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: applied and that the payments were not subject to income-tax withholding. Defendant now argues that the conditions governing the trust plan considered in the revenue ruling establish the baseline for the qualification of supplemental unemployment compensation benefits under § 3402(o). We cannot accept this argument. As an initial matter, the revenue ruling offers no analysis to explain why the plan conditions it recites are sufficient to take the payments in question outside the definition of “wages.” Clearly, such an explanation was called for, given, in particular, the expansive definition of the term “employment” that was announced by the Supreme Court’s decision, some ten years earlier, in Social Security Bd. v. Nierotko, 327 U.S. 358, 365-66, 66 S.Ct. 637, 90 L.Ed. 718 (1946) (<HOLDING>). Absent an explanation of its result, Rev. Options: A. holding that it is the claimants burden to show that the injury was the result of an accident that not only arose in the course of the employment but that it also grew out of or resulted from the employment B. holding that the term service as used in the social security acts definition of employment means not only work actually done but also the entire employeremployee relationship for which compensation is paid to the employee by the employer C. holding that the right to control the means by which the work is accomplished is clearly the most significant test of the employment relationship and observing that many of the other factors enumerated in the restatement second are merely evidentiary indicia of the right to control D. holding that where employee gave notice to employer of injury and employer told employee that nothing could be done for him through workmans compensation employer had breached statute and was liable for medical treatment which was reasonable and necessary to restore employee to maximum usefulness E. holding that an employer is accountable to a discharged employee for unpaid compensation if the employee was terminated in bad faith and the compensation is clearly connected to work already performed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the term service as used in the social security acts definition of employment means not only work actually done but also the entire employeremployee relationship for which compensation is paid to the employee by the employer
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: outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or confusion, as required under Fed. R.Evid. 403 to establish inadmissibility. It certainly is true, as the Court notes, that Davis’s residency in or control over the house was a key issue at trial. However, the district court immediately gave the limiting instruction that the face sheet was to be “received for the limited purposes of demonstrating the reason and lawfulness of the search in question and for no other reason than that.” Because the district court gave an appropriate limiting instruction, I believe that the additional probable cause finding set forth in the face sheet of the search warrant should not have a significant effect on the Rule 403 balancing test. See United States v. Karam, 37 F.3d 1280, 1286 (8th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). The Court notes that in applying the Rule 403 Options: A. holding that district court is not required to word jury instructions in any particular way so long as it correctly states the law B. recognizing that upon request the trial court may provide a limiting instruction to the jury C. holding that the decision of the appellate court establishes the law of the case and it must be followed by the trial court on remand D. holding that this court is required to assume that the jury followed the limiting instructions given by the district court E. recognizing that use of curative or limiting instructions is within the district courts discretion

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that this court is required to assume that the jury followed the limiting instructions given by the district court
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: above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home,’ ” id. at 25 n. 17 (quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 635, 128 S.Ct. 2783). Further, “[w]e think it sufficient to conclude, as did the Seventh Circuit, that a categorical ban on gun ownership by a class of individuals must be supported by some form of ‘strong showing,’ necessitating a substantial relationship between the restriction and an important governmental objective.” Id. at 25 (quoting Skoien, 614 F.3d at 641). In 2010, the Supreme Court made clear that the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms applies to the states as well as to the federal government. McDonald v. City of Chicago, — U.S.-, 130 S.Ct. 3020, 3050, 177 L.Ed.2d 894 (2010) (Alito, J., plurality opinion) (<HOLDING>). “In so doing, however, the McDonald Court Options: A. holding the sixth amendment applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment B. holding that the fourteenth amendment incorporated the sixth amendment right to counsel C. holding second amendment right is incorporated against the states through fourteenth amendment D. holding the sixth amendment right to a jury trial applies to the states through the fourteenth amendment E. holding that the second amendment fully applies to state and local regulation through the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding second amendment right is incorporated against the states through fourteenth amendment
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: not barred by it. Specifically, the Johnsons argue that Natalie “has causes of action for malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, quantum meruit, and breach of contract all of which ... do not arise under .the Act because she was not an employee of AS-ARCO.” But. Natalie’s claims, like Glenn’s, arise out of Crawford’s conduct in investigating, handling, and settling Glenn’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits. Specifically, she complains that Crawford breached promises to pay her to provide services to Glenn and that Crawford maliciously caused her to be prosecuted for insurance fraud. We have held that an employee’s spouse cannot bring a separate action alleging claims under the Act. See Rodriguez v. Naylor Indus., Inc., 763 S.W.2d 411, 412 (Tex.1989) (<HOLDING>). The only noted exception to this rule is if a Options: A. recognizing that any claims compensable under the act could not be brought by nonemployee spouse except for intentional tort claims B. holding that tort actions brought against a state actor must be brought in the illinois court of claims and the district courts dismissal of such claims was proper C. holding that this language applies to tort claims brought under the federal tort claims act against a contractor who has a selfdetermination contract D. holding section 101106f cannot be used by employees to obtain dismissal of common law intentional tort claims because those claims could not have been brought under the texas tort claims act E. holding that claims under 42 usc 1983 are not personal injury tort claims

