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: on the theme, and any number of them sed courts, when determining the propriety of apportionability, that they should not be distracted by the form in which the income is received: “One must look principally at the investment activity, not at the form of investment, to determine the propriety of apportionability____ Changing the form of the income works no change in the underlying economic realities of [whether] a unitary business [exists], and accordingly it ought not to affect the apportionability of income the parent receives.” ASARCO, 458 U.S. at 330, 102 S.Ct. at 3116 (quoting Mobil Oil, 445 U.S. at 440-41, 100 S.Ct. at 1233); accord Exxon, 447 U.S. at 223-24, 100 S.Ct. at 2120-21. See also Comptroller of the Treasury v. Armco, Inc., 70 Md.App. 403, 521 A.2d 785, 795 (1987) (<HOLDING>). Under this methodological approach, courts Options: A. holding that previous precedent statefs no rigid rule for the identification of an flsa employer but provides a nonexclusive and overlapping set of factors to ensure that the economic realities test mandated by the supreme court is sufficiently comprehensive and flexible to give proper effect to the broad language of the flsa B. recognizing that the supreme court in hayes consistently limited its holding that the mva title provisions applied instead of the ucc to cases involving tort law and liability insurance coverage C. recognizing that the supreme court has consistently applied an analysis keyed to economic realities D. recognizing that supreme court has not clearly explained role of discretionary functions in qualified immunity analysis E. recognizing that the virginia supreme court has consistently applied the one year statute of limitation to defamation actions

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that the supreme court has consistently applied an analysis keyed to economic realities
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: When all Obligations shall have been paid in full, the pledge of Collateral under Section 2 of this Agreement shall terminate without further action of any other Person and, in connection therewith, Lender shall forthwith cause to be assigned, transferred and delivered, against receipt but without any recourse, warranty or representation whatsoever (except that Lender has not sold, created or suffered to exist thereon any lien, security interest or encumbrance in favor of any third party) any remaining Collateral and money received in respect thereof, to or on the order of Pledgor.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company has all requisite corporate power and authority and has taken all requisite action on the part of the Company, its officers, directors and stockholders necessary for (i) the authorization, execution and delivery of the Transaction Documents, (ii) the authorization of the performance of all obligations of the Company hereunder or thereunder and (iii) the authorization, issuance (or reservation for issuance) and delivery of the Securities. The Transaction Documents constitute the legal, valid and binding obligations of the Company, enforceable against the Company in accordance with their terms, subject to bankruptcy, insolvency, fraudulent transfer, reorganization, moratorium and similar Laws of general applicability, relating to or affecting creditors’ rights generally and to general equitable principles.

assistant: Authorizations
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 execution, delivery and performance by each Loan Party of each Loan Document to which such Person is party, have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate, limited liability company or other organizational action, and do not and will not (a) contravene the terms of any of such Person's Organization Documents; (b) conflict with or result in any breach or contravention of, or the creation of any Lien (except Permitted Liens) under, or require any payment to be made under (i) any Contractual Obligation to which such Person is a party or affecting such Person or the properties of such Person or any of its Subsidiaries or (ii) any order, injunction, writ or decree of any Governmental Authority or any arbitral award to which such Person or its property is subject; or (c) violate any Law, except, in the case of clauses (b) and (c), to the extent that failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Authorizations
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: and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2) that there be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of — the injury must be fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant, and not the result of the independent action of some third party not before the court; and (3) that it be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision.” Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154, 167, 117 S.Ct. 1154, 137 L.Ed.2d 281 (1997); see also Lee v. Board of Governors of Fed. Reserve Sys., 118 F.3d 905, 910 (2d Cir .1997). The District Court properly concluded that the Worleys lack standing to litigate this matter. See New York Envtl. Justice Alliance v. Giuliani, 50 F.Supp.2d 250, 254 (S.D.N.Y.1999) (<HOLDING>), affd on other grounds, 214 F.3d 65 (2d Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring a civil rico claim predicated on illegal gambling because they failed to allege a compensable injury B. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to sue C. holding that a passenger who lacked a property or possessory interest in the automobile or property seized lacked standing to challenge a search of the car D. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring securities claims relating to funds that plaintiffs did not own E. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring suit under seqraceqr because they failed to allege any property interest in the community gardens at issue

