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: being a fund receiving legislative appropriation(s)-there can be no question it acts in behalf of the State. 121 Further, although State ex rel. State Insurance Fund v. Bone, 1959 OK 135, 344 P.2d 562 held-prior to the GTCA's enactment-that SIF was not within the traditional immunity afforded the sovereign because it was an agency or instrumentality of the State engaged in a business enterprise, as distinguished from a purely governmental function, Bone was decided when a distinction was made between governmental and proprietary functions of governmental entities for sovereign immunity purposes. See Vanderpool v. State, 1983 OK 82, 672 P.2d 1153 (general discussion of governmental/proprietary function issue) and Hershel v. University Hospital Foundation, 1980 OK 60, 610 P.2d 237, 242 (<HOLDING>) The previous distinction existing in sovereign Options: A. recognizing the courts treatment of sif in bone involved a holding that sif was a state enterprise engaged in a proprietary function not entitled to sovereign immunity B. holding that state sovereign immunity bars state constitutional claims C. holding that local school boards were not entitled to eleventh amendment immunity even though entitled to sovereign immunity in the same degree as the state itself from tort suits D. holding that a state may waive its sovereign immunity E. holding officers engaged in search entitled to immunity

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the courts treatment of sif in bone involved a holding that sif was a state enterprise engaged in a proprietary function not entitled to sovereign immunity
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: intent in the capital murder of Chapa. The record before us contains ample evidence, as well as the S & A extraneous offense, to prove Russell’s specific intent to kill Chapa. For these reasons, we cannot agree with the State’s contention that the Vogt Street offense was relevant to prove Russell’s intent by virtue of the application of the doctrine of chances. Nonetheless, deferring as we must to the trial court’s reliance on its own observations and experience in making a Rule 404(b) relevancy determination, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that the Vogt Street offense bore some relevance to the issue of Russell’s specific intent in the capital murder of Chapa. See, e.g., Bradshaw v. State, 65 S.W.3d 232, 237 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). The court’s charge authorized the jury to Options: A. holding evidence of virtually identical offense was relevant to show intent among other things in trial of charged offense B. holding extraneous conduct subsequent to the charged offense admissible C. holding extraneous acts relevant to show intent in charged offense D. holding defendants extraneous acts of nonpayment for goods and services were admissible in prosecution for theft of service because defendants intent could not be inferred from his nonpayment in the charged offense E. holding that high degree of similarity between extraneous and charged offense used in cases proving modus operandi not required when purpose of proof is to show intent

assistant: The best answer is C. holding extraneous acts relevant to show intent in charged 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: date of April 24, 1996, are given a one-year grace period in which to file their habeas petitions, that is, until April 24, 1997. See Ross v. Artuz, 150 F.3d 97, 103 (2d Cir.1998). Moreover, the grace period will be tolled while “a properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect to the pertinent claim or judgment is pending.” 28 U.S .C. § 2244(d)(2). Specifically, “a state court petition is ‘pending’ from the time it ís first filed until finally disposed of and further appellate review is unavailable under the particular state’s procedures.” Bennett v. Artuz, 199 F.3d 116, 120 (2d Cir.1999), aff'd on other grounds, 531 U.S. 4, 121 S.Ct. 361, 148 L.Ed.2d 213 (U.S. 2000); see also Smith v. McGinnis, 208 F.3d 13, 17 (2d Cir.) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 840, 121 S.Ct. 104, Options: A. holding that the statute of limitations period begins to run when the allegedly discriminatory pension plan is applied to the plaintiffs and leaving determination of the actual date the statute begins to run on each claim to the district court B. holding that the tolling provision excludes time during which properly filed state relief applications are pending but does not reset the date from which the oneyear statute of limitations begins to run C. holding that the statute of limitations begins to run on the date the alleged malpractice is discovered D. holding that the oneyear period begins to run when the mandate of the court of appeals issues E. holding the sixyear limitations period begins to run upon date that payment is made

