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: of material fact in dispute and that this case may be resolved by the Court on the record submitted. See supra note 2; see also Order 7/28/14 (Document 56). III. Discussion (A) Breach of Contract Claim Psychiatric Solutions claims that Fidelity violated the SFIP by failing to pay the difference between the two POLs ($36,093.77). See Pl.’s Second Am. Compl. (“SAC”) (Document 37) at 9. However, as a government fiscal agent, Fidelity could not properly pay this because Psychiatric Solutions did not fulfill its obligations under the SFIP and plaintiff was unable to obtain the required waiver for the difference in the amounts of the two signed POLs. The SFIP places the burden on the insured to follow all of the requirements listed by the SFIP when filing a POL. Suopys, 404 F.3d at 810 (<HOLDING>). These re quirements include filing a signed Options: A. holding that an insurance company which chose not to defend its insured could not later deny coverage by asserting the legally obligated to pay provision in the policy after the insured reached a settlement where the injured party agreed to collect only against insurance proceeds B. holding that despite assurances from the insurance company that the insured could file the pol after femas deadline the insured could not collect because the insured was responsible for timely filing C. holding that regardless of the subjective belief of the insured the record established a basis to believe that the insured had committed an act that could give rise to a claim under the policy D. holding a personal profit exclusion applicable to an insured corporation where the purpose of the exclusion was to exclude coverage when the insured received profits to which the insured was not legally entitled E. holding that reinsurer could be directly liable to an insured where the reinsurance agent was the ultimate consistent reimburser of losses of the insured and this status was conveyed to the insured

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that despite assurances from the insurance company that the insured could file the pol after femas deadline the insured could not collect because the insured was responsible for timely filing
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 wrongdoing is required, the probationer does not have sufficient notice of the admission requirement for the probationer’s refusal to admit sexual misconduct to be a willful violation. Sex offender treatment programs will always have program-specific requirements not embodied by the generic language of the probation condition requiring “successful completion” of the program. Bennett and Diaz rob the trial court of its discretion to make fact-specific determinations as to whether a probationer had notice of those program-specific requirements. Without discretion, courts would have to specifically delineate, in each probation order, the program to which an offender is being sent and that program’s internal requirements—an approach we have implicitly rejected. Lawson, 969 So.2d at 235 (<HOLDING>). Thus, we disapprove Bennett, Bell, and Diaz. Options: A. holding that effect must be given if possible to every clause and word of a statute B. holding that probation orders need not include every possible restriction so long as a reasonable person is put on notice of what conduct will subject him or her to revocation and that ajlthough the conditions should be clearly set out and must mean what they say every detail need not be spelled out and the language should be interpreted in its common ordinary usage C. holding that the nonmovant need not be given the benefit of every inference but only of every reasonable inference D. holding if the language of a deed or other written instrument is clear and unambiguous the intention of the parties is gathered from the instrument it is what the grant or said and not what he intended to say E. holding that plaintiff need not rebut every possible alteration or modification but only those that the defendant has produced

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that probation orders need not include every possible restriction so long as a reasonable person is put on notice of what conduct will subject him or her to revocation and that ajlthough the conditions should be clearly set out and must mean what they say every detail need not be spelled out and the language should be interpreted in its common ordinary usage
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 conduct complained of and [are] so clearly foreshadowed by applicable direct authority as to leave no doubt in the mind of a reasonable officer that his conduct, if challenged on constitutional grounds, would be found wanting.” Id. A few admittedly novel opinions from other circuit or district courts are not enough to form the basis for a clearly established constitutional right in the Sixth Circuit. Id. Here, the district court correctly determined that the right to direct the education of one’s child was clearly established. Both the Supreme Court and this court have repeatedly recognized that parents have a fundamental right to raise their children, including directing their children’s education. See, e.g., Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 400, 43 S.Ct. 625, 67 L.Ed. 1042 (1923) (<HOLDING>); Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, Options: A. recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children B. recognizing mutual duty of each parent to provide children with support and education suitable to the childrens circumstances C. holding that liberty includes the right of parents to establish a home and bring up children and to control the education of their own D. recognizing the right of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life E. holding that a school board policy prohibiting employees from sending their children to private schools interfered with employees constitutional right to control the education of their children

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing the right of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life
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: At the time of and immediately after such Credit Event, no Event of Default or Default shall have occurred and be continuing; provided , however , that the Events of Default the absence of which shall be a condition precedent to any Credit Extension pursuant to the Delayed Draw Term Loan C Commitments shall be limited to the Events of Default set forth in Section 7.01(h) and (i) .

