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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been validly authorized, executed and delivered by the Buyer and, assuming the due authorization, execution and delivery thereof by each Seller, is a valid and binding agreement enforceable in accordance with its terms, subject to the general principles of equity and to bankruptcy or other laws affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by the Buyer does not and will not conflict with, violate or cause a breach of, constitute a default under, or result in a violation of (i) any agreement, contract or instrument to which such Buyer is a party which would prevent the Buyer from performing its obligations hereunder or (ii) any law, statute, rule or regulation to which the Buyer is subject.

assistant: Authority
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: interpreted to have covered § 201(b) implicitly, that implicit holding would be insufficient to trump an agency construction to which we owe deference. But the question remains: do we owe deference to the FCC’s interpretation of § 201(b)? b. The Chevron framework applies. An administrative interpretation “qualifies for Chevron deference when it appears that Congress delegated authority to the agency generally to make rules carrying the force of law, and that the agency interpretation claiming deference was promulgated in the exercise of that authority.” United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 226-27, 121 S.Ct. 2164, 150 L.Ed.2d 292 (2001). In Brand X, the Supreme Court afforded Chevron deference to an interpretation contained in a declaratory ruling of the FCC. See 125 S.Ct. at 2699(<HOLDING>). We see no reason to treat the interpretation Options: A. holding that because the fcc is authorized to promulgate binding legal rules and it issued the order under review in the exercise of that authority its interpretation of the communications act was entitled to chevron deference B. holding that chevron deference is due only to a reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency C. holding regulations entitled to chevron deference D. holding that when an agency has not cemented its interpretation in the form of binding regulations its interpretation may not be entitled to de facto binding effect through judicial deference E. holding that administrative implementation of a particular statutory provision qualifies for chevron deference when it appears that congress delegated authority to the agency generally to make rules carrying the force of law and that the agency interpretation claiming deference was promulgated in the exercise of that authority

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that because the fcc is authorized to promulgate binding legal rules and it issued the order under review in the exercise of that authority its interpretation of the communications act was entitled to chevron deference
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 consummation of the transactions contemplated in this Agreement (the “ Closing ”) shall take place at the offices of Stony Hill Corp, 2355 Westwood Blvd., Suite 349, Los Angeles, California 90064, at 2:00 p.m. (local time) on February 23, 2017, or at such other time and place as the parties may agree (the “ Closing Date ”). Subject to the termination provisions of Article 10 , failure to consummate the transactions provided for in this Agreement on the date and time and at the place determined pur-suant to this Section 3.1 shall not result in the termination of this Agreement and shall not relieve any party of any obligation under this Agreement.

assistant: Closings
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: All Liens granted to Lender under the Loan Documents are for the benefit of Secured Parties. Promptly upon request, Borrowers shall deliver such instruments and agreements, and shall take such actions, as Lender deems appropriate under applicable law to evidence or perfect its Lien on any Collateral, or otherwise to give effect to the intent of this Agreement. Each Borrower authorizes Lender to file any financing statement that describes the Collateral as “all assets” or “all personal property” of Borrowers, or words to similar effect, and ratifies any action taken by Lender before the Closing Date to effect or perfect its Lien on any Collateral.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All questions concerning the construction, validity, enforcement and interpretation of this Note, and any claim, controversy or dispute arising under or related to this Note, the relationship of the parties, and/or the interpretation and enforcement of the rights and duties of the parties hereunder shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York, without regard to the principles of conflicts of law thereof. Each party agrees that all legal proceedings concerning the interpretations or enforcement of this Note (whether brought against a party hereto or its respective affiliates, directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents) shall be commenced in the state or federal courts sitting in the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan (the “New York Courts”). Each party hereto hereby irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the New York Courts for the adjudication of any dispute hereunder or in connection herewith or with any transaction contemplated hereby or discussed herein (including with respect to the enforcement of any of the Transaction Documents), and hereby irrevocably waives, and agrees not to assert in any suit, action or proceeding, any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of any such court, or such New York Courts are improper or inconvenient venue for such proceeding. Each party hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any such suit, action or proceeding by mailing a copy thereof via registered or certified mail or overnight delivery (with evidence of delivery) to such party at the address in effect for notices to it under this Note and agrees that such service shall constitute good and sufficient service of process and notice thereof. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any manner permitted by law. Each party hereto hereby irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any and all right to trial by jury in any legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this Note or the transactions contemplated hereby. If either party shall commence an action or proceeding to enforce any provisions of this Note, then the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be reimbursed by the other party for its attorney’s fees and other costs and expenses incurred with the investigation, preparation and prosecution of such action or proceeding.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: rights), and anything less than conduct intentionally directed at the familjal relationship was not clearly established as unlawful within the Second Circuit at the time of Stephens’ behavior in 1990. The Court therefore holds that Stephens is entitled to qualified immunity on McGarr’s familial association claim. See Wilkinson, 182 F.3d at 107. n. 10 (noting, in context of abuse investigation, that there is a difference between evaluating the appropriateness of a case worker’s actions, which “depends on the facts and events of a particular case,” and “evaluating whether it was objectively reasonable for a case worker to believe” that his or her actions were lawful, which “depends on the clarity of existing law at the time of those events”); see also Reasonover, 447 F.3d at 585 (<HOLDING>). H. Putnam County Defendant’s only argument Options: A. holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity B. recognizing the fourteenth amendment to the united state constitution embodies a right to familial integrity but stating the parameters of the right have never been clearly established and the right is not absolute or unqualified C. holding that expert report that sufficiently addressed certain claims against doctor employed by professional association was sufficient as to claims against professional association based on doctors negligence because the doctors negligence is imputed to the association under the professional association act D. holding that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for actions taken in 1983 as any right to familial association was not sufficiently clear such that the defendants reasonably could have understood they were violating it because njeither the supreme court nor this court has clearly held wrongful prosecution and incarceration of a family member violates a right to familial association E. holding that defendants claiming qualified immunity to 1983 action were entitled to summary judgment where factual disputes were not material