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the tolling provision excludes time during which properly filed state relief applications are pending but does not reset the date from which the oneyear statute of limitations begins to run
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: Unless otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement, the representations, warranties, covenants and conditions of the parties set forth in this Agreement shall not survive the consummation of the transaction contemplated by this Agreement and the delivery and recordation of the Deed. Notwithstanding the foregoing, (a) all indemnification obligations in this Agreement shall survive the Closing; and (b) the indemnification obligations set forth in Sections 3.1.5, 12.1, 12.3 and 12.11 shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

assistant: Survival
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: money to the Debtors for the purchase of the piano and the stereo, the second loan was valued to enable the Debtors to pay off the first loan to receive cash and to pay insurance charges. Id. at 800. The Court cited with approval In re Jones, 5 B.R. 655 (Bankr.M.D.N.C.1980). In Jones, the Bankruptcy Judge stated: “The purpose of the renewal note was to payoff (sic) the original note, an antecedent debt. The purchase money character of the security interest was extinguished when the proceeds from the first renewal note were used to satisfy the original note.” Id. at 657. The Circuits are split on the issue. Agreeing with Matthews, supra, are courts from the 1st, 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th and 11th Circuits. See, e.g., Dominion Bank of Cumberland's, N.A. v. Nuckolls, 780 F.2d 408 (4th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); Hipps v. Landmark Financial Services of Options: A. holding courts must look to the law of the state in which the security interest was created to determine if creditor retains a purchase money security interest despite refinancing B. holding that although a financing statement may be used to assist in the interpretation of the security agreement the financing statement does not create a security interest and cannot extend a security interest beyond what has been unambiguously described in a security agreement C. holding security interest in insurance premiums perfected by creation of security interest D. holding that the trustee could not avoid a security interest under section 549 when that security interest was authorized by the bankruptcy court E. holding that under virginia law a banks security interest which secured a loan made to refinance preexisting debt was a nonpossessory nonpurchasemoney security interest

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that under virginia law a banks security interest which secured a loan made to refinance preexisting debt was a nonpossessory nonpurchasemoney security interest
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: refusal and that they were willing to purchase the property by matching the high bid offered at the public sale. Id. at 966. The trial court agreed that the lessees had a right of first refusal and ordered that the property be sold to the lessees. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed, observing: The administrator is vested with no title to the real estate. His possession is for the purposes of administration. His authority to sell is not general, but special and limited, and can be exercised only for the purposes mentioned in the statute. He is not an agent of the heirs; does not derive his powers from them, and is not subject to their control. His possession of their property and sale thereof without their consent is in a sense ho ty. Tax Claim Bureau, 892 A.2d 868 (Pa.Commw.Ct.2006) (<HOLDING>); Benefit Realty Corp. v. City of Carrollton, Options: A. holding united states marshals involuntary bankruptcy sale of property did not trigger right of first refusal B. holding right of first refusal only applied to a voluntary sale and taking of property by condemnation is involuntary therefore right of first refusal not triggered C. holding sale of property by county taxing authority to pay delinquent taxes did not trigger right of first refusal provision contained in deed D. holding gratuitous transfer of real property to hospital did not trigger right of first refusal E. holding courtordered sale of property to satisfy judgment against lessor was involuntary sale and did not trigger lessees right of first refusal since agreement required that lessor be a willing seller of the property

assistant: The best answer is C. holding sale of property by county taxing authority to pay delinquent taxes did not trigger right of first refusal provision contained in deed
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of care and violated EMTALA, 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd, when they allegedly refused to accept transfer of Mrs. West as a patient to their facility. The Court addresses each claim in turn. A. EMTALA Claim ■ Plaintiffs assert that Defendants violated EMTALA when Dr. Huxol, acting on behalf of OMHS, allegedly refused to accept transfer of Mrs. West from Breekin-ridge Memorial to OMHS. Dr. Huxol contends he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law with respect to Plaintiffs’ EMTALA claim because EMTALA does not authorize a private right of action against individuals. Both Defendants move for, summary judgment on the ground that there is an absence of a genuine dispute of material fact related to whether Dr. Huxol ever refuse (same); Delaney v. Cade, 986 F.2d 387, 393-94 (10th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Baber v. Hosp, Corp. of Am., 977 F.2d 872, Options: A. holding plain language compelled that reading B. recognizing the cause of action C. recognizing cause of action D. holding plain language of act provides cause of action only against participating hospitals E. holding when ordinance language is clear courts must give language its plain meaning

