE GUIDANCE THAN THE CODE HOW

26:24 - DO WE DO

26:25 - THAT LINK.

26:27 - >>I'M GLAD YOU THAT WAS

26:28 - APPOINTED I WANT TO GET BACK TO

26:29 - YOUR HONOR SO GLAD YOU BROUGHT

26:30 - THE ARGUMENT THERE IT'S MORE

26:32 - THAN JUST GUIDANCE.

26:33 - IF YOU LOOK AT THE POLICY THAT

26:35 - APPEARS CURRENTLY ON THE

26:36 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S

26:37 - WEB SITE IN ORDER TO INSTITUTE

26:39 - IN A REMOTE LEARNING MODEL TO

26:40 - MEET THE 180 DAYS.

26:43 - A SCHOOL DISTRICT NEEDS

26:43 - CLEARANCE FROM THE DEPARTMENT

26:45 - OF EDUCATION THERE'S A FORM

26:46 - THEY NEED TO FILL OUT THERE'S A

26:47 - PLAN THAT HE'S BE CREATED AND

26:49 - THE PERMISSION TO DO IT IT'S

26:50 - NOT JUST SAYING THIS IS OUR

26:52 - INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE AND

26:54 - HERE'S HOW YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO

26:55 - MEET 180 DAYS.

26:56 - IT'S IF YOU'RE GOING TO USE THE

26:58 - VIRTUAL LEARNING THE MEDIA 180

27:00 - DAYS. TELL US WHAT YOUR PLAN IS

27:03 - WILL

27:03 - APPROVE IT AND WE'LL MEET 2.

27:05 - IT IS DOES NOT IT'S NOT SIMPLY

27:06 - GUIDANCE. IT'S A POLICY AND

27:09 - THAT POLICY. IT'S ALSO A POLICY

27:11 - THAT SAYS THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS

27:13 - NOTHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO

27:14 - YOU WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE

27:16 - AWAY EDUCATION DOLLARS WE'RE

27:17 - NOT GOING TO SUE YOU FOR THAT

27:18 - BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN

27:19 - DO THIS. WHAT DO YOU THINK THE

27:21 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHOULD BE

27:22 - STEPPING IN HERE THAT THE

27:23 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS HAD A LONG

27:25 - TIME.

27:25 - >>SINCE THIS PANDEMIC STARTED

27:27 - TO KNOW WHAT THE ISSUES ARE.

27:30 - AND IT'S ALMOST LIKE YOU'RE

27:31 - ASKING

27:31 - THIS COURT TO COME AND WEIGH IN

27:34 - ON WHAT THE POLICY IS

27:36 - AND I DON'T THINK THIS COURT TO

27:37 - BE WEIGHING IN ON THE RIGHT OR

27:39 - THE WRONG IN THE POLICY IN THE

27:40 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY NEED TO START

27:41 - TAKING SOME ACTION YEAR.

27:43 - AND LISTENING TO THE CITIZENS

27:44 - OF PENNSYLVANIA AND DETERMINE

27:47 - WHAT THE LAW REALLY MEANS WHAT

27:49 - IT NEEDS TO SAY

27:51 - IN ORDER TO BE RESPONSIVE TO

27:53 - THE CITIZENS OF THIS GREAT

27:54 - COMMONWEALTH.

27:56 - >>RESPECTFULLY YOUR HONOR I

27:57 - THINK THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

27:58 - HAS DONE THAT ALREADY TWICE.

28:01 - AND THIS IS THE JUDGE DO IS

28:02 - QUESTION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED

28:03 - DURING THE HEIGHT OF THE

28:04 - PANDEMIC IN ORDER TO USE THE

28:06 - FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION DAYS, THE

28:08 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY PASSED

28:09 - LEGISLATION THAT SAYS WE'RE

28:11 - GOING TO LIFT THE CAP.

28:12 - ONE FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION DAYS

28:13 - WHICH ARE CURRENTLY CAPPED AT 5

28:15 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS CAN USE AN

28:16 - UNLIMITED NUMBER OF FLEXIBLE

28:19 - INSTRUCTION DAYS TO COMPLETE

28:21 - THE 2019 2020 SCHOOL YEAR.

28:23 - THEY NEED TO GET THAT AUTHORITY

28:24 - FROM THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, THE

28:26 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY WAS VERY CLEAR

28:27 - IN THAT

28:28 - SPECIAL LEGISLATION THAT IT

28:29 - ONLY APPLIED TO THE 2019

28:32 - 2020 SCHOOL YEAR. THAT THAT

28:34 - APPEAR THAT SECTION 1515 OH ONE

28:38 - 0.8 B 2.

28:40 - THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER PORTION

28:42 - OF SPECIAL LEGISLATION IN THAT

28:43 - SAME BILL

28:44 - THAT SAID NOT WITHSTANDING ANY

28:47 - OTHER ORDERS OF THE GOVERNOR OF

28:49 - THE COMMONWEALTH. THE

28:51 - 180 DAY.

28:52 - SCHOOL REQUIREMENT OR REQUIRE

28:55 - THAT SCHOOLS BE KEPT OPEN.

28:58 - BEGINS AGAIN WITH THE 2020 2021

29:02 - SCHOOL YEAR. THIS THAT THE

29:04 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY, YOUR HONOR

29:05 - WAS

29:05 - VERY SPECIFIC ON THIS IS WHY

29:07 - THE WHY ARE WE HERE ARE YOU

29:08 - DOING ABOUT IT I MEAN THERE IS

29:10 - A HEAD ON.

29:11 - >>WHETHER OR NOT IT MEANS IN

29:13 - PERSON FACE TO FACE WITH THE

29:14 - MEANS VIRTUAL. SO I DON'T KNOW

29:17 - THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IS

29:18 - ACTUALLY CLARIFIED WHAT

29:20 - IT MEANS.

29:21 - >>WHAT WAS ESPECIALLY YOUR

29:22 - HONOR I THINK THAT IF THE IF WE

29:23 - LOOK AT THE TEXT OF THE STATUTE

29:25 - ITSELF THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT

29:27 - WHAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

29:27 - MEETING AND THE REASON WE'RE

29:28 - HERE IS THE COMMONWEALTH HAS A

29:30 - POLICY THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF

29:32 - THE

29:32 - SCHOOL CODE THAT INCLUDES THOSE

29:34 - 2 SECTIONS AND WE WE HAVE THAT

29:36 - IN OUR PETITION. WE HAVE THAT

29:37 - IN THE FURTHER BRIEFING THAT

29:38 - THAT THESE 2 SECTIONS ONLY

29:40 - CLARIFY THAT FLEXIBLE

29:41 - INSTRUCTION DAYS COULD ONLY BE

29:43 - USED IN A LIMITED AMOUNT OF

29:45 - TIME FOR THE 2019 2020 SCHOOL

29:48 - YEAR WE'RE NOW IN THE 2021

29:50 - 2022 SCHOOL YEAR THIS POLICY

29:51 - CONTINUES AND THAT'S WHEN THEY

29:53 - SIMPLY SAY THE DEPARTMENT IS

29:54 - VIOLATING THE LAW. EXACTLY YOUR

29:57 - HONOR.

29:58 - WE OUR PETITION IS SQUARELY ON

30:01 - THE DEPARTMENT HAS A POLICY

30:03 - THAT RUNS HEAD FIRST

30:05 - INTO THE PUBLIC SCHOOL CODE AND

30:06 - WHAT THE PUBLIC SCHOOL

30:07 - CODE REQUIRES SPECIFIC EXCUSE

30:10 - ME I'M SORRY, BUT THE BUT THE

30:12 - THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC

30:14 - INSTANCES.

30:15 - >>WHERE RIGHT NOW THE POLICY IS

30:17 - BEING IT MINISTER IT'S JUST

30:20 - POLICY BUT

30:22 - IN YOUR COMPLAINT THERE ARE NO

30:23 - SPECIFIC INSTANCES WHERE THE

30:25 - POLICY IS BEING INSTITUTED IN

30:28 - CAUSING HARM THAT HE IS BEING

30:29 - ALLEGED WELL IN THE IN THE

30:32 - COMPLAINT, THERE IS YOUR HONOR

30:33 - BECAUSE AT THE TIME THE

30:33 - COMPLAINT WAS FILED.

30:35 - >>ALL THE SCHOOLS WERE CLOSED.

30:37 - >>BUT SITTING HERE TODAY ARE I

30:39 - AWARE OF ANY SCHOOLS IN THE

30:40 - COMMONWEALTH THAT ARE USING

30:41 - VIRTUAL LEARNING TO ME THE

30:42 - WE'RE HAVE REFUSED IT

30:44 - I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER FOR THE

30:45 - COURT I THINK YOU'RE SITE

30:47 - COUNCIL YOUR POINT IS THAT AS

30:50 - AS THIS THE LANGUAGE READS.

30:53 - THEY CAN APPLY ANY POINT

30:54 - SCHOOL DISTRICT TO VISIT TO

30:57 - STAB A PROGRAM.

30:59 - SO IT'S NOT AS IF THEY DON'T

31:01 - HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT

31:03 - CURRENTLY CORRECT.

31:04 - CORRECT AND THE PROGRAMS THAT

31:07 - THE

31:07 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS WOULD HAVE

31:09 - FILED FOR THEIR IN PLACE

31:11 - THEY'VE BEEN APPROVED UNDER THE

31:12 - POLICY FROM THE COMMONWEALTH.

31:14 - >>SO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WILL

31:15 - NEED ANYTHING MORE THEY'VE

31:16 - GOTTEN CLEARANCE FROM THE

31:16 - COMMONWEALTH, THEY COULD CLOSE

31:18 - TOMORROW. THEY COULD CLOSE NEXT

31:19 - WEEK IF THEY FEEL LIKE IT.

31:21 - WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT IS

31:23 - WHAT VIOLATES THE SCHOOL CODE

31:24 - THIS POLICY CAN NOT STAND WE

31:26 - DON'T KNOW YOU KNOW IT'S GOING

31:27 - TO TOMORROW OR NEXT WEEK WE YOU

31:29 - KNOW WE DO KNOW THAT THE THREAT

31:30 - OF ONGOING HARM EXIST THE

31:32 - POLICY IS IN PLACE

31:33 - AND IT'S CAPABLE OF REPETITION

31:36 - COUNTRY WANTS IT.

31:38 - >>MISTER SMOCK COULD ADDRESS

31:40 - FOR US THEY NEED SURE OF THE

31:42 - ACTUAL PETITIONERS WHERE THE

31:46 - PARENTS WHO ARE BRINGING THE

31:48 - ACTION ON BEHALF OF THE

31:49 - CHILDREN THAT HAVE BEEN

31:51 - INJURED.

31:52 - >>IT'S BOTH YOUR HONOR I THINK

31:54 - IT'S PARENTS WHO HAVE A RIGHT

31:55 - TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN

31:56 - TO SCHOOL AND A SCHOOL BUILDING

31:58 - THAT IS OPEN FOR IN-PERSON

31:59 - INSTRUCTION AND IT IS THEIR

32:01 - INJURY. THEIR INJURY IS THE

32:03 - STATUTORY RIGHT

32:04 - TO HAVE A SCHOOL OPEN FOR

32:06 - INSTRUCTION FOR THEIR FOR THE

32:08 - EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN

32:09 - THEY HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL IS

32:10 - THAT DIFFERENT FROM ANYBODY

32:11 - ELSE IS RIGHT BECAUSE NOT

32:13 - EVERYBODY ELSE IS APPARENT THAT

32:14 - HAS SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN THEY

32:15 - CAN SEND THEIR KIDS TO PUBLIC

32:16 - SCHOOL. THEY'RE BRINGING THIS

32:17 - ON BEHALF OF

32:18 - ALL PARENTS. WELL THEY'RE BEING

32:20 - IT HAD CHILDREN THEY'RE BEING

32:22 - IN BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND THE

32:23 - AND

32:25 - THE ASSOCIATION OF PETITIONERS

32:27 - BRING IT ON BEHALF OF THEIR

32:28 - MEMBERS I CAN'T SAY THAT IT

32:29 - SAYS WE'VE ASKED FOR A CLASS

32:30 - STATUS HERE SO EACH OF THOSE

32:32 - PARENTS THOUGH HAVE A CHILD

32:33 - THAT HAS SPECIFICALLY BEEN

32:35 - HARMED, CORRECT YOUR HONOR.

32:38 - WHAT ABOUT

32:38 - CYBER SCHOOLS. WHOLE DIFFERENT

32:41 - SECTION OF THE SCHOOL CODE

32:42 - RIGHT OR NOT HEAR ABOUT CYBER

32:43 - SCHOOLS, WHETHER THE CYBER

32:44 - SCHOOLS BY SCHOOL GOT THE

32:46 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS SPOKEN HAS

32:47 - PASSED LEGISLATION THAT GOVERNS

32:49 - CYBER SCHOOLS WERE TALKING

32:50 - ABOUT TRADITIONAL SCHOOLS WITH

32:51 - SCHOOL BUILDINGS.

32:54 - >>I JUST WONDER IF YOU WANT TO

32:55 - ADDRESS THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE

32:56 - THE QUESTION IS BUT THERE'S

32:58 - A SCHOOL. YOU HAVE TO BE THE

33:00 - BUILDING DOES IT HAVE TO

33:01 - BE OPEN. AND CAN YOU ADDRESS

33:03 - THE LANGUAGE AND 15 '06 THAT

33:05 - ACTUALLY

33:05 - REQUIRES THAT WHEN THE SCHOOL

33:07 - BUILDING A SCHOOL BUILDING IS

33:09 - PREVENTED FROM OPENING AND THEN

33:10 - AGAIN PREVENTS A SCHOOL

33:12 - BUILDING FROM OPENING DO ANY OF

33:13 - THE FOLLOWING I HAVE TO YOUR

33:15 - HONOR IT.

33:16 - >>THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THE

33:17 - SCHOOL CODE SECTION 15 OH ONE

33:19 - SO SAYS SHALL BE KEPT OPEN.

33:21 - >>AND IT. IT IS WE AGREE THAT

33:24 - IT DOESN'T SAY.

33:26 - >>FOR IN-PERSON INSTRUCTION BUT

33:28 - IT DOESN'T NEED TO

33:29 - BECAUSE THE PHRASE KEPT OPEN IN

33:31 - 1949 WHEN THE SCHOOL CODE WAS

33:33 - PASSED, COULD MEAN ONLY ONE

33:35 - THING

33:35 - OPEN WITH WITH CHILDREN IN

33:37 - SCHOOL OBVIOUSLY THE 1919 49 TO

33:39 - THE DISTRICT DIDN'T HAVE THE

33:41 - ABILITY TO INSTRUCT STUDENTS

33:42 - ANY

33:42 - OTHER WAY AND IF AN END IN

33:44 - 1949, IT MEANS THAT NOW THAT

33:46 - DEFINITION OF THE TERM KEPT

33:47 - OPEN DOESN'T CHANGE WITH

33:48 - THE TIMES. HOWEVER YOUR HONOR I

33:51 - THINK YOUR TO YOUR HONOR'S

33:52 - POINT THERE IS ANY DOUBT AS TO

33:53 - WHAT KEPT OPEN MEANS IN SECTION

33:56 - 15 OH ONE WE ALL WE JUST HAVE

33:58 - TO LOOK TO SECTION 15 '06.

33:59 - THAT'S THE SECTION THAT GIVES A

34:01 - SPECIFIC DEFINITION FOR A

34:02 - FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION DAY AND A

34:04 - FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION DAY RATHER

34:07 - THAT OPPOSED TO A A A A A OTHER

34:10 - IS WHEN A SCHOOL BUILDING IS

34:12 - CLOSED FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS,

34:14 - INCLUDING ONE DISEASE EPIDEMIC

34:16 - INCLUDES HAZARDOUS WEATHER LAW

34:17 - ENFORCE EMERGENCY INAUDIBLE

34:19 - SCHOOL BUSES. SO IT'S IT IT.

34:21 - IT'S CLEAR THAT A FLEXIBLE

34:22 - INSTRUCTION DAY UNDER SECTION

34:24 - 15 '06 IS

34:25 - A DAY WHEN THE SCHOOL BUILDING

34:27 - CANNOT BE OPEN TO RECEIVE

34:29 - STUDENTS TO BE PHYSICALLY

34:30 - PRESENT IN THE BUILDING FOR

34:32 - IN-PERSON INSTRUCTION AND IN

34:34 - ORDER TO TO INSTRUCT STUDENTS

34:36 - ON A FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION DAY.

34:38 - THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SAID HAS

34:39 - SAID WE CAN USE VIRTUAL OR ZOOM

34:42 - LEARNING. STUDENTS CAN LEARN

34:43 - FROM HOME. BUT SECTION

34:46 - 15 '06 IS ALSO CLEAR IT'S

34:48 - CAPPED AT 5 SCHOOL DISTRICTS

34:50 - CAN ONLY USE 5

34:51 - THAT IS WHY THAT SPECIAL

34:52 - LEGISLATION WAS REQUIRED IN

34:54 - MARCH OF 2020 TO LIFT THE CAP.

34:57 - AND BY THE WAY EVEN BEFORE

34:58 - FLEXIBLE INSTRUCTION DAYS FOUND

34:59 - THEIR WAY INTO THE SCHOOL CODE

35:01 - IN

35:01 - 2019. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

35:03 - ACTED WITH SPECIAL LEGISLATION.

35:06 - 2 MILLION OR 8 THE EFFECTS OF

35:07 - THE 100 AND A DAY TO DAY

35:09 - REQUIREMENT.

35:11 - FOR NATURAL DISASTERS AND OTHER

35:12 - EVENTS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS

35:14 - THEIR

35:14 - SPECIAL LEGISLATION WHERE

35:15 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE BUILDINGS

35:16 - WERE CLOSED BECAUSE OF FLOODS

35:18 - AND AND NATURAL DISASTERS

35:20 - AND SNOWSTORMS SPECIAL

35:21 - LEGISLATION WAS PASSED THAT

35:22 - SAYS YOU KNOW FOR THIS SCHOOL

35:24 - DISTRICT IN THIS

35:25 - SCHOOL YEAR. WE WE'RE NOT GOING

35:27 - TO HAVE TO DO THE

35:28 - 180 DAYS THEY RECOGNIZE THAT IT

35:30 - WAS IMMUTABLE AND THAT'S THAT'S

35:31 - THAT THIS COURT'S DECISION AND

35:33 - SCANLON SCANLON SAYS IS A

35:35 - THRESHOLD MATTER OF EDUCATIONAL

35:37 - POLICY THAT THAT LIES FIRMLY

35:39 - WITHIN THE GHENT OF THE GENERAL

35:41 - ASSEMBLY IN ITS IMMUTABLE

35:42 - WITHOUT A SCHOOL DISTRICT ON

35:43 - ITS OWN. YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE

35:45 - SCHOOL CALENDAR TO HAVE LESS

35:47 - THAN 180 DAYS AND SCANLON WAS

35:49 - THEY WERE TRYING TO PRODUCE THE

35:50 - SCHOOL YEAR 265 DAYS TO THE

35:53 - BLUNT THE IMPACT OF HIS TEACHER

35:54 - STRIKE. BUT THIS COURT

35:55 - ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE AND

35:56 - SCANLON AND THAT IS WHAT THE

35:58 - COMMONWEALTH IS DOING TRYING TO

35:59 - DO HERE THAT YOU NEED TO DO

36:01 - EXACTLY WHAT THE SCHOOL

36:02 - DISTRICT SCANLON DID AND

36:04 - IRONICALLY THE COMMONWEALTH

36:06 - THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SAYS

36:07 - FUNDING ACTIVITY. I SEE IT

36:09 - MIGHT MY TIME IS EXPIRED RIGHT

36:10 - UNLESS THE COURT HAS ANY

36:11 - QUESTIONS I WOULD

36:12 - WE CONCLUDE.

36:13 - >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH, WE

36:15 - APPRECIATE YOUR ARGUMENTS.

36:17 - AND NOW YOU HAVE YOUR 3

36:18 - MINUTES. THANK

36:20 - >>I WILL TRY TO BETTER JOB OF

36:21 - ADDRESSING JUDGMENT CALL AS

36:22 - QUESTION REGARDING THE

36:23 - INTERPLAY BETWEEN SECTION 15

36:25 - '06. SECTION 15 OH ONE

36:28 - WHICH. SO

36:31 - AND THE QUESTION HERE IS IS IN

36:34 - IN

36:34 - 15 OH ONE. THE WORDS KEPT OPEN

36:37 - REQUIRE IN

36:39 - PERSON INSTRUCTION. THE

36:40 - LEGISLATURE COULD HAVE VERY

36:42 - SIMPLY SAID SO BUT DIDN'T YOU

36:44 - SO THE ASSUMPTION IS NOT TO THE

36:46 - THAT THE RULES OF

36:47 - STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

36:48 - >>REQUIRE OR PROHIBIT THE

36:51 - COURT. BUT FROM INSERTING WORDS

36:54 - INTO THE STATUE THAT DON'T

36:55 - EXIST THOSE WORKING ON IS VERY

36:57 - MATERIAL THOUGH DON'T WE READ

36:58 - THEM TOGETHER, ESPECIALLY IF

37:00 - WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND 15 OH

37:02 - 6.15 OH ONE, YES, YOU YOU YOU

37:04 - DO YOUR HONOR BUT AGAIN 15 '06

37:06 - IS AN OPPOSITE.

37:07 - >>BECAUSE 15 '06 ONLY CONSIDERS

37:09 - ONLY CONTEMPLATES THE

37:10 - TEMPORARY DISRUPTION. MY

37:13 - COLLEAGUE HERE WITH WAS

37:14 - REFERRING TO 1949, WELL, YOU

37:17 - KNOW THERE WAS WE WERE IN THE

37:18 - MIDST OF THE COLD WAR IN 1949,

37:20 - AND THERE WERE INSTANCES WHEN

37:22 - THERE ARE

37:22 - REAL THREATS OF MAJOR

37:24 - DISRUPTION POTENTIALLY NUCLEAR

37:26 - DESTRUCTION, THE CITIES

37:27 - IN THE EVENT THAT THAT SOME

37:29 - CITY HAD TO BE EVACUATED.

37:31 - I DON'T THINK YOU KNOW ARE YOU

37:32 - SAY THEN THE 180 DAYS COULD ALL

37:35 - BE VIRTUAL NOT NOT SITUATIONS,

37:37 - YOUR HONOR. WHAT WE'RE SAYING

37:39 - WELL, I DON'T KNOW YOU SEEM TO

37:40 - SAY WELL IT'S NOT A BIG IT WAS

37:42 - I PERSONALLY THINK IT'S

37:43 - AMBIGUOUS BECAUSE OF

37:43 - BOTH TALKING YOU'RE BOTH

37:45 - TALKING ABOUT 2 DIFFERENT SIDES

37:47 - OF THE THE 2 WORDS. BUT I AM

37:49 - CONCERNED WITH YOU JUST UTTERED

37:52 - IN THAT. WE COULD DO A

37:54 - 180 DAYS VIRTUAL. WELL, YOUR

37:56 - HONOR RESPECTFULLY IT'S THAT

37:57 - THERE'S AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION

37:58 - STANDARD HERE. P E'S

38:00 - INTERPRETATION OF THE STATUTE

38:02 - IS ENTITLED TO DEFERENCE AND NO

38:03 - ONE SAYING THAT ANY YOU KNOW

38:05 - DECISION MADE REGARDING AND

38:06 - SCHOOL DISTRICTS DECISIONS

38:08 - REGARDING THAT REQUIREMENT OR

38:09 - BY SOME THINK THE DIFFERENCE NO

38:10 - ONE SAYING THAT THERE'S AN

38:11 - REVIEWABLE DISCRETION HERE SO

38:13 - IN THE INSTANCE OF THAT WAS MY

38:14 - QUESTION MY QUESTION WAS BASED

38:16 - ON WHAT YOU

38:17 - JUST ARGUE ARE YOU SAYING THAT

38:19 - THE DEPARTMENT COULD SAY WE CAN

38:21 - DO A 180 DAYS VIRTUAL NOT I'M

38:23 - NOT HERE. GETTING OUT SO HOW DO

38:25 - WE LIMITED, I MEAN DIDN'T THE

38:26 - GENERAL ASSEMBLY SAY

38:28 - 5 DAYS. YOU GOT YOUR HONOR THAT

38:30 - IN 5 DAYS IN THE EVENT OF A

38:31 - TEMPORARY DISRUPTION I WOULD

38:34 - ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THE LAST

38:35 - SECTION OF SO I I UNDERSTAND

38:37 - THAT BUT YOU KNOW NOBODY EVER

38:38 - THOUGHT THAT THE PANDEMIC WOULD

38:39 - GO ON FOR AS LONG AS IT DID BUT

38:41 - THEN AGAIN MAYBE WE'RE ON THE

38:42 - TAIL END OF IT AND IT'S NOT IT

38:44 - IS GOING TO BE TEMPORARY.

