flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of real property comprising a state, county, or municipal park.” § 893.13(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013). As this Court explained in Maestas v. State, “[s]ection 893.13 offenses are general intent crimes” and “[although knowledge of presence is not expressly required by the text of section 893.13, such knowledge has always been required in drug possession cases.” 76 So.3d 991, 994-95 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). In other words, “knowledge of the presence of the substance” is a required element of the charged crime in this case, one which the State was required to prove regardless of Appellant’s defense of misidentification. See, e.g., Scott v. State, 808 So.2d 166, 171 (Fla. 2002), superseded on other grounds by § 893.101, Fla. Stat. (2002), as recognized in State v. Adkins, 96 So.3d 412 (Fla. 2012) (<HOLDING>). For the same reason, the error cannot be Options: A. holding that when no objection was made to jury instruction evidence to support finding based on instruction should be assessed in light of the instruction given B. holding good faith jury instruction is not necessary when the court has given an adequate specific intent instruction C. holding that because the requirement that an instruction must be given does not depend on the defense espoused an instruction on a required element must be given even when the defendant simply requires the state to prove its case and offers nothing by way of an affirmative defense D. holding that beck requires that a lesser included offense instruction be given when the evidence warrants such an instruction as a matter of due process in a capital case E. holding that issue of inadequate jury instruction was waived because the instruction given was the one expressly requested by defense counsel

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because the requirement that an instruction must be given does not depend on the defense espoused an instruction on a required element must be given even when the defendant simply requires the state to prove its case and offers nothing by way of an affirmative defense
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if the dispute has a claimed value of not more than $ 250,000 , an arbitration hearing will be conducted , at your election , either by telephone ( or other mutually agreeable remote technology ) or in city and county of san francisco , california .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: under Federal Rule of Evidence 703. Again, this argument rests on the flawed assumption that the District Court relied solely on Rule 703. However, even assuming the District Court mistakenly believed that its Rule 702 reliability analysis actually fell under Rule 703, Plaintiffs’ notice argument would still be meritless. A district court must give the parties “an adequate opportunity to be heard on evidentiary issues.” In re Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litig. (Paoli I), 916 F.2d 829, 854 (3d Cir.1990). Here, there was extensive briefing regarding DeRamus’s damages opinion, much of which focused on Eaton’s argument that DeRamus’s reliance on the SBP was improper. The District Court held not one, but two in limine hearings, in which DeRamus testified for several hours. ' Compare id. at 854-55 (<HOLDING>). As such, Plaintiffs were well aware of, and Options: A. holding that the trial court did not need to conduct an evidentiary hearing when the dispute could be resolved as a matter of law B. holding that district court abused its discretion by failing to conduct an adequate evidentiary hearing into the allegations of extraneous influences on the jury pursuant to the holding in remmer and remanding for a hearing at which the defendant should be accorded the opportunity to question the jurors individually and under qath C. holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court D. holding that the judge must allow the attorneys the opportunity to be heard on an initial 3850 motion in a capital case for the purpose of determining whether an evidentiary hearing is required and to hear legal argument relating to the motion E. holding that the district court did not give the plaintiffs an adequate opportunity to be heard where it failed to conduct an in limine hearing and denied oral argument on the evidentiary issues

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district court did not give the plaintiffs an adequate opportunity to be heard where it failed to conduct an in limine hearing and denied oral argument on the evidentiary issues
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the challenged action is essentially legislative in nature rather than quasi-judicial, such that it should not be subject to administrative review. As the preceding analysis suggests, we reject this characterization. Although the approval of a settlement agreement is superficially at issue, Petitioner’s challenge is directed at the underlying decision to permit the proposed development to proceed. Both the minutes of the February 27, 2002, City Council meeting and the settlement agreement clearly reflect that a development decision pertaining to the Sam’s Club property was made. Such site-specific development determinations are properly classified as quasi-judicial in nature. See W. Old Town Neighborhood Ass’n v. City of Albuquerque, 1996-NMCA-107, ¶ 11, 122 N.M. 495, 927 P.2d 529 (<HOLDING>). The fact that the City’s quasi-judicial Options: A. recognizing that the zoning code of a homerule city is a legislative enactment B. recognizing legislative or quasilegislative nature of design decision C. holding that a zoning decision pertaining to a specific property is not a legislative act but is rather quasijudicial in nature D. holding that to the extent that the securing of information is necessary to a prosecutors decision to initiate a criminal prosecution it is encompassed within the protected quasijudicial immunity afforded to the decision itself E. recognizing that zoning and rezoning are legislative matters

