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: at 672; see Young v. State, 283 S.W.3d 854, 872 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 130 S.Ct. 1015, 175 L.Ed.2d 622 (2009). A defendant satisfies this burden by establishing that a search or seizure occurred without a warrant. Amador, 221 S.W.3d at 672. Once the defendant has made this showing, the burden of proof shifts to the State, which is then required to establish that the search or seizure was conducted pursuant to a warrant or was reasonable. Id. at 672-73; Torres v. State, 182 S.W.3d 899, 902 (Tex.Crim.App.2005); Ford v. State, 158 S.W.3d 488, 492 (Tex.Crim.App.2005). Whether a search is reasonable is a question of law that we review de novo. Kothe v. 04 WL 213395, at *3 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 5, 2004, pet. ref'd) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 544 U.S. 961, 125 S.Ct. 1726, Options: A. holding that appellants privacy interests under the us and texas constitutions were not invaded when officer walked up appellants driveway to allow drug dog to sniff appellants garage door B. holding that deportation did not cut short appellants parole term regardless of appellants subjective beliefs C. holding officers articulated reasonable suspicion justified appellants contin ued detention to await canine unit when officer suspected appellant of drug trafficking based on appellants prior arrests for drug offenses appellants lie about his prior criminal history and appellants possession of small jewelers bags used in cocaine trafficking D. holding that a drugdetection dog sniff outside a garage door at a home was not a search under the fourth amendment E. holding that a dog sniff during a legitimate traffic stop does not constitute a search because there is no expectation of privacy in contraband and a dog sniff does not violate any privacy interest

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that appellants privacy interests under the us and texas constitutions were not invaded when officer walked up appellants driveway to allow drug dog to sniff appellants garage door
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 Participant hereby agrees to accept as binding, conclusive and final all actions, decisions and/or interpretations of the Board, its delegates, or agents, upon any questions or other matters arising under the Plan or this Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “offer to sell.” See 3D Systems, 160 F.3d at 1378. The relevant defendant there sent eight letters listing prices and describing the merchandise for sale to four different companies in California. Id. at 1376. The same defendant also sent order solicitations along with videos, sample parts and other promotional materials to eighteen other prospective customers in California. Id. U.S. Aquarium’s alleged conduct was not similar. Plaintiffs do not assert any facts indicating that U.S. Aquarium offered to sell the infringing goods to any resident of Massachusetts. In analyzing whether a defendant’s conduct amounted to an offer to sell, the Federal Circuit looked for evidence that the relevant parties discussed price, quantity and delivery dates. See HollyAnne, 199 F.3d at 1308-09 (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs here do not allege any Options: A. recognizing further that the offer of proof allows the aggrieved party to present a proper record for review on appeal and in the absence of such an offer error may not be preserved B. holding that a valid contract requires acceptance of an offer C. holding that an offer to donate cannot be an offer to sell D. holding an unaccepted settlement offer or offer of judgment does not moot a plaintiffs case emphasis added E. holding that an offer to compromise is generally not admissible as an admission

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an offer to donate cannot be an offer to sell
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a “bona fide creditor is entitled to payment regardless of the judgment’s validity, that creditor is not unjustly enriched by retention of the payment after the judgment’s reversal.” Cox, 780 N.E.2d at 962, In other words, because Burrle’s payment to Woodbridge Baric discharged an unconditional, bona fide obligation, Woodbridge Baric is not liable in restitution to the settlement program. See id. Treating an attorney with a contingency fee agreement as standing in his or her client’s shoes is only warranted to the extent the attorney’s claim against the client rests solely upon the now-failed contingency. See Mohamed, 91 F.3d at 1127 (remanding for determination of the portion of proceeds retained by attorney that represented payment of a contingent fee); Abrahami, 670 N.Y.S.2d at 468 (<HOLDING>); ef. Ehsani, 159 P.3d at 411 (“[T]here is no Options: A. holding contingency fee cases commenced prior to dissolution are assets of the firm B. holding that contingency fee contract did not cap award of attorneys fees where johnson had so held C. holding that a law firm could intervene in a former clients action to protect its interest in its contingency fee D. holding that an attorney was entitled to a quantum meruit recovery even though his oral contingency fee agreement with the client violated the ind rules of professional conduct which require a contingency fee agreement to be in writing E. holding that law firm was liable for restitution of contingency fee but not of other noncontingent fees following vacatur of judgment