38:46 - SO THEN WHERE DO WE GO WE'RE

38:47 - STILL IN THIS UNCERTAINTY AND I

38:50 - THINK THE STUDENTS NEED

38:51 - CERTAINTY.

38:52 - >>YOUR HONOR RESPECTFULLY I CAN

38:54 - ONLY ADDRESS WHAT THE STATUTE

38:55 - SAYS, AND THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING

38:57 - YOU

38:58 - TO ADDRESS AND I'M TRYING TO

39:00 - HONOR WHICH IS THE STATUTE SAYS

39:01 - KEPT OPEN.

39:03 - OKAY, IT IS THERE IS

39:06 - PDE HE'S GIVEN DEFERENCE IN THE

39:08 - INTERPRETATION OF THAT STATUTE.

39:10 - AND IT IS NOT AN ABUSE

39:11 - OF DISCRETION WHEN THE

39:12 - ALTERNATIVE THE ONLY

39:13 - ALTERNATIVE TO IN-PERSON

39:15 - INSTRUCTION IS IS THAT

39:16 - WHOLESALE SHUTTER A SCHOOL'S

39:18 - ENTIRE CAN UNDERSTAND WHY YOU

39:20 - KEEP SAYING THAT THE ONLY

39:21 - ALTERNATIVE IS TO SHUT THE

39:22 - SCHOOLS. I MEAN CURRENTLY THE

39:24 - SCHOOL'S AND IN MOST MOST

39:27 - RECENT PAST HAVE BEEN DOING

39:28 - VIRTUAL LEARNING.

39:30 - >>IT'S THE MOST RECENT PAST

39:31 - THEY HAVEN'T YOU'RE ON THE

39:32 - RIGHT RIGHT NOW THEY'RE DOING

39:33 - IN PERSON INSTRUCTION TO THE

39:34 - MOST RECENT.

39:35 - >>AND I'M SORRY. YES IN THE

39:37 - PAST THERE WERE DOING VIRTUAL

39:38 - INSTRUCTION.

39:40 - >>AND THAT.

39:41 - >>IN THE UNDER THE

39:42 - CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THAT WAS

39:43 - THE ONLY SAFE WAY TO OBTAIN

39:45 - INSTRUCTION WAS NOT AN ABUSE

39:47 - OF DISCRETION BY THE SCHOOL

39:49 - DISTRICTS THAT OFFER THAT OR BY

39:51 - THE GUIDANCE ISSUED AND THAT'S

39:52 - WHAT THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINED,

39:54 - I MEAN THERE'S A LOT OF SCHOOLS

39:55 - EVEN AT THE HEIGHT OF THE

39:56 - PANDEMIC THAT WERE OPEN MOST OF

40:00 - THEM WERE PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS.

40:02 - BUT THERE ARE STILL OPEN SO

40:04 - ISN'T THE DEPARTMENT COMING IN

40:05 - AND MAKING A SCIENTIFIC

40:07 - CONCLUSION THAT THIS WAS

40:09 - UNSAFE. WELL WHEN OTHER SCHOOLS

40:11 - WERE OPEN AND DOESN'T IT ALSO

40:13 - SHOW THAT THIS IS A DISCREET

40:15 - CLASS OF INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE

40:17 - BEEN HARMED BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE

40:19 - SOME STUDENTS GOING TO FACE TO

40:21 - FACE LEARNING AND OTHER

40:22 - STUDENTS TONIGHT WELL, A HUGE

40:24 - HONOR AGAIN NONE OF THIS HAS

40:25 - BEEN A LEGEND THE

40:26 - PETITION SO YOU KNOW WHAT COULD

40:28 - HAVE BEEN A LEDGE SHOULD HAVE

40:29 - BEEN A LEDGE I CAN'T REALLY

40:30 - SPEAK TO AND I HEAR IT, I MEAN

40:33 - I ASK A QUESTION YOU DANCE

40:34 - AROUND IT AND GO IN DIFFERENT

40:35 - DIRECTIONS BUT I HAVE BEEN

40:37 - WOKEN YOU WHAT IS THE QUESTION

40:39 - OF WHETHER MY

40:39 - BEST ANSWER. IT SEEM LIKE YOU

40:41 - KEPT GOING BACK TO THE ONLY

40:43 - ALTERNATIVE WAS TO SHUT

40:44 - THE SCHOOLS AND I JUST DON'T

40:46 - SEE WHERE THAT IS IN STATUTE.

40:50 - THE

40:50 - ONLY ALTERNATIVE. IF VIRTUAL

40:53 - INSTRUCTION WE'RE NOT

40:54 - PERMISSIVE AND I GUESS MAYBE I

40:55 - DID MISS MISSPEAK THE

40:57 - ALTERNATIVE. 2 SCHOOLS.

41:00 - LOCATED IN SPECIFIC COUNTIES

41:02 - WITH HIGH IN DANGEROUS COVID-19

41:05 - TRANSMISSION RATES WOULD BE THE

41:07 - SHOT WOULD HAVE BEEN

41:08 - SHUT DOWN THE SCHOOLS IN THOSE

41:10 - SPECIFIC LOCALITIES ONLY IF IT

41:12 - GOES BACK TO THE WORD PREVENT.

41:14 - WE NEED

41:14 - TO PREVENT.

41:16 - >>PREVENTS A SCHOOL BUILDING

41:18 - FROM OPENING ON DUE TO ANY OF

41:20 - THE FOLLOWING A DISEASE

41:22 - EPIDEMIC AND I THINK WHAT I'D

41:23 - BEFORE WE JUDGE KOBE IS SAYING

41:25 - IS IF OTHER SCHOOLS WERE OPEN.

41:28 - AND WE'RE FINE.

41:30 - HOW DO

41:32 - YOU KNOW ALLOWING ONE SCHOOL.

41:34 - TO REFUSE STUDENTS TO HAVE

41:36 - THEIR SCHOOL BUILDING OPEN

41:37 - WHICH IS HEALTH 15 '06

41:39 - DEFINES IT WE NEED THE STANDARD

41:41 - OF PREVENTING THE SCHOOL

41:43 - BUILDING FROM BEING OPEN WHEN

41:44 - OTHER

41:45 - SCHOOLS WORK THAT AND YOUR TIME

41:47 - IS OVER AND I'M SORRY I SAY

41:51 - >>WHY WHY DON'T WE GIVE YOU THE

41:53 - YOU KNOW MAYBE 10 OR 15 SECONDS

41:54 - TO SUM UP.

41:56 - UNLESS DID YOU WANT HIM TO KNOW

42:00 - >>I REALLY HAVE NOTHING FURTHER

42:02 - TO SAY THANK YOU FOR

42:04 - THESE REASONS WE WOULD ASK

42:05 - PEOPLE TO MARRY INJECTIONS BE

42:07 - SUSTAINED IN THE PETITION BE

42:08 - DISMISSED. THANK YOU, THANK YOU

42:10 - VERY MUCH. THAT WE APPRECIATE

42:13 - YOUR

42:13 - ARGUMENTS TODAY.

42:14 - >>VERY INTERESTING CASE AND WE

42:16 - WILL OF COURSE TAKE IT UNDER

42:17 - ADVISEMENT. THANK YOU.

42:41 - WE WILL NEXT HAVE NUMBER 24.

42:48 - GOOD SHOT FOR SAYS THE NEW CD

42:50 - R.

42:51 - AND WHILE YOU'RE MAKING YOUR

42:53 - WAY FORWARD. I.

42:57 - THE ELECTED TO WELCOME I GUESS

43:00 - OFFICIALLY THEY'VE BEEN

43:02 - WITH US NOW THIS IS THERE A

43:05 - SECOND MONTH, BUT FIRST ON BOND

43:07 - ARGUMENT TO WELCOME OUR NEW

43:09 - JUDGES. JUDGE

43:12 - LORI DUMAS AND JUDGE STACY

43:14 - WALLACE SO

43:14 - WELCOME TO ARGUMENTS WITH GARY

43:18 - HANG TO HAVING WELL.

43:20 - OKAY NEXT ON THE LIST NUMBER

43:23 - 24.

43:27 - GRIMSHAW VERSES

43:28 - HE CBR THE PETITIONER KELLY

43:32 - GROUP SHOT

43:32 - THAN THEIRS WORKED FOR FRANK

43:34 - HOSPITAL EMPLOYER. ON TUESDAY

43:37 - MAY 19TH 2020 PETITIONER

43:39 - EMAILED HER RESIGNATION TO

43:41 - EMPLOYER, STATING THAT HER LAST

43:43 - DAY OF EMPLOYMENT

43:45 - WOULD BE TUESDAY MAY

43:47 - 2620 20. EMPLOYER RESPONDED BY

43:50 - SAME DAY

43:51 - DISCHARGING PETITIONER

43:53 - EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY

43:55 - PETITIONER FILED FOR

43:56 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

43:58 - BENEFITS FOR THE WEEKS ENDING

43:59 - SATURDAY MAY 23RD AND

44:01 - SATURDAY MAY 30TH 2020.

44:04 - THE SERVICE CENTER DETERMINED

44:06 - PETITIONER WAS INELIGIBLE FOR

44:08 - BENEFITS UNDER THE UNEMPLOYMENT

44:10 - COMPENSATION LAW

44:12 - BECAUSE SHE VOLUNTARILY

44:13 - SEPARATED

44:14 - FROM EMPLOYER WITHOUT CAUSE OF

44:17 - THE NECESSITIES AND COMPELLING

44:18 - NATURE PETITIONER APPEALED TO

44:21 - THE REFEREE WHO DETERMINED TO

44:23 - THE PETITIONER WAS ELIGIBLE FOR

44:24 - BENEFITS FOR THE WEEK ENDING

44:26 - SATURDAY MAY

44:27 - 23RD 2020 BECAUSE HER

44:30 - UNEMPLOYMENT WAS DUE TO

44:31 - EMPLOYERS

44:32 - IMMEDIATE DISCHARGE ON THE DAY

44:34 - THAT SHE SUBMITTED

44:35 - HER RESIGNATION. CONVERSELY THE

44:37 - REFEREE CONCLUDED THE

44:39 - PETITIONER WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR

44:40 - BENEFITS FOR THE WEEK ENDING

44:43 - SATURDAY MAY 30TH 2020

44:45 - THE WEEK IN WHICH HER

44:47 - RESIGNATION WOULD HAVE BEEN

44:48 - EFFECTIVE. BUT FOR EMPLOYERS

44:50 - DISCHARGE. THE REFEREE,

44:52 - THEREFORE IMPOSED A FAULT OVER

44:54 - PAYMENT FOR THE SECOND WEEK OF

44:56 - BENEFITS PETITION RECEIVED

44:58 - THE UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

45:00 - BOARD OF REVIEW AFFIRMED

45:01 - AND PETITION IS APPEAL TO THIS

45:03 - COURT FOLLOWED.

45:05 - THE PRIMARY ISSUE ON APPEAL IS

45:07 - WHETHER PETITIONER WHO SOUGHT

45:09 - UNEMPLOYMENT

45:10 - COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR A

45:12 - WEEK IN WHICH SHE WOULD HAVE

45:13 - WORKED BUT FOR EMPLOYERS

45:15 - IMMEDIATE DISCHARGE IS

45:17 - DISQUALIFIED FROM RECEIVING

45:18 - BENEFITS FOR

45:19 - THE WEEK IN WHICH A RESIGNATION

45:21 - WOULD HAVE BEEN EFFECTIVE

45:23 - ON APPEAL PETITIONER ARGUES

45:25 - THAT THE

45:25 - BOARD ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT

45:27 - HER UNEMPLOYMENT FOR THE CLEAN

45:29 - WEEK ENDING SATURDAY MAY 30TH

45:31 - 2020 WAS DUE TO HER VOLUNTARY

45:34 - RESIGNATION, RATHER SHE ARGUES

45:37 - HER EMPLOYMENT WAS DUE TO

45:38 - EMPLOYERS ACCELERATION OF HER

45:41 - RESIGNATION DATE AND REFUSAL TO

45:43 - PERMIT HER TO WORK ARE

45:44 - SCHEDULED SHIFTS DURING THE

45:46 - CLAIM WEEK.

45:47 - IN RESPONSE THE BOARD MAINTAINS

45:49 - THE DISQUALIFYING CONDUCT THAT

45:52 - OCCURS AT ANY POINT DURING A

45:54 - CLAIM WEEK

45:56 - WENDERS AN INDIVIDUAL IN

45:58 - ELIGIBLE FOR BENEFITS FOR THE

46:00 - ENTIRE WEEK. DOES THE BOARD

46:02 - CONTENDS THE PETITIONER IS

46:04 - INELIGIBLE FOR BENEFITS

46:06 - FOR THE CLAIM WEEK ENDING

46:07 - SATURDAY MAY 30TH 2020 BECAUSE

46:10 - HER VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION WAS

46:12 - EFFECTIVE. TUESDAY MAY 26 2020.

46:17 - SO

46:18 - FOR THAT.

46:20 - PETITIONER.

46:21 - >>I'M MICHAEL SIMON I'M HERE ON

46:23 - BEHALF OF THE DUQUESNE LAW

46:25 - SCHOOLS, UNEMPLOYMENT

46:26 - COMPENSATION CLINIC. I'D LIKE

46:28 - TO RESERVE 2 MINUTES FOR

46:29 - REBUTTAL. YOU HAVE IT.

46:32 - ALL RIGHT. JUST LAUNCHING INTO

46:35 - THERE ARE A

46:36 - COUPLE OF SIGNIFICANT POINTS

46:38 - HERE AND THAT IS YOU KNOW THE

46:40 - FUNDAMENTAL THE LINCHPIN OF OUR

46:42 - ARGUMENT IS THE

46:43 - FACT THAT THE PETITIONERS

46:45 - UNEMPLOYMENT IN QUESTION WAS

46:47 - NOT WAS NOT DUE TO HER

46:49 - RESIGNATION IN THIS CASE.

46:52 - IT IS CLEAR THAT THE PETITIONER

46:54 - WAS A HEALTH CARE EMPLOYEE.

46:56 - AND AS SUCH SHE WAS AND SHE

46:57 - WORKED A DIFFERENT TYPE OF

46:59 - SCHEDULE. THE SOCAL UNDER THE

47:00 - SO-CALLED 8.80 ROLE.

47:03 - THE PENNSYLVANIA, MINIMUM WAGE

47:05 - ACT IN FACT WAS AMENDED TO

47:06 - ALLOW THIS

47:07 - TO OCCUR FOR HEALTH CARE

47:09 - WORKERS IN PENNSYLVANIA, SO

47:10 - CONSEQUENTLY SHE WORKED

47:12 - 12 HOUR SHIFTS AND THEN THE

47:14 - WEEKEND QUESTION. SHE WAS

47:16 - SCHEDULED TO WORK IT'S CLEAR

47:18 - FROM THE RECORD BEFORE THE

47:19 - REFEREE. SHE WAS SCHEDULED TO

47:20 - WORK TO

47:21 - 36 HOUR SHIFTS. DURING EACH

47:26 - YOU AND IN THE WEEK IN QUESTION

47:28 - SHE WOULD HAVE WORKED FOR 36

47:30 - HOUR SHIFT PRIOR TO THE TIME OF

47:32 - HER RESIGNATION. SO UNDER THIS

47:35 - CIRCUMSTANCE HAD SHE BEEN

47:36 - PERMITTED TO WORK SHE WOULD

47:38 - HAVE BEEN FULL-TIME EMPLOYED,

47:40 - SHE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN

47:41 - UNEMPLOYED PERIOD THE END AS

47:44 - A RESULT, THE

47:45 - EMPLOYERS ACTION IN

47:47 - ACCELERATING THE RESIGNATION

47:49 - ACCELERATING THE DATE OF THE

47:50 - RESIGNATION WHICH THEY'RE

47:51 - CERTAINLY ENTITLED TO DO.

47:53 - OF COURSE IN THIS CASE THEY

47:54 - DIDN'T PAY HER FOR THE DAYS,

47:56 - THIS IS WHAT IS IN IT IN PART

47:58 - SPECULATION THAT BUT YOU

48:00 - PROBABLY WOULDN'T WORK THOSE

48:02 - HOURS, BUT WE DON'T KNOW FOR

48:03 - CERTAIN THAT SHE WOULD HAVE

48:05 - WORK THOSE HOURS SEWING DOESN'T

48:06 - THAT BECOME.

48:08 - >>THE CONSIDERATION THAT THE

48:09 - COURT NEEDS TO VIEW WELL THE

48:11 - THERE THE THERE

48:12 - WELL IN OUR VIEW THERE REALLY

48:14 - ISN'T SPECULATION CONCERNING IT

48:16 - IN OUR VIEW THAT ACTUALLY GETS

48:17 - INTO AN ISSUE ABOUT DEVELOPMENT

48:19 - OF THE RECORD BEFORE

48:20 - THE REFEREE.

48:21 - >>BECAUSE UNDER THE

48:22 - CIRCUMSTANCE THE CLAIMANT

48:23 - PROS SAY INDICATED THE

48:26 - CIRCUMSTANCES THE REFEREE WAS

48:27 - AND IS A BOARD NOTES WAS

48:29 - UNFAMILIAR WITH THIS UNUSUAL

48:31 - ISSUED TO CONCERN THE

48:32 - SCHEDULING OF HEALTH CARE

48:33 - WORKERS. THE

48:34 - EMPLOYERS REPRESENTATIVE

48:35 - CONFIRMED THIS NOW IF THE COURT

48:37 - IS MENTIONING IT CAN SOMETHING

48:39 - PERHAPS HAVE

48:40 - HAPPENED YOU KNOW DURING THE

48:42 - COURSE OF THAT THE HUMAN EVENTS

48:43 - TO STOP HER FROM WORKING OR 3

48:45 - DAYS THAT WEEK CERTAINLY THAT

48:47 - IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE HAPPENED.

48:49 - I CAN'T

48:50 - DENY THAT BUT SHE WORRIES ME

48:52 - CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY 36 HOUR

48:54 - SHIFT TO A 12 TO 3.12 HOUR YOU

48:57 - CAN GET THIS BUT SUNDAY MONDAY

49:00 - AND TUESDAY 12 3.12 HOUR SHIFTS

49:03 - AND SHE WAS SCHEDULED FOR 3.12

49:04 - HOUR SHIFTS.

49:05 - >>THE DAY BEFORE THAT WAS HER

49:06 - FULL-TIME SCHEDULE AND SO WHAT

49:09 - TAKES THIS OUT OF CASES WHERE

49:11 - SOMEBODY FOR INSTANCE IS ON A

49:13 - LAYOFF STATUS AND THEN CHANGES

49:16 - TO YOU KNOW QUIT UNDER THE

49:19 - CIRCUMSTANCE OR THERE'S SOME

49:20 - CHANGE IN STATUS WHERE THERE'S

49:22 - A LOCKOUT AND

49:23 - SOMETHING ELSE HAPPENS IN THE

49:24 - AIRSTRIKE GOOD TURNS INTO A

49:27 - OR OTHER A WALKOUT THAT TURNS

49:29 - INTO A STRIKE OR REFUSE TO GO

49:30 - TO WORK THOSE THINGS ARE IN

49:32 - SORT OF IN THEIR OWN SEPARATE

49:34 - WORLD. IF WE LOOK AT

49:35 - THE DEW TO ANALYSIS WHICH

49:37 - CAMPBELL ADVICE US TO DO AS

49:40 - WELL AS THE SUPREME

49:41 - COURT'S DECISIONS.

49:43 - >>IN A IN A YOU KNOW THE NORMAL

49:45 - IN CASE IN THE

49:46 - HIGH CASE.

49:47 - >>THEY'VE ALL SAID YOU NEED TO

49:49 - LOOK AT THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN

49:51 - EACH WEEK. SO THERE'S SOME

49:53 - INTEREST FOR ONE SOMETHING

49:55 - DOESN'T BOTHER THIS AND I'M

49:56 - HOPEFULLY

49:58 - >>UNLIKE MAJOR. SO IN

50:00 - THIS CASE, YOUR CLIENT WAS

50:03 - DENIED THOSE 3 SHIPS FOR THE

50:05 - WEEK RIGHT. YOU KNOW WE'RE

50:07 - GETTING OF THE SECOND WEEK

50:08 - THAT'S CORRECT AND WORK THE

50:09 - FIRST THE FIRST OF HER SHIFTS

50:12 - DURING THE FIRST WEEK ENDING

50:13 - MAY 23RD.

50:14 - >>AND THEN ASKED AFTER

50:16 - ANNOUNCING THAT SHE WOULD BE

50:18 - RESIGNING THAT'S RIGHT. OK.

50:19 - >>SO LET'S ASSUME FOR THE

50:21 - PURPOSES OF THIS HYPOTHETICAL

50:23 - SHE WORKED. THE FIRST 12 HOUR

50:26 - SHIFTS OF THAT SECOND WEEK.

50:28 - THE SECOND 12 HOUR SHIFT OF THE

50:30 - SECOND WEEK.

50:32 - AND THEN A PARTIAL ON THE 3RD.

50:37 - AFTER

50:37 - 6 HOURS THE MANAGEMENT SAID

50:39 - WELL WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH

50:40 - PATIENT COUNT WE NEED TO LET

50:42 - SOMEONE GO.

50:44 - AND THEY SEND HER

50:45 - HOME THAT SHE GETS BENEFITS

50:46 - UNDER THAT SITUATION, YES, OUT

50:48 - OF THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES DUE

50:50 - TO

50:50 - THEIR ACTION. THE CASE IS SO SO

50:53 - LET ME TAKE A STEP FURTHER IF

50:55 - IT'S AN HOUR IF IT'S A MINUTE

50:56 - ANY TIME LESS THAN HER

50:58 - COMPLETE SHIFT. SHE'S AND OF

51:00 - THE BENEFITS THEY'VE STOPPED

51:01 - HER FROM WORKING THAT THAT THAT

51:03 - TIME AND THAT WOULD HAVE THAT

51:04 - WOULD HAVE TAKEN HER OUT OF

51:05 - BEING UNEMPLOYED.

51:07 - >>I MEAN SHE WOULD HAVE NOT

51:08 - BEEN HIM UNEMPLOYED HAD SHE

51:10 - BEEN PERMITTED

51:11 - TO WORK THAT'S THE DUE TO

51:13 - ANALYSIS HERE THAT'S THE

51:14 - GENESIS AND CAMPBELL AND ALL

51:16 - THESE OTHER CASES THAT HAVE

51:17 - COME AROUND. YOU KNOW IF YOU

51:19 - KNOW AND THAT'S A CIRCUMSTANCE

51:21 - THAT WE'RE FACING HERE BECAUSE

51:23 - SHE HAS TO BE FOR THE

51:24 - DISQUALIFICATION

51:26 - OF THE TIME PERIOD FOLLOWING A

51:28 - VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION WITHOUT

51:29 - COMPELLING IN SET OF

51:30 - CIRCUMSTANCES YOU KNOW THAT

51:33 - THAT'S THAT FITS INTO THE INTO

51:36 - THE MODEL ONLY IF IN FACT SHE

51:39 - WOULD HAVE

51:40 - BEEN UNEMPLOYED. SHE'S NOT

51:43 - UNEMPLOYED IS OR WOULD HAVE NOT

51:44 - BEEN UNEMPLOYED AS A RESULT

51:46 - OF THIS THEN WE HAVE

51:48 - A DIFFERENT SORT OF COURSE OF A

51:49 - DIFFERENT COLOR LITERALLY

51:51 - COUNCIL IS THE QUESTION I'M

51:54 - SOUL WAS.

51:55 - >>WAS NOT THE NATURE OF HER

51:58 - EMPLOYMENT BASED UPON THE

52:00 - AVAILABILITY

52:01 - OF PATIENTS.

52:02 - >>WHERE THE NEED FOR CARE BY

52:04 - PATIENTS, IT CERTAINLY WAS.

