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: is an impermissible intrusion onto tribal rights. Williams, 358 U.S. at 223; see also American Indian Law Deskbook, 118, 138-39 (Nicholas J. Spaeth et al. eds. 1993). Furthermore, it is undisputed that the Washoe Tribe has enacted a broad regulatory scheme in which the Tribe has expressly reserved jurisdiction over civil actions against its members arising on its lands. Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California Law and Order Code. Tribal jurisdiction extends to all tribally held lands as defined in the Tribe’s Constitution. In addition, the Tribal Court has reserved to itself subject matter jurisdiction over all civil causes of action, and personal jurisdiction over any person served within the territorial jurisdiction of the Tribe. Furthermore, it is undisputed th 3 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977) (<HOLDING>)). For the state court to assert its Options: A. holding federal government could not prosecute an american indian who on indian territory had murdered another member of his tribe as federal statute excluded such crime from federal criminal jurisdiction in favor of allowing the indians to engage in selfgovernment ie the regulation by themselves of their own domestic affairs the maintenance of order and peace among their own members by the administration of their own laws and customs B. holding that indian tribes lack tribal jurisdiction over crimes committed by nonmember indians within the tribes reservation C. holding that arizona could not impose an income tax on reservation indians D. holding that the admissibility of expert testimony was governed by state law E. holding that assumption of jurisdiction by the state court would infringe upon the right of reservation indians to make their own laws and be governed by them

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that assumption of jurisdiction by the state court would infringe upon the right of reservation indians to make their own laws and be governed by them
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 Equity Commitment Letter may not be amended or otherwise modified without the prior written consent of Par and Piceance. Together with the Agreement and the Definitive Documents, this Equity Commitment Letter constitutes the sole agreement, and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings and statements, written or oral, between Par and Piceance with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby. Each of the parties acknowledges that each party and its respective counsel have reviewed this Equity Commitment Letter and that any rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Equity Commitment Letter.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: states that a lack of due diligence should not prevent a party from presenting the new evidence. See Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 29 cmt. j (1982); see also Barker v. Brinegar, 346 N.J.Super. 558, 788 A.2d 834, 840 (2002) (“[T]he judge may consider diligence, or lack of diligence, ... [but] a lack of diligence does not require invocation of collateral estoppel particularly where, as here, plaintiff attempted to obtain Dr. Matthew’s evaluation prior to the arbitration proceeding.”). But see Klein v. Comm’r, 880 F.2d 260, 263 (10th Cir.1989) (“A party may not assert a change in controlling facts when the facts allegedly showing a change in circumstances could have been discovered in the exercise of due diligence.”); Calcutt v. Comm’r, 91 T.C. 14, 25, 1988 WL 71262 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Having concluded that the fairness Options: A. holding that posttrial discovery of asserted newly discovered evidence did not satisfy the requirement that the evidence must be such as with reasonable diligence could not have been discovered and produced at trial B. holding that evidence which by due diligence could have been produced in the first proceeding is considered to have been available at the first proceeding and therefore will not preclude the application of collateral estoppel C. holding that nonconstitutional claims that could have been raised on direct appeal may not be asserted in a collateral proceeding D. holding that a workers compensation proceeding is a legal proceeding E. holding that the party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted must have been a party to the prior action

