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: opportunity to observe the demeanor during the witness’ testimony.” Good v. State, 723 S.W.2d 734, 736 (Tex.Crim.App.1986) (en banc). 10 . While we discourage trial judges from waiting to rule as the thirteenth juror until the hearing on a motion for new trial, we acknowledge that a trial judge who tried the case may change his or her mind about the weight of the evidence upon further reflection and hearing argument at the motion for new trial hearing. Under those particular circumstances, the initial trial judge is not precluded from reversing his or her initial ruling. 11 . We reiterate that the defense has no obligation to present proof. 12 . We do not review the successor judge’s decision that the weight of the evidence supported the jury's verdicts. See Dankworth, 919 S.W.2d at 59 Options: A. holding the appellate standard of review in fourth amendment search and seizure cases is limited to determining whether any evidence supports the trial courts finding and the appellate court may only reverse where there is clear error B. holding that a reviewing court has an obligation to satisfy itself of the jurisdiction of the court below C. holding that reviewing court may consider trial evidence in reviewing denial of motion to suppress D. holding that rule 33s thirteenth juror provision is mandatory and requires a trial judge to act as the thirteenth juror E. recognizing that the duty of an appellate court is limited to reviewing whether a trial court performed its obligation as the thirteenth juror and does not include reweighing or reassessing the evidence

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that the duty of an appellate court is limited to reviewing whether a trial court performed its obligation as the thirteenth juror and does not include reweighing or reassessing the 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: judge ruled that [appellant] voluntarily absented himself from the trial, acting of his own volition during the evening, and doing something that found him to be unresponsive the next morning, knowing that the trial would be proceeding.” The district court concluded that a suicide attempt constitutes a voluntary absence from trial. Appellant argues that the district court abused its discretion in relying on the trial judge’s speculative and inadequate findings about his condition based on preliminary information and hearsay. There is no caselaw in Minnesota holding that a suicide attempt constitutes a voluntary absence from trial. But the Eighth Circuit has held that a suicide attempt can constitute a voluntary absence. United States v. St. James, 415 F.3d 800, 804-05 (8th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Crites, 176 F.3d 1096, 1098 Options: A. holding that in order to show unavailability of a witness service of process by the defendant was not required when the witness had jumped bail and fled B. holding that evidence failed to show that the state violated brady and giglio by failing to timely disclose impeachment evidence regarding an alleged plea deal when the defendant failed to show that there was a deal between the state and witness in which witness received consideration for his testimony at the defendants trial C. holding that defendant who fled the state and then attempted suicide failed to show his absence from trial was involuntary D. holding that the trial courts failure to have each bench conference and ruling properly transcribed was not reversible error when the defendant failed to show that he was prevented from presenting any relevant evidence and failed to establish that any prejudice resulted from the absence in the record E. holding that defendant failed to show that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by not objecting to the states leading questions when there was no evidence that such failure was not based on trial strategy

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that defendant who fled the state and then attempted suicide failed to show his absence from trial was involuntary
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: There are no judicial or administrative actions, proceedings or investigations pending or, to the best of Buyer’s knowledge, threatened, that question the validity of this Agreement or any action taken or to be taken by Buyer in connection with this Agreement. There are no Claims or governmental investigation pending or, to the best of Buyer’s knowledge, threatened, or any order, injunction or decree outstanding, against the Buyer that, if adversely determined, would have a material effect upon Buyer’s ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Restatement Agreement is held to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the legality, validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Restatement Agreement shall not be affected or impaired thereby. The invalidity of a provision in a particular jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was accompanied by citations to cases, one of which was pending review in the Florida Supreme Court. Mullins asserts that when the Florida Supreme Court dismissed his case on November 24, 2004, Mullins had two years from that date to seek postcon- vietion relief, and his July 10, 2006 petition for postconvietion relief was therefore timely t to accept jurisdiction of Mullins’ case and dismissed Mullins’ petition for discretionary review. As the Florida Supreme Court explained in Persaud, it has subject-matter jurisdiction to hear a petition for discretionary review based on an appellate court’s per curiam opinion with citations, where one of those authorities is pending review in that Court. Persaud, 838 So.2d at 531-32; see also, Florida Star, 530 So.2d at 288. Jur DCA 1987) Options: A. holding that the court of appeals in applying state law on appeal of a diversity action must apply law of the state as it existed at the time of its decision rather than as it stood at the time the case was decided in district court B. holding that the court had appellate jurisdiction to review the merits of the case because only the collateral issue of attorneys fees remained to be decided on remand to the bankruptcy court C. holding that a circuit court has no jurisdiction to review a district courts discretionary decision not to depart downward from the guidelines but would have jurisdiction if the district court based its decision on the belief that it did not have the authority to depart D. holding that because a claim was never raised in the district court this court would not consider it for the first time on appeal E. holding that the court should not have chosen to accept jurisdiction to review the per curiam opinion as it was it was decided on the authority of another decision that was never reviewed by the court on the merits