52:07 - IT CERTAINLY WAS I MEAN, YEAH

52:08 - SHE'S

52:09 - A GOOD WELL, YOU KNOW WE HAVE A

52:11 - DICHOTOMY HERE BECAUSE

52:13 - CERTAINLY PENNSYLVANIA IS AN

52:14 - AT-WILL STATE, HOWEVER

52:16 - UNEMPLOYMENT.

52:18 - >>KIND OF IMPOSES

52:19 - A FICTION ON ON ON THE THE

52:21 - CIRCUMSTANCES HERE IN THAT YOU

52:23 - KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE

52:24 - DISCHARGED ITS NEED TO BE FOR

52:26 - CAUSE IN ORDER TO HAVE A

52:28 - DISQUALIFICATION ET CETERA ET

52:29 - CETERA. SO WE HAVE 2 DIFFERENT

52:31 - WORLDS HERE CERTAINLY THE

52:33 - EMPLOYER WAS WITHIN THEIR

52:34 - RIGHTS.

52:35 - 2 TO SAY YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T

52:40 - WORK HERE ANY LONGER. THE

52:42 - QUESTION IS FOR UNEMPLOYMENT

52:44 - PURPOSES HAD SHE BEEN PERMITTED

52:46 - TO WORK ARE SCHEDULED SHIFTS

52:48 - UNDER THAT TIME FRAME UNDER

52:49 - THAT TIME FRAME WOULD SHE HAVE

52:51 - BEEN

52:52 - UNEMPLOYED, YOU KNOW AND UNDER

52:55 - THE CIRCUMSTANCES IF SHE HAD

52:56 - WORKED HER FULL-TIME SCARE

52:58 - THAT'S WHAT SET THIS APART

53:00 - FROM THE OTHER CASES. THAT'S I

53:01 - THINK WHY WE HAVE THE

53:02 - SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER YOU KNOW

53:03 - CONCERNING THE BRIEFING BECAUSE

53:05 - SHE WOULD HAVE WORKED HER

53:06 - ENTIRE FULL-TIME SCHEDULE PRIOR

53:08 - TO THE DATA RESIGNATION,

53:10 - WHAT'S IT MATTER WHAT YOU DO

53:11 - AFTER YOU WORK YOUR

53:12 - FULL-TIME SCHEDULE. YOU ARE A

53:14 - FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE OR WOULD

53:15 - HAVE BEEN THAT WEAK AND

53:17 - THEREFORE SHE WOULD NOT HAVE

53:19 - EVEN BEEN ELIGIBLE TO FILE A

53:21 - CLAIM BECAUSE SHE WOULD

53:23 - HAVE BEEN FULL TIME SO THE FACT

53:25 - OF WHAT YOU SAY YOU'RE SAYING

53:27 - THAT THIS CASE IS SO DIFFERENT

53:29 - THEN ARE PRECEDENT THAT WE

53:31 - DON'T HAVE TO OVERRULE AND I

53:33 - ARE CASE LAW THAT IT'S GOING TO

53:34 - BE DISTINGUISHABLE BECAUSE OF

53:36 - THE DUE TO I THINK IT'S I THINK

53:39 - IT IS CONVINCE ENTIRELY

53:41 - WITH IN EXISTING PRECEDENT I

53:43 - DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING

53:44 - NEW OR NOVEL ABOUT THIS IT'S

53:46 - SIMPLY APPLYING WHAT WE HAVE

53:48 - ALREADY SEEN IN TERMS OF

53:50 - THESE CASES IT NEEDS A CAMPBELL

53:53 - ESTABLISHED PROXIMATE CAUSE IS

53:55 - BASICALLY THE TEST HERE

53:56 - WE KNOW ALSO THAT THERE CAN'T

53:58 - BE SOME SORT OF MATHEMATICAL

54:00 - CONFIGURATION LIKE THE BOARD

54:01 - WANTED TO DO WELL SHE WAS

54:02 - SCHEDULED FOR 3 DAYS WITH THE

54:04 - RESIGNATION WAS BEFORE WE'RE

54:06 - SUCH AND SUCH AND SO AND SO

54:07 - THAT YOU OFFICE AND HIT THE

54:08 - JACKPOT YOU KNOW IF YOU HAVE

54:09 - SOME SOME SOME CONSIDERATION

54:11 - THAT THERE CAN'T BE A

54:13 - MATHEMATICAL BE TERMINATION

54:15 - BASED ON SIMPLY DAYS OF THE

54:16 - WEEK HERE AND IF WE GO AND

54:18 - APPLY PROXIMATE CAUSE ANALYSIS.

54:21 - THE RESIGNATION WAS

54:22 - ESSENTIALLY IRRELEVANT. YOU

54:24 - KNOW, AND WE HAVE A LINE OF

54:25 - CASES THAT ARE READY SAYS THAT

54:27 - THIS IS THE AGREE WITH WHAT

54:28 - YOU'RE TELLING US TO REALLY TO

54:30 - RE MANDATE TO GET DEVELOPED AND

54:32 - I THINK QUITE AND NEEDS TO BE

54:34 - AND THIS IS KIND OF ON A

54:35 - DIFFERENT POINT.

54:37 - >>BUT THE YOU KNOW I HAVE THAT

54:39 - REGARD FOR REFEREE SPEAKER WHO

54:41 - RECENTLY JUST AS AN ASIDE HIS

54:44 - MOTHER WAS THE BEST PIANO

54:49 - PUT YOU KNOW, BUT THE BOTTOM

54:50 - LINE IS AND HE'S VERY

54:52 - THOUGHTFUL TRANSPARENT REFEREE.

54:54 - THIS WAS A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL

54:56 - IN TERMS OF THE FACTS AND WHEN

54:58 - CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WERE

54:59 - PRESENTED IN FRONT OF THEM.

55:00 - YOU KNOW HE DIDN'T GO FURTHER

55:02 - WITH RESPECT TO THIS.

55:04 - YOU KNOW AND WITH HEARING THE

55:06 - VILE SCHEDULED 3 DAYS THIS

55:08 - WEEK'S 3 DAYS THAT WE IT BECAME

55:10 - CLEARER BEFORE THE BOARD.

55:12 - YOU KNOW WHEN THE CLAIMANTS

55:13 - APPEAL TO THE BOARD.

55:15 - YOU KNOW WHEN SHE SPECIFIED

55:17 - THIS, BUT AGAIN SHE'S PRO SE IN

55:18 - OUR ONE OF OUR POINT IS THAT IN

55:21 - FACT THERE SHOULD BE SOME

55:22 - ADDITIONAL FACTUAL DEVELOPMENT

55:24 - OF THE RECORD HERE JUST

55:26 - BECAUSE THE REFEREE

55:27 - INADVERTENTLY DIDN'T DEVELOP

55:29 - THE FACTS AS FULLY AS THEY

55:31 - SHOULD HAVE BEEN

55:32 - YOU KNOW THE BOARD DIDN'T TAKE

55:34 - INTO CONSIDERATION. THE FACT

55:35 - SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN

55:36 - FULL TIME. FOR THE FULL-TIME

55:38 - HOURS ALL THEY SAID WAS WELL

55:39 - SHE WOULD WORK 3 DAYS AND NOT

55:41 - WORK FOR AND YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

55:43 - BUT WAS SHE WOULD SHE HAVE.

55:47 - >>THE THREE-DAY CENTS. IF THERE

55:50 - WERE NOT ANY

55:51 - NEED FOR HER TO WORK IT BECAUSE

55:53 - IT WAS

55:54 - NO PATIENT.

55:55 - >>THAT'S IN NEED OF CARE THAT'S

55:57 - UP TO THE EMPLOYER, I MEAN YOU

55:59 - KNOW QUITE FRANKLY THAT

55:59 - SOMETHING IMPORTANT I THINK IT

56:00 - BEARS ON HER ELIGIBILITY FOR

56:02 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION ABOUT

56:04 - WHETHER OR NOT

56:05 - BUT WHETHER OR NOT HER

56:06 - UNEMPLOYMENT WAS DUE TO BECAUSE

56:09 - THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE

56:09 - SAME THING.

56:10 - >>WHAT WAS SHE WORKING AND

56:12 - FORGIVE ME WAS

56:13 - SHE WORKING FOR THE COMPANY OR

56:15 - WAS SHE WORKING AS AN

56:16 - INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR KNOW SHE

56:17 - WAS WORKING FOR THE COMPANY SHE

56:19 - HAD BEEN A

56:19 - LONG COVID.

56:21 - >>SHE GOT A CONTRACT THAT THE

56:22 - WALLET FOR IT CAME BACK, YOU

56:25 - KNOW CAME BACK

56:26 - AND THEN I DON'T YOU LIKE THE

56:29 - CONDITIONS OF FOR QUITE FRANKLY

56:30 - AFTER SHE HAD THEIR NOTICE SHE

56:32 - WAS GETTING ANOTHER JOB I THINK

56:34 - YOU WANT TO WORK FOR UPMC OR

56:35 - SOMETHING ELSE

56:36 - AFTER THAT. BUT THE BOTTOM LINE

56:37 - HERE IS THEY WOULDN'T EVEN BEEN

56:39 - A CLAIM HAVE THE EMPLOYER.

56:41 - YOU KNOW JUST ALLOWED HER TO

56:42 - WORK OR SHIPS OR 4.

56:43 - YOU KEEP ON COMING BACK TO YOU

56:45 - WE KEEP ON COMING BACK TO THE

56:46 - REBEL HOLDER SAYING THAT BUT

56:48 - FOR WHAT THEY DID HER

56:49 - RESIGNATION WAS BASICALLY YOU

56:52 - KNOW WAS AN APPEALING TARGET

56:54 - TO HIT.

56:55 - >>YOU KNOW THE RESIGNATION HAD

56:56 - NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT

56:58 - THAT SHE WAS UNEMPLOYED HERE

56:59 - WAS ALL THE EMPLOYERS CONDUCT

57:01 - AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT WEEK TO

57:02 - WEEK. YOU KNOW

57:04 - WE HAVE A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE

57:05 - WEEK ONE THEY DO THAT AND WE

57:07 - CAN TO THEIR ACTIONS HAVE THE

57:08 - SAME EFFECTS I'M

57:09 - NOT SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE

57:11 - WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS USING THE

57:13 - CASE LAW THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT

57:14 - OF US

57:15 - AND WE'RE YOU KNOW CONSTRAINED

57:18 - TO

57:18 - SAY THAT BUT FOR WORKING THIS

57:21 - SHIFT IF YOU WORK 36 HOURS SHE

57:23 - WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN UNEMPLOYED.

57:25 - >>WELL IN FACT IF YOU LOOK AT

57:26 - THE DEFINITION OF

57:28 - WE IT SAYS IT MEANS ANY

57:31 - CALENDAR WEEK ENDING AT

57:32 - MIDNIGHT

57:33 - SATURDAY, OR THE EQUIVALENT

57:36 - THAT'S RIGHT SO I SUPPOSE THERE

57:39 - ARE A COUPLE OF WAYS LOOKING AT

57:41 - IT, YOU KNOW YEARS ARE SAYING

57:43 - THE EQUIVALENT OF HER WEEK WAS

57:45 - MAYBE ONE THAT ENDED. YOU KNOW

57:48 - AS HER SHIFTED OR CONVERSELY

57:51 - WHAT IS TO USE

57:53 - ANOTHER HYPOTHETICAL, SOMEBODY

57:55 - WORKED.

57:58 - YOU

57:59 - WAS FRIDAY. SO THEY THEY GIVE

58:04 - GAVE THE RESIGNATION AS OF

58:05 - FRIDAY. BUT NOT SATURDAY

58:08 - WHEN THEY WOULDN'T WORK

58:08 - SATURDAY ANYWAY DOES THAT MEAN

58:10 - THAT IF THEIR EMPLOYER FIRES

58:12 - THEM AND THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO

58:13 - WORK MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.

58:16 - THEY STILL

58:16 - DON'T GET THAT IS IF THESE

58:18 - COULD CONCEIVABLY IT COULD

58:21 - CONCEIVABLY HAVE THAT THEY HAVE

58:22 - IF THEY HAD WORKED ALL WEEK IT

58:24 - BECOMES A THEORETICAL ISSUE

58:25 - BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD NOT BE

58:27 - UNEMPLOYED, THEY MIGHT HAVE

58:28 - BEEN UNEMPLOYED EMPLOYER

58:29 - DISCHARGES THEM BUT.

58:31 - >>INSTEAD OF HER DAY BEING

58:32 - WEDNESDAY WHAT IF IT HAD BEEN

58:34 - FRIDAY IT THIS IS IT STILL

58:36 - WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SATURDAY

58:37 - THAT MIDNIGHT THAT'S RIGHT

58:38 - THAT'S RIGHT. YOU KNOW THE

58:39 - POINT IS I MEAN WHAT WE HAVE A

58:41 - COUPLE DIFFERENT TRAINS A WEEK

58:42 - DEFINITION IS CERTAINLY

58:43 - IMPORTANT. BUT THE FACT IS THAT

58:45 - YOU CANNOT BE

58:46 - THE EMPLOYEE, WHATEVER YOUR

58:47 - FULL-TIME SCHEDULE IS IN THE

58:48 - BOARD HAS NEVER MADE ANY ROOM,

58:50 - YOU KNOW HARD AND FAST RULES

58:51 - ABOUT THIS, BUT WHATEVER YOUR

58:52 - FULL-TIME SCHEDULE IS YOUR FULL

58:54 - TIME YOU'RE NOT UNEMPLOYED.

58:56 - YOU KNOW AND SO THAT'S WHAT

58:57 - WE'RE WORKING WITH HERE.

58:58 - I KNOW GETTING SHORT JUST A

59:00 - COUPLE OTHER POINTS ON THE

59:02 - COVID BILL IF THE BOARD

59:03 - DISAGREES ARE THAT COURT

59:04 - DISAGREES WITH ME

59:06 - WE DON'T THINK THE OVERPAYMENT

59:07 - SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A FAULT

59:09 - OVERPAYMENT HERE THERE'S NO

59:11 - EVIDENCE OF ANY SEE ENTER ON

59:12 - THE PART THAT WAS AT

59:13 - ISSUE WAIVED WHAT WAS THAT

59:15 - ISSUE NO NOT

59:16 - AT ALL. YOU KNOW THAT AND I

59:18 - APPRECIATE THE BOARD'S POSITION

59:20 - BUT THE CLAIMANT SPECIFICALLY

59:21 - RAISED THE ISSUE OF THE

59:23 - OVERPAYMENT TO THE BOARD SHE

59:25 - DID NOT SPECIFY THE

59:26 - CLASSIFICATION SHE SAID REASONS

59:28 - FOR APPEAL AND I I CAN QUOTE,

59:30 - BUT

59:30 - IT SAID, YOU KNOW I I OVER

59:33 - PAYMENT OF $558 WAS IMPOSED IN

59:36 - SUCH AND SUCH AND SUCH AND SUCH

59:37 - AND I SHOULD HAVE BEEN

59:38 - DISQUALIFIED AND SO THE SET AND

59:39 - YOU HAVE.

59:40 - >>UNDER THE EXISTING CASE LAW

59:42 - THAT WAS SIGNIFICANT THAT

59:43 - SUFFICIENT TO BRING UP THE

59:46 - ISSUE BECAUSE THE

59:47 - CLASSIFICATION ISSUE IS

59:48 - SUBSUMED COMPLETELY IN THE

59:50 - OVERPAYMENT I DON'T THINK YOU

59:52 - NEED TO HAVE A CLAIMANT I MEAN

59:54 - IT WOULD HAVE

59:54 - BEEN NICE. YOU KNOW WHAT WOULD

59:56 - HAVE BEEN NICER CLEANER IF SHE

59:58 - SAID I WAS IMPOSED A FAULT

59:59 - 619 OVERPAYMENT I DON'T THINK I

01:00 - 01.269 SHOULD HAVE BEEN OF THOSE

01:00 - 03.029 INVOLVED OVERPAYMENT BUT FOR A

01:00 - 04.829 PRO SE CLAIMANT AND USING THE

01:00 - 06.279 CASES THAT WE'VE SEEN OUR

01:00 - 08.349 JURISPRUDENCE YOU KNOW FOR

01:00 - 10.409 INSTANCE RAISING A POINT ABOUT

01:00 - 11.339 A STATUE,

01:00 - 12.699 YOU KNOW AND ONE OF ONE OF THE

01:00 - 14.179 CASES I CITED IN MY BRIEF WAS

01:00 - 15.669 SUFFICIENT TO RAISE THE ISSUE

01:00 - 16.759 ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE

01:00 - 18.109 STATUTE, YOU KNOW WAS

01:00 - 19.799 CONSTITUTIONAL WHATEVER ELSE

01:00 - 20.949 THERE ARE YOU KNOW WHAT RACE

01:00 - 22.269 OTHER INFIRMITIES CONCERNING

01:00 - 24.409 THE STATUTE IN THIS PARTICULAR

01:00 - 26.529 CASE HERE ONCE YOU HIT THE

01:00 - 28.399 MAGIC WORDS OVERPAYMENT AND

01:00 - 30.319 THAT'S A REASON FOR THE APPEAL.

01:00 - 31.749 I THINK THAT'S SUFFICIENT

01:00 - 33.399 SAYING IT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

01:00 - 47.239 >>MAYBE IT'S THE COURT SHOW FOR

01:00 - 48.199 COUNSEL FOR THE UNEMPLOYMENT

01:00 - 49.669 COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW.

01:00 - 51.419 THE ISSUE BEFORE THIS COURT IS

01:00 - 52.319 WHETHER THE CLAIM IT SHOULD BE

01:00 - 53.699 INELIGIBLE FOR BENEFITS WITH

01:00 - 55.199 THE RESIGNATION WAS EFFECTIVE

01:00 - 56.149 IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WEEK AND

01:00 - 57.749 ISSUE. THIS COURT HAS

01:00 - 59.039 CONSISTENTLY HELD ITS

01:00 - 00.629 QUALIFYING CONDUCT DURING WEEK

01:01 - 02.039 IS QUALIFIED FOR THE ENTIRE

01:01 - 04.909 SHE WAS EXPLICITLY BEFORE THIS

01:01 - 06.759 COURT IS MOSS WHAT WHAT DAY WAS

01:01 - 07.579 MAY 30TH.

01:01 - 10.569 MAY WELL, WHATEVER FINAL THAT

01:01 - 11.919 WILL RESONATE THE RESIGNATION

01:01 - 13.159 WOULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON TUESDAY

01:01 - 14.289 ARE ALL RIGHT REMEMBER THE DATE

01:01 - 15.029 OF THAT.

01:01 - 17.479 THE DATE BUT THE FAMILY WAS

01:01 - 19.159 ADMITTED TUESDAY THAT THEIR

01:01 - 20.679 SCHEDULE WERE NOT AVOIDED

01:01 - 21.969 MONDAY TUESDAY. WE DON'T KNOW

01:01 - 24.049 YOUR HONOR. IT'S NOT THE THE

01:01 - 25.059 WEEK THAT SHE SUBMITTED HER

01:01 - 27.709 RESIGNATION SHE WORKED MONDAY

01:01 - 28.139 AND NOT

01:01 - 30.959 ON TUESDAY. SO THAT SHE

01:01 - 32.149 SUBMITTED HER RESIGNATION AND

01:01 - 33.909 DIDN'T WORK IS THAT WHY REAMIN

01:01 - 35.399 FOR FEDERAL FINDINGS I DON'T

01:01 - 36.859 THINK DOES YOUR HONOR BECAUSE

01:01 - 37.819 THE CLAIMANT TO NOT

01:01 - 39.359 SUFFICIENTLY RAISE THE ISSUE

01:01 - 40.119 FOR THE

01:01 - 42.849 REFEREE TO YOU KNOW TO ASK

01:01 - 44.099 QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT FOR THE

01:01 - 44.629 MORE ITS NOT

01:01 - 47.199 RELEVANT BECAUSE HAD BASED THE

01:01 - 48.379 REFEREE BASED ON ALL THE

01:01 - 49.379 PRESIDENT AT THE TIME WERE

01:01 - 50.969 DISQUALIFIED CONDUCT AT ANY

01:01 - 52.359 POINT DURING THE WEEK IS

01:01 - 52.979 QUALIFIED FOR THE

01:01 - 54.919 ENTIRE READ WHAT WAS THIS

01:01 - 56.859 QUALIFYING CONDUCT BECAUSE

01:01 - 57.889 EFFECTIVENESS OF HER

01:01 - 58.549 RESIGNATION,

01:01 - 00.579 YOUR HONOR, NO, BUT SHE WON HER

01:02 - 02.569 LAST DAY TO BE THE FOLLOWING

01:02 - 04.549 WEEK UNITED NOT THAT DAY WAS

01:02 - 05.519 THE EMPLOYER.

01:02 - 06.599 >>YOU'RE RIGHT HERE ON YOUR

01:02 - 07.979 SHOULDER WHO SHOWED HER

01:02 - 10.439 THE DOOR AND IF WE ARE TO

01:02 - 12.019 CONSTRUE THIS STATUTE AS WE

01:02 - 14.679 MUST AS FOR ME DEAL. DON'T WE

01:02 - 15.819 NEED TO FIND IN FAVOR OF

01:02 - 16.409 THE CLAIMANT.

01:02 - 18.079 >>NOTICE EARLIER BECAUSE THE

01:02 - 20.179 DISQUALIFYING CONDUCT IS THE

01:02 - 20.999 EFFECTIVENESS OF

01:02 - 23.489 HER RESIGNATION, IT USED A WEEK

01:02 - 25.409 LATER TO ANY EFFECTIVENESS OF

01:02 - 26.469 HER RESIGNATION.

01:02 - 28.899 WHEN SHE WHICH SHE WAS

01:02 - 30.179 DISQUALIFIED FOR BENEFITS UNDER

01:02 - 31.349 SECTION 4 TO BE OF

01:02 - 33.399 THE LAW AND CLAIM IT IS NOT

01:02 - 35.199 DISPUTED THE DISQUALIFICATION

01:02 - 35.849 ONLY WHEN IT

01:02 - 38.489 TAKES EFFECT SO THE CORRECT BUT

01:02 - 40.239 IT WAS THE EMPLOYER'S CONDUCT.

01:02 - 42.359 THAT CAUSED HER TO BE

01:02 - 44.839 UNEMPLOYED. THEY WERE READY FOR

01:02 - 46.889 THE FIRST. 2 WEEKS YOUR HONOR

01:02 - 47.849 BUT THEN NEED IN THE

01:02 - 49.949 3RD WEEK. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

01:02 - 51.119 HER RESIGNATION WOULD HAVE BEEN

01:02 - 51.809 A DISQUALIFYING

01:02 - 53.649 CONDUCT SO THIS COURT HAS

01:02 - 54.959 CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT ANY TIME

01:02 - 56.129 THERE IS DISQUALIFYING CONDUCT

01:02 - 57.919 IN THIS CASE, A RESIGNATION

01:02 - 58.799 WITHOUT AN ASSESSED THIS

01:02 - 01.039 COMPELLING REASON THEN IF IT

01:03 - 03.209 ANY 0 POINT DURING THAT WEEK.

01:03 - 03.809 THEN

01:03 - 06.079 THIS QUALIFICATION FLASH FOR

01:03 - 07.499 THE ENTIRE WEEK BECAUSE DOESN'T

01:03 - 09.129 THAT MAKE SENSE IF YOU IF YOU

01:03 - 10.119 THINK ABOUT IT.

01:03 - 15.889 >>IF THIS HAD HAPPENED THE WAY

01:03 - 17.119 SHE WANTED TO

01:03 - 18.959 AND HER LAST DAY HAD BEEN

01:03 - 21.539 TUESDAY. AND THAT WAS WHEN SHE

01:03 - 22.099 LEFT.

01:03 - 25.629 SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN PAID FOR

01:03 - 27.289 THE TIME THAT SHE WORKED AND

01:03 - 28.509 SHE WOULDN'T BE PAID FOR THE

01:03 - 29.219 TIME THAT SHE

01:03 - 31.229 DIDN'T WORK THE TIME THAT SHE

01:03 - 33.049 DIDN'T WORK WAS A RESULT OF HER

01:03 - 33.639 OWN

01:03 - 37.249 CONDUCT. AND SO THEREFORE SHE

01:03 - 38.439 WOULDN'T BE DESERVING OF

01:03 - 40.509 UNEMPLOYMENT COMP AND SO THAT

01:03 - 42.179 RULE MAKES PERFECT SENSE.

