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: that, to the best of her knowledge, “the documents filed with the Court and served on counsel of record in this matter constitute a true, correct, and complete copy of the administrative record in this action.” PI. 56(f) motion, Ex. B. The fact that the defendants have supplemented the record with approximately 70 pages of additional information does not raise significant questions as to the completeness of the record, particularly when the supplementary material is accompanied by affidavits stating that searches were completed to ensure that no additional documents were omitted. TOMAC erroneously asserts that all other federal agencies involved in the deci-sionmaking process are required to turn over all relevant information in their own files. Saratoga Dev. Corp., 21 F.3d at 457 (<HOLDING>). Its argument concerning additional Options: A. holding that additional records submitted to the appeals council are part of the administrative record for judicial review B. holding that information compiled by other agencies but never submitted to the decisionmaking agency is not part of the administrative record C. holding that evidence not submitted to the district court cannot be part of the record on appeal D. holding appeal of termination is limited to information that is part of the record E. holding that material submitted by appellant that is cumulative of evidence previously of record is not new

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that information compiled by other agencies but never submitted to the decisionmaking agency is not part of the administrative 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, all ad valorem, property, production, severance and similar taxes and assessments based on or measured by the ownership of property or the production of hydrocarbons or the receipt of proceeds therefrom with respect to the Assets for all periods prior to the Effective Date have been timely and properly paid and all such taxes and assessments which must be paid prior to the Closing shall have been properly paid by Seller.

assistant: Taxes
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: Without the prior written consent of Landlord, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, Tenant shall not assign this Lease, sublease all or any part of the Premises, or otherwise transfer or encumber all or any of Tenant’s interest in this Lease, whether voluntarily, involuntarily or by operation of law, or permit the use or occupancy of the Premises by anyone other than Tenant. Any transfer or change in the ownership of Tenant or any transactions pursuant to which Tenant is merged or consolidated with another entity or pursuant to which all or substantially all of Tenant’s assets are transferred to any other entity shall be deemed to be an assignment of this Lease.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If an amount due is not paid to Executive under this Agreement within five business days after such amount first became due and owing, interest shall accrue on such amount from the date it became due and owing until the date of payment at an annual rate equal to two hundred (200) basis points above the base commercial lending rate published in The Wall Street Journal in effect from time to time during the period of such nonpayment.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of Rule 804(b)(6) to permit the admission of those hearsay statements that would be admissible under the constitutional doctrine of waiver by misconduct[.] Id. (internal citation omitted). Despite the court’s acknowledgment that the rules of evidence and the Confrontation Clause are not coextensive, this statement seems to boil down to nothing more than an unsupported assertion that they are indeed coextensive with regard to the forfeiture doctrine. In fact, the Cherry court offered no other support for its conclusion that the elements of the federal rule are constitutionally mandated. Unlike the special concurrence, ¶ 85, we do not believe that Reynolds says anything about whether the intent to silence requirement is required by the constitution. See Reynolds, 98 U.S. at 158-61 (<HOLDING>). Further, we have been able to find no Options: A. holding that the defendant forfeited his confrontation rights where he kept the police from finding his wife so she could not testify but not addressing the intent requirement B. holding that defendant waived his confrontation rights by threatening witness not to testify C. holding that appellant forfeited his complaint regarding his sentence because he did not object at trial D. holding that a defendant forfeited his confrontation clause claim by failing to properly preserve it at trial E. holding that if the witness cannot testify because the defendant murdered her then the defendant is deemed to have forfeited his confrontation rights even though the act he is charged with is the same act that caused the witnesss unavailability