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring suit under seqraceqr because they failed to allege any property interest in the community gardens at issue
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: we must dismiss the appeal. See Reid, 844 So.2d at 1215. APPEAL DISMISSED. THOMPSON, P. J., and PITTMAN, BRYAN, and THOMAS, JJ., concur. 1 . Compare Reid and Tomlinson, supra, with Parker v. Parker, 946 So.2d 480 (Ala.Civ.App.2006) Options: A. holding a judgment that reserved the issue of child support indefinitely and not pending the occurrence of a specific event to be final B. holding a judgment that reserved the issue of child support pending the mothers taking an examination to obtain her nursing license to be nonfinal C. holding that it was error for the trial court to determine the issue of child support without a child support guidelines worksheet D. holding that an outofwedlock childs pending claim for retroactive child support was nondischargeable in bankruptcy because a debt for child support arises upon the birth of the child and that the fact that no court had yet ordered the debtor to support the child does not take the debt outside the scope of 11 usc 523a5 E. holding that the liability creating event constitutes an occurrence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding a judgment that reserved the issue of child support indefinitely and not pending the occurrence of a specific event to be final
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. Kitsap County, 59 Wn. App. 177, 180, 797 P.2d 516 (1990). 14 See Marley v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 125 Wn.2d 533, 541, 886 P.2d 189 (1994). 15 CR 60(b). We note that “irregularity in obtaining the order” is one of several bases for a motion to vacate a voidable order, whereas “procedural irregularity” in the due process discussion describes all potentially voidable orders. 16 Moody, 137 Wn.2d at 988 (“There are a number of reasons why married couples decide to petition for legal separation rather than dissolution. These could include religious concerns, emotional unpreparedness for dissolution, and financial considerations such as continuation of employment or social security benefits.”). 17 RCW 26.09.175(2); see In re Marriage of McLean, 132 Wn.2d 301, 306, 937 P.2d 602 (1997) (<HOLDING>). 18 50 Wn. App. 633, 637, 749 P.2d 754 (1988). Options: A. holding notice of balance due satisfies notice and demand requirements B. holding such service satisfies due process C. holding that a predeprivation opportunity to be heard satisfies the due process clause D. holding that service is not avoided by service on a partys attorney as service on an attorney is ineffective unless he has been authorized to accept such service E. holding that a preponderanceoftheevidence standard with respect to sentencing matters satisfies due process requirements

assistant: The best answer is B. holding such service satisfies due process
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: like the determination that inoculation against biological or chemical attack is warranted, Minns, 155 F.3d at 451 (emphasis added), or the determination of what constitutes appropriate “defense of national borders.” Tiffany, 931 F.2d at 278. This case simply does not involve the exercise of “professional military discretion.” As the Third Circuit held in rejecting the argument that the discretionary function exception barred a negligence claim against the government for the conduct of a Navy employee: This case is not about a national security concern, but rather a mundane, administrative, garden-variety, housekeeping problem that is about as far removed from the policies applicable to the Navy’s mission as it is possible to get. Gotha v. United States, 115 F.3d 176, 181 (3d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). These words are equally applicable here. The Options: A. holding discretionary function exception is no shield to claim of negligence in failing to provide handrails or adequate lighting on footpath B. holding asserted negligence in failure to provide adequate lighting or warning in federally controlled parking lot not shielded by discretionary function exception C. holding that the discretionary function exception may apply in the absence of a conscious decision D. recognizing a discretionary function exception to that waiver E. holding that an agent acting outside his delegated authority is not protected by the discretionary function exception

