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: than that faced by named defendants in other cases who were held not to be persons aggrieved. In In re El San Juan Hotel, for example, the First Circuit held that a former bankruptcy trustee did not have appellate standing to challenge the appointment of counsel for the estate to bring a fraudulent concealment action against him. 809 F.2d at 155. Because the former trustee’s “only interest [wa]s as party defendant,” the First Circuit held that the appointment “ha[d] no direct and immediate impact on [his] pecuniary interests.” Id. This was the case even though the moving party explicitly “request[ed] permission to prosecute a suit” and the bankruptcy court “granted the requisite leave to file the complaint.” Id. at 153 (emphasis added). See also Moran, 2006 WL 3253128, at *5 (<HOLDING>). In re Fondiller, upon which the JT & T Options: A. holding that the notice of claim filed by a guardian in a wrongful death action even though erroneously filed on the guardians own behalf was sufficient to preserve the parents claim because the guardian was legally authorized to file a claim on behalf of the parent B. holding claimant waived right to jury trial on claims brought against it on behalf of bankruptcy estate when it submitted its proof of claim against the estate and subjected itself to the equitable powers of the bankruptcy court C. holding that west virginia waived sovereign immunity by initiating adversary proceeding even though it had not filed a proof of claim D. holding that an adversary defendant was not a person aggrieved even though creditor committee acting on behalf of the estate had already filed claims against him E. holding that a general release covered plaintiffs claim even though he had already filed an eeoc charge

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an adversary defendant was not a person aggrieved even though creditor committee acting on behalf of the estate had already filed claims against him
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 will, and will cause each of its Material Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect (a) its legal existence and (b) the rights, qualifications, licenses, permits, privileges, franchises, governmental authorizations and intellectual property rights material to the conduct of its business, and maintain all requisite authority to conduct its business in each jurisdiction in which its business is conducted, except, in the case of clause (b), as would not be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; provided that the foregoing shall not prohibit any merger, consolidation, liquidation or dissolution permitted under Section 6.03.

assistant: Existence
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 trial court erred in overlooking the finality of the January 6, 2006, judgment. On January 6, 2006, the trial court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the Estate. A summary judgment that does not dispose of all the parties or issues is interlocutory. Schlipf v. Exxon Corp. 644 S.W.2d 453, 454 (Tex.1982). The judgment entered on January 6, 2006, disposed of the breach of contract and declaratory judgment issues. In addition to relief on the breach of contract and declaratory judgment issues, the Estate sought to recover its attorney’s fees. The summary judgment did not become final and appealable until January 23, 2006, when the trial court entered judgment on the breach of contract and the Estate’s attorney’s fees. See McNally v. Guevara, 52 S.W.3d 195, 196 (Tex.2001) (<HOLDING>). David’s third issue is overruled. ATTORNEY’S Options: A. holding summary judgment order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of the defendants claim for attorneys fees B. holding that the rule 12b6 ruling was not a final judgment and did not bind the district court at summary judgment C. holding that summary judgment order that does not dispose of all claims between parties does not confer appellate jurisdiction because it is not a final decision under 28 usc 1291 D. holding that because trial courts order did not dispose of the defendants counterclaim that order was not a final judgment that would support an appeal E. holding that an order is not a final appealable order when it does not dispose of the complaints against all of the defendants

assistant: The best answer is A. holding summary judgment order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of the defendants claim for attorneys fees
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Tenant agrees that the installation, operation and removal of Rooftop Equipment shall be at its sole risk. Tenant shall indemnify and defend Landlord and the other Indemnitees against any liability, claim or cost, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in connection with the loss of life, personal injury, damage to property or business or any other loss or injury (except to the extent due to the negligence or willful misconduct of Landlord or its employees, agents, or contractors) arising out of the installation, use, operation, or removal of Rooftop Equipment by Tenant or its employees, agents, or contractors, including any liability arising out of Tenant’s violation of this Article 21. Subject to the provisions of Section 21.05, Landlord assumes no responsibility for interference in the operation of Rooftop Equipment caused by other tenants’ equipment, if any, or for interference in the operation of other tenants’ equipment caused by Rooftop Equipment; provided, however, that Landlord shall use commercially reasonable efforts to enforce the rights of Tenant under this Lease to the extent the same are superior to that of any other tenants of the Property and shall comply with the provisions of Section 21.05, below. The provisions of this Section 21.03 shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease.