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the court should not have chosen to accept jurisdiction to review the per curiam opinion as it was it was decided on the authority of another decision that was never reviewed by the court on the merits
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: by clicking on the accept button and/or continuing to install the software or use the software , products and/or skype websites , you expressly consent to be bound by its terms and conditions and grant to skype the rights set forth herein .

assistant: Contract by using
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: opinion. To assist the court in its review, the court may request additional information or hold additional proceedings. We are confident that in making its determinations, the court will be mindful of the need to balance Respondents’ right to seek discovery in the legitimate pursuit of its claims with Petitioner’s privilege to prevent disclosure of information that might impede important government functions such as conducting criminal investigations, securing the borders, or protecting the public from international threats. The writ of mandamus is dismissed without prejudice. 1 . Other circuits also recognize the law enforcement privilege as covering documents relating to ongoing criminal investigations. See, e.g., Dellwood. Farms v. Cargill, Inc., 128 F.3d 1122, 1125 (7th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); In re Dep’t of Investigation, 856 F.2d 481, Options: A. recognizing a federal mediation privilege B. recognizing privilege under federal rules C. recognizing the law enforcement investigatoiy privilege D. recognizing privilege E. recognizing as a matter of law executive privilege for governor

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing the law enforcement investigatoiy privilege
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company has no Subsidiaries and has never had any Subsidiaries. The Company does not own, and has never owned, beneficially or otherwise, any shares or other securities of, or any direct or indirect equity or other financial interest in, any other Entity. The Company has not agreed and is not obligated to make any future investment in or capital contribution to any Entity. The Company has not guaranteed and is not responsible or liable for any obligation of any other Entity. Neither the Company nor any of its stockholders has ever approved or commenced any proceeding, or made any election contemplating, the dissolution or liquidation of the business or affairs of the Company. There are no outstanding or authorized options, warrants, purchase rights, subscription rights, conversion rights, exchange rights or other Contracts or commitments that could require the Company to issue, sell or otherwise cause to become outstanding any of its capital stock or other equity interests or that otherwise could affect rights or obligations of the holders of the capital stock or other equity interests of the Company.

assistant: Subsidiaries
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: free.” (Id.) Jacobs stated that the day had been long, that jurors did not have a dinner break, and that she felt worn down by the other jurors, one of whom was angry that the trial had continued so long that he would miss a big band concert. (Id. at 14-15, 18.) At the close of the hearing, the trial court denied the motion for new trial, holding that the jury verdict was not impeachable on the basis of Jacobs’ allegations, which involved misconduct inhering in the jury deliberations, rather than from improper influence by external factors. (Id. at 20-24.) Petitioner challenged the denial of new trial on direct appeal, raising only a state-law claim. The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed on the same grounds. (MCOA Op. at 4 (citing People v. Budzyn, 456 S.Ct. 450, 98 L.Ed. 654 (1954) (<HOLDING>); Mattox v. United States, 146 U.S. 140, 149, Options: A. holding that equally consistent circumstances of influence cannot be considered as evidence of undue influence B. holding that the government had not produced evidence that the defendant intended to influence an official proceeding because the evidence showed only that he intended to influence the state civil proceedings that he had brought against his insurance agency C. recognizing that failure to hold a hearing constitutes ah abuse of discretion only where there is evidence that the jury was subjected to influence by outside sources D. recognizing that trial court is obligated to conduct evidentiary hearing only when defendant makes a colorable showing of extrinsic influence E. holding that allegations of influence by an unnamed person outside the jury required the holding of an evidentiary hearing to determine extrinsic influence

