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: Notices and all other communications contemplated by this Agreement will be in writing and will be deemed to have been duly given when personally delivered or when mailed by U.S. registered or certified mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid. In the case of Executive, mailed notices will be addressed to him or her at the home address which he or she most recently communicated to the Company in writing. In the case of the Company, mailed notices will be addressed to its corporate headquarters, and all notices will be directed to the attention of its CEO.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: asserts that the real reason for his termination was UPS’s failure to reasonably accommodate his disability. “Whether summary judgment is appropriate ... depends on numerous factors, including the strength of the employee’s prima facie case, the probative value of the proof that the employer’s explanation is false, and any other evidence that supports the employer’s case and that properly may be considered.” Price v. Fed. Express Corp., 283 F.3d 715, 720 (5th Cir.2002). We conclude that Cooper has not produced sufficient evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could infer that Cooper was discharged as retaliation for filing claims of discrimination. Accordingly, summary judgment in favor of UPS on Cooper’s retaliatory discharge claims is appropriate. Cf. McCoy, 492 F.3d at 562 (<HOLDING>). III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we Options: A. holding that plaintiff cannot establish pretext because she is unable to show any causal connection her complaints and the adverse action B. holding that the plaintiffs evidence of pretext was insufficient because the plaintiff failed to present evidence that the employer did not honestly believe its proffered reasons for its action C. holding that summary judgment was appropriate where plaintiff attempted to prove pretext simply by showing that the defendant knew of her complaints and took an adverse employment action shortly thereafter and did not offer reasons as to why the legitimate reasons proffered for her discharge were pretextual D. holding that posthoc reasons for an adverse employment decision constitute evidence of pretext E. holding that the conflicting explanations given by defendants agents for the plaintiffs termination were also sufficient to raise a reasonable inference that defendants proffered reasons for the termination were pretextual the inconsistent testimony regarding the motivating reasons for plaintiffs termination cast doubts on the asserted nondiscriminatory legitimate reasons and may alone be sufficient to preclude summary judgment on plaintiffs claim

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that summary judgment was appropriate where plaintiff attempted to prove pretext simply by showing that the defendant knew of her complaints and took an adverse employment action shortly thereafter and did not offer reasons as to why the legitimate reasons proffered for her discharge were pretextual
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Set forth on Schedule 5.20(a) , as of the Closing Date, is (i) the name of each Subsidiary and joint venture of the Parent and its Subsidiaries (including, for each Subsidiary, the jurisdiction of organization, formation or incorporation, as applicable, of such Subsidiary, the amount, percentage and type of Equity Interests in such Subsidiary outstanding, the identity of each Person owning such Equity Interests, and an indication as to whether such Subsidiary is an Excluded Subsidiary), and (ii) any options, warrants or other rights outstanding to purchase any such Equity Interests. The Parent and each Subsidiary has good and marketable title to all of such Equity Interests it purports to own, free and clear in each case of any Lien. All such Equity Interests have been validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: F.3d 633, 641-42 (6th Cir.2010); Treesh v. Bagley, 612 F.3d 424, 437 (6th Cir.2010). And lately, the Eighth Circuit has noted, but not resolved, an inconsistency in its own case law with respect to whether it will apply implied bias. Sanders v. Norris, 529 F.3d 787, 791-93 (8th Cir.2008). 14 . See Brooks v. Dretke, supra, at 329 ("We maintain that the doctrine of implied bias is ‘clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court’ ” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), which requires federal habeas judges to defer to the judgments of state courts unless a particular state court judgment is "contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States”). 15 . Majority opinion, at 306 (<HOLDING>). 16 . 455 U.S. at 217, 102 S.Ct. 940. 17 . Id. Options: A. holding that smith v phillips stands for the categorical proposition that a hearing will invariably prove to be an adequate procedure for revealing actual juror bias B. holding that although this court affords broad discretion to the district court in determining the type of investigation necessary to determine juror bias the district court must provide the defendant a meaningful opportunity to prove the same C. recognizing that statutes mandating recusal for actual bias have constitutional bases unlike those that require recusal for a mere appearance of bias or prejudice D. holding that a challenge for cause for actual bias essentially requires a determination of credibility E. holding that the government need not prove actual notice to the prisoner