assistant: No Defaults
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: argue that they cannot be exempt even though salaried because AEP requires them to account for at least 40 hours of work each week and to make up for partial-day absence either by working extra hours or by taking vacation time or paid time off. An employer may require exempt salaried employees to make up for time missed from work due to personal business. It is only when an employer actually deducts from an employee’s paycheck that the employee is ineligible for the exemption. See, e.g., Cowart v. Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc., 213 F.3d 261, 265-66 (5th Cir.2000) (finding that employees who were required to make up personal time off and suffered no salary deductions for the lost time were paid on a salary basis); Haywood v. North Amer. Van Lines, Inc., 121 F.3d 1066, 1070 (7th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). Because the planners concede that AEP has not Options: A. holding that provisions protecting classified service employees from administrative demotion or discipline did not preclude reclassification of employees and warning against misinterpretation of scope of protections afforded to employees where protections apply only to administrative actions such as the promotion or discipline of employees they do not limit or preclude the city councils legislative authority to make necessary policy and budget decisions they do not somehow override the express authority for the city councils actions and thus they do not create a constitutionallyprotected property interest that prohibits the city council from passing the ordinance at issue in this case B. holding that the first amendment does not prohibit managerial discipline based on an employees expressions made pursuant to official responsibilities C. holding that the regulations prohibit only monetary discipline of exempt employees D. recognizing right of this court to regulate and discipline members of the bar E. holding that threatening to discipline employees for not reporting union solicitation violated 8a1

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the regulations prohibit only monetary discipline of exempt employees
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: 11165 et seq.) requires the reporting of all known and suspected instances of child abuse. (People v. Stritzinger (1983) 34 Cal.3d 505, 512 [194 Cal.Rptr. 431, 668 P.2d 738].) Section 11166, subdivision (a) provides “any child care custodian, medical practitioner, nonmedical practitioner, or employee of a child protective agency who has knowledge of or observes a child in his or her professional capacity or within the scope of his or her employment whom he or she knows or reasonably suspects has been the victim of child abuse shall report the known or suspected instance of child abuse to a child protective agency immediately or as soon as practically possible by telephone and shall prepare and send a written report thereof within 36 hours of receiving the weiker (1983) 559 F.Supp. 658 (<HOLDING>).) The right to seek a particular form of Options: A. holding ordinance requiring clinics to notify parents of their teenage daughters receipt of contraceptives unconstitutional B. recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children C. holding ordinance restricting availability of abortion unconstitutional D. holding unconstitutional an ordinance prohibiting opprobious language E. holding that polices flagrant violation of statute requiring officers to make reasonable attempts to notify parents among factors causing court to determine that defendants statement was involuntary and therefore should be suppressed

assistant: The best answer is A. holding ordinance requiring clinics to notify parents of their teenage daughters receipt of contraceptives unconstitutional
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 and its Subsidiaries and each other Person for whose taxes the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries could become liable have timely filed or caused to be filed all Federal income tax returns and all other material tax returns that are required to be filed by them, and have paid all taxes shown to be due and payable on such returns or on any assessments made against it or its property and all other taxes, fees or other charges imposed on it or any of its property by any Governmental Authority, except where the same are currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and for which the Borrower or such Subsidiary, as the case may be, has set aside on its books adequate reserves in accordance with GAAP. The charges, accruals and reserves on the books of the Borrower and its Subsidiaries in respect of such taxes are adequate, and no tax liabilities that could be materially in excess of the amount so provided are anticipated. Neither the Borrower nor any of its Subsidiaries has any obligation to pay or has any liability with respect to any of their Affiliates’ tax liability. No tax Lien has been filed and, to the knowledge of any Loan Party, no claim is being asserted with respect to any such tax or other such governmental charge.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 333 U.S. 426, 431, 68 S.Ct. 641, 644, 92 L.Ed. 784 (1948)); see also Castle v. Sangamo Weston, Inc., 837 F.2d 1550, 1563 (11th Cir.1988) (explaining grant or denial of equitable relief lies in the discretion of the district court). Mandamus, which is an extreme form of equitable relief, “is a writ designed to require an official to perform an act required by law.” See Corn v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 904 F.2d 585, 587 (11th Cir.1990). Although the writ of mandamus was abolished by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 81(b), federal courts “may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (2000); see also Armstrong v. Martin Marietta Corp., 138 F.3d 1374, 1385 (11th Cir.1998) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). Pursuant to their powers under 28 U.S.C. § Options: A. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion B. holding that to grant a writ of mandamus a court in the exercise of its discretion must be satisfied that the writ is appropriate under the circumstances C. recognizing the writ of mandamus may issue to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the failure to carry out a ministerial task D. recognizing that the issuance of a writ of mandamus is itself generally a matter of discretion E. recognizing that laches is a proper ground for refusing to issue a writ of mandamus