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that law firm was liable for restitution of contingency fee but not of other noncontingent fees following vacatur of judgment
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: Vol.), Art. 25A, § 5(U), as Harford County has done, the General Assembly has specifically mandated in § 5(U) that the administrative remedy before the board of appeals, with judicial review of the board’s decision, “shall be exclusive.” This Court has consistently held that, where there exists a remedy before a chartered county’s board of appeals under Art. 25A, § 5(U), “a party aggrieved ... in that county must appeal to that county’s board of appeals and may not [go] directly to the circuit court.” Hope v. Baltimore County, 288 Md. 656, 657-658, 421 A.2d 576, 577 (1980) (invalidating a local ordinance which authorized an action in the circuit court without exhausting the remedy before the board of appeals). See Klein v. Colonial Pipeline Co., 285 Md. 76, 83, 400 A.2d 768, 772 (1979) (<HOLDING>). See also Agrarian, Inc. v. Zoning Inspector, Options: A. holding that the district court was authorized to remand the proceedings to the board where the board failed to make required findings B. holding that the findings of fact conclusions of law and decision signed by the school board president constituted the decision of the board C. holding that an associations president who was not a party before the board of appeals was not entitled to appeal the boards decision granting a zoning application that his association had opposed in the board proceedings D. holding that a county ordinance imposing an impact fee on new residential construction to be used for new school facilities did not constitute an unauthorized delegation of power from the county to the school board because the fundamental policy decisions were made by the county and the discretion of the school board was sufficiently limited E. holding that the harford county board of appeals was established pursuant to art 25a 5u and that a decision by the board is a prerequisite to resort to the circuit court the court further held that a harford county ordinance authorizing a party to bypass the board of appeals was ultra vires and in conflict with 5u

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the harford county board of appeals was established pursuant to art 25a 5u and that a decision by the board is a prerequisite to resort to the circuit court the court further held that a harford county ordinance authorizing a party to bypass the board of appeals was ultra vires and in conflict with 5u
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: criminality of the behavior. It remains unclear to this court whether the deciding officials at the FBI interpreted its policy to require a criminal finding, such that they could only investigate Doe if his surreptitious videotaping of his sexual liaisons was criminal. The record indicates that the deciding officials at OPR as well as Doe’s own supervisors were under the impression that Doe’s conduct violated state voyeurism laws, and was reasonably subject to criminal prosecution. On appeal, the AJ held that Doe’s conduct likely did not violate the Ohio state voyeurism law, because Doe had not shown the videotapes to any other person and the females who had been taped waived their right to privacy with respect to Doe. See State v. Frost, 92 Ohio App.3d 106, 634 N.E.2d 272, 272 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Yet, while the Board agreed with the AJ’s Options: A. holding that when an employee had his duties changed but had no interest created or protected by the constitution or state law in those duties then no liberty interest claim was stated B. holding the government waived its standing argument when it was put on notice the defendant would claim a privacy interest C. holding that the district court had no right to apply the statute of limitations sua sponte because it had been waived D. holding no violation of ohio state voyeurism statute when the privacy interest to be protected had been waived by the females who probably expected to be observed E. holding statute of limitations is jurisdictional and may be raised at any time but noting other ohio appellate courts have held the statute of limitations is not jurisdictional and may be waived if not asserted at the trial level

assistant: The best answer is D. holding no violation of ohio state voyeurism statute when the privacy interest to be protected had been waived by the females who probably expected to be observed
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: You agree that through February 28, 2018, you will respond in a timely and helpful manner via telephone or email to CSI’s questions regarding your employment with CSI, such as, but not limited to, status of projects, business contacts, location of data, passwords, etc.

