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: for documents until after the suit was initiated. Until then it did not even attempt to search its files for the requested documents or review them at all. OL & S was therefore reasonable in believing that the filing of a lawsuit was necessary in order to induce government compliance. b. OL & S Vigorously Pursued Administrative Avenues Before Filing Suit. OL & S took full advantage of the administrative process to resolve its claim prior to filing a lawsuit, and had exhausted the process and reached an impasse before the suit was filed. A number of eases have held that a lawsuit was premature, and therefore unnecessary, when the plaintiff was aware that the agency was attempting to comply with the request. Weisberg v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 848 F.2d 1265, 1271 (D.C.Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>); Ginter v. Internal Revenue Serv., 648 F.2d Options: A. holding not necessary a suit filed while the government was still searching for the files and the plaintiffs requests were unduly broad B. recognizing that if the plaintiff files suit in a county where venue does not lie the plaintiff waives the right to choose and the defendant may have the suit transferred to a proper venue C. holding that a prior suit and a subsequent suit between the same parties did not involve the same claim because the evidence necessary to sustain the subsequent suit was insufficient to entitle the plaintiff to relief in the prior suit D. holding a suit not necessary where the government sent a telegram explaining the reason for delay and its ongoing attempts to comply and asked for plaintiffs phone number to discuss it plaintiff filed suit the day after receiving the telegram E. holding the government liable to plaintiffs for breach of contract

assistant: The best answer is A. holding not necessary a suit filed while the government was still searching for the files and the plaintiffs requests were unduly broad
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrowers and US Guarantors jointly and severally agree to pay on demand all Lender Group Expenses of Agent (including, without limitation, the fees and expenses of outside counsel for Agent) in connection with the preparation, negotiation, execution, delivery and administration of this Amendment and all other instruments or documents provided for herein or delivered or to be delivered hereunder or in connection herewith. All obligations provided herein shall survive any termination of this Amendment and the Credit Agreement as modified hereby.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of the Executive’s Involuntary Termination, if the Executive (i) reconfirms and agrees to abide by the covenants described in Section 14(a) and Section 14(c) above, (ii) executes the Release within fifty (50) days after the date of Involuntary Termination and does not revoke such Release in accordance with the terms thereof, and (iii) agrees to provide the consulting services described in Section 14(f) below, then in consideration for such covenants and consulting services, the Company shall pay the Executive, in one cash lump sum, an amount (the “ Consulting Payment ”) in cash equal to the greater of: (X) 170% of the Executive’s Annual Base Salary as in effect on the Date of Termination, and (Y) the Executive’s Annual Base Salary as in effect on the Date of Termination, plus the Executive’s Average Annual Bonus. Except as provided in this subsection, the Consulting Payment shall be paid on such date as is determined by the Company within the ten (10) day period commencing on the 60 th day after the date of the Executive’s Involuntary Termination; provided, however , that if the Executive is a Specified Employee on the date of the Executive’s Involuntary Termination, the Consulting Payment shall be paid as provided in Section 9 hereof to the extent required.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall not be assigned by the Advisor to a non-Affiliate. This Agreement may be assigned by the Advisor to an Affiliate with the approval of the Board, including a majority of the Independent Directors. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Advisor may assign any rights to receive fees or other payments under this Agreement without obtaining the approval of the Board. This Agreement shall not be assigned by the Company or the Partnership without the consent of the Advisor, except in the case of an assignment by the Company or the Partnership to a corporation or other organization which is a successor to all of the assets, rights and obligations of the Company or the Partnership, as the case may be, in which case such successor organization shall be bound hereunder and by the terms of said assignment in the same manner as the Company and the Partnership is bound by this Agreement.