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing the writ of mandamus may issue to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the failure to carry out a ministerial task
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: court earlier determined that "Trooper Swets['s] contact with [Haar] was not the product of a traffic stop.” Conclusions of Law ¶ 3 (emphasis added). 2 . The circuit court also erred in reasoning that a number of cases have concluded that canine sniffs not incident to a traffic stop are subject to the same rules as sniffs conducted incident to a traffic stop. The circuit court’s cited cases all involved canine sniffs that were either incident to a traffic stop or involved parked and unattended cars in public places where the defendant had no expectation of privacy. None of the court's cited cases involved what is alleged here: an investigatory detention of persons or property performed to conduct a canine sniff. See e.g. United States v. Engles, 481 F.3d 1243, 1245 (10th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Friend, 50 F.3d 548, 551-52 Options: A. holding no fourth amendment violation when police initiated a canine sniff of a trailer attached to a pickup truck that was parked and unattended on a public street B. holding that canine sniff not a search under the fourth amendment C. holding canine sniff of a vehicle validly stopped for a headlight violation was not unreasonable given that the driver was being issued a ticket at the time a second officer arrived on the scene and ran the drug dog around the vehicle D. holding that a canine sniff is a search for purposes of the fourth amendment E. holding dog sniff of a vehicle parked on a public street did not violate the fourth amendment when canine sniff was conducted after the driver was validly stopped and arrested for driving on a suspended license

assistant: The best answer is E. holding dog sniff of a vehicle parked on a public street did not violate the fourth amendment when canine sniff was conducted after the driver was validly stopped and arrested for driving on a suspended license
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: Upon Lender’s request and at Borrower’s sole cost and expense, Borrower shall execute, acknowledge and deliver any other instruments and perform any other acts necessary, desirable or proper, as reasonably determined by Lender, to carry out the purposes of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents or to perfect and preserve any security interests or liens created by the Loan Documents.

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: Each Obligor agrees that any suit, action or proceeding with respect to this Amendment or any other Loan Document to which it is a party or any judgment entered by any court in respect thereof may be brought initially in the federal or state courts in Houston, Texas or in the courts of its own corporate domicile and irrevocably submits to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of each such court for the purpose of any such suit, action, proceeding or judgment. This Section 5 is for the benefit of the Lenders only and, as a result, no Lender shall be prevented from taking proceedings in any other courts with jurisdiction. To the extent allowed by applicable Laws, the Lenders may take concurrent proceedings in any number of jurisdictions.

assistant: Submission To Jurisdiction
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: Harris failed to show prejudice. Harris filed a postjudgment motion to alter, amend, or vacate the May 30, 2008, judgment, but she did not present any argument as to how she had been prejudiced by the transformation of the injunction hearing into a trial on the merits. In her brief on appeal, Harris has also failed to show prejudice by indicating what addi oth that Harris had abandoned the premises and that she had surrendered the lease. Harris makes no argument in her initial brief that the circuit court erred in finding that she had surrendered the lease. Because the judgment of the circuit court would be justified under either theory, I see no need to address the merits of Harris’s abandonment argument. See Kellis v. Estate of Schnatz, 983 So.2d 408, 412-13 (Ala.Civ.App.2007) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, I concur in the decision not to Options: A. holding that when trial court found two alternate independent and sufficient grounds for voiding realestate contract this court would not review alleged error regarding first ground when trial courts judgment could be affirmed on second ground which appellant did not address B. holding that judgment may be affirmed on any ground supported by record C. holding that in reviewing a district courts decision on a motion for summary judgment de novo the decision can be affirmed on any ground that finds support in the record including an alternate ground D. holding if one ground proves dispositive then this court need not address the remaining grounds relied on by a trial court when it granted summary judgment E. holding that judgment may be affirmed on any ground supported by the record

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that when trial court found two alternate independent and sufficient grounds for voiding realestate contract this court would not review alleged error regarding first ground when trial courts judgment could be affirmed on second ground which appellant did not address
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 number of shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversions of this Note (“ Conversion Shares ”) shall be determined by the quotient obtained by dividing (x) the outstanding principal amount of this Note to be converted and any accrued and unpaid interest to be converted by (y) the Conversion Price.