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that allegations of influence by an unnamed person outside the jury required the holding of an evidentiary hearing to determine extrinsic influence
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 or other provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced by any rule of Law, or public policy, all other conditions and provisions of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect so long as the economic or legal substance of this Agreement is not materially affected in any manner adverse to any party, including the 3PBs. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced, the parties shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible in a manner mutually acceptable to the parties and the applicable 3PBs in order that the terms of this Agreement remain as originally contemplated to the fullest extent possible.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the Borrower’s Knowledge, all written information that has been made available by any of the Loan Parties to any Secured Party in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the other Operative Documents (such information to be taken as a whole, including, without limitation, updated or supplemented information), or that has been furnished by any of the Loan Parties to any third party in connection with the preparation and delivery by such third party of a report or certificate to any Secured Party, is complete and correct in all material respects, and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements contained therein not materially misleading under the circumstances in which they are made; provided , however , that in each case no representation or warranty is made with respect to projections, assumptions or other forward-looking statements provided by or on behalf of the Loan Parties with respect to the Advance Models other than as provided in Section 4.1(s) .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event that any provision of Sections 12 or 13 is found to be illegal or unenforceable, such provision shall be severed or modified only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable, and as so severed or modified, the remainder of those sections shall remain in full force and effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall not sell, offer for sale or solicit offers to buy or otherwise negotiate in respect of any security (as defined in Section 2 of the Securities Act) that would be integrated with the Exchange of the Original Securities in a manner that would require the registration under the Securities Act of the sale of the Exchange Notes or that would be integrated with the offer of the Exchange Notes for purposes of the rules and regulations of any Trading Market such that it would require shareholder approval prior to the closing of such other transaction unless shareholder approval is obtained before the closing of such subsequent transaction.

assistant: Integration
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: 2. Clerk Fees The SFWMD is further presumptively entitled to recover the Clerk Fees under Appellate Rule 39, which like Rule 54 is read in conjunction with Section 1920. See Fed. R.App. P. 39 advisory committee’s note (observing that “[statutory authorization for taxation of costs is found in 28 U.S.C. § 1920”). Section 1920(1) provides that taxable costs include “Fees of the clerk and marshal.” Appellate Rule 39(e)(4) specifically, allows the district court to tax “the fee for filing the notice of appeal.” Although they are costs of appeal, costs enumerated in Appellate Rule 39(e) are “made taxable in the district court for general convenience.” Fed. R.App. P. 39(e) advisory committee’s note. See also King v. Gowdy, No. 02-CV-75136, 2008 WL 1820837, at *4 (E.D.Mich. Apr. 22, 2008) (<HOLDING>). 3. Mandate Fees Finally, none of the parties Options: A. holding cafeteria management fee is not taxable even if it is bundled with the sales price of food B. holding that because record did not contain notice of appeal in compliance with rule 3 there was no appellate jurisdiction and appeal must be dismissed C. holding that appellate rule 66b does not authorize an interlocutory appeal that fails to comply with appellate rule 14 D. holding that 455 appeal fee is clearly a taxable cost citing section 19201 and appellate rule 39e4 E. holding that section 7263 authorizes this court to review fee agreements when appeal is properly before this court and when fee agreement has been filed with court at time appeal is filed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that 455 appeal fee is clearly a taxable cost citing section 19201 and appellate rule 39e4
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: time frame, beginning with the merger application to the FCC and ending with New Cingular’s refusal to disclose to its customers why they were experiencing service degradations. Moreover, while the claims are made on information and belief, Shroyer explains exactly what it is that he believes constituted the fraudulent statements: New Cingular telling the FCC that it would honor its pre-existing contracts. Thus, the fraud claims have been pleaded with particularity sufficient to allow New Cingular to prepare an answer. 2. Reliance New Cingular next argues that the fraud claims cannot stand because Shroyer cannot prove both actual and justifiable reliance. See OCM Principal Opportunities Fund v. CIBC World Mkts. Corp., 157 Cal.App.4th 835, 864, 68 Cal.Rptr.3d 828 (Cal.Ct.App.2007) (<HOLDING>). Shroyer counters that reliance can be Options: A. holding no justifiable reliance as a matter of law B. recognizing fraud to be a known misrepresentation or a nondisclosure C. holding that 523a2a requires justifiable but not reasonable reliance D. holding standard under section 523a2a is justifiable reliance E. holding that in fraud and nondisclosure claims a plaintiff must show actual and justifiable reliance