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that evidence which by due diligence could have been produced in the first proceeding is considered to have been available at the first proceeding and therefore will not preclude the application of collateral estoppel
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 waiver of any term, provision or condition of this Agreement or Work Order shall be effective only if it is in writing and no waiver, in any one or more instances, shall be deemed to be or construed as a further or continuing waiver or estoppel of any such term, provision or condition or any other term of this Agreement or a Work Order. No failure or delay by either Party in exercising any right or remedy under this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of such right, nor shall it prevent or restrict its further exercise. The Parties acknowledge and agree that they have not relied upon any representations made before contract in deciding to enter into this Agreement and the Parties waive all and any right to pursue any claim for misrepresentation except for fraudulent misrepresentation.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Guaranty and all obligations (other than those expressly stated to survive such termination) of the Administrative Agent and each Guarantor hereunder shall terminate and the Guarantors shall be automatically released from their obligations under this Guaranty (other than those expressly stated to survive such termination), all without delivery of any instrument or performance of any act by any Person, upon (a) Payment in Full, or (b) the release of such Guarantor pursuant to Section 9.02 of the Credit Agreement. At the request and sole expense of any Guarantor following any such termination or release, the Administrative Agent shall take all such action reasonably requested by such Guarantor to evidence the release of such Guarantor from its obligations under this Guaranty.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “there may have been—well, I would have ... gotten—and I can’t remember whether it was an e-mail or something from Tim Leitaker saying it was okay for me to do that.” The executive was then asked whether there was something in writing other than the email, .to which he replied, “I don’t remember the exact communication, but, yeah ... I guess I’m positive that it was communicated in writing. If not, it still had to be signed off on every time I turned.a loan in for it.” Even viewing the executive’s testimony about the purported side agreement in favor of the borrowers, there is no evidence from which a jury might conclude that all of the conditions - necessary to overcome section 1823(e) are present. At most, the statements are evidence of communicat d 378, 383-84 (11th Cir. 1991) (<HOLDING>); FDIC v. Gardner, 606 F.Supp. 1484, 1488 (S.D. Options: A. holding that a written form despite outlining the obligations of both parties and existing in the insolvent banks records did not meet section 1823es requirements because it had not been executed by the failed bank B. holding that a copy of an agreement executed by an insolvent bank found in the draft documents of the banks attorney did not satisfy section 1823es requirements because it was not an official record of the failed bank C. holding that the fdic may rely on erroneous bank records to determine whether there was an insured deposit at the time of the banks failure D. holding that a bank customer did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records maintained by the bank E. holding that courts comments after the parties had reached a definite agreement that had been reduced to writing and executed by the defendant and the government all without any direct involvement by the district judge did not violate rule 11