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: on this issue establishes both the standard of care and a breach of that standard, summary judgment was nevertheless proper because Melton failed to present evidence of a causal link between Feldman’s selection criteria and Melton’s injuries. We agree. When Dr. Gaddy was asked whether it would ever be proper for a physician to base the selection of a particular medical device on how much the physician liked the manufacturer’s sales representative, he answered, “I never use that [as a criterion].” This testimony is insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact because it only shows Dr. Feldman departed from Dr. Gaddy’s personal standard of care; it does not show Dr. Feldman departed from the generally accepted standard of care. See Guinan, 383 S.C. at 57, 677 S.E.2d at 37-38 (<HOLDING>). When Dr. Venegas was asked the same question, Options: A. holding that defendant did not preserve state constitutional challenge to experts testimony at punishment hearing because defendant relied exclusively on federal cases in arguing for exclusion of experts testimony B. holding that even if an experts testimony arguably embraced the ultimate issue such testimony is permissible as long as the experts testimony assists rather than supplants the jurys judgment C. holding experts testimony was insufficient to survive summary judgment because the testimony at most showed the defendant deviated from the experts personal standard of care rather than the generally accepted standard of care D. holding that an experts personal preference does not establish a national standard of care E. recognizing that a defendant physicians own practice was at least some evidence of the standard of care and concluding that the case was properly submitted to the jury notwithstanding the plaintiffs failure to call an independent expert on the standard of care

assistant: The best answer is C. holding experts testimony was insufficient to survive summary judgment because the testimony at most showed the defendant deviated from the experts personal standard of care rather than the generally accepted standard of care
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 Corporation shall indemnify the Indemnitee in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement with respect to all Expenses incurred or suffered by the Indemnitee as a result of the service, attendance or appearance by the Indemnitee as a witness (or in any other non-party capacity) in any Proceeding (including any part of a Proceeding such as appearance at a hearing, deposition or trial or any actions taken in response to any subpoena, order, discovery request or the like) if such service, attendance or appearance relates to or results from the Indemnitee’s Corporate Status or by reason of any action alleged to have been taken or omitted in such capacity.

assistant: Costs
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 a judicial or arbitral determination is made that any of the provisions of this Section ‎10 constitutes an unreasonable or otherwise unenforceable restriction against Executive the provisions of this Section ‎10 shall be rendered void only to the extent that such judicial or arbitral determination finds such provisions to be unreasonable or otherwise unenforceable with respect to Executive. In this regard, Executive hereby agrees that any judicial or arbitral authority construing this Agreement shall sever or reform any portion of the Territory, any prohibited business activity or any time period from the coverage of this Agreement to allow the covenants in this Section ‎10 to be enforced to the maximum extent authorized by law, and shall then enforce the covenants in this Section ‎10 as so severed or reformed.

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: The Agent shall have received a Notice of Borrowing, Letter of Credit Application, or Notice of Conversion/Continuation, as applicable, from the Borrower in accordance with Section 2.3(a) , Section 3.2 , Section 4.2 , or Section 5.2 , as applicable.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: official conduct. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Obergefell v. Hodges does not alter applicable law. — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2584, 2598, 192 L.Ed.2d 609 (2015). Whatever ramifications Obergefell may have for sexual relations beyond the approval of same-sex marriage are unstated at best, but Obergefell is expressly premised on the unique and special bond created by the formal marital relationship and children of that relationship. Id. at 2594-95. Obergefell does not create “rights” based on relationships that mock marriage, and no court has so held. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 1 . The alleged fact dispute does not exist, nor would it be material if it did. While Coker and Golden maintain they were ordered to "cease all contact” with the other (10th Cir. 2008) (<HOLDING>). 3 . Of course, even if such rights existed Options: A. holding that sexual harassment need not take the form of sexual advances or other explicitly sexual conduct in order to be actionable under title vii B. holding that baltimore city cannot be liable for police officers alleged tortious conduct where the officer was acting in a governmental capacity C. holding that police officers have a duty to conduct an investigation into the basis of the witness report D. holding that the illinois statutory definitions of sexual penetration and sexual conduct cover clearly distinct conduct and that therefore the statute was not unconstitutionally vague E. holding that governmental actions restricting police officers sexual conduct of an extramarital affair were reasonable