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that in fraud and nondisclosure claims a plaintiff must show actual and justifiable reliance
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 not be construed more strictly against one party than against the other merely by virtue of the fact that it may have been prepared by counsel for one of the parties, it being recognized that both Northern and AHIT have contributed substantially and materially to the preparation of this Agreement. The headings of various Sections in this Agreement are for convenience only, and are not to be utilized in construing the content or meaning of the substantive provisions hereof.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: described the manner of the attack), adopted by 2012 WL 1014821 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 23, 2012). In alleging that his face and hand were “smashed” by Defendants Yega and Gibson, (see Compl. § II), the Complaint puts forth more than a de minimis use of force that parallels the degree of force found by other courts to be sufficiently serious under the objective prong. See, e.g., Santiago v. Westchester Cty., No. 13-CV-1886, 2014 WL 2048201, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. May 19, 2014) (finding allegations that a prison official “threw [the] [p]laintiff to the ground, twisted his arm, [and] picked him up off the ground while squeezing his throat ... lead to a plausible inference that the force inflicted was malicious and wanton”); Taylor v. Wilde, No. 11-CV-3608, 2012 WL 2860999, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. July 10, 2012) (<HOLDING>); Phelan v. Hersh, No. 10-CV-11, 2011 WL Options: A. holding that the act of slamming is objectively sufficiently serious to state a claim for relief under the eighth amendment alterations and some internal quotation marks omitted B. recognizing that party is not permitted to use the accident of a remand to raise an issue that it could just as well have raised in the first appeal internal quotation marks and alterations omitted C. recognizing that procedural sentencing error is harmless if the resulting sentence is not longer thanthat to which the defendant would otherwise be subject alterations and internal quotation marks omitted D. holding that independent review is not de novo review of the constitutional issue but only a means to determine whether the state court decision is objectively unreasonable internal quotation marks omitted E. holding that the agency did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant a continuance where the petitioner was only at the first step in a long and discretionary process and relief was speculative at best alterations and internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the act of slamming is objectively sufficiently serious to state a claim for relief under the eighth amendment alterations and some internal quotation marks omitted
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: Schedule 4.22 sets forth a list of all material insurance policies (with respect to the liability, property, workers’ compensation, directors’ and officers’ liability or otherwise) maintained by any Loan Party or with respect to which any Loan Party is a named insured or otherwise the beneficiary of coverage (collectively, the “ Insurance Policies ”). The Insurance Policies are reasonable and customary for the operating, assets and properties of the Loan Parties. Such Insurance Policies are valid, binding and in full force and effect on the date of this Agreement and all premiums due on such Insurance Policies have been paid in full and none of such policies will generate any retrospective premium adjustments, audit premium adjustments, experience-based liability or loss sharing cost adjustment affecting any Loan Party after the date hereof. No Loan Party has received any written notice of cancellation or intent to cancel, or increase or intent to increase premiums, with respect to such Insurance Policies. Schedule 4.22 also contains a list of all pending claims filed by any Loan Party with any insurance company, any instances within the previous three years of a denial of coverage of any Loan Party by any insurance company and any issuances of reservation of rights letters with any insurance company with respect to the defense of any claims.

assistant: Insurances
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: violated professional probation; and refused to cooperate with disciplinary proceedings. Respondent has not participated in Minnesota’s disciplinary proceedings, and we therefore deem her misconduct conclusively established. See Roff, 581 N.W.2d at 34-35 (finding that an attorney’s misconduct was conclusively established by another state’s final adjudication where the attorney failed to participate in Minnesota’s disciplinary proceedings). We have held that “misappropriation of client funds is particularly serious misconduct and usually warrants disbarment absent clear and convincing evidence of substantial mitigating factors.” In re Rhodes, 740 N.W.2d 574, 579 (Minn.2007) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted); accord In re Fairbairn, 802 N.W.2d 734, 742-47 (Minn.2011) (<HOLDING>); In re Rooney, 709 N.W.2d 263, 272 (Minn.2006) Options: A. holding that in a case where a suspended attorney commingled funds between his attorney trust account and attorney business account and the funds could not be traced claimants state of new jersey and clients security fund reached an amicable agreement to divide the funds equally B. holding that a client is vicariously liable for an attorneys allegedly intentional tortious conduct if the attorney acted as the clients agent C. holding that an attorney should not be disbarred for misappropriation of client funds where there were no aggravating factors the attorneys clients did not suffer actual harm and the attorney established several mitigating factors D. holding that ambiguous agreement between attorney and client must be construed in the clients favor E. holding that when an attorney represents multiple clients and a dispute between the attorney and one client later occurs there is a waiver of the privilege but only by the client asserting the liability

