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: plain error. Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 466-68, 117 S.Ct. 1544, 1548-49, 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997); United States v. Meester, 762 F.2d 867, 879-80 (11th Cir.1985). An appeal attacking the sufficiency of evidence is a question of law to be reviewed de novo. The test is whether — with all reasonable inferences and credibility choices made in the government’s favor — a reasonable trier of fact could conclude that the evidence establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Miles, 290 F.3d 1341, 1355 (11th Cir.2002). An appeal relying on the statute of limitations is a challenge alleging defects in the indictment. Because this challenge is being raised for the first time in this appeal, it is waived. United States v. Ramirez, 324 F.3d 1225, 1227-28 (11th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). III. DISCUSSION A The absence of an Options: A. holding that the 1999 version of the sorp like the 1997 version is nonpunitive in both intent and effect B. holding that a statute of limitations defense first raised in a motion to dismiss at the close of the plaintiffs evidence was untimely C. holding that suppression issue not raised to the district court was waived under rule 12 D. holding that the statute of limitations in a criminal case is a nonjurisdictional affirmative defense that is waived if not raised in the trial court E. holding that a statute of limitations defense raised for the first time during trial was waived construing a previous version of federal rule of criminal procedure 12 that was not substantively different from the current version

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a statute of limitations defense raised for the first time during trial was waived construing a previous version of federal rule of criminal procedure 12 that was not substantively different from the current version
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: questions, Pennsylvania counsel also raised objections about the identity of documents Bayer’s counsel reviewed with the witnesses in deposition preparation. Defendants of course have no objection to the Court coordinating with Judge New on this matter and involving him in its resolution as appropriate. Nonetheless, it is appropriate for this Court to resolve the issue to preserve efficiency and consistency in Xarelto actions, particularly in light of PTO 23 (¶ H.M.38), which contemplates that this Court will resolve any "disputes during or relating to depositions” taken in tire MDL, See, e.g,, 28 U.S.C, § 1407 (MDL procedure exists to “promote the just and efficient conduct of [related] actions” and serve “the convenience of parties”); Manual for Complex Litigation (4th) § 20.313 (<HOLDING>). * V 4 Defendants respectfully request that Options: A. holding that a discovery exception to a statute of limitation applies only to the discovery of facts not discovery of the law B. recognizing the need for limited jurisdictional discovery to establish exception to the fsia C. recognizing need for coordinating rulings on discovery disputes D. recognizing trial courts decision on discovery issues implies a finding that requested discovery was not reasonably available E. recognizing applicability of discovery rule

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing need for coordinating rulings on discovery disputes
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There is no action, suit or proceeding pending or, to Seller’s knowledge, threatened against Seller in respect of the Stations that will subject Buyer to liability or which will affect Seller’s ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the respective rights and obligations of the Parties hereunder will be deemed independent and may be enforced independently irrespective of any of the other rights and obligations set forth herein. If any provision of this Release should be held illegal or invalid, such illegality or in validity will not affect in any way other provisions hereof, all of which will continue, nevertheless, in full force and effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the Second, Fourth and Seventh Circuits that actual innocence applies to a sentencing enhancement. Even assuming it does, courts applying actual innocence for non-capital sentencing have noted that for purposes of the actual innocence exception, “ ‘actual innocence’ means factual innocence, not mere legal insufficiency.” Bousley, 523 U.S. at 623, 118 S.Ct. 1604. Thus, some circuits have held that “for the actual innocence exception to apply in the noncapital sentencing context, a movant must show that he is factually innocent of the conduct or underlying crime that serves as the predicate for the enhanced sentence.” McKay v. United States, 657 F.3d 1190, 1198-99 (11th Cir.2011) (involving career offender guidelines). See also United States v. Pettiford, 612 F.3d 270, 284 (4th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); cf. Poindexter v. Nash, 333 F.3d 372, 381-82 Options: A. holding that the actual innocence exception applies to a sentencing enhancement in a noncapital sentence B. holding that no complete innocence exception to the doench doctrine exists C. holding under acca that the actual innocence of sentence exception applies in the context of habitual offender provisions only where the challenge to eligibility stems from factual innocence of the predicate crimes and not from the legal classification of the predicate crimes D. holding that as to each predicate act the plaintiff must allege the time place and contents of the misrepresentations E. holding that presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt standard are constitutionally required in criminal cases