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a written form despite outlining the obligations of both parties and existing in the insolvent banks records did not meet section 1823es requirements because it had not been executed by the failed bank
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: omnibus hearing, however, the state agreed that Aubid did not obtain the gun with intent to use it on the victim, and thus the robbery evidence does not establish motive. The state argues on appeal that the robbery evidence shows: (1) a general motive to shoot someone in the time period in which the kidnap-murder of the victim occurred; and (2) the “manner in which [he] obtained the contraband and intoxicants upon which he purports to base his defense of intoxication.” Because these issues were raised for the first time on appeal and fail to provide Aubid with a motive for participating in any crime against Paul Antonich, we conclude the trial court correctly determined the state was required to give notice to introduce the evidence. See State v. Grube, 531 N.W.2d 484, 489 (Minn.1995) (<HOLDING>). We need not address whether the state has Options: A. holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be asserted for the first time on appeal B. holding that issues not raised before a district court are waived on appeal C. holding issues not raised before the district court are not preserved for appeal D. holding that issues not properly presented to the bankruptcy court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal E. holding that issues not raised before the trial court cannot be raised on appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that issues not raised before the trial court cannot be raised on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Plan shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Company and the Covered Executives, their respective successors, executors, administrators, heirs and permitted assigns. In the event of a Covered Executive’s death after a Terminating Event but prior to the completion by the Company of all payments due him under this Plan, the Company shall continue such payments to the Covered Executive’s beneficiary designated in writing to the Company prior to his death (or to his estate, if the Covered Executive fails to make such designation).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Interest and fees hereunder shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360 days and for the actual number of days elapsed. If any payment to be made hereunder becomes due and payable on a day other than a Business Day , the due date thereof shall be extended to the next succeeding Business Day and interest thereon shall be payable at the applicable Contract Rate during such extension.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: look at (1) whether the circumstances involved were under a party’s own control, In re Payless Cashways, Inc., 230 B.R. 120, 139 (8th Cir.BAP1999); United States ex rel. Elec. Mach. Enters, of P.R., Inc. v. Fraya, 170 F.R.D. 346, 349 (D.P.R.1997); In re Diggs, 220 B.R. 247, 252 (Bkrtcy.M.D.N.C.1998), and (2) whether the party was paying appropriate attention to the matter in light of the surrounding circumstances. Dishman v. Dishman, 37 N.C.App. 543, 246 S.E.2d 819, 822 (1978). The courts have been reluctant to find excusable neglect in circumstances where ealled-for action was under the control of the party seeking relief and that party failed to act reasonably to make sure that the act was performed. United States ex rel. Elec. Mach. Enters. of P.R., Inc. v. Fraya, 170 F.R.D. at 349 (<HOLDING>); In re Bautista, 235 B.R. 678, 682 Options: A. holding because trial court fully considered plaintiffs response to summary judgment motion failure to render summary judgment without notice or hearing harmless thus trial court was not required to vacate the summary judgment and then reinstate it to accomplish the same end B. holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that a motion for summary judgment was not opposed C. holding that arguments not presented to the district court in response to a motion for summary judgment are waived D. holding that assuming that a secretary had filed a response to a summary judgment motion was not excusable neglect E. holding that a plaintiff may not raise a new legal claim in response to summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that assuming that a secretary had filed a response to a summary judgment motion was not excusable neglect
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 PLAN ADMINISTRATOR shall be deemed to have delegated its duties and powers for determining benefits, eligibility for benefits and/or other PLAN operations to a third party administrator, insurer or other person where such person has been appointed by the PLAN ADMINISTRATOR or its delegate to make such determinations. In such case, such other person shall have the duties and powers as the PLAN ADMINISTRATOR as set forth in this PLAN document. Any action of the delegate in the exercise of such delegated duties and powers shall have the same force and effect for all purposes hereunder as if such action had been taken by the PLAN ADMINISTRATOR and shall be afforded the same deference and arbitrary and capricious level of review afforded to the PLAN ADMINISTRATOR.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and sent by overnight delivery service (such as Federal Express), in which case notice shall be deemed given on the day after the date sent, or by personal delivery, in which case notice shall be deemed given on the date received, or by certified mail, in which case notice shall be deemed given three (3) days after the date sent, or by electronic mail (with copy by overnight delivery service), in which case notice shall be deemed given on the date sent, to the appropriate address set forth below or at such other place or places as either Buyer or Seller may, from time to time, respectively, designate in a written notice given to the other in the manner described above. In such case a copy of such notice shall also be sent by e-mail to counsel for the party at the e-mail address as appears below.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No modification, amendment, extension, discharge, termination or waiver of any provision of this Agreement, or of the Note, or of any other Loan Document, nor consent to any departure by Borrower therefrom, shall in any event be effective unless the same shall be in a writing signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought, and then such waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance, and for the purpose, for which given. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, no notice to, or demand on Borrower, shall entitle Borrower to any other or future notice or demand in the same, similar or other circumstances.

assistant: Modifications
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: misrepresentation, and civil conspiracy. As discussed above, we review the trial court’s determination of this issue de novo. To analyze this issue, we must decide issues raised by the parties regarding the legal standard to apply in making this segregation determination. Then, we apply that legal standard to the record in this case to determine if the trial court reversibly erred in determining that segregation as between the Theft Act claim and the remaining claims is required. 1. What is the proper legal standard for determining whether the “inextricably intertwined” exception applies? The parties, most courts addressing this issue, and this court all agree that the Sterling case provides the legal standard for determining segregation issues ex.App.Amarillo 1997, writ denied) (<HOLDING>); Panizo v. YMCA of the Greater Houston Area, Options: A. holding that tort claims were arbitrable because they arose out of and were related to contract B. holding segregation was required in part because the claims have significantly different elements than the claim for which attorneys fees are recoverable C. holding that contract and tort claims were capable of segregation in part because these claims required proof of different elements D. holding segregation was necessary because breachofcontract claim required proof of different elements than other claims E. holding trial court should have required segregation because tort claims entailed proof of facts unnecessary for proof of the contract claim

