flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: this opinion. 1 . Malone v. Malone, 587 P.2d 1167, 1167 (Alaska 1978) (noting "the court has broad discretion [to divide property] which will be interfered with on appeal only in cases of clear injustice"). 2 . Sampson v. Sampson, 14 P.3d 272, 275 (Alaska 2000). 3 . Hansen v. Hansen, 119 P.3d 1005, 1009 (Alaska 2005) (quoting Lewis v. Lewis, 785 P.2d 550, 558 (Alaska 1990)). 4 . Id. (citing Moffitt v. Moffitt, 749 P.2d 343, 346 (Alaska 1988)). 5 . Id. 6 . Id. at 1013. 7 . "Usufructory" is derived from the noun, "usu-fruct," which is "[the right of using and enjoying and receiving the profits of property that belongs to another." Brack's Law Dictionary 1544 (6th ed.1990). 8 . Schmitz v. Schmitz, 88 P.3d 1116, 1125 (Alaska 2004). 9 . Harrower v. Harrower, 71 P.3d 854, 858 (Alaska 2003) (<HOLDING>) (citing Green v. Green, 29 P.3d 854, 858 Options: A. holding that shares of stock in husbands name had not been transmuted B. holding void shares issued in excess of the amount of common shares authorized in the articles of incorporation C. holding in action for breach of contract caused by wrongful foreclosure and sale of shares of stock plaintiff was entitled to recover the fair market value of the stock at the time of its sale D. holding that rule 11 agreement stating that one party would return shares of stock for a specific amount of money contained essential terms E. holding in forfeiture case that circumstances surrounding mothers conveyance of stock to her soninlaw were sufficient under wisconsin law to create constructive trust in stock in daughters favor where testimony showed such was intent of conveyance despite facts that stock registered in husbands name and that no documentation supported testimony

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that shares of stock in husbands name had not been transmuted
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 those alleles.”). Contrary to defendant’s assertion, evidence that Hilario’s DNA matched that of the blood found on defendant’s clothing had "little probative value without Quartaro’s expert testimony — “[e]vidence of a match based on currently used testing processes is meaningless without evidence indicating the significance of the match.” Id. at 109 (quotin issue, was the very witness that the Supreme Court deemed necessary in Bullcoming: “the analysts who write reports that the prosecution introduces must be made available for confrontation even if they possess ‘the scientific acumen of Mme. Curie and the veracity of Mother Teresa.’ ” Bullcoming, 131 S.Ct. at 2715 (quoting Melendez-Diaz, 129 S.Ct. at 2537 n. 6); see also United States v. Moore, 651 F.3d 30, 71 (D.C.Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Boyd, 686 F.Supp.2d 382, 385 Options: A. holding that there was no violation of defendants confrontation rights where minor victim testified at trial and was available for recall after admission of her hearsay statements B. holding that court was within its discretion to refuse to consider reports that did not meet the supreme courts standards for admitting reports into evidence C. holding that the confrontation clause bars admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless the witness was unavailable to testify and the defendant had a prior opportunity for crossexamination D. holding that because a witness testified that he authored the reports at issue and was available for crossexamination at trial the admittance of those reports presented no confrontation clause problem under bullcoming E. holding that lab reports are accusatory and subject to confrontation clause