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: were arrested and a second search took place at their business. More Dilaudid tablets were seized at that time. B. Procedural background A superseding indictment on October 24, 2000 charged the Webbs both with conspiring to possess and with actually possessing Dilaudid, each with the intent to distribute. On February 8, 2001, both defendants pled guilty to all counts. The Webbs’ sentencing hearing took place in May of 2001. Although they did not object to the facts as presented in the Presen-tence Report, they filed four objections to the rec of a district court’s application of provisions of the Sentencing Guidelines to the facts should be treated deferentially and should not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous. United States v. Jackson-Randolph, 282 F.3d 369, 389-90 (6th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). B. The district court did not err in Options: A. holding that a trial courts sentencing is reviewed under a deferential abuse of discretion standard unless the order violates statutory or constitutional commands B. holding that a court of appeals may presume reasonable a district courts proper application of the sentencing guidelines C. holding that the standard of review for an award of statutory damages is even more deferential than an abuse of discretion standard D. holding that the supreme courts reasoning in buford leads to the use of a deferential standard of review in the application of the sentencing guidelines under circumstances involving factbound determinations E. holding unconstitutional the mandatory application of the federal sentencing guidelines

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the supreme courts reasoning in buford leads to the use of a deferential standard of review in the application of the sentencing guidelines under circumstances involving factbound determinations
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 action which may be brought in a court of law with respect to this Agreement may be brought in the courts of the Province of British Columbia, and the Executive accepts for himself and with respect to the Executive’s property, generally and unconditionally, the jurisdiction of these courts. The Executive irrevocably waives any objection, including, but not limited to, any objection of the laying of venue or based on the grounds of forum non conveniens , which the Executive may now or hereafter have to the bringing of any action in those jurisdictions.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: sentence.” However, the dis trict court erred in summarily dismissing Owens’ claim. Summary dismissal is appropriate in very limited circumstances, and this is not one of them. Thus, we reverse and remand to allow the district court to reconstrue Owens’ petition as a civil rights claim or to allow Owens the opportunity to amend. REVERSED AND REMANDED. ** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. 1 . ) ("[A] federal court may construe a § 1983 action as a habeas petition, or a habeas petition as a § 1983 action.") (internal citation omitted), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 519 U.S. 918, 117 S.Ct. 285, 136 L.Ed.2d 204 (1996). Cf. Franklin, 662 F.2d at 1347-48 & n. 13 (<HOLDING>). 5 . Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1135-37 Options: A. holding that habeas claim not included in petition and never raised by petitioner before the district court as basis for habeas relief is procedurally defaulted B. holding 1983 suit seeking restoration of sentence credits properly construed as 2254 petition C. holding 1 that the district court properly construed one 1983 claim as a habeas petition but improperly summarily dismissed it and 2 that the district court should have construed another 1983 claim as a habeas petition D. holding that district court properly dismissed claims in 2241 petition that had been decided in previous habeas action E. holding that the district court erred in summarily dismissing a 1983 complaint that should have been brought as a habeas petition

assistant: The best answer is C. holding 1 that the district court properly construed one 1983 claim as a habeas petition but improperly summarily dismissed it and 2 that the district court should have construed another 1983 claim as a habeas petition
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the responsibility for production of documents, undertake an independent search of documents responsive to a subpoena served on him is also allowed. The documents may, however, be reviewed by counsel before production and privileged documents, as defined herein, do not need to be produced. KFI contends further that the “subject matter” waiver engendered by the disclosure of the McLaughlin Letters extends to communications between the successor executor Puzo and his counsel, Fayerweather. This court does not agree. The Estate, itself, is not a separate legal entity. See Eubank Heights Apartments, Ltd. v. Lebow, 615 F.2d 571, 572 (1st Cir. 1980) (noting that Massachusetts does not recognize an estate itself as a legal entity); see also Crowe v. Di Manno, 225 F.2d 652, 653 (1st Cir.1955) (<HOLDING>). Consequently, McLaughlin was not the Estate’s Options: A. holding that a legal malpractice claim arising from errors by an attorney in rendering estateplanning services is properly brought by the personal representative of the estate when excess estate taxes are paid by the estate in contravention of the decedents intended estate plan B. holding liabilities of community estate can be considered by trial court in making just and right division of marital estate C. holding that for estate tax purposes property is to be valued as it exists in the hands of the estate D. holding a decedents estate is not a legal entity and only individuals administering the estate can be sued on estates behalf E. recognizing property of the estate to include the estates chose in action against its auditor