assistant: Indemnifications
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 BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that she failed to provide sufficient evidence to support her allegation that conditions in China have materially changed. We have previously reviewed the BIA’s consideration of similar evidence in the context of an untimely motion to reopen and have found no abuse of discretion in its conclusion that such evidence was insufficient to establish changed conditions in China. See, e.g., Wei Guang Wang v. BIA, 437 F.3d 270, 275 (2d Cir.2006) (noting that while the BIA must consider evidence such as “the oft-cited Ail'd affidavit, which [it] is asked to consider time and again[,] ... it may do so in summary fashion without a reviewing court presuming that it has abused its discretion”); Jian Huan Guan v. BIA, 345 F.3d 47 (2d Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). In addition, we find that the BIA did not Options: A. holding that a plaintiff who pled in her complaint that her law firm actively misled her in support of her request for application of the discovery rule had sufficiently pled the application of the doctrine B. holding that the bia did not abuse its discretion in denying a petitioners untimely motion to reopen where petitioner submitted proof of the birth of her two sons a letter from her parents warning of the danger of forced sterilization and a purported sterilization certificate for her cousin who allegedly also had two children C. holding that the bia correctly imputed a parents knowledge that she and her children were not eligible for entry to the united states to her children D. holding that bia abused its discretion in denying motion to reopen E. holding that the bia did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to reopen supported by allegedly unavailable evidence regarding changed country conditions where there had been a previous adverse credibility finding in the underlying asylum hearing

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the bia did not abuse its discretion in denying a petitioners untimely motion to reopen where petitioner submitted proof of the birth of her two sons a letter from her parents warning of the danger of forced sterilization and a purported sterilization certificate for her cousin who allegedly also had two children
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: 1980). 35 . Blood, 68 P.3d at 1255 (citing S & R Co. of Kingston v. Latona Trucking, Inc., 159 F,3d 80, 83 (2d Cir. 1988)). 36 . Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 24, 103 S.Ct. 927, 74 L.Ed.2d 765 (1983); Blood, 68 P.3d at 1255 (citing Doctor’s Assocs. Inc. v. Distajo, 107 F.3d 126, 130 (2d Cir. 1997)). 37 . 9 U.S.C. § 3 (2012) (emphasis added). 38 . We disagree with the dissent’s analysis about what would have happened had Hudson actually raised a UTPA counterclaim in the collection litigation. If Hudson had raised the UTPA simply to defend and reduce t 11-310 CV, 2012 WL 506568, at *3-5 (Tex. App. Feb. 16, 2012) (applying federal law and finding waiver when the two claims were based on the same contract). 40 . Midwest Window Sys., Inc., 630 F.2d at 537 (<HOLDING>). 41 . PPG Indus., Inc., 128 F.3d at 110. 42 . Options: A. holding that tort claims were arbitrable because they arose out of and were related to contract B. holding claims waived because they all grew out of their unsatisfactory business relationship C. recognizing that without claim preclusion plaintiffs in small claims cases will not feel obligated to present all of their claims or all of their evidence and they can simply file again if need be D. holding that doctrine of affinity grew out of canonical maxim that marriage makes husband and wife one E. holding that employees claims against firm were not subject to mandatory arbitration because they did not arise out of business activities of either employee or firm but instead arose out of divorce agreement