assistant: The best answer is A. holding discretionary function exception is no shield to claim of negligence in failing to provide handrails or adequate lighting on footpath
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 “ Closing ” as used herein shall refer to the actual consummation of the Sale Transactions in exchange for the payment delivered to Seller pursuant to Section 2.4 . The Closing shall take place by conference call and by exchange and release of signature pages by email or fax on the third Business Day following the date upon which all of the conditions precedent set forth in Articles IX and X are satisfied or waived by the appropriate party hereto, subject to Article XI , or at such other place and time or on such other date as is mutually agreed to in writing by Seller and Purchaser (“ Closing Date ”); provided , however , in no event shall the Closing occur prior to July 1, 2017 without the prior written consent of Purchaser. The Closing shall be deemed to take effect at 12:01 a.m. Chicago time on the Closing Date or at such other time or on such other date as is mutually agreed to in writing by Seller and Purchaser.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: plain error, see United States v. McGhee, 869 F.3d 703, 705 (8th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (stating that unobjected-to procedural sentencing errors are forfeited and thus reviewed only for plain error); United States v. Davis, 825 F.3d 359, 363 (8th Cir. 2016) (discussing plain-error review); U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(a)(2) (defining Grade B violation); see also 18 U.S.C. § 751(a) (defining crime of escape and penalties); United States v. Goad, 788 F.3d 873, 876 (8th Cir. 2015) (concluding that defendant’s unauthorized departure from his residential reentry facility constituted an escape within the meaning of § 751). We next conclude that the district court did not impose revocation sentences that exceeded the statutory maximum. See United States v. Lewis, 519 F.3d 822, 824-25 (8th Cir. 2008) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Walker, 513 F.3d 891, 893 Options: A. holding that there is no significant conceptual difference between the revocation of probation or parole and the revocation of supervised release B. holding that 5g12 did not limit the district courts authority to impose consecutive terms of imprisonment upon revocation of supervised release since the policy statements in chapter 7 governed revocation sentences C. recognizing that statutory maximums of 3583e3 apply in the aggregate and that where a defendant had previously been sentenced to oneyear and oneday imprisonment upon revocation of his supervised release the district court could sentence the defendant to only 364 days of imprisonment upon rerevocation of his supervised release D. holding that 18 usc 3583e3 requirement to aggregate revocation prison sentences changed with the april 30 2003 addition of the phrase on any such revocation where the original offense of conviction was committed thereafter the plain language of 3583e3 permits sentencing without considering or aggregating the prison terms for prior revocations E. holding that prison term following revocation of probation is a modification and part of the actual sentence imposed for the original offense

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that 18 usc 3583e3 requirement to aggregate revocation prison sentences changed with the april 30 2003 addition of the phrase on any such revocation where the original offense of conviction was committed thereafter the plain language of 3583e3 permits sentencing without considering or aggregating the prison terms for prior revocations
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 by one or more of the parties to this Agreement on any number of separate counterparts, and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed signature page of this Agreement by facsimile transmission or electronic mail (in “.pdf” or similar format) shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The agreements in this Section and the indemnity provision of Section 10.02(e) shall survive the resignation of the Administrative Agent, the L/C Issuer and the Swing Line Lender, the replacement of any Lender, the termination of the Aggregate Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all the other Obligations.

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 Administrative Agent shall have received (i) a certificate executed by a Responsible Officer of the Borrower as of the Closing Date, in form and substance satisfactory to the Administrative Agent, regarding the Solvency of each of the Loan Parties on a consolidated basis.

