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: The parole officer testified that his job was to supervise convicted felons and that Mr. Prieto was one of his supervisees. And during her testimony, Ms. Prieto stated twice that her son was a convicted felon. This testimony did not violate Old Chief or Rule 404(b)(1). Old Chief does not preclude reference to the fact that the defendant has a prior felony conviction; instead, it precludes any discussion of the nature and substance of the felony: “In dealing with the specific problem raised by § 922(g)(1) and its prior-conviction element, there can be no question that evidence of the name or nature of the prior offense generally carries a risk of unfair prejudice to the defendant.” 519 U.S. at 185, 117 S.Ct. 644; see also United States v. Wacker, 72 F.3d 1453, 1472 (10th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). However, there was no Old Chief violation Options: A. holding that a prior nonarizona conviction to be used as a prior felony conviction under the statute must both be for an offense that would constitute a felony in arizona and be classified as a felony in the other jurisdiction B. holding that for sentencing purposes the government does not need to allege a defendants prior conviction or prove the fact of a prior conviction where that fact is not an element of the present crime C. holding that to avoid the risk of unfair prejudice the parties should make use of a redacted record stipulation affidavit or other similar technique whereby the jury is informed only of the fact of a prior felony conviction but not the nature or substance of the conviction D. holding that in determining whether a prior conviction is a violent felony a court generally must look only to the fact of conviction and the statutory definition of the prior offense E. holding that where defendant stipulates to prior felony conviction evidence of the nature of the prior crime is irrelevant and should be excluded

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that to avoid the risk of unfair prejudice the parties should make use of a redacted record stipulation affidavit or other similar technique whereby the jury is informed only of the fact of a prior felony conviction but not the nature or substance of the conviction
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: All calculations of interest and fees under this Agreement and the other Loan Documents for any period (a) shall include the first day of such period and exclude the last day of such period; provided that any Loan that is repaid on the same day on which it is made shall bear interest for one day and (b) shall be calculated on the basis of a year of 365 or 366 days, as appropriate, for actual days elapsed, except that during any period any Loan bears interest based upon the LIBOR Rate, such interest shall be calculated on the basis of a year of 360 days, for actual days elapsed.

assistant: Fees
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 any gifts are subject to sales tax in any jurisdiction and you have not paid the applicable sales tax to the company , then you will be responsible for the payment of such sales tax and any related penalties or interest to the relevant tax authority .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Signatures to this Agreement transmitted by facsimile, telecopy or portable document format (.pdf) shall be binding on the Party transmitting such signatures and such Party shall not use as a defense against the enforceability of this Agreement the fact that such signature so transmitted is not original. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be enforceable against the Party executing and delivering same, and all of which shall constitute a single and enforceable agreement. Any facsimile or portable document format (PDF) signature shall be replaced with an original signature as promptly as practicable .

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: indicating that injunctive relief may be available when the plaintiff challenges the state tax law as being unconstitutional. See Las Animas & San Joaquin Land Co. v. Preciado, 167 Cal. 580, 587, 140 P. 239, 242 (1914) (injunction available to restrain a school district from assessing property taxes on land over which it has no authority); Bueneman v. City of Santa Barbara, 8 Cal. 2d 405, 407, 65 P. 2d 884, 886 (1937) (statutory provision precluding courts from enjoining execution of public laws for public benefit does not apply to claims that a taxing statute is unconstitutional). More recent decisions, however, have held injunctive relief to be precluded. See Modern Barber Colleges, Inc. v. California Employment Stabilization Comm’n, 31 Cal. 2d 720, 723, 192 P. 2d 916, 918 (1948) (<HOLDING>); Aronoff v. Franchise Tax Board, 60 Cal. 2d Options: A. holding that the taxpayer met the claim requirement where the taxpayer first filed a timely letter with the irs that requested a refund and subsequently filed a formal refund claim B. holding that even where taxpayer did not have the financial means to pay all of the taxes owed the taxpayer still willfully evaded tax obligation C. holding that a provision in the unemployment insurance act similar to 1851 prohibited injunctive relief leaving the taxpayer only with the option to pay the tax and seek a refund D. holding that a taxpayer only has a refund right after the irs has credited the refund to other underpaid taxes therefore the refund was not part of the bankruptcy estate E. holding that taxpayer was still required to go through tax refund procedure despite facial constitutional challenge to state intangibles tax