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a zoning decision pertaining to a specific property is not a legislative act but is rather quasijudicial in nature
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 368 U.S. 399 82 S.Ct. 429 7 L.Ed.2d 378 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDv.BRANDMAN IRON CO. No. 35. Decided Jan. 15, 1962. Former Solicitor General Rankin, Solicitor General Cox, Stuart Rothman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come, for petitioner. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The respondent consented to the entry by the National Labor Relations Board of an order directing it to cease-and-desist from certain practices as regards membership of its employees in a named labor organization 'or any other labor organization of its employees.' The respondent further waived all defenses to the entry by the Court of Appeals of a decree enforcing said order. The Court of Appeals, sua sponte, struck the words 'or any other labor organization of its employees' wherever they appeared in the Board's order. 6 Cir., 281 F.2d 797. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the case is remanded with directions that a judgment be entered which affirms and enforces the Board order. Labor Board v. Ochoa Fertilizer Corp., 368 U.S. 318, 82 S.Ct. 344, 7 L.Ed.2d 312. 2 Petition granted. 3 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, dissents.

assistant: 9
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth in this Section, in the event any provision of this Agreement shall be found unenforceable, the unenforceable provision shall be deemed deleted and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby; provided that if the general release of claims set forth above is found to be unenforceable, Employee will be required to enter into a new Agreement with a valid release of claims against the Released Parties.

assistant: Severability
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: murder” because, under New Mexico law, the crime of conspiracy “requires both an intent to agree and an intent to commit the offense which is the object of the conspiracy.” Id. at 788. The court noted that depraved-mind murder, as defined at that time by statute and case law, “is an unintentional killing resulting from highly reckless behavior,” and, citing the Model Penal Code, concluded that it could not be the object of a conspiracy. Id. The Supreme Court of Connecticut al , 853-54 (2002) (noting that Kansas does not recognize the crime of conspiracy to commit felony murder because conspiracy requires a specific intent and one cannot intentionally conspire to commit a crime which requires either negligence or no mens rea), Conley v. State, 146 Ga.App. 739, 247 S.E.2d 562, 565 (1978) (<HOLDING>). As previously noted, Section 903 of our Options: A. holding that failure to charge jury that state had burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant did not act in the heat of passion was harmless because the evidence did not support a charge on passionprovocation manslaughter B. holding that failure of trial court to instruct jury that state must prove beyond reasonable doubt killing was not committed in heat of passion required reversal of murder conviction even though there was general charge that state was required to prove each element of offenses beyond reasonable doubt C. holding that one cannot conspire to commit voluntary manslaughter which is a killing in the heat of passion D. holding that trial court should instruct the jury that if they had any reasonable doubt as to whether unlawful killing was murder or manslaughter it was jurys duty to convict defendant of the lesser offense manslaughter E. holding that no voluntary manslaughter instruction was required where a few hours passed between the allegedly provoking argument and the killing

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that one cannot conspire to commit voluntary manslaughter which is a killing in the heat of passion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Zhang (son of Jun Yun Zhang) and a proffer interview with Jun Yun Zhang. The court did not clearly err in relying on the PSR and finding that the included statements were reliable. In calculating a defendant’s sentencing range, a court may consider all relevant information that has “sufficient indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy,” U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3 (2011); United States v. Morales, 655 F.3d 608, 646 (7th Cir.2011), and may adopt the factual findings of the PSR if it has indicia of reliability, Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(b)(6)(D); United States v. Berkey, 161 F.3d 1099, 1101-02 (7th Cir.1998). In this case, the grand jury statements and proffer interview provided detailed, corroborated testimony by co-conspirators. See United States v. Ewers, 54 F.3d 419, 421-22 (7th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Both Lili Liu and Tao Zhang admitted to Options: A. holding a failure to object to a witnesses testimony while the witness was on the stand justified overruling a motion for a mistrial made several witnesses later B. holding that material for witnesses need not be produced to defendant where the witnesses were not called as government witnesses at trial C. holding that a district court was entitled to accept or reject testimony on the basis of the witnesses demeanor and candor or lack thereof and contradictions in the witnesses testimony D. holding that criminal defendants are entitled to obtain for impeachment purposes statements made by government witnesses to government agents that relate to the subject matter of the witnesses direct testimony E. holding that selfinterested witnesses can be reliable when they provide detailed testimony that is corroborated by other witnesses or facts