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that because a witness testified that he authored the reports at issue and was available for crossexamination at trial the admittance of those reports presented no confrontation clause problem under bullcoming
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: context of the provision of health care services for cancer patients, the quality of care is likely to be at least as important to patients as the price. Accordingly, defendants’ claim that plaintiffs have failed to allege market-wide injury is rejected, b. Failure to Adequately Allege Causation Defendants further argue that plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that defendants’ actions, even if anticompetitive, have caused plaintiffs’ injuries. Again, defendants’ argument fails. Defendants argue that, as owners and operators of radiology facilities, they are not competitors of Medscan. First, there is no requirement that a plaintiff be a consumer or competitor to assert an antitrust claim. See Blue Shield of Va. v. McCready, 457 U.S. 465, 483-84, 102 S.Ct. 2540, 73 L.Ed.2d 149 (1982) (<HOLDING>). Second, defendants’ definition of the Options: A. holding that injury to broker through loss of commission was not antitrust injury B. holding that an antitrust injury is an injury that is attributable to an anticompetitive aspect of the practice under scrutiny C. holding that noncompetitors injury was an antitrust injury as it was inextricably intertwined with the injury the conspirators sought to inflict D. holding that an antitrust injury is a necessary element of a 2 claim E. 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

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that noncompetitors injury was an antitrust injury as it was inextricably intertwined with the injury the conspirators sought to inflict
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: Employer hereby covenants and agrees to pay to Employee, and Employee hereby covenants and agrees to accept from Employer, (i) a base salary at the rate of Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($750,000.00) per annum from the Effective Date through August 31, 2018, and (ii) a base salary at the rate of Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($800,000.00) per annum from September 1, 2018 through the remainder of the Term, payable in such installments as shall be convenient to Employer (the “ Base Salary ”). Employee shall be subject to performance reviews and the Base Salary may be increased but not decreased as a result of any such review. Such Base Salary shall be exclusive of and in addition to any other benefits which Employer, in its sole discretion, may make available to Employee, including any discretionary bonus, profit sharing plan, pension plan, retirement plan, disability or life insurance plan, medical and/or hospitalization plan, or any and all other benefit plans which may be in effect during the Term.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 347 U.S. 610 74 S.Ct. 736 98 L.Ed. 987 ALTONv.ALTON. No. 531. Supreme Court of the United States Argued and Submitted April 7, 1954. June 1, 1954 Messrs. George H. T. Dudley, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, V.I., Abe Fortas, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Mr. Hyman Smollar, Washington, D.C., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner brought this action for divorce in the Virgin Islands. Following argument and submission of the case in this Court, we were authoritatively advised that a final divorce decree had been entered on April 28, 1954, in the State of Connecticut on application of the respondent. The Superior Court of Connecticut found respondent to be a domiciliary of that State and petitioner here personally appeared in that action. Petitioner does not suggest that she repudiates her appearance in the Connecticut action, that the Connecticut decree is invalid in any way, or, in fact, that there is any colorable basis for challenging it. Nor does petitioner seek any ancillary relief in the instant divorce action that could not be obtained in an independent action in the Virgin Islands. 2 On the premises, this case appears to be moot. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the cause is remanded to the District Court with directions to vacate its judgment and to dismiss the proceeding upon the ground that the cause is moot. 3 Mr. Justice BLACK dissents. He is of the opinion that petitioner is entitled to have her divorce case tried in the Virgin Islands since under the holding and opinion in Williams v. State of North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226, 65 S.Ct. 1092, 89 L.Ed. 1577, the Connecticut divorce decree does not necessarily protect petitioner from conviction for bigamy in the Virgin Islands or anywhere else. 4 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS and Mr. Justice JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 9
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the relief sought by the Appellant? Standard op Review Declaratory judgment actions are neither legal nor equitable and, therefore, the standard of review depends on' the nature of the underlying issues. Doe v. South Carolina Medical Malpractice Liability Joint Underwriting, 347 S.C. 642, 645, 557 S.E.2d 670, 672 (2001). An action for declaratory judgment that a magistrate’s judgment is void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is an action at law. Therefore, the master’s findings of fact will not be disturbed on appeal unless found to be without evidence which reasonabl 51 n. 2 (1996) (noting that an unappealed ruling becomes the law of the case and precludes further consideration of the issue on appeal); Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. Perry et al, 261 S.C. 538, 201 S.E.2d 245 (1973) (<HOLDING>); Watkins v. Hodge, 232 S.C. 245,-, 101 S.E.2d Options: A. holding that a ruling of the trial court to which no error has been assigned becomes the law of the case and is not subject to review by the court of appeals B. holding that an unappealed ruling is the law of the case C. holding that where a ruling on a demurrer to complaint is not appealed from it becomes the law of the case D. holding an appellate decision becomes the law of the case and is controlling on both the trial court and on any further appeals in the same case E. holding that a ruling from a prior decision of this court becomes the law of the case that cannot be challenged in a later proceeding quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where a ruling on a demurrer to complaint is not appealed from it becomes the law of the case