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the defendant forfeited his confrontation rights where he kept the police from finding his wife so she could not testify but not addressing the intent 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Third Amendment sets forth the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the matters set forth herein. There have been no additional oral or written representations or agreements. Except as modified in this Third Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. In the event of any conflict between the terms and conditions of the Agreement and this Third Amendment, this Third Amendment shall govern.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: seized by federal law enforcement agents were comprised of exclusively unroasted coffee beans. Id. As of the filing of this Opinion and Order, neither party has provided evidence to controvert the proposition that the coffee beans in question were unroasted. 4 . Although "Section 545 is a criminal provision,” a forfeiture action may be brought in "a civil in rem proceeding.” United States v. An Antique Platter of Gold, 184 F.3d 131, 139 n. 6, 140 (2d Cir.1999); see United States v. Davis, 648 F.3d 84, 96 (2d Cir.2011); United States v. Universal Fruits & Vegetables Corp., 370 F.3d 829, 835 n. 11 (9th Cir.2004) (noting that Congress has created "civil forfeiture remedies and criminal penalties,” citing 18 U.S.C. §§ 542 and 545); United States v. Ahmad, 213 F.3d 805, 811 (4th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); United States v. One Tintoretto Painting Options: A. holding that 545 entitles the government to civil forfeiture of certain funds subject to the eighth amendment B. holding in a civil forfeiture case under inter alia 18 usc 545 that cafra applies to the two forfeiture statutes invoked by the government that are found in title 18 C. holding that the exclusionary rule under the fourth amendment applies to civil forfeiture proceedings D. holding discovery rules apply to civil forfeiture proceedings E. holding that forfeiture of funds to be used for legal fees does not violate the fifth or sixth amendment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 545 entitles the government to civil forfeiture of certain funds subject to the eighth amendment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Empire agrees that, without the prior written consent of Getty in each instance, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, Empire shall not enter into any material amendment of the Purchase Agreement or grant any waiver of any of the conditions, covenants or other terms of the Purchase Agreement, if such amendment or waiver could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on Getty’s right to take title to the Getty Purchased Assets in accordance with this Agreement or otherwise materially affect Empire’s ability to perform its obligations hereunder. The parties acknowledge the terms of Section 6.2 of the Purchase Agreement, which requires the parties thereto to amend the Purchase Agreement upon request by the FTC to the extent necessary to obtain FTC and other governmental approvals. For avoidance of doubt, Getty shall have no approval or consent rights regarding any amendments to the Purchase Agreement described in the preceding sentence unless such amendment would have the effect of making any material change to the composition of the Properties to be included in the Getty Purchased Assets.

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: Promptly and in any event within 10 days after a Responsible Officer becomes aware of the commencement thereof, notice of all actions, suits, investigations, litigation and proceedings before any court or governmental department, commission, board, bureau, agency or instrumentality, domestic or foreign, (i) affecting any Loan Party or any of its Subsidiaries that could be reasonably likely to be adversely determined and if so to have a Material Adverse Effect or (ii) that challenge the transactions contemplated by this Agreement (including, without limitation, the rights of any Borrower to borrow hereunder, the use of the proceeds of any Borrowing hereunder or the performance by any Loan Party of its Obligations hereunder) or that base any claim against any Loan Party on such transactions.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except for the Consents described in Schedule 3.10 , no License or Order of or from, or declaration or filing with, any Governmental Authority, and no consent or waiver of any party to any Contract to which the Company is a party is required or declaration to or filing with any Governmental Authority, or any other third party is required to (a) execute this Agreement or any of the Related Documents, (b) consummate the transactions contemplated hereby or thereby, (c) permit the Company to sell the Assigned Assets to Buyer, or (d) enable the Company, after consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, to conduct the Business after the Closing Date in the same manner as presently operated.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No Individual Borrower is a party to any agreement or instrument or subject to any restriction which is reasonably expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. No Individual Borrower is in default with respect to any order or decree of any court or any order, regulation or demand of any Governmental Authority, which default is reasonably expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. No Individual Borrower is in default in any material respect in the performance, observance or fulfillment of any of the obligations, covenants or conditions contained in any Permitted Encumbrance or any other agreement or instrument to which it is a party or by which it or the Property is bound which is reasonably expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. No Individual Borrower has any material financial obligation (contingent or otherwise) under any indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, loan agreement or other agreement or instrument to which any Individual Borrower is a party or by which any Individual Borrower or the Property is otherwise bound, other than (a) obligations incurred in the ordinary course of the operation, management, leasing and improvement of the Property (including, without limitation, pursuant to the four (4) Management Agreements), (b) obligations under the Loan Documents and (c) obligations, covenants or conditions contained in any Permitted Encumbrance, the Leases and any Major Contract.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: against a foreign national. See United States v. Santos-Riviera, 183 F.3d 367, 370-71 (5th Cir.1999). The only intent requirement is the intent to take a hostage “in order to compel a third person or a governmental organization to do or abstain from doing any act.” 18 U.S.C. § 1203(a). Put another way, the proviso making the statute applicable to the kidnaping of foreign nationals inside the United States is simply a jurisdictional hook and, by its own terms, does not demand that the defendant have actual knowledge of the victim’s citizenship or nationality. Courts routinely have held that the government need not prove intent with respect to similar jurisdictional requirements in other criminal statutes. See, e.g., United States v. Scarborough, 813 F.2d 1244, 1246 (D.C.Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Napier, 518 F.2d 316, 319 Options: A. holding that while the government was required to prove that the defendants phone call crossed a state line the government did not need to prove that the defendant knew of the interstate nexus B. holding that the government need not prove that interstate transport was foreseeable in order to obtain a conviction under 18 usc 2314 which prohibits the interstate transportation of stolen goods C. holding that the defendant could be prosecuted for transporting stolen motor vehicles in interstate commerce under either 18 usc 2314 which prohibits interstate transportation of stolen goods or 18 usc 2312 which specifically prohibits interstate transportation of stolen motor vehicles and airplanes D. holding that the defendants stipulation that the gun had moved in interstate commerce was sufficient evidence to support his conviction under 18 usc 922g1 E. holding in a prosecution for the interstate transportation of forged securities that the government was permitted to prove and comment on a defendants refusal to produce exemplars as tending to prove his guilt of the offense charged

