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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No consent, waiver, approval or authorization is required from any person or entity (that has not already been obtained) in connection with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by Purchaser or the performance by Purchaser of the transactions contemplated hereby.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If and only if tax withholding applies with respect to the grant, vesting, ownership or disposition of Profits Interest Units, the Company or an Affiliate may withhold from the Recipient’s wages, or require the Recipient to remit to the Partnership, the Company or an Affiliate, any applicable required tax withholding.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any payment of cash or any issuance or transfer of shares of Common Stock or other property to the Participant, or to the Participant’s legal representative, heir, legatee or distributee, in accordance with the provisions hereof, shall, to the extent thereof, be in full satisfaction of all claims of such persons hereunder. The Company may require the Participant or the Participant’s legal representative, heir, legatee or distributee, as a condition precedent to such payment or issuance, to execute a release and receipt therefor in such form as it shall determine.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: It is the desire and intent of the Parties hereto that the provisions of this Agreement be enforced to the fullest extent permissible under the laws and public policies applied in each jurisdiction in which enforcement is sought. Accordingly, if any particular provision of this Agreement shall be adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, prohibited or unenforceable under any present or future law, and if the rights and obligations of any party under this Agreement will not be materially and adversely affected thereby, such provision, as to such jurisdiction, shall be ineffective, without invalidating the remaining provisions of this Agreement or affecting the validity or enforceability of such provision in any other jurisdiction; furthermore, in lieu of such invalid or unenforceable provision there will be added automatically as a part of this Agreement, a legal, valid and enforceable provision as similar in terms to such invalid or unenforceable provision as may be possible. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such provision could be more narrowly drawn so as not to be invalid, prohibited or unenforceable in such jurisdiction, it shall, as to such jurisdiction, be so narrowly drawn, without invalidating the remaining provisions of this Agreement or affecting the validity or enforceability of such provision in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Lenders shall have received (i) audited consolidated financial statements of APLP and its consolidated Subsidiaries for the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years, (ii) unaudited interim consolidated financial statements of APLP and its consolidated Subsidiaries for each fiscal quarter ended after the date of the latest applicable financial statements delivered pursuant to clause (i) of this paragraph and ended at least sixty (60) days prior to the Effective Date as to which such financial statements are available, and (iii) satisfactory projections through 2021 (which shall be prepared on a quarterly basis for each fiscal quarter in calendar years 2017 and 2018 and on an annual basis thereafter); provided that the Borrower shall be deemed to have furnished the information required by this clause (iii) if APLP shall have timely made the same available on “EDGAR” (or any successor thereto) and/or on its home page on the worldwide web (currently located at http://www.archrock.com).

