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 failure to make a timely objection in the trial court constitutes a waiver of any error. People ex rel. Barrett v. Board of Commissioners, 11 Ill. App. 3d 666, 668 (1973). The record indicates that respondent himself had regularly noticed matters for hearing in this case to be heard before Judge Pirrello in his Winnebago County courtroom. Where the parties consent to holding court in different places, they cannot complain on appeal. Patchen v. Patchen, 364 Ill. 178, 181-82 (1936). Moreover, the validity of an order is determined by where it became effective, and the fact that an order is signed by a judge in a county other than where he is presiding over a case does not affect the validity of the judgment. See People ex rel. Schwartz v. Fagerholm, 17 Ill. 2d 131, 137-38 (1959) (<HOLDING>). We therefore find no merit to respondent’s Options: A. holding that kane county judgment rendered by the presiding judge in de kalb county but ultimately filed in kane county was valid B. recognizing county officers as those whose general authority and jurisdiction are confined within the limits of the county in which they are appointed who are appointed in and for a particular county and whose duties apply only to that county and through whom the county performs its usual political functions C. holding that the grant county prosecutor had a statutory duty to be legal advisor to the county clerk even though she was not embroiled in litigation in which the county was the real party in interest D. holding that both saline county and grant county had jurisdiction to try the appellant for murder where the actual killing occurred in one county but the acts requisite to the consummation of the murder and the subsequent disposal of the body occurred in the other county E. holding that the county attorney had de facto authority and noting that the objection to the county attorneys authority was first made on appeal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that kane county judgment rendered by the presiding judge in de kalb county but ultimately filed in kane county was valid
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: all); and (4) there is no definition of “substantial or motivating factor” by which a sufficiency review can be conducted in this case. Although I agree that the instruction was poorly phrased, I do not read it as loosely as the majority. Rather, I believe the “If you find ..., then you will find.... ” language is tantamount to saying, “If you do not find ..., then you will not find.... ” and, accordingly, that the third sentence of the instruction required a but-for standard of causation. Moreover, because I do not believe that the evidence identified in the majority opinion is sufficient to satisfy a but-for standard, I would sustain the State’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to prove causation. 1 . See Tex. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Hinds, 904 S.W.2d 629, 637 (Tex.1995) (<HOLDING>). 2 . Nor do the first two sentences of the Options: A. holding that it is not the courts role to decide whether an experts opinion is correct B. holding that it was pure speculation that if the preference payment had not been made the vendor would have been included as a critical vendor and the court would have approved it C. holding that the core inquiry is whether the police would have discovered the evidence if the misconduct had not occurred D. holding that correct causation standard is whether employers action would not have occurred when it did had the employees protected communication not been made E. holding that it is not

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that correct causation standard is whether employers action would not have occurred when it did had the employees protected communication not been made
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: while urging that the prosecution should go forward can work a constitutional deprivation.”), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1081, 110 S.Ct. 1812, 108 L.Ed.2d 942 (1990). 46 . Even if issue preclusion were imposed here, it of course would not prevent Snyder from relying on evidence relevant to the earlier rulings to prove a fact other than those conclusively resolved in the prior proceedings. See Simon v. Commonwealth, 220 Va. 412, 258 S.E.2d 567, 572 (1979); Dorn v. Commonwealth, 3 Va.App. 110, 348 S.E.2d 412, 415 (1986). 47 .Virginia law controls here because, in § 1983 proceedings, a prior judgment has the same pre-clusive effect it would have in the courts of the state that issued the judgment. 28 U.S.C. § 1738; Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 96, 101 S.Ct. 411, 415, 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980) (<HOLDING>). 48 . Defendants were not parties to Snyder’s Options: A. holding that collateral estoppel applies to 1983 claims B. holding collateral estoppel elements met considering changed circumstances in the context of an exception to the general rule of collateral estoppel C. holding that the state law of collateral estoppel applies in civil rights actions brought under 42 usc 1983 D. holding that collateral estoppel applies only where the antecedent judgment was a final judgment E. holding that the debtor has the burden of showing that collateral estoppel applies

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that collateral estoppel applies to 1983 claims
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: no party shall be liable to the other for any delay or non-performance of its obligations under this agreement arising from any cause beyond its control including , without limitation , any of the following : act of god , governmental act , war , fire , flood , explosion or civil commotion .