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a provision in the unemployment insurance act similar to 1851 prohibited injunctive relief leaving the taxpayer only with the option to pay the tax and seek a refund
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: order terminating her parental rights. In two po 10-06-00037CV, 2006 WL 1642105, at *2 & n. 2 (Tex.App.-Waco June 16, 2006, no pet. h.) (Vance, J., concurring) (referring to and quoting the House Comm. On Juvenile Justice and Family Issues, Bill Analysis, Tex. H.B. 409, 79th Leg., R.S. (2005)). 3 . Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.405(f) (Vernon Supp.2005). 4 . D.S., 176 S.W.3d at 876 (examining the enacting legislation of section 263.405(f)). 5 . Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 107.013 (Vernon Supp. 2005). 6 . In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534, 544 (Tex.2003). 7 . In re K.L., 91 S.W.3d 1, 13 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2002, no pet.). 8 . M.S., 115 S.W.3d at 546 (footnote omitted). 9 . See Tex Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 11.07, 11.071 (Vernon 2005); see also Ex parte Torres, 943 S.W.2d 469, 475 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (<HOLDING>). 10 . See Tex. Fam.Code Ann § 161.211 (Vernon Options: A. holding on appeal from a habeas corpus denial that counsel was not ineffective for failure to file a notice of appeal because of defendants escape B. holding that defendant may raise claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal only if ineffective assistance is conclusive from the record C. holding that defendants claim for ineffective assistance of counsel due to a conflict of interest was not cognizable on direct appeal D. recognizing that there is a preference for habeas corpus proceedings over remand when the record on appeal does not establish a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel E. holding that rejection of ineffective assistance claim on direct appeal does not bar relitigation of it on habeas corpus to the ex tent that applicant seeks to gather and introduce additional evidence

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that rejection of ineffective assistance claim on direct appeal does not bar relitigation of it on habeas corpus to the ex tent that applicant seeks to gather and introduce additional evidence
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: to aid a crime avoids prohibiting protected speech); see also City of Seattle v. Slack, 113 Wn.2d 850, 855, 784 P.2d 494 (1989) (loitering in a public place with intent to commit prostitution-related crimes is not constitutionally protected). The United States Supreme Court has listed “speech integral to criminal conduct” as one of the traditional categories of unprotected speech. United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460, 468, 130 S. Ct. 1577, 176 L. Ed. 2d 435 (2010). ¶18 Courts in other jurisdictions specifically have concluded that the First Amendment does not protect speech in the furtherance of criminal conduct involving a child, particularly in the context of luring children either in person or over the Internet. See, e.g., United States v. Bailey, 228 F.3d 637, 639 (6th Cir. 2000) (<HOLDING>); People v. Williams, 133 Ill. 2d 449, 551 Options: A. holding that there is no first amendment right of access to presentence reports B. holding that there is no sixth amendment right to jury sentencing C. holding that there is no first amendment or common law right of access to documents which played no role in a judicial decision D. holding that where the first amendment does not protect a certain activity there can be no first amendment right of association to engage in that activity E. holding that there is no first amendment right to knowingly attempt to entice minors to engage in illegal sexual acts

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that there is no first amendment right to knowingly attempt to entice minors to engage in illegal sexual acts
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: Unclaimed amounts shall consist of the amounts of the Deferral Account of a Non-Employee Director that are not distributed because of the Administrator’s inability, after a reasonable search, to locate a Non-Employee Director or his Beneficiary, as applicable, within a period of two (2) years after the Distribution Date upon which the payment of any benefits becomes due. Unclaimed amounts shall be forfeited at the end of such two-year period. These forfeitures shall reduce the obligations of the Corporation under the Plan, and the Non-Employee Director or Beneficiary, as applicable, shall have no further right to his Deferral Account.