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: upon any termination , discontinuation , or cancellation of services or your account , the following provisions of these terms will survive : arbitration notice ; content ownership ; rights granted by you ; effect of termination on trading items , virtual money , and virtual goods ; feedback ; disclaimer of warranties ; indemnity ; limitation of liability ; dispute resolution ; general terms ; and this sentence of termination .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: must include the same wording as the questioned document, written twenty times. Indeed, such repetition allows an expert handwriting analyst to evaluate, inter alia, whether the defendant was purposefully attempting to conceal idiosyn-cracies of his own handwriting style when producing the exemplar. See generally Forensic Identification of Handwriting, 27 Am.Jur. Proof of Facts 3rd 489 (updated Sept. 2005). 6 . It has also been held that "[h]andwriting and voice exemplars fall on the side of the line where no reasonable expectation of privacy exists... and consequently outside of the protection of the Fourth Amendment.” United States v. Nix, 465 F.2d 90, 93 (5th Cir.1972) (citations omitted); see also United States v. Mara, 410 U.S. 19, 21-22, 93 S.Ct. 774, 35 L.Ed.2d 99 (1973) (<HOLDING>). 7 . See, e.g., United States v. Knight, 607 Options: A. holding the same with respect to violations of the fifth amendment B. holding that both fourth amendment warrant and probable cause and fifth amendment due process requirements apply to civil forfeiture proceedings C. recognizing that in addition to the fifth amendment there also is no legitimate fourth amendment interest violated by the compulsory production of characteristics exposed to the public D. recognizing a public employees first amendment right to address matters of legitimate public concern E. holding that arrest in backyard violated fourth amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that in addition to the fifth amendment there also is no legitimate fourth amendment interest violated by the compulsory production of characteristics exposed to the public
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: to commit himself to such an alternative to a federal sentence. 2 . Defendant also raises two additional arguments: (1) that the district court improperly based its sentence on the defendant’s refusal to waive his constitutional and statutory rights to oppose his deportation; and (2) that the district court failed to appreciate the scope of its authority to consider, as a mitigating circumstance upon which to base a departure, defendant's vulnerability and susceptibility to abuse in prison due to his physical condition. Both arguments lack merit. As to the first argument, the conditioning of a downward departure on the surrender of a statutory right to a deportation hearing would not have offended due process. See United States v. Galvez-Falconi, 174 F.3d 255, 260 (2d Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). See generally United States v. Options: A. recognizing that a defendant may appeal a district courts refusal to depart downward if the sentence was imposed in violation of law because the district court misconstrued its authority to depart B. holding that district court had authority to grant section 5k20 downward departure despite governments opposition C. holding that the district court was not required to state affirmatively on the record that it knew it possessed the authority to depart downward D. holding that a circuit court has no jurisdiction to review a district courts discretionary decision not to depart downward from the guidelines but would have jurisdiction if the district court based its decision on the belief that it did not have the authority to depart E. holding that where a defendant malees a showing that the act of consenting to deportation carries unusual assistance to the administration of justice district court has authority under ussg 5k20 to depart downward in absence of the governments consent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that where a defendant malees a showing that the act of consenting to deportation carries unusual assistance to the administration of justice district court has authority under ussg 5k20 to depart downward in absence of the governments consent
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Co., 120 F.R.D. 82, 86-87 (N.D.Ind.1987)); Aiken v. Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co., 151 F.R.D. 621, 623 n. 2 (E.D.Tex.1993) (citing Shields v. Sturm, Ruger & Co., 864 F.2d 379, 382 (5th Cir.1989); United States v. AT & T, 642 F.2d 1285, 1299 (D.C.Cir.1980)). Unlike the attorney-client privilege, the burden of proving waiver of work-product protection falls on the party asserting waiver. See High Tech Communications, 1995 WL 83614, at *5. C. Joint Defense Privilege The “joint defense” privilege, sometimes called the “common interest” or “community of interest” rule is not an independent privilege, but merely an exception to the general rule that no privilege attaches to communications that are made in the presence of or disclosed to a third party. See In re Auclair, 961 F.2d at 69 (<HOLDING>); LTV, 89 F.R.D. at 604 (The joint defense Options: A. holding that the joint defense privilege preserved the attorneyclient privilege against waiver in the context of a group with common interests seeking common representation B. holding that an invocation of the advice of counsel defense waives the attorneyclient privilege C. holding that failure to timely assert attorneyclient privilege constitutes waiver D. holding that the information is not protected by attorneyclient privilege E. recognizing privilege

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the joint defense privilege preserved the attorneyclient privilege against waiver in the context of a group with common interests seeking common representation
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 by either party (i) immediately upon notice to the other party in the event that the other party shall have materially failed to comply with any of the material provisions of this Agreement on its part to be performed during the term of this Agreement or if any of the representations, warranties, covenants or agreements of such party contained herein shall not have been materially complied with or satisfied within the times specified or (ii) by either party on 60 days written notice.