assistant: The best answer is B. holding claims waived because they all grew out of their unsatisfactory business relationship
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 articles and sections of this Agreement which by their terms are to be performed or enforced after or apply to the period of time after the termination or expiration of this Agreement will survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement, including without limitation, the covenants and agreements contained in Article 4.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: questions, or provided answers arguably favorable to the defense. Because of the vehemence with which the government argues a position with no seeming support in the law, this court pauses to discuss the obligations placed on each of the parties to a trial by the Federal Rules of Evidence. It is a basic tenet of our law that in order to preserve an evidentiary issue for review, the party opposing the admission of the evidence must make a timely objection. Fed.R.Evid. 103(a)(1); United States v. Auch, 187 F.3d 125, 130 (1st Cir.1999); United States v. Barone, 114 F.3d 1284, 1293 (1st Cir.1997); United States v. Wihbey, 75 F.3d 761, 770 & n. 4 (1st Cir.1996); Willco Kuwait (Trading) S.A.K. v. deSavary, 843 F.2d 618, 625 (1st Cir.1988); see also United State 378, 385 (1st Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>), and W. Fire Ins. Co. v. Word, 131 F.2d 541, Options: A. holding that general objection did not preserve error on appeal B. holding that an objection was adequate when the judge cut short the objection and the defendant was not afforded the opportunity to explain his objection fully C. holding that to preserve an alleged error in the admission of evidence a timely objection must be made to the introduction of the evidence specific grounds for the objection should be stated and a ruling on the objection must be made by the trial court D. holding that objection on grounds of relevance does not preserve an objection for lack of authentication E. holding that because at least three pages of transcript were recorded before the defendant objected the objection came too late to preserve the objection for appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that because at least three pages of transcript were recorded before the defendant objected the objection came too late to preserve the objection for appeal
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 Grantee’s right to retain the Award Shares will be subject to the Grantee remaining in continuous employment or service with the Company or any Subsidiary for a period of four(4) years (the “Restriction Period”) following the Date of Grant; provided, however, that such employment/service period restrictions (the “Restrictions”) will lapse and terminate prior to the end of the Restriction Period with respect to [ ] of such shares on [ ], with respect to [ ] of such shares on [ ], with respect to [ ] of such shares on [ ], and as set forth in Section 2.2 below [,Section 2.3 below,] or as otherwise set forth in the Plan.

assistant: Forfeitures
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, interpreted under, and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York applicable to agreements made and to be performed within the State of New York, without giving effect to any choice-of-law provisions thereof that would compel the application of the substantive laws of any other jurisdiction.

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: As of February 29, 2016, the authorized capital stock of the Company consists of (i) 200,000,0000 shares of Common Stock, par value $0.001, of which 40,253,056 shares are issued and outstanding, 3,935,000 shares are reserved for issuance pursuant to stock options granted, 17,888,945 shares are reserved for issuance pursuant to warrants to purchase Common Stock, and 4,056,042 shares are reserved for issuance upon exchange of Exchangeable Shares, and (ii) 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share, of which one share is designated as Special Voting Preferred Stock and is issued and outstanding, and 278,530 shares are designated as Series A Preferred Stock, of which 278,530 are issued and outstanding. Upon filing of the Series B Certificate of Designation with the Secretary of State of Nevada in accordance with this Agreement, 1,000,000 shares will be designated as Series B Preferred Stock, of which none are outstanding., provided however, the Company may increase the number of Series B Preferred Stock that has been designated solely by the action of the Company’s Board of Directors and no further consent of the Investors is required. Except as described above and in the SEC Documents (including without limitation, with respect to “piggyback” registration rights under placement agent warrants issued on March 6, 2013, and anti-dilution rights under warrants issued to investors in the quarter ended March 31, 2013), (i) there are no outstanding options, warrants, scrip, rights to subscribe for, puts, calls, rights of first refusal, agreements, understandings, claims or other commitments or rights of any character whatsoever relating to, or securities or rights convertible into or exchangeable for any shares of capital stock of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, or arrangements by which the Company or any of its Subsidiaries is or may become bound to issue additional shares of capital stock of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, (ii) there are no agreements or arrangements under which the Company or any of its Subsidiaries is obligated to register the sale of any of its or their securities under the Securities Act and (iii) there are no anti-dilution or price adjustment provisions contained in any security issued by the Company (or in any agreement providing rights to security holders). All of such outstanding shares of capital stock are, or upon issuance will be, duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable. No shares of capital stock of the Company are subject to preemptive rights or any other similar rights of the stockholders of the Company or any Lien imposed through the actions or failure to act of the Company.