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: This Agreement shall be governed according to the laws of the state of New York. Venue for any legal or equitable action between the Company and the Consultant which relates to this Agreement shall be in the Federal or State courts located in the borough of Manhattan, City of New York, State of New York.

assistant: Venues
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: 378 U.S. 544 84 S.Ct. 1696 12 L.Ed.2d 1028 Andrew J. LEONARDv.UNITED STATES. No. 1017, Misc. June 22, 1964. John G. Clancy, for petitioner. Solicitor General Cox, for the United States. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner was convicted in separate trials and by different juries of forging and uttering endorsements on government checks, 18 U.S.C. § 495, and of transportation of a forged instrument in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 2314. The two cases were tried in succession. The jury in the case tried first—forging and uttering endorsements—announced its guilty verdict in open court in the presence of the jury panel from which the jurors who were to try the second case—transportation of a forged instrument—were selected. Petitioner immediately objected to selecting a jury for the second case from among members of the panel who had heard the guilty verdict in the first case. The objection was overruled, and the actual jury which found petitioner guilty in the second case contained five jurors who had heard the verdict in the first case. The conviction in the second case was affirmed on appeal, 324 F.2d 914, and petitioner now seeks a writ of certiorari. 2 The Solicitor General, in his brief filed in this Court, states that: 3 'The procedure followed by the district court in selecting the jury was, in our view, plainly erroneous. 4 Prospective jurors who have sat in the courtroom and heard a verdict returned against a man charged with crime in a similar case immediately prior to the trial of another indictment against him should be automatically disqualified from serving at the second trial, if the objection is raised at the outset.' 5 We agree that under the circumstances of this case the trial court erred in denying petitioner's objection. Accordingly the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted, the judgment of conviction is reversed, and the cause is remanded for proceedings in conformity with this opinion. 6 It is so ordered. 7 Reversed and remanded.

assistant: 1
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: counsel for defendants if not by the district court’s order — to explore any topic she desired. In fact, she specifically asked about the officers’ prior contacts with VanVorous, contrary to her claim that she was prohibited from doing so. Plaintiff does not explain how she was prevented from conducting further discovery during the course of her state case, and we note that she had approximately six months between the time she filed her complaint and the time defendants’ motion for summary disposition was heard to proceed. But even if plaintiff should have been granted additional time for discovery, plaintiff was required to articulate the support she had for her allegations regarding a factual dispute. See Bellows v Delaware McDonald’s Corp, 206 Mich App 555, 561; 522 NW2d 707 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Here, plaintiff provides no basis on which Options: A. holding that when the nonmoving party requests a delay in ruling on a summary judgment motion until further discovery may be completed the party must demonstrate the likelihood that further discovery will uncover additional relevant evidence B. holding that the nonmoving party must show how additional discovery will defeat the summary judgment motion ie create a genuine dispute as to a material fact and that the nonmoving party must show that he has diligently pursued discovery of the evidence in question C. holding that where a party opposes a motion for summary disposition on the ground that discovery is incomplete the party must at least assert that a dispute does indeed exist and support that allegation by some independent evidence D. holding that the nonmoving parly must show how additional discovery will defeat the summary judgment motion ie create a genuine dispute as to a material fact and that the nonmoving party must show that he has diligently pursued discovery of the evidence in question E. holding that to survive a motion for summary judgment a party must make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that partys case and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where a party opposes a motion for summary disposition on the ground that discovery is incomplete the party must at least assert that a dispute does indeed exist and support that allegation by some independent 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: or even every valid governmental purpose, is an appropriate reason for breaching grand jury secrecy.” Id. at 480, 103 S.Ct. 3164. It goes without saying that the district court’s inherent authority does not include the power to contravene or circumvent an “express grant of or limitation on the ... court’s power contained in a rule or statute.” Dietz v. Bouldin, — U.S.-, 136 S.Ct. 1885, 1892, 195 L.Ed.2d 161 (2016); see also Carlisle v. United States, 517 U.S. 416, 426, 116 S.Ct. 1460, 134 L.Ed.2d 613 (1996) (“Whatever the scope of [the court’s] ‘inherent power,’ ,,. it does not include the power to develop rules that circumvent or conflict with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.”); Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250, 254, 108 S.Ct. 2369, 101 L.Ed.2d 228 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Rule 6(e) is an express limitation on the Options: A. holding that the substantial rights inquiry of federal rule of criminal procedure 52b mirrors rule 52as harmless error inquiry except that the burden in the former falls on the defendant to show prejudice B. holding that a district court cannot invoke its inherent authority to circumvent the harmlesserror inquiry required by rule 52a of the federal rules of criminal procedure C. holding that a shotgun pleading is in no sense the short and plain statement of a claim required by rule 8 of the federal rules of civil procedure D. holding that rule 33 of the federal rules of criminal procedure is an inflexible claimprocessing rule that may be waived if not raised E. recognizing the inherent common law authority of courts to promulgate rules of practice and procedure