01:03 - 45.429 WHEN IT IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE

01:03 - 48.049 INDIVIDUAL. BUT HERE. IT

01:03 - 50.159 WAS EMPLOYERS FIRING

01:03 - 52.879 OF HER THAT CAUSED HER NOT TO

01:03 - 54.869 BE ABLE TO WORK THOSE FIRST

01:03 - 57.589 2 DAYS. SO ARE 3 DAYS IF IT

01:03 - 58.059 BEGAN ON

01:03 - 00.759 A SUNDAY. SO WHY SHOULD

01:04 - 03.399 EMPLOYER GET THE BENEFIT OF NOT

01:04 - 04.799 HAVING TO PAY HER IT ALL

01:04 - 06.449 REMEMBER THIS IS INSURANCE IT'S

01:04 - 08.189 NOT A GIFT SHE'S BEEN

01:04 - 10.209 CONTRIBUTING TO THIS DURING THE

01:04 - 11.519 TIME THAT SHE'S BEEN WORKING

01:04 - 12.739 EMPLOYER HAS TO.

01:04 - 17.399 IT'S INSURANCE. SO WHY.

01:04 - 20.349 WHY SHOULD WE READ THE STATUTE

01:04 - 23.319 THE WAY YOU SAY IT WORKS WHEN

01:04 - 25.499 THAT IS THE CAUSE OF

01:04 - 27.439 HER UNEMPLOYMENT. BUT HER

01:04 - 29.069 UNEMPLOYMENT FOR THE FIRST 3

01:04 - 31.449 DAYS OF THAT WEEK WAS NOT HER

01:04 - 33.459 OWN DOING BECAUSE

01:04 - 34.239 THIS COURT.

01:04 - 36.979 >>IN DEMOSS RECOGNIZED

01:04 - 39.119 THAT THE USE OF THE WORDS ANY

01:04 - 40.249 WE DO KNOW THE LEGISLATIVE

01:04 - 41.719 INTENT TO THAT EMPLOYED WORKERS

01:04 - 42.999 SHOW ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS

01:04 - 44.979 DURING THE ENTIRE PERIOD OF

01:04 - 46.699 SUNDAY THROUGH SATURDAY AND THE

01:04 - 48.089 DISQUALIFIED CONDUCT DURING A

01:04 - 49.149 PORTION OF THE WEEK WITH

01:04 - 50.769 RESULT. THE LOSS OF BENEFITS

01:04 - 51.739 FOR THE ENTIRE WEEK

01:04 - 55.029 FURTHERMORE, CLAIMANTS ARGUMENT

01:04 - 56.929 IS HAS ALREADY BEEN REFUTED IN

01:04 - 00.239 A MOTTO, THE MOSQUE CASE THAT

01:05 - 00.829 YOU SAY

01:05 - 02.739 THIS RIGHT WITH THE FACTS ARE

01:05 - 04.519 THE FACTS TO SIMILAR ARE THEY

01:05 - 06.339 THE SAME THEY WERE DIFFERENT IN

01:05 - 07.159 THAT THE.

01:05 - 09.679 >>CLAIMANTS HAD BEEN PROHIBITED

01:05 - 12.069 FROM WORKING FOR A PART OF THE

01:05 - 12.499 WEEK.

01:05 - 14.049 >>DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES THERE

01:05 - 15.659 OUTSIDE THE CONTROL THERE WAS

01:05 - 17.759 THERE WAS A STRIKE AND THEY'RE

01:05 - 19.389 VERY GOOD SET OF THE PROHIBITED

01:05 - 20.819 THESE CLAIMANTS FROM ENTERING

01:05 - 21.809 THE WORKPLACE. WE MADE THE

01:05 - 23.009 CHOICE RIGHT AND

01:05 - 24.899 THEN TOO SUBSEQUENT IN THE WEEK

01:05 - 25.869 THEY MADE THE CHOICE TO

01:05 - 29.309 NOT CONTINUE. THE FACTS ARE

01:05 - 30.479 DIFFERENT THEY'RE SLIGHTLY

01:05 - 31.989 DIFFERENT BUT THE THE

01:05 - 33.879 RECOGNITION OF THE SUPREME ARE

01:05 - 36.109 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S INTENT

01:05 - 37.969 IN REQUIRING ELIGIBILITY

01:05 - 39.259 THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRETY OF

01:05 - 41.729 THE WEEK IS CONSISTENT IN EVEN

01:05 - 43.279 IF THE SUPREME COURT, YES, YOUR

01:05 - 43.489 HONOR.

01:05 - 45.959 >>IN THIS CASE. DO YOU PERCEIVE

01:05 - 47.079 THE CLAIM THAT IS BEING

01:05 - 48.949 PUNISHED FOR GIVING.

01:05 - 52.049 >>NOTICE WHAT HER FUTURE PLANS

01:05 - 52.719 TO RESIGN.

01:05 - 55.259 >>I'VE NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT,

01:05 - 56.689 BUT YOUR HONOR BECAUSE I DON'T

01:05 - 59.099 THINK THAT'S CLAIMANTS, YOU

01:05 - 59.989 KNOW AS I STATED

01:05 - 01.919 IT'S A IT'S AN AT-WILL STATE

01:06 - 03.819 AND CIRCUMSTANCES SOMETIMES ON

01:06 - 05.499 INDIVIDUALS CAN EMPLOY RIGHTLY

01:06 - 07.819 SO AND I WILL STATE THAT IF THE

01:06 - 09.069 EMPLOYER CHOOSES TO LET

01:06 - 10.039 SOMEONE GO.

01:06 - 11.909 >>THE PERSON DIDN'T VOLUNTARILY

01:06 - 13.909 QUIT AS A PERSON ENTITLED THE

01:06 - 14.659 BENEFITS.

01:06 - 17.039 UNLESS THE

01:06 - 18.569 INDIVIDUAL HAS QUIT AND THE

01:06 - 19.509 EFFECTIVENESS OF THAT

01:06 - 20.929 RESIGNATION TAKES PLACE DURING

01:06 - 22.279 THE WEEK IN WHICH HE WANTS TO

01:06 - 23.569 FILE CLAIMS FOR BENEFITS.

01:06 - 25.589 >>IN FACT, ONE OF THE CASES

01:06 - 26.899 THAT THIS COURT RECENTLY ISSUED

01:06 - 27.779 LESS THAN A YEAR AGO SOME

01:06 - 29.969 CABBAGE HAD TO CLAIMANTS WHO

01:06 - 31.919 WAS ELECT WORK THROUGH A

01:06 - 33.789 FRIDAY AND THE ADDITION OF A

01:06 - 34.789 SECOND YOU SAY THE NAME OF THE

01:06 - 36.739 CASES IN CABOT AUSTIN KIMMICH

01:06 - 39.349 IT'S IN I BELIEVE IT'S IN AT

01:06 - 40.789 LEAST ONE OF MY BRIEFS OF THE

01:06 - 41.939 MYRIAD WE FILED.

01:06 - 45.009 WELL IN THAT CASE, THE CLAIMANT

01:06 - 47.109 WAS UNEMPLOYED DUE TO LACK

01:06 - 48.829 OF WORK THROUGH FRIDAY AND THAT

01:06 - 49.709 SHE PUT IN HER NOTICE OF

01:06 - 51.489 RETIREMENT, IT WOULD TAKE THIS

01:06 - 52.859 TO THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION IS

01:06 - 54.099 CLAIMING HE'S ARGUED THAT.

01:06 - 55.849 WELL MOST OF THAT WEEK THE

01:06 - 56.939 CLAIM WAS SIMPLY DUE TO LACK

01:06 - 58.639 WORK, YES, THE TIMEFRAME IS

01:06 - 01.399 IS SWITCHED WHAT IS THE SAME

01:07 - 03.429 ONE SHE I'M RETIRED AND

01:07 - 04.569 GOT SEVERANCE.

01:07 - 06.879 >>WITH HER 7 RUNS IN THAT CASE

01:07 - 08.429 OF DISQUALIFIED OR ANY WAY FOR

01:07 - 09.989 MISSING WHEN SHE WAS PRESENT

01:07 - 11.389 THERE WAS A PRO SE CLAIMANT WHO

01:07 - 13.559 WAS NEVER REPRESENTED. SO IT'S

01:07 - 16.499 AWKWARD TO YOU KNOW PRESIDENT

01:07 - 18.049 BASED ON THAT THAT TYPE OF

01:07 - 19.369 SITUATION BUT ANYWAY.

01:07 - 20.979 WITH THE SEVERANCE HAVE

01:07 - 23.089 DISQUALIFIED TO SEVERANCE IS AN

01:07 - 24.839 AWKWARD SCENARIO BECAUSE IT

01:07 - 27.119 SUBSTANTIVELY SUBSTANTIVELY

01:07 - 28.079 DISQUALIFY ONE FROM

01:07 - 29.129 RECEIVING BENEFITS.

01:07 - 30.229 >>WHAT IT DOES IS IT

01:07 - 31.599 MATHEMATICALLY REDUCES THEIR

01:07 - 33.769 BENEFITS TO 0 SO THERE'S STILL

01:07 - 35.549 SO SHE WOULDN'T AS THE CLAIMANT

01:07 - 37.429 IN THAT CASE HAVING COME INTO A

01:07 - 39.709 LARGE SEVERANCE AT THE END

01:07 - 41.499 WHICH IS WHAT. WHAT

01:07 - 45.439 MOTIVATED HER. A DESIRE TO TO

01:07 - 46.999 LEAVE WORK BECAUSE EMPLOYER

01:07 - 48.569 OFFERED HER THE SEVERANCE IF

01:07 - 49.439 SHE WOULD DO SO

01:07 - 52.019 WOULD HAVE I'M UNABLE TO

01:07 - 53.209 RECEIVE 0 IN

01:07 - 55.319 UNEMPLOYMENT COME, CORRECT, BUT

01:07 - 56.549 YOUR HONOR THAT IF I REMEMBER

01:07 - 57.399 CORRECTLY THE CASE

01:07 - 59.409 WAS DECIDED UNDER SECTION 4 TO

01:07 - 00.889 BE OF THE LAW SO SHE WAS

01:08 - 02.439 SUBSTANTIVELY DISQUALIFIED

01:08 - 03.599 BECAUSE SHE LACKED AN ASSESSED

01:08 - 04.669 AS COMPELLING REASON TO QUIT

01:08 - 05.419 JUST AS THE CLAIM THAT

01:08 - 05.899 IT HERE.

01:08 - 06.889 >>YOU SAID WE SHOULD LOOK AT

01:08 - 08.319 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S INTENT

01:08 - 09.609 BASED ON THE DEFINITION OF

01:08 - 10.039 WEEK.

01:08 - 12.169 NOT NECESSARILY BASED ON THE

01:08 - 13.449 DEFINITION OF WEEK YOUR HONOR

01:08 - 14.889 BUT BASED ON THE FREEZING OF

01:08 - 16.299 SECTION FOR 2 OF THE LAW.

01:08 - 17.899 >>THAT SUPREME COURT IN THE

01:08 - 20.669 APARTMENT. FOR AND AFFIRMED BUT

01:08 - 21.769 RECOGNIZE THE SAME.

01:08 - 24.879 SUCH HENRI INTERPRETATION IS IN

01:08 - 25.899 THE MOSQUE WHEN STATING THAT

01:08 - 27.099 THIS PARTICULAR PHRASE IN A

01:08 - 28.509 SECTION FOR 2 OF THE LAW

01:08 - 30.499 SHOWING THAT TO ANY WEEK.

01:08 - 32.789 EVIDENCE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S

01:08 - 33.669 INTEND TO APPLY THOSE

01:08 - 34.659 PROVISIONS REGARDLESS OF THE

01:08 - 35.199 DURATION OF THE

01:08 - 37.129 DISQUALIFIED CONDUCT SUGGEST

01:08 - 38.199 THE CLAIM IS INELIGIBLE IN THE

01:08 - 39.859 COUNTRY CURSED AT ANY TIME

01:08 - 42.099 DURING THE THE DUMBEST FACTOR

01:08 - 43.609 DIFFERENT I THINK WE'VE AGREED

01:08 - 44.139 ON THAT.

01:08 - 46.749 >>SO I GO BACK TO

01:08 - 48.419 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HERE DID

01:08 - 50.359 STAY ITS INTENT FOR THE PURPOSE

01:08 - 52.049 OF THIS LAW AND BASICALLY WHAT

01:08 - 52.809 THEY SAID WAS

01:08 - 54.889 THE CLAIM IT BECOMES UNEMPLOYED

01:08 - 56.339 THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN.

01:08 - 58.909 THEN THE STATE WILL

01:08 - 01.199 ASSIST FINANCIALLY INTO A

01:09 - 02.449 PROGRAM WHERE THEY HAVE

01:09 - 04.809 CONTRIBUTED. SO THEY CAN HAVE

01:09 - 07.269 FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE. WE

01:09 - 08.749 RESPECT YOUR HONOR I DISAGREE

01:09 - 11.249 >>THE INTERPRETATION THAT WAS

01:09 - 12.649 LOOKED AT WAS NOT JUST WEEK.

01:09 - 14.579 IT WAS USING THE WORD.

01:09 - 17.619 64 TO OF ALL REQUIRES AN

01:09 - 18.709 EMPLOYEE SHOWED YOU KNOW THE

01:09 - 19.819 BILL FOR COMPENSATION FOR A

01:09 - 21.349 WEEK IN WHICH IS THAT

01:09 - 23.829 UNEMPLOYMENT IS DUE TO SO SO IN

01:09 - 24.999 THAT VOICE FOR THE FACTS, THE

01:09 - 26.609 SAME THE FACTS DON'T NEED TO

01:09 - 28.699 SAME FOR THE LOT OF THESE I I

01:09 - 31.089 UNDERSTAND BUT I'M ASKING YOU

01:09 - 32.499 DIFFERENT QUESTION AND MY

01:09 - 34.209 QUESTION IS THAT I KNOW

01:09 - 36.269 SO YOU'RE SEEING THAT IN HARM

01:09 - 37.809 AND THE CASE WAS SECTION FOR

01:09 - 40.719 2.6 OF ALL WHICH RIPPED WHICH

01:09 - 44.469 CONTRASTED THE THE LANGUAGE OF

01:09 - 46.209 THAT WHICH YOU KNOW WE ALSO GET

01:09 - 48.029 WINDY ALSO GET DURING VS

01:09 - 52.019 IN AND WHEN THE STATUTE SAYS

01:09 - 54.009 UNEMPLOYED DUE TO.

01:10 - 01.279 SHELL BE ELIGIBLE FOR

01:10 - 02.869 COMPENSATION IN ANY WEEK.

01:10 - 05.999 IN WHICH THE SIGNIFICANCE OF

01:10 - 06.829 THESE CASES THE

01:10 - 09.579 IN WHICH NOT THE WEEK OR THE

01:10 - 11.069 DUE TO ITS IN WHICH

01:10 - 12.629 BECAUSE IN WHICH IS WHEN THE

01:10 - 14.439 CONDUCT OCCURS AND THE CONDUCT

01:10 - 16.149 THAT OCCURRED HERE WAS THE

01:10 - 17.399 CLAIMANTS RESIGNATION

01:10 - 20.979 BEING EFFECTIVE AND THE BOSS IN

01:10 - 23.289 A MOTTO AND SOME CABBAGE THAT

01:10 - 25.169 WE HAVE WE GET RULES OF LAW

01:10 - 26.719 BASED ON FACTS

01:10 - 28.329 AND SO WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT

01:10 - 29.649 THE FACTS AND CONCLUDE THEIR

01:10 - 31.969 EYES. 2 OF THE FACTS ARE IN

01:10 - 33.679 THIS CASE OR ANY OTHER CASE.

01:10 - 35.909 I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR HONOR

01:10 - 37.559 BUT THIS ISN'T A MODEST SUPPORT

01:10 - 40.069 THE PETITIONERS POSITION BUT NO

01:10 - 41.769 YOUR HONOR DOES NOT IT ACTUALLY

01:10 - 42.199 SUPPORTS THE

01:10 - 44.409 BOARD'S POSITION THE CLAIMANT

01:10 - 45.519 RESIGNED EFFECTIVE ON A

01:10 - 47.729 WEDNESDAY. WHAT WAS DISCHARGED

01:10 - 49.159 A COUPLE WEEKS PRIOR. THE

01:10 - 51.739 WEEK'S ISSUE THAT WORTHY WE

01:10 - 53.109 ENDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

01:10 - 53.429 THE.

01:10 - 56.919 THE RESIGNATION, SHIFTING HIS

01:10 - 59.159 CIRCUMSTANCES FACTS BY ONE DAY

01:10 - 01.699 SO IN THE CASE PRESENTLY BEFORE

01:11 - 03.929 THIS COURT. CLAIMANTS LAST DAY

01:11 - 04.149 WOULD HAVE

01:11 - 06.009 BEEN TUESDAY IN A MODERATE THE

01:11 - 07.629 CASE WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR THE

01:11 - 08.349 LAST DAY WOULD HAVE BEEN

01:11 - 10.259 WEDNESDAY AT THE BOARD IN THAT

01:11 - 11.639 CASE GRANTED BENEFITS FOR THE

01:11 - 13.419 WEEKS PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE

01:11 - 13.609 WEEK

01:11 - 15.369 OF RESIGNATION AND THEN THE

01:11 - 17.169 CLAIMANT WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN

01:11 - 20.349 COURT OR THE BOARD DENIED

01:11 - 22.529 BENEFITS AND THEN THE CLAIMANT

01:11 - 23.579 REQUESTED THAT

01:11 - 27.369 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF I'M SORRY

01:11 - 29.019 THE DISCHARGE

01:11 - 31.369 WHICH ESSENTIALLY WIPE OUT THE

01:11 - 32.969 RESIGNATION BECAUSE THEN THE

01:11 - 35.319 CLAIM WAS TOO IN THE SAME

01:11 - 36.779 CIRCUMSTANCES, THE COURT SAID

01:11 - 38.359 WITH THIS CONTENTION. WE CANNOT

01:11 - 40.359 AGREE IF THE CLAIMANT HAD MADE

01:11 - 41.729 HER RESIGNATION DATE A COUPLE

01:11 - 42.569 DAYS LATER.

01:11 - 44.209 >>THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE

01:11 - 45.969 I THINK THE RESIGNATION OF IN

01:11 - 47.079 ANY TIME DURING THAT WEEK IT

01:11 - 47.409 WOULD HAVE BEEN

01:11 - 48.909 AN ISSUE BUT IF IT WAS AT THE

01:11 - 50.289 END OF THAT WEEK THE END OF THE

01:11 - 51.989 WORKWEEK WHICH IS PRETTY

01:11 - 53.549 DIFFERENT DATE. SHE WOULD HAVE

01:11 - 54.729 GOTTEN THE BENEFITS AND THE

01:11 - 55.829 RESULTS WE'VE BEEN THE SAME

01:11 - 58.239 BECAUSE SINGH CABBAGE WOULD IT

01:11 - 58.759 WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME

01:11 - 59.989 SCENARIOS AND CABBAGE WHERE

01:11 - 00.319 THE.

01:12 - 01.869 >>THE CLAIMANT WOULD HAVE

01:12 - 03.239 WORKED THE ENTIRE WEEK EXCEPT

01:12 - 05.349 FOR THE SOCIAL UNLESS IT WAS

01:12 - 06.589 SHE SAID SATURDAY NIGHT AT

01:12 - 07.849 MIDNIGHT IS WHEN I'M GOING TO

01:12 - 09.729 RETIRE AND THEN IT WOULDN'T

01:12 - 10.849 BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN

01:12 - 12.439 DURING THAT WEEK. I THINK THAT

01:12 - 12.629 THAT

01:12 - 15.419 WOULD BE SPLITTING WE TOO

01:12 - 18.789 MANY HERE'S YOUR HONOR IF IF IF

01:12 - 19.909 IF WHAT IF SHE DID WITH THAT

01:12 - 22.579 IT WAS EFFECTIVE DURING THE

01:12 - 24.089 WEEK, THEN YES, YOUR HONOR THE

01:12 - 25.589 SAME CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE SHE'S

01:12 - 27.619 WAITED UNTIL AFTER SHE FINISHED

01:12 - 28.889 WORKING HER SHIFT ON TUESDAY

01:12 - 28.989 AND

01:12 - 29.429 THEN SET.

01:12 - 32.099 >>OK I'M OUT OF HERE.

01:12 - 34.519 THE COURSE THEN THAT YOU

01:12 - 35.759 WOULDN'T GET UNEMPLOYMENT COMP

01:12 - 37.479 BECAUSE SHE QUIT,

01:12 - 38.609 BUT SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN PAID

01:12 - 39.939 FOR THOSE DAYS BUT SHE WOULDN'T

01:12 - 41.619 HAVE GIVEN EMPLOYER ANY NOTICE

01:12 - 42.369 AT ALL

01:12 - 44.699 OF HER INTENTION SO IS THAT

01:12 - 46.449 WHAT THE INCENTIVE IS HERE

01:12 - 48.609 UNDER THE THE WAY THE AKC

01:12 - 50.799 SHOULD BE READ THAT OKAY

01:12 - 52.739 ANYBODY IF YOU WANT TO

01:12 - 55.249 LEAVE YOUR JOB AND YOU'RE GOING

01:12 - 56.519 TO DO IT IN THE MIDDLE OF

01:12 - 59.749 THE WEEK OR BEFORE I GUESS

01:12 - 01.179 SATURDAY NIGHT AT MIDNIGHT.

01:13 - 03.389 DON'T GIVE YOUR EMPLOYER

01:13 - 05.229 NOTICE, DON'T LET THEM KNOW

01:13 - 06.509 THAT THEY SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR

01:13 - 07.339 SOMEBODY TO FILL

01:13 - 09.619 YOUR SHIFT IN THE FUTURE OR

01:13 - 10.439 WHATEVER YOU'RE GOING TO DO

01:13 - 12.129 JUST WAIT AND AT THE END OF

01:13 - 14.639 YOUR SHIFT SAY SEE YOU BECAUSE

01:13 - 16.489 OTHERWISE YOU WILL BE PUNISHED.

01:13 - 17.349 THE HONORS

01:13 - 19.629 THAT SECTION 4 TO BE OF THE LAW

01:13 - 21.239 REQUIRES AN INDIVIDUAL TAKE

01:13 - 22.499 REASONABLE STEPS TO PRESERVE

01:13 - 23.469 THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP.

01:13 - 24.929 >>THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY

01:13 - 25.979 MEAN PUTTING

01:13 - 28.479 A NOTICE PEOPLE WALK OFF SHIPS

01:13 - 29.999 THEY CAN GET BENEFITS SOMETIMES

01:13 - 31.129 THEY WOKE UP SHIFTS THEY DON'T

01:13 - 32.299 GET BENEFITS IT DEPENDS

01:13 - 34.139 ON THE REASON THEY LEFT AND

01:13 - 35.459 WHETHER UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES

01:13 - 36.049 THERE WAS A REASON

01:13 - 38.119 FOR THEM. YOU KNOW NOTICE

01:13 - 38.919 REALLY ISN'T IT ISN'T

01:13 - 40.269 NECESSARY. IT COULD BE

01:13 - 43.219 WHAT MATTERS IS WHETHER THEY

01:13 - 44.469 NOTIFIED THE EMPLOYER OF THE

01:13 - 45.659 PROBLEM THAT CAUSED THE

01:13 - 49.579 >>WHEN I PRACTICED ON

01:13 - 52.249 EMPLOYMENT OBVIOUSLY I WAS THE

01:13 - 53.839 ATTORNEY THERE PRACTICING SO I

01:13 - 55.469 NEVER GAVE MUCH THOUGHT TO

01:13 - 57.649 WHETHER IT WAS THE REFEREES

01:13 - 59.379 DUTY TO TELL THE RECORD OR IS

01:13 - 00.599 THIS A SCENARIO WHERE THE PRO

01:14 - 02.139 SE LITIGANT ASSUMES THE REST

01:14 - 03.519 BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T HAVE COUNSEL

01:14 - 05.489 WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY ON THAT.

01:14 - 07.389 >>ALL RIGHT JEN REALLY WIN.