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an attorney should not be disbarred for misappropriation of client funds where there were no aggravating factors the attorneys clients did not suffer actual harm and the attorney established several mitigating factors
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 door. They heard somebody say come in. * * * [T]here should be some type of obligation on the police officers to at least announce who they are before entering the premises [.]” The state appeals, arguing that defendant consented to the officers’ entry into his apartment and that the “knock and announce” rule does not apply. Defendant responds that the trial court was correct in concluding that the officers should have announced their identity before entering and that he did not consent to the officers’ entry because Jackson, not defendant, told the officers to “come in.” The “knock and announce” rule is required in Oregon by ORS 133.575(2), and by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 US 927, 930, 115 S Ct 1914, 131 L Ed 2d 976 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Under the rule, officers must first knock and Options: A. holding that padilla does not announce a new rule of constitutional criminal procedure and listing in footnotes three eases finding that padilla announced a new rule of criminal procedure and seven cases finding that padilla is simply the application of an old rule B. recognizing rule C. holding that commonlaw knock and announce rule is part of the fourth amendment reasonableness inquiry D. holding res judicata and statutes of limitations necessarily circumscribe the retroactive application of the rule we announce today E. recognizing that several circuits have recently announced alleyne does announce a new rule of constitutional law not made retroactive by the supreme court emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that commonlaw knock and announce rule is part of the fourth amendment reasonableness inquiry
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 Borrower shall, and shall cause each of its Subsidiaries to, pay and perform its material obligations before the same become delinquent or in default, including tax liabilities, except where (a) (i) the validity or amount thereof is being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings, and (ii) the Borrower or such Subsidiary has set aside on its books adequate reserves with respect thereto in accordance with GAAP, or (b) the failure to pay or perform pending such contest could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: The Evaluation Material will be used by Investor solely in connection with its evaluation of a possible Transaction, and not for any other purpose whatsoever. Neither Investor nor any of its Representatives shall, directly or indirectly, (x) market or use (other than as permitted by the Agreement) any Evaluation Material, Notwithstanding the return or destruction of Evaluation Material, Investor will continue to be bound by its obligations of confidentiality hereunder respecting Evaluation Material, including without limitation, with respect to oral Evaluation Material and their obligation not to use any Evaluation Material for any purpose other than as specifically permitted in this Agreement.

assistant: Yes
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: interest in inventory and a subsequent unperfected security interest in a painting placed with the gallery for sale on consignment. The law does not support the trial judge’s decision. The Florida UCC explicitly provides that a perfected security interest in goods takes priority over all subsequently perfected and unperfected security interests in the same goods. § 679.322(1), Fla. Stat. (2009). Florida law also explicitly provides that a consign- or’s interest in goods placed for sale with a consignee who routinely sells such goods is merely an unperfected security interest subject to the claims of those with prior perfected security interests. See §§ 679.319 and 679.322(l)(b), Fla. Stat. (2009); see also In re Corvette Collection of Boston Inc., 294 B.R. 409, 414 (Bkry.S.D.Fla.2003) (<HOLDING>). The consignor in this case could have Options: A. holding that ucc impliedwarranty action requires pleading of facts in respect to sale of goods B. holding that a statement of conditional sale of goods can be filed with the state auditor before the delivery of goods where statute says the statement must be filed within ten days of delivery of goods C. holding that a buyer who purchases goods subject to an express warranty that the goods are free from all liens takes free of any unperfected security interest D. holding that as to consigned goods presumption is that goods are held by consignee on sale or return basis subject to claims of consignees creditors E. holding that a creditors pmsi in goods sold to debtors did not survive consolidation of the original installment contract with a later contract for the purchase of additional goods