assistant: Solvency
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: misconduct. II. DISCUSSION We review for abuse of discretion a district judge’s dismissal for failure to comply with the rules of the court. Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada, 432 F.3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir.2005). “Discretion means the district court has a range of choice, and that its decision will not be disturbed as long as it stays within that range and is not influenced by any mistake of law.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Under Rule 8, a pleading that states a claim for relief must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). A district judge has the authority to dismiss a complaint for failure to comply with the federal rules. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); Betty K Agencies, Ltd., 432 F.3d at 1337 (<HOLDING>). The district judge also has the inherent Options: A. holding that a court may sua sponte dismiss pursuant to rule 41b for failure to comply with a court order B. recognizing that a district court may sua sponte dismiss a complaint for failure to serve after notice to the plaintiff C. holding that a court may sua sponte take judicial notice of its docket D. holding that district courts possess the inherent authority to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute with or sans notice to the parties E. recognizing a district judge may dismiss a case sua sponte under either rule 41b or its inherent authority to manage its docket

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing a district judge may dismiss a case sua sponte under either rule 41b or its inherent authority to manage its docket
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 treaty’s requirement, this and other circuits have held in recent years that an exclusionary rule is typically available only for constitutional violations, not for statutory or treaty violations. See United States v. Smith, 196 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir.1999) (“The use of the exclusionary rule is an exceptional remedy typically reserved for violations of constitutional rights.”). See also United States v. Hensel, 699 F.2d 18, 29 (1st Cir.1983) (rejecting suppression as a remedy for a treaty violation because the exclusionary rule “was not fashioned to vindicate a broad, general right to be free of agency action not ‘authorized’ by law, but rather to protect certain specific, constitutionally protected rights of individuals.”); United States v. Ware, 161 F.3d 414, 424 (6th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Mason, 52 F.3d 1286, 1289 n. Options: A. holding that violation of state law was not a per se constitutional violation B. holding that exclusionary rule only requires exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of constitutional rights and that exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of statutory rights is not necessarily required C. holding a statutory violation insufficient to justify imposition of the exclusionary rule absent an underlying constitutional violation or right D. holding that because code 19260 a procedural statute did not expressly provide a right of suppression of evidence a violation of that provision did not require application of the exclusionary rule in the absence of a constitutional violation E. holding that a violation of 6103 does not require the application of the exclusionary rule

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a statutory violation insufficient to justify imposition of the exclusionary rule absent an underlying constitutional violation or right
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: subordination, subordinate for purposes of distribution all or part of an allowed claim to all or part of another allowed claim or all or part of an allowed interest to all or part of an allowed interest.” 11 U.S.C. § 510(c). Application of the doctrine is at the discretion of the court. BankWest, Inc. v. United States, Farmers Home Admin., 102 B.R. 738, 741 (D.S.D.1989); see also Bayer Corp. v. MascoTech, Inc. (In re AutoStyle Plastics, Inc.), 269 F.3d 726, 744 (6th Cir.2001) (stating that a court is permitted to, not required to, subordinate a claim). The test that most district courts and courts of appeal follow is found in Benjamin v. Diamond (In re Mobile Steel Co.), 563 F.2d 692 (5th Cir.1977). United States v. Noland, 517 U.S. 535, 538-39, 116 S.Ct. 1524, 134 L.Ed.2d 748 (1996) (<HOLDING>). It is a three-part test that requires the Options: A. recognizing ajlthough presiding judge mccormicks opinion in davis is labeled a concurring opinion it was joined by a majority of the court and may be regarded as an opinion for the court B. holding a medical opinion to be not significantly probative where the opinion was contrary to other substantial record evidence C. holding even though experts are permitted to give an opinion they may not offer an opinion regarding the credibility of others D. recognizing mobile steel as an influential opinion E. recognizing that an advisory opinion is one that offers an opinion on a moot issue