assistant: Forfeitures
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 Historical Financial Statements fairly present in all material respects the financial condition and results of operation and cash flows of the Electronic Materials business of Air Products as of such dates and for such periods in accordance with GAAP consistently applied throughout the periods covered thereby (except as otherwise disclosed), subject, in the case of any such unaudited financial statements, to changes resulting from audit and normal year-end adjustments.

assistant: Financial Statements
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 constitutes the entire agreement relating to the matters stated herein, and it cancels and supersedes any prior agreements or understandings that may have existed between Employee and ANSYS with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement except that nothing in this Agreement releases Employee from any previous obligations Employee has under any agreements with ANSYS or its affiliates or subsidiaries including without limitation, the IPP Agreement, the Employment Agreement, or any other agreements protecting ANSYS intellectual property, and all stock option or other equity agreements executed by the Employee or equivalent documentation. No other promise or inducement has been offered to either Party except as set forth herein.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to the first prong of Darland’s holding was this Court’s conclusion that ERISA plan administrators are generally required, like the SSA, to give deference to the opinions of a claimant’s treating physician. That principle has since been rejected by the United States Supreme Court, however. In Black & Decker Disability Plan v. Nord, 538 U.S. 822, 123 S.Ct. 1965, 155 L.Ed.2d 1034 (2003), the Supreme Court held that, while plan administrators may not arbitrarily reject or refuse to consider the opinions of a treating physician, they “are not obligated to accord special deference to the opinions of treating physicians.” Id. at 825, 123 S.Ct. 1965. Thus, the “treating physician rale” followed in Darland no longer applies in the ERISA context. See also Whitaker, supra, 121 Fed. Appx. at 88 (<HOLDING>). This is not to say, however, as Liberty Options: A. holding that the district court is limited to considering the administrative record in reviewing the denial of benefits under an erisa plan B. holding that an employees claim against plan administrator for denied benefits is preempted C. holding that erisa does not preempt the plaintiffs claim that the erisa plan administrator is liable for medical malpractice where the plaintiff premised the claim solely on state law and did not invoke the erisa plan D. holding that district courts order remanding an erisa benefits determination to a plan administrator was nonfinal and therefore not appealable after the remand to plan administrator plan participant still could appeal the district courts decision that erisa preempted her state law claim and if successful she would be able to pursue punitive damage E. holding that an erisa plan administrator is not bound by an ssa disability determination when reviewing a claim for benefits

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an erisa plan administrator is not bound by an ssa disability determination when reviewing a claim for benefits
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: Employee, for and in consideration of the terms of this Agreement, does hereby for Employee, and for Employee’s heirs, personal representatives and assigns, fully and forever release and discharge the Company, the officers, employees, and/or agents of the Company, the members of the board of directors of the Company, and the Company’s benefit plans and its fiduciaries, from any and all claims, demands, damages, actions, rights of action, both known and unknown, costs, loss of wages, expenses, compensation, and any other relief, on account of, or in any way growing out of any events relating to Employee’s employment and/or termination from employment with the Company. This release includes (but is not limited to) any rights or claims that Employee may have under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, which prohibits age discrimination in employment; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991), which prohibits discrimination in employment based on race, color, national origin, religion or sex; the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits discrimination in employment based on disability; the Equal Pay Act, which prohibits paying men and women unequal pay for equal work; or any other federal, state or local laws or regulations prohibiting employment discrimination. This also includes a release of any claims for wrongful discharge arising from the separation of Employee’s employment and any claims under any severance plan of the Company. This release includes both claims that Employee knows about and those which Employee may not know about. Except as set forth in Paragraph 2 of this Agreement, this release also acts as a waiver and release of any rights Employee has to any benefits under the Company’s retirement or other benefit plans. Further, this release does not waive or release any rights or claims that Employee may have under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act which arise after the effective date of this Agreement. Employee agrees that nothing in this Agreement is to be construed as an admission of liability or wrongdoing of any sort by the Company in the negotiation or execution of this Agreement.