assistant: The best answer is C. holding under acca that the actual innocence of sentence exception applies in the context of habitual offender provisions only where the challenge to eligibility stems from factual innocence of the predicate crimes and not from the legal classification of the predicate crimes
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 definitions of terms herein shall apply equally to the singular and plural forms of the terms defined. Whenever the context may require, any pronoun shall include the corresponding masculine, feminine and neuter forms. The words “ include ,” “ includes ” and “ including ” shall be deemed to be followed by the phrase “ without limitation .” The word “ will ” shall be construed to have the same meaning and effect as the word “ shall .” Unless the context requires otherwise (i) any definition of or reference to any agreement, instrument or other document herein shall be construed as referring to such agreement, instrument or other document as from time to time amended, supplemented or otherwise modified (subject to any restrictions on such amendments, supplements or modifications set forth herein), (ii) any reference herein to any Person shall be construed to include such Person’s successors and assigns, (iii) the words “ herein ,” “ hereof ” and “ hereunder ,” and words of similar import, shall be construed to refer to this Agreement in its entirety and not to any particular provision hereof, (iv) all references herein to Articles, Sections, Exhibits and Schedules shall be construed to refer to Articles and Sections of, and Exhibits and Schedules to, this Agreement, (v) any reference to any law or regulation herein shall, unless otherwise specified, refer to such law or regulation as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, and (vi) the words “ asset ” and “ property ” shall be construed to have the same meaning and effect and to refer to any and all tangible and intangible assets and properties, including cash, securities, accounts and contract rights.

assistant: 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be terminated before the Closing by any Purchaser, as to such Purchaser’s obligations hereunder only and without any effect whatsoever on the obligations between the Company and the other Purchasers, by written notice to the other parties, if the Closing has not been consummated on or before August 17, 2017; provided , however , that such termination will not affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party (or parties).

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: is in accord with the vast majority of other decisions which address the issue. See, e.g., John Morrell & Co. v. Local Union SOkA of United Food and Commercial Workers, AFL-CIO, 913 F.2d 544, 556 (8th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 1683, 114 L.Ed.2d 78 (1991) (co-defendant could not waive appellee’s attorney-client privilege); Metro Wastewater Reclamation Dist: v. Continental Casualty Co., 142 F.R.D. 471, 478 (D.Colo.1992) (applying Colorado law in an environmental coverage dispute, the court ruled that for documents subject to a joint defense privilege, “a waiver of the privilege requires the consent of all parties participating in the joint defense.”); Construction Unlimited Corp. v. Woodfield, 1992 WL 157511, at *2, 1992 Conn.Super. LEXIS 1827, at *4 (June 15, 1992) (<HOLDING>); Ohio-Sealy Mattress Mfg. Co. v. Kaplan, 90 Options: A. holding that when an attorney represents multiple clients and a dispute between the attorney and one client later occurs there is a waiver of the privilege but only by the client asserting the liability B. holding that an attorney may only undertake to represent a new client against a former client where there is no confidential information received from the former client that is in any way relevant to representation of the current client C. holding an attorney is an agent of the client and therefore cannot conspire with the client D. holding that ambiguous agreement between attorney and client must be construed in the clients favor E. holding client is not liable for actions of attorney who misled client as to the status of case