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the government need not prove that interstate transport was foreseeable in order to obtain a conviction under 18 usc 2314 which prohibits the interstate transportation of stolen goods
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: Neither the execution and delivery by any Loan Party of the Loan Documents to which it is a party, nor the consummation of the transactions contemplated thereby, nor compliance by any Loan Party with the provisions thereof will violate any law, rule, regulation, order, writ, judgment, injunction, decree or award binding on the Company or any Subsidiary or the Company’s or such Loan Party’s articles of incorporation or by-laws or other constitutive documents and agreements or the provisions of any material indenture, instrument or agreement to which the Company or any Subsidiary is a party or is subject, or by which it, or its property, is bound, or conflict with or constitute a default thereunder, or result in the creation or imposition of any Lien on the property of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries pursuant to the terms of any such indenture, instrument or agreement. No order, consent, approval, license, authorization, or validation of, or filing, recording or registration with, or exemption by, any governmental or public body or authority, or any subdivision thereof, is required to be obtained by any Loan Party in connection with the authorization, execution, delivery and performance of, or the legality, validity, binding effect or enforceability of, any of the Loan Documents to which it is a party, except such as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: stated in “Rule 8 [of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] mark[] a notable and generous departure from the hyper-technical, code-pleading regime of a prior era ... it does not unlock the doors of discovery for a plaintiff armed with nothing more than conclusions.” Id. at 67 a merger clause that precludes consideration of extrinsic terms. The oral agreement as to the five-year term does not violate the parol evidence rule because it is not inconsistent with any of the written terms contained in the letter agreement. Zinn v. Walker, 87 N.C.App. 325, 333, 361 S.E.2d 314, 318 (1987) (merger clauses create a rebuttable presumption that the writing represents the final agreement between the parties); Hall v. Hotel L’Europe, Inc., 69 N.C.App. 664, 666, 318 S.E.2d 99, 101 (1984) (<HOLDING>). Defendant also argues the Complaint fails to Options: A. holding the parol evidence rule presumes finality with respect to the written terms of the agreement only and does not prevent consideration of parol evidence concerning the duration of contract B. holding that parol evidence is admissible to determine intent of parties C. holding that the parol evidence rule did not bar introduction of evidence of a subsequent oral contract concerning the brokers right to a commission and modifying the written agreement D. holding that when a contract is partially parol and partially written parol evidence may prove the parol terms E. holding that parol evidence can be presented when the terms of the agreement are ambiguous