assistant: The best answer is D. holding a decedents estate is not a legal entity and only individuals administering the estate can be sued on estates behalf
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: Mem. at 35, it nonetheless contends that “[t]he clear intent of making the subcontract a ‘part hereof (of the bond) was to supplement the default provisions in the bond agreement so that Tower would be obligated to perform the work according to the subcontract if POST did not,” id. at 36. The plain meaning of the contract language simply does not support Tower’s interpretation. The Performance Bond states that the Subcontract “is hereby referred to and made a part” of the Bond without any exception or reservation. The Court can discern no other meaning or effect of this language but to include the Subcontract’s terms as provisions of the Performance Bond in their entirety. Cf. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth. ex rel. Noralco Corp. v. Norair Eng’g Corp., 553 F.2d 233, 235 (D.C.Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, “[i]t is generally held that ‘[w]hen Options: A. holding that the unambiguous terms of the your work exclusion do not eliminate coverage for harm done to a subcontractors work B. holding that subcontract requirement that work be performed in accordance with specifications in prime contract meant that prime contract governed the manner of the performance of the work not the basis for computing the amount to be paid the subcontractor C. holding that only provisions relating to work specifications and performance were incorporated into the subcontract because the relevant clauses limited the incorporation of the terms insofar as they relate to the work undertaken herein D. recognizing that the work to be completed in accordance with the time limits of section 6 is the work for which lien enforcement is sought E. holding that the more transformative the new work the more likely the use of the old work is a fair one

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that only provisions relating to work specifications and performance were incorporated into the subcontract because the relevant clauses limited the incorporation of the terms insofar as they relate to the work undertaken herein
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: immediately after the shooting, Marrero made a telephone call from his cellular telephone. He then refused to assist the police in gathering information about the perpetrators. This testimony corroborated other evidence that the Santiago organization was engaged in a "drug war" with a rival gang. 3 . The rule provides in pertinent part: [T]he defendant may, in order to afford an opportunity to move to suppress evidence request notice of the government's intention to use (in its evidence in chief at trial) any evidence which the defendant may be entitled to discover under Rule 16.... 4 . Indeed, the district court noted specially that a variety of factors, such as the unavailability of witnesses and sloppy prosecutorial work at the local level, may well have contributed to t Cir.1963) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, since none of the alternates Options: A. holding that rule 24c violations not brought to the district courts attention are forfeited B. holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts C. holding that federal district courts have jurisdiction over violations of collective bargaining contracts even if such violations are also unfair labor practices subject to nlrb jurisdiction D. holding that a district courts findings under rule 52a are to be liberally construed in support of the district courts judgment E. recognizing that in the interest of judicial economy res judicata may properly be raised by a district court sua sponte particularly where both actions are brought in the courts of the same district

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that rule 24c violations not brought to the district courts attention are forfeited
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: representative the right of action which accrued to the deceased at common law. See Harvey v. Hassinger, 315 Pa.Super. 97, 461 A.2d 814, 817 (1983). A survival action is brought by the personal representative of the decedent, and is an action which the decedent himself could bring had he survived and, in effect, is brought on behalf of the decedent. See In re Pozzuolo’s Estate, 433 Pa. 185, 249 A.2d 540, 544 (1969). In order to succeed on his claims of wrongful death and survival action on behalf of Keith Ketchmore and Markeith Ketchmore, respectively, Donlan must establish that the defendants were negligent with respect to the care of Markeith Ketchmore. See Estate of Zimmerman v. S.E.P.T.A., 168 F.3d 680, 684 (3d Cir. 1999); Carroll v. Colon, 608 F.Supp. 1277, 1279 (E.D.Pa.1985) (<HOLDING>). Thus, in consideration of the facts pleaded, Options: A. holding act 111 valid under pennsylvania constitution B. holding that pennsylvania law applied as the parties did not argue choice of law issue and implied that pennsylvania law applied by focusing their arguments on same C. holding that when majority of class lived in new jersey maryland pennsylvania and virginia the eastern district of pennsylvania was a desirable forum D. holding that an amended complaint alleging injuries to the driver caused by an auto accident which were allegedly the result of defendants negligence and that pennsylvania survival act was the basis for the cause of action stated a valid survival claim under pennsylvania law E. holding that we are required to predict the position which the pennsylvania supreme court would take in resolving this dispute and in the absence of a clear statement by the pennsylvania supreme court to the contrary or other persuasive evidence of a change in pennsylvania law we are bound by the holdings of previous panels of this court