assistant: Capitalization
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 provision of this Agreement may be modified, waived or discharged unless such modification, waiver or discharge is approved by Employer’s Board or a Person authorized thereby and is agreed to in writing by Executive and, in the case of any such modification, waiver or discharge affecting the rights or obligations of GPHC, is approved by the Board of Directors of GPHC or a Person authorized thereby. No waiver by any party hereto at any time of any breach by any other party hereto of, or compliance with, any condition or provision of this Agreement to be performed by such other party shall be deemed a waiver of similar or dissimilar provisions or conditions at the same or at any prior or subsequent time. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be implied from any course of dealing between or among the parties hereto or from any failure by any party hereto to assert its rights hereunder on any occasion or series of occasions.

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: defendant’s "non-constitutional argument that § 922(g)(9) does not apply to him because his civil rights had been restored.’’ Chovan, 735 F.3d at 1131. Applying its prior decision in U.S. v. Brailey, 408 F.3d 609, 611-13 (9th Cir.2005), the court rejected the defendant's argument that his civil rights had been restored within the meaning of § 921(a)(33)(B)(ii) when his ten-year ban on owning firearms under California state law expired. Chovan, 735 F.3d at 1131-33. 19 . In their supplemental brief, Defendants cite two federal district court cases for the proposition that the Lautenberg Amendment survives constitutional scrutiny even if the particular offender cannot satisfy any of the statutory exceptions in § 921(a)(33)(B)(ii). See U.S. v. Smith, 742 F.Supp.2d 855, 869 (S.D.W.Va.2010) (<HOLDING>); Enos v. Holder, 855 F.Supp.2d 1088, 1098-1100 Options: A. holding that such classifications are permissible only when suitably tailored to serve a compelling state interest B. holding that unlawful possession of five firearms throughout a four to five month period established a behavior pattern of unlawfully possessing firearms that meets the same course of conduct requirement C. holding that children are often physically assaulted or witness violence against one of their parents and may suffer deep and lasting emotional harm from victimization and from exposure to family violence consequently a family law judge should take domestic violence into account when making an award of temporary eustodyt based upon a recognition that it is clear that where domestic violence is present it should be considered when determining parental fitness D. holding that even assuming the defendant is permanently barred from future firearms possession 922g9 is reasonably tailored to accomplish the governments compelling interest in preventing domestic violence misdemeanants from possessing guns E. holding that the government interest in preventing crime is compelling

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that even assuming the defendant is permanently barred from future firearms possession 922g9 is reasonably tailored to accomplish the governments compelling interest in preventing domestic violence misdemeanants from possessing guns
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: 26-7A, 26-8A, and 26-8C or of Title 27A shall control, and the provisions of this chapter are in all respects to be supplementary thereto. (emphasis added). Thus, where allegations of abuse and neglect serve as the grounds for the guardianship petition, as was the case here, the statutory provisions specifically relating to abuse and neglect proceedings, as well as the provisions relating to juvenile court, must control. See Martinmaas, 2000 SD 85 at ¶ 49, 612 N.W.2d at 611. [¶ 10.] Adjudication of abuse or neglect is done in juvenile court pursuant to SDCL chapters 26-7A and 26-8A. SDCL 26-7A-2 provides for exclusive juri ’s interest, as parens patriae, in protecting the welfare of the child. SDCL 26-8A-1. See also Matter of N.J.W., N.G.B., and K.F.B., 273 N.W.2d 134, 137 (S.D.1978) (<HOLDING>). The State is the only party that may seek to Options: A. holding care custody and control of children is a fundamental right B. holding state as parens patriae takes strong interest in care and treatment of children within its borders C. recognizing parents fundamental liberty interest in the care custody and management of their children D. holding that missouri has interest in providing a forum for victims injured as a result of activities conducted within its borders E. recognizing that with respect to regulating or affecting conduct within its borders the place of the wrong has the predominant interest

