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: require the same proof and level of preparation as those in Premier’s first amended answer. The Sellers’ proposed counterclaims seek much greater and varied damages than Premier’s counterclaims. In addition, the facts underpinning Premier’s counterclaims are distinct from those needed to sustain the Sellers’ proposed counterclaims. To allow the Sellers’ amendments now would unfairly obligate the Buyers to defend against these belated counterclaims, causing them to incur significant additional expenses by extending an already protracted discovery period. Given that the trial of this matter is less than two months away, to allow the proposed amendments at this late stage would impose undue hardship on the Buyers. See, e.g., Serrano Medina v. United States, 709 F.2d 104 (1st Cir. 1983) (<HOLDING>); DeBry v. Transamerica Corp., 601 F.2d 480 Options: A. holding that erroneous admission of improper and prejudicial evidence did not require reversal because the jury would have returned a verdict of guilty against the defendant even without the prejudicial testimony B. holding that where a plaintiff is unaware of the identity of alleged defendants plaintiff should be given an opportunity through discovery to identify the unknown defendants unless it is clear that discovery would not uncover the identities or that the complaint would be dismissed on other grounds C. holding that it was within the trial courts discretion to refuse any additional discovery and that the courts refusal to allow additional discovery was not an abuse of discretion D. holding that entry of summary judgment while a motion for additional discovery was pending should be construed as an implicit denial of the motion for additional discovery E. holding that an eleventhhour amendment that would require extensive additional discovery would be prejudicial to the defendants

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an eleventhhour amendment that would require extensive additional discovery would be prejudicial to the defendants
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: notice of Relator’s claims, they could have intervened earlier, participated fully in the investigation of Relator’s claims and subsequently made more informed decisions as to how to proceed in relation to the federal Government’s suit. The federal Government was duly notified by Relator and decided to intervene; the States were not afforded that necessary opportunity. Compare Lavender Hill Farm, at 2002 WL 31513418, *6 (where the Government has not yet decided whether to intervene in a qui tarn suit, purposes of seal provision were sufficiently frustrated by relator’s failure to file complaint under seal as to warrant dismissal) with Kusner, at 1996 WL 287259, *5 (where the Government had already decided not to intervene in qui tarn s rp. 1995 WL 608462, at *3 (E.D.La. Oct. 16, 1995)(<HOLDING>); Erickson ex rel. United States v. Am. Inst. Options: A. holding that the ninetyday filing requirement is not a jurisdictional prerequisite and is subject to equitable tolling B. holding that challenges to an arrest warrant are not jurisdictional C. holding that in camera filing requirement is jurisdictional and that defects warrant dismissal D. holding that time limit for filing petition for review is mandatory and jurisdictional E. holding that this time requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that in camera filing requirement is jurisdictional and that defects warrant dismissal
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 not such creditor has objected to, has accepted, or has rejected the plan. (b) Except as otherwise provided in the plan or the order confirming the plan, the confirmation of a plan vests all of the property of the estate in the debtor. (c) Except as otherwise provided in the plan or in the order confirming the plan, the property vesting in the debtor under subsection (b) of this section is free and clear of any claim or interest of any creditor provided for by the plan. [11 U.S.C section 1327 (1982).] Nothing in 11 U.S.C. section 1327, or elsewhere in chapter 13 of the bankruptcy code, suggests that confirmation of the chapter 13 plan results in the case being closed or dismissed or a discharge being granted or denied. See also In re Herbert, 61 B.R. 44 (Bankr. W.D. La. 1986) (<HOLDING>) Therefore, there is no termination of the Options: A. holding that refusal to provide chapter 7 debtor transcript because of default on student loan was a violation of the automatic stay based on the plain language of 11 usc 362 B. holding that although the automatic stay only applies to proceedings against the debtor counterclaims seeking affirmative relief against a debtor implicate the automatic stay C. holding that the automatic stay provisions of section 362 remain in full force and effect during chapter 13 proceedings in order to prevent harassment of debtor while he attempts to rehabiliate himself and pay off some outstanding debts D. holding that relief from the codebtor stay is mandated to the extent that the chapter 13 plan does not propose to pay the claim in full E. recognizing that in enacting 362 in 1978 congress significantly broadened the scope of the automatic stay