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that when an attorney represents multiple clients and a dispute between the attorney and one client later occurs there is a waiver of the privilege but only by the client asserting the liability
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: engaged in by an employee before the commencement of his ‘principal’ activity ... and ‘postliminary activity1 means an activity engaged in by an employee after the completion of his ‘principal’ activity.” 29 C.F.R. § 790.7; see also, § 785.5. A rounding claim is something quite different; it arises, if at all, from rounding the clocked times at which employees start and stop their “principal” activities. See Lacy v. Reddy Elec. Co., No. 11-CV-52, 2013 WL 3580309, at *13-14, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97718, at *37 (S.D.Ohio, July 11, 2013) (to recover damages under rounding theory, employees must show they clocked in and engaged in principal activities before their scheduled start time, but were not compensated); see also, Gorman v. Consol. Edison Corp., 488 F.3d 586, 590 (2d Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). In short, a rounding claim cannot reasonably Options: A. recognizing the substantial body of case law discussing distinction between preliminary and postliminary activities on the one hand and principle activities of employment on the other B. holding that congress may regulate purely local intrastate activities if they are part of an economic class of activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce C. recognizing the liens on the one hand and representing that the tax claim had been released on the other D. recognizing a traditional distinction between the public and governmental acts of sovereign states on the one hand and their private and commercial acts on the other E. holding that presale activities were preliminary and did not transfer title

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the substantial body of case law discussing distinction between preliminary and postliminary activities on the one hand and principle activities of employment on the other
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: non-discriminatory reason for its employment decision.” McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802, 93 S.Ct. 1817. In contrast to Plaintiffs showing as to a pri-ma facie case, he is unable to establish that GEL’s stated reason was “merely pretex-tual” and carry his “ultimate burden of proving intentional discrimination.” Runnebaum, 123 F.3d at 164, citing, St. Mary’s Honor Ctr., 509 U.S. at 506-11, 113 S.Ct. 2742. At the outset, the undersigned notes that it is undisputed that the Plaintiff was discharged, along with Bob West and 24 other GEL C & I sales employees, as part of a division-wide RIF effecting 4% of all GEL employees. Economic hardship resulting in layoffs can be, as a matter of law, a legitimate, non-pretextual reason for reductions-in-force. Accord Rowe, 233 F.3d at 830 (<HOLDING>); and Birkbeck v. Marvel Lighting Corp., 30 Options: A. holding that where contract does not authorize employers selective discharge of union officials discharge violates section 8a3 B. holding employers rif was valid nonpretextual reason for discharge C. holding that an employee may establish that the legitimate reason for an employment decision offered by an employer is pretextual by showing by a preponderance of the evidence either that the discrim inatory reason was the true reason motivating the employers conduct or that the profferred legitimate reason was false D. holding that employers report to state employment agency providing a reason for termination that was different than employers proffered reason did not create a genuine and material issue of fact as to pretext particularly when evidence showed the inaccurate reporting benefitted employee E. holding that an atwill employee may have a cause of action for wrongful discharge when the reason for a discharge was the employees exercise of a right conferred by a wellestablished legislative enactment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding employers rif was valid nonpretextual reason for discharge
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: State v. Neri 593 A.2d 953, 956 (R.I.1991). In the case at hand, when counsel for DCYF moved that exhibits 1 and 2 be admitted into evidence as full exhibits, counsel for Mr. Patino stated his objection as follows: “I guess I’d object to the reports, your Honor, since the witness [Dr. Barron] is here to testify.” The trial justice overruled Mr. Patino’s counsel’s stated objection, and exhibits 1 and 2 were then admitted into evidence as full exhibits. In arguing on appeal that exhibits 1 and 2 should not have been admitted into evidence, Mr. Patino relies on th been admitted as full exhibits when respondent’s counsel at a later point in time raised a hearsay objection with respect to those exhibits, that hearsay objection was untimely and therefore waived. See Brown, 9 A.3d at 1245 (<HOLDING>). In view of the clear language of Rule Options: A. holding that appellant had waived any objection to an instruction that he had himself introduced and which was amended by the state without objection from appellant B. holding that the defendants objection was untimely and thus waived because the evidence to which he objected had already been presented to the jury C. holding a party failed to preserve an objection to the jury instructions where the party objected prior to the court instructing the jury but not after D. holding that the defendants objection did not suggest that the objected to statement was hearsay and therefore concluding that the defendant waived appellate review of the hearsay argument E. holding that the defendant objected to the evidence on only one ground thus he failed to preserve the additional grounds presented on appeal