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an amended complaint alleging injuries to the driver caused by an auto accident which were allegedly the result of defendants negligence and that pennsylvania survival act was the basis for the cause of action stated a valid survival claim under pennsylvania law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with respondent and applied the “cause and prejudice” test to determine whether Collier’s failure to follow the applicable state procedural rules precluded his claim. See Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 86-87, 97 S.Ct. 2497, 2506, 53 L.Ed.2d 594 (1977) (applying the rule from Francis v. Henderson, 425 U.S. 536, 96 S.Ct. 1708, 48 L.Ed.2d 149 (1976), which established that petitioners who raise claims in federal habeas corpus petitions that are barred by state doctrines of procedural waiver must establish “cause” and “prejudice” for their failure to raise the claims in state court). The court held that Collier had demonstrated sufficient cause by the fact that he was represented on his first state habeas petition by trial counsel. See Stephens v. Kemp, 846 F.2d 642, 651 (11th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). The court then evaluated Collier’s claim on Options: A. holding that a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel could not be resolved by the facts in the record and must be pursued in an action for habeas corpus B. holding that petitioner who did not raise the methamphetaminetype issue at sentencing or on direct appeal was barred from raising that issue for the first time in 2255 motion and that petitioner did not satisfy either the performance prong or prejudice prong of ineffective assistance of counsel standard C. holding that a habeas corpus petitioner who did not raise an ineffective assistance claim in his first state habeas petition satisfied the cause prong of the cause and prejudice test when counsel on the first state habeas petition was also trial counsel whose performance was allegedly inadequate D. holding that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel could not be resolved on the facts appearing in the record and that under such circumstances the defendants remedy is to file a petition for habeas corpus E. holding that active jurisdiction arose when the petitioner was detained for purposes of habeas corpus when the petition was filed

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a habeas corpus petitioner who did not raise an ineffective assistance claim in his first state habeas petition satisfied the cause prong of the cause and prejudice test when counsel on the first state habeas petition was also trial counsel whose performance was allegedly inadequate
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 pursue a declaratory judgment action against an insurer. Id. at 137-38, 142 N.W.2d at 647. The intermediate appellate court has no authority to overrule a decision by the supreme court. Mueller v. Theis, 512 N.W.2d 907, 912 (Minn.App.1994) (citing Principal Fin. Group v. Allstate Ins. Co., 472 N.W.2d 338, 343 (Minn.App.1991) (Davies, J. concurring specially)), review denied (Minn. Apr. 28, 1994). b. Continental argues that it should not be liable for Domtar’s attorney fees incurred in this action to address the indemnity issues, because the jury did not find a breach of a duty to indemnify. Rather, Continental argues that it is solely liable for Domtar’s attorney fees incurred to establish a duty to defend. See Lanoue v. Fireman’s Fund Amer. Ins. Cos., 278 N.W.2d 49, 55 (Minn.1979) (<HOLDING>); Morrison, 274 Minn. at 137-38, 142 N.W.2d at Options: A. holding despite a reservation of rights that when the insurer provides a defense to its insured the insured has no right to interfere with the insurers control of the defense and a stipulated judgment between the insured and the injured claimant without the consent of the insurer is ineffective to impose liability upon the insurer B. holding that chapter 38 permits an insured to recover attorney fees from the insurer C. holding that insured may recover from its insurer any attorney fees incurred in successfully attempting to force the insurer to defend an action against the insured D. holding that when the insured brings an action for a declaration of coverage and prevails absent a bad faith denial of coverage by the insurer attorneys fees incurred by the insured in the prosecution of that action are not incurred at the request of the insurer E. holding that insured may recover attorneys fees from insurer where insurer acts in bad faith