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the parol evidence rule presumes finality with respect to the written terms of the agreement only and does not prevent consideration of parol evidence concerning the duration 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: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Guaranty may not be amended except in a writing signed by the Requisite Lenders (or all of the Lenders if required under the terms of the Term Loan Agreement), the Administrative Agent and each Guarantor subject to Section 13.17 of the Term Loan Agreement; provided , however , that any Subsidiary Guarantor may be released hereunder in accordance with the terms of Section 8.14.(c) of the Term Loan Agreement and any Subsidiary may become a Guarantor hereunder by executing and delivering an Accession Agreement in accordance with Section 8.14.(a) of the Term Loan Agreement.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: in addition , both host and co-host are jointly responsible and severally liable for third party claims , including guest claims , arising from the acts and omissions of the other person as related to hosting activities , communications with guests , and the provision of any co-host services .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as may otherwise be provided by the Committee either in the Award Agreement or in writing after the Award Agreement is issued, a grantee’s right in all Restricted Stock Units that have not vested shall automatically terminate upon the grantee’s cessation of Service Relationship with the Company and any Subsidiary for any reason.

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: There is no action, suit or proceeding pending against, or to the knowledge of the Company threatened against or affecting, the Company or any of its Subsidiaries before any court or arbitrator or any governmental body, agency or official in which there is a reasonable possibility of an adverse decision which could materially adversely affect the business, consolidated financial position or consolidated results of operations of the Company and its Consolidated Subsidiaries considered as a whole or which in any manner draws into question the validity of this Agreement or any other Loan Document.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Subscription Agreement may be terminated by the Investors, by written notice to the Company, if the Closing has not been consummated on or before the Closing Date; provided , however , that no such termination will affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party.

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: and the adverse action. Charlton v. Paramus Bd. of Edue., 25 F.3d 194, 201 (3d Cir.1994). Once a prima facie case is presented, the burden of production shifts to the employer to articulate a non-retaliatory explanation for the challenged employment decision. Woodson v. Scott Paper Co., 109 F.3d 913, 920 n. 2 (3d Cir. 1997). If a non-retaliatory reason is proffered, it is then the plaintiffs burden to prove that the employer’s articulated reason is a pretext and that retaliation was the true motive. Id. “To survive a motion for summary judgment in the employer’s favor, a plaintiff must produce some evidence from which a jury could reasonably reach these conclusions.” Moore, 461 F.3d at 342 (citing Fuentes v. Perskie, 32 F.3d 759, 764 (3d Cir.1994)); see also Fuentes, 32 F.3d at 765 (<HOLDING>) (internal quotations omitted) (emphasis in Options: A. holding that the district court erred in failing to consider all of the employers proffered evidence of legitimate business reasons for the plaintiffs termination B. holding that plaintiff need only point to sufficient evidence to support an inference that the employer did not act for its proffered nondiscriminatory reasons C. holding that a plaintiff may satisfy his burden by demonstrating such weaknesses implausibilities inconsistencies incoherencies or contradictions in the employers proffered legitimate reasons for its action that a reasonable factfinder could rationally find them unworthy of credence and hence infer that the employer did not act for the asserted nondiscriminatory reasons D. holding that the conflicting explanations given by defendants agents for the plaintiffs termination were also sufficient to raise a reasonable inference that defendants proffered reasons for the termination were pretextual the inconsistent testimony regarding the motivating reasons for plaintiffs termination cast doubts on the asserted nondiscriminatory legitimate reasons and may alone be sufficient to preclude summary judgment on plaintiffs claim E. holding that in producing nondiscriminatory reasons for its challenged action the employer is not obligated to support these reasons with objective evidence sufficient to satisfy the preponderance of the evidence standard