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that selfinterested witnesses can be reliable when they provide detailed testimony that is corroborated by other witnesses or facts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any provision of this Guarantee held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability without affecting the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof; and the invalidity of a particular provision in a particular jurisdiction shall not invalidate such provision in any other jurisdiction.

assistant: Severability
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of interest.” Rubin v. Gee, 292 F.3d 396, 401 (4th Cir.2002) (citing Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 348-50, 100 S.Ct. 1708, 64 L.Ed.2d 333 (1980); Wood v. Georgia, 450 U.S. 261, 271, 101 S.Ct. 1097, 67 L.Ed.2d 220 (1981)). Here, we have an instance of successive representation. For a criminal defendant to prove a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel in cases involving successive representation, he must demonstrate that: 1) counsel’s “representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness,” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052, and 2) “there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different,” id. at 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052; see Lordi v. Ishee, 384 F.3d 189, 193 (6th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Here, Appellant asserts he was prejudiced by Options: A. holding that the strickland test applies to claims that counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to file a notice of appeal B. recognizing that strickland applies to ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims C. recognizing that generally pennsylvania applies decisions involving changes in the law in civil cases retrospectively le to cases pending on appeal D. holding that conflicts of constitutional magnitude can arise from cases of successive representation E. holding that strickland applies to cases involving successive representation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that strickland applies to cases involving successive representation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: shown that the Defendants had sufficient minimum contacts with New York to exercise personal jurisdiction over them without violating due process and offending traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Jurisdiction Over NIBC Has Not Been Established With respect to NIBC Capital, Aquiline has not cited to a New York contact of jurisdictional significance. As noted above, the Plaintiff has not contested the facts set forth in the Verhoog Declaration. While Plaintiff alleges that NIBC Capital sent certain emails and faxes to New York in response to Aquiline’s solicitation of business in Belgium, those sporadic contacts are not sufficient to establish specific jurisdiction over NIBC Capital. See, e.g., Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn v. Haisfield, 1990 WL 165687, at **2-3 (<HOLDING>). Bernstein acknowledges in her affidavit that Options: A. holding that outofstate defendants transmittal into new york of ceaseanddesist letter to new york plaintiff for purported trademark infringement was insufficient to create jurisdiction over defendant in a new york declaratory judgment action B. holding that contract signed in new york by promisor from florida and partially performed in florida was governed by new york law because it was executed in new york C. holding that for purposes of longarm jurisdiction because plaintiff was employed in new york the original event causing his injury occurred in new york D. holding jurisdiction over nonresident defendant existed where note was payable in new york contained new york choice of law clause and proceeds were used to finance new york limited partnership E. holding that two meet ings in new york and numerous telephone calls and correspondence to new york were not sufficient to confer jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that two meet ings in new york and numerous telephone calls and correspondence to new york were not sufficient to confer jurisdiction
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless the context otherwise requires, when used herein the following terms shall have the meanings indicated. Any capitalized terms used but not defined herein that are defined in the Warrant Agreement shall have the meanings set forth in the Warrant Agreement.

assistant: Definitions
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To accept such Transfer Prepayment Offer, a holder of Notes shall cause a notice of such acceptance to be delivered to the Company not later than twenty (20) days after the date of such written notice from the Company, provided, that failure to accept such offer in writing within twenty (20) days after the date of such written notice shall be deemed to constitute a rejection of the Transfer Prepayment Offer. If so accepted by any holder of a Note, such offered prepayment (equal to such holder’s Ratable Portion of the Net Proceeds Amount in respect of such Debt Prepayment Transfer) shall be due and payable on the Transfer Prepayment Date. Such offered prepayment shall be made at 100% of the principal amount of such Notes being so prepaid, together with interest on such principal amount then being prepaid accrued to the Transfer Prepayment Date determined as of the date of such prepayment, but without any Make-Whole Amount or penalty or premium of any kind. The prepayment shall be made on the Transfer Prepayment Date.