assistant: The best answer is B. holding state as parens patriae takes strong interest in care and treatment of children within its borders
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 understands and confirms that the Purchasers will rely on the foregoing representation in effecting transactions in securities of the Company. All of the disclosure furnished by or on behalf of the Company to the Purchasers regarding the Company and its Subsidiaries, their respective businesses and the transactions contemplated hereby, is true and correct and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The Company acknowledges and agrees that no Purchaser makes or has made any representations or warranties with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby other than those specifically set forth in Section 3.2 hereof.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Subject to the applicable limitations set forth in the Security Documents, Holdings and the Borrower will, and will cause each Subsidiary Guarantor to, execute any and all further documents, financing statements, agreements and instruments, and take all such further actions (including the filing and recording of financing statements, fixture filings, mortgages, deeds of trust and other documents), which may be required under any Applicable Law, or which the Administrative Agent, the Collateral Agent or the Required Lenders may reasonably request, in order to grant, preserve, protect and perfect the validity and priority of the security interests created or intended to be created by the Security Documents, all at the expense of the Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notices or other communications provided for hereunder may be made by hand, by ce rtified or registered mail, postage prepaid, return r eceipt requested, or by nationally recognized express courier services provided that the same are addressed to the party required to be notified at its address first written above, or such other address as may h ereafter be estab l ished by a party by written notice to the other party. Notice sha ll be considered accomp li shed on the date delivered, three days af t er being mailed or one day after deposit w i th the express courier, as app li cable.

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: If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable under any applicable law, then such contravention or invalidity shall not invalidate the entire Agreement. Such provision shall be deemed to be modified to the extent necessary to render it legal, valid and enforceable, and if no such modification shall render it legal, valid and enforceable, then this Agreement shall be construed as if not containing the provision held to be invalid, and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced accordingly.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the Act, “all property acquired by either spouse after the marriage and before a judgment of dissolution *** is presumed to be marital property, regardless of whether title is held individually or by the spouses in some form of co-ownership.” 750 ILCS 5/503(b) (West 2000). Further, section 503(e) provides in pertinent part that “[e]ach spouse has a species of common ownership in the marital property which vests at the time dissolution proceedings are commenced and continues only during the pendency of the action.” 750 ILCS 5/503(e) (West 2000). Thus, during the pendency of the divorce proceedings Debora has a vested interest in all marital property regardless of which party holds title to it. 750 ILCS 5/503(e) (West 2000); Hofmann v. Hofmann, 94 Ill. 2d 205, 446 N.E.2d 499 (1983) (<HOLDING>). While the term “property” has been defined as Options: A. holding that the law to be applied in determining the validity of an outofstate marriage is the law of the state in which the marriage occurred B. holding husband could not have marriage annulled because wife was pregnant by him at time of marriage C. recognizing that basis for deportation was aliens misrepresentation about his marriage not the validity of his marriage D. recognizing the common enterprise theory of marriage E. recognizing theory of constructive possession