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing mobile steel as an influential opinion
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 Guaranty is an amendment, restatement and consolidation of, but not a release, novation, extinguishment, discharge or satisfaction of any indebtedness, liabilities, obligations, waivers or agreements of each of the Guarantors under, the Existing Guaranties. Each of the Guarantors affirms and ratifies its waivers and agreements in each Existing Guaranty to which it is a party and agrees that the waivers and agreements made by such Guarantor in each Existing Guaranty to which it is a party shall remain valid, binding, and enforceable waivers and agreements in favor of the Guaranteed Parties, but shall hereafter be governed by this Guaranty that amends and restates the Existing Guaranties in their entirety. This Guaranty is not intended as, and shall not be construed as, a release, novation, extinguishment, discharge or satisfaction of any indebtedness, liabilities, obligations, waivers or agreements of any of the Guarantors pursuant to any Existing Guaranty.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the district court did not impermissibly delegate its authority to establish a repayment plan to the IRS. The district court clearly stated at the resentencing hearing that it: anticipate^] a payment plan being submitted to it within 30 days of the defendant’s beginning of supervised release that would set forth the nature of the regular payments, not only during supervised release, but for the period within which those payments can be demanded and accepted and paid. Resentencing Tr. at 29. Here, the district court delegated the establishment of an initial payment plan to the IRS, which the district court would then approve or reject upon submission. Our precedents make clear that this is an acceptable procedure. See Weinberger v. United States, 268 F.3d 346, 360 (6th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). May does not fare any better with his Options: A. holding that where the government has not presented evidence at the hearing concerning the appropriate amount of restitution the imposition of the restitution order constitutes plain error B. holding that when trial court orders restitution at sentencing pursuant to statute the defendant is entitled to notice of the amount claimed and the opportunity to dispute the amount C. holding that the decision of the appellate court establishes the law of the case and it must be followed by the trial court on remand D. holding that the court erred in failing to inform the defendant that it could impose restitution but that the error did not affect the defendants substantial rights because the court informed the defendant that it could impose a maximum fine of an amount higher than the restitution amount imposed E. holding that a sentencing court does not abrogate its judicial authority when it delegates the setting of a restitutionpayment schedule provided that the court first establishes the amount of restitution

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a sentencing court does not abrogate its judicial authority when it delegates the setting of a restitutionpayment schedule provided that the court first establishes the amount of restitution
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: post office box and planned to maintain surveillance over the post office box to determine that Rowland picked up the package. The affidavit also indicated that Rowland had been observed on several occasions collecting his mail from the post office box and then walking back to work. Because the controlled delivery was made to Rowland’s private post office box and not to his residence, however, establishing probable cause that the delivery would take place does not mean there was probable cause that the video tapes would be at Rowland’s residence when the search took place. Therefore, this court must determine whether the affidavit supporting the anticipatory warrant contained evidence establishing a nexus between the contraband and Rowland’s residence. See Hendricks, 743 F.2d at 654-55 (<HOLDING>). Only an oblique reference was made in the Options: A. holding anticipatory warrant for search of defendants home was invalid when defendant was required to pick up suitcase containing contraband at airport and there was no assurance at time warrant was issued that defendant would take suitcase to his home B. holding anticipatory warrant for search of defendants home was invalid because contraband was picked up by defendant rather than being delivered to his home and affidavit failed to provide facts establishing a nexus between contraband and defendants home C. holding anticipatory warrant for search of defendants home was invalid when defendant was required to pick up suitcase containing contraband at airport and there was no information indicating defendant would take suitcase home or otherwise linking defendants residence to illegal activity D. holding anticipatory warrant for search of defendants home was invalid because affidavit provided no assurance that defendant would take package to his home after collecting it at the airport despite fact that warrant contained condition that it was not to be executed until package arrived at defendants house E. holding anticipatory warrant for search of defendants home was invalid because facts made known to magistrate did not establish at time warrant was issued the required nexus between the contraband to be seized which was mailed to defendants post office box and defendants home

assistant: The best answer is B. holding anticipatory warrant for search of defendants home was invalid because contraband was picked up by defendant rather than being delivered to his home and affidavit failed to provide facts establishing a nexus between contraband and defendants home
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: Borrower shall use the proceeds of each Loan solely: (a) to fund cash payments required to be made by Borrower to the seller(s) of a target bank in connection with a Permitted Acquisition; (b) to pay Lender any sums due under this Agreement; (c) for general corporate purposes of Borrower, as approved by Lender; and (d) for such other purposes as Lender shall approve in its sole and absolute discretion, which approval must be in writing and must be given prior to Borrower’s use of such proceeds for such purposes.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed effective upon personal delivery or upon deposit in the United States Post Office, by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the other party at the address shown above, or at such other address or addresses as either party shall designate to the other in accordance with this Section 13.