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that any claims compensable under the act could not be brought by nonemployee spouse except for intentional tort claims
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the rights, remedies and obligations contained in any provision hereof, may be modified or waived only in accordance with this Section 18. No waiver by either party of any breach by the other or any provision hereof shall be deemed to be a waiver of any later or other breach thereof or as a waiver of any other provision of this Agreement. This Agreement and its terms may not be waived, changed, discharged or terminated orally or by any course of dealing between the parties, but only by a written instrument signed by the party against whom any waiver, change, discharge or termination is sought. No modification or waiver by the Bank is effective without written consent of the Board.

assistant: Modifications
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 contest or dispute arises between the parties with respect to this Agreement or Consultant’s engagement or termination thereof, other than injunctive and equitable relief with regard to Section 9 hereof, such contest or dispute shall be submitted to binding arbitration in San Diego, California in accordance with the rules and procedures of the Commercial Arbitration Rules and the expedited arbitration procedures of the American Arbitration Association (“ AAA ”) then in effect. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties and may be entered in any court of applicable jurisdiction. The parties shall split the fees of AAA and the arbitrator, which fees shall be recoverable as costs by the prevailing party pursuant to Section 12.11.

assistant: Arbitration
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: solely in respect of users located in european economic area ( eea ) and/or australia , nothing in these terms of use shall be deemed to exclude or limit our or your liability ( as applicable ) in respect of :