assistant: Cooperation
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 judge had seen the videotape of James Eas-ley impheating Woodard, the trial court’s conclusion, without explanation or a hearing, that there was no “deceit or trickery” appears unsupported by the bare record before us. Whether the government indeed threatened Woodard with a murder charge if he did not testify before the grand jury, or diverted him from consulting with his attorney before he did so, or misled him into thinking he was not a target, are open questions of fact that must be tested at a hearing. Whether all or some of those alleged facts, even if true, undercut the voluntariness of his grand jury testimony despite the Miranda waiver, is a question that only a hearing can begin to answer. See Miller v. Fenton, 474 U.S. 104, 115, 106 S.Ct. 445, 88 L.Ed.2d 405 (1985) (<HOLDING>)”. I’m sure that the government will object to Options: A. holding that under 28 usc 2254d the ultimate question of the admissibility of a confession merits treatment as a legal inquiry requiring plenary review B. recognizing the possibility that 28 usc 1331 supplies jurisdiction for violations of international law but not reaching the ultimate merits of the issue C. holding that the ninth circuits decision exceeded the limits imposed on federal habeas review by 28 usc 2254d D. holding that a claim brought in a pro se brief that the state court did not address was not adjudicated on the merits as required by 2254d E. recognizing that the ultimate question of the voluntariness of consent is one of law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that under 28 usc 2254d the ultimate question of the admissibility of a confession merits treatment as a legal inquiry requiring plenary review
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 Debtors shall provide draft copies of all “first day” motions, applications, and other documents that any Debtor intends to file with the Bankruptcy Court to counsel to the Restructuring Support Parties at least five (5) business days prior to the date when such Debtor intends to file such document. Counsel to the Restructuring Support Parties shall use commercially reasonable efforts to provide all comments to all such documents by no later than two (2) calendar days prior to the date when the Debtors intend to file such documents, and counsel to the respective Parties shall consult in good faith regarding the form and substance of any such proposed filing with the Bankruptcy Court. The Debtors will provide draft copies of all other material pleadings any Debtor intends to file with the Bankruptcy Court to counsel to the Restructuring Support Parties at least two (2) business days prior to filing such pleading to the extent practicable. Counsel to the Restructuring Support Parties shall use commercially reasonable efforts to provide all comments to such pleadings by no later than one (1) calendar day prior to the date when the Debtor intends to file such document, to the extent practicable, and counsel to the respective Parties shall consult in good faith regarding the form and substance of any such proposed pleading. For the avoidance of doubt, the Parties agree to negotiate in good faith the Definitive Documentation (including the Cash Collateral Orders) that is subject to negotiation and completion, consistent with Sub-Clause (b) of Section 3 hereof and that notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Definitive Documentation, including any motions or orders related thereto, shall be consistent with this Agreement and otherwise shall be in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Majority Restructuring Support Parties. The Debtors shall make reasonable best efforts to (i) provide to the Restructuring Support Parties’ advisors, and direct its employees, officers, advisors and other representatives to provide the Restructuring Support Parties’ advisors, (A) reasonable access (without any material disruption to the conduct of the Debtors’ businesses) during normal business hours to the Debtors’ books and records, (B) reasonable access to the management and advisors of the Debtors for the purposes of evaluating the Debtors’ assets, liabilities, operations, businesses, finances, strategies, prospects and affairs, and (C) timely and reasonable responses to all reasonable diligence requests; and (ii) promptly notify the Restructuring Support Parties of any governmental or third party litigations, investigations or hearings against, or communications with, any of the Debtors.