assistant: Releases
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 effective as of the Effective Date and, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Sections 10.2 , 10.3 or 10.4 , shall continue in full force and effect, on a country-by-country basis in the Territory, until expiration of all payment obligations hereunder (the “ Term ”). Upon expiration in a given country, Endocyte’s rights in the Licensed Know-How pursuant to Section 1.1 in such country shall become fully paid-up and perpetual.

assistant: Terms
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: Neither Borrower nor any Guarantor shall enter into, or cause, suffer or permit to exist, directly or indirectly, any arrangement, transaction or contract with any Affiliates thereof or with any of the holders of Borrower’s Capital Stock unless (a) such arrangement, transaction or contract is identified on Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof, or (b) such arrangement, transaction or contract is on an arm’s length basis and on commercially reasonable terms.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: to all interested parties.” Id. § 50-11.2; see also id. §§ 50-20, 50-21 (providing similar permissive language with respect to the distribution of marital property). If claims for custody or support are not pursued in the original divorce proceeding, they may be maintained as independent civil actions. See id. § 50 — 13.5(b)(1); e.g., Flitt v. Flitt, 149 N.C.App. 475, 561 S.E.2d 511, 512-13 (2002) (noting that matters concerning child custody and support were pending in another action separate from the divorce proceeding). These separate actions may proceed before or after the divorce is final and regardless of whether a petition for divorce has even been filed. See N.C. GemStat. §§ 50-13.1, 50-13.4; e.g., Baumann-Chacon v. Baumann, 212 N.C.App. 137, 710 S.E.2d 431, 435-36 (2011) (<HOLDING>). However, in the interest of judicial economy, Options: A. holding that the trial court had continuing jurisdiction over all subsequent custody orders once the trial court acquired jurisdiction B. holding in a case considering whether the trial court should have conducted a competency hearing sua sponte that an appellate court may only consider those facts which were before the court when the trial commenced C. holding that utah jurisdiction was proper over washington state resident who commenced proceedings in utah to enforce visitation and custody provisions of divorce decree D. holding that district court had no jurisdiction to consider plaintiffs claims that his constitutional rights were violated in state divorce proceeding E. holding that trial court had jurisdiction to consider custody dispute before a divorce or separation action had commenced

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that trial court had jurisdiction to consider custody dispute before a divorce or separation action had commenced
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 Lender shall have received all fees and other amounts due and payable on or prior to the Effective Date, including, to the extent invoiced, reimbursement or payment of all out of pocket expenses required to be reimbursed or paid by the Borrower hereunder.

assistant: Fees
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: is unsupported by substantial evidence because Commerce relied on the non-cooperation of 110 respondents, which is tantamount to applying adverse facts available to cooperative respondents, and imper-missibly considered the presence of non-de minimis calculated rates for separate rate respondents, including Changzhou Hawd, in the First and Second Administrative Reviews. PL’s Br., ECF No. 132, at 4-11. These arguments remain as unpersuasive as before, when Plaintiffs used them to challenge the same inference in the Second Redetermi-nation. See Second Redetermination, ECF No. 52, at 4 (Commerce making the same inference); Pis.’ Comments on Second Redeter-mination, ECF No. 69, at 15-19 (Plaintiffs making the same argument against it); Changzhou Hawd, - CIT at -, 44 F.Supp.3d at 1385-87 (<HOLDING>). 29 . Plaintiff argues this does not follow Options: A. holding the same for the other separate rate plaintiffs in this action B. holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract C. holding that the respondents statelaw claims are barred by the filed rate doctrine D. holding that under the filed rate doctrine a question regarding reasonable rates should be addressed to the department of insurance and that the rate plaintiff was charged is conclusively presumed reasonable under the filed rate doctrine E. holding that commerces inference of a greater than de minimis separate rate is supported by substantial evidence is not the equivalent of applying afa to separate rate respondents and does not impermissibly consider rates from subsequent stages rather using them permissibly for corroboration

