Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): of educational institutions. On the other hand, it does not provide a standard for courts to follow and ensures that every nontraditional school will litigate its exemption status. Other states have adopted an even less restrictive definition of schools. In most of those jurisdictions, however, the inquiry focuses on whether the institution serves “an educational purpose.” See, e.g., McKee v. Evans, 490 P.2d 1226, 1230-31 (Alaska 1971) (granting exemption to-Apprentice and Manpower Training Trust’s nonprofit educational school because “educational purposes” were defined to “include[] systematic instruction in any and all branches of learning from which a substantial public benefit is derived”); see also J.A.T.T. Title Holding Corp. v. Roberts, 258 Ga. 519, 371 S.E.2d 861, 862 (1988) (<HOLDING>); Smith v. Feather, 149 Tex. 402, 234 S.W.2d 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that legislation cannot prohibit school children from learning languages other than english (B) holding that a rico action by union members was properly dismissed where any financial improprieties occurred with union funds and directly injured solely the union (C) holding that extracurricular activities like a high school dance are within the charitable purpose of conducting a school for learning even where the organization charged admission (D) holding trade school operated by union trust was seminary of learning (E) recognizing that union members interests are adequately represented by the union
Output (English): holding that legislation cannot prohibit school children from learning languages other than english