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that insured may recover from its insurer any attorney fees incurred in successfully attempting to force the insurer to defend an action against the insured
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: One option was to increase taxes on all residents to raise the funds needed for road improvements. Montgomery County Code sec. 52—48(c)(2). The County relies, in part, on the fact that improvements would not be necessary if the new developments were not to be built. Thus, they contend the decision to impose an impact tax as opposed to raising taxes on all property owners is a rational one and the classification legitimate according to the County’s position. This is especially true, according to the County’s position, in light of the fact that the existing development pays for a portion of the road improvements and expansion through already existing tax schemes. See Sanitary Comm’n v. Noel, 155 Md. 427, 434, 142 A. 634, appeal dismissed, 278 U.S. 573, 49 S.Ct. 94, 73 L.Ed. 513 (1928) (<HOLDING>). Appellees argue that if the circumstances Options: A. holding that a plantshutdown benefit is not an optional form of benefit B. holding higher taxes on those residents that receive a greater benefit was not an arbitrary classification C. holding that an eic was neither a social security benefit nor a local public assistance benefit D. holding that the classification made by 252242 was neither unreasonable nor arbitrary E. holding that the claims to a statutory benefit had not yet vested when the legislature eliminated the benefit

assistant: The best answer is B. holding higher taxes on those residents that receive a greater benefit was not an arbitrary classification
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 the Closing, the Company shall use the proceeds of the issuance of the Preferred Stock to repay the Existing Credit Facility and pay the fees and expenses incurred in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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: U.S. Const. amend. IV; Me. Const. art. I, § 5; State v. Glover, 2014 ME 49, ¶ 10, 89 A.3d 1077. This authority applies to defendants who have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the location of the search. Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 143, 99 S.Ct. 421, 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978). [¶ 16] The owner of a home has the right to consent to a warrantless search by law enforcement. Fernandez v. California, — U.S.-, 134 S.Ct. 1126, 1132, 188 L.Ed.2d 25 (2014). However, the United States Supreme Court has generally recognized that an overnight guest in a home has a reasonable expectation of privacy in that home. Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91, 96-97, 110 S.Ct. 1684, 109 L.Ed.2d 85 (1990); see also Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483, 488-90 & n. 7, 84 S.Ct. 889, 11 L.Ed.2d 856 (1964) (<HOLDING>). [¶ 17] An officer may conduct a warrantless Options: A. holding that while a mother could consent to a search of her sons room she did not have authority to consent to a search of a locked footlocker within the room B. holding that search of hotel room without a search warrant and without consent of absent guest was unlawful even though hotel clerk had consented to search C. holding that hotel night clerks consent to search an occupied guest room was not valid consent and the evidence obtained from the search was inadmissible D. holding that the defendants unlawful arrest in his hotel room rendered his subsequent consent to the search of his room invalid even though he signed a consent form allowing the search after his arrest because the government completely failed to address whether there was a break in the causal relationship between the unlawful arrest and the subsequent search E. holding that evidence obtained by improper search or seizure is inadmissible