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the automatic stay provisions of section 362 remain in full force and effect during chapter 13 proceedings in order to prevent harassment of debtor while he attempts to rehabiliate himself and pay off some outstanding debts
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: have explicitly disagreed as to the essential terms thereof. A valid modification of a contract or lease requires “a meeting of the minds of the parties, which must be spelled out, either expressly or impliedly, with sufficient definiteness.” Valcarce v. Bitters, 12 Utah 2d 61, 63, 362 P.2d 427 (1961); see Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 33(1) (1981). Modification of such terms as the amount of rent must be agreed upon in a modification of a lease agreement. As Corbin notes, when parties have not agreed on a reasonable price or a method for determining one, “the agreement is too indefinite and uncertain for enforcement.” Joseph M. Perillo et al., Corbin on Contracts § 4.3, at 568 (rev. ed. 1993); see Pingree v. Continental Group of Utah, Inc., 558 P.2d 1317, 1321 (Utah 1976) (<HOLDING>). Barton and Tsem did not agree as to the Options: A. holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease but providing no more specific time requirement the lessee had a reasonable time to exercise the option within the term of the lease B. holding that plaintiff was entitled to compensation for governments taking of option to renew a lease C. holding that an option to renew at the expiration of the original lease was effectively exercised because the lessees holding over without express notification of renewal was deemed an election to renew the lease D. holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease the lessee was required to exercise the option on or before the last day of the lease E. holding option to renew in lease that provided for rental amount to be negotiated but not to exceed specified amount too vague and indefinite to be enforceable

assistant: The best answer is E. holding option to renew in lease that provided for rental amount to be negotiated but not to exceed specified amount too vague and indefinite to be enforceable
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: Here, however, CNI did not make that choice. CNI’s charter requires board approval to waive sovereign immunity. The charter provides: To sue in its corporate name and, notwithstanding the immunity possessed by the Corporation as a wholly owned corporation of the Chickasaw Nation, to permit by written resolution of the board of directors enforcement of leases, contracts, agreements and mortgage instruments to which the Corporation is a party, against the Corporation in tribal court, or any court of competent jurisdiction by agreement of the board of directors.... MBF argues that CNI’s charter has a sue- and-be sued clause, which expressly waives immunity. Some courts have held that a broad sue-and-be-sued clause does waive tribal- ain Ute Tribe, 107 P.3d 402, 407-08 (Colo.Ct.App.2004) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we conclude that CNI’s charter Options: A. holding that a state may waive its sovereign immunity B. holding that an act of legislature may be required to waive sovereign immunity C. holding that a tribes agent who has apparent authority may waive immunity without board approval D. holding that an indian tribes exercise of criminal jurisdiction over nonindians is inconsistent with the domesticdependent status of the tribes and that tribes may not assume such jurisdiction without congressional authorization E. holding that tribes did not waive their immunity by intervening in administrative proceedings because any waiver must be unequivocal and may not be implied