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing the common enterprise theory of marriage
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 Montgomery Towers. ‘All-risks” first-party insurance coverage, such as the coverage at issue in the instant case, does not protect against losses that are certain to happen. See Intermetal Mexicana, S.A. v. Insurance Co. of N. Am., 866 F.2d 71, 77 (3rd. Cir. 1989); Standard Structural Steel Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 597 F.Supp. 164, 191 (D.Conn.1984); Chu v. Canadian Indem. Co., 224 Cal.App.3d 86, 274 Cal.Rptr. 20, 26 (1990); Miller v. Boston Ins. Co., 420 Pa. 566, 218 A.2d 275, 277 (1966); Glassner v. Detroit Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 23 Wis.2d 532, 127 N.W.2d 761, 764 (1964). A related principle is that “all-risks” insurance does not cover loss for events that occur prior to issuance of the policy. See Nevers v. Aetna Ins. Co., 14 Wash.App. 906, 546 P.2d 1240, 1241 (1976) (<HOLDING>). In this case, the underlying problem causing Options: A. holding that the date of discrimination is the date on which a decision not to hire a plaintiff becomes effective B. holding that the commission on remand can set the effective date of a rate to be the effective date of the original commission activity C. holding that an allrisks policy does not cover undisclosed events which take place prior to the effective date of coverage D. holding that an amendment to a policy in existence prior to the effective date of a statute requiring uninsured motorist coverage which substituted insured automobiles did not incorporate the new statute because to do so would be an unconstitutional impairment of the obligation of the contract E. holding that the statute does not apply retroactively to claims accruing prior to the effective date

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an allrisks policy does not cover undisclosed events which take place prior to the effective date of coverage
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 foster parents have standing under federal law to raise foster child’s rights). We should join the growing number of our sister jurisdictions who have conferred standing to be heard to foster parents in proceedings related to children that have been in their care. Some states, such as Delaware, Nebraska, South Carolina, and West Virginia have conferred standing to foster parents via judicial decision. See In re C.M.D., 256 A.2d 266 (De.1969)(deciding that foster parents had standing to petition Family Court for custody of foster child); In re Jorius G., 249 Neb. 892, 546 N.W.2d 796 (1996)(finding that foster parents had standing to contest agency’s removal of foster child); Greenville County Department of Social Services v. Bowes, 313 S.C. 188, 437 S.E.2d 107 (1993)(<HOLDING>); In re Harley C., 203 W.Va. 594, 509 S.E.2d Options: A. recognizing that the department is required to present clear and convincing evidence to support termination of a parents parental rights B. holding foster parents not liable for willful act of their foster child C. recognizing emotional bond between foster parents and child although ultimately determining foster parents did not have rights of parents in dependency action under chapter 2644 rcw D. holding that natural parents could not lose parental rights to foster parents where the foster agreement contemplates a surrender of custody for only a temporary period of time E. holding that foster parents have standing to intervene to seek termination of parental rights

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that foster parents have standing to intervene to seek termination of parental rights
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any chief financial officer of the Company shall keep and maintain, or cause to be kept and maintained, books and records of accounts of the properties and business transactions of the Company, including accounts of its assets, liabilities, receipts, disbursements, gains, losses and capital. He or she shall disburse the funds of the Company as may be ordered by the Board of Directors and shall render to the Board of Directors at their request an account of all his or her transactions as chief financial officer and of the financial condition of the Company. Authorizations with respect to the Company’s depositories, disbursement of funds and related banking matters shall be as set forth in resolutions of the Board of Directors.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any party may, subject to applicable Law, solely as to itself: (i) waive any inaccuracies in the representations and warranties of any other party hereto; (ii) extend the time for the performance of any of the obligations or acts of any other party hereto; or (iii) waive compliance by any other party with any of the agreements contained in this Agreement or, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, waive any of such party’s conditions set forth in this Agreement. Any agreement on the part of a party hereto to any such extension or waiver shall be valid only if set forth in an instrument in writing signed on behalf of such party. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no failure or delay by either Stockholder, Parent or Sub in exercising any right hereunder shall operate as a waiver of rights, nor shall any single or partial exercise of such rights preclude any other or further exercise of such rights or the exercise of any other right hereunder.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: question. Moreover, Alcantara’s credibility was severely undermined by his admissions that he had been convicted of illegal reentry in 1995, 1997, 2002, and 2009. Notably, Al-cantara was arrested for illegal reentry on two occasions after traveling into the United States from Tecate. Alcantara also conceded that he lied during a prior arrest when he falsely stated that he had never used methamphetamine. Although the prosecutor did improperly vouch for government witnesses by mentioning during rebuttal argument that the border patrol agents were “sworn to uphold the law,” the district court immediately sustained the defense attorney’s objection, and instructed the jury to disregard the comment, rendering any error harmless. See United States v. Parks, 285 F.3d 1133, 1141 (9th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). The district court did not abuse its Options: A. holding mistrial not warranted for improper statement by police officer where court sustained defendants objection and admonished jury to disregard statement and where there was overwhelming evidence of guilt B. holding that a jury is presumed to heed the district courts instruction to disregard the fact that the defendants were held in contempt and admonished before the jury C. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendants request for severance because the district court nullified any prejudicial error when it repeatedly admonished the jury throughout the trial to consider the evidence only against the defendant to whom it related and at the end of trial gave the jury instructions that admonished the jury to consider separately each offense and evidence in support of each offense D. holding that the district courts improper admission of an unauthenticated registration statement was harmless because the proponent of the registration statement later properly authenticated the statement in a motion to reconsider E. holding that improper statement was rendered harmless because the district court sustained the defendants objection and admonished the jury to disregard the statement