assistant: The best answer is D. holding plain language of act provides cause of action only against participating hospitals
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 sets forth the exclusive contract terms between the Parties with respect to, and shall apply to, all orders for the Drug Product. Any terms in a Purchase Order, sales order, invoice or other notice submitted by either Party to the other Party that are different from or additional to the provisions hereof shall be null and void notwithstanding CRL’s delivery of, and Client’s acceptance of, the Drug Product under any Purchase Order, sales order, invoice or other notice containing such terms.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: so that no party is harmed by what we have called a 'preliminary' adjudication." (quoting United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 40-41, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950))); Peter A. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children's Servs., 146 P.3d 991, 994-96 (Alaska 2006) (finding equity requires vacatur of challenged order when prevailing party's unilateral actions below resulted in issue becoming moot); City of Valdez v. Gavora, Inc., 692 P.2d 959, 960-61 (Alaska 1984) (vacating judgment because it was moot and to prevent it having later legal effect). 10 . See, e.g., State v. Carlin, 249 P.3d 752, 756 (Alaska 2011) ("We will overturn one of our prior decisions only when we are 'clearly convinced that the rule was originally erroneous or is no 0) (<HOLDING>). 18 . See, e.g., Bigley v. Alaska Psychiatric Options: A. recognizing policy and ruling that person who failed to file counterclaim when childs paternity was being determined in earlier litigation should not be allowed to bring later suit to establish that he was childs natural father as this would not be in the childs best interests B. holding harmless the improper admission of a social workers hearsay testimony concerning a childs report of sexual abuse where the credibility of the childs testimony was supported by other witnesses C. holding that a plenary hearing was necessary based upon mothers certification and school social workers report of childs behavioral problems D. holding childs claim he was improperly adjudicated as delinquent not moot even though adjudication was later declared void ab initio because childs records were easily obtainable by others such as school authorities social workers judges at sentencing military and prospective employers E. holding that trial court improperly awarded custody of child to the childs stepmother and grandparents where no pleading in the case was directed at such relief and the childs mother had no notice that the issue would be considered

assistant: The best answer is D. holding childs claim he was improperly adjudicated as delinquent not moot even though adjudication was later declared void ab initio because childs records were easily obtainable by others such as school authorities social workers judges at sentencing military and prospective employers
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed severable and the invalidity or unenforceability of any provision shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the other provisions hereof. If any provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to any Person or any circumstance, is invalid or unenforceable, (a) a suitable and equitable provision shall be substituted therefor in order to carry out, so far as may be valid and enforceable, the intent and purpose of such invalid or unenforceable provision and (b) the remainder of this Agreement and the application of such provision to other Persons or circumstances shall not be affected by such invalidity or unenforceability, nor shall such invalidity or unenforceability affect the validity or enforceability of such provision, or the application of such provision, in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Prior to closing, Seller shall at its sole expense, provide title opinions prepared by attorneys of Seller’s choosing, covering each of the leases from the date of Patent to a date not earlier than the date this Agreement is executed. Buyer may at its sole cost and expense review such title opinions and conduct such examination of title relating to and the Leases as it sees fit and shall notify Seller in writing, on or before Closing, of any title defect which Buyer requests Seller to cure before closing. In the event Buyer notifies Seller of any defects, Seller shall attempt to cure same. In the event of a title defect which Seller is unable to cure, the parties shall use reasonable efforts to agree on an adjustment of the Purchase Price. In the event the parties are unable to reach such an agreement, Buyer or Seller may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the other Party on or before Closing.