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: interests ... are not limited by a few rigid, technical forms,” Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593, 601, 92 S.Ct. 2694, 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1972), the Due Process Clause’s “procedural component does not protect everything that might be described as a benefit.” Town of Castle Rock, Colo. v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748, 749, 125 S.Ct. 2796, 162 L.Ed.2d 658 (2005) (quoting Roth, 408 U.S. at 577, 92 S.Ct. 2701). State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment); see also Leary v. Daeschner, 228 F.3d 729, 742 (6th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); Ramsey v. Bd. of Educ., 844 F.2d 1268, 1272 Options: A. holding that a collective bargaining agreement between school board and teachers union established a teachers legitimate claim of entitlement to their positions at elementary school B. holding that a reprimand letter sent in response to a teachers union representation of a fellow employees grievance infringed on the teachers right of free association C. holding that the board of education violated a school teachers first amendment rights by dismissing him because he had criticized the board in a letter to the local newspaper D. holding that members of the board of trustees of an elementary school had standing to challenge the actions of the county board of education because they suffered an actual injury when the county board nullified their unanimous vote to reject a candidate for principal of the elementary school E. holding that the district was not liable under respondeat superior for a teachers sexual assault of a student even though it occurred on school grounds and during school hours because the criminal misconduct was not within the scope of the teachers employment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a collective bargaining agreement between school board and teachers union established a teachers legitimate claim of entitlement to their positions at elementary school
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: where the rights of employees may be vindicated to the fullest extent possible under our workers’ compensation statutory scheme. For example, in Pro-Football, Inc. v. McCants, a player on the roster of the Washington NFL football team brought in Maryland a workers’ compensation claim for game injuries sustained in various forums—some in Maryland, and some out of state. 428 Md. 270, 275-76, 51 A.3d 586, 589-90 (2012). McCants’ employment contract contained a forum-selection clause choosing Virginia law, but we allowed McCants nonetheless to maintain a claim in Maryland for the injuries sustained here and out-of-state. McCants, 428 Md. at 288, 51 A.3d at 596-97; see Pro-Football, Inc. v. Tupa, 197 Md.App. 463, 471, 474, 14 A.3d 678, 682, 684 (2011), aff'd, 428 Md. 198, 51 A.3d 544 (2012) (<HOLDING>). Although significant differences exist Options: A. holding that employee must prove that the sole reason for their discharge was their filing of a workers compensation claim to prevail on a claim of wrongful discharge under marylands workers compensation act B. holding that when an employee suffers an injury from an unexplained fall while the employee is on the job and performing the duties of his employment that injury is eligible for compensation under the workers compensation act C. holding that because maryland law expressly creates right to file workers compensation claim action exists for wrongful discharge for termination based solely on the filing of a workers compensation claim D. holding that the trial courts authority to initiate workers compensation benefits before the final adjudication was not divested by the legislature and was consistent with the stated purpose of the workers compensation act E. holding that a player on the roster of the washington nfl football team was a covered employee under 9203a of the workers compensation statute despite working intermittently in maryland playing games at fedex field and primarily in virginia practicing

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a player on the roster of the washington nfl football team was a covered employee under 9203a of the workers compensation statute despite working intermittently in maryland playing games at fedex field and primarily in virginia practicing
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 for normal restaurant or nightclub inspections conducted by a Governmental Authority in the Ordinary Course and the Proceedings set forth on Schedule 4.12 of the Disclosure Schedule, there is not, and since December 31, 2013 there has not been, any Proceeding pending against, or, to the Knowledge of the Acquired Entities, threatened against or affecting, such Acquired Entity or any of its Subsidiaries before (or, in the case of threatened Proceedings, would be before) or by any Governmental Authority or arbitrator that would reasonably be expected to be, individually or in the aggregate, Material. Except for normal restaurant or nightclub inspections conducted by a Governmental Authority in the Ordinary Course and the Proceedings set forth on Schedule 4.12 of the Disclosure Schedule, no Acquired Entity and none of its Subsidiaries has received since December 31, 2013 any notice, Order, complaint or other written communication from any Governmental Authority that it is not in compliance with any Applicable Law, or that it is subject to any obligation to undertake, or to bear all or any portion of the cost of, any corrective or response action that would reasonably be expected to be, individually or in the aggregate, Material. Neither any Acquired Entity nor any Subsidiary of an Acquired Entity is, or since December 31, 2013 has been, operating under or subject to any Order that would reasonably be expected to be, individually or in the aggregate, Material.

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: The parties to each assignment shall execute and deliver to the Agent an Assignment and Assumption, together with a processing and recordation fee in the amount of $3,500; provided , however , that no such fee shall be payable in the case of an assignment made at the request of the Borrower to an existing Lender. The assignee, if it is not a Lender, shall deliver to the Agent an Administrative Questionnaire.