01:14 - 08.689 I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ANY

01:14 - 10.779 SPECIFICALLY ON DEVELOPMENT OF

01:14 - 13.349 THE RECORD. BUT I DO KNOW THAT

01:14 - 13.779 AN ISSUE

01:14 - 16.479 CAN BE WAVED IT IS NOT PROPERLY

01:14 - 17.579 DEVELOP EVEN BY PERCY

01:14 - 18.999 INDIVIDUAL IN THE CLINTON DID

01:14 - 21.379 NOT RAISE THIS ON APPEAL TO TO

01:14 - 22.789 THE BOARD TO IT WOULD BE WITHIN

01:14 - 24.649 THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. NEITHER DO

01:14 - 26.499 THEIR FREE DOES HAVE A DUTY TO

01:14 - 27.339 ASSIST.

01:14 - 30.349 AND COUNCIL PARTIES TO

01:14 - 31.569 DEVELOP THE RECORD ON MATTERS

01:14 - 33.029 THAT HE OR SHE HAS REASON TO

01:14 - 33.939 KNOW OR

01:14 - 35.399 RELEVANT. BUT CONSIDERING THE

01:14 - 37.629 CASE LAW IS UNANIMOUSLY ON ONE

01:14 - 38.669 SIDE OF THIS ISSUE

01:14 - 40.179 AND THAT THIS COURT HAS

01:14 - 41.739 CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT

01:14 - 42.779 SEPARATION THAT IS

01:14 - 44.019 DISQUALIFYING AT ANY POINT

01:14 - 45.039 DURING THE WEEK RESULT IN

01:14 - 46.599 DISQUALIFICATION FOR THE

01:14 - 48.189 ENTIRETY OF THE WEEK THERE'S NO

01:14 - 50.429 RATIONAL BASIS FOR THE REFEREE

01:14 - 52.039 TO OF THOUGHT HEY I NEED TO

01:14 - 53.689 LOOK INTO THIS FURTHERMORE THE

01:14 - 54.909 CLAIM AND ALL THOSE STATING

01:14 - 55.309 THAT

01:14 - 58.369 SHE. WAS SCHEDULED UP TO

01:14 - 00.149 TUESDAY IS NOT AN INDICATION

01:15 - 01.139 THAT SHE WOULD HAVE WORKED

01:15 - 02.989 MONDAY TUESDAY. FOR SUNDAY

01:15 - 04.329 MONDAY AND TUESDAY, ESPECIALLY

01:15 - 05.619 CONSIDERING THAT OR THE

01:15 - 07.229 CIRCUMSTANCES WHAT YOU PUT IN

01:15 - 09.019 HER NOTICE OF WORK, THE NOSE OF

01:15 - 10.449 RESIGNATION SHOULD WORK ONE DAY

01:15 - 10.939 THAT WEEK

01:15 - 12.889 AND PUT A NOTICE IN ON TUESDAY,

01:15 - 14.029 SO SHE DID WORK SUNDAY SHE

01:15 - 16.029 DIDN'T WORK. TUESDAY,

01:15 - 17.219 SO SHE CERTAINLY DIDN'T WORK

01:15 - 18.309 EVERY SUNDAY MONDAY AND

01:15 - 18.789 TUESDAY.

01:15 - 24.039 SO ESPECIALLY IF YOUR QUESTION

01:15 - 25.289 OR YES, THANKS THANK YOU.

01:15 - 28.379 CM ALMOST OUT OF TIME.

01:15 - 31.729 >>I JUST WITH A MOTTO.

01:15 - 34.319 THEY GAVE. UNEMPLOYMENT

01:15 - 36.589 THROUGH MARCH 31ST, WHICH WAS

01:15 - 38.649 THE DAY AND THE EMPLOYEES.

01:15 - 44.699 >>IT SAID THAT THE VOLUNTARY

01:15 - 46.269 RESIGNATION WOULD TAKE EFFECT

01:15 - 48.559 THE COURT IN A MODEL RECOGNIZE

01:15 - 49.359 THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS A

01:15 - 50.999 VOLUNTEER LEON, HIM FOR THAT

01:15 - 52.109 WAS INVOLUNTARY AND THE

01:15 - 54.339 UNEMPLOYED UP UNTIL MARCH 31

01:15 - 57.339 AFTER BUT NONETHELESS DENIED

01:15 - 58.559 BENEFITS FOR THAT WEEK.

01:16 - 04.259 >>OK THAT'S NOT THE WAY I READ

01:16 - 05.569 IT I

01:16 - 08.159 IT WAS CITED IT IS LIMITED EVEN

01:16 - 09.839 THAT I INITIALLY BELIEVED THE

01:16 - 10.799 SAME THING BUT ON

01:16 - 11.699 CLOSER READING.

01:16 - 12.809 >>EARLIER THIS WEEK I

01:16 - 14.089 DISCOVERED THAT MOTTO IS

01:16 - 14.939 ACTUALLY ON POINT WITH THE

01:16 - 16.699 BOARD'S HOLDING. OKAY I'LL TAKE

01:16 - 18.419 ANOTHER LOOK. IT SAYS

01:16 - 19.199 SUBSEQUENT TO

01:16 - 21.739 THAT DATE. SO I SAW THAT WAS

01:16 - 23.169 THAT DATE THE CLAIMANT IN MARCH

01:16 - 25.029 31ST CORRECT SUBSEQUENT TO THAT

01:16 - 26.349 DATE THE CLAIMANTS REASON FOR

01:16 - 27.659 UNEMPLOYMENT HAS CHANGED.

01:16 - 29.819 BUT THE COURT STILL DENIED

01:16 - 31.989 BENEFITS FOR THAT WEEK IN WHICH

01:16 - 33.469 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE

01:16 - 34.469 RESIGNATION OCCURRED.

01:16 - 36.999 NOW ALL THE ALL THE CASES THAT

01:16 - 38.379 WE CITED HAVE CONSISTENTLY

01:16 - 39.549 AGREE THAT THE BOARD'S BROADER

01:16 - 42.379 POINT THAT THE

01:16 - 43.009 THAT

01:16 - 44.919 CERTAIN SENSES CAN CHANGE WEEK

01:16 - 47.749 TO WEEK IN INDIVIDUAL MAY BE

01:16 - 48.239 UNEMPLOYED FOR

01:16 - 49.869 DIFFERENT REASONS BUT NONE OF

01:16 - 50.999 THEM HAVE REFUTED THE FINER

01:16 - 52.069 POINT THAT ANY TIME THAT

01:16 - 53.489 THERE'S A DISQUALIFICATION

01:16 - 54.049 DURING

01:16 - 56.299 THE WEEK THAT DISQUALIFICATION

01:16 - 57.529 PRIZE FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE

01:16 - 58.799 WEEK. IT'S JUST ALL

01:16 - 00.629 THESE COURTS. THIS COURT'S

01:17 - 02.019 CASES THE SUPREME COURT'S

01:17 - 02.989 GUIDANCE AND HARTMAN.

01:17 - 05.349 AND THEREFORE I REQUEST THAT

01:17 - 07.559 THE FROM THIS OR THINK YOU DO

01:17 - 07.769 THAT.

01:17 - 10.819 JUST A

01:17 - 13.879 COUPLE FOLLOW-UP POINTS AGAIN I

01:17 - 15.189 THINK WE SEE THAT THE BOARD

01:17 - 17.219 WANTS A MECHANICAL RULE APPLIED

01:17 - 17.569 HERE

01:17 - 19.519 CONCERNING DISQUALIFICATION.

01:17 - 21.459 >>THEY CANNOT SIMPLY LOOK AT

01:17 - 22.649 WHETHER DISQUALIFICATION

01:17 - 25.169 OCCURRED DURING THE WEEK THE

01:17 - 26.849 QUESTION IS WHETHER HAS TO BE

01:17 - 28.539 BALANCED AGAINST WHETHER OR NOT

01:17 - 29.719 WHAT THE EMPLOYMENT

01:17 - 31.889 UNEMPLOYMENT IS DUE TO AND

01:17 - 34.669 THAT'S CAN'T JUST HAVE ONE SIDE

01:17 - 35.829 OF THE EQUATION THEY NEED TO

01:17 - 38.199 HAVE BOTH BOTH OF SINCE AND

01:17 - 40.499 CABBAGE DID NOT INVOLVE FOLKS

01:17 - 41.879 THAT WERE SCHEDULED

01:17 - 44.319 TO WORK WHAT SPECIFIC SHIPS AND

01:17 - 45.569 WANT TO WORK FULL TIME THEY

01:17 - 47.489 WERE BOTH ON LAYOFF STATUS.

01:17 - 49.269 SO THE PROBLEM WITH USING THOSE

01:17 - 51.019 CASES OF PARADIGM TO DENY

01:17 - 51.939 BENEFITS HERE

01:17 - 54.559 DOESN'T FLY. IF THE CLAIMANT

01:17 - 56.599 CIRCUMSTANCE IN TERMS OF BEING

01:17 - 57.719 SCHEDULED UNDER THE

01:17 - 59.929 CIRCUMSTANCE SCHEDULED TO WORK

01:17 - 02.249 AND WORK FULL TIME, IT'S KIND

01:18 - 03.019 OF WITH

01:18 - 05.469 THE OT CASE ALL HERE AND THAT'S

01:18 - 07.419 PROBABLY WHAT LED TO THE ORDER

01:18 - 08.879 ABOUT SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON

01:18 - 10.869 THIS ISSUE JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE

01:18 - 12.319 NONE OF THE CASES HAVE DEALT

01:18 - 13.369 WITH A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE

01:18 - 15.069 SOMEBODY WAS SCHEDULE AND WOULD

01:18 - 16.549 HAVE COMPLETED THEIR FULL-TIME

01:18 - 19.469 WORK. HASLER IS THE CASE THAT

01:18 - 21.029 INVOLVES THE DUTY OF THE

01:18 - 23.609 REFEREE TO DEVELOP THE RECORD

01:18 - 25.389 AND YOU KNOW IN TERMS OF THIS.

01:18 - 26.359 THE BOARD EVEN

01:18 - 29.529 IN THE 3 THAT BECAUSE OF THE

01:18 - 31.079 CLAIMANTS UNCONVENTIONAL WORK

01:18 - 32.849 SCHEDULE, NOBODY ADDRESS THIS

01:18 - 33.829 DURING THE COURSE OF THE

01:18 - 35.919 HEARING ALL WE'RE SAYING HERE

01:18 - 39.019 IS THAT NOT SHOOTING DAGGERS

01:18 - 40.309 THAT ANYBODY WOULD JUST SIMPLY

01:18 - 42.259 SAYING THAT SOMEBODY THAT MAY

01:18 - 44.229 HAVE YOU KNOW REALIZE WHAT WHAT

01:18 - 45.259 THE THE GRAVITY OF

01:18 - 47.729 THIS ISSUE WITH THIS STATEMENT

01:18 - 49.389 ABOUT THE EMPLOYER CONFIRMING

01:18 - 51.609 THAT SHE WAS WORKING THIS 36

01:18 - 53.359 HOUR SCHEDULE WE EACH WEEK

01:18 - 55.049 SHOULD HAVE TRIGGERED IN WORRY

01:18 - 56.559 AND OVER THE BOARD SAW THIS

01:18 - 58.439 ON APPEAL. THEY COULD HAVE JUST

01:18 - 59.879 SIMPLY SAID THIS BACK FOR SOME

01:18 - 02.359 FACT-FINDING ON THIS KATZ IS

01:19 - 03.569 THE CASE INVOLVING

01:19 - 05.519 THE BOARD. YOU KNOW IT MENTIONS

01:19 - 07.069 IS THAT YOU NEED TO MENTION THE

01:19 - 08.429 ISSUE WITH THAT SUFFICIENT TO

01:19 - 10.459 PRESERVE IT ON APPEAL. GRAND

01:19 - 11.689 STREET WAS ANOTHER CASE

01:19 - 12.549 INTERPRETING THIS

01:19 - 14.969 FINALLY LAY HE'S THE MOST

01:19 - 17.009 RECENT CASE INVOLVING A SHOWING

01:19 - 18.689 AND THE NECESSITY FOR A SHOWING

01:19 - 20.489 OF SEE ENTER IN TERMS

01:19 - 23.009 THE DISQUALIFICATION OR OTHER A

01:19 - 24.959 FULL OVERPAYMENT IN POSITION IN

01:19 - 26.589 THIS CASE. THAT'S

01:19 - 27.029 ALL I.

01:19 - 30.119 >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH MISTER IN

01:19 - 30.689 MIND TO TAKE

01:19 - 32.939 IT THAT REFEREE SPEED LOSE

01:19 - 34.879 MOTHER WAS YOUR PIANO TEACHER S

01:19 - 36.549 BUT YES SIR THAT IS THE MOST

01:19 - 37.889 PITTSBURGH THING I'VE HEARD IN

01:19 - 40.809 A LONG LITTLE BOY.

01:19 - 43.139 >>THIS IS BACK IN THE DAY, YOU

01:19 - 44.509 KNOW COURSE YOU KNOW I WAS AND

01:19 - 45.849 HOW YOU KNOW JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL

01:19 - 47.719 LEAGUE OVER THE LESSONS AT 7.30

01:19 - 47.819 OR

01:19 - 49.809 8 AT NIGHT AND NOR WOULD BE

01:19 - 52.989 UPSTAIRS AND THE ALL THIS IS

01:19 - 55.329 JUST A. LUMINARY IN TERMS OF

01:19 - 56.769 THE PIANO PLAYING WORLD SHE

01:19 - 57.589 LITERALLY TURN

01:19 - 01.079 WHY A WHOLE LIFE UPSIDE DOWN

01:20 - 02.729 AND GOT ME PLAYING THE PIANO

01:20 - 04.259 SITE READING THE WHOLE 9 OR

01:20 - 07.029 WONDERFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH

01:20 - 07.499 FOR THAT.

01:20 - 12.879 >>NEXT ON

01:20 - 14.979 THE LIST, WE'LL BEING NUMBER

01:20 - 15.809 25.

01:20 - 39.199 WELL YOU'RE

01:20 - 40.049 GETTING SETTLED.

01:20 - 43.069 NUMBER 25 IN MAY THE U.S. STATE

01:20 - 45.189 OF EDWARD J PUT A CAR DECEASED

01:20 - 45.919 IN THE PROTOCOL OR

01:20 - 47.949 FAMILY TRUST. THIS IS THE

01:20 - 49.609 APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF

01:20 - 51.409 REVENUE INHERITANCE TAX

01:20 - 51.969 DIVISION.

01:20 - 55.049 CASE NUMBER 25 CONCERNS WHETHER

01:20 - 56.899 THE POTEET CAR FAMILY TRUST

01:20 - 00.149 CREATED IN 1999. AN AMENDED IN

01:21 - 03.509 2013. QUALIFIES AS A SOLE

01:21 - 06.329 USE TRUST FOR INHERITANCE TAX

01:21 - 07.989 PURPOSES PURSUANT TO CURRENT

01:21 - 12.159 SECTIONS, 21 OH 2 2113 OF THE

01:21 - 14.219 INHERITANCE ESTATE TAX AT.

01:21 - 16.759 RESOLUTION OF THIS ISSUE

01:21 - 18.769 DETERMINES THE TAX RATE FOR THE

01:21 - 20.429 NET TRUST ASSETS

01:21 - 22.729 IN THE YEAR FOLLOWING THE DEATH

01:21 - 23.899 OF MISTER POE TO CAR.

01:21 - 26.309 SPECIFICALLY WHETHER THE NET

01:21 - 28.139 ASSETS SHOULD BE ASSESSED UNDER

01:21 - 31.099 THE SPOUSAL TAX RATE OF 0%

01:21 - 32.629 WE'RE UNDER THE LINEAL

01:21 - 35.729 DESCENDANT RATE A 4.5%.

01:21 - 37.709 THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

01:21 - 38.379 INHERITANCE

01:21 - 40.859 TAX DIVISION MAINTAINS THAT TO

01:21 - 43.499 QUALIFY AS THE SOLE USE TRUST

01:21 - 45.499 FOR INHERITANCE TAX PURPOSES,

01:21 - 48.239 THE SURVIVING SPOUSE MUST NOT

01:21 - 49.479 ONLY BE ENTITLED

01:21 - 51.439 TO ALL INCOME AND PRINCIPAL

01:21 - 53.129 DISTRIBUTIONS FROM THE TRUST

01:21 - 54.549 DURING HER LIFETIME.

01:21 - 56.379 BUT SHOULD NOT RETAIN AN

01:21 - 57.789 INTERVIEW I THOSE POWER OF

01:21 - 59.159 APPOINTMENT OVER THE TRUST

01:21 - 01.679 PROPERTY. THE DEPARTMENT ARGUES

01:22 - 03.319 THAT UNDER THE SPECIFIC TERMS

01:22 - 05.179 OF THE PUBLIC ARE FAMILY TRUST

01:22 - 07.159 MISSUS POGACAR THE SURVIVING

01:22 - 09.549 SPOUSE RETAINED THE REVOCABLE

01:22 - 10.129 POWER

01:22 - 11.999 TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE OF THE

01:22 - 14.789 TRUST AS WELL AS A ENTRY POWER

01:22 - 16.999 OF APPOINTMENT. ACCORDING TO

01:22 - 19.089 THE DEPARTMENT THE RETENTION OF

01:22 - 20.119 SUCH POWERS

01:22 - 22.599 IS CONSISTENT WITH A REVOCABLE

01:22 - 24.429 RATHER THAN AN IRREVOCABLE

01:22 - 26.999 TRUST AND DISQUALIFIES THE PO

01:22 - 28.919 TO CAR FAMILY TRUST FROM THE

01:22 - 29.459 SOLE

01:22 - 31.669 USE STATUS. FURTHER THE

01:22 - 32.979 DEPARTMENT IS CERTAIN IS THAT

01:22 - 35.179 THE INHERITANCE AND ESTATE TAX

01:22 - 37.319 ACT'S DEFINITION OF A

01:22 - 39.429 TRANSFER OF PROPERTY FOR SOLE

01:22 - 41.829 USE WAS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED IN

01:22 - 45.209 2002 2003 TO ADDRESS THIS

01:22 - 45.869 ISSUE.

01:22 - 47.839 THE U.S. STATE INTEREST

01:22 - 49.459 COUNTERED THAT FOLLOWING MISTER

01:22 - 50.569 POE TO CAUSE DEATH.

01:22 - 52.819 THE TRUST ASSETS WERE OWNED BY

01:22 - 55.019 MISSUS PUT A CAR AND NOT SIMPLY

01:22 - 55.269 FOR

01:22 - 58.029 HER USE RENDERING SECTION 21

01:22 - 59.329 '02 AND SECTION

01:22 - 02.129 2113 OF THE INHERITANCE AND THE

01:23 - 03.409 STATE TAX ACT

01:23 - 05.499 AND APPLICABLE. THEY FURTHER

01:23 - 07.219 ARGUE THAT THE SETTLER OF A

01:23 - 07.759 ROOF OF A

01:23 - 09.859 REVOCABLE TRUST IS THE ONLY

01:23 - 12.049 BENEFICIARY OF THE TRUST AND

01:23 - 14.019 AS SUCH IS THE OWNER OF THE

01:23 - 16.279 TRUST ASSETS FOR PENNSYLVANIA

01:23 - 19.029 TAX PURPOSES. THE U.S. STATE

01:23 - 20.249 INTEREST TO SIRTE

01:23 - 21.829 THAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE TRUST

01:23 - 23.799 DOCUMENT ITSELF DEMONSTRATES

01:23 - 25.089 THERE WAS NO INTENTION BY

01:23 - 26.859 THE SETTLERS THAT THE TRUST

01:23 - 28.469 ASSETS SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO

01:23 - 30.939 INHERITANCE TAX UPON THE DEATH

01:23 - 33.039 OF THE FIRST SETTLER MISTER POE

01:23 - 36.219 TO CAR. SO WITH THAT. WE

01:23 - 37.059 CAN BEGIN

01:23 - 42.559 THE. DEPARTMENT IS THE

01:23 - 43.109 APPELLANT.

01:23 - 48.949 YOU MAY FEEL FREE TO COME TO

01:23 - 50.419 THAT PODIUM, YOU WISH.

01:23 - 51.689 >>IT'S OUR EYES ON BEHALF OF

01:23 - 53.119 THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE YARDS

01:23 - 54.659 TAX EVASION I'D LIKE TO RESERVE

01:23 - 56.169 3 MINUTES FOR A BOTTLE YOU HAVE

01:23 - 56.859 TO THINK THEY

01:23 - 58.539 THEY'RE NOT ITALY'S THE GREAT

01:23 - 00.369 WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE THE

01:24 - 01.429 TRIAL COURT ERRED

01:24 - 03.019 WHEN IT FOUND THAT THIS PART OF

01:24 - 04.639 OUR FAMILY TRUST QUALIFIED AS A

01:24 - 06.559 SO YOU STRESSED EVEN THOSE ARE

01:24 - 08.099 VOCAL IN NATURE AND WAS

01:24 - 09.579 THEREFORE EXEMPT FROM TAX AT

01:24 - 11.639 THE HUSBAND'S DEATH OR IN OTHER

01:24 - 12.719 WORDS QUALIFIED FOR

01:24 - 14.769 DEFERRED TAX COUNCILOR YOU

01:24 - 17.089 DON'T DO YOU KNOW DISPUTE THAT

01:24 - 19.059 EVEN IF IT'S SO YOU STRESS THAT

01:24 - 19.549 IT'S STILL A

01:24 - 20.819 REVOCABLE TRUST.

01:24 - 22.879 >>CORRECT. THERE IS ADEQUATE

01:24 - 23.899 EVIDENCE ON THE RECORD THAT

01:24 - 24.369 THIS IS A REAL

01:24 - 26.819 VOCAL TRUST AND AS SUCH ALL

01:24 - 29.039 TRUST ASSETS ARE SUBJECT TO TAX

01:24 - 29.749 AND HAS ACTUALLY LEARNED

01:24 - 30.689 GETTING INTO NEXT.

01:24 - 32.899 WELL ACTUALLY WHAT IT JUST TO

01:24 - 33.569 FOLLOW UP ON MY

01:24 - 36.429 IF YOU HAVE A REVOCABLE TRUST

01:24 - 38.189 AND SOMETHING IS SUBJECT TO

01:24 - 40.599 INHERITANCE TAX IS IT THAT THE

01:24 - 42.739 TRUST ITSELF RETAINS OWNERSHIP

01:24 - 44.649 OF IT AND THE GRAND TOURS INTO

01:24 - 45.879 THE TRUST OR SETTLERS AS IT

01:24 - 48.449 MAY BE ACTUALLY HAVE THE ASSETS

01:24 - 50.549 ATTRIBUTABLE TO THEM FOR

01:24 - 51.879 INHERITANCE TAX PURPOSES,

01:24 - 53.999 CORRECT SO FOR A VOCAL TRUST

01:24 - 55.429 WHILE THE SAME PERSON CAN WEAR

01:24 - 56.819 ALL 3 HATS AS I'VE INDICATED IN

01:24 - 58.439 MY BRIEF THEY CAN BE BOTH THEY

01:24 - 00.049 CAN BE THE TRUSTEE AND THE

01:25 - 00.859 GRANTS WERE AND THE

01:25 - 02.689 BENEFICIARY. THEY TECHNICALLY

01:25 - 04.059 ARE SERVING IN SEPARATE

01:25 - 05.959 DISTINCT ROLES WHICH IS

01:25 - 07.919 MANDATED BY TRUST THEORY SO

01:25 - 09.809 WHILE THE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL

01:25 - 11.909 TRUST WHILE THE TRUSTEE MIGHT

01:25 - 13.099 BE THE OWNER OF THE TRUST

01:25 - 13.749 PROPERTY.

01:25 - 16.569 THE BENEFICIARY IS THE ONE THAT

01:25 - 17.709 IS GRANTED THE USE AND

01:25 - 19.469 ENJOYMENT OF THOSE ASSETS, THE

01:25 - 20.899 BIGGEST ISSUE DOES NOT OWN

01:25 - 23.049 THOSE ASSETS. THE TRUSTEE DOES

01:25 - 25.039 SO EVEN IF SHE IS THAT EVEN IF

01:25 - 26.379 IT WAS A ROBOT WILL TRUST AND

01:25 - 27.489 SHE'S THE TRUSTEE.

01:25 - 30.479 SHE CANNOT OWN THOSE ASSETS OUT

01:25 - 31.679 RAIN-FREE OF TRUST YOU CAN'T

01:25 - 34.019 HAVE A DOLLAR BILL INTEREST AND

01:25 - 35.889 IN HER HAND SO IF THE ASSETS

01:25 - 37.209 ARE STILL THEN OWNED BY THE

01:25 - 38.409 TRUST AND WE'RE JUST SAYING

01:25 - 39.609 THAT THERE ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO

01:25 - 40.829 THE GRAND TOURS.