assistant: Terms
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 provision of this Agreement is independent, and if any provision of this Agreement shall be found or held to be unenforceable or invalid in any jurisdiction by any competent authority, the remaining provisions shall remain enforceable and valid in such jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, be binding upon, and be enforceable by the Company and its successors and assigns. The Optionee shall not assign (except as provided by Section 9 hereof) any part of this Agreement without the prior express written consent of the Company.

assistant: Assignments
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 Waiver sets forth the entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to the waiver to the Credit Agreement set forth herein and supersedes all prior understandings and agreements, whether written or oral, between the parties hereto relating to such waiver. No representation, promise, inducement or statement of intention has been made by any party that is not embodied in this Waiver, and no party shall be bound by or liable for any alleged representation, promise, inducement or statement of intention not set forth herein.

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: a statutory power of attorney did not give her the ability to practice law without a license. The doctrine of judicial estoppel binds Shell to her previous acknowledgment that a power of attorney is not a proxy for a law license. See Estate of Burford v. Burford, 935 P.2d 943, 947 (Colo.1997) (explaining judicial estoppel). Judicial estoppel is “an equitable doctrine by which courts require parties to maintain a consistency of positions,” thereby “preventing the parties from deliberately shifting positions to suit the exigencies of the moment.” Id. Under this doctrine, Shell cannot contradict her acknowledgment in her 2001 Stipulation that statutory powers of attorney do not allow her to practice law. See Leonia Bank v. Kouri, 3 A.D.3d 213, 772 N.Y.S.2d 251, 255-56 (N.Y.App.Div.2004) (<HOLDING>); see also Hall v. GE Plastic Pac. PTE Ltd., Options: A. holding judicial estoppel inapplicable where record revealed no legal pleadings signed by the claimant under oath asserting a position contrary to the one asserted in the instant case B. holding that stipulation precluded litigant from asserting contrary position in subsequent case C. holding that the plaintiff was precluded from asserting her failure to promote claim as a continuing violation D. holding appeal waiver in conditional guilty plea agreement precluded defendant from asserting new argument on appeal in support of suppression motion E. recognizing principle that as between common parties a position taken in an earlier judicial proceeding estops a litigant from adopting an inconsistent position in a later proceeding

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that stipulation precluded litigant from asserting contrary position in subsequent 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: considered or honored. In sum, it is reasonable to infer procedural unconscionability”). Hernandez contends that, beyond the adhesive nature of the agreement, the fact that CarMax did not give her a copy of the DRRP before she signed the DRA adds an additional layer of procedural un-conseionability. She notes that courts have concluded that “[t]he failure to attach the applicable rules referred to in the agreement, or provide them to employee at the time the agreement is entered into establishes further procedural unconscion-ability.” California courts have found agreements procedurally unconscionable if they fail to attach the rules pursuant to which the arbitration will be conducted. See, e.g., Trivedi v. Curexo Technology Corp., 189 Cal.App.4th 387, 393, 116 Cal.Rptr.3d 804 (2010) (<HOLDING>); Fitz v. NCR Corp., 118 Cal.App.4th 702, 721, Options: A. holding that an arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable because it did not attach the aaa rules B. holding failhre to provide a copy of arbitration rules supports a finding of procedural unconscionability C. holding that an arbitration in accordance with aaa rules is a binding arbitration D. holding that failure to attach the aaa arbitration rules weighed in favor of a finding of procedural unconscionability E. holding that courts should address a procedural unconscionability defense to the enforcement of an arbitration provision