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that hotel night clerks consent to search an occupied guest room was not valid consent and the evidence obtained from the search was inadmissible
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any term or provision of this Agreement shall be held or declared to be invalid, unenforceable, or illegal, for any reason, by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity, unenforceability, or illegality shall not affect any other term or provision of this Agreement or invalidate or render unenforceable such term or provision in any other jurisdiction. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, unenforceable, or illegal, the parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible in a mutually acceptable manner in order that the transactions contemplated hereby be consummated as originally contemplated to the greatest extent possible.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No Protected Partner shall assign this Agreement or its rights hereunder to any Person without the prior written consent of the Partnership, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, provided that any such assignment undertaken without such consent shall be null and void. For the avoidance of doubt, any transfer of OP Units by a Protected Partner shall be governed by the terms of the OP Agreement as amended by the Admission Amendment.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Lease constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and may not be changed or modified except by an agreement in writing signed by the parties. Landlord and Tenant hereby agree that all prior or contemporaneous oral understandings, agreements or negotiations relative to the leasing of the Premises are merged into and revoked by this Lease. All exhibits and schedules to this Lease are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

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: (2004). “Common issues ... predominate if they ‘ha[ve] a direct impact on every class member’s effort to establish liability and on every class member’s entitlement to injunctive and monetary relief.’ ” Klay v. Humana, Inc., 382 F.3d 1241, 1255 (11th Cir.2004) (citation omitted). Each party must be able to prove their own individual case, and in so doing, prove the case of the other unnamed class members. See Earnest v. Amoco Oil Co., 859 So.2d 1255, 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). If Plaintiffs must still present a great deal of individualized proof or argue individualized legal points to establish most or all of the elements of their claims, class certification is not appropriate. See Klay, 382 F.3d at 1255; see also Terry L. Braun, P.A. v. Campbell, 827 So.2d 261 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (<HOLDING>). A. Failure to prove elements of claims Here, Options: A. holding that fmla does not impose individual liability B. holding no individual liability under the adea C. holding that where both liability and damages depend on individual factual determinations claims may only be determined on individual basis D. holding jurisdiction over an individual may not usually be predicated on jurisdiction over a corporation unless the corporation is the alter ego of the individual or when the individual perpetrates a fraud E. holding that there is no individual liability under title vii

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where both liability and damages depend on individual factual determinations claims may only be determined on individual basis
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: does not affect any right of a creditor to offset....” This language has been interpreted to mean that a creditor’s right to setoff a mutual, pre-petition debt survives even the discharge of the debtor, because it would “be unfair to deny a creditor the right to recover an established obligation while requiring the creditor to fully satisfy a debt to a debtor.” In re Davidovich, 901 F.2d 1533, 1539 (10th Cir.1990) (quoting In re G.S. Omni Corp., 835 F.2d 1317, 1318 (10th Cir.1987)); see also In re Service Decorating Co., 105 B.R. 859, 862-63 (N.D.Ill.1989); In re Morgan, 77 B.R. 81, 85 (Bankr.S.D.Miss.1987); In re Ford, 35 B.R. 277, 279-80 (Bankr.N.D.Ga.1983); In re Slaw Constr. Corp., 17 B.R. 744, 748 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1982). Contra In re Johnson, 13 B.R. 185, 188-89 (Bankr.M.D.Tenn.1981) (<HOLDING>). Buckenmaier relies upon numerous cases that Options: A. holding that creditors cannot allow postpetition funds to be automatically applied to a prepetition indebtedness absent some positive indication that debtors indeed intend to voluntarily assume their prepetition debts B. holding that an attempted setoff in response to a debtors postpetition lawsuit was enjoined by 524a2 notwithstanding that acts giving rise to action occurred prepetition C. holding that a postpetition claim under section 1305 is a liability that arises postpetition and relates only to postpetition activity D. holding disputed claim for misappropriation of funds is noncontingent and liquidated because all events giving rise to liability occurred prepetition and the amount of the debt can be calculated E. holding that legal malpractice claim against chapter 7 debtor arose prepetition when the conduct giving rise to the claim occurred and therefore was subject to the debtors discharge