assistant: Payments
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: after being placed on the ground, so there was no reason for Officer Frost to place his knee on her back. Pl.’s Opp. at 13. In light of Officer Frost’s prior experience with plaintiffs attempts to escape custody, it was reasonable for him to believe that he needed to use some other part of his body to hold her down while using both of his hands to handcuff her. In that context, pushing his knee over her left arm and onto her back was not an excessive use of force. It is true that at the time Officer Frost placed his knee on plaintiffs back, she was already being restrained by two other officers. But that does not make Officer Frost’s actions unreasonable because plaintiff had managed to escape the grip of multiple officers earlier during the encounter. See Scott, 101 F.3d at 759-60 (<HOLDING>). The Court of Appeals has upheld the use of Options: A. holding that officers knocking the plaintiff to the ground rolling him over and pinning him with their knees on his neck back and legs so he could be handcuffed did not constitute excessive force and noting that the plaintiffs offer to return to custody after his escape attempt did not eliminate the need for force B. holding that purposely tripping the plaintiff while he was being escorted in handcuffs causing him to fall to the floor and cut his face could be excessive force C. holding that where an officer grabbed plaintiffs arm twisted it around plaintiffs back jerking it up high to the shoulder and then handcuffing the plaintiff as plaintiff fell to his knees screaming did not constitute excessive force D. holding that inquiry as to whether officers are entitled to qualified immunity for use of excessive force is distinct from inquiry on the merits of the excessive force claim E. holding that where the plaintiffs evidence supported a finding that the defendants had applied force to restrain him the jury must determine not only whether the officers were justified in using force at all but if so whether the degree of force actually used was reasonable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that officers knocking the plaintiff to the ground rolling him over and pinning him with their knees on his neck back and legs so he could be handcuffed did not constitute excessive force and noting that the plaintiffs offer to return to custody after his escape attempt did not eliminate the need for force
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTERNAL LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO ANY CHOICE OR CONFLICT OF LAW PROVISION OR RULE (WHETHER OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK OR ANY OTHER JURISDICTION) THAT WOULD CAUSE THE APPLICATION OF THE LAW OF ANY JURISDICTION OTHER THAN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

assistant: Governing Laws
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: against the Debtor have been discharged and that MDE’s pursuit of those claims in the State Court Action constitutes a violation of the discharge injunction. Accordingly, the Court orders the Respondents to cease any further pursuit of the Debtor in connection with the alleged claims but denies the Debtor’s -request for an award of damages and attorneys’ fees. A separate order will be entered consistent with this ruling. 1 . Unless otherwise noted, all statutory and rule references are to the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101 to 1532, and the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. 2 . In addition to the pleadings filed in this matter, the Court takes judicial notice of the docket in the Debtor's case. See Cervac v. Littman (In re Littman), 561 B.R. 79, 83 n.4 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2016) (<HOLDING>). 3 . Unless otherwise noted, future references Options: A. recognizing that the court may take judicial notice of its own docket B. recognizing that a court may take judicial notice of court filings and other matters of public record C. recognizing that a court may rely on matters of which a court may take judicial notice D. holding that the appellate court may take judicial notice of its own records in related proceedings E. holding that a court may sua sponte take judicial notice of its docket