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that improper statement was rendered harmless because the district court sustained the defendants objection and admonished the jury to disregard the statement
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you and the company agree the following rules , which are intended to streamline the dispute resolution process and reduce the costs and burdens on the parties : ( a ) the arbitration will be conducted online and/or be solely based on written submissions , the specific manner to be chosen by the party initiating the arbitration ; ( b ) the arbitration will not require any personal appearance by the parties or witnesses unless otherwise mutually agreed in writing by the parties ; and ( c ) any judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction .

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: yes, I probably would have smoked with her.” At the conclusion of Williams’s testimony, which contained numerous inconsistencies, the district court opined: “I’m not sure you even realize what you are saying.... You sat here on this witness stand this morning and told me that it was your intention to distribute that crack cocaine.” Despite this apparent admission that Williams intended to distribute the crack to his girlfriend, however, the district court gave him the benefit of the doubt and refused to make such a finding: “I’m not going to enhance your sentence based upon a conclusion that you were possessing those drugs for resale when in fact I cannot rest easy with the conclusion that you were.” Because the district court did not enhance Williams (6th Cir.2007) (unpublished) (<HOLDING>). And Williams’s contention that the district Options: A. holding that defendants 46month aboveguidelines sentence upon revocation of supervised release was not unreasonable even where the guidelines recommended a sentence of only seven to thirteen months B. holding that confinement in community treatment center after parole revocation was part of original term of imprisonment C. holding that term of supervised release was not automatically terminated when defendant was deported from united states and thus defendants subsequent commission of another offense illegal reentry after deportation prior to expiration of term of supervised release violated condition of supervised release that defendant commit no new offenses D. holding that an aboveguidelines sentence based in part on the defendants commission of new crimes only nine days after his release from confinement was not improper E. holding that defendants 36month aboveguidelines but belowstatutorymaximum sentence upon revocation of supervised release was not unreasonable where the district court had discussed both the guidelines and other 3553a factors during sentencing

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an aboveguidelines sentence based in part on the defendants commission of new crimes only nine days after his release from confinement was not improper
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: It is hereby mutually acknowledged and agreed that the provisions of this Lease have been fully negotiated between parties of comparable bargaining power with the assistance of counsel and shall be applied according to the normal meaning and tenor thereof without regard to the general rule that contractual provisions are to be construed narrowly against the party that drafted the same or any similar rule of construction.