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a tribes agent who has apparent authority may waive immunity without board approval
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 by one or more parties to this Agreement on any number of separate counterparts, and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed signature page of this Agreement by facsimile transmission or via email (including “pdf” files) shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Parties hereby agree to waive their respective rights to a jury trial of any claim or cause of action related to or arising out of this Agreement. The scope of the waiver is intended to be all encompassing of any and all disputes that may be filed in any court and that relate to the subject matter herein, including without limitation, contract claims, tort claims, breach of duty claims, and all other common law and statutory claims. The Parties each acknowledge that the waiver is a material inducement for each Party to enter into a business relationship, that each Party has already relied on the waiver in entering into this Agreement and that each will continue to rely on the waiver in their related future dealings. Each Party further warrants and represents that each has had the opportunity to have legal counsel review the waiver. The waiver is irrevocable, meaning that it may not be modified either orally or in writing, and the waiver shall apply to any subsequent amendments, renewals, supplements or modifications to this Agreement. In the event of litigation, this Agreement may be filed as written consent to a trial by court.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Onee established, the burden then shifts to the nonmovant to respond with specifically designated facts that establish the existence of a genuine issue for trial. Id, On review, we may not search the entire record to support the judgment, but may only consider that evidence which was specifically designated to the trial court. A presumption of validity clothes a trial court's grant of summary judgment, and the appellant has the burden of demonstrating to this Court that the , 342 N.E.2d 619 (Ind.1976) (extending a builder's implied warranty of habitability to a subsequent purchaser, limiting lability to latent de-feets not discoverable by a subsequent purchaser's reasonable inspection of the premises before the sale); Theis v. Heuer, 264 Ind. 1, 280 N.E.2d 300 (Ind.1972) (<HOLDING>). Although an implied warranty of habitability Options: A. holding that subsequent to a judicial sale the report of the sale must be made to and ratified by the court before a deed for the property is given by the trustee to the purchaser B. holding the sale valid as between the original parties despite noncompliance with the act C. holding that purchaser could rescind contract where seller failed to disclose a fact the flooding of the subject real estate that seller knew purchaser would regard as material D. holding that the rule of caveat emptor would no longer be applicable to the sale of a newly constructed house and recognizing an implied warranty of fitness and habitability with regard to such sales E. holding that the rule of caveat emptor is no longer valid with regard to the sale of a new residence by the buildervendor to the immediate purchaser

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the rule of caveat emptor is no longer valid with regard to the sale of a new residence by the buildervendor to the immediate purchaser
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: be brought as a class action. In McKesson, the court avoided ruling on this issue, but stated that there was doubt as to whether the class could be certified because the class may lack typicality. We find no reason in this case to prevent the class from bringing this action on behalf of the plan. Defendants do not argue that plaintiffs’ desired relief would be incompatible or that there is somehow a conflict of interest in fifing suit on behalf of the plan as well as individually. Moreover, the Seventh Circuit has determined that in similar cases plaintiffs seeking recovery on behalf of a plan must sue as either representatives of the plan in a derivative action or as representatives of the beneficiaries in a class action suit. See Thornton v. Evans, 692 F.2d 1064, 1080 (7th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>). We find no reason that this plaintiff class Options: A. recognizing cause of action by class member against class counsel for negligence in providing notice B. recognizing that in a derivative action the corporation for whose benefit suit is brought is a necessary party to the action C. holding a suit against an agency of the state is a suit against the state D. holding that an action against nonfiduciaries for a conspiracy with fiduciaries to violate trust obligations must be brought as a derivative suit or class action because it will avoid multiple litigation while providing the beneficiaries with a forum to adjudicate claims against the fund as a whole E. holding that in rendering judgment following the settlement of a derivative action that did not involve a class action trial court lacked jurisdiction to render judgment that would adjudicate rights and personal claims of individual shareholders who were not parties to derivative action that was being settled

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an action against nonfiduciaries for a conspiracy with fiduciaries to violate trust obligations must be brought as a derivative suit or class action because it will avoid multiple litigation while providing the beneficiaries with a forum to adjudicate claims against the fund as a whole
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: ( iii ) skype may change the rates for calling phones and premium rate numbers at any time without notice to you by posting such change at www.skype.com/go/allrates .