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that smith v phillips stands for the categorical proposition that a hearing will invariably prove to be an adequate procedure for revealing actual juror bias
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 term of a Stock Appreciation Right shall be determined by the Committee and set forth in the related Award Agreement; provided however, that in no event shall the term of any Stock Appreciation Right exceed ten years from the date of grant of the Stock Appreciation Right.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to cases brought under the APA, as the test was "most usefully understood as a gloss on the meaning of § 702.” Clarke, 107 S.Ct. 758 n. 16. The Court did not purport to speak beyond cases brought under the "generous review provisions" of the APA, id. (quoting Data Processing, 397 U.S. at 156, 90 S.Ct. at 831), an act to be construed as "serving a broad remedial purpose.” Id. at 755 (quoting Data Processing). When a court adjudicates a case brought under a specific statutory private right of action it may need to analyze more carefully what actions Congress contemplated in creating that cause of action. Id. (citing Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66, 95 S.Ct. 2080, 45 L.Ed.2d 26 (1975). See also Cargill, Inc. v. Monfort of Colorado, Inc., — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 484, 490, 93 L.Ed.2d 427 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Water Transport Ass’n v. ICC, 819 F.2d 1189, Options: A. holding that plaintiff seeking injunction under clayton act 16 must allege an injury of the type the antitrust laws were designed to prevent B. holding that plaintiff must show antitrust injury meaning injury of the type the antitrust laws were intended to prevent and which flows from defendants unlawful acts C. holding that a plaintiff must show antitrust injury in order to bring an antitrust lawsuit D. holding that the fcc was not given the power to decide antitrust issues and that its actions do not prevent enforcement of the antitrust laws in federal courts E. holding that to have standing to bring a 2a robinsonpatman claim a private plaintiff must make some showing of actual injury attributable to something the antitrust laws were designed to prevent

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that plaintiff seeking injunction under clayton act 16 must allege an injury of the type the antitrust laws were designed to prevent
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 3.1(p) of the Disclosure Schedules, the Company has, or has rights to use, all patents, patent applications, trademarks, trademark applications, service marks, trade names, trade secrets, inventions, copyrights, licenses and other intellectual property rights and similar rights as described in the SEC Reports as necessary or required for use in connection with their respective businesses and which the failure to so have could have a Material Adverse Effect (collectively, the “ Intellectual Property Rights ”). The Company has not received a written notice, or otherwise has knowledge of the fact, that any of the Intellectual Property Rights has expired, terminated or been abandoned, or is expected to expire or terminate or be abandoned, within two (2) years from the date of this Agreement. The Company has not received, since the date of the latest audited financial statements included within the SEC Reports, a written notice of a claim or otherwise has any knowledge that the Intellectual Property Rights violate or infringe upon the rights of any Person, except as could not have or reasonably be expected to not have a Material Adverse Effect. To the knowledge of the Company, all such Intellectual Property Rights are enforceable and there is no existing infringement by another Person of any of the Intellectual Property Rights. The Company has taken reasonable security measures to protect the secrecy, confidentiality and value of all of their intellectual properties, except where failure to do so could not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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 Administrator shall furnish Participants with all disclosures now or hereafter required by ERISA or the Code. The Plan Administrator shall file, as required, the various reports and disclosures concerning the Plan and its operations as required by ERISA and by the Code, and shall be solely responsible for establishing and maintaining all records of the Plan.