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, the First Lien Loan Documents and the Second Lien Documents represent the entire agreement of the Grantors, the First Lien Claimholders and the Second Lien Claimholders with respect to the subject matter hereof and thereof, and supersede any and all previous agreements and understandings, oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof and thereof. There are no promises, undertakings, representations or warranties by the First Lien Claimholders or the Second Lien Claimholders relative to the subject matter hereof and thereof not expressly set forth or referred to herein or therein. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and the provisions of the First Lien Loan Documents or the Second Lien Documents, the provisions of this Agreement shall govern and control.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company may withhold and shall timely remit to any applicable tax authority all amounts required by any Law to be withheld by the Company from or with respect to Distributions to a Member or from or with respect to a Member’s distributive share of Company taxable income or loss (or item thereof). Each Member shall timely provide to the Company upon request all information, forms and certifications reasonably necessary or appropriate to enable the Company to comply with any such withholding obligation, or to establish the Company’s legal entitlement to an exemption from, or reduction of, withholding or other taxes or similar payments, including U.S. federal withholding tax under Sections 1471 and 1472 of the Code or the Treasury Regulations thereunder. Further, each Member covenants to the Company that the information, forms and certifications furnished by it shall be true and accurate in all respects. Each Member shall, upon demand by the Company, indemnify the Company for the indemnifying Member’s share of any such withholding and all related costs and expenses of the Company. Any amounts so withheld in respect of a Member shall be treated as a distribution to such Member for all purposes of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Court addressed Jefferson’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, máde in his motion for a new trial. Jefferson pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance. He filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that his counsel had been ineffective. His motion did not set forth any facts supporting his claim. The Court of Criminal Appeals held that because the motion for a new trial raised only a general claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the claim was not properly presented to the trial court or preserved for appellate review. In his petition for a writ of certiorari to this Court, Jefferson contended that facts in the record supported his motion and, therefore, that he was not required to make a more specific assertion. See Hill v. State, 675 So.2d 484 (Ala.Crim.App.l995)(<HOLDING>). Jefferson argued that the record on its face Options: A. holding that the statement of specific grounds in a motion for a new trial waives all other grounds not specified B. holding that when the grounds stated in the motion for a new trial are evident in the record a hearing is warranted even though the motion is not supported by affidavits or other extrinsic evidence C. holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion D. holding appellants issue was rendered moot because appellant was given the opportunity to make a record in support of his motion for new trial and appellate court considered that record in disposing of only issue raised in the motion for new trial E. holding that ajffidavits in support of or in opposition to motions for summary judgment must be filed into evidence at the hearing on the motion or filed into the record in order for the affidavits to be part of the record on appeal emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that when the grounds stated in the motion for a new trial are evident in the record a hearing is warranted even though the motion is not supported by affidavits or other extrinsic 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: Licensee agrees to indemnify and hold Licensor, its officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, successors and assigns harmless from and against all losses, damages or expenses of whatever form or nature, including attorneys' fees and other costs of legal defense, whether direct or indirect, which they, or any of them, sustain or incur as a result of (a) the breach of or failure to perform any obligation, provision or condition of Licensee contained in any of the provisions of this Agreement; (b) violation by Licensee (or any of its directors, officers, managers, affiliates, employees, representatives, or agents) of any applicable law, regulation or order; or (c) any misappropriation or misuse by Licensee of any Licensed Patents, Licensed Technical Information, or Confidential Information of Licensor.

assistant: Indemnity
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: Executive hereby assigns and agrees to assign in the future to the Company all Executive’s right, title and interest in and to any and all such work products and designs (whether or not patentable or registerable under copyright or similar statutes) made or conceived or reduced to practice or learned by Executive, either individually or jointly with others, during Executive’s employment with the Company (“Intellectual Property”).