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the defendants objection was untimely and thus waived because the evidence to which he objected had already been presented to the jury
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: testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise. Expert testimony is generally admissible if: “(1) it assists the trier of fact, (2) it has a reasonable basis, (3) it is relevant, and (4) its probative value outweighs its potential for prejudice.” State v. Jensen, 482 N.W.2d 238, 239 (Minn.App.1992), review denied (Minn. May 15, 1992). Although the supreme court has refused “to establish a categorical rule that expert testimony concerning all characteristics typically displayed by adolescent sexual abuse victims is admissible,” the supreme court has upheld the admission of expert testimony regarding the behavior characteristics often displayed by child sexual assault victims. State v. Hall, 406 N.W.2d 503, 505 (Minn.1987); see also State v. Myers, 359 N.W.2d 604, 609 (Minn.1984) (<HOLDING>); State v. Garden, 404 N.W.2d 912, 916 Options: A. holding admission of expert testimony not erroneous where expert described typical traits and characteristics of sexually abused children B. holding that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing expert testimony that directly linked the characteristics of sexually abused children to the complainants in this case C. holding that proper foundation existed for qualified experts testimony regarding child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome where expert had extensive training and experience with sexually abused children expert testified regarding the characteristics of the syndrome and its recognition by specific agencies and defense counsel rigorously crossexamined witness concerning the basis of her knowledge of the victims conduct D. holding that the admission of expert testimony was prejudicial where the testimony was pervasive E. holding that the testimony of an expert witness is admissible when the witness outlines the general characteristics of sexually abused children and then states that the victims symptoms are consistent with those characteristics

assistant: The best answer is A. holding admission of expert testimony not erroneous where expert described typical traits and characteristics of sexually abused children
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, during such period as a Lender is a Defaulting Lender, such Defaulting Lender will not be entitled to any fees accruing during such period pursuant to Section 2.08(a), (b) or (d) (without prejudice to the rights of the Non‑Defaulting Lenders in respect of such fees), provided that to the extent that all or a portion of the Facility Exposure of such Defaulting Lender is reallocated to the Non‑Defaulting Lenders pursuant to Section 2.21(a), such fees (other than the fee payable pursuant to Section 2.08(d)) that would have accrued for the benefit of such Defaulting Lender will instead accrue for the benefit of and be payable to such Non‑Defaulting Lenders in the applicable Tranche, pro rata from the date of such reallocation in accordance with their respective Commitments.

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: F.2d 257, 259 (11th Cir.1981)). “[I]n order to amount to reversible error, a judge’s remarks must demonstrate such pervasive bias and unfairness that they prejudice one of the parties in the case.” United States v. Ramirez-Chilel, 289 F.3d 744, 750 n. 6 (11th Cir.2002). Appellant argues that the district court judge made several negative remarks about defense counsel which resulted in prejudice to his client. Appellant argues that the “pervasively demeaning treatment” of defense counsel and the trial judge’s refusal to give a curative instruction to the jury warrant a new trial. (Appellant’s Br. at 17.) We disagree and conclude, instead, that the district court did not abuse its discretion and that a new trial is unnecessary. It is apparent from the record that on sever 0th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). The Second Circuit has held that the defense Options: A. holding that possession was not so fleeting as to extend the statute beyond its arguable limits B. holding that trial court acted properly in refusing to give jury instruction on fleeting possession theory C. holding that the defendants possession of the firearm was not so fleeting as to warrant an instruction on temporary innocent possession D. holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to give the defendants tendered instruction regarding the voluntariness of his confession E. holding that a district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to give a mere inspection instruction in a firearm possession case