assistant: Records
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: 716 F.2d at 623 n. 5, 625 (court reversed restitution order that was based on figures prepared by postal inspector); Orr, 691 F.2d at 433-34 & n. 3 (neither the defendant’s admissions in presentence interview nor her private agreement for restitution could be used to require restitution greater than the indictment amounts). Our cases have recognized an exception to the rule limiting restitution to amounts set forth in the indictment counts on which the defendant stands convicted. The court will carry out a plea agreement that specifically determines the amount of restitution, provided the defendant freely and voluntarily consents to it, and the agreement has been fully explored in open court. Phillips v. United States, 679 F.2d 192, 194 (9th Cir.1982); see also Black, 767 F.2d at 1343 (<HOLDING>); Gering, 716 F.2d at 623; Orr, 691 F.2d at Options: A. recognizing exception B. holding that the phillips exception is expressly limited to the status of materials attached to a nondispositive motion emphasis omitted C. recognizing the rule and the exception but holding facts did not support claim to exception D. recognizing such an exception E. recognizing the phillips exception

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing the phillips exception
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 mentioned, Richardson does not challenge the legality of the initial stop. An investigative detention must be temporary, and the questioning must last no longer than is necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop. Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 500, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 1325, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983); Balentine v. State, 71 S.W.3d 763, 770-71 (Tex.Crim.App.2002); Davis v. State, 947 S.W.2d 240, 245 (Tex.Crim.App.1997). Once an officer concludes the investigation of the conduct that initiated the stop, continued detention of a person is permitted for the purpose of issuing a citation. Kothe v. State, 152 S.W.3d 54, 65 n. 43 (Tex.Crim.App.2004) (citing United States v. Wellman, 185 F.3d 651, 656 (6th Cir.1999)); see Coleman v. State, 188 S.W.3d 708, 719 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2005, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 999, 127 S.Ct. 502, Options: A. holding that purpose of stop was complete upon the issuance of the citation B. holding that reasonable suspicion is required to prolong a traffic stop after the purpose for which the investigatory stop was instituted has been accomplished C. holding that if an agent does not develop reasonable suspicion of criminal activity before the justifying purpose of a checkpoint stop has been accomplished he may not prolong the stop D. holding complete prohibition on use of crime or accident reports for purpose of soliciting clients too broad a means of effectuating the intended purpose of the law E. holding that although the investigation of the traffic offense that served as the basis for the stop was complete when the officer issued the citation the officers continued detention of the appellant thereafter for a canine search was lawful because during the investigation of the traffic offense the officer had developed a reasonable suspicion that the appellant had committed a drugrelated offense

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that purpose of stop was complete upon the issuance of the citation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be binding upon the Partnership, each Purchaser and their respective successors and permitted assigns. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, this Agreement shall not be construed so as to confer any right or benefit upon any Person other than the Parties to this Agreement and as provided in Article VII, and their respective successors and permitted assigns.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: See e.g., Murphy v. Town of Duxbury, 40 Mass.App.Ct. 513, 665 N.E.2d 1014, review denied, 423 Mass. 1105, 668 N.E.2d 356 (1996) (affirming grant of summary judgment on MCRA claim for lack of proof as there was no evidence that the Town officials were motivated other than by desire to enforce their interpretation of zoning laws). In addition, Cignetti’s claim against Healy fails because it is based solely on a theory of vicarious liability. Cignetti does not allege that Healy threatened him directly, but asserts that the “threats” allegedly made by Rossi can be attributed to Healy because Rossi was Healy’s agent. However, nothing in the record indicates that Rossi was acting at Healy’s direction or that Healy authorized or approved Rossi’s alleged “threats.” Cf. Alioto, 835 F.2d at 1175 (<HOLDING>). The MCRA claim against Fitzgerald also fails Options: A. holding that liability may not be imposed on supervisory personnel under 1983 where at best the plaintiff has merely claimed that the appellants were aware of alleged violation but did not take appropriate action B. holding that an employer alone is liable for a violation of title vii by supervisory employees C. holding that supervisory liability under 1983 requires a showing that the supervisory official at least implicitly authorized or approved or knowingly acquiesced in the unconstitutional conduct of the offending subordinate D. holding that employer may be held liable under 1981 for discrimination by supervisory employee E. holding supervisory personnel liable for 1983 violations only where evidence establishes that they authorized or approved the unconstitutional conduct