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: conduct a de novo review of the evidence, as the acquittee requests, when we are faced with the issue of whether the evidence was sufficient to support the court’s decision. We are not in a position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and reweigh the evidence as a de novo review would require. See State v. Fernandez, 254 Conn. 637, 647-48, 758 A.2d 842 (2000) (declining to apply de novo review to highly fact based decision of trial court on counsel’s motion to withdraw), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 913, 121 S. Ct. 1247, 149 L. Ed. 2d 153 (2001); State v. Santiago, 252 Conn. 635, 640, 748 A.2d 293 (2000) (declining to review de novo trial court’s conclusions as to allegations of juror’s racial bias); Doe v. Connecticut Bar Examining Committee, 263 Conn. 39, 57-58, 818 A.2d 14 (2003) (<HOLDING>). Having determined that we must apply the Options: A. holding that review of the construction of a sentencing statute is de novo B. holding courts reweighing of evidence improper as de novo review of record C. holding that the proper review for the trial courts application of the law is de novo D. recognizing de novo standard of review E. holding that we review a district courts interpretation of a statute de novo

assistant: The best answer is B. holding courts reweighing of evidence improper as de novo review of record
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: 342 (3d Cir.1999) (internal quotations omitted). II. Request for Declaratory Judgement In his Motion to Dismiss, Defendant argues that Hartford is collaterally estopped from seeking declaratory relief before this Court because it has acquiesced to the jurisdiction of the arbitration panel. (Def. Mot. at ¶ 14; Def. Mem. at 7). Both parties admit that the O’Maras’ insurance policy contains a valid arbitration clause; the question is whether that clause applies to .the present dispute. Based on our reading of state law and other courts’ related holdings, we find that it does. Defendant correctly points out that arbitration panels are generally given broad authority to resolve claim disputes. Brennan v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp., 524 Pa. 542, 574 A.2d 580, 583 (1990) (<HOLDING>). Hartford contends, however, that Defendant Options: A. holding that question was within arbitration provision because provision contained no specific language precluding arbitrators from reaching question B. holding that an arbitration provision that waived class actions and thus required the consumer to pay a 125 fee to vindicate a 150 claim was substantively unconscionable but also holding that the waiver provision was severable from the remainder of the arbitration provision which would be enforced C. holding wills more specific provision prevails over general provision D. holding the question of whether insurance companys requests were reasonable under policy language was a fact question E. holding that a dispute arising out of an insurance policy was not covered by the arbitration provision in the parties separate premium payment agreement because if the party had intended to subject this dispute to the arbitration provision it could easily clearly and unequivocally have done so either by including an arbitration provision in the insurance policy itself or by adding to the above arbitration provision

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that question was within arbitration provision because provision contained no specific language precluding arbitrators from reaching question
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: after petitioner had completed all of the terms of his sentence and after his driving privileges were reinstated, the Department informed petitioner by letter that he would either have to install the device on his vehicles or face revocation of his driver license. Despite the Department’s arguments to the contrary, neither section 316.193 nor section 322.16, Florida Statutes (2002), grants the Department authority to require the imposition of the device in the absence of a court order. The unambiguous language of section 316.193 clearly establishes that Florida’s trial courts, not the Department, are responsible for ordering the installation of the device upon qualified offenders. See Dickenson, Dep't of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Aultman, 905 So.2d 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)(<HOLDING>). While section 322.16 provides general Options: A. holding that director of police department does not have final policymaking authority in miamidade county despite having some discretionary authority B. holding that fmla does not impose individual liability C. holding that department does not have independent authority to impose device in absence of court order D. recognizing inherent power of supreme court independent of statutory authority to punish for contempt of court E. holding that when defendant failed to appear at scheduled suppression hearing the court could have decided the motion in defendants absence but it did not have the authority to refuse to consider it