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that failure to attach the aaa arbitration rules weighed in favor of a finding of procedural unconscionability
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: Refining and Marketing Co., supra, this court held that defendant Getty’s failure to promote Cuffy and its alleged breach of an EEOC Settlement Agreement in 1981 were insufficiently related to Getty’s suspension of Cuffy in 1984 to constitute a continuing violation: Moreover, the discriminatory nature of each act is not of itself sufficient to demonstrate the necessary relationship. There is simply no intrinsic connection between these events, other than the involvement of the defendant, to show that they are part of a pattern of discrimination. These acts are best understood as “isolated instances of discrimination,” and insufficient to support a continuing violation theory. Cuffy, 648 F.Supp. at 810; see also Bronze Shields, Inc. v. N.J. Dept. of Civil Serv., 667 F.2d at 1080-1084 (<HOLDING>). In this case, Carr alleges two discrete Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs causes of action were preempted because their claims were premised on the existence of an erisa plan B. holding that if undisclosed evidence might have affected the disposition of the summary judgment motion the plaintiffs chose not to disclose the basis of their claim and they did so at their own risk C. holding that plaintiffs could not relitigate their claim that they were entitled to vsf benefits and that while plaintiffs could have raised additional claims in one or more of the foregoing actions they opted not to do so and they are barred by res judicata from doing so now D. holding that neglect was not excusable where the defendants did not do all that they were required to do after they received the summons and complaint in that they did not contact a lawyer or make any other arrangements with respect to their defense E. holding that continued use of an eligibility roster for hiring did not constitute an ongoing violation so as to preserve plaintiffs claims after they learned their names were excluded from the roster

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that continued use of an eligibility roster for hiring did not constitute an ongoing violation so as to preserve plaintiffs claims after they learned their names were excluded from the roster
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the sale proceeds as disposable income to be distributed under the plan. b. Case Law Case law supports this analysis. Only regular income and substitutes therefor can be counted in the determination of disposable income for the purposes of the chapter 13 test. See, e.g., Hagel, 184 B.R. at 799 (social security disability payments); In re Jackson, 173 B.R. 168, 171 (Bankr.E.D.Mo.1994) (workers compensation proceeds); In re Minor, 177 B.R. 576, 582-83 (Bankr.E.D.Tenn.1995) (same). The test is whether the asset in question is an anticipated stream of payments. If it is a stream of payments, the payments must be included in projected income. If the asset is not a stream of payments, it is not included. See, e.g., Solomon v. Cosby (In re Solomon), 67 F.3d 1128, 1132 (4th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); In re Bicsak, 207 B.R. 657, 661-61 Options: A. holding that a claimant is required to establish a physical inability to follow any occupation from which he can earn a reasonably substantial income rising to the dignity of an income or livelihood although the income may not be as much as was earned prior to the disability B. holding that projected disposable income for an abovemedian income debtor would not include a deduction for contractual payments on undersecured debt that the debtor would not actually be required to pay because the plan bifurcated the claim or surrendered the collateral C. holding that net farm income when applied to a producer in the fishing industry means net income from all fishing activity not just that income from a particular commodity and further providing that the regulations make it reasonably clear that the determination of net fishing income is not to be made solely on the basis of tax return information if other information is relevant to determining the producers net income from all fishing sources D. holding a state cannot impose an income tax on indians whose income is solely from reservation sources E. holding that withdrawals from individual retirement accounts were not income or income replacements because the debtor was not receiving a regular distribution from the accounts

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that withdrawals from individual retirement accounts were not income or income replacements because the debtor was not receiving a regular distribution from the accounts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you will fully cooperate with supercell to investigate any suspected unlawful , fraudulent or improper activity , including , without limitation , granting supercell access to any password-protected portions of your account .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Without the prior written consent of Landlord (which consent Landlord shall not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay, due consideration being given to the experience of the proposed assignee or subtenant in the conduct of businesses permitted by this Lease and also to the financial stature of such proposed assignee or subtenant), neither Tenant, nor Tenant’s legal representatives or successors in interest shall assign this Lease, by operation of law or otherwise, or sublet the whole or any part of the Leased Premises. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Tenant may sublet up to 11,000 sq. ft to WEG Electric Corp. or any affiliate thereof without Landlord’s consent. Without limitation, the term “assign” as used herein, shall include: (i) an assignment of a part interest in this Lease or a part interest in the Premises; and (ii) any merger, consolidation, transfer (singly or in combination) of shares or interests constituting more than half of the total shares or interests outstanding or any other transaction the effect of which is directly or indirectly to transfer to any third party the benefits of this Lease, unless the successor would have an equal or greater net worth than Tenant in which case such transfer shall not be included in the term “assign”. Upon thirty day’s written notice to Landlord by Tenant, Landlord shall consent to Tenant’s assignment of its rights under this Lease: (a) to a wholly owned subsidiary of Tenant; or (b) as security in favor of any bank or lending institution to secure any loan or other financial accommodation by such bank or lending institution to Tenant, provided that such assignment shall not encumber, and shall remain subordinate to, the interest of Landlord or Landlord’s mortgagee in the Leased Premises and that such collateral assignment shall be consistent with the terms of this Lease, and provided, further, that Landlord and such mortgagee shall enter into a written agreement to that effect, in form reasonably satisfactory to Landlord.