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a plaintiff may satisfy his burden by demonstrating such weaknesses implausibilities inconsistencies incoherencies or contradictions in the employers proffered legitimate reasons for its action that a reasonable factfinder could rationally find them unworthy of credence and hence infer that the employer did not act for the asserted nondiscriminatory reasons
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. BTC, 907 F.2d 1101, 1105 (11th Cir.1990). However, the federal policy expressed in the D’Oench decision “applies in virtually all cases where a federal depository institution regulatory agency is confronted with an agreement not documented in the institution’s records.” OPS Shopping Ctr., Inc. v. FDIC, 992 F.2d 306, 308 (11th Cir.1993) (quoting Baumann, 934 F.2d at 1510). Courts therefore applied the federal common law D’Oench doctrine to protect certain entities not covered by the language of § 1823(e)(1)—including, for example, the FDIC as receiver, the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (“FSLIC”), and transferees of assets (such as bridge banks) from banking regulatory agencies. See, e.g., FSLIC v. Two Rivers Assocs., Inc., 880 F.2d 1267, 1274, 1276-77 (11th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); Newton v. Uniwest Fin. Corp., 967 F.2d 340, Options: A. holding that no complete innocence exception to the doench doctrine exists B. holding that claims that do not diminish or defeat the fdics interest in any specific asset are nevertheless doench barred in light of the established purpose of the doench doctrine to protect the fdics reliance on the banks records C. holding that the fifth circuit does not recognize an innocent borrower exception to the doench doctrine D. holding that the doench doctrine protects the fdic even where the fdic does not have an interest in an asset E. holding that the federal common law doench doctrine protects the fslic and the fdic in both receiver and corporate capacities

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the federal common law doench doctrine protects the fslic and the fdic in both receiver and corporate capacities
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: a jury that they rose to the level of a “meeting” as defined by the Freedom of Information Act, and consequently, would not be prohibited by the statute. See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 1-200(2) (" 'Meeting' means any hearing or other proceeding of a public agency, any convening or assembly of a quorum of a multimember public agency, any any communication by or to a quorum of a multimember public agency ... to discuss or act upon a matter of which the public agency has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power. 'Meeting' does not include ... any chance meeting, or a social meeting neither planned nor intended for the purpose of discussing matters relating to official business”); Lawson v. East Hampton Planning and Zoning Comm’n, 2005 WL 3662907 at *1-3 (Conn.Super.Ct. Dec. 13, 2005) Options: A. holding annexation ordinance only voidable due to procedural irregularities B. holding that contract failed for indefiniteness because there were essential terms upon which there was no agreement C. recognizing that the necessary inquiry is not whether there was a warrant or whether there was time to get one but whether there was probable cause for the arrest D. holding that procedural irregularities do not amount to a denial of fundamental fairness even where there was a recess during which there were unrecorded conversations between commission members E. holding that even when there is a conflict of evidence before the commission and the evidence was such that the commission could have reasonably reached a contrary decision the commissions decision was not arbitrary and capricious

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that procedural irregularities do not amount to a denial of fundamental fairness even where there was a recess during which there were unrecorded conversations between commission members
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: conviction; and (3) multiple punishments for the same offense. Ohio v. Johnson, 467 U.S. 493, 498, 104 S.Ct. 2536, 2540, 81 L.Ed.2d 425 (1984). In a jury trial, jeopardy attaches when a jury is empaneled and sworn; in a non-jury trial, jeopardy attaches when the court begins to hear evidence. Serfass v. United States, 420 U.S. 377, 388, 95 S.Ct. 1055, 1062, 43 L.Ed.2d 265 (1975). The protections provided by the Double Jeopardy Clause do not “alter the fundamental principle that an accused must suffer jeopardy before he can suffer double jeopardy.” Id. at 393, 95 S.Ct. at 1065. As jeopardy does not attach until a defendant is put before the trier of fact, the constitutional prohibitions cannot be applied to judicial proceedings where no prosecution occurs. Id. at 389, 95 S.Ct. at 1063 (<HOLDING>); United States v. Dionisio, 503 F.3d 78, 79 Options: A. holding that an issue was not properly before the court on appeal because the trial court did not have the opportunity to make any findings of fact regarding it B. holding that plea in bar was properly denied when bjecause the trial court did not accept a guilty plea to the deaddocketed counts 4 and 5 of the fulton county indictment which alleged the same crimes as the gwinnett county indictment here jeopardy did not attach C. holding in the administrative forfeiture context that jeopardy does not and cannot attach until one is made a party to a proceeding before a trier of fact having jurisdiction to try the question of guilt or innocence D. holding that jeopardy did not attach when the judge dismissed indictment because case was not put to fact finder and court did not make determination of guilt E. recognizing that an indictment may be dismissed in part