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that department does not have independent authority to impose device in absence of court order
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 Designated Agent shall have received payment of all expenses then due and payable to the Designated Agent pursuant to the Credit Agreement (including all reasonable attorney costs of the Designated Agent), subject to the Borrower receiving an invoice with respect thereto.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: as “bad faith” or “willful” spoliation, we mean that the party acted with the subjective purpose of concealing or destroying discoverable evidence. This includes the concept of “willful blindness,” court “must analyze the available sanctions and offer a reasoned explanation as to the appropriateness of the sanction imposed”). 2. Caveat Authorizing Instruction in Context of Negligent Spoliation Our conclusion regarding the requisite state of mind to justify a jury instruction, however, must include a narrow caveat. On rare occasions, a situation may arise in which a party’s negligent breach of its duty to reasonably preserve evidence irreparably prevents the nonspoliating party from having any meaningful opportunity to present a claim or defense. See Wal-Mart Stores, 106 S.W.3d at 721 (<HOLDING>). In such circumstances, the destruction or Options: A. recognizing that the loss or destruction of evidence may seriously impair a partys ability to present its case B. holding that the trial court failed to exercise its discretion by stating that it did not have the ability to present the transcript to the jury C. holding that plaintiff must present such evidence D. recognizing spoliation as an independent cause of action for negligence where a party is unable to prove its case due to the loss or destruction of key evidence E. holding that cause of action for injury to corporations property or for impairment or destruction of its business is vested in corporation as distinguished from its shareholders

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that the loss or destruction of evidence may seriously impair a partys ability to present its case
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: 93, 95 (1971) (attorney general, not county attorney, represents state’s interests with respect to revocation of drivers’ licenses). Because the county attorney did not represent the DOT in the criminal proceedings and had no independent authority, any representation by the county attorney that section 321.209 did not apply to Schumacher is not binding on the DOT. Cf. Bassion, 568 A.2d at 1320 (because department of transportation was not a party to criminal proceeding, any order entered in criminal case concerning the defendant’s operating privileges would not be binding on the department). For the same reasons, a county attorney does not have the authority to waive the applicability of section 321.209 as part of plea bargaining in a criminal case. State v. House, 192 N.W.2d at 95 (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Lefever, 533 A.2d 501, 503 Options: A. holding that officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct a vehicle stop where official license and registration records reflected that the vehicle was registered to a driver with a revoked license B. holding that a guilty plea to underage drinking could not be withdrawn based on fact defendant was unaware that his drivers license would be suspended because of his conviction as the license suspension was a civil consequence of the conviction C. holding that county attorney had no authority to agree during plea negotiations that defendants drivers license would not be revoked D. holding that the county attorney had de facto authority and noting that the objection to the county attorneys authority was first made on appeal E. holding that district attorney had no power during plea bargaining to bind the state department of transportation to forego license suspension