assistant: Unilateral change
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: statutes. A similar argument was made and rejected in Columbia Park. 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16370, at *9. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s statement in Wright v. Terrell is a clear indication that the rule announced in Wilson continues to be adhered to by our highest court. ¶12 The City also contends that had the Supreme Court disagreed with Harberd, it would not have denied the petition for review of that decision. A similar argument was also rejected in Columbia Park. 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16370, at *3. Indeed, the Supreme Court’s denial of review has never been taken as an expression of the court’s implicit acceptance of an appellate court’s decision. State v. Rudolph, 141 Wn. App. 59, 67, 168 P.3d 430 (2007); accord In re Estate of Borghi, 141 Wn. App. 294, 301, 169 P.3d 847 (2007) (<HOLDING>). ¶13 We are not free to ignore controlling Options: A. holding that the supreme court has final appellate review of agency decisions B. holding that the court of appeals lacks the authority to overrule decisions of the supreme court of north carolina and has a responsibility to follow those decisions until otherwise ordered by the supreme court C. holding that it is not our prerogative to overrule or ignore clearly written decisions of our supreme court D. recognizing that our supreme court does not overrule binding precedent sub silentio and noting that because an appellate court opinion did not mention a contradicting supreme court decision the conflict between the two decisions was not called to the attention of the court which denied review of the appellate decision E. holding that even though petition for allowance of appeal was pending before the pennsylvania supreme court decision remained binding precedent as long as the decision had not been overturned by our supreme court

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that our supreme court does not overrule binding precedent sub silentio and noting that because an appellate court opinion did not mention a contradicting supreme court decision the conflict between the two decisions was not called to the attention of the court which denied review of the appellate decision
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 WAIVES ANY RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING TO ENFORCE OR DEFEND ANY RIGHTS UNDER OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, ANY OTHER TRANSACTION DOCUMENT, OR ANY AMENDMENT, INSTRUMENT, DOCUMENT OR AGREEMENT DELIVERED OR WHICH MAY IN THE FUTURE BE DELIVERED IN CONNECTION HEREWITH OR ARISING FROM ANY RELATIONSHIP EXISTING IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER TRANSACTION DOCUMENT, AND AGREES THAT (a) ANY SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING SHALL BE TRIED BEFORE A COURT AND NOT BEFORE A JURY AND (b) ANY PARTY HERETO (OR ANY ASSIGNEE OR THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY OF THIS AGREEMENT) MAY FILE AN ORIGINAL COUNTERPART OR A COPY OF THIS AGREEMENT WITH ANY COURT AS WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF THE CONSENT OF ANY OTHER PARTY OR PARTIES HERETO TO WAIVER OF ITS OR THEIR RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY.

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: Promptly notify the Agent in writing as soon as the Borrower has knowledge thereof, of the institution or filing of any litigation, action, suit, claim, counterclaim, or administrative proceeding against, or investigation of, the Borrower or any Subsidiary to which the Borrower or any Subsidiary is a party by or before any regulatory body or governmental agency (a) the outcome of which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect or could reasonably be expected to materially and adversely affect the Borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations hereunder, or (b) which questions the validity of this Agreement, the Notes or any action taken or to be taken pursuant to any of the foregoing; and furnish or cause to be furnished to the Agent such information regarding the same as the Agent may request.

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: This Agreement and the other Loan Documents constitute the entire contract between the parties relative to the subject matter hereof. Any other previous agreement among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof is superseded by this Agreement and the other Loan Documents. Nothing in this Agreement or in the other Loan Documents, expressed or implied, is intended to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto and thereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereunder (including any Affiliate of the Issuing Bank that issues any Letter of Credit) and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent, the Collateral Agent, the Arrangers, the Issuing Banks and the Lenders) any rights, remedies, obligations or liabilities under or by reason of this Agreement or the other Loan Documents.