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that as to consigned goods presumption is that goods are held by consignee on sale or return basis subject to claims of consignees creditors
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 — indeed, contrary to — her prior deposition testimony that she could not perform the “picker” job, either with or without reasonable accommodation. As the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently explained,' It is well-settled that “[pjarties to a motion for summary judgment cannot create sham issues of fact in an effort to defeat summary judgment.” American Airlines, Inc. v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, Inc., 114 F.3d 108, 111 (8th Cir.1997). Consequently, a party should not be allowed to create issues of credibility by contradicting his own earlier testimony. Ambiguities and even conflicts in a deponent’s testimony are generally matters for the jury to sort out, but a district court may grant summary judgment where a party’s sudden and unexpla 18-22 (N.D.Iowa May 6, 1999) (<HOLDING>); Waitek v. Daikon Shield Claimants Trust, 908 Options: A. holding that an affidavit and deposition testimony are not blatantly contradictory where the two statements can possibly be consistent with one another B. holding that plaintiffs affidavit submitted at summary judgment stage and contradicting earlier deposition testimony should not be considered C. holding that the court could not conclude that the plaintiffs deposition testimony was so contradictory of the statements contained in plaintiffs affidavit as to foreclose the affidavits use for summary judgment purposes D. holding that plaintiffs affidavit failed to fall within the exception stated in camfield tires inc v michelin tire corp 719 f2d 1361 8th cir1983 that an affidavit contradicting the prior deposition testimony of the affiant but containing an adequate explanation for the disparity may create a genuine issue of fact because plaintiffs deposition testimony was so contradictory from the statements contained in her affidavit E. holding that facts alleged in an employees affidavit were insufficient to raise an issue of fact for the purposes of defeating a summary judgment where the affidavit contradicted the employees earlier deposition statements

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the court could not conclude that the plaintiffs deposition testimony was so contradictory of the statements contained in plaintiffs affidavit as to foreclose the affidavits use for summary judgment purposes
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 Participants in this Executive Incentive Plan are those officers having the titles of (i) President or Executive Vice President (“NEO Participants”), or (ii) Senior Vice President (“SVP Participants”) and who have been designated as Participants by the Committee.

assistant: Participations
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: There are no pending actions, proceedings, or investi- gations pending or, to the knowledge of the Sellers, threatened against Mind Solutions Inc., and neither Mind Solutions Inc. nor the Sellers know or have any reason to know of any basis for any such action, proceeding, or investigation. There is no event or condition of any kind or character pertaining to the business, assets, or prospects of Mind Solutions Inc. that may materially and adversely affect such business, assets or prospects other than as disclosed in VOIS's reports filed with the SEC. VOIS reports filed with the SEC reflect one outstanding judgment in excess of $150,000.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at *4, 2001 U.S. Dist LEXIS 22783, at *13 (N.D.Ill. Sept. 28, 2001) ("Because 'this is not one of the rare cases in which the [plaintiff’s] impairments tire so severe that [her] substantial foreclosure from the job market is obvious,' at a minimum she was required to come up with some evidence of the types of jobs in her area from which she would have been excluded.”) (quoting EEOC v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 243 F.3d 1012, 1017 (7th Cir.2001)). 31 . Compare Mondzelewski, 162 F.3d at 785-86 (finding vocational expert's report was sufficient to show the plaintiff was significantly restricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes), with Cade v. Consol. Rail Corp., No. Civ.A. 98-5941, 2002 WL 922150, at *11-12 (E.D.Pa. May 7, 2002) (<HOLDING>); Balls v. AT & T Corp., 28 F.Supp.2d 970, 975 Options: A. holding that similar impairments do not create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether her impairment rendered the plaintiff unable to perform a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes within a geographical area to which she had reasonable access B. holding plaintiff not substantially limited in working because plaintiff failed to present evidence of disqualification because of knee condition from any jobs in the geographic area to which she had reasonable access C. holding that plaintiff must present such evidence D. holding that the plaintiff had failed to produce sufficient evidence to establish constructive notice because the plaintiff did not present any evidence to establish that the oil was on the floor for any length of time E. holding that the plaintiff had failed to prove the defendants reasons for not hiring the plaintiff were pretext because the plaintiff failed to submit any evidence other than her own subjective testimony that she was more qualified for the job than the selectee