assistant: Cooperation
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 Amendment may be signed in any number of counterparts, which may be delivered in original, facsimile or other electronic form (i.e., “PDF”) each of which shall be construed as an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be deemed to be a contract made under the laws of the State of New York and for all purposes shall be construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York without regard to the conflicts of laws principles thereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Count IV prayed for declaratory relief as to Dominion’s entitlement to reimbursement from State Farm and Johnson. Both Johnson and State Farm moved to dismiss, asserting that the statute of limitations barred Dominion’s claims. In particular, the defendants argued that Dominion was required to sue them within four years of March 1, 1993, the date of the accident. The circuit court entered judgment dismissing the action with prejudice, holding that the complaint on its face established that the statute of limitations on a subro-gation claim expired before the filing of the complaint. As an initial matter, we note that the statute of limitations did not bar the indemnification count. See Scott & Jobalia Const. Co., Inc. v. Halifax Paving, Inc., 538 So.2d 76, 79 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (<HOLDING>), approved, 565 So.2d 1346 (Fla. 1990); Mims Options: A. holding that fouryear limitation period on indemnification claim does not commence until the party seeking indemnification has paid a judgment or has made a voluntary payment of its legal liability to an injured party B. holding that indemnification without regard to the negligence of any party clearly and unequivocally provided bay drilling with indemnification for its own negligence C. holding that indemnification provision did not expressly state the party was seeking indemnity for its own negligence so as to satisfy express negligence test D. holding original tortfeasor had no right to indemnification because it was not an innocent party E. holding that where there has been no settlement or judgment of liability regarding the underlying claim any imposition of liability is not so immediate as to warrant declaratory relief on the issue of indemnification

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that fouryear limitation period on indemnification claim does not commence until the party seeking indemnification has paid a judgment or has made a voluntary payment of its legal liability to an injured party
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: conclude N.D.C.C. § 16.1 — 11— 36 imposes a substantial burden on the LPND and candidates’ First and Fourteenth Amendment rights by restricting their access to the general elections ballot. However, this substantial burden is not necessarily undue or excessive. An undue burden, which essentially removes all realistic chance for a minor party or independent candidate to ever access the general election ballot, cannot be justified by any state interest, regardless of how compelling the interest may be. Am. Party of Tex., 415 U.S. at 787-88, 94 S.Ct. 1296; MacBride v. Exon, 558 F.2d 443, 449 (8th Cir.1977). Thus, a ballot access statute imposing an undue burden is necessarily unconstitutional. In alleging N.D.C.C. § 16.1-11-36 is unduly burdensome, the LPND and candidates foc S.Ct. 1296 (<HOLDING>); Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431, 432, 91 Options: A. holding that the use of the term protection in the ballot title did not constitute impermissible political or emotional rhetoric B. holding a 1 signature requirement as within the outer boundaries of support the state may require before affording political parties ballot position C. recognizing howard holding that fiction of a state within a state has no validity to prevent exercise of power by state over federal area within its boundaries so long as there is no interference with federal jurisdiction D. recognizing federal enclave remains within geographic boundaries of state E. holding that the determination of the boundaries of a political subdivision of the state is a political question solely within the power prerogative and discretion of the legislature and not subject to judicial review

assistant: The best answer is B. holding a 1 signature requirement as within the outer boundaries of support the state may require before affording political parties ballot position
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) The Borrower agrees to pay to the Administrative Agent, for the account of each Lender having a Revolving Credit Commitment (in each case pro rata according to the respective Revolving Credit Commitments of all such Lenders), a commitment fee for each day from and including the Closing Date to but excluding the Final Date applicable to such Revolving Credit Commitment. Such commitment fee shall be payable for each Class of Revolving Credit Commitments quarterly in arrears (x) on the last Business Day of each fiscal quarter of the Borrower and (y) on the Final Date for such Class (for the period ended on such date for which no payment has been received pursuant to clause (x) above), and shall be computed for each day during such period at a rate per annum equal to the Commitment Fee Rate in effect on such day on the Available Commitment in effect on such day. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Borrower shall not be obligated to pay any amounts to any Defaulting Lender pursuant to this Section 4.1(a).

assistant: 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: No provisions of this Agreement shall be modified, waived or discharged unless the modification, waiver or discharge is agreed to in writing and signed by the Executive and by an authorized officer of the Company (other than the Executive). No waiver by either party of any breach of, or of compliance with, any condition or provision of this Agreement by the other party shall be considered a waiver of any other condition or provision or of the same condition or provision at another time.