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that county attorney had no authority to agree during plea negotiations that defendants drivers license would not be revoked
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: v. City of Presque Isle, 1998 ME 166, 715 A.2d 148, a plaintiff claiming a Freedom of Access violation was required to file a motion pursuant to Rule 80B(d) in order to present evidence to the Superior Court. See Moreau v. Town of Turner, 661 A.2d 677, 679 (Me.1995); Palesky v. Town of Topsham, 614 A.2d 1307, 1310 n. 3 (Me.1992) Marxsen v. Board of Dirs., M.S.A.D. No. 5, 591 A.2d 867, 871 (Me.1991). In Underwood, we expressly overruled Marxsen to the extent it required a Rule 80B(d) motion in order for evidence to be presented in a Freedom of Access case. We did so because 1 M.R.S.A. § 409(2) (1989) provides a claimant a trial de novo in the Superior Court. See Underwood, 1998 ME 166, ¶ 22, 715 A.2d at 155; see also Service & Erection Co. v. State Tax Assessor, 684 A.2d 1, 2 (Me.1996) (<HOLDING>) Although in Underwood we did not mention the Options: A. holding no requirement of rule 80bd motion in tax appeal where statute provides for trial de novo B. holding that review of the construction of a sentencing statute is de novo C. holding that review of a rule 60b4 motion is de novo D. recognizing ruling on motion for judgment of acquittal is reviewed de novo on appeal E. recognizing de novo standard of review

assistant: The best answer is A. holding no requirement of rule 80bd motion in tax appeal where statute provides for trial de novo
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: Calumet hereby acknowledges its obligation pursuant to Section 13.1 of the SOA to deliver the quarterly report by November 14, 2017, which delivery date was extended to December 15, 2017 pursuant to the Original Waiver, and requests a temporary waiver thereof. Macquarie hereby consents to the temporary waiver of Calumet’s obligation with respect to the quarterly report for the quarter ending September 30, 2017 until December 31, 2017 (“ Temporary Waiver ”). The waiver by Macquarie described in this Section 2 is contingent upon the satisfaction of the conditions specified in Section 4 of this Agreement and is limited solely to this Temporary Waiver. This Temporary Waiver is limited to the extent described herein and shall not be construed to be a consent to or a permanent waiver of Section 13.1 of the SOA or any other terms, provisions, covenants, warranties or agreements contained in the SOA. Macquarie reserves the right to exercise any rights and remedies available to it in connection with any other present or future Events of Default under the SOA (including any future default or Event of Default under Section 13.1 of the SOA). The description herein of the Temporary Waiver is based upon the information available to Macquarie on or prior to the date hereof and shall not be deemed to exclude the existence of any Events of Default. The failure of Macquarie to give notice to Calumet of any such Events of Default is not intended to be and shall not be a waiver thereof.

assistant: Waivers
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 executed in any number of counterparts, all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument and any of the parties hereto may execute this Agreement by signing any such counterpart. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Agreement by telecopier or electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of which will be considered one and the same agreement and will become effective when counterparts have been signed by each of the Parties and delivered to each other Party (including via facsimile or other electronic transmission), it being understood that each Party need not sign the same counterpart. Any facsimile or electronic signature shall be treated in all respects as having the same effect as having an original signature.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party’s obligations under this Section 3.4 shall survive any assignment of rights by, or the replacement of, a Lender, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all other obligations under any Loan Document.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New Jersey without regard to principles of conflicts of laws. Any action brought by either party against the other concerning the transactions contemplated by this Agreement shall be brought only in the state courts of New Jersey or in the federal courts located in the state. The parties to this Agreement hereby irrevocably waive any objection to jurisdiction and venue of any action instituted hereunder and shall not assert any defense based on lack of jurisdiction or venue or based upon forum non conveniens . The Company and Purchaser waive trial by jury. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorney's fees and costs. In the event that any provision of this Agreement or any other agreement delivered in connection herewith is invalid or unenforceable under any applicable statute or rule of law, then such provision shall be deemed inoperative to the extent that it may conflict therewith and shall be deemed modified to conform with such statute or rule of law. Any such provision which may prove invalid or unenforceable under any law shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of any agreement. Each party hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any suit, action or proceeding in connection with this Agreement or any other Transaction Document 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 Agreement 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 other manner permitted by law.