01:25 - 43.199 HOW IS IT THAT THE A 100% WOULD

01:25 - 44.539 BE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE FIRST TO

01:25 - 45.659 DIE HAS BEEN

01:25 - 47.649 CAN YOU BE THAT QUESTION SO IF

01:25 - 50.019 THE TRUST OWNS THE ASSETS AND

01:25 - 51.519 WE'RE JUST ATTRIBUTING THAT TO

01:25 - 52.509 THE GRAND TOURS

01:25 - 54.859 FOR PURPOSES OF INHERITANCE TAX

01:25 - 55.229 THE GRAND

01:25 - 58.239 TOURS WERE. AND THE PROPERTY AS

01:25 - 59.489 JOINT TENANTS BEFORE IT WENT

01:25 - 00.419 INTO THE TRUST

01:26 - 02.289 EVEN IF WE ASSUME THAT THAT'S

01:26 - 04.139 THAT TENDENCY WAS SEVERED WHEN

01:26 - 04.699 IT WENT INTO

01:26 - 06.429 THE TRUST WHEN WE BACK IT OUT

01:26 - 07.959 FOR ATTRIBUTION, HOW IS IT THAT

01:26 - 09.669 WE CAN HAVE A 100% OF

01:26 - 11.949 THAT ASSET DEVOTED TO

01:26 - 13.319 INHERITANCE TAX ON THE FIRST TO

01:26 - 14.769 DIE HAS BEEN I UNDERSTAND YOUR

01:26 - 15.759 QUESTION IT'S NOT A

01:26 - 18.999 ATTRIBUTABLE TO TO TAX SO THEY

01:26 - 21.439 NEED IF THE CAR CAN WE TRUST

01:26 - 21.569 WOULD

01:26 - 23.579 HAVE BEEN DRAFTED CORRECTLY IT

01:26 - 24.939 WOULD HAVE BEEN A JOINT REVOKE

01:26 - 25.759 THE BOOK TRUST

01:26 - 27.599 THAT THE THAT THE HUSBAND AND

01:26 - 30.039 WIFE WOULD BOTH HAVE ACCESS TO

01:26 - 31.799 USE AND ENJOYMENT OF THE ASSETS

01:26 - 31.989 DURING

01:26 - 33.679 THEIR LIFETIME. BUT TRUST

01:26 - 36.029 MANDATES THAT AT THE DEATH OF

01:26 - 37.129 THE FIRST ALSO LET'S

01:26 - 40.099 SAY HUSBAND. DEATH FIRST THE

01:26 - 41.879 THAT NUMBER ONE TO JOIN A VOCAL

01:26 - 43.959 TRUST ACTUALLY TERMINATED AND

01:26 - 46.139 SEPARATE INTO 2 SEPARATE AND

01:26 - 48.319 DISTINCT SHARES. THE HUSBAND IS

01:26 - 49.999 SEEN AS CONTRIBUTING ONE HALF

01:26 - 51.419 OF THE SHARE AND THE WIFE IS

01:26 - 52.639 SEEN AS CONTRIBUTING ONE HALF

01:26 - 53.249 OF THE SHARE.

01:26 - 55.819 THE HUSBAND'S ASSETS ARE NOT

01:26 - 58.019 CONSIDERED TO BE PART OF THE

01:26 - 00.109 WIFE'S ESTATE BUT THE WIFE'S

01:27 - 01.659 ASSETS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE

01:27 - 02.739 PART OF THE HAS BEEN SO THE

01:27 - 03.659 HUSBAND IS THE

01:27 - 06.689 SOLE USE PORTION AND IT IS NOT

01:27 - 08.729 SOMETHING IS NOT SUBJECT TO TAX

01:27 - 11.129 AT HIS DEATH. HER PORTION IS

01:27 - 12.079 SUBJECT TO TAX.

01:27 - 15.129 SO IT'S NOT A 100% PORTION ME

01:27 - 16.929 IT'S JUST HALF. IT HAD BEEN

01:27 - 19.449 DRAFTED CORRECTLY THEN ONLY

01:27 - 20.349 HALF OF IT WOULD HAVE BEEN

01:27 - 22.299 SUBJECT TO TAX AT THE TIME OF

01:27 - 23.789 DEATH AND THE OTHER HALF OF THE

01:27 - 25.279 BEEN QUALIFY FOR THE DEFERRAL

01:27 - 26.719 OF TAX. HER DEATH.

01:27 - 29.079 SO WHAT TAX THE AREAS THAT THAT

01:27 - 31.949 SAYS THAT THE ASSETS ARE

01:27 - 34.279 ATTRIBUTABLE 50% EACH

01:27 - 36.989 THAT THE INHERITANCE TAXES DUE

01:27 - 39.319 ON 100% OF THAT BECAUSE IT'S

01:27 - 39.679 NOT WHAT

01:27 - 41.369 HAPPENED HERE. DID YOU TAKE

01:27 - 43.419 100% OF THE ASSETS ATTRIBUTE

01:27 - 43.879 THEM TO THE

01:27 - 45.829 HAS BEEN AND SAY WHAT

01:27 - 47.279 PERCENTAGE OF THAT THEY WOULD

01:27 - 48.859 BE TAXED AT BASED ON WHO THE

01:27 - 50.589 ULTIMATE BENEFICIARIES WERE NO

01:27 - 52.569 IT WAS ONLY ONE HALF AND THE

01:27 - 54.399 WAY THE REASON THAT IT WAS TAX

01:27 - 55.149 WAS BECAUSE

01:27 - 59.299 THE STATE THOSE ARRIVING CELLS

01:27 - 00.839 HAD THE OPTION TO SUBMIT A

01:28 - 02.609 SCHEDULE AND FUTURE INTEREST

01:28 - 04.709 COMPROMISE SAYING OKAY OUT OF

01:28 - 06.359 THE ASSETS THAT I'VE YOU KNOW

01:28 - 08.699 THAT I HAVE SO USE AND BENEFIT

01:28 - 10.989 OF I PLAN TO USE. LET'S SAY

01:28 - 12.729 THERE'S A $100,000 IN THE TRUST

01:28 - 14.399 AS MANY AS 50,000 OF IT DURING

01:28 - 16.019 MY LIFETIME AND THE REMAINING

01:28 - 19.049 50,000 I PLAN TO LEAVE TO MY

01:28 - 19.799 KNEES UPON

01:28 - 22.529 MY DEATH SO PER $50,000 WOULD

01:28 - 23.869 NOT HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO TAX

01:28 - 26.709 BUT THEY $50,000 THAT WAS GOING

01:28 - 28.119 TO BE GIVEN TO THE NICE AT

01:28 - 29.379 DEATH WOULD BE SUBJECT TO

01:28 - 32.339 15%. THERE WAS NO SCHEDULE AND

01:28 - 33.649 DISTRIBUTE THERE'S A SCHEDULE

01:28 - 35.619 AND A FEW CHANGES COMPROMISE

01:28 - 37.229 THAT WAS SUBMITTED. SO THE

01:28 - 38.269 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE HAD NO

01:28 - 39.789 CHOICE, BUT JUST A MINUTE

01:28 - 42.029 BUT TO TAX IT AT 15% AND THEY

01:28 - 43.339 DIDN'T EVEN DO THAT THE TEXAS

01:28 - 46.029 4.5 1 IS IT THEN THAT

01:28 - 50.129 ARE ATTRIBUTING THAT AMOUNT TO

01:28 - 52.159 THE FIRST GRANT OR.

01:28 - 54.029 TAXING AT

01:28 - 55.819 A RATE THAT'S ATTRIBUTABLE FOR

01:28 - 57.749 THAT THAT WOULD BE ASSIGNED TO

01:28 - 59.729 IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE EVEN

01:28 - 00.829 MORE OF A RATE BUT A RATE

01:29 - 01.329 THAT'S NOT A

01:29 - 03.349 SPOUSAL RAPE. WHEN THE

01:29 - 05.089 BENEFICIARIES HERE

01:29 - 08.109 ARE NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO BE

01:29 - 09.279 THE BENEFICIARIES BECAUSE WE'RE

01:29 - 11.349 TALKING ABOUT YOU REVOKE ABOUT

01:29 - 12.729 RAP THAT'S EXACTLY IT THAT'S

01:29 - 14.359 EXACTLY WHY BECAUSE

01:29 - 16.369 WHEN WHEN THE WIFE OR TEEN TO

01:29 - 17.539 POWER OF TESTAMENT OR

01:29 - 19.079 EMPLOYMENT AND INTERVIEW THOSE

01:29 - 20.239 APPOINTMENT. WE

01:29 - 21.909 DON'T KNOW WHO SHE WOULD HAVE

01:29 - 23.119 GIVEN THOSE ASSETS TO DURING

01:29 - 25.039 HER LIFETIME, BUT WE ALSO DON'T

01:29 - 26.209 KNOW THAT SHE WOULDN'T HAVE

01:29 - 28.199 GIVEN THEM TO HER NEXT HAS BEEN

01:29 - 29.889 AND THEN ONLY A SPOUSAL RATE

01:29 - 31.049 WOULD BE CHARGED THAT'S

01:29 - 32.449 CORRECT. IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT

01:29 - 33.979 THAN SHE THEN THE HUSBAND, THE

01:29 - 35.239 ORIGINAL HAS BEEN PART OF OUR

01:29 - 36.609 SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HER THE MONEY

01:29 - 37.999 OUT RAIN-FREE OF TRUST TO DO

01:29 - 38.949 WITH THAT SHE WISHED

01:29 - 41.219 BUT IN THIS CASE IF WE'RE NOT

01:29 - 43.109 LOOKING AT IS THE SOLE DISTRUST

01:29 - 44.819 AND IT'S WHAT IT'S LOOKED AT AS

01:29 - 46.119 A REVOCABLE TRUST ISN'T IT

01:29 - 47.699 REALLY JUST ANOTHER FORM OF

01:29 - 49.739 THEM MANAGING THEIR ASSETS AND

01:29 - 51.629 HAD THE MANAGE THEIR ASSETS

01:29 - 52.269 OUTSIDE OF

01:29 - 53.889 THE TRUST THEY WOULD HAVE HAD A

01:29 - 55.479 JOINT TENANCY TO BEGIN WITH

01:29 - 56.449 WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN TENANTS

01:29 - 59.189 IN COMMON AND NOW BY THE FACT

01:29 - 00.439 THAT THEY'VE MADE THE STRESS

01:30 - 01.699 WHICH ARE NOT GIVING THE SOLE

01:30 - 04.029 USE EFFECT OF YOU'RE NOW

01:30 - 04.709 IN YOUR

01:30 - 07.539 PUTTING UP ON THAT INHERITANCE

01:30 - 08.789 TAX RATIFICATION IS THAT

01:30 - 10.409 WOULDN'T EXIST. WELL YOU'RE

01:30 - 11.619 CENTURY DO YOU THINK IS YOUR

01:30 - 13.439 NOTIFYING THE TRUST THAT SAYING

01:30 - 14.639 THAT YOU CAN'T RETAIN THE

01:30 - 16.309 BENEFIT OF THAT JOINT TENANCY

01:30 - 17.319 THAT YOU WOULD HAVE HAD

01:30 - 18.659 WHICH WOULD HAVE MEANT THAT THE

01:30 - 20.189 SECOND TO DIE WOULD PAY THE

01:30 - 22.129 INHERITANCE TAX. THAT'S THAT'S

01:30 - 23.439 CORRECT BECAUSE

01:30 - 25.219 YOU EITHER HAVE A TRUST OR YOU

01:30 - 26.749 DON'T AND THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

01:30 - 27.879 MADE IT VERY CLEAR

01:30 - 30.849 THAT MEANS 72 P S SECTION 9, 1,

01:30 - 34.879 3, 9, ONE '02 9, 1, 3, 9,

01:30 - 37.159 SO NOW WANTED TO SAYS THAT

01:30 - 38.839 TRUST ARE SUBJECT TO TAX THEIR

01:30 - 39.739 SUBJECT TO INHERITANCE

01:30 - 42.239 TAX REGARDLESS 9, 1, UNLESS

01:30 - 43.449 THEY QUALIFY FOR AN EXEMPTION

01:30 - 45.549 FOR DEFERRED TAX. NOW 1, 1, 3,

01:30 - 47.529 LAYS OUT THE ELEMENTS FOR THAT.

01:30 - 49.839 FOR THOSE EXEMPTIONS ONE OF

01:30 - 50.789 WHICH IS SO USE.

01:30 - 52.509 SO HERE IS THAT THAT IS

01:30 - 53.649 THE AS AS YOUR INTEREST THEY'RE

01:30 - 55.269 SUBJECT TO TAX NOW LET'S TAKE

01:30 - 57.179 IT ONE CENTS STEP FURTHER THAN

01:30 - 58.609 WHAT IF WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR

01:30 - 00.649 AN EXEMPTION WHAT IF YOU'RE

01:31 - 01.659 ONLY LOOKING TO PAY THE

01:31 - 03.719 SPOUSAL RATE THEN YOU LEAVE

01:31 - 05.249 YOUR ASSETS TO YOUR SPOUSE OUT

01:31 - 06.229 RIGHT IN FRONT OF TRUST YOU

01:31 - 07.359 DON'T GET TO HAVE BOTH YOU

01:31 - 08.529 DON'T GET TO HAVE THE

01:31 - 09.889 PROTECTION AND THE AND THE

01:31 - 11.249 NUMBER SECTION, BUT THE

01:31 - 12.539 BENEFITS OF A TRUST.

01:31 - 13.869 BUT WHAT ARE YOUR ASSETS INTO A

01:31 - 15.669 TRUST THAT THERE IS NEW HERE AT

01:31 - 17.969 THE TRUST CORRECT. SO YOU KNOW

01:31 - 19.099 YOU SAID THAT.

01:31 - 22.009 THE GRAND TOURS DON'T GET THE

01:31 - 23.089 BENEFIT OF BOTH.

01:31 - 24.939 >>BUT WHAT I'M SENSING WHEN I

01:31 - 26.519 READ THIS IS THAT THE

01:31 - 27.869 GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO HAVE

01:31 - 28.409 THE BENEFIT

01:31 - 30.899 OF BOTH BECAUSE THIS DOCUMENT

01:31 - 32.539 THIS TRUST WAS NOT AN ASSET

01:31 - 34.789 PROTECTION DOCUMENT. THIS WAS A

01:31 - 36.199 CASE WHERE IF SHE WOULD HAVE

01:31 - 37.639 APPLIED FOR CERTAIN BENEFITS

01:31 - 38.929 SUCH AS MEDICAID WE WOULD

01:31 - 41.249 HAVE SAID NO SHE MAINTAINS

01:31 - 41.989 CONTROL OVER

01:31 - 44.279 THOSE ASSETS. BUT NOW BECAUSE

01:31 - 45.729 SHE MAINTAINS CONTROL OVER

01:31 - 46.639 THOSE ASSETS WERE

01:31 - 48.839 TRYING TO WELL IN HERAT AND

01:31 - 50.719 STACKS ON HER PREMATURELY

01:31 - 54.699 SO IT MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT

01:31 - 55.819 ANYONE'S TRYING

01:31 - 57.879 TO HAVE THEIR CAKE AND EAT IT

01:31 - 59.549 TOO AND THE BENEFIT OF BOTH

01:31 - 01.159 IT'S ACTUALLY THE GOVERNMENT

01:32 - 02.629 THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S DOING IT

01:32 - 04.129 AND IF THAT MIGHT THAT MIGHT

01:32 - 05.529 BE THE YOU KNOW THE

01:32 - 06.859 INTERPRETATION BUT AGAIN THAT'S

01:32 - 08.119 FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO

01:32 - 09.929 DECIDE AND NOT FOR YOUR HONOR'S

01:32 - 11.499 TO DECIDE SO YOU WOULD YOU

01:32 - 13.249 THINK THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT.

01:32 - 15.179 WHAT HAS BEEN 2

01:32 - 17.029 HAVEN'T TRUST THAT'S NOT AN

01:32 - 17.409 ASSET

01:32 - 19.579 PROTECTION TRUST THAT SPRINGS

01:32 - 21.529 IN INHERITANCE TAX PREMATURELY

01:32 - 22.479 YOU THINK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN

01:32 - 23.849 THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT. I DON'T

01:32 - 24.899 THINK THAT'S THE LEGISLATIVE

01:32 - 26.059 INTENT. IF THAT'S YOUR HONOR'S

01:32 - 27.309 INTERPRETATION OF IT THAT'S

01:32 - 28.779 THAT'S ONE THINGS LIKE THAT.

01:32 - 31.119 BUT THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT AS

01:32 - 32.289 IT STANDS RIGHT NOW

01:32 - 33.619 THERE WAS NO DEFINITION FOR

01:32 - 35.469 SOYUZ TRUST AND WHEN THAT THE

01:32 - 36.649 PRESIDENT JUDGE INDICATED

01:32 - 38.599 THAT THE STATUE HAS BEEN

01:32 - 40.849 REVISED TWICE 2002 2003.

01:32 - 42.219 AND THEN IT FINALLY INCLUDED A

01:32 - 43.639 DEFINITION AN ELEMENT OF

01:32 - 45.229 SO USE IF THE GENERAL

01:32 - 47.149 ASSEMBLY'S INTENT WAS TO ALLOW

01:32 - 48.669 FOR THIS TYPE OF DIFFERENT

01:32 - 50.499 EXEMPTION FOR A VOCAL TRUST IT

01:32 - 51.329 WOULD HAVE SAID SO.

01:32 - 52.629 >>THERE'S ALSO SUPPORTING CASE

01:32 - 54.489 LAW FROM ADAMS THE STATE THAT

01:32 - 56.679 INDICATES THAT THIS SORT

01:32 - 59.479 THIS APPLICATION FOR THIS

01:32 - 00.889 EXEMPTION THIS DEFERRED TAX

01:33 - 02.219 EYES ONLY APPLIES HERE. BUT

01:33 - 04.279 WHAT RUSS BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE

01:33 - 06.189 IF IF IF THE IF THE

01:33 - 08.799 SPOUSE ROUTINES THE INTERVIEW,

01:33 - 10.059 THOSE POWER OF APPOINTMENT.

01:33 - 12.199 IT IS NOT A SOYUZ TRUSTED IS

01:33 - 12.999 THERE FOR A VOCAL

01:33 - 14.809 AND THAT IF THEY'RE NOT LOOKING

01:33 - 16.319 FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SOLE USE

01:33 - 18.059 TRUST AND IT'S A REVOCABLE

01:33 - 21.129 TRUST AND THE SECOND SPOUSE.

01:33 - 24.499 >>THEN IT DOESN'T HAVE TO WELL

01:33 - 25.679 THE FIRST GAS IS GOING HAVE TO

01:33 - 27.059 PAY ALL THE INHERITANCE TAX AND

01:33 - 28.899 IT'S REVOCABLE IT COULD NO

01:33 - 30.549 LONGER EXIST AT THE TIME THAT

01:33 - 31.979 THE FIRST TO DOCK THE FIRST

01:33 - 33.989 DIES IN OTHER WORDS, THEY'RE

01:33 - 35.759 NOT GETTING ANY BENEFIT FROM

01:33 - 37.739 THE TRUST AND IF THEY'RE NOT

01:33 - 38.899 GETTING ANY BENEFIT FROM

01:33 - 41.469 THE TRUST. AND IT'S REVOCABLE

01:33 - 43.249 IT'S NOT CONTINUING EXISTENCE

01:33 - 44.439 AND THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT

01:33 - 46.149 THERE WILL BE ANY TRANSFER TO

01:33 - 47.609 ULTIMATE BENEFICIARIES OTHER

01:33 - 48.529 THAN A SPOUSE.

01:33 - 50.339 I DON'T QUITE FOLLOW THAT.

01:33 - 51.399 BUT WHAT I THINK YOU'RE SAYING

01:33 - 52.129 IS IF.

01:33 - 55.879 THE SO YOU STRESS IS THERE IS A

01:33 - 57.669 BENEFIT TO THAT THIS IT'S I

01:33 - 58.909 WE'RE NOT DISAGREEING THAT IT'S

01:33 - 00.509 NOT A SOYUZ TRUST LET'S SAY

01:34 - 01.849 IT'S JUST A REVOCABLE TRUST

01:34 - 03.339 IT'S NOT A SOYUZ TRUST OKAY,

01:34 - 05.409 NOT IT'S NOT IF IT'S WILL SAY

01:34 - 06.559 FOR SAKE OF ARGUMENT, IT'S NOT

01:34 - 08.889 DRAFTED AND AND THAT IT DOESN'T

01:34 - 10.219 HAVE THE EFFECT THAT MAY OR MAY

01:34 - 11.519 NOT HAVE BEEN INTENDED HAVE

01:34 - 12.549 NONETHELESS IT'S STILL

01:34 - 14.929 REPLICABLE AND SO THE WORST

01:34 - 15.229 THING THAT

01:34 - 18.049 CAN HAPPEN IS THAT YOU WHICH I

01:34 - 19.439 THINK IS AN OUTSTANDING ISSUE

01:34 - 21.019 OF LAW TO IS HOW DO YOU

01:34 - 22.119 ATTRIBUTE IT DO YOU ATTRIBUTE

01:34 - 23.819 IT IN WHAT FORM OF TENDENCY TO

01:34 - 25.339 THE 2 OWNERS OF THE TRUST

01:34 - 27.079 THEY LOSE THAT TENDENCY BY THE

01:34 - 28.159 ENTIRE TEASE WHEN THEY PUT THE

01:34 - 29.959 TRUST PROPERTY IN WORK AND THEY

01:34 - 32.099 TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT NOW THAT

01:34 - 33.199 THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE INCURRED

01:34 - 35.249 ITS TAX ATTRIBUTED TO THAT SO

01:34 - 36.859 THAT'S THAT'S THE ONE ISSUE AND

01:34 - 38.269 THE SECOND ISSUE IS THAT IT'S

01:34 - 39.719 COMPLETELY REVOCABLE WITHIN THE

01:34 - 41.239 CONTROL OF THE SECOND SPOUSE,

01:34 - 42.539 THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS THAT

01:34 - 43.829 SHE HAS TO KEEP THIS TRUST IN

01:34 - 45.669 EXISTENCE. AND THERE'S NOTHING

01:34 - 46.539 THAT GUARANTEES THE

01:34 - 47.859 BENEFICIARIES THAT EXIST IN

01:34 - 50.329 THE DOCUMENT AND SO HOW IS IT

01:34 - 51.639 THAT YOU DON'T KNOW THAT SHE'S

01:34 - 53.239 NOT GOING TO SHUT DOWN THE

01:34 - 55.079 TRUST THE NEXT DAY CREATE A NEW

01:34 - 57.199 ONE CHANGE THE BENEFICIARIES OR

01:34 - 57.639 ANYTHING

01:34 - 59.719 ELSE THAT MIGHT MAKE THE FACT

01:34 - 01.239 THAT YOU KNOW 84%

01:35 - 03.839 4.5 PER OR 84% OF THE TRUST

01:35 - 06.109 THAT 4.5% DOESN'T SEEM FAIR AND

01:35 - 08.139 SO THAT'S EXACTLY OUR POINT AND

01:35 - 09.309 I MIGHT BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THIS

01:35 - 09.799 BETTER WITH

01:35 - 11.629 A HYPOTHETICAL. LET'S SAY

01:35 - 13.539 BECAUSE WE'VE ALL CONCEDED THAT

01:35 - 15.219 THIS IS A REVOLT TRUST WHICH

01:35 - 16.709 MEANS THAT SHE CAN CHANGE AND

01:35 - 18.299 AND GIVE MONEY AWAY AS MUCH AS

01:35 - 18.859 SHE WANTS.

01:35 - 20.779 >>AND ACTUALLY FIRST YEAR POINT

01:35 - 21.119 JUDGE.