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that contract and tort claims were capable of segregation in part because these claims required proof of different elements
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, Crowley, 226 Mass, at 585, 116 N.E. 241— of the broader rule that a mortgagee must have a valid claim to the debt before attempting foreclosure. Requiring reunification of the note and mortgage prior to the notice of sale arises logically as a rule from the fact that a mortgage urt in In re Marrón, foreclosure of a mortgage does not become impossible only when the debt has been extinguished; rather, “[a] mortgage cannot be made available without connecting it with the debt or duty secured thereby.” Sanger, 78 Mass, at 367 (emphasis added). Were a mortgagee without an interest in the debt able to exercise the power of sale, the note would be left outstanding as a valid obligation of the mortgagor to its holder. Cf. Cooperstein v. Bogas, 317 Mass. 341, 344, 58 N.E.2d 131 (1944) (<HOLDING>). “[T]he holder of the note could attempt to Options: A. holding that evidence of similar incidents is probative as to notice element in premises liability case B. recognizing defense in securities case C. recognizing double liability as a concern in a reach and apply case D. recognizing that injury is a prerequisite to liability E. recognizing contribution in the appropriate case

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing double liability as a concern in a reach and apply case
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that Defendants violated a clearly established Constitutional right, Miller analogizes the role a Sheriffs Deputy plays as a law enforcement officer to that of a member of a state militia in times of crisis. Miller points to N.J.S.A. § 38A:l-l(a), (g) & (h) defining militia as “all the military ... land, aú and sea forces established by State or Federal laws, as applicable.” In relation to this statutorily constructed authority conferred upon the Governor to call on members of the state militia, i.e., the National Guard or Army, in times of crisis, Miller urges his role in the post>-9/ll world to be analogous to that of a militiaman. Miller’s interpretation of the Second Amendment is unpersuasive. See generally, United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 59 S.Ct. 816, 83 L.Ed. 1206 (1939) (<HOLDING>) While local law enforcement officers Options: A. holding there was no abuse of discretion where although the district court did not discuss the relationship that the damages awarded had to the damages sought the district courts opinion made clear that it was well aware of this relationship B. holding that the second amendment fully applies to state and local regulation through the fourteenth amendment C. holding second amendment right is incorporated against the states through fourteenth amendment D. holding that the defendant could not avail himself of second amendment protection because his weapon possession bore no reasonable relationship to the preservation of a well regulated militia E. holding that the designation of a defendant as sexually oriented offender for kidnapping his child where there was no evidence of sexual motivation bore no rational relationship to purpose of the statute

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the defendant could not avail himself of second amendment protection because his weapon possession bore no reasonable relationship to the preservation of a well regulated militia
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance by each Loan Party of the Loan Documents to which it is a party (a) do not require any consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, except those as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect and except for filings necessary to perfect or maintain perfection of the Liens created under the Loan Documents, (b) will not violate any Requirement of Law applicable to such Loan Party or any of its Subsidiaries or any judgment, order or ruling of any Governmental Authority which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, (c) will not violate or result in a default under (i) the Organizational Documents of such Loan Party or any of its Subsidiaries or (ii) any Contractual Obligation of such Loan Party or any of its Subsidiaries or any of its assets or give rise to a right thereunder to require any payment to be made by such Loan Party or any of its Subsidiaries which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect and (d) will not result in the creation or imposition of any Lien on any asset of such Loan Party or any of its Subsidiaries, except Liens (if any) created under the Loan Documents.