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that trial court acted properly in refusing to give jury instruction on fleeting possession theory
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 Fourteenth Amendment.” Id. at 711 n. 5, 96 S.Ct. at 1165 n. 5. 12 .We note that this case is not about Beh-rens' relationship with his already-adopted child. With regard to that child, Behrens, of course, has full parental and custodial rights. Instead, this case considers whether Behrens has any protected right or interest in the prospective adoption of another child. 13 . Although the foster family relationship differs from the situation before us, we note that several circuit courts, including this Court, have held that foster parents do not have a protected liberty interest in adopting or maintaining a relationship with the children who are temporarily in their care. See, e.g., Drummond v. Fulton County Dep't of Family & Children's Servs., 563 F.2d 1200, 1206-08 (5th Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>); Rodriguez v. McLoughlin, 214 F.3d 328, 336-41 Options: A. recognizing that foster parents do not have a constitutionally protected liberty interest in a continued relationship with their foster child B. holding the foster parent did not possess a liberty interest in her relationship with the foster child C. holding foster parents not liable for willful act of their foster child D. holding there is no protected liberty interest in maintaining the foster family relationship E. holding that there was no liberty interest for the typical foster parents in question

assistant: The best answer is D. holding there is no protected liberty interest in maintaining the foster family relationship
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: contractors. Such decisions are not, of course, wholly immune from review. The Secretary’s discretion, like that of a prosecutor, remains “subject to constitutional constraints,” including those “imposed by the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” Armstrong, 517 U.S. at 464, 116 S.Ct. 1480. Moreover, the Commission retains authority to adjudicate — subject to the appropriate standard of review — whether safety violations have in fact occurred. See 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(d), 823(d). In this case, however, Twentymile has stipulated that the conditions cited by the Secretary constitute violations of safety standards. See ALJ Decision, 25 F.M.S.H.R.C. at 353. We therefore grant the Secretary’s petition for review. The decision , 459-60 (D.C.Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); In re Sealed Case, 131 F.3d 208, 216 Options: A. recognizing that an agencys decision to terminate an employee is presumed correct B. holding that judicial review of an administrative agencys decision is limited solely to whether given the relevant standard and facts the agencys decision was arbitrary illegal capricious or unreasonable C. holding icc decision not to investigate nonreviewable D. holding that the faas decision not to renew an aircraft examiners authority is nonreviewable E. holding that an agencys decision to reach a settlement is nonreviewable

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an agencys decision to reach a settlement is nonreviewable
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: bond “for the protection of all persons supplying labor and material” under the contract. 40 U.S.C. § 3131(b)(2). The universe of claimants who may obtain relief upon a payment bond is therefore limited to those who furnish labor or materials. Clifford F. MacEvoy Co. v. United States, 322 U.S. 102, 107-08, 64 S.Ct. 890, 88 L.Ed. 1163 (1944). Loans for payments to laborers or suppliers, however, do not themselves constitute labor or material. Bill Curphy Co. v. Elliott, 207 F.2d 103, 109 (5th Cir.1953). A lender of funds for such payments therefore is not a proper claimant under a Miller Act payment bond. Id.; 8 Government Contracts: Law, Administration & Procedures § 49A.20[14] (Matthew Bender 2013); see also Bank of Auburn v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 295 F.2d 641, 642 (5th Cir.1961) (<HOLDING>); United States ex rel. Fid. Nat’l Bank v. Options: A. holding that a plaintiffs lack of knowledge regarding the number of affected persons does not bar class certification when defendant has the means to identify those persons at will B. holding that payment bond protecting suppliers of labor and material does not extend to a bank which might lend money for the purpose of paying for such work and materials C. holding that bond protecting those persons who do work or furnish materials did not protect bank lending money to contractor for payment to those persons D. holding that a prosecutor has an obligation to protect not only the public interest but the innocent and to safeguard the rights guaranteed to all persons including those who may be guilty E. holding that persons supplying labor or materials to a subcontractor on a public works project may seek reimbursement under a statutory payment bond provided by the general contractor