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a district court cannot invoke its inherent authority to circumvent the harmlesserror inquiry required by rule 52a of the federal rules of criminal procedure
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: other product and service names located on the service may be trademarks or service marks owned by third parties ( the `` third-party trademarks , '' and , collectively with the company trademarks , the `` trademarks '' ) .

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: The provisions of the Grant Letter and these Grant Conditions shall extend to any business that becomes a successor to the Company or its subsidiaries or affiliates on account of a merger, consolidation, sale of assets, spinoff or similar transaction with respect to any business of the Company or its subsidiaries or affiliates with which the Grantee is employed, and if this grant continues in effect after such corporate event, references to the “Company or its subsidiaries or affiliates” or the “Employer” in the Grant Letter and these Grant Conditions shall include the successor business and its affiliates, as appropriate. In that event, the Company may make such modifications to the Grant Letter and these Grant Conditions as it deems appropriate to reflect the corporate event.

assistant: Successors
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 term, provision, covenant or restriction of this Plan is held by a court of competent jurisdiction or other authority to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the terms, provisions, covenants and restrictions of this Plan shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated; provided, however, that if such excluded provision shall affect the rights, immunities, liabilities, duties or obligations of the Rights Agent, the Rights Agent shall be entitled to resign immediately upon written notice to the Company.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you have assigned your rights to a music publisher , then you must obtain the consent of such music publisher to grant the royalty-free license ( s ) set forth in this eula or have such music publisher enter into this agreement with us .

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: This Agreement and the Confidentiality and Invention Assignment Agreement contain the entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede all prior or contemporaneous promises, understandings, or agreements, whether written or oral, relating to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may not be changed orally, but only by an agreement in writing, signed by both parties.

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: of success on the merits. Anderson challenges the district court’s conclusion about reasonable accommodation. “A reasonable accommodation of an employee’s religion is one that ‘eliminates the conflict between employment requirements and religious practices.’ ” Wright v. Runyon, 2 F.3d 214, 217 (7th Cir.1993) (quoting Ansonia Bd. of Educ. v. Philbrook, 479 U.S. 60, 70, 107 S.Ct. 367, 93 L.Ed.2d 305 (1986)). However, it is well settled that “Title VII ... requires only reasonable accommodation, not satisfaction of an employee’s every desire.” Rodriguez v. City of Chicago, 156 F.3d 771, 776 (7th Cir.1998) (internal citations omitted). Further, a finding of reasonable accommodation is a finding of fact entitled to deference. See Redmond v. GAF Corp., 574 F.2d 897, 903 (7th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>). Anderson first argues that the district court Options: A. recognizing that mixed questions of fact and law that are essentially factual in nature should be reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard as opposed to the generally administered de novo standard B. holding that the appellate standard of review of ineffectiveness claim is de novo C. holding that a finding of accommodation is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review instead of under a de novo standard D. holding that review of the denial of a motion to compel arbitration is under the de novo standard E. recognizing de novo standard of review