assistant: The best answer is E. holding supervisory personnel liable for 1983 violations only where evidence establishes that they authorized or approved the unconstitutional conduct
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: "should not sua sponte excuse a potential juror except on grounds of absolute disqualification”). An unqualified juror is one who is subject to disqualification by a challenge for cause under any of the non-absolute reasons. See id. at 130 n.9. These jurors are “presumptively qualified.” Id. A trial court may not sua sponte excuse a juror on the basis that the juror is unqualified. See id. at 130; see also Goodman v. State, 701 S.W.2d 850, 856 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) ("It is well settled that a trial judge should not on its own motion excuse a prospective juror for cause unless the juror is absolutely disqualified from serving on a jury.”), A juror is unqualified if he or she does not reside in the county of the district court. See Mayo v. State, 4 S.W.3d 9, 11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (<HOLDING>); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. Options: A. holding that person who is not party to contract does not have standing to challenge contract B. holding that there was a raceneutral reason the states use of a peremptory challenge against a venireperson who had a very individualistic hairstyle C. holding that a challenge for cause based on county residence is waived if not made the legislature did not intend for a defendant to waive the countyresidence requirement only by knowingly accepting a disqualified juror D. holding that mandamus is appropriate to challenge temporary orders because they are not subject to interlocutory appeal E. holding that a venireperson who does not live in the county is subject to challenge

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a venireperson who does not live in the county is subject to challenge
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice or communication under this Agreement must be in writing and given by (i) deposit in the United States mail, addressed to the party to be notified, postage prepaid and registered or certified with return receipt requested, (ii) delivery in person or by courier service providing evidence of delivery, or (iii) transmission by hand delivery, electronic mail, telecopy, telegram or facsimile. Each notice or communication that is mailed, delivered, or transmitted in the manner described above shall be deemed sufficiently given, served, sent, and received, in the case of mailed notices, on the third business day following the date on which it is mailed and, in the case of notices delivered by courier service, hand delivery, electronic mail, telecopy, telegram or facsimile, at such time as it is delivered to the addressee (with the delivery receipt or the affidavit of messenger) or at such time as delivery is refused by the addressee upon presentation. Any notice or communication under this Agreement must be addressed, if to the Company, to: Federal Street Acquisition Corp., 100 Federal Street, Boston, MA 02110, Attention: Arthur McAleer or by facsimile at (617) 227-3514, and, if to any Holder, at such Holder’s address or facsimile number as set forth in the Company’s books and records. Any party may change its address for notice at any time and from time to time by written notice to the other parties hereto, and such change of address shall become effective thirty (30) days after delivery of such notice as provided in this Section 5.1 .

assistant: Notices
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: 770 (9th Cir.2004) (“He must establish that the political opinion would motivate his potential persecutors.”)- Viktor’s status as a government employee clearly suffices to show an imputed political opinion under our case law. We have stated that we consider “persecution of those who work for or with political figures to be on account of the political opinion of their employer even if the nature of their work ... is not in itself political.” Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 659 n. 19 (9th Cir.2000 r the act of publicizing corruption amounts to persecution on account of a political opinion” even when the petitioner “did not espouse a political theory.” Hasan v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 1114, 1120 (9th Cir.2004); see also Njuguna, 374 F.3d at 770-71; Grava v. INS, 205 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). These cases also require that the corruption Options: A. holding that summary judgment was inappropriate where plaintiff actually told her supervisors that she was being sexually harassed and the supervisors did not take any steps whatsoever to investigate those allegations B. holding that nexus existed where government employee exposed corruption of his supervisors C. holding that federal employee could not sue supervisors for discharge alleged to have violated her first amendment rights D. holding no triable issue of fact existed where employee had not asked for accommodation E. holding that standing existed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that nexus existed where government employee exposed corruption of his supervisors
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 of the provisions of this Agreement or the application thereof to any party under any circumstances is adjudicated to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement or the application thereof.