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an attempted setoff in response to a debtors postpetition lawsuit was enjoined by 524a2 notwithstanding that acts giving rise to action occurred prepetition
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: North Dakota ex rel. Olson v. Andrus, 581 F.2d 177, 180 (8th Cir. 1978); Mead Data Cent., Inc. v. United States Dep’t of Air Force, 566 F.2d 242 (D.C. Cir. 1977); Shell Oil Co. v. Internal Revenue Serv., 772 F. Supp. 202 (D. Del. 1991); Wash. Post Co. v. United States Dep’t of Air Force, 617 F. Supp. 602 (D.D.C. 1985) (each discussing FOIA “exemption 5,” which exempts from disclosure “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency,” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5), and holding that, by analogy to waiver of attorney-client privilege, an agency cannot claim that the information is exempt from disclosure); N.W. Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides v. Browner, 941 F. Supp. 197, 201 (D.D.C. 1996) (<HOLDING>); Lawyers Comm. for Human Rights v. Immigration Options: A. holding that foia exemption 4 did not apply because agency did not meet burden of showing that desired information consisted of trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person that are privileged or confidential B. holding that the scope of the trade secrets act is at least coextensive with that of exemption 4 of foia C. recognizing a legitimate need to protect an employee from disclosing an employers trade secrets or other confidential information to a competitor D. holding that disclosure during discovery of certain kinds of information including privileged material trade secrets attorney work product or material involving a confidential informant could constitute a material injury of an irreparable nature E. holding records did not qualify as exempt confidential commercial information under exemption 4 because the information was not actually confidential

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that foia exemption 4 did not apply because agency did not meet burden of showing that desired information consisted of trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person that are privileged or confidential
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: for all intents and purposes, the DCOHR receives charges filed with the EEOC. Even if this arrangement alone fails to refute PwC’s argument, it bears mentioning that the DCOHR has waived its right to process age discrimination claims initially filed with the EEOC. The worksharing agreement provides that “[t]he EEOC and the [DCOHR] will process all Title VII, ADA, and ADEA charges that they originally receive.” Id. ¶ III A. Deferral state filing requirements are designed to “give state agencies a prior opportunity to consider discrimination complaints,” Love v. Pullman Co., 404 U.S. 522, 526, 92 S.Ct. 616, 30 L.Ed.2d 679 (1972), and states may voluntarily waive that right if they wish, see EEOC v. Commercial Office Prods. Co., 486 U.S. 107, 117, 108 S.Ct. 1666, 100 L.Ed.2d 96 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Here, the District of Columbia has Options: A. holding that actions to consider or enforce voluntary conciliation agreements between the eeoc and the defendants under title vii are properly within the jurisdiction of the federal courts B. holding that states may waive the title vii 60day deferral period but retain jurisdiction over discrimination charges by entering into worksharing agreements with the eeoc C. holding that in light of a worksharing agreement between the state agency and the eeoc a charge of discrimination filed with the state agency was properly filed with the eeoc on the same date D. holding that the limitations period for a title vii claim for pay discrimination begins with the first discrete act E. holding that a claim for discrimination in private employment is not preempted by title vii

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that states may waive the title vii 60day deferral period but retain jurisdiction over discrimination charges by entering into worksharing agreements with the eeoc
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: No course of dealing or any delay or failure to exercise any right hereunder on the part of Holder shall operate as a waiver of such right or otherwise prejudice Holder's rights, powers or remedies. Without limiting any other provision of this Warrant or the Agreement, if the Company willfully and knowingly fails to comply with any provision of this Warrant, which results in any material damages to the Holder, the Company shall pay to Holder such amounts as shall be sufficient to cover any costs and expenses including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees, including those of appellate proceedings, incurred by Holder in collecting any amounts due pursuant hereto or in otherwise enforcing any of its rights, powers or remedies hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Outside Director Equity Compensation Policy (the “Policy”) is adopted by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) in accordance with Section 12 of the Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 2004 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”). Capitalized but undefined terms used herein shall have the meanings provided for in the Plan.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: F.Supp. at 582. As such, a court must “ ‘weigh the need for truth against the importance of the relationship or policy sought to be furthered by the privilege, and the likelihood that recognition of the privilege will in fact protect that relationship in the factual setting of the case.’ ” Memorial Hospital, 664 F.2d at 1061-62 (citation omitted); see also In re Franklin National Bank Sec. Litigation, 478 F.Supp. 577 (E.D.N.Y.1 ion would ensure more efficient governmental decision making on the state level. Id. The court further reasoned that such a conclusion was consistent with Illinois’ emerging policy of protecting governmental deliberative materials. Id.; see also Hoffman v. Department of Corrections, 158 Ill.App.3d 473, 110 Ill.Dec. 582, 584, 511 N.E.2d 759, 761 (1st Dist.1987) (<HOLDING>); Carrigan v. Harkrader, 146 Ill.App.3d 535, Options: A. holding that lprs are entitled to the protection of the equal protection clause B. recognizing utswmc as a governmental unit under the act C. recognizing the protection of preliminary governmental materials D. holding section 1010215 does not waive governmental immunity merely because a governmental action falls within the listed governmental functions thus further inquiry under the act is necessary E. recognizing governmental interest in rehabilitation