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: area formed to combat automobile theft. On November 10, 2011, they executed a search warrant at Douglas Rathbun’s business and seized five motor vehicles. Claiming the search warrant was invalid, Mr. Rathbun brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. He sued all of the officers in their individual capacities for money damages. The officers filed a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) invoking qualified immunity. The district court denied the motion and the officers appeal. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 over this final collateral order denying the motion to dismiss on qualified-immunity grounds. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 672, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (<HOLDING>). We reverse. I. Background Mr. Rathbun owns Options: A. holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts B. holding appellate courts have jurisdiction over the district courts orders rejecting as a matter of law qualified immunity raised in a motion to dismiss C. holding that the court lacked appellate jurisdiction over a partial summary judgment on liability in a qualified immunity case D. holding that a district courts order is final and immediately reviewable under mitchell if the appellants properly raised a claim of qualified immunity in the district court E. holding that the circuit courts have no appellate jurisdiction over a general district courts review of an administrative license suspension in the absence of any statutory authority vesting them with such jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is B. holding appellate courts have jurisdiction over the district courts orders rejecting as a matter of law qualified immunity raised in a motion to dismiss
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: reversal. Gonzalez was stopped at a border checkpoint at Bridge 2 in Laredo, Texas, when she entered the United States from Mexico driving a van. A border patrol officer referred her to the secondary inspection area, because Gonzalez appeared nervous and had glanced toward the ceiling of the van. In the secondary inspection area, a canine alerted to all four corners of the roof. An x-ray revealed an anomaly in the roof of the van. An officer drilled into the roof and discovered forty packages of cocaine having a total weight of forty-eight kilograms, hidden in a very sophisticated manner in a compartment in the top rear portion of the roof. Incorrect jury instructions are generally not considered structural errors. Hedgpeth v. Pulido, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 530, 532, — L.Ed.2d-(2008) (<HOLDING>). We apply the plain error standard of review Options: A. holding that instructional errors that are trial errors are subject to harmless error analysis B. holding trial errors are subject to a harmless error analysis C. holding that harmless error analysis applies to sandstrom mandatory presumption errors D. holding blakely errors are subject to harmless error analysis E. holding that instructional errors that do not categorically vitiate all the jurys findings are trial errors as to which harmless error analysis applies not structural errors emphasis and internal quotation marks omitted quoting neder v united states 527 us 1 11 119 sct 1827 144 led2d 35 1999

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that instructional errors that do not categorically vitiate all the jurys findings are trial errors as to which harmless error analysis applies not structural errors emphasis and internal quotation marks omitted quoting neder v united states 527 us 1 11 119 sct 1827 144 led2d 35 1999
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 Plan is binding on all persons entitled to benefits hereunder and their respective heirs and legal representatives, on the Committee and its successor and on the Company and its successor, whether by way of merger, consolidation, purchase or otherwise.

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: California law governs this Agreement without regard to principles of conflicts of law. Debtors and Flex each submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the State and Federal courts in Los Angeles County, California; provided, however, that nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to operate to preclude Flex from bringing suit or taking other legal action in any other jurisdiction to realize on the Collateral or any other security for the Obligations, or to enforce a judgment or other court order in favor of Flex. Debtor expressly submits and consents in advance to such jurisdiction in any action or suit commenced in any such court, and Debtor hereby waives any objection that it may have based upon lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, or forum non conveniens and hereby consents to the granting of such legal or equitable relief as is deemed appropriate by such court. Debtor hereby waives personal service of the summons, complaints, and other process issued in such action or suit and agrees that service of such summons, complaints, and other process may be made by registered or certified mail addressed to Debtor at the address set forth in, or subsequently provided by Debtors in accordance with the Flex Services Agreements and that service so made shall be deemed completed upon the earlier to occur of Debtors’ actual receipt thereof or three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. mails, proper postage prepaid.

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: American Airlines, Inc., 996 F.2d 1315, 1319 (1st Cir.1993) (finding doctrine not to apply because of “no breach of a special transport promise” and “no deviation from the kind of thing one might expect to find when a carrier has lost, damaged, or delayed cargo”) (internal quotation omitted); United States Gold Corp. v. Federal Express Corp., 719 F.Supp. 1217, 1225 (S.D.N.Y.1989) (citing cases upholding validity of limitation of liability with respect to express carriers). None of the cases cited by Nippon are to the contrary. See, e.g., Coughlin v. TWA, 847 F.2d 1432, 1433-34 (9th Cir.1988) (breach of special contract provision to carry valuables in cabin) (per curiam); Nissan Fire & Marines Ins. Co. v. North American Van Lines, Inc., No. C-96-03621-VRQ, 1997 WL 81179 (N.D.Cal.1997) (<HOLDING>); Information Control Corp. v. United Airlines Options: A. recognizing the validity of the doctrine but holding no equitable tolling on the facts presented B. recognizing doctrine C. recognizing but finding inapplicable pure question of law exception to doctrine of exhaustion D. recognizing validity of doctrine but finding that the number of drivers is not such a safety measure E. recognizing the validity of the singlelarceny doctrine in new mexico