assistant: The best answer is B. holding plaintiff not substantially limited in working because plaintiff failed to present evidence of disqualification because of knee condition from any jobs in the geographic area to which she had reasonable access
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: 1998). The defendant argued that the statute was unconstitutionally vague because it was not clear when an obstruction was significant enough to violate the law. Arciniega, 569 F.3d at 397-98. In holding that the statute was constitutional, the court noted that “the plain language of the statute unambiguously provides that any object that obstructs a clear and full view through the windshield violates Nebraska law.” Id. at 398 (quoting United States v. Ramos-Caraballo, 375 F.3d 797, 801 (8th Cir. 2004)); accord United States v. Yang, No. 8:09CR287, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112285, at *6-8 (D. Neb. Nov. 12, 2009) (Findings and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge), approved and adopted, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112170 (D. Neb. Dec. 3, 2009); cf. State v. Rose, 677 P.2d 1011, 1013-17 (Kan. 1984) (<HOLDING>). The Court finds that Va. Code § 46.2-1054 Options: A. holding that a statute prohibiting the operation of a motor vehicle in such a manner as to likely endanger persons or property is open to conjecture and unconstitutionally vague B. holding that plaintiff who slipped and fell on ice while securing cars on his employers motor vehicle carrier preparing to travel was very close to the vehicle and engaged in a task related to the vehicle and therefore was an occupier of a motor vehicle C. holding that the sensible and popular understanding of what a motor vehicle accident entails necessarily involves the motor vehicle being operated as a motor vehicle D. holding that the statutory definition of motor vehicle is not controlling E. holding that a kansas statute providing among other things that no motor vehicle could be operated on the highways equipped with oneway glass or adhesive film which prohibits or substantially impairs the ability to see into such motor vehicle from the outside was not unconstitutionally vague

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a kansas statute providing among other things that no motor vehicle could be operated on the highways equipped with oneway glass or adhesive film which prohibits or substantially impairs the ability to see into such motor vehicle from the outside was not unconstitutionally vague
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 both types of aggravated robbery, and Terry pled guilty to conspiracy to commit both. Hence, Terry was convicted of conspiracy to commit aggravated robbery in contravention of section 18-4-302(a) and (b). Because aggravated robbery under section 18-4-302(b) is a per se crime of violence under the reasoning of this court’s holding in Alonzo Terry, conspiracy to commit that crime “is itself a crime of violence” under section 18-2-201(4.5). Therefore, under our holding today, Terry must be sentenced according to the provisions of section 16-11-309(1)(a), resulting in a minimum lawful sentence of five years. We thus affirm the court of appeals’ order vacating Terry’s sentence, and we remand this ease for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 . 791 P.2d 374 (Colo.1990) (<HOLDING>). 2 . Section 16-11-309 crimes of violence are Options: A. holding different rule applicable for conviction of second degree murder B. holding that fourthdegree aggravated assault is a violent felony C. holding that consent is not a defense to the charge of second degree assault where the assault occurred in the context of a prison fight between inmates D. holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely if ever can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowners premises E. holding that a reference to the violent crime sentencing statute in the second degree assault statute required automatic imposition of violent crime sentencing for a defendant convicted of second degree assault

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a reference to the violent crime sentencing statute in the second degree assault statute required automatic imposition of violent crime sentencing for a defendant convicted of second degree assault
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: GM is entitled to obtain Licensed Services for the benefit of and use by affiliates of GM. Such affiliates and their respective employees are entitled to use the Licensed Services in accordance with this Agreement and have and are entitled to all rights, benefits, and protections granted to GM pursuant to this Agreement with respect to such Licensed Services. GM is responsible for compliance by its affiliates with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

assistant: General
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: associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.” “Since the [Supreme] Court’s decision in Imbler, courts have taken a functional approach to absolute immunity.” “The analytical key to prosecutorial immunity ... is advocacy-whether the actions in question are those of an advocate.” “If the challenged actions of the prosecutor were not performed in his role as advocate, if they do not relate to an advocate’s preparation for the initiation of a prosecution or for judicial proceedings, then only qualified immunity applies.” But courts will bar § 1983 suits arising out of even unquestionably illegal or improper conduct by the prosecutor so long as the general nature of the action in question is part of the normal duties of a prosecutor. Imbler, 424 U.S. at 413, 430, 96 S.Ct. 984 (<HOLDING>); Jones v. Shankland, 800 F.2d 77, 80 (6th Options: A. holding that while a witness and prosecutor were protected by absolute immunity for their participation in judicial proceedings they were not entitled to absolute immunity on a 1983 claim that they conspired to present false testimony B. holding that prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity from 1983 suits for initiating a prosecution and presenting the case at trial C. holding that the prosecutor is prohibited from knowingly presenting or failing to correct false and material evidence against the defendant D. holding that a prosecutor accused of knowingly presenting false testimony at trial is protected by absolute immunity E. holding that prosecutor cannot obtain conviction with the aid of false testimony where the prosecutor knows such testimony is false

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a prosecutor accused of knowingly presenting false testimony at trial is protected by absolute immunity