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that commerces inference of a greater than de minimis separate rate is supported by substantial evidence is not the equivalent of applying afa to separate rate respondents and does not impermissibly consider rates from subsequent stages rather using them permissibly for corroboration
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: As a condition to receiving the payments and benefits set forth in Section 4(b) or Section 4(c), Executive shall be required, within 60 days of Executive’s Date of Termination (including, without limitation, a Date of Termination that occurs after the expiration of the Term), to execute, deliver and not revoke (with any applicable revocation period having expired) a general release of claims in a form attached hereto as Exhibit A. To the extent required by Section 19, any payments or benefits that would otherwise have been made during such 60-day period shall not be made and shall be accumulated and paid in a single lump sum on the expiration of such 60-day period.

assistant: Releases
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 amended, modified, or superseded, and any of the terms hereof may be waived, only by written instrument executed by the parties hereto or in the case of a waiver, by the party waiving compliance. The failure of any party at any time to require performance of any provision hereof shall in no manner affect the right at a later time to enforce the same. No waiver by any party of any term continued in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed as a further or continuing waiver of any such breach in any subsequent instance or a waiver of any such breach in any subsequent instance or a waiver of any breach of any other terms contained in this Agreement.

assistant: Amendments
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: Each member of the Engaged Group agrees that it will cause its Affiliates and Associates to comply with the terms of this Agreement. As used in this Agreement, the terms “ Affiliate ” and “ Associate ” shall have the respective meanings set forth in Rule 12b-2 promulgated by the SEC under the Exchange Act and shall include all Persons that at any time during the Restricted Period become Affiliates or Associates of any Person referred to in this Agreement. The obligations of the members of the Engaged Group will be joint and several among such members. Each of the parties hereto acknowledges that it has been represented by counsel of its choice throughout all negotiations that have preceded the execution of this Agreement, and that it has executed the same with the advice of said independent counsel. Each party and its counsel cooperated and participated in the drafting and preparation of this Agreement and the documents referred to herein, and any and all drafts relating thereto exchanged among the parties shall be deemed the work product of all of the parties and may not be construed against any party by reason of its drafting or preparation.

assistant: Construction
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 the Potential Events of Default, no Borrower is in default under any of the Current Loan Documents, nor has any event or circumstance occurred that is continuing that, with the giving of notice or the passage of time, or both, would be a default or an event of default by a Borrower under any of the Current Loan Documents.

assistant: No Defaults
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: are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). The defendants concede that Ricks and Marrie have exhausted their administrative remedies for their sexual assault claims. Def.Br. at 9. It is not clear from the parties’ submissions whether Ricks attempted to exhaust his administrative remedies with regard to his retaliation claim. Various district and appellate courts hold that if a prison’s grievance system does not provide for the administrative award of monetary relief, the grievance system is not “available” to a prisoner. See, e.g., Hollimon v. DeTella, 6 F.Supp.2d 968, 970 (N.D.Ill.1998); Lacey v. C.S.P. Solano Med. Staff, 990 F.Supp. 1199, 1202 (E.D.Cal.1997); Polite v. Barbarin, 1998 WL 146687, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar.25, 1998); see also Lunsford v. Jumao-As, 155 F.3d 1178 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). In Garrett v. Hawk, 127 F.3d 1263, 1266-67 Options: A. holding that bivens plaintiff was not required to exhaust administrative remedies where administrative remedy program provided only for injunctive relief B. holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies by failing to include issue in case brief C. holding that plaintiff could not look to the courts for relief because he did not exhaust his administrative remedies under the adea D. holding that an alien must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking habeas relief from detention E. holding that a plaintiff need not exhaust his administrative remedies to bring a retaliation claim

