Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): paragraph borrows from passages in his work, The Seventeenth-Century Revolution in the English Land Law, 43 Clev. St. L. Rev. 221, 268-72 (1995). 7 . "[T]he validity of a limitation is ... to be determined under the circumstances then existing, and the certainty that it will vest within the permitted period, if at all, must be discernible at that date.” 70 C.J.S. Perpetuities § 16. 8 . The deed also grants the option to Otis’ immediately related heirs and assignees without temporal limitation. This offensive aspect of the optionee class as well is remedied by the holdings of this Opinion. 9 . Pathmark Stores, Del.Ch., 663 A.2d at 1191—92. 10 . Smith Deed at 11. 11 . Del.Ch., C.A. No. 1096-S, mem. op. at 15, Allen, C., 1988 WL 34528 (Apr. 13, 1988). 12 . Id. at 15-18. 13 . Id. at 18-19 (<HOLDING>). Another way of looking at it is to say that 
 Holding statements: (A) holding right of first refusal only applied to a voluntary sale and taking of property by condemnation is involuntary therefore right of first refusal not triggered (B) holding that when determining the proper amount for a burdened property that was purchased in a package only two methods suggest themselves as arguably appropriate 1 a determination of the fair market value of the  property burdened by the right of first refusal or 2 a determination of the portion of the  purchase price which based on the percentage of the fair market value of the entire package represented by the  property burdened by the right of first refusal should be allocated to the  property burdened by the right of first refusal (C) holding this type of agreement fixedprice right of first refusal at least in this type of market threatens to act as a complete impediment to the free alienability of land that our law has for centuries sought to encourage (D) recognizing the significance of territorial jurisdiction and concluding that a more stringent approach needs to be followed in order to confer this type of authority (E) holding prior use of one type of drug is not relevant to establish use of another type of drug on a different occasion
Output (English): holding prior use of one type of drug is not relevant to establish use of another type of drug on a different occasion