assistant: Interpretations
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: In consideration for the Base Services provided by MCRLP hereunder (including use of Shared Assets and Service Delivery Employees) and all Additional Services provided by MCRLP hereunder that the Parties have agreed in accordance with Section 1.1(b) will not increase the Services Fee, the Partnership shall pay to MCRLP the aggregate sum of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per year, in twelve equal monthly payments of eighty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three dollars and thirty-three cents ($83,333.33), commencing on the Effective Date and continuing until termination of this Agreement, with an annual three percent (3%) increase each year thereafter during the Services Period (the “ Base Services Fee ”). In consideration for any Additional Services provided by MCRLP hereunder for which the Parties have agreed to an increase in the Services Fee in accordance with Section 1.1(b) , the Partnership shall pay to MCRLP, in twelve equal monthly payments, the amount agreed by the Parties for such Additional Services (the “ Additional Services Fee ” and, together with the Base Services Fee, the “ Services Fee ”). The Services Fee shall be paid on a monthly basis in advance.

assistant: Payments
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: Mr. Johnson on the other hand claims that he never filed the false or misleading claim which Colonial has accused him of doing, but rather that this is a mere pretext for the actual reason he was fired. Mr. Johnson instead presented evidence showing Colonial’s dissatisfaction with his practice of helping policyholders fill out claim forms as the reason for termination and evidence of threats made by Colonial representatives to fire him if he did not discontinue this practice. Where there was a genuine issue as to a material fact, whether or not there was a breach, the claim for breach of contract was properly submitted to the jury to weigh the evidence and judge- the credibility of the witnesses. Draughon v. Harnett Cty. Bd. of Educ., 158 N.C. App. 705, 708, 582 S.E.2d 343, 345 (2003), (<HOLDING>), aff’d per curiam, 358 N.C. 137, 591 S.E.2d Options: A. holding that in determining the propriety of summary judgment credibility determinations may not be made B. holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony C. holding that the postconviction court is the sole judge of the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses D. holding that summary judgment is not appropriate where matters of credibility and determining the weight of the evidence exist E. holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if the resolution of material issues depends upon credibility determinations

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that summary judgment is not appropriate where matters of credibility and determining the weight of the evidence exist
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 Agreement was negotiated, at least in part, in New York.”). Therefore, if characterized as a contract dispute, the preliminary meetings, general conversations, and exchanges of drafts would be particularly relevant to the venue determination. Conversely, the Defendants rely on cases decided in the more traditional legal malpractice context, where, although not a bright line rule, most courts have found that the alleged malpractice, not the entire attorney-client relationship is the relevant inquiry. The location of the attorney is not only relevant to the where the legal work was performed, but is also relevant in regards to any communications. See, e.g., Astor Holdings, Inc. v. Steefel, Levitt & Weiss, P.C., No. 03-CV-1242, 2003 WL 21108316, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. May 14, 2003) (<HOLDING>); Saferstein v. Paul, Mardinly, Durham, James, Options: A. holding that venue was not proper in the southern district of new york where the plaintiff resided because the allegedly erroneous advice to file a case in new york that could result in a finding of civil contempt against the plaintiff originated from the defendants office in california B. holding that judge in southern district of new york could authorize wiretap in maryland C. holding that for purposes of longarm jurisdiction because plaintiff was employed in new york the original event causing his injury occurred in new york D. holding that contract signed in new york by promisor from florida and partially performed in florida was governed by new york law because it was executed in new york E. recognizing forum selection clause providing that no such claim shall be commenced prosecuted or continued in any forum other than the courts of the state of new york located in the city and county of new york or in the united states district court for the southern district of new york as clear and unambiguous expression of parties selection of exclusive forum in affirming district courts dismissal of action commenced in united states district court for the district of new jersey

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that venue was not proper in the southern district of new york where the plaintiff resided because the allegedly erroneous advice to file a case in new york that could result in a finding of civil contempt against the plaintiff originated from the defendants office in california
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 otherwise specified herein or as the context may otherwise require, capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein are defined in Appendix A to the Sale Agreement, dated as of the date hereof (as amended, supplemented, or otherwise modified and in effect from time to time, the “ Sale Agreement ”), between the Issuer and Capital One Auto Receivables, LLC, which also contains rules as to usage that are applicable herein.

assistant: Definitions