assistant: Assignments
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: preferences under § 547 in a case under chapters 7 or 11 because the 90-day avoidance period has lapsed; all of these attachments could have been avoided if a case under chapters 7 or 11 had been filed when the chapter 15 petitions were filed. 3 . In addition to the Notice of Intent filed on ECF on February 24, 2009, counsel for the foreign representative stated such intent at a hearing on February 20, 2009. 4 . The Objecting Creditors argue that § 31 of the Danish Bankruptcy Act should not be given extraterritorial effect. They did not offer evidence on this issue of Danish law. Indeed, other countries' foreign laws are often given extraterritorial effect by U.S. courts. See Adinolfi v. Empire Marble & Granite, Inc. (In re Rosacometta, S.r.L), 336 B.R. 557, 564 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.2005) (<HOLDING>). In light of the Court's disposition in this Options: A. holding that the automatic stay did not bar the filing of a proof of claim where the debtor actively litigated a separate action during the pending bankruptcy proceeding because to permit the automatic stay provision to be used as a trump card played after an unfavorable result was reached would be inconsistent with the underlying purpose of the automatic stay B. holding judgment in violation of automatic stay void C. recognizing that any action taken in violation of the automatic bankruptcy stay is void and without effect D. recognizing italys automatic stay in ancillary proceeding in the us and ordering avoidance of garnishment E. holding rule 11 sanction proceeding was exempt from automatic stay

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing italys automatic stay in ancillary proceeding in the us and ordering avoidance of garnishment
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: since you may use a free evernote service account , and since we provide a number of mechanisms to allow you to share your account content with others , we strongly urge you not to share your information with anyone , unless you are doing so as part of your estate planning purposes , as discussed below .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: property. The court held that the hotel was community property, and the husband was not entitled to reimbursement. The court stated, however, that had Cal. Civ.Code § 4800.2 [the predecessor statute to § 2640] been applicable, the husband would have been entitled to reimbursement for his separate property contributions to the community property assets upon dissolution. Fabian, 41 Cal.3d at 447-48, 224 Cal.Rptr. 333, 715 P.2d 253. “Under the new law [section 4800.2] no agreement is needed: the tables are turned so that the separate property interest is now preserved unless the right to reimbursement is waived in writing.” Id. at 450, 224 Cal. Rptr. at 339, 715 P.2d at 259 (emphasis added); see also Witt v. Witt (In re Martiage of Witt), 197 Cal.App.3d 103, 105, 242 Cal.Rptr. 646 (1987) (<HOLDING>). There is no contention that Dorothy ever Options: A. holding that separate property may become marital property if spouse donates it to marital unit with intent at time of donation that property become marital B. holding that claims for pain and suffering are the separate property of a spouse C. holding that when a spouse has given separate property to the marital community section 2640 preserves to the contributing spouse the equity value of his or her separate property contribution unless that retained interest is waived D. recognizing that loss of consortium is a right of action separate from that of the spouse E. holding that a retained equity interest is property even if it has no market value

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that when a spouse has given separate property to the marital community section 2640 preserves to the contributing spouse the equity value of his or her separate property contribution unless that retained interest is waived
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: therefore , you are solely responsible for checking with your mobile carrier to determine if the mobile services are available for your mobile device ( s ) , what restrictions , if any , may be applicable to your use of the mobile services , and how much they will cost you .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 1995 and September 1997 regional office decisions, his appeal will be dismissed. In addition, the Board decision on appeal will be vacated because the Board erred to the extent that it entertained such an improper “claim” without imposing the strictures of finality. See Smith (Irma) v. B ished opinion). The Court notes, however, that Mr. Rudd is not without recourse, as he remains free to file a motion to revise based upon clear and unmistakable error with respect to the March 1995 and September 1997 regional office decisions. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that his arguments on appeal all pertain to the duties to notify and assist and that such arguments would be of no avail in the clear-and-unmistakable-error context. See Livesay v. Principi, 15 Vet.App. 165, 179 (2001) (en banc) (<HOLDING>); see also Cook, 318 F.3d at 1344-47 (holding Options: A. holding that the notice requirements of section 101101 do not apply to employees because they are not governmental units B. holding that the federal register notice requirements do not apply to federal criminal statutes C. holding that more stringent requirements of 1823e do not apply retroactively D. holding that apprendi does not retroactively apply to 2255 motions E. holding that the notice requirements of 38 usc 5103a do not apply to motions based on clear and unmistakable error