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that bivens plaintiff was not required to exhaust administrative remedies where administrative remedy program provided only for injunctive relief
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: the deposit of the amount in controversy into the registry of the court. Konover, 511 So.2d at 706. Nevertheless, the non-final order effectively restrains the use of Pi-aneta’s unrestricted assets, the funds in escrow that exceed $167,355.74, plus pre judgment interest, pending the conclusion of the parties’ appeals. Clearly, the amount in excess of the new final judgment, plus prejudgment interest, remains disputed by the Liebermans and, thereby, is being used to improperly secure the collection of a greater award of money damages in the future. The Liebermans’ argument that Pianeta would make the assets unreachable by leaving the country before this court concluded the pending appeals certainly does not provide a legal basis for injunctive relief. See Konover, 511 So.2d at 705-06 (<HOLDING>). We reject the Liebermans’ contention that the Options: A. holding that the trial court erred in entering an order requiring seller to deposit 500000 in escrow pending the outcome of the case despite purchasers claim that recovery may be impaired because seller was ill and if he died the money would be tied up in the estate B. holding assets in escrow C. holding that a defendants counterclaim that is based on the breach of the same maritime insurance contract as the main claim cannot be granted a jury trial because the resolution of the defendants claim would dispose of all or part of the plaintiffs action the net result would be to resolve the case in a jury trial despite the plaintiffs 9h election D. holding that the outcome of the case could have been different if the trial court had imposed the appropriate burden E. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to accept the defendants guilty pleas to two counts of the indictment and stating that even if the trial court erred the error had not prejudiced the defendant because he was found guilty by the jury of the charges to which he intended to plead and the evidence of the other crimes would have been admissible in the trial for the first degree murder charge

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the trial court erred in entering an order requiring seller to deposit 500000 in escrow pending the outcome of the case despite purchasers claim that recovery may be impaired because seller was ill and if he died the money would be tied up in the estate
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: Court explained this concept as follows: It is true, when the defendants ... purchased or erected their breweries, the laws of the state did not forbid the manufacture of intoxicating liquors. But the state did not thereby give any assurance, or come under an obligation, that its legislation upon that subject would remain unchanged. Indeed, ... the supervision of the public health and the public morals is a governmental power, continuing in its nature, and to be dealt with as the special exigencies of the moment may require; and that, for this purpose, the largest legislative discretion is allowed, and the discretion cannot be parted with any more than the power itself. Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623, 669, 8 S.Ct. 278, 31 L.Ed. 205 (1887) (internal citations and quotations omitted) (<HOLDING>). While the owner of land might once have been Options: A. holding that local ordinance prohibiting the sale of beer or wine to persons less than 21 years of age was not preempted by state statute prohibiting the furnishing of any alcoholic beverages to persons under 21 B. holding that the statute qualifies as an exemption 3 statute C. holding that the title of the statute did not limit the reach of the statute D. holding that a state statute that prohibited manufacture of alcoholic beverages was not a taking even though such manufacture was legal before the statute E. holding that the state must prove criminal negligence for its homicide by vehicle statute even though the statute specifically states that any traffic violation is sufficient

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a state statute that prohibited manufacture of alcoholic beverages was not a taking even though such manufacture was legal before the statute
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: may testify and be cross-examined. Nonetheless, because the Board is seized with jurisdiction over Mr. Helferty’s claims, the salient question is the extent to which the court may cause the Board to have an evidentiary hearing be conducted. The government in its reply emphasizes that, by statute, corrections to military records “shall be made under procedures established by the Secretary [concerned.” Def.’s Reply at 2 (quoting 10 U.S.C. § 1552(a)(3)) (internal quotation marks omitted). The government then points to the discretionary nature of the procedures specified in 32 C.F.R. § 723.4(a) relating to whether a personal appearance should be granted in connection with adjudication of an application for relief. Id. at 2-3 (citing Flute v. United States, 535 F.2d 624, 628 (Ct.Cl.1976) (<HOLDING>); Renicker v. United States, 17 Cl.Ct. 611, 617 Options: A. holding that we ordinarily review jury instruction challenges for correction of errors at law B. holding that both as to real and personal property a board of review cannot arbitrarily increase the valuation of the assessor without proof being furnished C. holding that as to the correction of an erroneous application of law a nondeferential standard of review applies D. holding that the air force board for correction of military records had not acted arbitrarily in denying an application for review of a courtmartial conviction without a hearing E. holding that judicial review of decisions of military correction boards is review of the administrative record conducted under the administrative procedure act