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that bond protecting those persons who do work or furnish materials did not protect bank lending money to contractor for payment to those persons
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party giving any notice required or permitted under this IP Agreement will give the notice in writing and use one of the following methods of delivery to the party to be notified, at the address set forth below or another address of which the sending party has been notified in accordance with this Section 7.4 as follows: (i) personal delivery; (ii) facsimile or telecopy transmission with a reasonable method of confirming transmission; (iii) commercial overnight courier with a reasonable method of confirming delivery; or (iv) pre-paid, United States of America certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. Notice to a party is effective for purposes of this IP Agreement only if given as provided in this Section 7.4 and will be deemed given on the date that the intended addressee actually receives the notice.

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: The Plan will be governed by and construed in accordance with ERISA and, to the extent not preempted thereby, the laws of the State of California, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflicting provision or rule (whether of the State of California or any other jurisdiction) that would cause the laws of any jurisdiction other than United States federal law and the law of the State of California to be applied. In furtherance of the foregoing, applicable federal law and, to the extent not preempted by applicable federal law, the internal law of the State of California will control the interpretation and construction of the Plan, even if under such jurisdiction’s choice of law or conflict of law analysis, the substantive law of some other jurisdiction would ordinarily apply. Any statutory reference in the Plan shall also be deemed to refer to all applicable final rules and final regulations promulgated under or with respect to the referenced statutory provision.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except solely with respect to the release agreement to be executed by Employee pursuant to Section 25 below, this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto, including any and all agreements discussed and/or previously made with T.B.A. Insurance, Inc., or any other entity related in any way to T.B.A. Insurance, Inc., or State National Insurance Company, or to any of their subsidiaries, affiliates or related companies, relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, whether oral or written, with respect to the same.

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: § 523(a)(8) and whether the Debtor may attempt to discharge the amount through the plan confirmation process. Initially, the parties dispute whether the amount at issue represents a default penalty or collection costs incurred in USAFI’s attempt to collect upon the student loan debt. The Debtor argues that the amount is a default penalty that may either be discharged or cured through payment of the student loan principal and interest. The Debtor is correct that default penalty provisions, meant to penalize a debtor rather than repay the loan or reimburse a creditor for costs, have been held to be outside the discharge exception for student loans found in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8). See Rural Kentucky Medical Scholarship Fund, Inc. v. Lipps (In re Lipps), 79 B.R. 67, 70 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1987) (<HOLDING>). However, USAFI’s “Statement of Purchased Options: A. holding that 1322b2 prohibits modification of the interest rate on the loan on the debtors principal residence B. holding that accruing interest at the default interest rate was not a penalty but the addition of a 5 late charge on top of the default interest would have been unreasonable pursuant to 506b and would have therefore been a penalty C. holding that in a chapter 7 case postpetition interest on a nondischargeable tax claim is also nondischargeable D. holding that the principal and interest of a student loan was nondischargeable but that the default penalty arising from the debtors failure to practice medicine in the contractually agreed upon area was dischargeable E. holding that where parties to an oral loan agreed that the loan would be repaid on demand the statute of limitations did not begin to run until the date plaintiff demanded repayment of the loan