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that the court may take judicial notice of its own docket
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall (a) by 10:00 a.m. (New York City time) on the Trading Day immediately following the date hereof, issue a press release disclosing the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereby, and (b) file a Current Report on Form 8-K, including the Transaction Documents as exhibits thereto, with the Commission within the time required by the Exchange Act (the “ 8-K Filing ”). From and after the issuance of such press release, the Company represents to the Purchasers that it shall have publicly disclosed all material, non-public information delivered to any of the Purchasers by the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, or any of their respective officers, directors, employees or agents. In addition, effective upon the issuance of such press release, the Company acknowledges and agrees that any and all confidentiality or similar obligations under any agreement, whether written or oral, between the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any of their respective officers, directors, agents, employees or Affiliates on the one hand, and any of the Purchaser or any of their Affiliates on the other hand, shall terminate. The Company and each Purchaser shall consult with each other in issuing any other press releases with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby, and neither the Company nor any Purchaser shall issue any such press release nor otherwise make any such public statement without the prior consent of the Company, with respect to any press release of any Purchaser, or without the prior consent of each Purchaser named in any further press release or public statement, with respect to any press release of the Company, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed, except if such disclosure is required by law, in which case the disclosing party shall promptly provide the other party with prior notice of such public statement or communication. For clarity, any public statement or press release of the Company that does not name any Purchaser and includes disclosure about the transactions consistent with the initial press release and 8-K Filing described above shall not require further consent from any Purchaser. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company shall not publicly disclose the name of any Purchaser, or include the name of any Purchaser in any filing with the Commission or any regulatory agency or Trading Market, without the prior written consent of such Purchaser, except (a) as required by federal securities law in connection with the filing of final Transaction Documents with the Commission and (b) to the extent such disclosure is required by law or Trading Market regulations, in which case the Company shall provide the Purchasers with prior notice of such disclosure permitted under this clause (b).

assistant: Publicity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Sowards, 203 F.3d at 431 (citation omitted). Butler County has presented evidence that Harris’s admitted violation of the associations policy led to his resignation and that Harris therefore would have been asked to resign or be terminated even if he had not engaged in any protected conduct. Harris also stated that he knew he could be terminated for his contacts with Holland. Butler County’s interest in preventing exploitative relationships between its employees and former inmates constitutes a legitimate reason supporting Harris’s termination. Harris has not come forward with evidence permitting the trier of fact to conclude that Butler County would not have terminated him absent protected conduct on Harris’s part. See Garvey v. Montgomery, 128 Fed.Appx. 453, 463 (6th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); Driggers v. City of Owensboro, 110 Fed.Appx. Options: A. holding that the plaintiff was precluded from raising the issue for the first time on appeal B. holding that evidence of misconduct or a deficient work performance record precluded the plaintiff from establishing a genuine issue of material fact such that a reasonable juror could find for the plaintiff C. holding that plaintiff failed to show genuine issue of material fact on equitable estoppel claim D. holding that dispute regarding material fact is genuine if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party E. holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that evidence of misconduct or a deficient work performance record precluded the plaintiff from establishing a genuine issue of material fact such that a reasonable juror could find for the plaintiff
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: We do not discern any inconsistency between the judgments and, even if there.were any inconsistency, it would not provide a basis for avoiding the application of collateral estoppel. See Steen v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 106 F.3d 904, 913 (9th Cir.1997) (collateral estoppel applies even if the prior case was erroneously decided). Moreover, Healy’s assertion that the state court judgments did not include any affirmative findings of fraud or willful and malicious conduct is flatly contradicted by the record. The bankruptcy court correctly analyzed the relevant factors under Washington state law in determining that Healy was collaterally estopped from relitigating the issues decided in the state court actions. See Diamond v. Kolcum (In re Diamond), 285 F.3d 822, 826 (9th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we affirm the bankruptcy court’s Options: A. holding that to determine collateral estoppel effect of a federal civil rights action fjederal law governs the preclusive effect of a claim arising under federal law B. recognizing that state law controls applicability of res judicata or collateral estoppel in nondiversity action where prior judgment involved issues of state law C. holding that in a subsequent criminal action for driving under the influence collateral estoppel did not apply to issues decided at a prior administrative hearing held pursuant to implied consent statute D. holding that state law controls whether issues decided in a prior state court action are entitled to preclusive effect and setting forth the elements of collateral estoppel under washington law E. holding that federal rules of res judicata and collateral estoppel determine preclusive effect of prior federal ftca judgments even though liability is based on state law