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: underlying claim to be without merit for multiple reasons and appellate counsel was not ineffective for the failure to present this claim. II. Ring and Apprendi Violations with Death Penalty Statute Overton contends that his sentences of death must be vacated because Florida’s capital sentencing scheme is a violation of both Ring and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). The claim is without merit. This Court addressed the contention that Florida’s capital sentencing scheme violates the United States Constitution under Apprendi and Ring in Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So.2d 693 (Fla.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1070, 123 S.Ct. 662, 154 L.Ed.2d 564 (2002), and King v. Moore, 831 So.2d 143 (Fla.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1067, 123 S.Ct. 657, 154 L.Ed.2d 556 (<HOLDING>). CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we Options: A. holding that ring does not apply retroactively in florida postconviction proceedings to cases that were final on direct review at the time of the ring decision B. holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively in florida postconviction proceedings to cases that were final on direct review at the time of the apprendi decision C. holding that apprendi does not apply on collateral review D. holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively E. holding that apprendi does not retroactively apply to 2255 motions

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively in florida postconviction proceedings to cases that were final on direct review at the time of the apprendi decision
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 376 U.S. 189 84 S.Ct. 636 11 L.Ed.2d 602 CITY OF NEW ORLEANS et al.v.Evangeline BARTHE et al. No. 663. Supreme Court of the United States February 17, 1964 Alvin J. Liska, for appellants. Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, Ernest N. Morial and A. P. Tureaud, for appellees. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, before judgment,* pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1), to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the petition is granted. The judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana is affirmed. Turner v. City of Memphis, 369 U.S. 350, 82 S.Ct. 805, 7 L.Ed.2d 762; Watson v. City of Memphis, 373 U.S. 526, 83 S.Ct. 1314, 10 L.Ed.2d 529. 2 Mr. Justice BLACK, Mr. Justice HARLAN and Mr. Justice WHITE are of the opinion that this case is not appealable to this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1253 but is appealable to the Court of Appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and that this Court should dismiss the appeal for the Court of Appeals to consider and decide the appeal of this case now properly pending before it. See Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S. 31, 82 S.Ct. 549, 7 L.Ed.2d 512. * See Griffin v. Prince Edward County Bd., 375 U.S. 391, 84 S.Ct. 487, and cases cited.

assistant: 2
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: Guarantor has heretofore furnished to Buyer a copy of (a) its consolidated balance sheets for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 and the related consolidated statements of income and retained earnings and of cash flows for such fiscal year, with the opinion thereon of Deloitte & Touche LLP and (b) its consolidated balance sheets for each quarterly fiscal period ended June 30, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and the related consolidated statements of income and retained earnings and of cash flows for it and its consolidated Subsidiaries for such quarterly fiscal periods. All such financial statements are complete and correct and fairly present, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of Guarantor and its consolidated Subsidiaries, as applicable and the consolidated results of their operations as at such dates and for such fiscal periods, all in accordance with GAAP (other than monthly financial statements solely with respect to footnotes, year-end adjustments and cash flow statements) applied on a consistent basis. Guarantor has, on the date of the statements delivered pursuant to this Section (the “ Statement Date ”) no liabilities, direct or indirect, fixed or contingent, matured or unmatured, known or unknown, or liabilities for taxes, long-term leases or unusual forward or long-term commitments not disclosed by, or reserved against in, said balance sheet and related statements, and at the present time there are no material unrealized or anticipated losses from any loans, advances or other commitments of Seller except as heretofore disclosed to Buyer in writing.