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: of credit and Bank One’s potential indemnification claim. Bank One’s Brief in Opposition at 10. The effect on the estate will be the same regardless of who wins this action. Should the City prevail in its action against Bank One, Bank One will likely have an indemnification against Debtor. Should the City fail in the action against Bank One, it will still have its claim against Debtor arising out of Debtor’s asserted failure to complete the subdivision improvements. Both claims would arise out of the same obligation and would be for approximately the same amount. See, e.g., In re Salem Mills, Inc., 148 B.R. 505, 508 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.1992) (stating indemnification agreements impact only on allocation of assets among competing creditors, not on size of asset pool); Xonics, 813 F.2d at 127 (<HOLDING>). It seems apparent that one of these two Options: A. recognizing need to balance interests of debt or and creditor in determining nature of protection to be afforded creditor B. holding that property seized by a creditor prior to debtors bankruptcy was property of the estate even though creditor the irs held a secured interest a tax lien in the property C. holding that a wifes interest in property has priority over a general creditor D. holding jurisdiction over creditor disputes only involves property of estate or resolution affects some other creditor E. recognizing that when a creditor does not receive adequate notice the creditor is not bound by the confirmation order

assistant: The best answer is D. holding jurisdiction over creditor disputes only involves property of estate or resolution affects some other creditor
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: agree. In the previous appeal, we considered the question of whether prior insolvency negates the possibility of a four-point enhancement and found that it does not. McDermot, No. 93-3603 at 24. Application Note 15 does not define safety and soundness solely in terms of the institution's solvency. A defendant who perpetrates fraud with respect to an already insolvent institution may still "substantially reduce benefits to ... insureds" or cause the institution to be unable "on demand to refund fully any deposit, payment, or investment” over and above the consequences of the initial insolvency. Indeed, the district court so held in the original sentencing hearing, stating that “[w]ithout those [fraudulent securities] going on the books, I believe Presidential would ha (5th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 1865, 128 Options: A. holding that district courts factual findings for purposes of obstruction enhancement are reviewed for clear error B. holding that enhancement for obstruction of justice which uses similar mandatory language must be applied where factual predicates are satisfied C. holding that before a court imposes an enhancement for obstruction of justice the court must review the evidence and make independent findings necessary to establish a willful impediment to or obstruction of justice D. holding that obstruction of justice enhancement was properly applied where the defendant provided materially false information to a magistrate judge E. holding similar language to be a valid disclaimer

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that enhancement for obstruction of justice which uses similar mandatory language must be applied where factual predicates are satisfied
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: qualifies in general, there is nonetheless an unresolved issue as to whether it qualifies in Ms. Abbott’s particular case. Wé address each of these assertions. 1. Reproduction Writ Large. The question of whether reproduction in large constitutes a major life activity under the ADA is not free from doubt. The ADA itself does not define the term “major life activities,” and the few available judicial precedents reveal divergent opinions. Compare Pacourek v. Inland Steel Co., 916 F.Supp. 797, 804 (N.D.Ill.1996) (finding that reproduction is a major life activity) and Erickson v. Board of Govs, of State Colleges, 911 F.Supp. 316, 323 (N.D.Ill.1995) (same) and Cain v. Hyatt, 734 F.Supp. 671, 679 (E.D.Pa. 1990) (same) with Krauel v. Iowa Methodist Med. Ctr., 95 F.3d 674, 677 (8th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>) and Zatarain v. WDSU-Television, Inc., 881 Options: A. holding that breathing is a major life activity within the contemplation of the ada B. holding that a lifting restriction of ten pounds did not constitute a physical impairment that substantially limited a major life activity C. holding that reproduction is major fife activity pursuant to ada D. holding that reproduction is not a major life activity E. recognizing sleeping as major life activity