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for actions taken in 1983 as any right to familial association was not sufficiently clear such that the defendants reasonably could have understood they were violating it because njeither the supreme court nor this court has clearly held wrongful prosecution and incarceration of a family member violates a right to familial association
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 or the application thereof shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect or render invalid or unenforceable any other provision of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall be valid and enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: not rest a claim to relief on the legal rights or.interests of third parties .., would exclude a case.such as this from initiation in federal court.”) (emphasis added). 47 . See Tex. Const. art. II, § 1. 48 . Ex parte Halsted, 147 Tex.Crim. 453, 457, 182 S.W.2d 479, 482 (1944). 49 . See Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497, 516, 127 S.Ct. 1438, 167 L.Ed.2d 248 (2007) (No justiciable controversy exists under Article III of the United States Constitution when the parties ask for an advisory opinion.). 50 . See supra n. 12. 51 . See also Federal Election Commission v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11, 24, 118 S.Ct. 1777, 141 L.Ed.2d 10 (1998) (indicating the injury-in-fact requirement of Article III prevents advisory opinions); Savage v. Gee, 665 F.3d 732, 740 (6th Cir. 2012) (<HOLDING>). 52 . At oral argument, the State claimed that Options: A. holding that a claim under the first amendment overbreadth doctrine will not succeed unless the challenged statute itself will significantly compromise recognized first amendment protections of parties not before the court B. recognizing the application of overbreadth doctrine to state laws and explaining that because first amendment freedoms need breathing space to survive government may regulate in the area only with narrow specificity C. holding that overbreadth claimant must still show that enforcement of the challenged statute against him is actual or imminent and quoting prime media v city of brentwood 485 f3d 343 350 6th cir 2007 because overbreadth creates an exception only to the prudential standing inquiry the supreme court has made clear that the injury in fact requirement still applies to overbreadth claims under the first amendment D. holding that in order to establish standing a plaintiff must show 1 it has suffered an injury in fact 2 the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and 3 it is likely as opposed to merely speculative that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision E. holding that the decedents estate had standing because the traditional requirement that the plaintiff show an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the conduct of the defendant is met by the allegation in the complaint that the defendants actions resulted in the diminishment of the assets of the estate

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that overbreadth claimant must still show that enforcement of the challenged statute against him is actual or imminent and quoting prime media v city of brentwood 485 f3d 343 350 6th cir 2007 because overbreadth creates an exception only to the prudential standing inquiry the supreme court has made clear that the injury in fact requirement still applies to overbreadth claims under the first amendment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be terminated by any Purchaser, as to such Purchaser’s obligations hereunder only and without any effect whatsoever on the obligations between the Company and the other Purchasers, by written notice to the other parties, if the Closing has not been consummated on or before July 14, 2016; provided , however , that no such termination will affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party (or parties).