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that jeopardy did not attach when the judge dismissed indictment because case was not put to fact finder and court did not make determination of guilt
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: nature of witness’ availability at original trial date). Due Process {30} Defendant also argues that the delay in concluding the amenability hearing on remand violated his due process rights. “To prevail on a claim that delay in the proceedings violated Defendant’s right to due process, Defendant must prove prejudice and an intentional delay by the State to gain a tactical advantage.” State v. Gibson, 113 N.M. 547, 559, 828 P.2d 980, 992 (Ct.App.1992). The prejudice shown must be “actual” and “substantial.” Id. For the same reasons just discussed, the record does not demonstrate any of these features. Rule 5-604 {31} Defendant argues that the delay in this case also violates the six-month rule, Rule 5-604(B) NMRA 2000. See Michael S., 124 N.M. 732, 955 P.2d 201, 1998-NMCA-041. ¶ 9 (<HOLDING>); Rule 10-101(A)(2) NMRA 2000 (holding rules of Options: A. holding sixmonth rule applies to youthful offender proceedings B. holding 2254 applies to administrative proceedings C. holding sixmonth rule suspended based on parties agreement that proceedings be held in abeyance pending ruling by court on plea bargain D. holding that exclusionary rule applies to civil forfeiture proceedings E. holding that the exclusionary rule under the fourth amendment applies to civil forfeiture proceedings

assistant: The best answer is A. holding sixmonth rule applies to youthful offender proceedings
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 facts relative to this issue are not in dispute. The parties agree that Billy Cleveland was notified by letter of the reinsurance agreement in 1997, and that he was sent a “Certificate of Assumption” in March 1998, which recited that Central United had assumed all of Commonwealth’s contractual liabilities, and which advised Mr. Cleveland that from and after the date hereof, you should submit all claims under this Policy, whenever incurred, and all premiums due under this Policy, to Central United, and further advised that “Central United will be responsible for all liabilities related to the policies and for all administrative services related to the policies.” And it appears agreed that after receipt of the Ce rd Life Ins. Co., 19 Wis.2d 426, 435, 120 N.W.2d 687, 692 (1963) (<HOLDING>). However, this court cannot conclude with the Options: A. recognizing that production of a written insurance policy was unnecessary to prove the existence of the policy because the proof required was proof of the fact of insurance and not of the contents of a writing B. holding that insureds retention of original insurance policy accompanied by silence after receiving certificate of assumption and his payment to reinsurer of 15 premiums after notification of transfer of liability by reinsurer constituted an acceptance of the assumption agreement C. holding that the proceeds of a liability insurance policy were not property of the estate D. holding liability could not be transferred to the fund where the certificate of insurance was not signed E. holding whether defendant revoked certificate of acceptance is question of fact

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that insureds retention of original insurance policy accompanied by silence after receiving certificate of assumption and his payment to reinsurer of 15 premiums after notification of transfer of liability by reinsurer constituted an acceptance of the assumption agreement
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: fees incurred by a party in previous litigation are not recoverable against the present adversary in new, current litigation, but holding that necessary and reasonable attorney's fees and costs, even though expended and incurred in previous litigation, can be recovered as proper damages in a later suit based on tortious interference of contract, where the natural and proximate results and consequences of prior wrongful acts had involved a plaintiff in litigation with and against third parties and other parties); Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Holmes, 842 S.W.2d 335, 341 (Tex.App. — San Antonio 1992, writ denied) (recognizing that a recoveiy of attorney's fees based upon equitable principles can exist); Baja Energy, Inc. v. Ball, 669 S.W.2d 836, 839 (Tex.App. — Eastland 1984, no writ) (<HOLDING>); Powell v. Narried, 463 S.W.2d 43, 46 Options: A. holding that on the basis of usages and principles of equity plaintiff was entitled to recover his attorneys fees to defend prior lawsuit because the expenses were caused by the defendants wrongful act B. holding in a false imprisonment action that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover attorneys fees unless the services were to secure his discharge from the illegal restraint C. holding that a public administrator was not entitled to attorneys fees in a claim against the estate of a former guardian where the case was not one where attorneys fees were authorized and there was no evidence to support the award D. holding that plaintiffs equal protection conspiracy claim which was the basis of the lawsuit was groundless and thus defendants were entitled to an award of attorneys fees E. recognizing that where a plaintiff failed to perform because of the defendants breach the plaintiff could recover damages caused by the defendants breach