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: 718 NW2d 386 (2006). 12 Baker v Waste Mgt of Michigan, Inc, 208 Mich App 602, 605; 528 NW2d 835 (1995). 13 See Office Planning Group, Inc v Baraga-Houghton-Keewenaw Child Dev Bd, 472 Mich 479, 488; 697 NW2d 871 (2005). 14 Fane v Detroit Library Comm, 465 Mich 68, 74; 631 NW2d 678 (2001). 15 Title Office, Inc v Van Buren Co Treasurer, 469 Mich 516, 519; 676 NW2d 207 (2004), quoting In re MCI Telecom Complaint, 460 Mich 396, 411; 596 NW2d 164 (1999). 16 Title Office, supra at 519. 17 Nicholas v Michigan State Employees Retirement Bd, 144 Mich App 70, 74; 372 NW2d 685 (1985). 18 Id.-, see MCL 8.3a. 19 Nicholas, supra at 74. 20 MCL 691.1417(2); Willett, supra at 49-50. 21 MCL 691.1417(2) and (3). 22 MCL 691.1417(3)(a). 23 MCL 691.1416(b). 24 MCL 691.1417(3)(b); see Willett, supra at 50-52 (<HOLDING>). 25 MCL 691.1417(3)(c). 26 MCL 691.1417(3)(d). Options: A. holding that the failure to object to a defect in the arbitrator selection process constituted a waiver B. holding that the failure to object to an instruction constitutes a waiver of error C. holding that a sewer trench on sewer district property was not a physical defect arid therefore was not a dangerous condition D. holding that the failure to object to a trial courts instruction constitutes waiver E. holding that an obstruction by a foreign object in a sewer line constitutes a defect

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an obstruction by a foreign object in a sewer line constitutes a defect
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All communications and notices hereunder shall (except as otherwise expressly permitted herein) be in writing and given as provided in Section 10.2 of the Credit Agreement. All communications and notices hereunder to any Subsidiary Guarantor shall be given to it in care of the Borrower as provided in Section 10.2 of the Credit Agreement.

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: right to homestead allowance and exempt property, and any family allowance to my wife shall be charged against this provision under my will.’”). 64 . AS 13.12.405 (noting "children who are adults” may select property for exempt property allowance); UNIF. PROBATE CODE § 2-403, cmt. (am. 2010) ("Unlike the exempt amount described in Sections 2-402 [Homestead Allowance] and 2-404 [Family Allowance], the exempt amount described in this section [Exempt Property] is available in a case in which the decedent left no spouse but left only adult children.”); see also WELLMAN, supra note 17, at 113 (noting that when there is no spouse, “adult children” may partake in exempt property allowance). 65 . See AS 13.12.402. 66 . Cf. AS 13.12.517 ("A provision in a will purporti P.2d 1303, 1305-06 (1982) (<HOLDING>). 69 . 956 P.2d 1230, 1232 (Alaska 1998). 70 . Options: A. holding that the debtor could retain exempt property because it was not property of the estate B. holding child specifically disinherited in will was entitled to statutory exempt property allowance C. recognizing that exempt property ceases to be property of the estate D. holding that because nondischargeable debt based on fraud was not one of the four enumerated exceptions to exempt property the exempt property was not liable for the creditors surviving claim E. holding adult emancipated child was entitled to statutory exempt property allowance despite specific will provision that under no circumstances should any share of estate go to that child

assistant: The best answer is B. holding child specifically disinherited in will was entitled to statutory exempt property allowance
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 amendment or waiver of any provision of this Agreement nor consent to any departure by any Originator therefrom shall in any event be effective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by Buyer, Administrative Agent and (if an amendment) such Originator, and if such amendment or waiver affects the obligations of the Performance Guarantor, the Performance Guarantor consents in writing thereto, and then any such waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which given. No Originator may amend or otherwise modify any other Transaction Document executed by it without the written consent of Buyer and Administrative Agent, and if such amendment or waiver affects the obligations of the Performance Guarantor, the Performance Guarantor consents in writing thereto.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Grantee, if such person is an officer, director or owner of greater than 5% of the Common Stock of the Company at such time (including, for purposes of determining stock ownership, shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of options or warrants, or conversion of securities convertible into shares of Common Stock), and if requested by the Company and the lead underwriter of any public offering of the Common Stock or other securities of the Company (the “Lead Underwriter”), hereby irrevocably agrees not to sell, contract to sell, grant any option to purchase, transfer the economic risk of ownership in, make any short sale of, pledge or otherwise transfer or dispose of any interest in any Common Stock or any securities convertible into or exchangeable or exercisable for or any other rights to purchase or acquire Common Stock (except Common Stock included in such public offering or acquired on the public market after such offering) during the 180-day period following the effective date of a registration statement of the Company filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or such shorter period of time as the Lead Underwriter shall specify. Grantee further agrees to sign such documents as may be requested by the Lead Underwriter to effect the foregoing and agrees that the Company may impose stop-transfer instructions with respect to such Common Stock subject until the end of such period. The Company and Grantee acknowledge that each Lead Underwriter of a public offering of the Company’s stock, during the period of such offering and for the 180-day period thereafter, is an intended beneficiary of this Section 11.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Co-Owners shall exercise prudent business judgment in the management of the Property. If the Co-Owners cannot agree on a prudent course of action to take relative to the Property, either Co-Owner may compel first mediation and if that does not resolve the dispute, binding arbitration before the American Arbitration Association.