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the air force board for correction of military records had not acted arbitrarily in denying an application for review of a courtmartial conviction without a hearing
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 Awards define Change in Control to have the definition assigned to such term in the Company’s Senior Executive Severance Plan. That definition is hereby amended to provide that a Change in Control that would occur pursuant to clause (3) of that definition (e.g., approval by the stockholders of CEC of certain reorganizations, mergers or consolidations of CEC or a statutory exchange of outstanding Voting Securities of CEC) shall only occur if and when the reorganization, merger, consolidation or statutory share exchange contemplated by that clause is consummated.

assistant: Amendments
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 is governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Nevada, without giving effect to its conflict or choice of law principles that might otherwise refer construction or interpretation of this Agreement to the substantive law of another jurisdiction.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement or in the definitive documents for the Transaction, each party hereto will bear its own costs and expenses incurred in connection with the preparation, execution and performance of this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you may not give your rights or your obligations under these terms , feature terms , community rules , or our privacy policy without first getting zynga 's written consent , and any attempt to do so without our consent is void .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Note is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the balance of this Note shall remain in effect, and if any provision is inapplicable to any Person or circumstance, it shall nevertheless remain applicable to all other Persons and circumstances.

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: With power comes responsibility, moral if not legal, for its prudent and restrained exercise; and responsibility implies knowledge, experience, and sound judgment, not just good faith.”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 2163, 128 L.Ed.2d 886 (1994). If the government did in fact promise Bischel at the time of sentencing that it would seek a further downward departure by filing a Rule 35(b) motion and Bischel relied on that promise to his detriment, i.e., he did not appeal his sentence because he believed a further reduction was forthcoming, then we believe he would have satisfied the jurisdictional requirement under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because he would be claiming his incarceration was unconstitutional. See Mabry v. Johnson, 467 U.S. 504, 509, 104 S.Ct. 2543, 2547, 81 L.Ed.2d 437 (1984) (<HOLDING>); Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 262, 92 Options: A. holding that due process requires that defendant be fully aware of direct consequences of guilty plea B. holding that a defendant who has successfully challenged his plea in one ease should be allowed to withdraw his plea in a second case when both cases were part of one negotiated settlement of his charges C. holding only when it develops that the defendant was not fairly apprised of his pleas consequences can his plea be challenged under the due process clause D. holding that where a defendant acknowledged awareness of the consequences of his plea agreement counsels erroneous explanation of the consequences was not prejudicial E. holding that an exercise by the state of its police power is presumed to be valid when it is challenged under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding only when it develops that the defendant was not fairly apprised of his pleas consequences can his plea be challenged under the due process clause
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: the 88R: “The role of all committees is advisory only. Final responsibility in selection rests with the Chancellor.” Ex. M to Dean Decl. at ¶1(4). Furthermore, while Russo was responsible only for Bronx High Schools, the 30R clearly requires the system of assignment to include “city-wide standards and procedures developed and promulgated by the Chancellor as minimum city-wide requirements ____” Ex. L to Dean Decl. at ¶ 11(C). Given this evidence, the Court finds that the Chancellor, not Ms. Russo, possessed final decisionmaking authority as a matter of New York law over the hiring of an AP for Smith High. Therefore, the Board cannot be liable for Russo’s actions insofar as they relate to the promotion process. See Carrero v. New York City Housing Authority, 890 F.2d 569 (2d Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); see also Davis v. City of New York, 1990 WL Options: A. holding that a supervisor cannot be held personally liable for the unconstitutional conduct of a subordinate based on vicarious liability B. holding that the delegation of discretionary authority to supervisors for discipline and promotion constituted a policy or practice sufficient to satisfy the commonality requirement C. holding that the housing authority could not be held liable for the allegedly discriminatory behavior of a supervisor because the supervisors alleged behavior was contrary to stated housing authority policy D. holding that a supervisor who implemented a maternity leave policy that violated the terms of title vii could not be held individually liable E. holding that absent explicit statutory authority a municipality cannot be held liable for punitive damages