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: days after the seizure. Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 59.04(a); State v. Lot 10, Pine Haven Estates, 900 S.W.2d 400, 401 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1995, no writ). Appellant contends that the seizure, forfeiture, and filing of the lis pendens were simultaneously done in violation of article 59.04, which, according to appellant, mandates that the property must first be seized before the lis pendens is filed and forfeiture proceedings begin. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 59.04(a), (g). We disagree with appellant’s interpretation of article 59.04. There is nothing in the statute, and appellant has provided no relevant law or discussion, indicating that the simultaneous filing of these documents is improper. See Bochas v. State, 951 S.W.2d 64, 70 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1997, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>). Appellant also challenges the findings of Options: A. holding that the legal title holders to real property held it in constructive trust for the equitable title holder who was entitled to the real property based on an earlier contract B. holding that a tax appeal on real property is a lien on the real estate and not a personal obligation of the landowner C. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property D. holding that forfeiture of real property may be adjudicated before the seizure occurs because real property cannot abscond E. recognizing that water rights constitute a real property interest

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that forfeiture of real property may be adjudicated before the seizure occurs because real property cannot abscond
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 executed in counterparts (and by different parties hereto on different counterparts), each of which shall constitute an original but all of which when taken together shall constitute a single contract. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Agreement by facsimile or other electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually signed counterpart of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of law, the trial court was required to permit him to withdraw his plea because he demonstrated good cause. The burden is upon the defendant to'establish good cause. Robinson v. State, 761 So.2d 269 (Fla.1999); Taylor v. State, 870 So.2d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Good cause exists in situations where the defendant demonstrates that his guilty plea was infected by misapprehension, undue persuasion, ignorance, was entered by one not competent to know its consequence, the ends of justice would be served by withdrawal of such plea or that it was otherwise involuntary. Onnestad v. State, 404 So.2d 403 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). A defendant’s entry of a plea based upon his attorney’s mistaken advice can be a valid basis for finding good cause. See Graham v. State, 779 So.2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)(<HOLDING>). Here, the defendant’s claim of good cause is Options: A. holding that counsels mistaken advice that defendants photo would not be placed on the internet established good cause for permitting defendant to withdraw his guilty plea B. holding the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendants motion to withdraw his guilty plea because the defendant did not admit to facts demonstrating the required mental state C. holding that a defendant may withdraw a guilty plea as a matter of right before it is accepted by the court based on ndr crim p 32d3 which states that a defendant may not withdraw his plea of guilty as a matter of right once the plea has been accepted by the court alteration in original D. holding that where a defendant is misled and induced to plead by his counsels mistaken advice then he may be allowed to withdraw his plea E. holding that a defendant who is allowed to withdraw his plea must either withdraw his plea to all charges or to none when his plea to all charges was part of an agreement with the state

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that counsels mistaken advice that defendants photo would not be placed on the internet established good cause for permitting defendant to withdraw his guilty plea
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Administrative Agent shall have received an unaudited consolidated balance sheet of the Borrower and its consolidated Subsidiaries and the related unaudited consolidated statements of operations and of cash flows for each fiscal quarter ended after December 31, 2017 (so long as such fiscal quarters have ended at least 40 days prior to the Effective Date). The Borrower’s filing of any required unaudited financial statements with respect to the Borrower on Form 10-Q will satisfy the requirements under this paragraph.

assistant: Financial Statements
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 Executive’s employment is terminated as a result of Disability, the Company shall provide Executive with long-term disability benefits in accordance with the Company’s then-existing benefit plans, and the Company shall pay to Executive the Earned Amounts and income due for the remainder of the Term.