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that on the basis of usages and principles of equity plaintiff was entitled to recover his attorneys fees to defend prior lawsuit because the expenses were caused by the defendants wrongful act
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to conduct further review. In re Emmanuel Nursing Home, 411 N.W.2d 511, 516 (Minn.App.1987), review denied (Minn. Oct. 13, 1987); Johnson v. Metro. Med. Ctr., 395 N.W.2d 380, 382 (Minn.App.1986). Here, unlike in Pfalzgrajf and Steams-Hotzfield, the ULJ did not amend the June 11, 2004 decision within the 30-day appeal period. Rather, the ULJ corrected the error 68 days after it issued its original decision — 38 days after the decision became final. Once the ULJ’s decision became final, the entire department— including the ULJ and the SURJ — lacked jurisdiction to consider the matter further. Nieszner, 499 N.W.2d at 838. Without jurisdiction, the ULJ lacked the legal authority to correct an erroneous decision. See Mackler v. Bd. of Educ., 16 N. J. 362, 108 A.2d 854, 857-58 (1954) (<HOLDING>); Boydston v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 166 Options: A. holding that a statutory basis is necessary for an administrative body to initiate reconsideration of its prior final quasijudicial decisions B. holding that an administrative agency is not subject to a contempt proceeding for failure to comply with an order C. holding that while trial courts are encouraged to state all findings in their written orders they are not required to do so as long as the basis for their decisions is clear from the record and thus susceptible to review D. holding that administrative decisions are subject to reconsideration as long as the agency still retains control of the proceeding E. holding that the court may not overturn the administrative law judges factual findings as long as they are supported by competent substantial evidence

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that administrative decisions are subject to reconsideration as long as the agency still retains control of the proceeding
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: Interest on Advances shall be payable in arrears on the first Business Day of each calendar quarter with respect to Domestic Rate Loans and, with respect to LIBOR Rate Loans, at the end of each Interest Period; provided , that all accrued and unpaid interest shall be due and payable at the end of the Term. Interest charges shall be computed on the actual principal amount of Advances outstanding during the month at a rate per annum equal to (i) with respect to Revolving Advances, the applicable Revolving Interest Rate and (ii) with respect to Swing Loans, the Revolving Interest Rate for Domestic Rate Loans (as applicable, the " Contract Rate "). Except as expressly provided otherwise in this Agreement, any Obligations other than the Advances (and other than Hedge Liabilities and Cash Management Liabilities) that are not paid when due shall accrue interest at the Revolving Interest Rate for Domestic Rate Loans, subject to the provision of the final sentence of this Section 3.1 regarding the Default Rate. Whenever, subsequent to the date of this Agreement, the Alternate Base Rate is increased or decreased, the applicable Contract Rate shall be similarly changed without notice or demand of any kind by an amount equal to the amount of such change in the Alternate Base Rate during the time such change or changes remain in effect. The LIBOR Rate shall be adjusted with respect to LIBOR Rate Loans without notice or demand of any kind on the effective date of any change in the Reserve Percentage as of such effective date. Upon and after the occurrence of an Event of Default, and during the continuation thereof, at the option of Agent or at the direction of Required Lenders (or, in the case of any Event of Default under Section 10.7, immediately and automatically upon the occurrence of any such Event of Default without the requirement of any affirmative action by any party), the Obligations (other than Hedge Liabilities and Cash Management Liabilities) shall bear interest at the applicable Contract Rate for Domestic Rate Loans plus two percent (2%) per annum (the " Default Rate ").