assistant: Assignments
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: Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to the extent that Indemnitee is or may be, by reason of Indemnitee’s Corporate Status, made a witness or otherwise asked to participate in any Proceeding, whether instituted by the Company or any other person, and to which Indemnitee is not a party, Indemnitee shall be advanced and indemnified against all Expenses actually and reasonably incurred by Indemnitee or on Indemnitee’s behalf in connection therewith within ten days after the receipt by the Company of a statement or statements requesting any such advance or indemnification from time to time, whether prior to or after final disposition of such Proceeding. Such statement or statements shall reasonably evidence the Expenses incurred by Indemnitee. In connection with any such advance of Expenses, the Company may require Indemnitee to provide an undertaking and affirmation substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The representations and warranties of the Purchaser shall be true and correct in all material respects as of the date when made and as of the Initial Closing and as of each Settlement Date as though made at that time (except for representations and warranties that speak as of a particular date, which shall be true and correct in all material respects as of such dates).

assistant: Warranties
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: alternatives at the time it was passed, Renton would have virtually been a “non-case” — because there were no adult establishments in existence when the ordinance was passed, the ordinance could not have unconstitutionally limited them as of that time. The Court, of course, did not take this easy route, but rather evaluated the availability of alternatives at some date subsequent to enactment (precisely which date is unclear from the opinion). In doing so, the Court explained that “the First Amendment requires only that Renton refrain from effectively denying respondents a reasonable opportunity to open and operate an adult theater within the city.” Id. at 54, 106 S.Ct. 925 (emphasis added); see also Boss Capital, Inc. v. City of Casselberry, 187 F.3d 1251, 1254 (11th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>), abrogated on other grounds by City of Options: A. holding that courts should consider a number of factors including the type and complexity of the case and whether the indigent is capable of adequately presenting the case B. holding that a prima facie case of discrimination is not established merely by the number of peremptory strikes against blacks in cases where the percentage of blacks on the empaneled jury is higher than the percentage of the venire pool C. recognizing that in determining numerosity courts must consider the geographical dispersion of the class the ease with which class members may be identified the nature of the action and the size of each plaintiffs claim D. holding that in evaluating adequacy courts may consider the communitys population and size the acreage available to adult businesses as a percentage of the overall size the location of available sites the number of adult businesses already in existence and the number of adult entertainment establishments wanting to operate in the community in the future E. holding that the court must consider the adequacy of the inquiry into the conflict the extent of the conflict and the timeliness of the motion