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a finding of accommodation is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review instead of under a de novo standard
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 an amendment and restatement of the Existing Credit Agreement, effective from and after the Effective Date. The execution and delivery of this Agreement shall not constitute a novation of any indebtedness or other obligations owing to the Lenders or the Administrative Agent under the Existing Credit Agreement based on facts or events occurring or existing prior to the execution and delivery of this Agreement. On the Effective Date, the credit facilities described in the Existing Credit Agreement, shall be amended, supplemented, modified and restated in their entirety by the facilities described herein, and all loans and other obligations of the Borrower outstanding as of such date under the Existing Credit Agreement, shall be deemed to be loans and obligations outstanding under the corresponding facilities described herein, without any further action by any Person, except that the Administrative Agent shall make such transfers of funds as are necessary in order that the outstanding balance of such Loans, together with any Loans funded on the Effective Date, reflect the respective Revolving Credit Exposure of the Lenders hereunder.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the ADA. See McKay, 110 F.3d at 373 (citing Jasany v. United States Postal Serv., 755 F.2d 1244, 1249 (6th Cir.1985)) (rejecting the plaintiffs ADA claim because her impairment “disqualified] her from only the narrow range of assembly line manufacturing jobs that require repetitive motion or frequent lifting of more than ten pounds,” and thus did “not significantly restrict her ability to perform a broad range of jobs in various classes”); Thompson, 121 F.3d at 540 (finding that a registered nurse’s inability to lift more than 25 pounds on a regular basis did not render her disabled because she presented “no evidence that the restrictions on her ability to perform total patient care preclude[d] her from ... an entire class of jobs”); Ray v. Glidden Co., 85 F.3d 227, 229 (5th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Gutridge v. Clure, 153 F.3d 898, 900-01 (8th Options: A. holding that evidence that plaintiff could walk only four hours a day was insufficient as a matter of law to prove that she was disabled B. holding that an individual whose ability to lift is substantially impaired qualifies as a disabled person within the meaning of the ada C. holding that the plaintiffs evidence that his back injury precluded him from performing at least 50 of the jobs previously available to him was enough to classify him as disabled under the ada D. holding that a plaintiff whose lifting restrictions allowed him to lift 50pound containers for a maximum of three to four hours a day did not render him disabled under the ada because the restrictions only prohibited him from performing one of the discrete tasks associated with the single particular job of a loading truck driver E. holding that the plaintiff who was under a 40pound lifting restriction was not disabled as defined by the ada and listing five cases from various circuits including our own in which courts have held that weight restrictions alone do not render a plaintiff disabled

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a plaintiff whose lifting restrictions allowed him to lift 50pound containers for a maximum of three to four hours a day did not render him disabled under the ada because the restrictions only prohibited him from performing one of the discrete tasks associated with the single particular job of a loading truck driver
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 parties do not dispute that Davey or DLS insisted that Shaffer return a signed contract to DLS and that in July of 2000 counsel for Shaffer did so. The parties also do not dispute that Shaffer continued to ship Martin Brower freight brokered by DLS in the two travel lanes at least until November of 2000. Thus, Davey has asserted sufficient facts on the issue of acceptance by performance. See Ivas v. Reardon, 265 Mass. 367, 370-70 (stating whether offer accepted before its withdrawal question of fact for the jury to decide). See also Thomas v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 39 Mass.App.Ct. 537, 538 (finding material questions of fact on the issue of acceptance). Cf. Unisys Finance Corporation v. The Allan R, Hackel Organization, Inc., 42 Mass.App.Ct. 275, 282 (1997) (<HOLDING>). Since DLS continued to use Shaffer until Options: A. holding it is a question of fact B. holding whether defendant revoked certificate of acceptance is question of fact C. holding that estoppel was a question of fact D. holding the question of whether insurance companys requests were reasonable under policy language was a fact question E. holding that generally the question of waiver and estoppel is a question of fact