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: All communications and notices provided for hereunder shall be in writing (including bank wire, telecopy or electronic facsimile transmission or similar writing) and shall be given to the other parties hereto at their respective addresses or telecopy numbers set forth on the signature pages hereof or at such other address or telecopy number as such Person may hereafter specify for the purpose of notice to each of the other parties hereto. Each such notice or other communication shall be effective (i) if given by telecopy, upon the receipt thereof, (ii) if given by mail, three (3) Business Days after the time such communication is deposited in the mail with first class postage prepaid or (iii) if given by any other means, when received at the address specified in this Section 7.2.

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: evidence of arson. Oscar merely helped Mr. Long focus his investigation to determine the point of origin. The point of origin was then independently confirmed by separate an 2 (2d Cir.1998) (noting that even if decision to allow expert testimony was erroneous, “there was substantial additional evidence ... that an accelerant was used by the defendant”); Carr, 482 S.E.2d at 318 (finding harmful error because no other evidence of arson existed); People v. Dix, 242 A.D.2d 912, 662 N.Y.S.2d 879, 879 (N.Y.App.Div.1997) (finding failure to lay proper foundation for accel-erant-sniffing dog evidence harmless since proof of guilt was overwhelming and there was no significant probability that error contributed to defendant’s conviction); State v. Simpson, 2002 Ohio 3717,¶ 78 (Ohio Ct.App. 2002) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Gwynn, 555 Pa. 86, 723 A.2d Options: A. holding that a fiftynine minute detention to wait for a drug dog was reasonable where the officer requested the dog immediately after developing reasonable suspicion B. holding that a dog sniff of a federal express package was a search C. holding district courts finding of consent was not clearly erroneous when the defendant consented after officers told him they could get a drug dog even though the defendant knew the dog would alert D. holding that even without testimony of handler of dog used for accelerant detection there was other evidence of accelerant E. holding that motherowner of home in which attack occurred was not hable for attack by dog owned by sontenant where there was no evidence that she exercised dominion and control over the dog

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that even without testimony of handler of dog used for accelerant detection there was other evidence of accelerant
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 Borrower is the sole Subsidiary of the Parent, and the Parent owns all of the membership interest of the Borrower. Schedule 3 contains an accurate list of all Subsidiaries of the Parent and the Borrower (as of the Closing Date), setting forth their respective jurisdictions of organization and the percentage of their respective capital stock or other ownership interests owned by the Borrower or other Subsidiaries. All of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock or other ownership interests of such Subsidiaries have been (to the extent such concepts are relevant with respect to such ownership interests) duly authorized and issued and are 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of laws rules or provisions (whether of the State of Delaware or any other jurisdiction) that would cause the application of the laws of any jurisdiction other than the State of Delaware.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY TO THIS AGREEMENT HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY ACTION, SUIT OR PROCEEDING, WHETHER AT LAW OR EQUITY, BROUGHT BY ANY OF THEM IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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 Letter Agreement shall terminate on the earlier of (i) the expiration of the Founder Shares Lock-up Period and (ii) the liquidation of the Company; provided , however , that this Letter Agreement shall earlier terminate in the event that the Public Offering is not consummated and closed by December 31, 2018.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: balance between a party's need for information concerning an expert witness's potential bias and the witness’s right to be free from burdensome and intrusive production requests." Id. at 522. Courts in at least two other states have used a similar balancing test, heavily weighted against forcing expert witnesses to produce their income tax records. See Ex Parte Morris, 530 So.2d 785, 789 (Ala. 1988) (weighing liberal discovery rules against "the emerging qualified privilege disfavoring disclosure of one’s income tax records” and finding any "incremental value” of information in such records substantially outweighed by prejudice production imposes on non-party over non-controlling issue); Allen v.Super. Ct. of Contra Costa County, 151 Cal.App.3d 447, 198 Cal.Rptr. 737, 740-41 (1984) (<HOLDING>). Contrary to Marron’s assertion, Rowe v. State Options: A. holding that unless discovery is granted as a matter of statute court rule or the constitution discovery is within the discretion of the trial court whose ruling will be upheld on appeal absent an abuse of discretion B. holding that a discovery exception to a statute of limitation applies only to the discovery of facts not discovery of the law C. holding that constitutional right of privacy does not apply to medical records D. holding that when considering civil rights against abusive discovery and state constitutional right to privacy court must carefully weigh privacy rights of nonparties against factors including the real needs of the litigant who seeks discovery and court abuses its discretion when it fails to require a less intrusive method of discovery such as conducting a deposition without production of records E. holding that district court did not abuse its discretion by denying motion to extend discovery where no effort was made to explain why the requested discovery could not have taken place within the original discovery period