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that governmental actions restricting police officers sexual conduct of an extramarital affair were reasonable
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 parties hereto agree that irreparable damage would occur in the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement were not performed in accordance with their specific terms or were otherwise breached. It is accordingly agreed that each party hereto shall be entitled to an injunction or injunctions to prevent breaches of this Agreement and to enforce specifically the terms and provisions of this Agreement, without the posting of any bond, and, if any action should be brought in equity to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, none of the parties hereto shall raise the defense that there is an adequate remedy at law. All remedies, either under this Agreement, by law, or otherwise afforded to any party, shall be cumulative and not alternative.

assistant: Remedies
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 fact and conclusion of law: Here, the Defendant signed a consent form that was written in Spanish, his native language. The consent form was read to him. The Defendant indicated no lack of understanding. The Defendant did not object at any time to the consent that he gave by signing the consent form. The Defendant was cooperative in providing the consent and the Defendant provided information relating to the location of his room within the trailer on the form further indicating his consent. So I therefore conclude that the consent in this case was voluntarily given. Competent evidence in the record supports the trial court’s findings of fact and these findings support the trial court’s conclusion that defendant voluntarily consented to the search, conducted in his bedroom. See id. (<HOLDING>). The trial court properly denied defendant’s Options: A. holding that the defendant voluntarily consented to a search and the patdown of his person did not exceed the scope of his consent which included a search of the groin area B. holding that child cannot consent to search of parents bedroom C. holding that a defendants sister could consent to a search of only the common areas of their shared house and her own bedroom and explicitly stating that the sister could not consent to search the defendants bedroom because the defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in her own bedroom D. holding the defendant voluntarily consented to a search of his bedroom based upon evidence that defendant 1 did not contest the fact that he had voluntarily given verbal consent to the search 2 did not appear to be nervous or scared and was cooperative with the officers 3 led officers to his bedroom and 4 was present for the search and did not indicate at any time that he wished to revoke his consent E. holding that consent was freely and voluntarily given despite officers advisement that the police could get a search warrant if consent was not given

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the defendant voluntarily consented to a search of his bedroom based upon evidence that defendant 1 did not contest the fact that he had voluntarily given verbal consent to the search 2 did not appear to be nervous or scared and was cooperative with the officers 3 led officers to his bedroom and 4 was present for the search and did not indicate at any time that he wished to revoke his consent
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 Underlying Repurchase Counterparty’s audited annual financial statements or the notes thereto or other opinions or conclusions stated therein are not qualified or limited by reference to the status of such Underlying Repurchase Counterparty as a “going concern” or a reference of similar import.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: because if McCallum had been a partner on November 17, 1994, Judge Imber’s Order providing for the retention of his partnership interest would have been superfluous. Further, in her Order dated March 19, 1992, Judge Imber unequivocally stated that McCallum’s withdrawal from the partnership had been accepted on May 23,1991. A partner’s right of withdrawal or retirement from the partnership is an inseparable incident of every partnership; no party is compelled to continue as a partner when he chooses to withdraw. 59A Am.Jur.2d Partnership § 520 (1987). The right of a retiring partner who has not been paid for his partnership interest is that of a creditor of the partnership. Ark.Code Ann. § 4-42-614 (Michie 1987). See also Zach v. Schulman, 213 Ark. 122, 128, 210 S.W.2d 124, 128 (1948) (<HOLDING>). Further, the unequivocal language of the Options: A. holding partner owes fiduciary duty in dealings effecting the winding up of the partnership and the proper preservation of partnership assets during that time B. holding that under texas law limited partner could not bring breach of fiduciary duty claims without the partnership because the partners claims would be indirect and duplicative of the partnerships claims C. holding only a party to the partnership agreement can breach it and be liable for a breach of fiduciary duty relating to partnership obligations D. holding that a retiring partner or the representative of a deceased partner is a creditor of the partnership in the amount of the retiring or deceased partners partnership interest E. holding that under the texas uniform partnership act the government was entitled to collect the tax liability indisputably a partnership debt from any one of the general partners