assistant: The best answer is B. holding whether defendant revoked certificate of acceptance is question of fact
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: for clarity and notwithstanding the foregoing , those disputes relating to , arising out of , or in any way in connection with your rights of privacy and publicity are not excluded disputes .

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: findings to support its statute of repose defenses but challenged the jury’s finding that the acid addition system was not designed by an Occidental employee who was a licensed or registered engineer. Occidental asserted that it conclusively proved the opposite. It further asserted that it conclusively proved alternative elements of its statute of repose defense on which it failed to request a jury finding: that the system was planned by an Occidental employee licensed in engineering and that it was inspected by an Occidental employee licensed in engineering. A statute of repose provides an affirmative defense, and Occidental bore the burden of proving all factual requisites to the application of the statutes of repose. See Ryland Group, Inc. v. Hood, 924 S.W.2d 120, 121 (Tex.1996) (<HOLDING>); Nexen Inc. v. Gulf Interstate Eng’g Co., 224 Options: A. holding defendant bears burden of establishing affirmative defense of official immunity B. holding that defendant bore burden of establishing right to summary judgment on basis of statute of repose defense C. holding that the introduction of a psychiatric examination was harmless even though the state bore the burden of establishing future dangerousness D. holding that statute was one of repose because it embodies the most distinctive characteristic of a statute of repose the barring of the right to bring an action rather than the remedy prescribed E. holding that provision has the characteristics of a statute of repose

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendant bore burden of establishing right to summary judgment on basis of statute of repose 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 13-CV-3098, 2014 WL 148631, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2014) (same), aff'd, 588 Fed.Appx. 57 (2d Cir.2014), However, the savings statute does not apply to claims that were dismissed for lack -‘of- - personal jurisdiction. See N.Y. C.P.L.R. 205(a) (providing that this section applies to. “an action [that] is timely commenced and is terminated- in any other manner than ... a failure to obtain personal jurisdiction over [a] defendant”); Midwest Mem’l Grp., LLC v. Int’l Fund Servs. (Ir.) Ltd., No. 10-CV-8660, 2011 WL 4916407, at *6-(S.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2011) (noting that § 205(a)’s' “tolling provisions are not applicable where a prior action against the same defendant ha[d]’been terminated for lack- of personal jurisdiction”); Jacquez v. Campouerde, 309 A.D.2d 903, 766 N.Y.S.2d 89, 89 (2003) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the savings statute applies Options: A. holding that district court appropriately dismissed suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when the case was moot B. holding that the proper ground for dismissal of a 1983 action in which the plaintiff has failed to establish state action is lack of jurisdiction C. holding that the case must be dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction where notice of appeal was untimely D. holding that in the context of the federal tort claims act claims dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds are not dismissed for lack of jurisdiction but for the existence of a defense E. holding that because a court previously dismissed an action against the defendant for lack of personal jurisdiction the plaintiff was not entitled to inyoke the sixmonth extension contained in 205a to recommence his terminatedaction