assistant: No Conflicts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: disposes of all of plaintiffs’ claims, direct or derivative. Whether a suit falls within the exception is a threshold question of subject-matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., Tippett v. United States, 108 F.3d 1194, 1196-97 (10th Cir.1997); Daigle v. Shell Oil Co., 972 F.2d 1527, 1537 (10th Cir.1992). Neither party suggests that the inquiry differs if the suit is direct or derivative. Only if this court were to hold that there is subject-matter jurisdiction under the FTCA, .or under another waiver of immunity, would we have to decide whether Kansas law entitles plaintiffs to sue directly, derivatively, or neither. This is true even if we also deem the latter questions "jurisdictional.” See Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 66-67, 117 S.Ct. 1055, 137 L.Ed.2d 170 (1997) (<HOLDING>); Cross-Sound Ferry Servs., Inc. v. ICC, 934 Options: A. holding that federal courts may not consider other issues before resolving standing an article iii jurisdictional matter B. holding that court may assume standing despite grave doubts in order to decide mootness as both questions concern article iii jurisdiction not the merits C. holding that article iii standing is not a prerequisite to intervention D. recognizing that while in a diversity case a federal court may not address the plaintiffs claim unless the plaintiff has standing to sue under state law the plaintiff must also meet article iii standing requirements E. holding that article iii standing is necessary for intervention

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that court may assume standing despite grave doubts in order to decide mootness as both questions concern article iii jurisdiction not the merits
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: Woodmancy v. Colvin, No. 5:12-CV-991 GLS, 2013 WL 5567553, at *2 (N.D.N.Y. Oct. 9, 2013), we conclude that substantial evidence supports the agency determination that Woodmancy did not carry her burden of demonstrating that these conditions were severe impairments. Nor are we persuaded that there is any unwarranted inconsistency between the ALJ’s determination that these conditions did not cause serious impairment while substance abuse did. While these conditions may all have required ongoing treatment, substantial record evidence indicated that Wood-mancy either failed to pursue or to benefit from treatment for substance abuse but did benefit from treatment for the other conditions in ways that minimized their impairing effect. See Mongeur v. Heckler, 722 F.2d 1033, 1039 (2d Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>). 2. Residual Functional Capacity Woodmancy Options: A. holding that receiving advice or treatment during the exclusionary period for a condition which proves to be the same condition the claimant seeks benefits for qualifies as a preexisting condition regardless of whether there was an accurate diagnosis B. holding that once one severe impairment is found the combined effect of all impairments must be considered even if other impairments would not be severe C. holding that for a plaintiff to prove that he has a record of impairment under 42 usc 121022b there must be a record of an impairment that substantially limits one or more of his major life activities D. holding condition was not severe impairment where it improved from treatment E. holding that torture is something more severe than the kind of treatment that would suffice to prove persecution

assistant: The best answer is D. holding condition was not severe impairment where it improved from treatment
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: license, and any permit, firearms identification card, license, certification, certificate, form of register, of registration statement [ ]• maintained by any State or municipal-governmental agency. Pursuant to Executive Order No. 9 (Sept. 30, 1963), the Attorney General is one of the State-government officials specifically authorized to adopt regulations exempting records from disclosure under the Right-to-Know Law. As a consequence -of 0the Attorney General’s readoption of N.J.A.C. 13:54-1.15, the investigative-file documents clearly are exempted from public disclosure under the Right-to-Know Law, which renders moot plaintiffs claim of access to the documents pursuant to the Right-to-Know Law. See In re Application of Madin/Lord Land Dev. Int’l, 103 N.J. 689, 695, 512 A.2d 490 (1986) (<HOLDING>); In re “Plan For Orderly Withdrawal From New Options: A. holding court precluded from reviewing denial of motion for reconsideration where petitioner did not separately seek review of that decision B. holding that wjhere the right to compensation depends upon which of two conflicting medical theories should be accepted the issue is peculiarly for commissions determination C. holding that deference to the guidelines depends on the thoroughness of the commissions analysis and the validity of its reasoning D. holding that pinelands commissions new rules rendered moot the issue whether localplanning agency of uncertified municipality had right to seek commissions reconsideration in developmentapplication review process E. holding that a corporations payment of commissions to one of its owners was constructively fraudulent under dcl 273 and justified piercing the corporate veil because the commissions were inappropriately transferred for the owners personal use without compensation to the corporation apparently as part of a kickback scheme devised by the owner