assistant: Titles
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: deadlines,’ ... is merely a ‘rule[ ] that seek[s] to promote the orderly progress of litigation by requiring that the parties take certain procedural steps at certain specified times.’ ” Achates, 803 F.3d at 658 (alterations in original) (quoting Henderson ex rel. Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U.S. 428, 435, 131 S.Ct. 1197, 179 L.Ed.2d 159 (2011)). Unlike the IPR time bar which is simply a procedural requirement that rights be exercised in a timely manner, § 18(a)(1)(B) relates to a party’s right to seek CBM review in the first instance. There is no doubt that, despite the AIA’s no-appeal provisions, judicial review remains available on questions of “whether the [Board] exceeded statutory limits on its authority to invalidate.” Versata, 793 F.3d at 1319; see also Cuozzo, 136 S.Ct. at 2141 (<HOLDING>). As we have explained, to hold otherwise would Options: A. holding that judicial review under apa standards is alone sufficient to preclude a bivens action B. holding that a mandatory arbitration clause does not preclude litigating a federal statutory claim C. holding that 314d does not preclude judicial review when the pto acts outside its statutory limits D. holding that the economic loss rule does not preclude independent tort claims that fall outside the scope of a breach of contract E. recognizing judicial immunity for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that 314d does not preclude judicial review when the pto acts outside its statutory limits
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’s obligations under this Section 3.7 shall survive the resignation or replacement of the Administrative Agent or any assignment of rights by, or the replacement of, a Lender, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all obligations under any Loan Document.

assistant: Survival
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 regulation is unrelated to the content of the expression, the regulation will be deemed neutral even if it has an ‘incidental effect’ on some speakers and not on others.” New Jersey Freedom Org. v. City of New Brunswick, 7 F.Supp.2d 499, 506 (D.N.J.1997) (citation omitted). Therefore, the Court must look to the purported purpose behind the regulation and determine whether it is related to the content of the expression. Courts have consistently found that where speech contains both outreach or canvassing protected by the First Amendment and commercial solicitation, the high-value speech is not eclipsed by the commercial speech. Heffron, 452 U.S. at 647, 101 S.Ct. 2559; Riley v. Nat’l Fed. of the Blind of North Carolina, Inc., 487 U.S. 781, 796, 108 S.Ct. 2667, 101 L.Ed.2d 669 (1988) (<HOLDING>); Telco Comm’n, Inc. v. Barry, 731 F.Supp. 670, Options: A. holding that a defendants right to an independent blood alcohol test means the right to a test that is not subject to government manipulation B. holding where the component parts of a single speech are inextricably intertwined we cannot parcel out the speech applying one test to one phrase and another test to another phrase we apply our test for fully protected expression C. holding that first amendment protections apply to compelled speech as well as restrictions on speech D. holding that the plaintiffs right to political speech is fully in accord with the publics interest in free speech and association E. holding that statute reaching beyond purely commercial speech to chill fully protected speech can merit application of the overbreadth doctrine