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the principal and interest of a student loan was nondischargeable but that the default penalty arising from the debtors failure to practice medicine in the contractually agreed upon area was dischargeable
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 and Lead Investor may terminate the appointment of the Escrow Agent hereunder upon written notice specifying the date upon which such termination shall take effect, which date shall be at least thirty (30) days from the date of such notice. In the event of such termination, the Company and Lead Investor shall, within thirty (30) days of such notice, appoint a successor escrow agent and the Escrow Agent shall, upon receipt of written instructions signed by the Company and Lead Investor, turn over to such successor escrow agent all of the Escrow Securities; provided , however , that if the Company and Lead Investor fail to appoint a successor escrow agent within such thirty (30)-day period, such termination notice shall be null and void and the Escrow Agent shall continue to be bound by all of the provisions hereof. Upon receipt of the Escrow Securities, the successor escrow agent shall become the escrow agent hereunder and shall be bound by all of the provisions hereof and Escrow Agent shall be relieved of all further obligations and released from all liability thereafter arising with respect to the Escrow Securities and under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Maker hereby consents to the jurisdic tion of any state or federal court located in the County of New York, State of New York, and, to the extent permitted by applicable law, waives any objection based on venue or forum non conveniens with respect to any action instituted in any such court and agrees that process in any such action will be sufficient if served on the Maker by certified mail, return receipt requested or in any manner provided by law. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the holder of this Note shall have the right to bring any action or proceeding against the Maker or Maker ’ s property in the courts of any other jurisdiction such holder deems necessary or appropriate in order to enforce the obligations of the Maker under this Note. 10. Choice of Law . This Note shall be deemed to have been made and delivered in the State of New York and the rights and obligations of the Holder and the Maker under this Note shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, without regard to the conflict of laws principles thereof other than mandatory provisions of law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487, 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985); Leary v. Daeschner, 228 F.3d 729, 742 (6th Cir.2000); Williams v. Kentucky, 24 F.3d 1526, 1537-38 (6th Cir.1994). 6 . The landmark decision in Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 542, 105 S.Ct. 1487, 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985) noted that due process requires ."some pretermination opportunity to respond” only where a person is deprived of a "significant property interest.” Whether a five-day suspension without pay is a significant loss of property has not been decided by the Supreme Court. Berardinelli v. Town of Newburgh, 895 F.Supp. 56, 57, n. 3 (S.D.N.Y.1995). The issue has received inconsistent treatment from the lower courts. Compare Garraghty v. Jordan, 830 F.2d 1295, 1299 (4th Cir.1987)(<HOLDING>) and Boals v. Gray, 775 F.2d 686, 689 (6th Options: A. holding that fiveday suspension was not a de minimis deprivation B. holding that district court properlydiscounted four calls as de minimis C. holding that a robbery of 40 to 50 satisfied the de minimis standard D. holding that to demonstrate retaliation complainedof action must be more than de minimis E. holding that a suspension from employment and deprivation of duties and equipment constitute discrete acts