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing validity of doctrine but finding that the number of drivers is not such a safety measure
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: sua sponte. See Dubay, 506 F.3d at 433 (“While we find Dubay’s challenge to the Michigan Paternity Act to lack support in our equal protection jurisprudence, we do not consider his appeal of the district court’s decision to be frivolous or worthy of imposing sanctions.”). But we are also cognizant of the fact that this is Killian’s third interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion for summary judgment in which he has sought qualified immunity. We further note that this case has been pending since 2003. The ability of defendants to bring interlocutory appeals from denials of qualified immunity raises the concern that they might bring such motions solely in order to delay the proceedings against them. See Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 310, 116 S.Ct. 834, 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996) (<HOLDING>). With our decision here, the law of the case Options: A. holding that if and when abuse does occur it is well within the supervisory powers of the courts of appeals to establish summary procedures and calendars to weed out frivolous claims brackets and internal quotation marks omitted B. holding that the electronic submission of information across state lines qualifies as in or affecting interstate commerce internal quotation marks and brackets omitted C. recognizing that the declaratory judgment act is only procedural and does not create substantive rights internal quotation marks and citations omitted D. recognizing probable cause as complete defense to a claim of malicious prosecution in new york internal quotation marks and brackets omitted E. holding that although a determination that an issue of fact is genuine is unreviewable scott allows interlocutory appeals from denials of summary judgment in those rare cases where the district court makes a blatant and demonstrable error brackets and internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that if and when abuse does occur it is well within the supervisory powers of the courts of appeals to establish summary procedures and calendars to weed out frivolous claims brackets and 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: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each such counterpart constituting an original but all together one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Agreement by facsimile or other electronic means shall be as effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement. Any party delivering an executed counterpart of this Agreement by facsimile or other electronic means also shall deliver a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement but the failure to deliver a manually executed counterpart shall not affect the validity, enforceability, and binding effect 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: (a) Maintain, with financially sound and reputable insurance companies, insurance in such amounts and against such risks as are customarily maintained by similarly situated companies engaged in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations and cause, subject to the time periods set forth in clause (ix) of the definition of "Collateral Requirement" and Schedule 5.02(d) , if applicable, Agent to be listed as a co-loss payee on property and casualty policies and as an additional insured on liability policies.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties hereto hereby acknowledge and agree that (i), on the date hereof, Celanese Sales U.S. Ltd. shall automatically and unconditionally assume from Celanese U.S. Sales LLC all of the latter's rights, powers and obligations under the Sale Agreement and any other Transaction Document to which it is a party (including its limited liability company agreement) without the requirement of any further action by any Person or entity and (ii) pursuant to Section 1(k) of Exhibit IV of the Receivables Purchase Agreement, the execution of the Amended LLC Agreement is hereby consented to by the Administrator and Majority Purchaser Agents.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Guarantor agrees to do such further acts and things and to execute and deliver such statements, assignments, agreements, instruments and other documents as Lender from time to time may request in connection with this Guaranty and in order to (a) evidence, confirm, perfect and protect any lien granted by Guarantor, (b) give Lender or its designees or representatives confirmation and further assurance of its rights, powers, privileges, remedies and interests under this Guaranty, the other Loan Documents and applicable law, (c) better enable Lender or its designees or representatives to exercise any such right, power, privilege, remedy or interest, and (d) otherwise effectuate the purpose and the terms and provisions of this Guaranty or the other Loan Documents, each in such form and substance as may be acceptable to Lender.