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that in evaluating adequacy courts may consider the communitys population and size the acreage available to adult businesses as a percentage of the overall size the location of available sites the number of adult businesses already in existence and the number of adult entertainment establishments wanting to operate in the community in the future
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: Monterey, Ltd., 526 U.S. 687, 702, 119 S. Ct. 1624, 143 L. Ed. 2d 882 (1999), which expressly defined the term “exaction” to be “the dedication of property to public use.” (Emphasis added.) The City, citing City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd., 526 U.S. 687, 702, 119 S. Ct. 1624, 1635, 143 L. Ed. 2d 882 (1999), argues that the Dolan proportionality standard does not apply here because there was no “exaction” as the United States Supreme Court uses that term — “the dedication of property to public use.” We disagree for the following reasons: (1) the language in Del Monte Dunes defining exactions is nonbinding dicta, see Honesty in Environmental Analysis & Legislation (HEAL) v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Bd., 96 Wn. App. 522, 534, 979 P.2d 864 (1999) (<HOLDING>); and (2) even if Del Monte Dunes did control, Options: A. holding authority to control limits duty to control B. holding that the puc does not have the authority to regulate or control the management decisions of a utility absent a finding that the management decision would adversely affect the public C. holding that pharmaceutical benefit management companies are generally not erisa fiduciaries because they lack discretionary authority or control in the management of the plan but rather engage in ministerial duties D. holding that a partner in and accounting firm who brought an action under the age discrimination in employment act adea and the employee retirement income security act erisa was considered an employee because he was subject to the control of a management committee which acted in secrecy and had no bona fide ownership interest fiduciary relationship voting right or management control E. holding that del monte dunes dicta did not control applicability of nollandolan to growth management act regulations

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that del monte dunes dicta did not control applicability of nollandolan to growth management act regulations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the trial court re-set the submission date for the Motion to March 18. In determining that the trial court reversibly erred in granting the Motion (and that the Insureds’ motion for rehearing should be granted), the majority relies on its conclusion that the trial court did not re-set the submission date for the Motion to March 18. But, contrary to the majority’s conclusion, in their Motion for Rehearing, the Insureds assert that the trial court did re-set the submission date for the Motion to March 18; however, the Insureds claim that they did not receive notice that the Motion had been re-set until March 18. The Insureds state that “giving notice on March 18 — the day summary judg 14-04-00064-CV, 2004 WL 2933575, at *1 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] Dec. 21, 2004, no pet.) (mem. op.) (<HOLDING>); Rios v. Texas Bank, 948 S.W.2d 30, 32-33 Options: A. holding appellant waived her complaint that trial court gave her no notice of summaryjudgment hearing by not raising the objection in the trial court B. holding that the plaintiffs second complaint did not relate back to her first complaint because her second complaint was not an amendment to her first complaint but rather a separate filing C. holding that parties waived any choice of law objection by not raising an objection D. holding that once a trial court has set a date for a summaryjudgment hearing the court must allow the nonmoving party an opportunity to be heard E. holding that appellant who properly filed an objection in accordance with the notice he received from the trial court had standing to appeal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding appellant waived her complaint that trial court gave her no notice of summaryjudgment hearing by not raising the objection in the trial court
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: for their approval, nor until they shall have approved such plans and specifications and the location of such bridge and accessory works[.] Id. Thus, in 1906, Congress gave the Secretary of War and Chief of Engineers statutory authority to assess and approve proposed bridge plans. The 1906 Bridge Act was the last congressional enactment concerning international bridges until 1972, long after Congress had approved the Ambassador Bridge in 1921. In 1946, Congress enacted the General Bridge Act of 1946, currently codified at 33 U.S.C. §§ 525-534. The General Bridge Act of 1946 removed Congress from the process of approving individual domestic bridges and authorized all such bridges subject only to approval by the War Department. See Sisselman v. Smith, 432 F.2d 750, 753 (3d Cir.1970) (<HOLDING>). However, international bridges remained Options: A. recognizing the delegation of authority to the united states attorneys B. holding that with respect to domestic bridges the general bridge authority act was clearly intended to end piecemeal congressional supervision of bridge construction by delegation of congressional authority to an expert administrative agency C. holding that a precondition to chevron deference is congressional delegation of administrative authority D. recognizing the medicare statutes broad delegation of authority E. holding grant of authority to an agency to adopt rules necessary to carry out this chapter clearly vested in the agency authority to interpret a statute