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that when considering civil rights against abusive discovery and state constitutional right to privacy court must carefully weigh privacy rights of nonparties against factors including the real needs of the litigant who seeks discovery and court abuses its discretion when it fails to require a less intrusive method of discovery such as conducting a deposition without production of 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No approval, consent or authorization of, filing with, notice to or other act by or in respect of, any Governmental Authority or any other Person is required in connection with acceptance of Extensions of Credit by the Borrower or the making of the Loan Guaranty hereunder or with the execution, delivery or performance of any Loan Document by the Loan Parties (other than those which have been obtained) or with the validity or enforceability of any Loan Document against the Loan Parties (except such filings as are necessary in connection with the perfection of the Liens created by such Loan Documents).

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: on this appeal, is held sufficient to sustain the verdict found and the judgment of conviction based thereon, we do not approve of such information as a model pleading, nor do we express any opinion as to whether the allegations, as to the former conviction, would have been sufficient as against a proper and timely objection in the trial court. The case before us demonstrates that those in charge of criminal prosecutions should exercise the greatest possible care in the preparation of criminal infor-mations. The numerous practice questions which arise in criminal cases are a burden upon the courts which might well be obviated, and which would be obviated if the attorneys for the prosecution exercised that care in the performance of their labors which the importance thereof ju 910) (<HOLDING>). [¶ 16] The dissent cites several Federal Options: A. holding that it is not B. holding that being deported after a conviction for an aggravated felony is all that is required and it is irrelevant whether the conviction is valid at the time of sentencing C. holding there was no claim and no basis for a claim of surprise concerning allegation of a former conviction D. holding that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting child hearsay because it failed to exhibit sufficient indications of reliability but noting that it is not every error that warrants reversal of a judgment of conviction and examining whether there was sufficient evidence outside of the hearsay to support the conviction E. holding allegation of former conviction is sufficient if it enables plaintiff to prepare for trial of whether he is the convict

assistant: The best answer is E. holding allegation of former conviction is sufficient if it enables plaintiff to prepare for trial of whether he is the convict
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: retroactively to “Certain Disparate Impact Cases.” This section clouds the issue, because it implies by exclusion that in non-enumerated cases re-troactivity could apply. See Croce v. V.I.P. Real Estate, Inc., 786 F.Supp. 1141 (S.D.N.Y.1992). The legislative history is no more helpful. One court noted: Every federal court in the United States is now faced with the problem which this proposed amendment presents. Why? Because Congress in this new Civil Rights litigation punted on the question of whether or not the Act applies retroactively. Many Senators and Congressmen have deliberately tried to create a “legislative history” to support their personal views on this question [and] deliberately choose not to include in the statute itself a provision either for retroactive or .D.N.Y.1992) (<HOLDING>). In this district, Judge Dorsey held that the Options: A. holding no retroactive application B. holding that the act is not retroactive C. holding apprendi is not retroactive D. holding retroactive application of the act to prosecution that was pending before the effective date of the act was precluded because the act is prospective E. holding retroactive application