assistant: The best answer is B. holding where the component parts of a single speech are inextricably intertwined we cannot parcel out the speech applying one test to one phrase and another test to another phrase we apply our test for fully protected expression
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: Other than as expressly contemplated by Section 3.15 hereof, each Guarantor shall remain obligated hereunder notwithstanding that, without any reservation of rights against any Guarantor and without notice to or further assent by any Guarantor, any demand for payment of any of the Guaranteed Obligations made by any Guaranteed Party may be rescinded by such Guaranteed Party and any of the Guaranteed Obligations continued, and the Guaranteed Obligations, or the liability of any other Person upon or for any part thereof, or any collateral security or guarantee therefor or right of offset with respect thereto, may, from time to time, in whole or in part, be renewed, extended, amended, modified, accelerated, compromised, waived, surrendered or released by any Guaranteed Party, and the Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents and any other documents executed and delivered in connection therewith may be amended, modified, supplemented or terminated, in whole or in part, as the Administrative Agent (or the Required Lenders, the Majority Facility Lenders, all affected Lenders, or all Lenders, as the case may be) may deem advisable from time to time, and any collateral security, guarantee or right of offset at any time held by any Guaranteed Party for the payment of the Guaranteed Obligations may be sold, exchanged, waived, surrendered or released. No Guaranteed Party shall have any obligation to protect, secure, perfect or insure any Lien at any time held by it as security for the Guaranteed Obligations or for the guarantee contained in this Section 2 or any property subject thereto.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: id. at 1313. Before doing so, however, the Welch court noted that the defendant there pleaded guilty prior to the Florida Supreme Court’s Robinson decision in a circuit court within Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal, which “had not yet spoken definitively on the question” of whether mere snatching was sufficient. Id. at 1311 & n. 32. Unlike the defendant in Welch, Defendant was convicted within a Florida appel late district that had “spoken definitively on the question.” Defendant’s 1986 conviction was in Hillsborough County, which is within the Second District Court of Appeal. The Second District ruled both prior to and after 1986 that more than mere “snatching” is required to sustain a robbery conviction. See, e.g., Adams v. State, 295 So.2d 114, 116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (<HOLDING>); Goldsmith v. State, 573 So.2d 445, 445 (Fla. Options: A. holding that the district court correctly instructed the jury that there had to be a substantial similarity between the indictment and the proof in order to find the defendant guilty B. holding that the trial court correctly instructed the jury that the use of physical force to overcome victims resistance was necessary for offense to amount to robbery C. holding that the district court correctly declined to instruct the jury that the government was required to prove as an element of the offense that the defendant did not intend to establish a life with his wife D. holding that the trial court correctly instructed the jury that the defendant had to establish by evidence that outweighed the evidence against him that he lacked the capacity to form specific intent E. holding that the trial judge correctly instructed the jury that in resolving whether the crime occurred in tennessee they must be persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence introduced on that issue

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the trial court correctly instructed the jury that the use of physical force to overcome victims resistance was necessary for offense to amount to robbery
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 Board may amend or terminate the Plan at any time; provided, however, that the Board shall not amend the Plan without approval of the stockholders of the Company if such approval is required in order to comply with the Code, applicable laws and stock exchange requirements, or as required by Section 21(b) below. No amendment or termination of this Plan shall, without the consent of the Participant, impair any rights or obligations under any Grant previously made to the Participant, unless such right has been reserved in the Plan or the Grant Instrument, or except as provided in Section 21(b) below.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 197 (Tex.1999) (orig. proceeding); Rosales v. H.E. Butt Grocery Co., 905 S.W.2d 745, 750 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1995, writ denied). Lighthouse asserts venue is proper under both Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 15.002(a)(1) and Section 15.035(a). A. Standard of Review An appellate court reviews a trial court’s denial of a motion to transfer venue de novo. Wilson v. Texas Parks & Wildlife Dept., 886 S.W.2d 259, 260-62 (Tex.1994). We, therefore, conduct an independent review of the entire record. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 15.064(b) (Vernon 2002); Wilson, 886 S.W.2d at 260-62. If there is any probative evidence in the record demonstrating venue was proper in the county where judgment was rendered, we must uphold the trial court’s ruling. Rosales, 905 S.W.2d at 748 (<HOLDING>). B. Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Options: A. holding that review of a partial and truncated record by the district court was error and case remanded for review on the entire administrative record B. holding that review consists of entire record including the trial on the merits to determine whether there is any probative evidence that venue was proper C. holding that in reviewing a jury instruction this court must review the entire instruction and look at all the evidence on the record to determine whether there was error and whether that error prejudiced the complaining party D. holding that the district courts review of a partial and truncated record was error and remanding the case for review on the entire administrative record E. holding that an appellate court may review the entire record to determine whether hearsay statements are sufficiently reliable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that review consists of entire record including the trial on the merits to determine whether there is any probative evidence that venue was proper
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be designed specifically to accommodate creditors like LVNV, who claim to be unable to produce documents. Given these provisions, it is difficult to understand how providing a summary of documents supporting a claim, or at least providing an explanation for why the proof of claim has nothing attached to it, unduly burdens creditors. The only explanation could be that certain creditors wish to continue their routine of executing and filing proofs of claim without objection and without any evidence — essentially, without having to do any work. This practice violates the Bankruptcy Rules and undermines the bedrock notion of the legal system that claimants bear the burden of proving their claims. See Raleigh v. Ill. Dep’t of Revenue, 530 U.S. 15, 21, 120 S.Ct. 1951, 147 L.Ed.2d 13 (2000) (<HOLDING>). For the reasons stated above, LVNVs original Options: A. holding that the burden of proof is on the claimant B. recognizing burden C. recognizing that the burden of proof is an essential element of the claim itself and that one who asserts a claim has the burden of proof that normally comes with it D. holding burden of proof is on one asserting an affirmative defense E. recognizing that even where a party has the burden of proof at trial that party need not produce proof supporting his claim in response to a motion for summary judgment unless the movant has first presented evidence that would negate an element of the nonmovants claim or indicates that the nonmovant will be unable to meet his burden at trial it is never enough simply to state that the nonmoving party cannot meet its burden at trial