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that with respect to domestic bridges the general bridge authority act was clearly intended to end piecemeal congressional supervision of bridge construction by delegation of congressional authority to an expert administrative agency
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event, in any case prior to the Vesting Date, of (1) a termination of Participant’s employment other than under circumstances that would result in the Accelerated Vesting Date, (2) Participant attempting to sell, assign, transfer or otherwise dispose of, or mortgage, pledge or otherwise encumber any unvested RSUs or (3) any unvested RSUs becoming subject to attachment or any similar involuntary process, then such Participant’s unvested RSUs shall be forfeited by the Participant to the Company, and the Participant shall thereafter have no right, title or interest whatever in such RSUs.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is a split among the circuits on this question, our approach accords with that taken by the majority of the circuits to have considered the question. Compare Jones v. International Riding Helmets, Ltd., 49 F.3d 692, 695 (11th Cir.1995) (requiring lack of reasonable inquiry and frivolousness); Kale v. Combined Ins. Co. of America, 861 F.2d 746, 759 (1st Cir.1988) (same); Calloway v. Marvel Entertainment Group, 854 F.2d 1452, 1470 (2d Cir.1988) (same), rev’d in part on other grounds sub nom. Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entertainment Group, 493 U.S. 120, 110 S.Ct. 456, 107 L.Ed.2d 438 (1989) with Garr v. U.S. Healthcare, Inc., 22 F.3d 1274 (3d Cir.1994) (sanctioning based solely on failure to conduct reasonable inquiry); Matter of Excello Press, Inc., 967 F.2d 1109, 1112 (7th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge, concurring in Options: A. holding that reasonableness for qualified immunity purposes requires an objective inquiry into the totality of the circumstances B. holding that the reasonableness inquiry is based upon the totality of the circumstances in determining whether or not a search was reasonable C. holding that the courts inquiry into the reasonableness of the governments proposed corrective action was proper D. holding that commonlaw knock and announce rule is part of the fourth amendment reasonableness inquiry E. holding that proper focus is reasonableness of inquiry not frivolousness

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that proper focus is reasonableness of inquiry not frivolousness
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 364 U.S. 441 81 S.Ct. 198 5 L.Ed.2d 183 NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN AND HARTFORD RAILROAD COMPANY, Petitioner,v.Mary L. Donnelly HENAGAN. No. 38. Argued Nov. 8, 1960. Decided Nov. 21, 1960. Mr. Noel W. Deering, Boston, Mass., for petitioner. Mr. James W. Kelleher, Boston, Mass., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The respondent was a waitress in the grill car of one of petitioner's trains. She brought this action under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq., 45 U.S.C.A. § 51 et seq., for damages for injuries allegedly sustained when an emergency application of the brakes brought the train to a sudden stop. A jury which heard the case in the District Court for the District of Massachusetts returned a verdict for respondent. The trial judge denied the petitioner's motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial. The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed, 272 F.2d 153. We granted certiorari, 362 U.S. 967, 80 S.Ct. 954, 4 L.Ed.2d 899. 2 The train was pulling into petitioner's station at Providence, Rhode Island, for a scheduled stop. One Montell apparently to commit suicide, stepped on the track from the station platform as the train approached alongside the platform. The engineer made the emergency application of the brakes in an unsuccessful effort to stop the train before it reached Montell. We have examined the trial record and hold that the proofs were insufficient to submit to the jury the question whether employer negligence played a part in the emergency application of the brakes which allegedly produced the respondent's injury. See Herdman v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 352 U.S. 518, 77 S.Ct. 455, 1 L.Ed.2d 508. 3 The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the cause remanded to the District Court with direction to enter judgment for the petitioner notwithstanding the verdict. It is so ordered. 4 Judgment of Court of Appeals reversed and cause remanded to District Court with direction. 5 Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice DOUGLAS dissent. They believe there was evidence of negligence sufficient for the jury, as summarized by Judge Woodbury, speaking for a unanimous Court of Appeals. 272 F.2d 153. They also dissent from the direction to enter judgment for the petitioner, since they are of the view that if there is a reversal, there should be a new trial. See Galloway v. United States, 319 U.S. 372, 396, 63 S.Ct. 1077, 1090, 87 L.Ed. 1458 (dissenting opinion). 6 For the reasons set forth in his opinion in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 524, 77 S.Ct. 443, 459, 1 L.Ed.2d 493, Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER is of the view that the writ of certiorari was improvidently granted.