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a retiring partner or the representative of a deceased partner is a creditor of the partnership in the amount of the retiring or deceased partners partnership interest
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: Predicate of Discrimination The majority apparently concludes that “vestiges” of past discrimination do not constitute a sufficient predicate for affirmative action — that there must be some kind of “smoking gun” evidence of present discrimination before a predicate can be found. The majority is, of course, wrong. The Supreme Court has stated time and again, in both Title VII and equal protection contexts, that affirmative action may be used to eradicate continuing effects (i.e., “vestiges”) of discrimination that occurred in the past. See, e.g., Wygant, 106 S.Ct. at 1847; Fullilove, 448 U.S. at 484, 100 S.Ct. at 2777; id. at 496, 100 S.Ct. at 2783 (Powell, J., concurring); Weber, 443 U.S. at 197, 99 S.Ct. at 2724; Bakke, 438 U.S. at 307-308, 98 S.Ct. .2d 557, 562-63 (7th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). The majority states that there must always be Options: A. holding that plaintiffs evidence of statistical disparities in hiring promotion and compensation was sufficient to support claim of intentional discrimination where the employment decisions were based on completely subjective criteria B. holding that statistical disparity plus other indicia of past discrimination constitute sufficient remedial predicate C. holding in the discrimination context that a plaintiff may challenge incidents which occurred outside the statute of limitations period if the various acts of discrimination constitute a continuing pattern of discrimination D. holding that an anonymous tip must have sufficient indicia of reliability to justify a stop and frisk E. holding that a thirtyone month delay could be outweighed by other indicia of reliability

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that statistical disparity plus other indicia of past discrimination constitute sufficient remedial predicate
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: Unless disclosure is otherwise required by legal or regulatory requirements, Employee shall keep all terms of this Agreement, including the existence of this Agreement and the amount of the Severance Benefit, strictly confidential. Employee shall keep this Agreement in a private location and shall use his or her best efforts to prevent this Agreement from being seen by others, including co-workers.

assistant: Confidentiality
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: one of the central issues in this case — if not the central issue in this case — is whether that agreement extends to Google’s current use of Digital Envoy’s technology. Moreover, the forum selection clause in the license agreement is not limited, as Digital Envoy seems to suggest, to claims that are dependent upon the agreement or to those that allege breach of the agreement. Rather, it encompasses “[a]ny lawsuit regarding this Agreement.” License Agreement § 12. Digital Envoy’s claims in this case clearly “regard” the license agreement, as they regard alleged activities that may or may not be covered by the agreement and, indeed, they will almost certainly fail if Google’s use of its technology is found to be within the scope of the agreement. See also Stewart Org., 810 F.2d at 1070 (<HOLDING>); Bullard v. Capital One, F.S.B., 288 F.Supp.2d Options: A. holding that a clause covering any controversy or claim related directly or indirectly to this agreement was a broad arbitration clause B. holding that when action arising under contract containing venue selection clause is filed in court other than that specified in clause case will be transferred to forum selected by contract unless venue selection clause is unreasonable and unjust or invalid due to fraud or overreaching C. holding that plaintiffs fraudulent inducement claim was subject to mandatory forum selection clause requiring litigation in florida of any claims or disputes arising from employment agreement D. holding valid forum selection clause providing that all disputes and matters whatsoever arising under in connection with or incident to this contract shall be litigated if at all in and before a court located in the state of florida quoting underlying contract E. holding that a forum selection clause encompassing any case or controversy arising under or in connection with this agreement included all causes of action arising directly or indirectly from the business relationship evidenced by the contract

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a forum selection clause encompassing any case or controversy arising under or in connection with this agreement included all causes of action arising directly or indirectly from the business relationship evidenced by the 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 191 F.Supp.3d 1046, 2016 WL 3163049, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74192 (N.D. Cal. June 7, 2016), that the residual clause in § 924(c)(3)—which Mr. Johnson challenges here—is unconstitutionally vague based on Johnson II and Dimaya. Nevertheless, the government asks the Court to reconsider its decision because, since Baires-Reyes was decided, several circuit courts have held that either the residual clause of § 924(c)(3) or § 16(b) (the statute at issue in Dimaya) is not void for vagueness. See, e.g., United States v. Prickett, 839 F.3d 697 (8th Cir. 2016) (§ 924(c)(3)(B)); United States v. Hill, 832 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2016) (§ 924(c)(3)(B)); United States v. Gonzalez-Longoria, 831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (§ 16(b)); see also United States v. Taylor, 814 F.3d 340 (6th Cir. 2016) (<HOLDING>). But see Baptiste v. AG United States, 841 Options: A. holding factor b is not unconstitutionally vague B. holding an identical residual clause in the us sentencing guidelines unconstitutionally vague C. holding that johnson did not support the defendants collateral challenge under 28 usc 2255 to his sentence enhanced under the residual clause of the ussg D. holding that the vagueness doctrine does not apply to advisory sentencing guidelines notwithstanding the governments position that the residual clause of 4b12a was unconstitutionally vague following johnson E. holding before bairesreyes was decid ed that the residual clause of 924c3 is not unconstitutionally vague recognizing that the seventh and ninth circuits recently invalidated 18 usc 16b under johnson ii s reasoning1 but declining to follow those cases