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that pinelands commissions new rules rendered moot the issue whether localplanning agency of uncertified municipality had right to seek commissions reconsideration in developmentapplication review process
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: times, specifically required them to state, in their Claim to the Cargo, the specific interest in the Cargo “by which the claimant demands restitution.” Furthermore, on August 9, 2000, counsel for Intamex and Amaleo issued a letter of security to Hawkspere in which they stated “[i]n consideration for your releasing to our clients Intamex and Amal-eo or their designates, certain Intamex and Amaleo cargo ” (emphasis added). And it was Intamex and Amaleo who posted the security for the Cargo’s release. The Shippers had a duty under Supplemental Admiralty Rule C to disclose the alleged non-ownership of the Cargo. Their silence on the point thus effectively constituted a material misrepresentation. See Edell & Assoc., P.C. v. Law Offices of Peter Angelos, 264 F.3d 424, 440 (4th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, the statement in their August 9, Options: A. holding that silence can constitute misrepresentation when there is duty to speak B. holding that upon choosing to speak one has a duty to be both accurate and complete C. holding that objection was called for by the party to be estopped since an estoppel may arise as effectually from silence where it is a duty to speak as from words spoken D. holding that the government can use prearrest silence for impeachment purposes against a defendant because no government action induced the silence E. holding where there is no duty to defend there is no duty to indemnify

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that silence can constitute misrepresentation when there is duty to speak
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 court nevertheless held that such damages were available under Delaware law. Id. at 312-13. In the court’s view, the only argument against awarding such damages along with other pecuniary losses is that the growth of the decedent’s estate and whether the plaintiff would naturally have survived the decedent are “matter[s] of speculation.” Id. at 312. The court discounted this argument by noting that, in general, damages in the wrongful death area are impossible to calculate exactly and that whether the plaintiff would naturally have survived the decedent may be answered by referring to longevity tables. See id. The court also found that legal commentators supported awarding such damages. See id; see also Esquilin v. Waterman Steamship Corp., 196 F.Supp. 600, 600-01 (D.P.R.1961) (<HOLDING>); cf. Moss v. Executive Beechcraft, Inc., 662 Options: A. holding that severance payments are compensable as actual damages and not speculative in nature like damages for lost opportunities and profits B. holding that first amendment principles preclude recovery under state law for damages caused by speech or other protected conduct C. holding such damages available where local law silent on issue speculative nature of damages does not preclude recovery D. holding that nominal damages award was appropriate where the evidence supporting the damages was speculative E. holding that no recovery exists for speculative damages

assistant: The best answer is C. holding such damages available where local law silent on issue speculative nature of damages does not preclude recovery
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if a court of competent jurisdiction finds the foregoing arbitration provisions invalid or inapplicable , you and duolingo agree that all claims arising out of or related to these terms and conditions must be resolved exclusively by a state or federal court located in the county of allegheny in the commonwealth of pennsylvania , and you and duolingo each agree to submit to the exercise of personal jurisdiction of such courts for the purpose of litigating all such claims .

assistant: 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g), the Company has filed all reports, schedules, forms, statements and other documents required to be filed by the Company under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, including pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) thereof, for the two years preceding the date hereof (or such shorter period as the Company was required by law or regulation to file such material) (the foregoing materials, including the exhibits thereto and documents incorporated by reference therein, being collectively referred to herein as the “SEC Reports”). As of their respective dates, the SEC Reports complied in all material respects with the requirements of the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, as applicable, and none of the SEC Reports, when filed, contained any untrue statement of a material fact or omitted to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The Company is not now or has not in the last year been an issuer subject to Rule 144(i) under the Securities Act. The financial statements of the Company included in the SEC Reports comply in all material respects with applicable or accounting requirements and the rules and regulations of the Commission with respect thereto as in effect at the time of filing. Such financial statements have been prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis during the periods involved (“ GAAP ”), except as may be otherwise specified in such financial statements or the notes thereto and except that unaudited financial statements may not contain all footnotes required by GAAP, and fairly present in all material respects the financial position of the Company and its consolidated Subsidiaries as of and for the dates thereof and the results of operations and cash flows for the periods then ended, subject, in the case of unaudited statements, to normal, immaterial, year-end audit adjustments.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The terms and conditions of this Agreement and any and all related negotiations are confidential and will not be disclosed to any third party except the Purchaser’s and Seller’s counsel and agents and representatives who need such information to carry out the terms of the Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company will require any successor (whether direct or indirect, by purchase, merger, consolidation or otherwise) to all or substantially all of the business and assets of the Company, by a written agreement, to expressly assume and agree to carry out the provisions of this Plan in the same manner and to the same extent that the Company would be required to carry them out if no such succession had occurred.