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that the burden of proof is an essential element of the claim itself and that one who asserts a claim has the burden of proof that normally comes with it
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 a california resident , you waive california civil code § 1542 , which says : a general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release , which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The covenants and agreements of the parties set forth in SECTIONS 4, 5 and 6 are of a continuing nature and shall survive the expiration, termination or cancellation of this Agreement, irrespective of the reason therefor.

assistant: Survival
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: As such, the court may consider documents outside the complaint for purposes of such a motion. Acierno v. New Castle County, 2006 WL 1668370, at *1 n. 8 (Del.Ch. June 8, 2006). 16 . Elf Atochem N. Am., Inc. v. Jaffari, 727 A.2d 286, 295 (Del.1999). 17 . Anadarko Petroleum Corp. v. Panhandle E. Corp., 1987 WL 13520, at *8 (Del.Ch. July 7, 1987). 18 . SBC Interactive, Inc. v. Corporate Media Partners, 714 A.2d 758, 761 (Del.1998). 19 . 817 A.2d 149 (Del.2002). 20 . Id. at 155. 21 . Majkowski v. Am. Imaging Mgmt. Servs., LLC, 913 A.2d 572, 581-82 (Del.Ch.2006); Westendorf v. Gateway 2000, Inc., 2000 WL 307369, at *3 (Del.Ch. Mar. 16, 2000). 22 . Parfi, 817 A.2d at 156. 23 . James & Jackson, LLC v. Willie Gary, LLC, 906 A.2d 76, 78 (Del.2006). 24 . See, e.g., Parfi, 817 A.2d at 156-57 (<HOLDING>); Majkowski, 913 A.2d at 584-85 (holding that Options: A. holding that plaintiffs were entitled to a jury trial on claim of breach of fiduciary duty where underlying claim was a common law negligence action B. holding that where excess policy provided that duty to defend did not arise until the underlying insurance was exhausted by payments of judgments settlements and any cost or expense subject to such limit excess insurers duty to defend did not arise until the payment of the settlement C. holding that employers decision to merge plans did not invoke the fiduciary duty provisions of erisa D. holding that a duty of care may arise out of a contractual relationship between two parties E. holding that certain fiduciary duty claims did not arise out of the underlying contractual provisions

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that certain fiduciary duty claims did not arise out of the underlying contractual provisions
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 a resident of the european union : these terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with dutch law , without regard to its conflict of law principles .