assistant: The best answer is E. holding before bairesreyes was decid ed that the residual clause of 924c3 is not unconstitutionally vague recognizing that the seventh and ninth circuits recently invalidated 18 usc 16b under johnson ii s reasoning1 but declining to follow those cases
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: exceptions.” Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219, 93 S.Ct. 2041, 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). “It is equally well settled that one of the specifically established exceptions to the requirements of both a warrant and probable cause is a search that is conducted pursuant to consent.” Id. “The Second Circuit has consistently held that consent need not be express but may be implied from an individual’s words, acts or conduct.” Seifert v. Rivera, 933 F.Supp.2d 307, 316 (D. Conn. 2013) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). “Thus a search may be lawful even if the person giving consent does not recite the talismanic phrase: ‘You have, my permission to search.’” United States v. Grant, 375 Fed.Appx. 79, 80 (2d Cir. 2010) (<HOLDING>). “So long as the police do- not coerce Options: A. holding that insufficient evidence supported the defendants conviction for possession of cocaine when officers executed a warrant on a small oneroom apartment and found large quantities of crackcocaine in plain view although the defendant supplied police with a false name when they questioned him at the apartment there was no evidence that the defendant had drugs on his person or that he had ever used cocaine B. holding that the police officers had probable cause to make a warrantless entry C. holding that the defendant had consented where he allowed the police officers into his apartment building and allowed the officers to follow him into his apartment without impediment or objection to the entry of the police D. holding that where an undercover officers initial entry into an apartment was consensual the undercover officer witnessed the commission of a crime and upon leaving the apartment the undercover officer immediately notified his backup arrest team that was waiting a short distance away the backup teams subsequent nonconsensual entry into the apartment fifteen to twenty minutes later to make arrests was a component of a single continuous and integrated police action and did not violate the fourth amendment E. holding that statements by defendant and apartment manager that defendant lived in the apartment where drugs were found demonstrated his control over the apartment even though no documents personal effects or keys were found

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the defendant had consented where he allowed the police officers into his apartment building and allowed the officers to follow him into his apartment without impediment or objection to the entry of the police
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 frauds. Defs.’ Mem. at 36-43. Zirintusa contends that record evidence creates a genuine issue of material fact as to whether she and Whitaker intended to be bound by an employment agreement and agreed to the material terms of such an agreement. Taking the facts in the light most favorable to Zirintusa, she has met her burden of demonstrating that there is a genuine issue of material fact for trial on this claim. Zirintusa’s sworn testimony, [redacted] Whitaker’s sworn statements, and statements Whitaker made to Joyce Kyakuhaire provide sufficient evidence for Zirintusa to convince a factfinder that Whitaker and Zirintusa intended to be bound by an oral employment agreement and that they agreed as to the material terms. See Sanchez, 892 A.2d at 1133; Calvetti, 346 F.Supp.2d at 103 (<HOLDING>) (alteration in original) (quoting Georgetown Options: A. recognizing application of the doctrines may involve a fact question for the jury but not finding such a question in the case before it B. recognizing that under district of columbia law what the parties deem to be the material elements of their agreement either set forth in or absent from those documents is largely a question of fact for the jury and concluding in that case that whether an enforceable oral contract was created and was subsequently breached is a question of fact for the jury to decide not this court C. holding it is a question of fact D. holding that whether a contract has been modified by subsequent oral agreement or course of dealing is a question of fact for the jury E. holding that claim construction is an issue of law for the court not a question of fact for the jury

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that under district of columbia law what the parties deem to be the material elements of their agreement either set forth in or absent from those documents is largely a question of fact for the jury and concluding in that case that whether an enforceable oral contract was created and was subsequently breached is a question of fact for the jury to decide not this court