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that because a court previously dismissed an action against the defendant for lack of personal jurisdiction the plaintiff was not entitled to inyoke the sixmonth extension contained in 205a to recommence his terminatedaction
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: impractical. First, the creditor presents the check, which is authorized by 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(11). Then, as it is being honored by the debtors’ bank, the creditor would have to withdraw the presentment (wait— wasn’t that presentment legal?) before the debtors’ bank transmits the funds. To do this, the creditor would have to know when the funds are being wired to its account, or perhaps to an account in an intermediate corresponding bank, all of which is an unreasonable expectation in light of the sophisticated electronic pathways traveled by today’s money. Alternatively, the creditor could present the check but instruct the bank to dishonor the check, because dishonor is also allowed by 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(ll). But those instructions would be contrary to a legal presentment, and th (<HOLDING>). This is a question of fact requiring an Options: A. holding secured creditors refusal to turn over property of debtors estate to debtor upon demand constituted an exercise of control over such property in violation of automatic stay B. holding pursuant to bankruptcy rule 7004b9 that because the creditor mailed the complaint and summons to the debtors attorney and to the address listed in the debtors bankruptcy petition service of process was sufficient even if the debtors were out of the country and did not actually receive notice of the complaint and summons C. holding that the filing of an adversary proceeding in the same court sis debtors petition but different bankruptcy case violated the automatic stay D. holding that payments made by third parties on behalf of debtors are disbursements notwithstanding the debtors lack of control over the funds E. holding creditor willfully violated the automatic stay in refusing after notified of debtors bankruptcy filing to turn over debtors funds in his possession

assistant: The best answer is E. holding creditor willfully violated the automatic stay in refusing after notified of debtors bankruptcy filing to turn over debtors funds in his possession
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 several counterparts and by each party on a separate counterpart, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. In proving this Agreement, it shall not be necessary to produce or account for more than one such counterpart signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Agreement by facsimile or electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this 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: This Agreement, the terms of Consultant’s Engagement, and any contest, dispute, controversy or claim arising therefrom or relating thereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas, without regard to its conflict of laws principles.

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: Acito, 47 F.3d at 52 (quotation omitted). Moreover, the Class Complaint is silent as to how IAC’s decision to remit tax on the wholesale price it paid for rooms, rather than on the full retail price paid by customers, contributed to the deterioration of its relationships with hotel chains or customers. Although the Complaint advances other alleged misstatements (CC ¶¶ 44-48, 53, 56, 57-59, 74), none of these are accompanied by particularized facts explaining-why plaintiffs believe that the statements were fraudulent. See, e.g., CC ¶ 44 (“We are convinced that this merger [with IAC] will enhance the growth prospects for Hotels.com....”); CC ¶45 (“[W]e had a great quarter. Travel revenue was up 93% and EBITDA for tra ing Plan v. Philip Morris Cos., 75 F.3d 801, 811 (2d Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Duane Reade, 2003 WL 22801416, at *6, aff'd Options: A. holding that nyseg telling its investors that it would not compromise its financial integrity was not actionable under the securities laws B. holding that expressions of puffery and corporate optimism do not give rise to securities violations C. holding that such information is not material under securities law D. holding that accurate statements about past performance are not actionable under the securities laws E. holding that puffery is not actionable under the securities laws

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that puffery is not actionable under the securities 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: This Agreement, and all questions relating to its validity, interpretation, performance and enforcement, as well as the legal relations hereby created between the parties hereto, shall be governed by and construed under, and interpreted and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of Minnesota applicable to contracts executed in and to be performed in that State.

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: Weatherford US is a limited liability company duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Delaware and has all requisite corporate power and authority to own, lease and operate its properties and to carry on its business as now conducted. Weatherford CA is a corporation duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the Province of Alberta, and has all requisite corporate power and authority to own, lease and operate its properties and to carry on its business as now conducted. The Weatherford Entities are duly qualified or authorized to do business as a foreign corporation and are in good standing under the laws of each jurisdiction in which it owns or leases real property in connection with the Weatherford Business and each other jurisdiction in which the conduct of the Weatherford Business or the ownership of their respective properties related to the Weatherford Business requires such qualification or authorization, except where the failure to be so qualified, authorized or in good standing would not have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Organizations
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 Operative Documents to which the Borrower is a party delivered on or prior to the date hereof or the Delivery Date, as the case may be, each constitute legal, valid and binding obligations of the Borrower enforceable against the Borrower in accordance with the terms thereof except as such may be limited by equitable principles or applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other similar laws affecting creditors’ rights generally.