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that reproduction is not a major life activity
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 Glad Parties have insurance policies with respect to the assets and Liabilities attributed to the Glad Global Business that are of the type and in amounts that are adequate to protect and conduct the Glad Global Business. There is no material claim by Clorox or any of its Subsidiaries pending under any of such insurance policies.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: if Anyssa were returned to Mother’s care. In addition, Dr. Kathryn Coffman, a pediatrician who had examined Anyssa as well as Ashley’s medical reports, testified that she would be “very concerned about any child being in [Mother’s] care” based on Mother’s failure “to take any steps to protect” Ashley despite Mother’s knowledge that the abuse was taking place. As Dr. Coffman put it, “for two months at least [Ashley] was beaten while in [Mother’s] care, that she continued to leave the child in harm’s way, and the child ended up dying a very painful death” due to Mother’s knowing failure to protect her. Our review of the record reveals sufficient evidence to uphold the juvenile court’s best interest finding. See Kent K v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279, 288, ¶ 42, 110 P.3d 1013, 1022 (2005) (<HOLDING>). CONCLUSION ¶ 18 Based on the foregoing, we Options: A. holding that uncharged conduct may be considered at sentencing when that conduct is proven by a preponderance of the evidence B. holding in the context a rico conspiracy that the applicability of relevant conduct need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence not beyond a reasonable doubt C. holding all exceptions to discharge under 523a must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence D. holding that best interest of child need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence E. holding that when information which potentially undermines the best interest of the child as well as the interest sought to be protected by the legitimation statutes and the policy of this state it must first be tested in light of the best interest of the child standard

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that best interest of child need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence
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 provision or provisions of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable for any reason whatsoever: (a) the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement (including, without limitation, each portion of any Section, paragraph or sentence of this Agreement containing any such provision held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable that is not itself invalid, illegal or unenforceable) shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby and shall remain enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law; (b) such provision or provisions shall be deemed reformed to the extent necessary to conform to applicable law and to give the maximum effect to the intent of the parties hereto; and (c) to the fullest extent possible, the provisions of this Agreement (including, without limitation, each portion of any Section, paragraph or sentence of this Agreement containing any such provision held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, that is not itself invalid, illegal or unenforceable) shall be construed so as to give effect to the intent manifested thereby.

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: outside the scope of his employment. See Brown v. King, 328 Ill.App.3d 717, 262 Ill.Dec. 897, 767 N.E.2d 357, 361 (2001) (“[A]n off-duty officer may often be found to be acting within the scope of his employment.’’) (collecting cases). The mere fact that Moussa was outside Chicago is not necessarily disposi-tive either. See Restatement (Second) of Agency § 234 (1958) (“One may be a servant, although a bad servant, in performing his master’s business at a forbidden place' if the place is within the general territory-in which the servant is employed.”). But Anderson points to no case in which a police officer who was both off-duty and far outside his jurisdiction was held to be acting within the scope of his employment. See Karas v. Snell, 11 Ill.2d 233, 142 N.E.2d 46, 49, 57-58 (1957) (<HOLDING>); Brown, 262 Ill.Dec. 897, 767 N.E.2d at 359, Options: A. holding that the trial court did not err in charging the jury that the defendant was in the custody of the victim officer when he shot and killed the officer due to the undisputed evidence presented at trial including the defendants pretrial statement to police admitting that fact B. holding that scope of employment was an issue for the jury where a chicago police officer was off duty but within the city limits when he shot the plaintiff C. holding that a suspended chicago police officer was not acting within his scope of employment when discharging his weapon in the neighboring municipality of cicero D. holding that a reasonable jury could find that an offduty chicago police officer acted within the scope of his employment during a roadside altercation on interstate 55 near the damen street exit which is in chicago E. holding as a matter of law that a police officer was not acting within the scope of his employment when assaulting an acquaintance of a woman he had detained