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the notice requirements of 38 usc 5103a do not apply to motions based on clear and unmistakable error
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: At all times during Executive’s employment and after the date of Executive’s termination of employment, Executive agrees to reasonably cooperate (i) with the Company, the Operating Partnership, and Employer in the defense of any legal matter involving any matter that arose during Executive’s employment in the business of the Company, the Operating Partnership, and Employer, and (ii) with all government authorities on matters pertaining to any investigation, litigation or administrative proceeding pertaining to the business of the Company, the Operating Partnership or Employer. The Company, the Operating Partnership or Employer, as applicable, will reimburse Executive for reasonable travel and out of pocket expenses incurred by Executive in providing such cooperation.

assistant: Cooperation
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 validity, interpretation, construction and performance of this Agreement and the rights of the parties thereunder shall be interpreted and enforced under California law without reference to principles of conflicts of laws. The parties expressly agree that inasmuch as the Company’s headquarters and principal place of business are located in California, it is appropriate that California law govern this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If there is any change in the number or kind of shares of Stock outstanding (i) by reason of a stock dividend, spinoff, recapitalization, stock split, or combination or exchange of shares, (ii) by reason of a merger, reorganization or consolidation, (iii) by reason of a reclassification or change in par value, or (iv) by reason of any other extraordinary or unusual event affecting the outstanding Stock as a class without the Company’s receipt of consideration, or if the value of outstanding shares of Stock is substantially reduced as a result of a spinoff or the Company’s payment of an extraordinary dividend or distribution, the maximum number of shares of Stock available for issuance under the Plan, the maximum number of shares of Stock for which any individual may receive pursuant to Grants in any year, the number of shares covered by outstanding Grants, the kind of shares to be issued or transferred under the Plan, and the price per share or the applicable market value of such Grants shall be equitably adjusted by the Administrator, in such manner as the Administrator deems appropriate, to reflect any increase or decrease in the number of, or change in the kind or value of, issued shares of Stock to preclude, to the extent practicable, the enlargement or dilution of rights and benefits under such Grants; provided, however, that any fractional shares resulting from such adjustment shall be eliminated. In addition, in the event of a Change of Control of the Company, the provisions of Section 18 of the Plan shall apply. Any adjustments to outstanding Grants shall be consistent with section 409A or 424 of the Code, to the extent applicable. Any adjustments determined by the Administrator shall be final, binding and conclusive.

assistant: Adjustments
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) There are no actions, suits, proceedings or investigations by or before any arbitrator or Governmental Authority pending against or, to the knowledge of the Borrower, threatened against or affecting the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or Immaterial Entities (i) as to which there is a reasonable possibility of an adverse determination and that, if adversely determined, could reasonably be expected, individually or in the aggregate, to result in a Material Adverse Effect or (ii) that involve this Agreement or the Transactions.

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: by courts as “overbroad,” Kapeluschnik, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22883, at *18, and “frivolous,” Sturdevant v. Thomas E. Jolas, P.C., 942 F.Supp. 426, 430 (W.D.Wis.1996). At the same time, courts have noted that “in cases where the likelihood of legal action is not clear from the language, the letter’s source can be determinative, especially if it purports to be from an attorney.” Jenkins v. Union Corp., 999 F.Supp. 1120 (N.D.Ill.1998). “Because to most consumers, the relevant distinction between a collection agency and an attorney is the ability to sue,” a letter signed by an attorney signals to the unsophistcated consumer that legal action is at hand. United States v. Nat’l Fin. Servs., 98 F.3d 131, 136-37 (4th Cir.1996); see Russey v. Rankin, 911 F.Supp. 1449, 1454 (D.N.M. 1995) (<HOLDING>). In addition to the source of the Options: A. holding that plaintiffs failure to notify attorney of receipt of right to sue letter and failure to confirm that the attorney had received the letter did not warrant the application of equitable tolling B. holding that the right to have counsel present means the right to have counsel physically present during the interrogation not merely the right to consult an attorney by telephone C. holding that a letter clearly threatened litigation when it purported to be from an attorney and declared that we have the legal right to file a lawsuit D. holding an arrestee has the right to contact an attorney but not a specific attorney who is unavailable when called E. holding that district court could impose attorney fees where plaintiffs lawsuit patently had no legal merit