assistant: Terminations
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 retaliation, whereupon the burden shifts to the employer to establish a legitimate non-retaliatory reason for the action. Id. If Defendant MetLife sets forth a legitimate, non-retaliatory explanation for the action, Plaintiff then must show that the employer’s proffered reasons are pretextual, or her claim will fail. Id. Plaintiff can offer proof of pretext by showin th MetLife Human Resources alleging racial harassment by Ms. Gagnon on March 14, 2001. Plaintiff alleges that she complained again about the same type of conduct on April 8, 2002. Although the formal complaint was investigated and no racial motive was found, the informal follow-up complaint was, nevertheless, a “protected activity.” Cf. Hill v. Lockheed Martin Logistics Management, Inc., 354 F.3d 277, 298 (4th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). The question of whether Plaintiff has Options: A. holding defendant waived complaint B. holding that the fact that employer had knowledge of the employees protected activity was not sufficient to establish a prima facie case of retaliation where the timing of the discharge was not proximate to the protected activity C. holding that raising a complaint about a violation of an internal policy is not considered protected activity D. holding that the plaintiffs second complaint did not relate back to her first complaint because her second complaint was not an amendment to her first complaint but rather a separate filing E. recognizing that complaint to supervisor could constitute protected activity where employer was made aware of such complaint

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that complaint to supervisor could constitute protected activity where employer was made aware of such complaint
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in the context of an election case, even in the absence of a class action, and concluding that the case was not moot); Rosario v. Rockefeller, 410 U.S. 752, 756 n. 5, 93 S.Ct. 1245, 36 L.Ed.2d 1 (1973) (concluding that plaintiffs’ class action challenge to New York’s Election Law was capable of repetition yet evading review, although primary election had passed and the petitioners would be eligible to vote in the next primary); Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 333 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. 995, 31 L.Ed.2d 274 (1972) (in challenge to a provision of Tennessee’s election law, concluding that, although plaintiff would be eligible to vote in the next election, the controversy was capable of repetition yet evading review); Fulani v. League of Women Voters Educ. Fund, 882 F.2d 621, 628 (2d Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). We adopt the approach of the former cases, Options: A. holding that appeal was not moot despite the fact that the election had passed because there would be every reason to expect the same parties to generate a similar future controversy emphasis added B. holding that although the 1972 election had long since passed the case was not moot because the statute under review would apply to other candidates in the future C. holding that election case was not moot after election because there is a reasonable expectation that the same complaining parties would be subject to that same action in the future D. holding that issues as to whether declaratory relief should be granted had become moot and would be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction but that under hallman the entire appeal was not moot because there still was a live controversy as to whether appellee was entitled to recover attorneys fees under the declaratory judgments act and therefore issues regarding attorneys fees were not moot and would be decided E. holding that plaintiffs claims were not moot although the election was over because the same issues would affect minorparty candidacies in the future but failing to address whether fulani herself would be affected

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that plaintiffs claims were not moot although the election was over because the same issues would affect minorparty candidacies in the future but failing to address whether fulani herself would be affected
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: you and spotify agree that any dispute , claim , or controversy between you and spotify arising in connection with or relating in any way to these agreements or to your relationship with spotify as a user of the service ( whether based in contract , tort , statute , fraud , misrepresentation , or any other legal theory , and whether the claims arise during or after the termination of the agreements ) will be determined by mandatory binding individual arbitration .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by the juvenile court. We leave it to the district court on remand to determine whether any City policy could be held to have caused any violation of the Wallises’ rights after the date of the juvenile court hearing. With respect to the four-day period between the removal and the court hearing, only one alleged violation of the Wallises’ rights merits separate consideration—the subjecting of Lauren and Jessie to invasive vaginal and anal medical examinations at the behest of the Escondido police department. The right to family association includes the right of parents to make important medical decisions for their children, and of children to have those decisions made by their parents rather than the state. See Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602, 99 S.Ct. 2493, 61 L.Ed.2d 101 (1979) (<HOLDING>); see also Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 Options: A. recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children B. holding that natural parents have a fundamental liberty interest in the care custody and management of their children C. holding that it is in the interest of both parents and children that parents have ultimate authority to make medical decisions for their children unless neutral fact finder determines through due process hearing that parent is not acting in childs best interests D. recognizing that the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care custody and control of their children E. recognizing that because the state has cognizable interests in the safety of children in its jurisdiction neglectful parents may be separated from their children

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it is in the interest of both parents and children that parents have ultimate authority to make medical decisions for their children unless neutral fact finder determines through due process hearing that parent is not acting in childs best interests
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the rights hereunder are personal to you and may not be transferred or assigned by you at any time. The Company may assign its rights, together with its obligations hereunder, to any parent, subsidiary, affiliate or successor, or in connection with any sale, transfer or other disposition of all or substantially all of its business assets (whether by merger or otherwise).