01:35 - 23.989 THE FACT THAT IT IS A VOCAL

01:35 - 25.089 MEANS THAT IT DOESN'T QUALIFY

01:35 - 26.949 FOR SO USE AND SO WE DON'T HAVE

01:35 - 28.449 THIS LIKE YOU SAID THIS WAS

01:35 - 30.539 DRAFTED INCORRECTLY SO IT IS

01:35 - 32.929 ALL SPECULATIVE BUT WHAT WOULD

01:35 - 35.149 WHAT COULD HAPPEN IS ON THE EVE

01:35 - 36.469 OF HER DEATH ON THE EVE OF

01:35 - 36.989 MISSES HER

01:35 - 38.799 CAR'S DEATH. SHE COULD DECIDE

01:35 - 39.949 YOU KNOW WHAT ALL THE ASSETS OF

01:35 - 41.799 MISTRUST, I'M GOING TO GIVE

01:35 - 43.169 THEM ALL TO MY KNEES ON THE EVE

01:35 - 43.719 OF HER DEATH.

01:35 - 45.769 SO AS BECAUSE INHERITANCE TAX

01:35 - 47.269 ASSESSED AT THE DATE OF DEATH

01:35 - 49.159 THEN THE MONEY THAT WOULD HAVE

01:35 - 50.839 BEEN THE TRUST THAT SHOULD HAVE

01:35 - 54.599 GOT THAT SHOULD HAVE TAX OF 15%

01:35 - 55.659 TO GO TO THE KNEES WHEN SHE

01:35 - 57.519 RECEIVED IT ON THE DAY AFTER

01:35 - 59.359 DEATH. INSTEAD ALL OF

01:35 - 02.489 THAT MONEY PASSES JOINT OUR TAX

01:36 - 04.019 RATE TAX RATES NOT IN A

01:36 - 05.539 REPUTABLE TRUST IT'S NEVER BEEN

01:36 - 06.229 GUARANTEED

01:36 - 08.829 GO TIFFANY'S SO BECAUSE IT'S

01:36 - 10.589 REVOCABLE SHE COULD CHANGE THAT

01:36 - 12.219 ANY DAY WITH OR WITHOUT THE

01:36 - 13.799 EXISTENCE OF A TRUST SO IF THE

01:36 - 15.269 TRUST DIDN'T EXIST AND CHOOSE

01:36 - 16.989 MANAGING HER ASSETS OUTSIDE OF

01:36 - 18.209 THEM AND SHE HAD A WILL THAT

01:36 - 18.969 SAID I'M GOING TO LEAVE

01:36 - 20.239 EVERYTHING TO THE KNEES SHE

01:36 - 21.519 DOESN'T HAVE TO PAY INHERITANCE

01:36 - 22.629 TAX ON THAT NOW

01:36 - 24.289 AND THEN THE DAY BEFORE HE CAN

01:36 - 25.279 DECIDE SHE'S GOING TO GIVE IT

01:36 - 26.329 TO SOMEONE THAT SHE DIDN'T DO

01:36 - 27.379 THAT, BUT IT'S THE SAME WAY

01:36 - 28.909 WITH THE TRUST IS NOT THE SAME

01:36 - 30.249 WAY THAT TRUST BECAUSE TRUST

01:36 - 31.519 ASSETS ARE TAXABLE UNDER

01:36 - 34.049 9, 9, 9, 1, TO 2, 9, 1, 1, 3,

01:36 - 35.619 IF YOU WANT TO IF YOU WANT TO

01:36 - 37.659 AVOID TAX WITH THE FACT THAT

01:36 - 39.249 THEIR TAXABLE I'M JUST SAYING

01:36 - 41.469 THE FACT THAT THEY ARE IT'S THE

01:36 - 42.099 RATE AT WHICH

01:36 - 43.869 THEY'RE TAXABLE AND IN THIS

01:36 - 45.729 CASE ALL WE KNOW IS WE HAVE TO

01:36 - 46.719 WE HAVE A HUSBAND

01:36 - 48.699 AND WIFE OWNED IT AS JOINT

01:36 - 50.569 TENANTS PUT THAT PROPERTY AGAIN

01:36 - 51.679 AND NOW YOUR TRIBUTE BACK

01:36 - 53.219 THAT'S ALL YOU KNOW AT THIS

01:36 - 54.839 POINT I'D LIKE TO CHIME IN

01:36 - 57.129 FIRST OF ALL JUST FOR THE SAKE

01:36 - 58.599 OF CLARITY LIKE ALI DID IT

01:36 - 00.319 DID NOT SAY THAT THAT DOCUMENT

01:37 - 01.359 WAS DRAFTED HE SAID FOR

01:37 - 02.769 ARGUMENT'S SAKE, LET'S SAY THAT

01:37 - 03.799 IT WAS DRAFTED YES CERTAINLY.

01:37 - 05.269 >>SHE DID WAS DRAFTED

01:37 - 05.829 INCORRECTLY.

01:37 - 08.609 AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS YOU

01:37 - 09.869 SAID TWICE IT WAS DRAFTED

01:37 - 11.459 INCORRECTLY WHAT IS THE

01:37 - 12.859 LANGUAGE THAT WOULD HAVE MADE

01:37 - 15.589 A DIFFERENCE. THE SPOUSE WOULD

01:37 - 17.269 NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RETAIN AN

01:37 - 18.119 INTERVIEW HAS POWER OF

01:37 - 20.179 APPOINTMENT AS CLEARLY DEFINED

01:37 - 20.679 BEING.

01:37 - 22.009 >>SECTION 9, 1, 1, 3, OF

01:37 - 25.669 THE STATUTE IN THE ACTUAL TRUST

01:37 - 28.689 AGREEMENT UNDER SHE

01:37 - 30.909 RETAINS THAT. INTERVIEW AS PART

01:37 - 32.369 OF A AND SHE ALSO RETAINS A

01:37 - 33.679 TESTAMENT TO THE POWER OF WOMEN

01:37 - 35.019 UNDER BEFORE E

01:37 - 38.169 BEFORE C. SHE IS ABLE TO

01:37 - 40.549 SHE'S ABLE TO MAKE AMENDMENTS

01:37 - 43.369 TO THE TRUST IS WELL OK SO I'M

01:37 - 44.659 JUST KIND OF THINKING OUT LOUD

01:37 - 45.359 HERE SO.

01:37 - 46.829 >>SHE AND HER HUSBAND PUT THE

01:37 - 49.369 ASSETS INTO THE TRUST. SHE

01:37 - 49.969 RETAINED

01:37 - 52.179 THE POWER TO DO WHATEVER SHE

01:37 - 53.939 WANTS WITHIN THE TRUST AND YOUR

01:37 - 55.039 CONCERN IS

01:37 - 56.589 BUT IF SHE GIVES IT AWAY AND

01:37 - 57.519 THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T GET

01:37 - 00.949 THERE THERE. INHERITANCE TAX MY

01:38 - 01.559 QUESTION TO

01:38 - 03.799 YOU IS WHAT IS THE BENEFIT THAT

01:38 - 05.699 SHE RECEIVED FROM IT BEING IN

01:38 - 05.769 THE

01:38 - 08.139 TRUST IT. SHE SHOULD WHAT IS

01:38 - 09.909 SHE GETTING OUT OF THE FACT YOU

01:38 - 10.999 KNOW LIKE I SAID TO YOU IT'S

01:38 - 11.709 NOT AN ASSET

01:38 - 13.919 PROTECTION TRUST. SO WHAT IS

01:38 - 15.569 HER BENEFIT TO HAVING IN THE

01:38 - 17.559 TRUST SHE RECEIVES THE INCOMING

01:38 - 18.869 PRINCE OR DISTRIBUTIONS DURING

01:38 - 19.629 HER LIFETIME

01:38 - 21.129 WHEN THE GOVERNMENT'S BUDGET

01:38 - 22.179 WHAT ARE WE LOOKING TO PROTECT

01:38 - 22.759 THE GOVERNMENT

01:38 - 24.889 FROM THERE, SHE'S NOT SHE

01:38 - 26.719 DIDN'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF

01:38 - 28.689 GETTING. SIR AND.

01:38 - 31.609 SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE IN A

01:38 - 33.329 NURSING HOME FOR SHE'S NOT

01:38 - 36.469 GETTING MEDICAID. SO WHERE IS

01:38 - 38.089 THE GOVERNMENT GETTING HOSED.

01:38 - 42.719 THE DEFERRAL OF THE TAX SO HALF

01:38 - 45.239 OF THE ASSETS ARE TAXED AT A

01:38 - 45.899 LATER DATE.

01:38 - 48.419 INSTEAD IT WAS SO YOU SEE THOSE

01:38 - 50.709 USE THAT IF THIS WAS HER OWN

01:38 - 53.199 ASSETS ALTOGETHER. I'M NOT IN

01:38 - 53.989 THE TRUST.

01:38 - 56.939 IT DIDN'T TAKE IT TAKE IT TO

01:38 - 59.009 THE EXTENT OF YOUR KNEES OR HER

01:38 - 00.759 KNEES AND SHE GIVES HER OWN

01:39 - 02.499 ASSETS AWAY SO IF THERE'S NO

01:39 - 03.769 TRUST SHE CAN DO WHATEVER SHE

01:39 - 04.099 WANTS WITH

01:39 - 05.929 THEIR ASSETS AND THIS DRESS SHE

01:39 - 07.169 MAINTAIN THE POWER TO DO

01:39 - 08.219 WHATEVER SHE WANTS WITH HER

01:39 - 10.469 ASSETS. SHE GIVES IT AWAY TO

01:39 - 11.289 HER KNEES.

01:39 - 14.539 SHE COULD HAVE DONE THAT ANYWAY

01:39 - 14.889 WITHOUT

01:39 - 16.769 THE TRUST CORRECT, BUT THAT

01:39 - 18.549 SHOULD HAVE PUT INTO A TRUST IF

01:39 - 20.309 YOU SHOOT SHE MAINTAIN CONTROL

01:39 - 21.799 IN THIS REVOCABLE TRUST.

01:39 - 23.229 SO IT'S NOTHING MORE

01:39 - 25.699 THAN A MANAGEMENT AND IT'S

01:39 - 28.169 NOTHING MORE IN NAME ONLY SHE'S

01:39 - 29.869 JUST MANAGING HER ASSETS

01:39 - 31.239 THROUGH THE TRUST THAT'S NOT

01:39 - 32.409 TRUE IF IT.

01:39 - 34.699 >>IT WAS A JOINT BANK ACCOUNT.

01:39 - 36.059 THEN THAT WOULD BE ALRIGHT AND

01:39 - 37.539 FREE OF TRUST TO DO IS CASH

01:39 - 39.409 IN HER POCKET THAT WOULD BE OUR

01:39 - 41.259 IN FREE OF TRUST ITS INTEREST

01:39 - 42.749 IT'S IN A TRUST, BUT NOBODY'S

01:39 - 44.539 DISPUTING THE INHERITANCE TAXES

01:39 - 45.989 DO IT'S JUST

01:39 - 48.849 THE AMOUNT THAT IS DUE AND THE

01:39 - 49.819 FACT THAT

01:39 - 51.849 SHE BECAUSE SHE'S MANAGING

01:39 - 53.429 THROUGH A TRUST NOT RECEIVING

01:39 - 54.559 BENEFIT FROM THAT

01:39 - 57.419 THE FIRST TO DIE IS NOT GETTING

01:39 - 58.859 THE SPOUSAL RATE

01:39 - 01.269 OF INHERITANCE TAX INSTEAD THE

01:40 - 02.999 INTERNS TAXES BEING CHARGED OR

01:40 - 05.139 THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS STREET

01:40 - 07.259 OVER TRUST ADD IN A TRUST THAT

01:40 - 07.429 CAN

01:40 - 10.289 BE REVOKED SO THAT SHE GOT NO

01:40 - 11.939 BENEFIT FROM THE TRUST SHE JUST

01:40 - 13.459 HAS IT OUT THERE AS A STATE

01:40 - 16.169 PLANNING TOOL WILL SAY. AND NOW

01:40 - 18.099 SHE'S IT HAVING TO PAY

01:40 - 19.849 INHERITANCE TAX WHEN HER

01:40 - 21.309 HUSBAND PASSES AWAY,

01:40 - 23.619 INSTEAD OF THE SECOND TO DIE

01:40 - 25.029 NOT BECAUSE SHE HAD THAT SHE

01:40 - 27.119 WANTED IT TO SO USE TRUST WE'RE

01:40 - 28.369 MAKING THAT ASSUMPTION.

01:40 - 29.899 BUT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT

01:40 - 31.129 ATTRIBUTING IT TO THEM AS

01:40 - 33.429 HUSBAND AND WIFE AND WE'RE NOT

01:40 - 33.999 SEEING SHE SHOULD

01:40 - 36.129 BE EXEMPT FROM INHERITANCE TAX

01:40 - 37.319 BUT THAT THE PROPER RATE SHOULD

01:40 - 38.999 BE BECAUSE YOUR RULE ABOUT THE

01:40 - 40.429 TAX STILL HAVE TO BE PAID IS

01:40 - 41.779 THERE. IT'S JUST THE RATE.

01:40 - 43.159 BUT IT'S GOING TO BE PAID

01:40 - 45.309 AT THERE BECAUSE THERE'S NO

01:40 - 47.239 GUARANTEE THAT SHE'S TAKING IT

01:40 - 48.749 OUT OF HER STATE AND AND

01:40 - 50.999 GIVEN THIS IRREVOCABLE GIFT TO

01:40 - 52.059 THESE PEOPLE

01:40 - 53.489 EVEN IF IT WERE A NUMBER OF

01:40 - 54.829 PEOPLE AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT

01:40 - 56.069 THE SPECIFIC RATE WAS GOING TO

01:40 - 56.169 BE

01:40 - 58.219 BECAUSE IT'S REVOCABLE IS

01:40 - 00.259 REALLY JUST A FALLACY IT'S JUST

01:41 - 02.229 IT HAS NO OTHER EFFECT OTHER

01:41 - 02.649 THEN

01:41 - 04.459 A WILL THE COUNCIL ARE WE

01:41 - 06.419 SAYING I'M SORRY ARE YOU START

01:41 - 07.809 AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

01:41 - 10.699 >>IS OTHER. ACTIONS HAD

01:41 - 12.029 HAPPENED ON THE PART.

01:41 - 17.459 AFTER THE HUSBAND DIE WHEN

01:41 - 21.049 WE WHEN SHE WAS ABLE TO RETAIN

01:41 - 23.059 THIS AS HER OWN.

01:41 - 26.009 THOSE OTHER THINGS THAT SHE

01:41 - 26.989 COULD HAVE THE OR THERE WERE

01:41 - 28.099 OTHER THINGS THAT SHE COULD

01:41 - 29.239 HAVE DONE THAT WOULD HAVE

01:41 - 31.559 PREVENTED THE HIGHER TAX

01:41 - 32.089 BRACKET.

01:41 - 35.899 >>I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THE

01:41 - 37.399 QUESTION BUT HAD THE TRUST

01:41 - 38.279 AGREEMENT BEEN DRAFTED

01:41 - 40.519 CORRECTLY WITH THAT.

01:41 - 43.289 WHY BUT WHAT IT WAS WHATEVER IT

01:41 - 43.989 WAS IT'S IT'S

01:41 - 45.889 DRAFTED BUT YOU SAID A LITTLE

01:41 - 48.929 EARLIER IF SHE HAD FILED A

01:41 - 50.249 ANOTHER MAN OK.

01:41 - 52.379 >>SO WHERE DID SO THERE WAS

01:41 - 54.899 FURTHER. I GUESS PLANNING IF

01:41 - 56.769 YOU WILL THAT HAD TO OCCUR ONCE

01:41 - 58.329 SHE BECAME THE OWNER OF THE

01:41 - 00.129 TRUST KNOW DAY SCHEDULE

01:42 - 03.509 SCHEDULED OF COURSE ONE OF THE

01:42 - 05.449 HAIR IS TAX RETURN SO HAD SHE

01:42 - 07.169 FILED THE SCHEDULE AND WITH THE

01:42 - 08.169 INHERITANCE TAX RETURN

01:42 - 09.569 INDICATING HOW MUCH YOU PLAN TO

01:42 - 10.329 USE HERSELF.

01:42 - 12.139 >>AND COMPARED IT TO HOW MUCH

01:42 - 12.609 YOU PLAN TO

01:42 - 14.289 GIVE AWAY THEN SHE COULD HAVE

01:42 - 16.419 ASKED FOR THE COMPROMISE OF

01:42 - 18.109 THAT FUTURE INTEREST AND TO

01:42 - 19.859 HAVE CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ACCESS

01:42 - 23.269 TAXED AT NO WITH NO TAX AND

01:42 - 25.059 THEN THE REST OF IT TO THE NICE

01:42 - 26.369 SO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SO IN

01:42 - 27.909 ORDER FOR HER TO QUALIFY FOR NO

01:42 - 29.179 TAX ON THAT.

01:42 - 30.909 >>FORM SHE WOULD

01:42 - 32.859 HAVE HAD THIS TO HIS SAYS

01:42 - 34.729 BASICALLY MAKE SURE THAT THE

01:42 - 36.399 MAJORITY OF THAT MONEY OR ALL

01:42 - 38.329 OF ALL OF THE I GUESS THE VALUE

01:42 - 40.369 OF THE TRUST, WHATEVER WAS

01:42 - 41.929 ATTRIBUTED JUST TO HER.

01:42 - 43.529 IF SHE WAS PLANNING TO USE IT

01:42 - 44.649 ALL DURING HER LIFETIME, BUT

01:42 - 46.619 AGAIN THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY

01:42 - 48.169 WORK BECAUSE THIS WAS NOT

01:42 - 49.789 CORRECTLY THE EXEMPTION

01:42 - 51.359 WOULDN'T DOESN'T ACTUALLY APPLY

01:42 - 52.489 TO REVOKE THE TRUST.

01:42 - 54.579 >>OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH I

01:42 - 56.009 THINK YOUR TIME IS WELL OVER A

01:42 - 59.169 SO WILSON. I HAVE TO SAY IT.

01:43 - 02.599 >>GOOD MORNING, YOUR

01:43 - 05.579 PLEASE THE COURT MY NAME IS PAT

01:43 - 07.439 FELIX. YOU HAVE

01:43 - 08.959 THE BENEFIT OF HAVING THE

01:43 - 10.469 DRAFTING A TURN HERE TODAY AS

01:43 - 11.969 WELL AS THE ATTORNEY ARGUING

01:43 - 13.519 THE APPEAL. SO WE'LL TALK ABOUT

01:43 - 14.619 IT WAS DRAFTED CORRECTLY AND

01:43 - 17.339 JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE

01:43 - 19.429 BACKGROUND FOR THE PAST 36

01:43 - 20.249 YEARS, I'VE LIVED IN MY

01:43 - 21.859 PRACTICE TO ESTATE PLANNING

01:43 - 24.069 EXCLUSIVELY. I DRAFTED AND

01:43 - 24.889 WHERE MISTER MORE THAN

01:43 - 27.469 3,000 TRUSTS I PROBABLY FILED

01:43 - 29.459 OVER 1000 HARRIS TAX RETURNS,

01:43 - 30.819 THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM BEING

01:43 - 32.229 VOCAL TRUST RETURNS.

01:43 - 35.359 AND I'VE NEVER UP

01:43 - 37.759 UNTIL TODAY. WE HAVE RECEIVED

01:43 - 39.229 ANY PROBLEMS WITH MY JOINT

01:43 - 40.779 REVOKE ULTRA STRONG AND PARENTS

01:43 - 42.599 TAX RETURN. THE ACTION THE

01:43 - 43.439 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE WAS

01:43 - 44.209 UNDERTAKING HERE IS

01:43 - 46.109 UNPRECEDENTED. WHAT THEY'RE

01:43 - 47.069 ATTEMPTING TO DO IS THEY'RE

01:43 - 48.879 ATTEMPTING TO 10 ASSETS

01:43 - 51.009 THAT BELONG TO THE SURVIVING

01:43 - 53.139 SPOUSES JUDGE O'TOOLE FOUND THE

01:43 - 54.229 PRESIDENT JUDGE OF THE ORPHANS

01:43 - 56.339 COURT ALLEGHENY COUNTY WE'RE

01:43 - 57.309 DOING THE SAME THING.

01:43 - 59.769 SO YOU TRUST DOES NOT APPLY

01:43 - 01.639 HERE. I DIDN'T DRAFTED TO BE A

01:44 - 03.269 SLOW NEWS TRUST I DRAFTED

01:44 - 04.889 PLENTY OF SONGS TRUST THIS WAS

01:44 - 06.839 NOT ONE OF THEM. I DRAFTED

01:44 - 08.849 THAT WELL MISTER PUT THE

01:44 - 11.419 CAR DIED. EVERYTHING IN THE

01:44 - 14.989 TRUST IS CONTROLLED OWNED BY

01:44 - 18.249 MISSUS POTENT. SHE IS THE LEGAL

01:44 - 19.379 OWNER ALL THE TRUST DOES A

01:44 - 20.999 SEPARATE LEGAL BENEFICIAL

01:44 - 21.899 OWNERSHIP. ALL

01:44 - 24.369 OF THAT MISSUS POTEET CAR IS

01:44 - 25.529 THE LEGAL OWNER, SHE'S THE SOLE

01:44 - 27.599 TRUSTEE. MISSUS POTEET CAR IS

01:44 - 29.639 THE SOUL BENEFICIARY

01:44 - 31.849 HOLDS COMPLETE EQUITABLE TITLED

01:44 - 32.379 THE TRUST.

01:44 - 34.659 THERE IS NO SCHEDULE AND TO

01:44 - 36.409 PREPARE BECAUSE NOBODY ELSE HAS

01:44 - 38.179 AN INTEREST IN THIS TRUST IS

01:44 - 40.359 REVOKED THE BALL. WHY WHY WHY

01:44 - 41.269 IS THERE A TRUST

01:44 - 42.829 WHY IS THEIR TRUST BECAUSE THE

01:44 - 43.999 BEST ESTATE PLANNING TOOL YOU

01:44 - 44.549 CAN USE.

01:44 - 48.469 BUT IN CHARGE.

01:44 - 53.999 HAD THE 0 TAX RATE SHE IF SHE

01:44 - 55.339 DIDN'T HAVE A TRUST AND SHE

01:44 - 56.699 DOES NOT OWN THE SAME THING.

01:44 - 59.639 >>JUDGE WOULD HAVE BEEN ANY

01:44 - 00.909 DIFFERENT SHE TOOK IT ALL OUT

01:45 - 01.959 THE DAY AFTER MISTER POE TO

01:45 - 03.539 CAR DIED. AND THEN TURNED

01:45 - 04.659 AROUND AND THE TITLE OVER

01:45 - 05.829 ASSETS AND PUT IT RIGHT BACK IN

01:45 - 05.909 THE

01:45 - 07.809 SAME TRUST. NOW THERE WOULD BE

01:45 - 09.559 NO DIFFERENCE. HE HAS THE RIGHT

01:45 - 10.739 TO DO THAT IT BELONGS

01:45 - 13.139 EXCLUSIVELY TO HURT AND NOBODY

01:45 - 15.079 HAS STANDING TO OBJECT

01:45 - 17.149 TO THAT THE PROCESS IS THOUGH

01:45 - 18.589 OTHER BENEFICIARIES I HAVE A

01:45 - 19.889 QUESTION IN THE SERIES IS NO

01:45 - 20.999 SCHEDULE HIM.

01:45 - 23.829 >>CRATES PAUL'S WITH ME

01:45 - 26.359 MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER THAT WE

01:45 - 28.979 RAN OUT OF TIME AND THE COUNCIL

01:45 - 30.969 IS ARGUING. I'VE

01:45 - 32.289 NEVER KNOWN A TAXING AUTHORITY

01:45 - 32.839 TO BE

01:45 - 35.149 GRACIOUSLY REDUCE WHAT THE

01:45 - 37.669 TAXING ABILITY IS SO THEY HAD

01:45 - 40.079 THE BAR, THE TAX OF 15%.

01:45 - 41.719 WHY DOES A TAX CUT.

01:45 - 44.349 4.5% I GUESS IS BECAUSE THEY

01:45 - 45.459 FROM AN INITIALLY WHEN THEY

01:45 - 46.619 SCREW THE THING UP TRYING TO

01:45 - 47.669 BEATRICE THAT WAS

01:45 - 48.459 NEVER CREATED.