assistant: Choice of 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: b. C.A.’s Claim is not Moot The defendants argue that C.A.’s claim is moot because they have submitted the requisite payment authorization to enroll C.A. at Cabin John Middle School. Defs.’ Mot., Ex. 1. The plaintiffs, in their reply, point out that DCPS has not submitted any documentary evidence, other than a declaration, to prove that it submitted the required paperwork. Pis.’ Reply at 4. The plaintiffs further allege that while the defendants may have submitted the payment authorization for C.A.’s enrollment at Cabin John, the defendants recently “rescinded funding authorization for [C.A.]’s Grafton School placement.” Id. at 5. A failure to fund a student’s placement constitutes a unilateral change in the placement, Petties v. Dist. of Columbia, 881 F.Supp. 63, 66 (D.D.C.1995) (<HOLDING>). DCPS’ failure to fund C.A.’s placement, in Options: A. holding that in a city or town a sidewalk is that part of a street or highway that is intended or used by pedestrians B. holding that failure to make payments in whole or in part or cutting off funds for special education programs amounts to a unilateral change in students placements which is prohibited by the idea C. holding that in order to constitute a materially adverse change in the terms of plaintiffs employment a transfer must include either diminished responsibilities a demotion evidenced by a change in salary title or benefits or other indices unique to the particular situation D. holding court cannot change custody without showing that change is in best interests of child E. holding that a showing of a change in circumstances that is or is likely to be beneficial to the child may also warrant a change in custody

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that failure to make payments in whole or in part or cutting off funds for special education programs amounts to a unilateral change in students placements which is prohibited by the idea
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: 854, the Court has never elevated this judicial preference to a per se rule mandating warrants for all arrests irrespective of the existence of probable cause. See, e.g., Watson, 423 U.S. at 417, 96 S.Ct. 820 (stating that “ ‘such a requirement would constitute an intolerable handicap for legitimate law enforcement’ ” (citation omitted)). Indeed, in Gerstein, the court noted that it “has never invalidated an arrest supported by probable cause solely because the officers failed to secure a warrant,” 420 U.S. at 113, 95 S.Ct. 854, and in the intervening years since Ger-stein it has strayed from this principle only once, when it imposed a warrant requirement for arrests made in a suspect’s home. See Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 585-86, 589-90, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, in Payton the Court justified its Options: A. holding the fourth amendment prohibits the police from making a warrantless and nonconsensual entry into a suspects home in order to make a routine felony arrest B. holding that absent exigent circumstances an arrest within the home can only be effectuated with a warrant probable cause is insufficient C. holding that in die absence of exigent circumstances the mere existence of probable cause does not justify a nonconsensual entry by police into a home without an arrest or search warrant D. holding that absent exigent circumstances the fourth amendment prohibits warrantless nonconsensual entry into a suspects home in order to make a felony arrest notwithstanding the existence of probable cause to arrest E. holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that absent exigent circumstances the fourth amendment prohibits warrantless nonconsensual entry into a suspects home in order to make a felony arrest notwithstanding the existence of probable cause to arrest
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: on the timeliness of the motion could be waived and Metellus’s failure to object constituted waiver of the claim. Although the Fifth District distinguished this case from Joslin v. State, 826 So.2d 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), and Robie v. State, 807 So.2d 781 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), it certified conflict to the extent that Joslin and Robie conflict and that they consider rule 3.170 to be jurisdictional. LAW AND ANALYSIS We first address Metellus’s claim that there was a double jeopardy violation. The Fifth District held that no double jeopardy violation occurred. We agree. The double jeopardy clause does not protect a defendant from reprosecution or resentencing if the defendant willfully re fuses to perform a condition of a plea bargain. See, e.g., Melvin v. State, 645 So.2d 448 (Fla.1994) (<HOLDING>); Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d 607 (Fla.1994) Options: A. holding that a bargainedfor plea waives the right to attack multiple convictions on double jeopardy grounds B. holding that the constitutional protection against double jeopardy may be waived pursuant to a bargainedfor plea C. holding that where a plea agreement is vacated the parties can be returned to their original position without violating the prohibition against double jeopardy D. holding that a defendants acceptance of sentencing pursuant to a bargained for plea agreement waives any double jeopardy violations E. holding that constitutional protections against double jeopardy apply to a defendant prosecuted as an habitual criminal