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that scope of employment was an issue for the jury where a chicago police officer was off duty but within the city limits when he shot the plaintiff
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company and its subsidiaries are corporations, duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the Laws of the jurisdiction in which they are incorporated. The Company has the full corporate power and authority and all necessary certificates, licenses, approvals and Permits to: (i) enter into and execute this Agreement and the Transaction Documents and to perform all of its Obligations hereunder and thereunder; and (ii) own and operate its Assets and properties and to conduct and carry on its business as and to the extent now conducted. The Company is duly qualified to transact business and is in good standing as a foreign corporation in each jurisdiction where the character of its business or the ownership or use and operation of its Assets or properties requires such qualification, except to the extent that failure to so qualify will not result in a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Organizations
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: During the Term, the Company shall pay the Consultant a monthly fee of $33,667.00 for the Services (the “ Fee ”). The Consultant shall invoice the Company for this fee on a monthly basis at the beginning of each month. All invoices shall be paid within thirty (30) days of receipt. Additionally, the Company will reimburse the Consultant for reasonable out of pocket expenses approved in advance by the Company if greater than one hundred dollars ($100) and incurred in connection with providing the Services, supported by appropriate documentation.

assistant: Fees
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: they would not have dissuaded a reasonable employee from filing a Title VII claim). Under the facts of this case, the performance improvement plan, alone, did not cause Haskenhoff material harm either within the workplace or outside of it. Haskenhoff was never suspended, with or without pay. See Burlington N., 548 U.S. at 72, 126 S.Ct. at 2417. Her work hours were not reduced, nor was her pay cut. The performance improvement plan did not affect her professional advancement. See id. at 69, 126 S.Ct. at 2416. Her duties and status remained unchanged, both within the workplace and outside of it. Under her performance improvement plan, Haskenhoff was only required to abide by rules applicable to others in her position. See Fischer v. Andersen Corp., 483 F.3d 553, 556-58 (8th Cir. 2007) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, Finke and Wendland assured Options: A. holding that a payment is under the plan when the debt is provided for in the plan B. holding that plan language giving plan administrator power to determine which employees are eligible to participate in the plan and providing all parties dealing with the plan an interpretation of plan provisions on request indicates deferential standard of review of trustee eligibility decisions C. holding that placement on performance improvement plan was not a constructive discharge when employee acknowledged that plan requirements were largely fair and in conformance with what one would expect from an engineer D. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant E. holding that an employers requirement that an employee comply with a performance improvement plan or face disciplinary action did not constitute adverse employment action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that placement on performance improvement plan was not a constructive discharge when employee acknowledged that plan requirements were largely fair and in conformance with what one would expect from an engineer
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 may be otherwise provided by the Plan or determined by the Administrator, any written notices provided for in this Agreement or the Plan shall be in writing and shall be deemed sufficiently given if either hand delivered or if sent by fax or overnight courier, or by postage paid first class mail. Notices sent by mail shall be deemed received three business days after mailed but in no event later than the date of actual receipt. Notices shall be directed, if to the Participant, at the Participant’s address indicated on Schedule A (or such other address as may be designated by the Participant in a manner acceptable to the Administrator), or if to the Company, at the Company’s principal office. Notice may also be provided by electronic submission, if and to the extent permitted by the Administrator.

assistant: Notices
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 Committee shall administer the Plan. To the extent required to comply with the provisions of Rule 16b-3 promulgated under the Exchange Act (if the Board is not acting as the Committee under the Plan) it is intended that each member of the Committee shall, at the time such member takes any action with respect to an Award under the Plan that is intended to qualify for the exemptions provided by Rule 16b-3 promulgated under the Exchange Act be a Qualifying Director. However, the fact that a Committee member shall fail to qualify as a Qualifying Director shall not invalidate any Award granted by the Committee that is otherwise validly granted under the Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All covenants, representations and warranties made in this Agreement continue in full force while any Lender Obligations remain outstanding (other than indemnities which survive termination and are unliquidated). The obligations of Borrower in Section 12.2 to indemnify Lender will survive until all statutes of limitations for actions that may be brought against Lender have run.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Requesting Parties shall have obtained (i) the written consent of SNH to the granting of the exceptions to the Ownership Limit to the Requesting Parties and the Collateral Persons by the FVE Board described in Sections 2.1(c) and 2.1(d) and (ii) a written waiver from SNH, on behalf of itself and its subsidiaries, of any default or event of default under any lease, management or other agreement between or among the Company and SNH, or any of their subsidiaries, arising or resulting from the consummation of the Proposed Acquisition or the granting of such exceptions. Such written consent and waiver shall be for the benefit of the Company, the Requesting Parties and the Collateral Persons and otherwise in such form as is satisfactory to the FVE Board in its sole discretion (the “ SNH Consent ”) and all conditions to the effectiveness of the SNH Consent set forth therein shall have been satisfied.