01:45 - 49.829 >>BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION

01:45 - 51.259 JUDGE CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION

01:45 - 52.519 THERE'S A CASE COMING UP BEHIND

01:45 - 54.499 THIS ONE IN WESTMORELAND COUNTY

01:45 - 56.239 EXACT SAME SITUATION. THE ONLY

01:45 - 57.479 DIFFERENCE IS THEY TRIED TO TAX

01:45 - 58.419 THE WHOLE THING IS YOU JUST

01:45 - 00.079 SUGGESTED SO THAT CASE IS

01:46 - 01.029 COMING THIS WAY BECAUSE

01:46 - 03.709 THE PRESIDENT JUDGE IN

01:46 - 05.259 WESTMORELAND COUNTY JUDGE HALF

01:46 - 06.229 WE FOUND IN FAVOR OF

01:46 - 07.999 THE TAXPAYER. THAT'S NOW ON

01:46 - 09.269 APPEAL YOU'LL BE SEEING THAT

01:46 - 10.689 SHORTLY EXACT SAME SET

01:46 - 12.299 OF FACTS. THEY TRIED TO TAX THE

01:46 - 13.609 ENTIRE THING IN THE DID'T

01:46 - 15.729 ACCIDENT 15% WE'RE TALKING

01:46 - 17.009 ABOUT $600,000

01:46 - 18.839 INHERITANCE TAX THAT WILL COME

01:46 - 19.869 OUT OF THE TRUST THAT WILL NOT

01:46 - 21.159 BE AVAILABLE TO THE SURVIVING

01:46 - 22.319 SPOUSE TO DO WITH AS SHE

01:46 - 23.899 PLEASES WHAT EXEMPTION

01:46 - 26.449 SURE THE UAE AND FALLING

01:46 - 28.609 ANDERSON ALSO YOU DAISY ROW

01:46 - 29.599 SURE WE'LL FALLING UNDER THE

01:46 - 30.559 EXEMPTION ANYTHING JUDGE

01:46 - 31.899 O'TOOLE WAS REFERENCING IS THE

01:46 - 34.009 FACT THAT YES IT'S IN THE TRUST

01:46 - 35.669 FOR INHERITANCE TAX PURPOSES

01:46 - 38.149 ARE IN FACT OWN BY THE

01:46 - 39.879 FACT THOUGH THIS IS PART OF A

01:46 - 41.609 CAR SO IF YOU WANT TO SECTION

01:46 - 45.459 9, 1, 1, 6, 8, 1.1. THAT

01:46 - 48.029 SECTION. SPECIFICALLY

01:46 - 50.429 STATES THAT INHERITANCE TAX

01:46 - 51.619 UPON THE TRANSFER CAUGHT

01:46 - 53.199 PASSING TO OR FOR THE USE OF A

01:46 - 54.449 HUSBAND WHY SHOULD BE TAXED

01:46 - 56.409 AT 0. THIS ASSET

01:46 - 58.589 TAX TRANSFER TO THE SURVIVING

01:46 - 00.279 SPOUSE, IT'S SIMPLY TRANSFERRED

01:47 - 01.839 INSIDE OF A TRUST IN WHICH IRAQ

01:47 - 03.599 HAS ALL 3 POSITIONS THE STATE

01:47 - 05.329 IS THEY MAY BE TRUE BUT AT THE

01:47 - 06.739 END OF THE DAY. SHE OWNS

01:47 - 08.869 THE ASSETS. NO ONE ELSE HAS ANY

01:47 - 09.929 INTEREST IN THE TRUST.

01:47 - 13.109 WHAT SO EVER WHICH IS WHY I

01:47 - 13.879 DIDN'T FILE A

01:47 - 15.779 SCHEDULE M FOR AN OFFER FOR

01:47 - 17.259 COMPROMISE LIKE I'VE DONE

01:47 - 19.389 THOUSANDS OF TIMES DID APPLY

01:47 - 20.759 HERE WHEN YOU SAY IT'S

01:47 - 21.829 BENEFICIAL FOR.

01:47 - 23.759 >>TAX PLANNING HOW WAS IT WAS

01:47 - 25.099 BENEFICIAL FOR OVERALL PLANNING

01:47 - 26.819 HAD DONE ABOUT 3,000 OF THE

01:47 - 28.869 SEMI BENEFIT HAVING

01:47 - 30.639 ENJOYED TRUST. IT'S A BIGGER

01:47 - 31.869 ASSET MANAGEMENT WILL HAVE ALL

01:47 - 33.269 MY ASSETS ONE PLACE A LOT OF MY

01:47 - 34.399 CLIENTS HAVE ASSETS IN OTHER

01:47 - 35.459 STATES BECOME LICENSED AND

01:47 - 37.259 CIVIL JURISDICTION, SO I AVOID

01:47 - 39.189 PROBATE COURT COSTS AND OTHER

01:47 - 40.989 STATES WHEN ONE SPOUSE DIES

01:47 - 42.009 EVERYTHING STAYS IN THE SAME

01:47 - 42.489 TRUST

01:47 - 44.309 HERE AFTER MIS MISTER PUT

01:47 - 45.389 ACROSS DEFINITION COULD

01:47 - 46.339 PROBABLY SLIPPING A LITTLE BIT

01:47 - 47.679 SHE BROUGHT HER SON ON THE COTE

01:47 - 49.229 RUSTY. THEY'RE NOW MANAGING

01:47 - 49.419 THOSE

01:47 - 50.919 ASSETS TOGETHER MUCH MORE

01:47 - 52.099 EFFECTIVELY THAN THE POWER OF

01:47 - 53.559 ATTORNEY THEN A DURABLE POWER

01:47 - 53.659 OF

01:47 - 55.549 ATTORNEY WITH AND NOW SHE CAN

01:47 - 56.979 CHANGE THE TRUST HER SHE WANTS

01:47 - 58.299 SHE CHANGES ONE DOCUMENT

01:47 - 59.789 THAT CHANGED THE DISPOSITION OF

01:47 - 01.139 ALL OR ASSETS JUST HAVE TO GO

01:48 - 01.839 BACK AND SEE WHAT THE

01:48 - 02.869 BENEFICIARIES OF HER LIFE

01:48 - 04.799 INSURANCE ANNUITIES RETIREMENT

01:48 - 06.609 PLANS ARE THIS IS ONE DOCUMENT

01:48 - 07.739 THE CONTROLS THE DISPOSITION OF

01:48 - 09.459 ALL ASSETS THAT SHE CAN EASILY

01:48 - 09.839 HANDLE AND

01:48 - 11.579 TAKE CARE AND IT MANAGES THE

01:48 - 13.089 ASSETS FOR THE SURVIVING SPOUSE

01:48 - 14.189 MUCH MORE EFFECTIVELY THAN A

01:48 - 15.639 POWER OF ATTORNEY. SO

01:48 - 17.299 THEREFORE THE BECAUSE YOU

01:48 - 18.639 DECIDE TO GO DOWN THIS ROUTE.

01:48 - 20.169 THE DEPARTMENT WANTS TO JUMP

01:48 - 20.699 IN.

01:48 - 22.829 >>TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE FACT

01:48 - 24.429 THAT SHE SHOULD BE TAXED

01:48 - 25.339 DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE IT'S A

01:48 - 27.069 QUOTE UNQUOTE VO COUPLE TRUST

01:48 - 28.349 NOT REALLY WHAT THE DEPARTMENT

01:48 - 29.369 OF REVENUE IS SAYING IS THAT

01:48 - 30.659 THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN AVOID

01:48 - 32.629 INHERITANCE TAX WITH THE TRUST

01:48 - 34.169 IS IMPORTANT TO QUALIFY.

01:48 - 35.869 UNDER THIS 9, 1, 1, 3, IS A

01:48 - 37.899 SOYUZ TRUST. SHE DOESN'T HAVE

01:48 - 39.429 THE SOLE USE OF THE PROPERTY AS

01:48 - 41.859 TO FACT SHE HAS OWNERSHIP OF

01:48 - 43.389 THE PROPERTY EVEN THOUGH SHE'S

01:48 - 45.769 OCCUPY ALL 3 POSITIONS WHO ELSE

01:48 - 46.369 IS THE OWNER.

01:48 - 49.039 I SALUTE YOU NOBODY HAS HAS AN

01:48 - 50.329 OWNERSHIP INTEREST TO ONLY

01:48 - 52.419 HURT. HOW CAN SOMEBODY ELSE BE

01:48 - 54.169 TEXTING THIS ASSET LIKE

01:48 - 55.449 I SAID, IF YOU ARE TAKING THE

01:48 - 56.579 ASSETS OF THE DAY AFTER YOU

01:48 - 58.029 DIE, AND PUT THEM BACK IN IS

01:48 - 59.299 THAT WHAT I NOW HAVE TO DO TO

01:48 - 00.789 GO BACK TO MY CLIENTS DO THAT

01:49 - 01.259 TO AVOID

01:49 - 03.089 THIS MISHAP THAT DOESN'T SEEM

01:49 - 04.129 LIKE IT MAKES A NICE UNLESS

01:49 - 06.379 SHE REQUIRED ARE YOU REQUIRED

01:49 - 08.119 REQUIRED BY LAW TO GET ANY EYE

01:49 - 09.509 ON WHEN THIS TRUST WAS.

01:49 - 11.039 >>ESTABLISHED KNOW.

01:49 - 12.339 >>WHATEVER YOU CREATE A JOINT

01:49 - 13.439 WE HAVE A CREDIT TO TRY TO

01:49 - 14.759 REVOKE THE TRUST THE SONG IS

01:49 - 15.999 THE CREATOR OF THE TRUST IS A

01:49 - 17.919 TRUSTEE. THE SOLE TRUSTEE

01:49 - 20.369 TRUSTEE. UNDER THE TAX LAWS

01:49 - 21.359 FEDERAL TAX LAW THERE'S NO

01:49 - 22.559 REQUIREMENT TO GET A TAX ID

01:49 - 23.929 NUMBER THE ONLY TIME YOU GET A

01:49 - 25.549 TAX ID NUMBER AS ONE OF THE

01:49 - 26.759 TRUST BECOMES A REVOLT

01:49 - 28.399 AND HAD THE TRUST BECOME VERY

01:49 - 31.399 VOCAL. THIS 9, 1, 1, 3, I AGREE

01:49 - 32.069 WOULD BE RIGHT ON

01:49 - 33.599 THE MONEY, WE'LL BE RIGHT ON

01:49 - 34.659 THE MONEY, BUT IT'S NOT VERY

01:49 - 36.359 VOCAL ITS REVOKE INTENSE YOUR

01:49 - 36.729 QUESTION,

01:49 - 38.239 YOUR HONOR I DID NOT GET A NEW

01:49 - 39.919 100 AND DID NOT GET ANY TAX ID

01:49 - 41.789 NUMBER I USING HER SOCIAL

01:49 - 43.799 SECURITY NUMBER AND ALSO YOUR

01:49 - 44.189 POINT IS

01:49 - 46.009 WELL TAKEN SHE GOES TO APPLY

01:49 - 47.819 NOT MISSING ASSISTANCE GUESS

01:49 - 48.879 WHAT ALL THOSE ASSETS IN THE

01:49 - 51.099 TRUST OR KABUL, WHY BECAUSE

01:49 - 52.419 THOSE RESOURCES BELONG.

01:49 - 55.509 SHE GOT SUPER HAD A CREDIBLE

01:49 - 56.919 CLAIM WITH ALL THE ASSETS IN

01:49 - 58.409 THE TRUST BE SUBJECTED TO THAT

01:49 - 00.259 CREDIT CLAIM ABSOLUTELY

01:50 - 02.449 POSITIVELY. YES. THEY'RE HER

01:50 - 04.079 SHE CAN TAKE THEM OUT CRITTER

01:50 - 05.329 CAN STEP INTO HER SHOES.

01:50 - 07.479 SO THE SAME AUTHORITY TAKE THEM

01:50 - 08.039 ALL OUT

01:50 - 08.959 AND THEREFORE THEY'RE ALL

01:50 - 10.669 SUBJECT TO CREDIT LINES AND SHE

01:50 - 12.879 OWNS THE ASSETS AND SO IN YOUR

01:50 - 15.659 MIND THEN SHE SHOULD HAVE HAD

01:50 - 16.969 THE ASSETS LISTED ON THE

01:50 - 18.299 INHERITANCE TAX RETURN AND IS

01:50 - 19.179 0%.

01:50 - 21.419 >>RATE WOULD APPLY. JUST WHAT

01:50 - 23.929 I DO EXACTLY WHAT I DID EVERY

01:50 - 24.889 PART OF THE ASSETS ON THE

01:50 - 26.089 RETURN AND I PUT

01:50 - 28.429 DOWN 0 BECAUSE IT PASSED TO HER

01:50 - 29.669 LIKE I'VE DONE THOUSANDS OF

01:50 - 31.159 OTHER TIMES ALL THE SUDDEN NOW.

01:50 - 32.179 >>WE HAVE THIS NEW NOVEL

01:50 - 33.489 ARGUMENT THAT THE ONLY WAY YOU

01:50 - 34.669 CAN AVOID INHERITANCE TAX WITH

01:50 - 35.909 A REVOKED THE TRUST ME GOES TO

01:50 - 37.609 A SPOUSE IS IT TO QUALIFY

01:50 - 39.129 SO USE I DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE

01:50 - 40.369 YOU THE NEWS I WANT TO GIVE HER

01:50 - 41.399 THE ASSETS WITHOUT HAVING TO

01:50 - 42.499 TAKE THEM OUT OF THE TRUST.

01:50 - 44.369 YOU KNOW WE ALL DROVE TO WORK

01:50 - 46.599 TODAY. WELL IF I DROVE A CAR

01:50 - 47.929 THAT WAS LEAST ONE SOMEBODY

01:50 - 48.649 ELSE. I'D THE USE

01:50 - 50.459 OF IT 5 OF CARDS IN MY NAME

01:50 - 51.779 DRIVE THE USE OF IT OR DO I OWN

01:50 - 53.609 THE CAR. SAME PRINCIPLE

01:50 - 55.699 BASICALLY THAT'S A TRUST LET'S

01:50 - 57.909 NOT LOSE THE FACT THAT SHE IS

01:50 - 59.579 THE DE FACTO OWNER BECAUSE SHE

01:50 - 00.429 OCCUPIES ALL

01:51 - 02.259 3 POSITIONS WHO ELSE TO SHE

01:51 - 04.159 OWING ALLEGIANCE OR ANY LEGAL

01:51 - 06.559 RESPONSIBILITY TO NO ONE.

01:51 - 12.599 THE 2 CASES

01:51 - 13.799 BEHIND THIS AND ALLEGHENY

01:51 - 14.889 COUNTY THAT ON HOLD PENDING

01:51 - 15.819 THIS COULD THIS CASE

01:51 - 18.209 FOREIGN CASES DELBEL THE OTHER

01:51 - 19.409 POINT HERE YOU NEED TO

01:51 - 20.389 UNDERSTAND IS THESE THESE

01:51 - 21.709 ASSETS ARE GOING TO BE TAXED

01:51 - 23.289 TWICE. THE DEPARTMENT OF

01:51 - 24.759 REVENUE WILL TELL YOU KNOW, BUT

01:51 - 26.009 I CAN TELL YOU THEY WILL BE

01:51 - 28.119 BECAUSE AND ADELE BELL CASE,

01:51 - 29.289 THE WIFE DIED FIRST.

01:51 - 31.869 I REPORTED TO NOT PAYING ANY

01:51 - 33.989 INHERITANCE TAX. 8 MONTHS LATER

01:51 - 35.539 ROUGHLY THE HUSBAND THAT

01:51 - 37.379 REPORTED PAY THE INHERITANCE

01:51 - 38.919 TAX ON THE WHOLE FRONT. THE

01:51 - 40.339 PENNSYLVANIA HAD STACKS WILL

01:51 - 42.339 NOW THEY'RE APPEALING THAT SO

01:51 - 43.139 NOW I WANT TO GO BACK AND

01:51 - 45.559 PAY TAX WHEN MISTER DENNIS

01:51 - 47.249 MISSES DELBEL DIED ON HER HALF

01:51 - 49.249 OF THE ASSETS IN 8 MONTHS LATER

01:51 - 49.669 GOING TO PAY

01:51 - 51.959 TAX AGAIN ON MESS DIDN'T CHANGE

01:51 - 53.439 AT ALL SHE DID USE THE INCOME

01:51 - 55.019 SAME ASSET SAME PLACE SAME

01:51 - 55.799 ACCOUNT NUMBER SAYING

01:51 - 57.259 EVERYTHING SO 8 MONTHS LATER

01:51 - 58.679 NOW I WANT TO PAY INHERITANCE

01:51 - 00.719 TAX ON THE SAME EXACT ASSETS

01:52 - 03.089 ONCE AGAIN I DOUBT VERY MUCH

01:52 - 04.199 THAT OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

01:52 - 06.439 INTENDED HERE. AND THAT'S WHAT

01:52 - 07.669 WE'RE TRYING TO DO THIS

01:52 - 09.299 IS UNPRECEDENTED. YOU KNOW TO A

01:52 - 10.649 POLL OF THE DEPARTMENT REVENUES

01:52 - 11.889 DOING WILL CHANGE ESTATE

01:52 - 13.479 PLANNING AND TAX PLANNING TO

01:52 - 15.499 LOCAL PLANNING. THROUGHOUT THE

01:52 - 16.139 COMMONWEALTH.

01:52 - 18.909 WE'RE EXCITED TO

01:52 - 21.459 SO TIED UP IN THE BUT I'VE DONE

01:52 - 22.499 A LOT OF THESE AND THIS IS MY

01:52 - 24.449 LIFE SO THIS HAS BEEN A LITTLE

01:52 - 28.409 ANY QUESTIONS ANYTHING ELSE I

01:52 - 29.269 CAN ANSWER PLEASE.

01:52 - 30.589 >>THE TRUST HAD

01:52 - 33.569 WE FORMED AS AN IRREVOCABLE

01:52 - 34.939 TRUST, BUT THERE IS A

01:52 - 38.249 POWER OF CONTROL OVER THE

01:52 - 40.219 INCOME OR SOME POWER OF

01:52 - 41.889 APPOINTMENT THAT WAS ROUTINE.

01:52 - 44.129 DIDN'T DOES THAT THEN BLOW IT

01:52 - 46.159 UP AND MAKE IT INTO A REVOCABLE

01:52 - 47.829 TRUST NUMBER 8 BACK TO THIS

01:52 - 49.389 DISCUSSION ABSOLUTELY BECAUSE

01:52 - 50.699 IF IT WAS YOUR READ A COUPLE

01:52 - 52.389 TRUST AND I HAVE I WOULD HAVE

01:52 - 53.849 REMAINED ARE BENEFICIARIES THAT

01:52 - 55.139 HAVE VESTED INTERESTS.

01:52 - 56.509 >>SO I WOULD HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE

01:52 - 57.989 THAT HAS AN INTEREST AND I READ

01:52 - 59.279 WAS IT ONLY DELAYED UNTIL THEY

01:52 - 00.589 CAN ENJOY IT. BUT IN THERE

01:53 - 02.139 EVERY A VERY VOCAL, TRUSTING

01:53 - 02.829 THE WIFE HAS

01:53 - 04.639 INCOME INTEREST FOR HER LIFE

01:53 - 05.819 THINK HE'S PRINCIPLE FOR HEALTH

01:53 - 07.109 OFTEN MEANS AND SUPPORT AND

01:53 - 07.979 UPON HER DEATH.

01:53 - 09.499 IT GOES TO THE 3 CHILDREN,

01:53 - 10.529 THOSE TREAT CHILDREN HAVE A

01:53 - 12.099 VESTED INTEREST THEY CAN ENJOY

01:53 - 13.829 IT TO THE MOTHER DIES. THEN I

01:53 - 14.609 WOULD DO AN OFFER FOR

01:53 - 15.299 COMPROMISE

01:53 - 17.209 AND SAY SHE'S 8 YEARS OVER

01:53 - 18.859 ISSUES WITH 23% THAT

01:53 - 20.759 0 TAX. THE REMAINING INTEREST

01:53 - 22.609 ACTUALLY IS ALLOCATED TO OR FOR

01:53 - 23.749 THE BENEFIT, THE CHILDREN

01:53 - 25.029 SUBJECT TO 4 AND A HALF PERCENT

01:53 - 26.559 TAX WE WOULD PAY THE TAX AND

01:53 - 27.569 THAT WOULD WORK IS THERE

01:53 - 29.049 SOMETHING IN PENNSYLVANIA LAW

01:53 - 29.529 THAT.

01:53 - 31.259 >>GUIDES US TO KNOW

01:53 - 33.629 WHAT THE WITH WHEN WE'RE

01:53 - 36.219 ATTRIBUTING A TRUST ASSET TO A

01:53 - 37.519 JOINT A PREVIOUS

01:53 - 39.719 JOINT TENANTS HOW IT'S TO BE

01:53 - 41.029 TREATED, YOU KNOW GOOD GOOD

01:53 - 42.979 POINT ON IF YOU LOOK AT

01:53 - 43.689 MY TRUST.

01:53 - 46.279 >>I CHANGE THE CHARACTERIZATION

01:53 - 47.599 OF THE TRUST US TEND TO BUY THE

01:53 - 48.749 ENTIRE JUST A JOINT TENANTS

01:53 - 49.049 WITH RIGHT

01:53 - 51.279 OF SURVIVORSHIP SEEING RESULT

01:53 - 52.629 WHEN ONE DIES ALL GOES TO THE

01:53 - 53.869 SURVIVING SPOUSE I DID THAT

01:53 - 54.749 BECAUSE IN ORDER TO DO A

01:53 - 56.429 DISCLAIMER TO USE WHAT'S CALLED

01:53 - 57.769 THE BYPASS TRUSTEES OF THE

01:53 - 58.959 FIRST EXEMPTION OF THE FIRST

01:53 - 59.189 ASKED

01:53 - 01.689 TO DIE. YOU HAVE TO DO WITH THE

01:54 - 02.979 9 MONTHS OF THE CREATION OF THE

01:54 - 04.359 TENANTS BY THE ENTIRETY AS WELL

01:54 - 05.469 AS A JOINT TENANTS WITH RIGHT

01:54 - 06.929 OF SURVIVORSHIP I CAN DO WITH

01:54 - 08.029 THE 9 MONTHS TO THE DATE OF THE

01:54 - 09.559 FIRST SPOUSES DEATHS THAT'S WHY

01:54 - 11.339 I DID THIS YEAR BUT TO ANSWER

01:54 - 12.959 YOUR QUESTION AS I WAS GOING

01:54 - 14.019 THROUGH IN PREPARING FOR THIS I

01:54 - 15.259 CAME ACROSS AN INTERESTING CASE

01:54 - 16.829 THAT IS NOT IN MY BRIEF THAT

01:54 - 18.229 IS THE CASE THE CASE AND THE

01:54 - 20.409 KUNA AND

01:54 - 21.689 EUNICE STATE IS

01:54 - 24.459 3.48 PA 23.

01:54 - 28.299 IT'S 33 A SECOND 14 THIS IS AN

01:54 - 29.369 INTERESTING CASE, THIS IS A

01:54 - 30.709 PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT

01:54 - 34.469 CASE. IN WHICH HAS BEEN A HAS

01:54 - 36.009 BEEN TO PUT THE MAJORITY THE

01:54 - 37.229 ASSETS INTEREST ALONG WITH

01:54 - 39.229 THE WIFE AND THEY DID SAY WHAT

01:54 - 41.949 WAS TO BE HELD THEY HAD BANK BE

01:54 - 43.479 THE TRUSTEE, NOT THEMSELVES.

01:54 - 45.099 IT WAS REVOKE ABUL DURING THEIR

01:54 - 46.579 LIFETIME IN THE COURT SAID

01:54 - 48.209 WHENEVER ASSETS OR PUT INTO A

01:54 - 49.449 JOINT TRUST BETWEEN HUSBAND AND

01:54 - 51.309 WIFE THEY ARE PRESUMED TO BE

01:54 - 52.829 TENDENCY BY THE ENTIRE

01:54 - 54.479 PROPERTY. THEY HAVE ALL THE

01:54 - 55.189 UNIT, HE'S A

01:54 - 56.759 BIG DEAL. AND WHAT THE COURT

01:54 - 57.899 GOES ON TO SAY THIS IS ACTUALLY

01:54 - 58.639 BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT OF

01:54 - 00.129 REVENUE WAS ARGUING THAT THE

01:55 - 01.449 TRUST WAS TENDED TO BY THE

01:55 - 02.779 ENTIRE PROPERTY AND THEREFORE

01:55 - 03.759 SHOULD HAVE ALL BEEN SUBJECT TO

01:55 - 05.959 TAX WHEN THE SURVIVING SPOUSE

01:55 - 07.449 THAT THE SURVIVING SPOUSE, I'M