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the housing authority could not be held liable for the allegedly discriminatory behavior of a supervisor because the supervisors alleged behavior was contrary to stated housing authority 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: these terms and conditions ( `` terms of service '' ) govern your access to and use of crowdtangle 's website , platform integrations and other features or services ( collectively , our `` services '' ) , and any and all information , text , graphics , photos or other materials uploaded , downloaded , or appearing on the services ( collectively `` content '' ) .

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: 665, 666 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); Wilson v. State, 947 So.2d 1225, 1226-27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). Accordingly, we must determine whether the commencement of Wilson’s trial in this instance should be regarded as a crucial stage of the proceedings requiring the renewal of the offer of assistance of counsel under rule 3.111(d)(5). II. Discussion The beginning of the “trial” in the context of rule 3.111(d)(5) may not be the actual start of trial, but the start of the trial stage. See McCarthy v. State, 731 So.2d 778, 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (concluding a pretrial hearing was the “commencement of the trial stage of the proceedings, since it addressed McCarthy’s ability to competently handle the mechanics of the trial process on his own”); Lamb v. State, 535 So.2d 698, 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (<HOLDING>). The trial stage does not necessarily commence Options: A. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to continue trial three months where although trial was complex and records were voluminous court had already granted two prior continuances and continuance of three weeks was sufficient to prepare for trial B. holding that the defendant was entitled to a pretrial evidentiary hearing on his claim of immunity based on selfdefense C. holding a pretrial hearing on the waiver of counsel conducted three weeks before trial was the start of the trial stage where there were no changes between the pretrial hearing and the trial D. holding the rule was not applicable in a pretrial venue hearing E. holding that even if it could be considered retrospective hearing conducted by trial court on second day of trial was consistent with due process given the lack of a lapse in time the fact that the psychologist who testified at the hearing had interviewed petitioner and prepared a report five weeks before trial and the trial courts direct observation and question of petitioner just before the trial

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a pretrial hearing on the waiver of counsel conducted three weeks before trial was the start of the trial stage where there were no changes between the pretrial hearing and the trial
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: 251 La. 749, 206 So.2d 95 (1968); American Metal Window Co. v. St. Tammany Parish School Bd., 183 So.2d 667, 669 (La.App. 1st Cir.1966). 12 . Duet v. Lucky, 621 So.2d 168, 173 (La.App. 4th Cir.1993) (noting that absent evidence substantiating alleged mistake in intent, no reason exists to look beyond four comers of document); Brown v. Simoneaux, 593 So.2d 939, 941 (La.App. 4th Cir.1992) (noting that "the language of the release is so broad and unambiguous it leaves little to be misunderstood”); Barnhill v. Consolidated Medical, Disability & Life Trust, 569 So.2d 1115, 1117 (La.App. 3d Cir.1990), writ denied, 572 So.2d 93 (La.1991) (finding language of release so broad as to clearly cover liability sued upon); Shepherd v. Allstate Ins. Co., 562 So.2d 1099, 1102 (La.App. 4th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); Watkins v. lohns-Manville Corp., 458 So.2d Options: A. holding plaintiff could not avoid release absent evidence he made reasonable effort to have document read to him B. holding that legislative consent to suit must be by clear and unambiguous language in either a statute or by other express legislative permission C. holding that to be valid and binding a release must be executed with full knowledge of the import of what is being signed and with the intent to discharge from liability D. holding that inaction was not a sufficient manifestation of consent to support a release E. holding unambiguous release executed by literate intelligent party could not be nullified absent vice of consent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding unambiguous release executed by literate intelligent party could not be nullified absent vice of consent