assistant: Successors
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: S1753-02 (daily ed. March 27, 2000) (statement of Sen. Hatch); see also H.R. Rep. No. 105-358, pt. 1, at 35 (“[CAFRA] would [also] amend section 2461 of title 28 to give the government the option of pursuing criminal forfeiture as an alternative to current civil forfeiture if civil forfeiture is otherwise authorized.”). Thus, the intent of Congress when passing CAFRA was two-fold — to expand the criminal forfeiture authority to the civil forfeiture context and to require that appropriate due process procedures were implemente no meaningful difference between the propriety of an in personam money judgment arising directly under 21 U.S.C. § 853 ... and the propriety of an in personam money judgment under 21 U.S.C. § 853 by way of 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c).”); Capoccia, 402 Fed.Appx. at 641 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the court concludes that under Options: A. holding that while some courts have adopted the intent to silence requirement we see no reason why the forfeiture doctrine should be limited to such cases B. holding that reference to ordinance is not improper reference to an external document because injunction sufficiently describes the act sought to be enjoined and reference to the ordinance as stated in the injunction is merely to give further notice as to the enjoined conduct but the reference was unnecessary to give the appellants sufficient notice of that conduct C. holding that when a plea agreement or consent order does not explicitly prohibit seeking the forfeiture of substitute assets via civil forfeiture under 981 the statutory scheme controls and requires the forfeiture of substitute assets pursuant to 2461c and 853p D. holding that a single implicit reference to the email in which the complaint makes no explicit reference to nor does it quote at all from is insufficient to establish that the email was incorporated by reference into the complaint E. holding that since the reference in 2461c to the procedures of 853 includes the latter statutes implicit authorization of in personam money judgments we see no reason why this reference should not also include the forfeiture of substitute assets