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a letter clearly threatened litigation when it purported to be from an attorney and declared that we have the legal right to file a lawsuit
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: we strive to keep the services up and running ; however , all online services suffer occasional disruptions and outages , and microsoft is not liable for any disruption or loss you may suffer as a result .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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 hereby irrevocably and unconditionally, for itself and its property, submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of any New York State court or Federal court of the United Stated of America sitting, in each case in the Borough of Manhattan in New York City, and any appellate court from any thereof (such courts in such jurisdictional priority, the “ Forum ”), in any Proceeding (whether based in contract, tort or statute) based upon, arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the negotiation, execution or performance of this Agreement, or any transaction contemplated hereby, and agrees that all claims in respect of such Proceeding may be heard and determined in the Forum, and each of the Parties hereby irrevocably and unconditionally (a) agrees not to commence any such Proceeding except in the Forum, (b) agrees that any claim in respect of any such Proceeding may be heard and determined in the Forum, (c) waives, to the fullest extent it may legally and effectively do so, any objection which it may now or hereafter have to the laying of venue of any such Proceeding in the Forum, and (d) waives, to the fullest extent it may legally and effectively do so, the defense of an inconvenient forum to the maintenance of such Proceeding in the Forum. Each Party hereby agrees that service of summons, complaint or other process in connection with any Proceedings contemplated hereby may be made by registered or certified mail addressed to such Party at the address specified pursuant to Section 2.8, and that service so made will be effective as if personally made in the State of New York.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that everyone called Dekarske “Gramps” and that it had more or less become his nickname. There is no evidence, however, that Feltman was aware that other FedEx employees were calling Dekarske Gramps and this is not evidence which requires a conclusion, without inference, that Feltman terminated Dekarske with discriminatory intent. By contrast, calling an employee “an old man” ten to twenty times in connection with complaints that he is “slow,” is the type of evidence that has been found sufficiently patent to constitute direct evidence of discriminatory intent and could be viewed as such by the Court for purposes of summary judgment. However, direct evidence of discriminatory remarks must also relate those remarks to the decision to terminate the employee. Geiger, 579 F.3d at 621 (<HOLDING>) (alteration in original) (internal quotation Options: A. holding that burden of demonstrating coverage rests with the insured B. holding that the defendant bears the burden of demonstrating that the action should be transferred C. holding that the party asserting notice error has the burden of demonstrating prejudice D. holding that an appellant bears the burden of demonstrating error on appeal E. holding that statements unrelated to the decisional process itself cannot suffice to satisfy the plaintiffs burden of demonstrating animus

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that statements unrelated to the decisional process itself cannot suffice to satisfy the plaintiffs burden of demonstrating animus
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: In support of his argument, Jewell cites In re 2002 Lake County Tax Sale of Real Property with Delinquent Taxes or Special Assessments Tax I.D. #: 16-27-0122-0026, 818 N.E.2d 505, 509 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), which interpreted that section to mean a “trial court does not have the discretion to extend the period of redemption beyond the one-year limitation.” Id. However, “[e]quity has power, where necessary, to pierce rigid statutory rules to prevent injustice.” Swami, 841 N.E.2d at 1178. The trial court determined Powell was prejudicially misled by the incomplete information given to him by the Grant County Treasurer’s Office, and that determination supports piercing the statutory rules to prevent injustice. See Tajuddin v. Sandhu Petroleum Corp. No. 3, 921 N.E.2d 891, 895 (Ind.Ct.App.2010) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Options: A. holding a corporation excused from a tax penalty when the sole people in charge of filing and paying taxes were embezzling funds from the corporation thus disabling the corporations ability to pay B. holding that taxes were a claim against the estate that had to be filed in probate court thus reversing an order requiring heirs to pay taxes on estate property because the district court did not have jurisdiction C. holding unemployment taxes accrued when employees were terminated not when the amount of compensation taxes are determinable D. holding trial court properly denied a petition for a tax deed when the property owners thought they were paying property taxes on an improved parcel of land but actually were paying taxes on a different unimproved parcel because of an assessment irregularity E. holding petitioner could not deduct real estate taxes imposed on property he did not own because these taxes were not imposed on him