assistant: Enforceability
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: was in "early 1995.” (Dahan Deck, ¶ 1.) "To acquire ownership of a trademark,” however, "it is not enough to have invented the mark first”; instead, "the party claiming ownership must have been the first to actually use the mark in the sale of goods or services.” Sengoku Works Ltd. v. RMC Int’l, Ltd., 96 F.3d 1217, 1219 (9th Cir. 1996), as modified, 97 F.3d 1460 (9th Cir. 1996). 33 . The fact that plaintiff only recently acquired the mark through an assignment from its initial registrant — which appears to have been motivated primarily by plaintiffs desire to secure priority over defendants — does not detract from the validity of the assignment. See Glow Industries, 252 F.Supp.2d at 982 (citing Carnival Brand Seafood Co. v. Carnival Brands, Inc., 187 F.3d 1307, 1309 (11th Cir. 1999)) (<HOLDING>); and Money Store v. Haniscorp Finance, Inc., Options: A. holding over B. holding that an assignment to achieve priority over a rival was valid C. holding plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the validity of an assignment from mers to bac because she was not a party to the assignment and the assignment did not affect her underlying obligation to make timely payments D. holding assignment of a mortgage was not subject to article 9 E. holding that a wifes interest in property has priority over a general creditor

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an assignment to achieve priority over a rival was valid
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: by auto and several motor vehicle offenses. The evidence at trial indicated that his BAC at the time of the accident was .253%. Id. at 5, 671 A.2d 1045. The defendant there argued that the court erred in “instruct[ing] the jurors that if they found defendant’s blood alcohol level was 0.10 percent or higher they could presume recklessness.” Id. at 12, 671 A.2d 1045. We found that the court “never mentioned a presumption, but merely told the jurors that if they found this level of blood alcohol, it was one factor from which they could infer recklessness. This was proper.” Ibid. Where alcohol is presented as evidence of recklessness, the State must present evidence of the defendant’s BAC at the time of the incident. State v. Casele, 198 N.J.Super. 462, 472, 487 A.2d 765 (App.Div.1985) (<HOLDING>). Here, however, although the State argued that Options: A. holding that the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate retaliation for activities that occurred two years prior to the termination B. holding in part that awareness of resale activities together with evidence of kickback relationship is sufficient to support conviction for conspiracy to distribute C. holding that evidence of intoxication together with the circumstances of the accident were sufficient to demonstrate recklessness D. recognizing that circumstantial evidence alone can be sufficient to demonstrate a defendants guilt E. holding that red flags along with the defendants positions within the company were sufficient to demonstrate scienter

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that evidence of intoxication together with the circumstances of the accident were sufficient to demonstrate recklessness
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: WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL . EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY OR THEREBY (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER THEORY). EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PARTY HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PARTY WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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 PARTY HERETO IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY AGREES THAT IT WILL NOT COMMENCE ANY ACTION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING OF ANY KIND OR DESCRIPTION, WHETHER IN LAW OR EQUITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT OR IN TORT OR OTHERWISE, IN ANY WAY RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS RELATING HERETO OR THERETO, IN ANY FORUM OTHER THAN THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK SITTING IN NEW YORK COUNTY AND OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, AND ANY APPELLATE COURT FROM ANY THEREOF, AND EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY SUBMITS TO THE JURISDICTION OF SUCH COURTS AND AGREES THAT ALL CLAIMS IN RESPECT OF ANY SUCH ACTION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING MAY BE HEARD AND DETERMINED IN SUCH NEW YORK STATE COURT OR, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN SUCH FEDERAL COURT. EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO AGREES THAT A FINAL JUDGMENT IN ANY SUCH ACTION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING SHALL BE CONCLUSIVE AND MAY BE ENFORCED IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS BY SUIT ON THE JUDGMENT OR IN ANY OTHER MANNER PROVIDED BY LAW. NOTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT OR IN ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT SHALL AFFECT ANY RIGHT THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT, ANY LENDER OR ANY L/C ISSUER MAY OTHERWISE HAVE TO BRING ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING TO ENFORCE ANY AWARD OR JUDGMENT OR EXERCISE ANY RIGHT UNDER THE COLLATERAL DOCUMENTS OR AGAINST ANY COLLATERAL OR OTHER PROPERTY OF ANY LOAN PARTY IN ANY OTHER FORUM IN WHICH JURISDICTION CAN BE ESTABLISHED.