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that since the reference in 2461c to the procedures of 853 includes the latter statutes implicit authorization of in personam money judgments we see no reason why this reference should not also include the forfeiture of substitute assets
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: “whether the harm to [plaintiff] was foreseeable in the first instance.” Commerce Bank/Pennsylvania v. First Union Nat’l Bank, 911 A.2d 133, 139 (Pa.Super.Ct.2006). Therefore, it is not enough to claim that Boeing knew, at the time, that Plaintiffs husband was exposed to asbestos while working there. Rather, Plaintiff must allege that Boeing knew, or should have known, that if Mr. Gillen took home his work clothing, Mrs. Gillen would be exposed to friable asbestos while washing his work clothing at home. This Plaintiff has not done. Moreover, even if Plaintiff was deemed a foreseeable third party, foreseeability “is not alone determinative of the duty question,” and “is not necessarily a dominant factor” in the duty assessment under Pennsylvania law. Seebold, 57 A.3d 1232, 1249 & n. 26 (<HOLDING>). For example, in Estate of Witthoeft v. Options: A. holding that it is the exclusive province of the judge in nonjury trials to assess the credibility of witnesses and to assign weight to their testimony B. holding that courts must examine the facts surrounding the publication the context in which the statements were made and the nature of the language used C. holding that due process requires a hearing appropriate to the nature of the case D. holding the court must assign appropriate weight to each policy factor depending on the nature and context of the duty in question E. holding that it was appropriate for the trial court to find that lack of a prior criminal record was not a mitigating factor in light of the violent nature of the crime committed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the court must assign appropriate weight to each policy factor depending on the nature and context of the duty in question
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: is situated. See, e.g., Crawford v. Silette, 608 F.3d 275, 277-78 (5th Cir.2010). 7 . Peter Paul asserts that "[t]he Texas Supreme Court has already rejected an attempt to apply the local action rule to a case just like this,” citing Smith v. Hall, 147 Tex. 634, 219 S.W.2d 441, 444 (1949). According to Peter Paul, "Smith rightly holds that the local action rule does not apply to 'a suit for specific performance of a contract to convey an interest in land, or for Cir.2010) ("The local action doctrine holds that ‘federal and state courts lack jurisdiction over the subject-matter of claims to land located outside the state in which the court sits.' ") (citing Hayes v. Gulf Oil Corp., 821 F.2d 285, 287 (5th Cir.1987)); Tex. & P. Ry. Co. v. Gay, 86 Tex. 571, 26 S.W. 599, 607-09 (Tex.1894) (<HOLDING>), aff'd, 167 U.S. 745, 17 S.Ct. 1000, 42 L.Ed. Options: A. holding that louisiana courts lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate possession of land situated in texas and stating it has sometimes been stated that the principles thus announced furnished simply a technical rule in reference to venue and that they had no bearing on the more substantial question of jurisdiction but the language of the great judge is not susceptible of such a construction B. recognizing the same rule in texas courts C. holding that the contract language the courts of texas usa shall have jurisdiction precluded federal jurisdiction by explaining that flederal district courts may be in texas but they are not of texas emphasis in original D. holding that the decision not to remove materials during canal construction was based not on policy judgments but on technical scientific engineering considerations and thus is not susceptible to policy considerations E. holding that the improper appointment of a judge to a case deprived the court of jurisdiction to rule on any motions pending before that judge the orders entered by that judge were entered without jurisdiction of the court and were thus void

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that louisiana courts lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate possession of land situated in texas and stating it has sometimes been stated that the principles thus announced furnished simply a technical rule in reference to venue and that they had no bearing on the more substantial question of jurisdiction but the language of the great judge is not susceptible of such a construction
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 498; Corley, 246 F.Supp.2d at 573. But we rely solely on those terms except in the case of ambiguity, Koelsch, 132 S.W.3d at 498, which is not an issue here. We may not, therefore, add terms not present in the easement, as Bluebonnet’s and Petro-Guard’s conten tion would require. See Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Schaefer, 124 S.W.3d 154, 161-68 (Tex.2003) (stating, in context of insurance-coverage determination, “we may neither rewrite the parties’ contract nor add to its language”); Helmerich & Payne Int’l Drilling Co. v. Swift Energy Co., 180 S.W.3d 635, 640-42 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet.) (declining to “rewrite” drilling contract or “add to it under the guise of interpretation”); see also Oxford v. Williams Cos., 154 F.Supp.2d 942, 949-50 (E.D.Tex.2001) (memo op.) (<HOLDING>). 2. Technological Advancement or Development Options: A. recognizing that the dominant easement owner not the servient estate owner bears responsibility for maintaining an easement B. holding that owners of a dominant estate had a duty to keep the easement in a proper state of repair to avoid damaging the servient estate through erosion C. holding that owners of access easement had no claim for severance damages arising from condemnation of servient tenement D. holding that language of easement did not support restrictive interpretation proposed by landowner owners of servient estate E. holding that the burden on the servient estate cannot be increased without the consent of the owners of the servient estate and that the owner of the dominant estate to which the appurtenant easement is attached has no power to convey or expand use of that easement in connection with a tract of land owned by another

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that language of easement did not support restrictive interpretation proposed by landowner owners of servient estate
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 is made and granted pursuant to the Plan and is in all respects limited by and subject to the terms of the Plan. In the event of any inconsistency between the Plan and this Agreement, the terms of the Plan shall control.

assistant: Construction