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the constitutional protection against double jeopardy may be waived pursuant to a bargainedfor plea
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 district court replied that “in a perfect world, you would be right ... [But] I am constrained to say that ... they’re in interstate commerce since they’re foreigners coming here for business.” Vargas timely filed a notice of appeal. II. Standard of Review We review a district court’s finding of guilt after a bench trial to determine whether it is supported by “any substantial evidence.” United States v. Shelton, 325 F.3d 553, 557 (5th Cir. 2003) (quoting United States v. Rosas-Fuentes, 970 F.2d 1379, 1381 (5th Cir. 1992)). Because there was a bench trial, this standard applies regardless of whether there was a formal motion for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence. See Rosas-Fuentes, 970 F.2d at 1381; Hall v. United States, 286 F.2d 676, 677 (5th Cir. 1960) (<HOLDING>). “Evidence is sufficient to sustain a Options: A. holding that there is no need for a formal motion for a judgment of acquittal in a bench trial because the plea of not guilty asks the court for a judgment of acquittal B. holding that a prior acquittal does not preclude the admission of evidence of a defendants other alleged crimes in a prosecution for the bank robbery on the basis of collateral estoppel principles because the prior acquittal did not determine an ultimate issue in the present case C. holding trial court properly overruled defendants motion for judgment of acquittal where corroborating evidence existed D. holding that trial court erred in denying motion for judgment of acquittal when state failed to prove venue E. recognizing ruling on motion for judgment of acquittal is reviewed de novo on appeal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that there is no need for a formal motion for a judgment of acquittal in a bench trial because the plea of not guilty asks the court for a judgment of acquittal
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 also grant you a license ( solely with respect to the masks contained with your implementation ) , with the right to sublicense , to download , use , reproduce , modify , create derivative works of , distribute , publicly display or publicly perform your implementation , including in connection with our services or any facebook companies or third-party services .

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: Anderson-Tra-han simply by becoming embroiled in this conflict, and the existence of Mitchell’s lawsuit, regardless of whether Mitchell prevails. Hood’s claims against Judge Anderson-Trahan stand on their own, and Hood’s amended complaint does not limit his claims to mitigating any damages that he may need to pay to Mitchell. Because Judge Anderson-Trahan is not a properly impleaded party under Rule 14, she must be dismissed as a party. Therefore, we need not address whether Louisiana’s anti-SLAPP statute may be raised by a third party on behalf of an original defendant. Nor do we address whether a party must embrace the speech at issue in order to assert a defense under the anti-SLAPP statute. The district court also certified the question of whether it could a 54, 261 (9th Cir.2013) (<HOLDING>); Godin v. Schencks, 629 F.3d 79, 88 (1st Options: A. holding cercla does not preempt californias corporate capacity statute B. holding that californias liquor pricefixing statute violated federal antitrust law C. holding that the district of columbias antislapp law could not be applied in federal court in a diversity case because it conflicted with federal rules of civil procedure 12 and 56 D. holding that californias antislapp statute is applicable in federal court E. holding that maines antislapp statute could be applied in the district court because federal rules of civil procedure 12 and 56 are not so broad as to attempt to answer the same question as the statute

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that californias antislapp statute is applicable in federal 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: None of the Seller nor any of the Acquired Companies is a party to or subject of any, and there are no pending or, to the Knowledge of Seller, threatened, legal, administrative, arbitral or other proceedings, claims, actions or governmental or regulatory investigations of any nature against Seller or the Acquired Companies. There is no injunction, order, judgment, regulatory restrictions (other than those of general application that apply to similarly situated banks) or decrees imposed upon Seller or the Acquired Companies, or the assets of the Acquired Companies.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Lease may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and all of which shall be one and the same agreement. Electronic signatures shall be treated as “wet-ink” signatures for purposes of the execution hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the fullest extent permissible under the Act, the Company shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless any Person who was or is a party defendant or is threatened to be made a party defendant to any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative, or investigative (other than an action by or in the right of the Company) by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a Member, Manager, or officer of the Company, against all losses, liabilities, damages, and expenses, including attorney’s fees, judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement, actually and reasonably incurred by the indemnified party in connection with such action, suit or proceeding. The termination of any action, suit or proceeding by judgment, order, settlement, conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere or its equivalent, shall not in itself create a presumption that the person did not act in good faith and in a manner which he or she reasonably believed to be in the best interest of the Company, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had reasonable cause to believe that his or her conduct was unlawful.

assistant: Indemnifications