assistant: The best answer is D. holding trial court properly denied a petition for a tax deed when the property owners thought they were paying property taxes on an improved parcel of land but actually were paying taxes on a different unimproved parcel because of an assessment irregularity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you are at least 13 , but are still a minor ( this depends on where you live ) , you must have your parent or legal guardian 's permission to use the vimeo service .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: her individual capacity. In Miller v. Maxwell’s Intern. Inc., 991 F.2d 583 (1993), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that there was no individual liability under the ADEA. The court explained that the statutory scheme of the ADEA itself indicates that Congress did not intend to impose individual liability on employees. The ADEA limits liability to employers with 20 or more employees, 29 U.S.C.A. § 630(b), in part because Congress did not want to burden small entities with the costs associated with litigating discrimination suits. Surely Congress would not wish to impose the same civil liability on individual employees that it decided to remove from small entities with limited resources. Id. at 587. See also Birkbeck v. Marvel Lighting Corporation, 30 F.3d 507, 510 (4th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). This conclusion is supported by the law of Options: A. holding that there is no individual liability under law 44 B. holding that individual employees are not proper defendants in adea lawsuits C. holding no individual liability under the adea D. holding that there is no individual liability under title vii E. holding that there is no disparate impact claim under the adea

assistant: The best answer is C. holding no individual liability under the adea
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: record thus does not wholly negate Jacob’s testimony that Killian took photographs on that date. Moreover, Jacob’s expert determined that not all of the photographs in the record were taken on January 7, 2000. Killian also admitted that he inspected Jacob’s property on June 26, 2001. In addition, Jacob testified more generally that there were many occasions on which he walked out of his house and found Killian “rummaging around” or “rumbling and rambling” in the yard. Jacob even recalled the details of a specific conversation that he had with Killian on one such occasion. Jacob legitimately claims that he could not list the specific date of each incident because Killian intruded on his property so many times. Cf. Harvill v. Westward Commc’ns, L.L.C., 433 F.3d 428, 436 (5th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). The dates of Killian’s alleged intrusions are Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs sexualharassment claim that she was touched numerous times instead of providing exact dates or the exact number of instances did not prevent her allegations from raising a genuine issue of material fact B. holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment C. holding that there is no independent tort duty because the exact same conduct is described in both the contract and tort claims and the exact same facts and circumstances are at play which is indicative of overlapping duties D. holding that plaintiff failed to show genuine issue of material fact on equitable estoppel claim E. holding that unsupported allegations or denials are insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact for purposes of summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the plaintiffs sexualharassment claim that she was touched numerous times instead of providing exact dates or the exact number of instances did not prevent her allegations from raising a genuine issue of material fact
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the other Transaction Documents represents the entire agreement and understanding between the parties concerning the Exchange and the other matters described herein and therein and supersedes and replaces any and all prior agreements and understandings solely with respect to the subject matter hereof and thereof.

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: Rectanus Co., 248 U.S. 90, 39 S.Ct. 48, 63 L.Ed. 141 (1918). A sale (assignment) of a trademark apart from its goodwill is characterized as an “assignment in gross” and passes no rights to the assignee. See, Sands, Taylor & Wood Co. v. Quaker Oats Co., 978 F.2d 947, 956 (7th Cir.1992). In the case of a bare assignment of a trademark, apart from genuine goodwill, assets, trade secrets or management, courts will generally invalidate such a transfer as an assignment in gross. McCarthy, supra; Mister Donut of Am., Inc. v. Mr. Donut, Inc., 418 F.2d 838, 842 (9th Cir.1969) (stating that the assignment was in gross because there had been no transfer of “customer lists, merchandise, equipment, recipes, decals or other goods”); PepsiCo, Inc. v. Grapette Co., 416 F.2d 285, 290 (8th Cir.1969) (<HOLDING>); and Hough Mfg. Corp. v. Virginia Metal Options: A. holding the transfer invalid when the assignee did not acquire any of the assignors assets such as the formula or process by which the soft drink was manufactured B. holding that 727a2a does not apply to the transfer of the assets of a corporation in which the debtor is a shareholder C. holding that the unauthorized transfer of estate assets was in blatant disregard of the integrity of the court as well as the constraints mandated by congress in the bankruptcy code D. holding that the states transfer statute did not violate the apprendi rule because the transfer hearing determines not the minors guilt but the forum in which his guilt may be adjudicated E. holding that the failure to condition a transfer on death or remarriage of the wife was a factor showing that the transfer was not in the nature of alimony