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing the protection of preliminary governmental materials
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 Purchase Agreement and the instruments referenced herein contain the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the matters covered herein and therein and, except as specifically set forth herein or therein, neither the Company nor the Purchaser makes any representation, warranty, covenant or undertaking with respect to such matters. Each party expressly represents and warrants that it is not relying on any oral or written representations, warranties, covenants or agreements outside of this Purchase Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, the Proprietary Information and Confidentiality Agreement attached and the exhibits hereto, contain the entire Agreement among the parties and supersede all prior and contemporaneous oral and written agreements, understandings and representations among the parties, including without limitation any offer letter. There are no representations, agreements, arrangements, or understandings, whether oral or written, between or among the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement that are not fully expressed herein and therein.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 466 U.S. 377 104 S.Ct. 2144 80 L.Ed.2d 377 BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PARIS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 95, et al., petitioners,v.Jesse A. VAIL. No. 83-87. Supreme Court of the United States April 23, 1984. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. 2 Justice MARSHALL took no part in the decision of this case.

assistant: 4
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall pay Executive a base salary of $ [•] per year (“ Base Salary ”). The Base Salary may be increased annually by an amount as may be approved by the Board or the Compensation Committee, and, upon such increase, the increased amount shall thereafter be deemed to be the Base Salary for purposes of this Agreement.

assistant: Base Salary
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: crowdtangle , in its sole discretion , has the right to suspend , terminate or restrict your access to the services , or any other crowdtangle service , for any reason and at any time .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: court held that statements made by employees suggesting that plaintiff was fired because of his age were outside the scope of 802(d)(2)(D) because the employees were not involved in the decision to fire plaintiff. Defendants’ reading of Rule 802(d)(2)(D) is too narrow. Whether something is within an employee’s scope of employment extends beyond matters involving direct decisionmakers. Carter v. Univ. of Toledo, 349 F.3d 269, 275 (6th Cir.2003). As Wilson argues, McComb’s comments about Page fall squarely within the scope of her employment because she was a supervisor, who gave evaluations of those working under her, including Page. Grizzell v. City of Columbus Div. of Police, 461 F.3d 711, 722 (6th Cir.2005) (citing Barner v. Pilkington N. Am. Inc., 399 F.3d 745, 750 (6th Cir.2005)) (<HOLDING>). Further, although comments made by Options: A. holding that employee charged with managing the promotional process was within his authority when he spoke on the matter of promotions B. holding that the public employee plaintiff was charged with knowledge of the statutory limitation on the governors authority to bind the state to pay the employee a fixed annual salary C. holding that even when employee was driving employers vehicle employee was not acting within the scope of his employment absent evidence that he had undertaken a special mission at his employers direction D. holding that issues of fact precluded summary judgment on the question of whether an employee was acting within the course and scope of his employment for purposes of insurance coverage when the employee was simply sitting in his vehicle in his employers parking lot waiting for the business to open at the time the accident occurred E. holding that for immunity an official must first prove that he was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority when the allegedly wrongful acts occurred

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that employee charged with managing the promotional process was within his authority when he spoke on the matter of promotions