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: argued that “given the criteria for major reports at the CCUSO unit,” section 229A.8A(2)(e) constituted “an unconstitutional imposition of a limitation on a less restrictive placement.” While we generally oppose the “elevat[ion of] form over substance” in conducting error preservation analysis, we note Taft did not cite a specific constitutional principle or provision in support of his challenge to section 229A.8A(2)(e). Office of Consumer Advocate v. Iowa State Commerce Comm’n, 465 N.W.2d 280, 283-84 (Iowa 1991) (noting that error was preserved on a due process argument where the party cited the Fourteenth Amendment but not the Due Process Clause in support of its constitutional challenge); see also City of Muscatine v. Northbrook P’ship Co., 619 N.W.2d 362, 368 n. 2 (Iowa 2000) (<HOLDING>). A party cannot preserve error for appeal by Options: A. holding that patients constitutional due process rights were violated when his trial counsel was not allowed to present a closing argument prior to involuntary commitment B. holding that when neither the petitioners state court briefs nor the state courts decision made any reference to any federal constitutional claim or cited any federal constitutional cases the lack of fundamental error found by the state court was a lack of fundamental error under arizonas state constitution C. holding a party failed to preserve error on its constitutional due process argument concerning notice when they did not cite any state or federal constitutional provision to the trial court or otherwise explain how lack of notice violated their constitutional rights D. holding that due process rights were not violated when alien claimed a lack of actual notice but his attorney received notice E. recognizing defendants state and federal constitutional rights to testify

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a party failed to preserve error on its constitutional due process argument concerning notice when they did not cite any state or federal constitutional provision to the trial court or otherwise explain how lack of notice violated their constitutional rights
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan is incorporated herein by reference. This Award Agreement, the Plan, the personalized information in Schedule A, and such other documents as may be provided to you pursuant to this Award Agreement regarding any applicable performance, service or vesting conditions and the size of your Award, constitute the entire agreement and understanding of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all prior understandings and agreements with respect to such subject matter.

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: does not affect the power to enjoin proceedings in any other entity of state government, such as a state administrative agency. See Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. v. City of West Chicago, 914 F.2d 820, 824 (7th Cir.1990); American Motor Sales Corp. v. Runke, 708 F.2d 202, 204-05 (6th Cir.1983); Engelman v. Cahn, 425 F.2d 954, 958 (2d Cir.1970) (Friendly, J.); Taylor v. Kentucky State Bar Ass’n., 424 F.2d 478, 482 (6th Cir.1970); see also SMA Life Assurance Co. v. Sanchez-Pica, 960 F.2d 274, 276 (1st Cir.1992) (‘While the Supreme Court has left the issue open, the appellate courts seem to agree that the Act applies only to state courts.”) (citation omitted) (citing Gibson, 411 U.S. at 573 n. 12, 93 S.Ct. at 1695 n. 12); Armstrong v. Maple Leaf Apartments, Ltd., 508 F.2d 518 (10th Cir.1974) (<HOLDING>). We agree with these cases and hold that the Options: A. holding the antiinjunction act inapplicable unless tribunal is performing a state judicial function B. holding that imposition of punishment is a judicial function C. holding administrative tribunal need not mirror judicial procedures D. holding the act inapplicable to the united states in its role as employer E. recognizing in a dictum judicial function exception but holding that receiving from defendant false name and consent form to proceed thereunder is within courts administrative function