assistant: Disability
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: number of class members exceeds forty. See Stewart v. Abraham, 275 F.3d 220, 226-27 (3d Cir.2001). In addition, the numerosity requirement is satisfied where the exact size of the class is not known, but general knowledge and common sense indicate that the class is large. Olden v. LaFarge Corp., 203 F.R.D. 254, 269 (E.D.Mich.), aff'd, 383 F.3d 495 (6th Cir.2004). In her complaint, plaintiff suggests that the class is comprised of “at least tens of thousands of persons,” and common sense would seem to dictate that the potential class may be even larger than plaintiff’s good faith estimation. (Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 22.) Courts have consistently found classes similar in size to the one proposed by plaintiff to be sufficiently numerous to make join-der impracticable. See Daffin, 458 F.3d at 552 (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation omitted); see, e.g., Options: A. recognizing that in determining numerosity the proper focus is not on numbers alone but on whether joinder of all members is practicable in view of the numerosity of the class and all other relevant factors B. holding that 100 to 150 members is within the range that generally satisfies the numerosity requirement C. holding that a potential class of 256 members did not satisfy numerosity D. holding that classes of seven nine and ten members did not satisfy numerosity E. recognizing that substantial numbers usually satisfy the numerosity requirement

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that substantial numbers usually satisfy the numerosity requirement
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: authority. In determining whether to retain jurisdiction, courts look to four factors: economy, convenience to the parties, fairness to the parties, and comity. Querner, 7 F.3d at 1202; In re Carraher, 971 F.2d at 328; In re Morris, 960 F.2d at 1534. Thus, when claims had been pending for several years and concerned issues with which bankruptcy courts are familiar, the factors have warranted continuing jurisdiction. See, e.g, In re Carraher, 971 F.2d at 328 (finding postbankruptcy jurisdiction appropriate where comity not implicated because issue concerned res judicata effect of prior bankruptcy decision and claims had been pending for six years); In re Morris, 950 F.2d at 1534 (continuing jurisdiction over contract claim that had been pending six years); In re Smith, 866 F.2d at 580 (<HOLDING>). In contrast, continuing jurisdiction was not Options: A. holding citys plea to the jurisdiction in rule 202 proceeding properly denied because district court had jurisdiction over portion of claim under investigation even if city and governmental agency had exclusive jurisdiction over another portion of claim B. holding postbankruptcy jurisdiction proper over fraud claim pending for four years C. holding that the time of discovery of fraud is not a proper matter for summary judgment D. holding over E. holding that mere disagreement over the proper treatment does not create a constitutional claim

assistant: The best answer is B. holding postbankruptcy jurisdiction proper over fraud claim pending for four years
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the dispute at issue, and we do not see how Leroy’s claims are completely independent of the Purchase Agreement so that they could be maintained without reference to it. See Marshall, 909 S.W.2d at 899; Arnold Oil Co., 30 S.W.3d at 498. Moreover, the arbitration provision here is broad, encompassing “[a]ny controversy or claim arising out of or relating to” the Purchase Agreement. The financing of Leroy’s vehicle is a matter that arises out of and relates to Leroy’s agreement to purchase the vehicle, as reflected in the Purchase Agreement. But for Leroy’s purchase, there would have been no relationship between the parties and no financing transaction that is the basis of Leroy’s claims. See In re Conseco Fin. Servicing Corp., 19 S.W.3d 562, 570 (Tex.App.-Waco 2000, orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>); Gerwell v. Moran, 10 S.W.3d 28, 32-33 Options: A. holding that broad arbitration provision encompassed statutory and tort claims not based on the formation negotiation terms or performance of contract B. holding that broad arbitration provision in 1993 partnership agreement encompassed claims arising out of 1999 agreement to assign partnership interest C. holding claims based on title vii subject to arbitration D. holding that antitrust claims were arbitrable under a broad arbitration clause even though the claims concerned matters beyond the making of a particular contract between the parties and the performance of its terms E. holding that the forum selection clause at issue encompassed both contract and tort claims

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that broad arbitration provision encompassed statutory and tort claims not based on the formation negotiation terms or performance of contract
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Receiving Party agrees not to use, divulge, reproduce or otherwise make available the Confidential Information other than for the purposes of the Project and to disclose it only to its officers, agents, employees, partners, and professional advisors as necessary, who shall also be bound to comply with this Agreement.

assistant: Yes