assistant: Further Assurances
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 a fellow prisoner who stated and will testify that Alan Pursell admitted killing the boy. Now that is something that is dramatic to say the least, and was certainly not in the case before, and I do understand that it was provided to the district attorney’s office only on Friday and they gave it to me immediately. (Voir Dire Tr. 1/19/82, at 368-69) (emphasis added). If anything, counsel’s statement creates the impression that DeFoy approached the government, without any prior agreement. Indeed, DeFoy’s statement seemed to have caught the police themselves off guard, coming as it did on the eve of trial. Under these circumstances, Pursell’s counsel could reasonably conclude that Massiah simply did not apply to this case. See United States v. Yeager, 428 F.2d 182, 184 (3d Cir.1970) (<HOLDING>). Second, there is nothing in the record to Options: A. holding that sixth amendment not violated when sentence enhanced based on prior convictions that were not charged in indictment or admitted by defendant B. holding that a defendants sixth amendment confrontation clause rights are violated when a court admits into evidence an incriminating statement given by a nontestifying codefendant C. holding that sixth amendment not violated when defendant makes incriminating statements after indictment to persons who are not related to the government D. holding that the sixth amendment is violated when the state obtains incriminating statements by knowingly circumventing the accuseds right to have counsel present in a confrontation between the accused and a state agent E. holding that states use of informant to obtain incriminating evidence from defendant about pending charges violated defendants sixth amendment right to counsel notwithstanding that state was also investigating other charges as to which the sixth amendment right to counsel had not attached

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that sixth amendment not violated when defendant makes incriminating statements after indictment to persons who are not related to the government
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: Trial Act entitles criminal defendants to adequate time for preparing a defense, but that right may not be used as a two-edged sword in this fashion.” Id.; see also Kington, 875 F.2d at 1108 (endorsing “the sensible maxim that defendants ought not to be able to claim relief on the basis of delays which they themselves deliberately caused”); United States v. Mentz, 840 F.2d 315, 331 (6th Cir.1988) (concluding that delay caused by defendant’s plea vacillation stopped speedy trial clock because otherwise defendant “would have successfully worked both sides of the street lulling the court and prosecution into a false sense of security only to turn around later and use the ... leisurely pace of the case as grounds for dismissal”); United States v. Pringle, 751 F.2d 419, 434 (1st Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>); cf. United States v. Willis, 958 F.2d 60, 64 Options: A. holding the defendant did not demonstrate a denial of his sixth amendment right to a speedy trial where even though the delay was substantial and the defendant was detained pretrial for three years the fault for the delay was shared and the defendant continued to request continuances following his assertion for the right to a speedy trial B. holding that delay created by defendant in mistakenly agreeing to a waiver of his speedy trial rights is excludable C. holding that when determining whether a delay in prosecution violates a defendants right to a speedy trial courts must consider the length of the delay the reason for the delay whether the defendant asserted his rights and the resulting prejudice to the defendant D. holding that a delay of 8 months is enough to provoke a speedy trial inquiry E. holding waiver of right to counsel not voluntary and knowing when defendant terminated counsel and requested another attorney but the trial court would allow delay and appointment only upon waiver of speedy trial right

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that delay created by defendant in mistakenly agreeing to a waiver of his speedy trial rights is excludable
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as disclosed in Section 2.9 of the Disclosure Schedule, the Seller is operating and has operated the Purchased Assets within the last two (2) years in compliance in all material respects with applicable Laws and Orders. Except as set forth in Section 2.9 of the Disclosure Schedule, the Seller has not, at any time within the last two (2) years received any written notice that it is or has at any time within the last two (2) years been, in violation of or in default in any material respect under any applicable Law or Order with respect to the Business. This Section 2.9 does not relate to employee or employee benefits matters (which are addressed exclusively in Section 2.17 and Section 2.18 ), Tax matters (which are addressed exclusively in Section 2.7 ) or Environmental Laws, Environmental Permits, Hazardous Materials, Environmental Actions and all other environmental matters (which are addressed exclusively in Section 2.15 ).