assistant: Arbitration
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 shall each pay their own expenses incurred incident to this Agreement and the transactions contemplated herein, including their respective legal fees. If, however, any legal action or other proceeding is brought for the interpretation or enforcement of or otherwise under this Agreement, or to obtain damages, injunctive or equitable relief arising out of a breach of this Agreement, the prevailing Parties shall be entitled to recover from the non-prevailing Parties, all attorney’s fees and costs incurred in such action or proceeding, at both trial and appellate levels, in addition to any and all other relief relating to the attorney’s fees and costs set forth in this Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: would nevertheless violate those rights if taken in the absence of such state law. For example, a defendant convicted of larceny may be constitutionally incarcerated for 20 years if the applicable state statute provides for such a term. However, it is a violation of both state law and the federal Constitution for a state to incarcerate a defendant for larceny for a 20-year period if the applicable state statute provides for only a 10-year term. My colleagues err by concluding that merely because California could have constitutionally burdened Galin-do’s right to testify in his own defense by enacting certain rules, his constitutional rights were not violated when the state burdened that right in the absence of such rules. See, e.g., Hines v. Enomoto, 658 F.2d 667, 672 (9th Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>). Because Galindo was induced to waive his Options: A. holding that a defendant who was denied the right to exercise half of the twentysix preemptory challenges he was allowed under state law had a federal constitutional claim cognizable on habeas despite the fact that the constitution does not require that a defendant be given twentysix challenges B. holding that courts should exercise judicial restraint and decide asapplied challenges before facial challenges C. holding that the constitution prohibits a criminal defendant from engaging in purposeful discrimination on the ground of race in the exercise of peremptory challenges D. holding that where the appellants listed challenges in the statement of issues but failed to brief them the challenges were waived E. holding that sufficiency challenges are cognizable in a federal habeas proceeding

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a defendant who was denied the right to exercise half of the twentysix preemptory challenges he was allowed under state law had a federal constitutional claim cognizable on habeas despite the fact that the constitution does not require that a defendant be given twentysix challenges
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: FROM AND AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE, THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT SHALL MAKE ALL PAYMENTS IN RESPECT OF THE ASSIGNED INTEREST (INCLUDING PAYMENTS OF PRINCIPAL, INTEREST, FEES AND OTHER AMOUNTS) TO THE ASSIGNEE WHETHER SUCH AMOUNTS HAVE ACCRUED PRIOR TO OR ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE. THE ASSIGNOR AND THE ASSIGNEE SHALL MAKE ALL APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENTS IN PAYMENTS BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT FOR PERIODS PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OR WITH RESPECT TO THE MAKING OF THIS ASSIGNMENT DIRECTLY BETWEEN THEMSELVES. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT SHALL MAKE ALL PAYMENTS OF INTEREST, FEES OR OTHER AMOUNTS PAID OR PAYABLE IN KIND FROM AND AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE TO THE ASSIGNEE.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Cash Collateral (or the appropriate portion thereof) provided to reduce Fronting Exposure or to secure other obligations shall be released promptly following (i) the elimination of the applicable Fronting Exposure or other obligations giving rise thereto (including by the termination of Defaulting Lender status of the applicable Lender (or, as appropriate, its assignee following compliance with Section 10.06(b)(vi) )) or (ii) the determination by the Administrative Agent and the L/C Issuer that there exists excess Cash Collateral; provided , however , (x) Cash Collateral furnished by or on behalf of the Borrower shall not be released during the continuance of a Default, and (y) the Person providing Cash Collateral and the L/C Issuer may agree that Cash Collateral shall not be released but instead held to support future anticipated Fronting Exposure or other obligations.