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the antiinjunction act inapplicable unless tribunal is performing a state judicial function
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: not apply, and Holland was required to object in order to preserve the double-jeopardy issue. 2 . Holland has also argued, in vain, that his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim should fall within a Wicks exception. We have rejected a similar argument before. See Rackley v. State, 371 Ark. 438, 441, 267 S.W.3d 578, 581 (2007) ("Our research has not revealed a single case where this court has considered an ineffective-assistance, conflict-of-interest argument on direct appeal in the absence of a proper objection in the trial court.”). And as far as we can tell, there is nothing that will prevent Holland from raising this issue, and developing a much more complete record, during Rule 37 proceedings. 3 . See Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719, 739, 112 S.Ct. 2222, 119 L.Ed.2d 492 (1992) (<HOLDING>); Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510, 522 Options: A. holding that defendants have a right to be present at voir dire B. holding that though judge did not question juror individually note from juror to judge requesting private meeting to ask legal question did not suggest juror would not base verdict on evidence C. holding that it was permissible to ask whether a juror would consider death sentence if juror determined aggravating circumstances outweighed mitigating circumstances D. holding that a court must allow the defendant to ask in voir dire whether a potential juror would automatically impose the death penalty and suggesting that such a juror should be disqualified for cause E. holding that trial courts denial of motion for new trial based on juror misconduct was justified where there was no evidence presented at hearing on motion that juror had knowingly concealed relevant litigation experience during voir dire and identity of juror as county court litigant was not demonstrated

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a court must allow the defendant to ask in voir dire whether a potential juror would automatically impose the death penalty and suggesting that such a juror should be disqualified for cause
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 the “case may be completed”; to the trial court’s discussion with the jury, undertaken in response to the jury’s wish to return home for the evening, informing the jury its only options were to deliberate into the night or return to deliberate in the morning after spending the night at a hotel, the record in this case so indicates jury coercion that it was an unreasonable application of Lowenfield for the OCCA to deny Hooks relief. a. Initial Second Stage Jury Instructions Placing the Allen charge in context, as required by Lowenfield, begins by recognizing that the relevant instructions given by the trial court prior to c is certainly one of the contextual circumstances bearing on the question of jury coercion in this particular case. Lowenfield, 484 U.S. at 234, 108 S.Ct. 546 (<HOLDING>); Darks v. Mullin, 327 F.3d 1001, 1014 (10th Options: A. recognizing that before the case was submitted to the jury the trial court charged the jury that if it were unable to reach a unanimous recommendation the court would impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole B. holding that since the court in its charge authorized guilty finding if jury found theft by either method of accomplishment and indictment charged defendant only with first method of taking the court was unable to foreclose the possibility of a fatal variance because the jury could have convicted the appellant of a crime not charged C. holding that a court need only explain that a unanimous vote is required before a jury can impose the death penalty D. holding discretion of district court for sentencing is explicitly limited in this case by the statute which provides that life imprisonment may be imposed only if death results from the defendants actions and if the jury directs the imposition of the sentence E. holding that the sentence entered by the circuit court was illegal because the court had no authority to impose a sentence that exceeded the punishment fixed by the jury

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that before the case was submitted to the jury the trial court charged the jury that if it were unable to reach a unanimous recommendation the court would impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth on Schedule 3.21, (a) each product designed, manufactured, shipped, sold or distributed by or on behalf of any Group Company since December 31, 2015 (the “Products”) has been in material conformity with all applicable express or implied warranties, and (b) there is no pending or, to the Company’s knowledge, threatened recall of any Product. There are no existing nor, to the Company’s knowledge, threatened in writing, claims against any Group Company relating to any work performed by any Group Company, product liability, indemnity, warranty or other similar claims against any Group Company alleging that any Product is defective in any material respect or fails to meet any product or services warranties in any material respect.

assistant: Warranties
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: justification was pretextual.” Smith v. District of Columbia, 430 F.3d 450, 455 (D.C.Cir.2005) (quoting Murray v. Gilmore, 406 F.3d 708, 713 (D.C.Cir.2005)). The court should assess the plaintiffs challenge to the employer’s explanation in light of the totality of the circumstances of the case. Aka, 156 F.3d at 1291. The strength of the plaintiffs prima facie case, especially the existence of a causal connection, can be a significant factor in his attempt to rebut the defendant’s legitimate non-retaliatory reason for the adverse action. See Aka, 156 F.3d at 1289 n. 4 (stating that “a prima facie case that strongly suggests intentional discrimination may be enough by itself to survive summary judgment”); Laurent v. Bureau of Rehab., Inc., 544 F.Supp.2d 17, 23 n. 5 (D.D.C.2008) (<HOLDING>); Meadows v. Mukasey, 2008 WL 2211434, at *5-6 Options: A. holding that to show a causal connection the plaintiff must demonstrate a relationship between the misconduct and the plaintiffs injury B. holding that the plaintiff cannot establish pretext because she is unable to show any causal connection C. holding that to establish a causal connection plaintiff must show that the individual who took adverse action against him knew of the employees protected activity D. holding that the plaintiff demonstrated pretext in part by establishing a causal connection E. holding that plaintiff could not establish a prima facie case of discrimination because she was unable to present evidence that she was qualified for the position