assistant: Consents
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: provisions are contained in a single sentence broken down into three subdivisions and stated in the conjunctive, as demonstrated by use of the word “and” connecting the second and third subdivisions. This conjunctive structure indicates that all three prongs must be applied to an extension of benefits. The second sentence of the extended coverage provision states that all of the provisions in the Policy will apply in the extended period. The Court finds that these extended coverage provisions were complied with by State Farm as a matter of law. On April 3, 1993, the defendant elected not to renew the plaintiffs policy. This decision was in accordance with both New York State law, see First United American Life Ins. Co. v. Curiale, 200 A.D.2d 243, 613 N.Y.S.2d 494, 495 (3d Dept.1994) (<HOLDING>), and the terms of the Policy’s “Renewability” Options: A. holding that in the event that parties are from different states and the subject matter is national in scope and where the contract states it shall be deemed to be made under the laws of the state of new york and for all purposes construed in accordance with laws of said state new york law applies as the parties choice of law B. holding that contract signed in new york by promisor from florida and partially performed in florida was governed by new york law because it was executed in new york C. holding jurisdiction over nonresident defendant existed where note was payable in new york contained new york choice of law clause and proceeds were used to finance new york limited partnership D. holding that neither the new york location of the terrorist attack giving rise to the policyholders claim nor the new yorkbased claims adjustor rendered new york the locus of operative facts because new york was not the site of the contracts execution E. recognizing that insurers have the option to continue their policy in accordance with the statutes community rating requirements or to withdraw from the new york market

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that insurers have the option to continue their policy in accordance with the statutes community rating requirements or to withdraw from the new york market
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: fund taxes fall within the ambit of Code § 507(a)(8)(C) and are therefore entitled to priority treatment. Despite the Debtor’s argument to the contrary, it is also well established that civil penalties assessed in relation to unpaid trust fund taxes, such as those assessed against the Debtor under I.R.C. § 6672, are nondischargeable in bankruptcy, and are to be accorded the same priority as the underlying taxes themselves. See Matter of Taylor, 132 F.3d 256, 261 (5th Cir.1998); In re Mosbrucker, 220 B.R. 656, 658 (Bankr.D.N.D.1998); In re Felland, 153 B.R. 835, 839 (Bankr.W.D.Wis.1993); In re LMS Holding Co., 149 B.R. 684 (Bankr.N.D.Okla.1993); In re Hughes, 137 B.R. 614, 615 (Bankr.E.D.Va.1992); see also, United States v. Sotelo, 436 U.S. 268, 98 S.Ct. 1795, 56 L.Ed.2d 275 (1978) (<HOLDING>) (Sotelo, a Bankruptcy Act case, was Options: A. holding that plaintiff could not recover medical bills that were discharged in bankruptcy B. recognizing that the party who primarily benefited from income for taxes that are due and owing should be declared exclusively responsible for the tax liability penalty and interest C. holding that discharged debtor is protected only from in personam liability not in rem liability on lien given as security for mortgage loan D. holding that operates as a charge of debtors in personam tax liability not debtors in rem tax liability E. holding that responsible person liability under irc 6672 although labeled a penalty was actually a tax liability that could not be discharged in bankruptcy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that responsible person liability under irc 6672 although labeled a penalty was actually a tax liability that could not be discharged in bankruptcy