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that state law controls whether issues decided in a prior state court action are entitled to preclusive effect and setting forth the elements of collateral estoppel under washington law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During and after the Executive’s employment, and at all times, so long as there is not a significant conflict with the Executive’s then employment, the Executive shall cooperate reasonably with the Company in the defense or prosecution of any claims or actions now in existence or which may be brought in the future against or on behalf of the Company which relate to events or occurrences that transpired while the Executive was employed by the Company. The Executive’s reasonable cooperation in connection with such claims or actions shall include, but not be limited to, being available to meet with counsel to prepare for discovery or trial and to act as a witness on behalf of the Company at mutually convenient times. During and after the Executive’s employment, the Executive also shall cooperate reasonably with the Company in connection with any investigation or review of the Company by any federal, state or local regulatory authority as any such investigation or review relates to events or occurrences that transpired while the Executive was employed by the Company. The Company shall reasonably compensate Executive for the time dedicated to, and shall reimburse the Executive for any reasonable out of pocket expenses incurred in connection with, the Executive’s performance of the obligations set forth in this Section; provided, however, that the Company will not pay the Executive any fee or amount for time spent providing testimony in any arbitration, trial, administrative hearing or other proceeding.

assistant: Litigations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event that any provision in these Terms and Conditions shall be held invalid or unenforceable for any reason, such provision shall be severable from, and such invalidity or unenforceability shall not be construed to have any effect on, the remaining provisions of these Terms and Conditions.

assistant: Severability
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement will be a valid and binding agreement of the Parties only if and when it is fully executed and delivered by the Parties, and until such execution and delivery no legal obligation will be created by virtue hereof. This Agreement, the Confidentiality Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements, together with the Appendices and Exhibits hereto and thereto and the certificates and instruments delivered hereunder or in accordance herewith, embodies the entire agreement and understanding of the Parties hereto in respect of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. This Agreement, the Confidentiality Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements supersede all prior agreements and understandings between the Parties with respect to such transactions contemplated hereby. Neither this Agreement, the Confidentiality Agreement nor any Ancillary Agreement shall be deemed to contain or imply any restriction, covenant, representation, warranty, agreement or undertaking of any party with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby or thereby other than those expressly set forth herein or therein or in any document required to be delivered hereunder or thereunder.

assistant: Entire Agreements
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive is the Chief Executive Officer of the Company and reports to the Board of Directors for the Company, and is presently the Chairman of the Board of Directors. In this position, Executive has the responsibility for the general management and operation of the Company and the performance of such other executive services and duties as shall be reasonably assigned to and requested of him by the Board of Directors of the Company. Executive shall serve in any position and office with the Company as the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) may determine from time to time. However, Executive shall always remain as Chief Executive Officer and at the level of a senior executive officer of the Company. During the Employment Period, Executive shall devote substantially all his working time and efforts to the business and affairs of the Company and serve the Company in its business and perform his duties to the best of his ability.

assistant: Positions
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Other than Johnson Rice & Company, L.L.C., the financial advisor to the audit committee of the board of directors of SN, no investment banker, broker, finder, financial advisor or other intermediary has been (directly or indirectly) retained by or is authorized to act on behalf of the SN Parties or their Affiliates who is entitled to receive from Buyer any fee or commission in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

assistant: Brokers
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Voting Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, and by the different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when executed shall be deemed to be an original but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

assistant: Counterparts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company and the Engine Group shall be responsible for their own fees and expenses in connection with this Agreement and all matters relating hereto; provided , however , that the Company, promptly following its receipt from Engine after the date of this Agreement of a reasonably detailed invoice evidencing the Engine Group’s reasonable, documented out-of-pocket fees and expenses (including legal expenses) incurred in connection with seeking Board representation at the Company at the 2016 Annual Meeting and the negotiation and execution of this Agreement, shall reimburse the Engine Group for the amounts so incurred provided that such reimbursement shall not exceed $50,000 in the aggregate.