assistant: Submission To 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: With respect to actions for equitable relief brought pursuant to Section 6.1.7 or 12.1.4(e), each Party (i) irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts sitting in England, with respect to actions or proceedings arising in whole or in part out of, related to, based upon or in connection with this Agreement or the subject matter hereof; (ii) agrees that all claims in respect of such actions or proceedings may be heard and determined only in any such court; and (iii) agrees not to bring any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement in any other court (except to the extent required to enforce an order, judgment or ruling for equitable relief in an action brought pursuant to Section 6.1.7 or 12.1.4(e) issued by a court sitting in England). Each Party waives any defense of inconvenient forum to the maintenance of any action or proceeding so brought and waives any bond, surety or other security that might be required of the other Party with respect thereto.

assistant: Jurisdictions
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: case violates the Due Process Clause was certainly an open question before Cage.” Adams, 41 F. 3d, at 178; see also Gaines, supra, at 606-607 (noting that Cage led to reversals of numerous convictions that had been based on similar reasonable-doubt instruction); State v. Humphrey, 544 So. 2d 1188, 1192 (La. App.) (citing multiple decisions by Louisiana Supreme Court which had upheld reasonable-doubt instructions like that invalidated in Cage), cert. denied, 550 So. 2d 627 (1989). And our holding that such a misdescription of the burden of proof means that “there has been no jury verdi olding that application of double jeopardy bar to successive noncapital sentencing would not be unfair and would enhance rather than hinder accuracy); Sawyer v. Smith, 497 U. S. 227, 242-244 (1990) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Teague, supra, at 314 (plurality Options: A. recognizing the availability of summary judgment based on absolute prosecutorial immunity B. holding that the rule in caldwell v mississippi 472 u s 320 1985 did not fit within the second teague exception even though it added to an existing guarantee of due process protection against fundamental unfairness C. holding that absolute prosecutorial immunity extends to civil forfeiture proceedings D. recognizing fundamental error as an exception to the general rule of preservation E. holding that rule which provided an additional measure of protection to existing prohibition on prosecutorial remarks that render a proceeding fundamentally unfair was not an absolute prerequisite to fundamental fairness that would fall within the second teague exception

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that rule which provided an additional measure of protection to existing prohibition on prosecutorial remarks that render a proceeding fundamentally unfair was not an absolute prerequisite to fundamental fairness that would fall within the second teague exception
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: Borrowers shall have the right to request a one-time twelve (12) month extension of the Initial Revolving Period and Initial Maturity Date by delivering a written request therefor to Lender no earlier than twelve (12) months prior to the Initial Maturity Date and no later than sixty (60) days prior to the Initial Revolving Period End Date. Lender shall notify the Borrowers within thirty (30) days in writing whether Lender consents to such extension request, which consent it may give or withhold in its sole discretion. If Lender agrees to such extension, the Revolving Period and the Maturity Date shall each be extended for an additional twelve (12) months from the Initial Revolving Period End Date and the Initial Maturity Date, respectively, with no other modifications to the terms of the Agreement or other Facility Documents unless agreed to in writing by the parties thereto, and Borrowers shall pay to Lender, within ten (10) Business Days of Lender’s agreement to extend, an incremental Facility Fee as calculated pursuant to clause (ii) of the definition thereof.

assistant: Terms