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the act is not retroactive
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 HERETO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY OF ANY CLAIM OR CAUSE OF ACTION BASED UPON OR ARISING HEREUNDER OR UNDER ANY OF THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS OR ANY DEALINGS BETWEEN THEM RELATING TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS LOAN TRANSACTION OR THE LENDER/BORROWER RELATIONSHIP THAT IS BEING ESTABLISHED. THE SCOPE OF THIS WAIVER IS INTENDED TO BE ALL ENCOMPASSING OF ANY AND ALL DISPUTES THAT MAY BE FILED IN ANY COURT AND THAT RELATE TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS TRANSACTION, INCLUDING CONTRACT CLAIMS, TORT CLAIMS, BREACH OF DUTY CLAIMS AND ALL OTHER COMMON LAW AND STATUTORY CLAIMS. EACH PARTY HERETO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THIS WAIVER IS A MATERIAL INDUCEMENT TO ENTER INTO A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP, THAT EACH HAS ALREADY RELIED ON THIS WAIVER IN ENTERING INTO THIS AGREEMENT, AND THAT EACH WILL CONTINUE TO RELY ON THIS WAIVER IN ITS RELATED FUTURE DEALINGS. EACH PARTY HERETO FURTHER WARRANTS AND REPRESENTS THAT IT HAS REVIEWED THIS WAIVER WITH ITS LEGAL COUNSEL AND THAT IT KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY WAIVES ITS JURY TRIAL RIGHTS FOLLOWING CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL. THIS WAIVER IS IRREVOCABLE, MEANING THAT IT MAY NOT BE MODIFIED EITHER ORALLY OR IN WRITING (OTHER THAN BY A MUTUAL WRITTEN WAIVER SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO THIS SECTION 11.15 AND EXECUTED BY EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO), AND THIS WAIVER SHALL APPLY TO ANY SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS, RENEWALS, SUPPLEMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS HERETO OR ANY OF THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS OR TO ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS OR AGREEMENTS RELATING TO THE LOANS MADE HEREUNDER. IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, THIS AGREEMENT MAY BE FILED AS A WRITTEN CONSENT TO A TRIAL BY THE COURT.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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 the firefighters, this Court stated: “The vicarious liability of a putative master under the rule of respondeat superior depends upon the liability of the putative servant. See Larry Terry Contractors, Inc. v. Bogle, 404 So.2d 613, 614 (Ala.1981) (‘“[W]hen [a] principal and his agent are sued in [a] joint action in tort for misfeasance or malfeasance of the servant, and his liability for the conduct of said servant is under the rule of respondeat superior, a verdict in favor of the servant entitles the master to have the verdict against him set aside.” ’) (quoting Louisville & N.R.R. v. Maddox, 236 Ala. 594, 600, 183 So. 849, 853 (1938)), and Gore v. City of Hoover, 559 So.2d 163, 165 (Ala.1990), overruled on other grounds, Franklin v. City of Huntsville, 670 So.2d 848 (Ala.1995) (<HOLDING>). Thus, if a putative servant is not liable, Options: A. recognizing that a judge is not absolutely immune from criminal liability B. holding that a car dealership could be held vicariously liable for the intentional tort of its employee who shot out the tires of the plaintiffs truck during a repossession attempt C. holding that a city could not be held vicariously liable for the act of a magistrate who was immune from liability D. holding that a city may not be held liable under 1983 where there was no underlying constitutional violation by any of its officers E. holding that a hospital was not vicariously liable for sexual abuse by an orderly

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a city could not be held vicariously liable for the act of a magistrate who was immune from liability