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that fiveday suspension was not a de minimis deprivation
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: When a reference is made in this Agreement to a Section, Article, Exhibit or Schedule such reference shall be to a Section, Article, Exhibit or Schedule of this Agreement unless otherwise indicated. The table of contents and headings contained in this Agreement or in any Exhibit or Schedule are for convenience of reference purposes only and shall not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. All words used in this Agreement will be construed to be of such gender or number as the circumstances require. Any capitalized terms used in any Exhibit or Schedule but not otherwise defined therein shall have the meaning as defined in this Agreement. All Exhibits and Schedules annexed hereto or referred to herein are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement as if set forth herein. The word “including” and words of similar import when used in this Agreement will mean “including, without limitation,” unless otherwise specified. The words “hereof,” “herein” and “hereunder” and words of similar import when used in this Agreement shall refer to the Agreement as a whole and not to any particular provision in this Agreement. The term “or” is not exclusive and shall be construed to include “and/or.” The word “will” shall be construed to have the same meaning and effect as the word “shall.” References to days mean calendar days unless otherwise specified. When an applicable provision refers to a “party” or the “parties” in the context of a two-party relationship or interaction, the Buyer and the Buyer Parent, collectively, shall be deemed to be a single party, and the Seller and the Parent shall be deemed a single party.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Transactions (a) do not require any consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, except such as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect and except filings necessary to perfect Liens created under the Loan Documents, (b) will not violate any Requirement of Law applicable to the Company or any Subsidiary, except to the extent any such violations, individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, (c) will not violate or result (alone or with notice or lapse of time or both) in a default under any indenture or agreement governing Indebtedness, any material agreement or any other material instrument binding upon the Company or any Subsidiary or their respective assets, or give rise to a right thereunder to require any payment, repurchase or redemption to be made by the Company or any Subsidiary or give rise to a right of, or result in, termination, cancelation or acceleration of any obligation thereunder, except to the extent any such violations, individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, and (d) will not result in the creation or imposition of any Lien on any asset now owned or hereafter acquired by the Company or any Subsidiary, except Liens 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Seller and each Other Seller shall jointly and severally reimburse, hold harmless, indemnify and defend Buyer, its successors and assigns and their respective agents, employees, officers, trustees, members and retirants and the Property and the Community from and against any and all obligations, liabilities, claims, liens or encumbrances, demands, losses, damages, causes of action, judgments, costs and expenses asserted by third parties (including attorneys’ fees), whether direct, contingent or consequential and no matter how arising (“ Losses and Liabilities ”) in any way (i) related to the Property and/or the Community and arising or occurring prior to the Closing, including for any Seller Retained Liabilities (which for the avoidance of doubt, shall include the matters set forth on Schedule 7.1.6; (ii) related to or arising from any act, conduct, omission, contract or commitment of either Seller related to the Property or the Community Employees; or (iii) resulting from any breach or inaccuracy of representation or warranty or other breach or default by either Seller under this Agreement.

assistant: Indemnity
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: weight.’” NationsBank of N.C., N.A. v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 513 U.S. 251, 257 1957 (quoting Chevron, supra, at 844). Haggar, 526 U.S. at 392. Applying these principles in this action, the court notes that the HMT statute does not address the specific method for refunding HMT collections, and therefore, the court must consider whether Customs’ refund regulation reasonably accomplishes the statutory purposes. The purpose of the HMT statute is to provide revenue for the maintenance and development of U.S. ports and harbors. Although the section related to export-related payments was declared unconstitutional, the rest of the statute remains in effect. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 4461, 4462 (2000); Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. United States, 200 F.3d 1361, 1368-69 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (<HOLDING>). Customs must still collect and deposit Options: A. holding boards unconstitutional regulations severable from remainder B. holding export provision severable from other hmt provisions C. holding that an arbitration provision that waived class actions and thus required the consumer to pay a 125 fee to vindicate a 150 claim was substantively unconscionable but also holding that the waiver provision was severable from the remainder of the arbitration provision which would be enforced D. holding hmt on exports unconstitutional E. holding that costsplitting provision in pep boys arbitration agreement is severable from the rest of the agreement

assistant: The best answer is B. holding export provision severable from other hmt provisions
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 in the SEC Reports, there is not pending or, to the Company’s Knowledge, threatened or contemplated, any action, suit or proceeding to which the Company is a party or of which any property or assets of the Company is the subject before or by any court or governmental agency, authority or body, or any arbitrator, which, individually or in the aggregate, (i) adversely affects or challenges the legality, validity or enforceability of any of the Transaction Documents or the Securities or (ii) could, if there were an unfavorable decision, have or reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. There are no current or pending legal, governmental or regulatory actions, suits or proceedings that are required to be described in the SEC Reports that have not been so described. Neither the Company nor any director or officer of the Company is or has been the subject of any Action involving a claim of violation of or liability under federal or state securities laws or a claim of breach of fiduciary duty. There has not been, and to the Company’s Knowledge, there is not pending or contemplated, any investigation by the Commission involving the Company or any current or former director or officer of the Company. The Commission has not issued any stop order or other order suspending the effectiveness of any registration statement filed by the Company under the Exchange Act or the Securities Act.

assistant: Litigations