assistant: Expenses
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: An insurer’s obligations to an insured are governed by the contract of insurance between the parties. In contrast, the reciprocal contribution rights and obligations of several insurers covering the same risk do not arise from and are not governed by contract; instead they flow from equitable principles designed to accomplish ultimate justice in the bearing of a specific burden. Nucor, 231 Ariz. at 421-22, 296 P.3d at 84-85 (emphasis in original) (internal citations omitted). Because the current dispute is between two insurers, Nationwide’s obligation to pay its share of the defense costs is not triggered by a breach of the policy or improper denial of the claim, but by a finding that the Auto Policy also provided coverage for the McArdle claims. Id., 231 Ariz. at 422, 296 P.3d at 85 (<HOLDING>). Nationwide also argues that it cannot be held Options: A. holding that an insurers obligation to defend an insured was a property interest subject to prejudgment attachment B. holding that admonishment for breach of insurers obligation to insured is not applicable to equitable share dispute between insurers C. holding that a jury question as to an insurers bad faith arises when facts permit differing inferences as to the reasonableness of the insurers conduct D. holding that the employer was not the insurers agent E. holding that the language of 9133 applies only to insurers and not to the insurers employees

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that admonishment for breach of insurers obligation to insured is not applicable to equitable share dispute between insurers
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: could have been the culpable party” and that “the court’s rulings left the defense with no way to suggest an answer to [the] question” of “who else the cocaine could have come from.” III. Prior to trial, appellant moved to suppress physical evidence obtained as a result of the arrest team’s entry into the apartment. He argued, and contends again on appeal, that as the officers did not have a search warrant for the premises and as he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the apartment as a frequent guest, the entry of the arrest team violated the Fourth Amendment. Citing Morton v. United States, 734 A.2d 178 (D.C.1999), the trial court found that Brown had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the apartment as an invited guest of Powell, the owner of the premises. See id. at 182 (<HOLDING>). The court ruled, however, that although the Options: A. holding that the driver of a ear owned by his wife who had given him permission to use it had a legitimate expectation of privacy under the fourth amendment B. holding that rooming house residents had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the front hallway of the house they shared which was not obviously a rooming house open to the general public C. holding that because social guests of the host generally have a legitimate expectation of privacy appellant met his burden of showing that he had a protectible interest in the house the police entered in order to seize him D. holding that defendant staying in abandoned house had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the house despite having a key to the house and the ability to let people in and out of it E. recognizing record supported determination that defendant lacked expectation of privacy in house

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because social guests of the host generally have a legitimate expectation of privacy appellant met his burden of showing that he had a protectible interest in the house the police entered in order to seize him
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of which will be considered one and the same agreement and will become effective when counterparts have been signed by each of the parties and delivered to each other party (including via facsimile or other electronic transmission), it being understood that each party need not sign the same counterpart.

assistant: Counterparts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: negotiations in good faith, sending them to binding arbitration instead. In addition, the arbitration provision is intended to apply even if, as here, one of the parties continues to be represented by the same counsel who represented that party in the settlement negotiations, contravening the letter and intent of the public policy of Texas as stated in sections 1.101 and 6.603 of the Family Code. Thus, even if I had not concluded that the entire Agreement was void, I would hold that the inclusion of an arbitration provision in the parties cooperative law agreement violates the letter and the spirit of sections 1.101 and 6.603 of the Family Code and that the provision is void an unenforceable as against the public policy of the State of Texas. See In re Poly-America, 262 S.W.3d at 348 (<HOLDING>). Conclusion For all the foregoing reasons, I Options: A. holding that immunity agreements are analogous to plea agreements and are enforced under principles of contract law within the constitutional safeguards of due process B. holding he who seeks equity must do equity C. holding invalid on preemption grounds state statute making agreements to arbitrate franchise claims unenforceable D. holding similar agreement void on public policy grounds E. holding that agreements to arbitrate are valid unless grounds exist at law or in equity for revocation including voidness under public policy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that agreements to arbitrate are valid unless grounds exist at law or in equity for revocation including voidness under public policy
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Company elects not to extend the Term of this Agreement pursuant to Section 1 , the provisions of Section 6 shall not survive the termination of this Agreement. In the case of any other termination of this Agreement, the provisions of Section 6 shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

assistant: Survival
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: 1.1 your use of the youtube website ( the `` website '' ) and any youtube products , channels , software , data feeds and services , including the youtube embeddable video player ( the `` youtube player '' ) provided to you on or from or through the website by youtube ( collectively the `` service '' ) is subject to the terms of a legal agreement between you and youtube .

assistant: None