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a causal link between the protected activity and the adverse- action. San Antonio Water Sys., 461 S.W.3d at 137. UTEP’s plea to the jurisdiction contended there was no causal connection between any of its actions and Esparza’s alleged EEOC activity. Espar-za alleged that UTEP’s “unlawful employment practices .., were carried - on and committed because of Plaintiff’s EEO activity.” As noted above, the only protected activity Esparza alleged was that she filed an EEOC claim on March 25, 2010. Esparza’s specific factual allegations, however, addressed only actions by UTEP that occurred before" she filed her EEOC charge. Likewise, the evidence she filed in response to UTEP’s plea addressed only actions occurring before she filed her EEOC charge. It is axiomatic that UTEP (6th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). See also Dodge v. City of Belton, Mo., No. Options: A. holding that investigative report into police chiefs conduct was protected as private personnel data B. holding that investigatory suspension with pay was not adverse employment action C. recognizing that unequal pay is an adverse action D. holding that suspension with pay was not adverse employment action E. holding that police chiefs suspen sion with pay was not an adverseemployment action

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that police chiefs suspen sion with pay was not an adverseemployment action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of the Plan is held illegal or invalid for any reason, the illegality or invalidity shall not affect the remaining parts of the Plan, and the Plan shall be construed and enforced as if the illegal or invalid provision had not been included.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: None of the reports, financial statements, certificates or other information furnished by or on behalf of the Borrower or any Restricted Subsidiary to the Administrative Agent or any Lender or any of their Affiliates in connection with the negotiation of this Agreement or any other Loan Document or delivered hereunder or under any other Loan Document (as modified or supplemented by other information so furnished) contains any material misstatement of fact or omits to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; provided that, with respect to projected financial information, the Borrower represents only that such information was prepared in good faith based upon assumptions believed to be reasonable at the time (it being understood that actual results may vary from the projected financial information). There is no fact peculiar to the Borrower or any Restricted Subsidiary which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect or in the future is reasonably likely to have a Material Adverse Effect and which has not been set forth in this Agreement or the Loan Documents or the other documents, certificates and statements furnished to the Administrative Agent or the Lenders by or on behalf of the Borrower or any Restricted Subsidiary on the date hereof in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby. No statements or conclusions exist in any Reserve Report which are based upon or include misleading information or which fail to take into account material information regarding the matters reported therein to the extent such misstatement, misleading information or failure could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Disclosures
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: counter-argument fails to persuade. They argue that their convictions are not “final,” meaning that Great American must pay until the cases are resolved in a final adjudication. At the time they filed their briefs, they argued that “final” meant that “the judgment of conviction was rendered, the availability of appeal exhausted, and the time for petition for certiorari elapsed or [was] ... denied.” Ayers Reply Br., p. 4 (quoting Tehan v. United, States, 382 U.S. 406, 409 n. 3, 86 S.Ct. 459, 15 L.Ed.2d 453 (1966)). Even by the Principals’ own definition, the convictions of Ayers, Faulkenberry, and Dierker are now final. The Sixth Circuit has affirmed their convictions for securities fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy, a n, No. PCA 87-30080-WS, 1987 WL 49657, at *1 (N.D.Fla. July 5, 1987) (<HOLDING>); Chubb Custom Ins. Co. v. Triumph Capital Options: A. holding that the judgment or other final adjudication language of a dishonesty exclusion was satisfied by a criminal conviction B. holding that an adjudication on summary judgment is an adjudication on the merits C. holding that to establish a conviction for immigration purposes a court must accept a guilty plea or jury verdict make an adjudication and impose a sentence D. holding that a district court judgment is not a final judgment appealable by the defendant unless it includes the final adjudication and the final sentence E. holding that guilty plea to crime of fraud satisfied judgment or final adjudication language of dishonesty exclusion

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that guilty plea to crime of fraud satisfied judgment or final adjudication language of dishonesty exclusion