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the transfer invalid when the assignee did not acquire any of the assignors assets such as the formula or process by which the soft drink was manufactured
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: GUARANTORS AGREE THAT, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY SUIT, ACTION OR PROCEEDING, WHETHER CLAIM OR COUNTERCLAIM, BROUGHT BY LENDER OR GUARANTORS ON OR WITH RESPECT TO THIS GUARANTY OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE DEALINGS OF THE PARTIES WITH RESPECT HERETO OR THERETO, SHALL BE TRIED ONLY BY A COURT AND NOT BY A JURY. LENDER AND GUARANTORS HEREBY KNOWINGLY, VOLUNTARILY, INTENTIONALLY AND INTELLIGENTLY, AND WITH THE ADVICE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL, WAIVE, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY SUCH SUIT, ACTION OR PROCEEDING. FURTHER, LENDER AND GUARANTORS WAIVE ANY RIGHT THEY MAY HAVE TO CLAIM OR RECOVER, IN ANY SUCH SUIT, ACTION OR PROCEEDING, ANY SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OTHER THAN, OR IN ADDITION TO, ACTUAL DAMAGES. GUARANTORS ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREES THAT THIS SECTION IS A SPECIFIC AND MATERIAL ASPECT OF THIS GUARANTY AND THAT LENDER WOULD NOT PURCHASE THE DEBENTURES IF THE WAIVERS SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION WERE NOT A PART OF THIS GUARANTY.

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: granted the motion to suppress and signed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The only finding made by the trial court was that “[a]ll witnesses were credible and testified truthfully.” The court concluded that “based on the totality of the circumstances, law enforcement lacked sufficient probable cause to enter the motel room” and “an exigency that required an immediate entry into said motel room without a warrant did not exist.” Applicable Law Because the trial court found the only witnesses who testified — Investigator Geske and Corporal Engstrom — to be “credible and truthful,” we review the application of the law to the facts de novo. See Carmouche v. State, 10 S.W.3d 323, 327 (Tex.Crim.App.2000). Both probable cause and exigent circumstances must have existed for the s p.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 986, 109 S.Ct. 543, Options: A. holding that the officer had reasonable grounds to conduct an investigatory detention where a juvenile in a high drug area started walking away upon the approach of a law enforcement officer while keeping his head turned away from the officer and while moving his mouth as if he had something in it B. holding that the incriminating nature of an item was immediately apparent where the police officers had probable cause to believe that it contained evidence of a crime C. holding that the hgn test may be considered as a factor in determining probable cause D. holding police officer had probable cause to believe defendant was operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol E. holding fact that appellant immediately turned and started walking in opposite direction when confronted by police officer was factor to be considered in determining existence of probable cause to believe he was attempting to flee after committing offense

assistant: The best answer is E. holding fact that appellant immediately turned and started walking in opposite direction when confronted by police officer was factor to be considered in determining existence of probable cause to believe he was attempting to flee after committing offense
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notices to be given under this Agreement may be effected by personal delivery in writing or by mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid with return receipt requested. Mailed notices shall be addressed to the parties at the addresses appearing on the first page of this Agreement (to the attention of the Secretary in the case of notices to the Company), but each party may change the delivery address by written notice in accordance with this Section 6.3. Notices delivered personally shall be deemed communicated as of actual receipt; mailed notices shall be deemed communicated as of the second day following deposit in the United States Mail.

assistant: Notices