assistant: Compliance With 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 Guaranty Agreement is for the benefit of Lender, and its successors and assigns, and in the event of an assignment by Lender (in accordance with the terms of the Loan Agreement) of the Guaranteed Obligations, or any part thereof, the rights and benefits hereunder, to the extent applicable to the indebtedness, liabilities, and obligations so assigned, shall be deemed transferred with such indebtedness, liabilities, and obligations without necessity of further express action. This Guaranty Agreement is binding upon each Guarantor and its successors and assigns.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise permitted under Section 6.3 or Section 6.4 , each Loan Party will, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, at all times preserve and keep in full force and effect such Person's valid existence and good standing in its jurisdiction of organization and, except as could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, good standing with respect to all other jurisdictions in which it is qualified to do business and any rights, franchises, permits, licenses, accreditations, authorizations, or other approvals material to their businesses.

assistant: Existence
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: “severability and judicial modification provision.” Accordingly, these Defendants’ non-solicitation is modified to preclude solicitation as provided for under the agreements, if he or she uses Wells Fargo’s trade secrets to do so. Phoeniic Capital, 176 P.3d at 844. Similarly, as .to Mr. McQuate’s agreement, the non-solicitation provision is overboard, but' the Court agrees with Wells Fargo that' the agreement may be judicially modified, even though it does not provide for such modification. See Whittenberg v. Williams, 110 Colo. 418, 421, 135 P.2d 228, 229 (1943) (trial court acted within its discretion in reducing overbroad territorial restriction and enforcing it only to the extent, necessary to. afford employer contemplated protection); Doubleclick, Inc., 402 F.Supp.2d at 1259 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, as to Mr. McQuate’s agreement, Options: A. holding that the judiciary is without authority to modify alimony in a nonmerged separation agreement B. holding that trial court is without authority to modify a settlement agreement but may enforce and interpret it C. recognizing court has authority to modify agreement to cure any unreasonable provision as to duration or scope D. holding that a trust provision granting a trustee the power to alter amend or modify the trust agreement was never intended to confer authority to amend the trust agreement in so vital a part as to extend the period of its duration E. holding that court may not refuse to enforce noncompete agreement solely because geographical area is unreasonable but rather must modify unreasonable restriction and enforce agreement as modified

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing court has authority to modify agreement to cure any unreasonable provision as to duration or scope
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to tax costs, but that discretion is restricted by Fed R App P 39(e), which provides: Costs on Appeal Taxable in the District Court. The following costs on appeal are taxable in the district court for the benefit of the party entitled to costs under this rule: (1) the preparation and transmission of the record; (2) the reporter’s transcript, if needed to determine the appeal; (3) premiums paid for a supersedeas bond or other bond to preserve rights pending appeal-, and (4) the fee for filing the notice of appeal. [Emphasis added.] In cases such as the present case, in which a party has obtained a supersedeas bond or stay bond and collateralized that bond with a letter of credit, the federal circuits have generally held a taxed cost to be “reasonable” under Rule 39(e) if the total c ) (<HOLDING>). A minority of jurisdictions has refused to Options: A. holding that taxable costs included only the premium on a surety bond posted on appeal not the fees paid for letters of credit to secure the bond where the state statute and court rule only specifically allowed for premium on any surety bond B. holding that surety was liable to subcontractor on payment bond because payment bond applied to any claimant who among other things supplied materials that were reasonably required for use in the performance of the subcontract C. holding that the defendants were entitled to recover as costs not only bond premiums but the additional cost to obtain a letter of credit that was required by the surety as collateral before the issuance of bond D. holding that the letter of credit was substantially equivalent to posting a supersedeas bond and the 100 cost was reasonable and probably less than the premium of a surety bond E. holding that the bond was intended to and did substantially comply with sjection 71323 therefore because its conditions were not broader and more protective than the statute required the contention that the bond was a common law bond failed

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the defendants were entitled to recover as costs not only bond premiums but the additional cost to obtain a letter of credit that was required by the surety as collateral before the issuance of bond
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: Munzee has not agreed to pay any brokerage fees, finder’s fees or other fees or commissions with respect to the Transaction, and no person is entitled, or intends to claim that it is entitled, to receive any such fees or commissions in connection with such transaction.

assistant: Brokers