CTA Case No. 2744 (Decision)

-- ' - -' � C MMI ., 0 X~ - - � � ~ ~ � � ~ -� D I I i 1 t eo 1 t !" t0 io r t c t t t 1 , l 75 a i i tnat f 11 ct r t u- f i l (1 s � 75-14) t , +43 . an trati 1 st h vs 1 I t sh1 ' r 1 t I �t r Vi 1 t1 n :l 2r:23 f t e r1f" c s- �, �� �r t Cod e f act a t 1 1 ute. ("'! t e I1 t ar iv at th t t5b e t a til 11 " 1b t '$ i as el in t 1- 1 th v sel' ar if 21,7; lb � 'WV a a1 i

i 0.,�, ...,., .a~ n�� n lU nd ( ' :t 1 ..�..� n . 1 "'f I.a � ng 0 I ti

o� .7 � 125

l ICY- "' s: � 7 - 4 .... It 1 r he r th th 11 bl f r v 1 t1 r th . th t t r tri r tn t the h1 p 1r d (1) i ere� ac ... e, 1 tb t er, fficer r t th ve s ljO ( . ) th v s l i tl lir ti t 11 s f ei t .r (3) t d� 1 . ... r- ; (lt} the h1 r i� et llYt th s 1t ,~l.r ,�. 1 2 6 -"-

�? - .. it b c ,;:} t s p i t ' '1 1 it f he c 1 v lv u n 11 1 8 ed , ll s tho 1 1 t1 1 tn ti r oll wi ca e e thi c {' th �� 1. �

. ;; c I o. 27 - 128

. � ~'7 I f 129

.. � cc - 1..:t. v9 0