assistant: Releases
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: standard of care relating to the need to administer anti-coagulation medication following surgery. Because Dr. Goldman’s report and curriculum vitae demonstrate his knowledge and experience treating patients in circumstances similar to those that form the basis of the allegations in this claim, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding Dr. Goldman qualified. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 74.401(a)(2); Rittger, 332 S.W.3d at 558 (neurologist qualified to provide expert opinion on standard of care or breach thereof by emergency room physician where prospective medical expert had practical knowledge of what is usually and customarily done by practitioners under similar circumstances); see also Barber v. Mercer, 303 S.W.3d 786, 795 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2009, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); Blan, 7 S.W.3d at 746 (condition involved in Options: A. holding article 1802 claims only survive where the conduct alleged of is based on tortious or negligent conduct different from the conduct covered by other specific labor laws involved B. holding anesthesiologist qualified to opine on conduct of surgeon in health care liability claim because anesthesiologists report tied his education training and experience to the specific alleged breach the positioning and padding of a patient during surgery not the conduct of the actual operating techniques C. holding that anesthesiologist who had participated in numerous similar surgeries and had observed proper padding and positioning technique as part of surgical team was qualified to provide expert report as to standard of care applicable to general surgeon D. holding that where the conduct forming the basis of the plaintiffs breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing claim is the same conduct forming the basis for the breach of contract claim the claims merge and there is no separate cause of action for breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing E. holding claim that negligent supervision caused assault was health care liability claim because it was inseparable from the health care and nursing services provided

assistant: The best answer is B. holding anesthesiologist qualified to opine on conduct of surgeon in health care liability claim because anesthesiologists report tied his education training and experience to the specific alleged breach the positioning and padding of a patient during surgery not the conduct of the actual operating techniques
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: her relationship with defendant, which infuriated defendant and escalated into the May 18, 2007 incident. At that time, defendant harassed Hilario and stabbed her mattress numerous times. This violent outburst was followed, only days later, by the vicious stabbing murder of Hilario. The extent that these prior acts are interwoven reflects directly upon, and is highly probative of, defendant’s motive and intent to murder Hilario. “Evidence of a prior threat made by a defendant is relevant to the question of whether the defendant ‘acted with malice or premeditation, or whether he had a motive to commit the crime.’” State v. Pule, 453 A.2d 1095, 1098 (R.I.1982) (quoting 1 Wharton, Criminal Evidence § 201 at 414-15 (13th ed.1972)); see also State v. Rios, 996 A.2d 635, 639 (R.I.2010) (<HOLDING>). Contrary to defendant’s contention, this Options: A. holding evidence of sexual assault relevant to show defendants motive in kidnapping victim B. holding that the defendants previous threatening behavior toward the victim was highly probative of his motive C. holding that evidence of assault on victim that was subsequent to the arson for which defendant was tried was admissible to show defendants bent of mind toward violence directed at the victim D. holding that evidence that the defendant had stalked threatened and assaulted the victim his exgirlfriend was evidence as to the nature of the defendants relationship with the victim and that it was relevant to establish motive E. holding that evidence of defendants threatening behavior toward a witness was admissible

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the defendants previous threatening behavior toward the victim was highly probative of his motive
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 shall reimburse Executive for reasonable expenses incurred in the performance of his duties and services hereunder and in furtherance of the business of the Company, in accordance with the policies and procedures established by the Company. No expenses incurred after the cessation of Executive’s employment shall be subject to reimbursement.

assistant: Expenses