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the plaintiff cannot establish pretext because she is unable to show any causal connection
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: our services may include interactive features and areas where you may submit , post , upload , publish , email , send or otherwise transmit content , including , but not limited to , text , images , photos , videos , sounds , virtual-reality environments or features , software and other information and materials ( collectively , `` user content '' ) .

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: Subject to the provisions of Section 12.2 relating to permitted contests, Lessee will not directly or indirectly create or allow to remain and will promptly discharge at its expense any lien, encumbrance, attachment, title retention agreement or claim upon the Leased Property or any attachment, levy, claim or encumbrance in respect of the Rent, not including, however, (a) this Lease, (b) the matters included as exceptions in the title policy insuring Lessor’s interest in the Leased Property, (c) restrictions, liens and other encumbrances which are consented to in writing by Lessor or any easements granted pursuant to the provisions of Section 7.3 of this Lease, (d) liens for those taxes upon Lessor or the Leased Property which Lessee is not required to pay hereunder, (e) subleases permitted by Article 20 hereof, (f) liens for Impositions or for sums resulting from noncompliance with Legal Requirements so long as (1) the same are not yet payable or are payable without the addition of any fine or penalty or (2) such liens are in the process of being contested as permitted by Section 12.2, (g) liens of mechanics, laborers, materialmen, suppliers or vendors for sums either disputed or not yet due provided that (1) the payment of such sums shall not be postponed under any related contract for more than sixty (60) days after the completion of the action giving rise to such lien and such reserve or other appropriate provisions as shall be required by law or generally accepted accounting principles shall have been made therefor or (2) any such liens are in the process of being contested as permitted by Section 12.2 hereof, and (h) any liens which are the responsibility of Lessor pursuant to the provisions of Article 22 of this Lease.

assistant: Liens
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: ground for standing. Given that he did not allege this ground in his pleadings, it will not support standing. See H.G., 267 S.W.3d at 123. 3 . J.P.K. did not challenge the inapplicability of the parental presumption in modification actions on constitutional grounds. He did not raise any constitutional issues, either below or in this court, on this issue. Rather, he relies on the statutory scheme in the Texas Family Code, arguing this is an original action, not a modification. Accordingly, it would be inappropriate for this court to address the possible constitutional issues relevant to the parental presumption’s absence from Chapter 156 of the Family Code because we are not permitted to consider unassigned error. See Western Steel Co. v. Altenburg, 206 S.W.3d 121, 124 (Tex.2006) (<HOLDING>); Allright, Inc. v. Pearson, 735 S.W.2d 240, Options: A. holding an appellate court cannot reverse a trial courts judgment absent properly assigned error B. holding that an appellate court may not review errors that have not been assigned by a party or a point of error C. holding that absent rare fundamental error appellate court should refrain from deciding cases on legal errors not assigned by parties D. holding that lack of appellate jurisdiction is fundamental error E. holding errors which are argued but not assigned will not be considered by appellate court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that absent rare fundamental error appellate court should refrain from deciding cases on legal errors not assigned by parties
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at Morris. The Plaintiffs rely on several United States Supreme Court cases when asserting that a person is clearly seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if “a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave.” United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 554, 100 S.Ct. 1870, 64 L.Ed.2d 497 (1980) (explaining that the following circumstances might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave: the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer’s request might be compelled); see also Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249, 257, 127 S.Ct. 2400, 168 L.Ed.2d 132 (2007) (<HOLDING>); Colorado v. Bannister, 449 U.S. 1, 101 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that police officer may order passengers to remain in vehicle with hands up during traffic stop B. holding police officers making a traffic stop could order passengers out of the stopped car C. holding that a traffic stop is reasonable under the fourth amendment when police have probable cause to believe a traffic infraction has occurred D. holding that passengers of automobiles that are pulled over by a police officer for a traffic stop are seized under the fourth amendment E. holding that an officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to exit the car pending completion of the stop

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that passengers of automobiles that are pulled over by a police officer for a traffic stop are seized under the fourth amendment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement will benefit and will be bindin g upon the permitted assigns, successors in interest, personal representatives, estates, heirs and legatees of each of th e parties hereto. However, the Stock Option is non-assignable, except as may be permitted by the Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Administrative Agent will determine the Dollar Amount of all outstanding and requested Advances and Facility LCs on each Computation Date. If at any time (a) the Dollar Amount of the Aggregate Outstanding Credit Exposure exceeds the Aggregate Commitment, the Borrowers shall immediately make a payment on the Obligations sufficient to eliminate such excess and (b) the Dollar Amount of the aggregate amount of outstanding Facility LCs (less any amount already held by the Administrative Agent in the Facility LC Collateral Account) exceeds one hundred five percent (105%) of the Facility LC Sublimit, the Borrowers shall immediately pay the Administrative Agent an amount in immediately available funds, which funds shall be held in the Facility LC Collateral Account, equal to the excess of the aggregate amount of outstanding Facility LCs (less any amount already held by the Administrative Agent in the Facility LC Collateral Account) over the Facility LC Sublimit. The Aggregate Outstanding Credit Exposure and all other unpaid Obligations shall be paid in full by the Borrowers on the Facility Termination Date or, as to Outstanding Revolving Credit Exposure as to which there shall have been an Extension, the Extended Termination Date, as the case may be.

assistant: Terminations
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 Amendment constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of each Borrower, and is enforceable against each of the Borrowers in accordance with its terms, except as the enforceability thereof may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency or other similar laws relating to the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally and by general equitable principles.

assistant: Enforceability
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: Pursuant to Section 7.1(a) of the Merger Agreement, the Parties hereby agree that the Merger Agreement, including all schedules and exhibits thereto, and all ancillary agreements contemplated thereby or entered pursuant thereto (collectively, the “ Transaction Documents ”), are hereby terminated effective immediately as of the date hereof (the “ Termination Time ”) and, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Transaction Documents, including Section 7.2 of the Merger Agreement, the Transaction Documents are terminated in their entirety and shall be of no further force or effect whatsoever (the “ Termination ”); provided that Section 5.2(e) of the Merger Agreement (other than the proviso set forth therein), the Confidentiality Agreement, the Clean Team Agreement, the Joint Defense and Confidentiality Agreement, dated February 23, 2015, by and among Parent, the Company and the other parties thereto (the “ JDA ”), the Clean Team Confidentiality Agreement, dated July 28, 2015, between Parent and the Company (the “ EU Clean Team Agreement ”) and the “Clean Team” Non-Disclosure Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2016, between Parent, the Company and the advisor party thereto (the “ Advisor Clean Team Agreement ”) shall each remain in full force and effect in accordance with their respective terms.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that a spouse domiciled in Texas has “the obligation, not merely the right, to report half the community income.” 510 F.2d at 113. The district court’s analysis in the present case, by contrast, is consistent with our precedent and Revenue Ruling 2004-74. We therefore hold that the district court did not err in calculating Gray’s share of her and her husband’s joint tax liability. TV. Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court. 1 . Although not binding precedent, courts “generally accord significant weight to the determinations of the IRS in its revenue rulings.” St. David’s Health Care Sys. v. United States, 349 F.3d 232, 239 n. 9 (5th Cir.2003). But cf. Mercantile Bank & Trust Co. v. United States, 441 F.2d 364, 368 (8th Cir. 1971) (<HOLDING>). 2 . Gray’s appeal addresses only this narrow Options: A. holding that the statute qualifies as an exemption 3 statute B. holding that the title of the statute did not limit the reach of the statute C. recognizing that statute of limitations questions may be resolved on a motion to dismiss D. holding conflict between experts theories is matter to be resolved by jury E. holding that conflicts between a revenue ruling and a statute must be resolved by the statute

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that conflicts between a revenue ruling and a statute must be resolved by the statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and its exhibits represent the entire agreement between the Company and Employee concerning Employee’s separation from the Company, and supersede any and all prior agreements concerning Employee’s relationship with the Company and Employee's compensation by the Company. Employee acknowledges that neither the Employer nor any representative of Employer has made any representation or promise to Employee other than as set forth in this Agreement. No other promises or agreements or modifications to this Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and signed by both parties. Any oral representations regarding this Release shall have no force or effect. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing to the contrary, the Indemnification Agreement, dated February 10, 2014, between the Employee and the Company shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.

assistant: Entire Agreements