assistant: 8
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 and the obligations of the Members hereunder shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, excluding any conflicts of law rule or principle which might refer such construction to the laws of another state or country. Each Member submits to the jurisdiction of the state and federal courts of the State of New York.

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: No Borrower shall acquire or accept any Inventory on consignment or approval, and shall take all steps to assure that all Inventory is produced in accordance with Applicable Law, including the FLSA. No Borrower shall sell any Inventory on consignment or approval or any other basis under which the customer may return or require a Borrower to repurchase such Inventory. Borrowers shall use, store and maintain all Inventory with reasonable care and caution, in accordance with applicable standards of any insurance and in conformity with all material Applicable Law, and shall make current rent payments (within applicable grace periods provided for in leases and subject to disputes in good faith) at all locations where a material portion of Collateral is located.

assistant: Sales
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 certification will not guarantee that water quality impacts will be prevented. The defendant-intervenor asserts similar arguments with regard to the Warm Springs Tribe. They claim that (1) the Tribe has not shown that the treaty rights apply to Camp Creek, (2) there is no connection between issuance of grazing permit without state certification and harm to the treaty rights, and (3) there is no evidence that the harm will cease if the Forest Service orders state certification. The defendant-intervenor’s argument fails. Plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenor satisfy the Lujan standing test, having established an injury in fact because plaintiffs live and recreate in the area of the challenged action. Salmon River Concerned Citizens v. Robertson, 32 F.3d 1346, 1345-55 (9th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs have also adequately established Options: A. holding law of case doctrine is procedural and does not go to jurisdiction of court B. holding that under alabama law the law of the forum applies to procedural matters and that in most instances the statute of limitations is considered to be a procedural rule C. holding that the declaratory judgment act is a procedural device D. holding that procedural bar rule does not apply to ineffectiveness claims E. holding that a procedural challenge does not mean plaintiffs injury is procedural if plaintiff lives or recreates in the area

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a procedural challenge does not mean plaintiffs injury is procedural if plaintiff lives or recreates in the area
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: error, giving due weight to the inferences drawn from those facts by the trial judge. Id. A trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress, apart from determinations of reasonable suspicion to conduct investigatory stops and probable cause to perform warrantless searches, is to be upheld on appeal unless its findings of fact are clearly erroneous. See, State v. Newman, 250 Neb. 226, 548 N.W.2d 739 (1996); State v. Bowers, 250 Neb. 151, 548 N.W.2d 725 (1996). In making this determination, an appellate court does not reweigh the evidence or resolve conflicts in the evidence, but, rather, recognizes the trial court as the finder of fact and takes into consideration that it observed the witnesses. Id. See Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690, 699, 116 S. Ct. 1657, 134 L. Ed. 2d 911 (1996) (<HOLDING>). ANALYSIS Legality of Stop. Chitty initially Options: A. holding that findings of fact are reviewed for clear error B. holding that determinations of reasonable suspicion for investigative stops and probable cause to perform warrantless searches should be reviewed de novo by appellate courts C. holding the ultimate question of probable cause should be reviewed de novo D. holding that the question of whether the police had reasonable suspicion and probable cause to make a warrantless search should be reviewed de novo E. holding appellate courts should review findings of historical fact for clear error only giving due weight to inferences drawn from those facts by resident judges and local law enforcement officers while as general matter determinations of reasonable suspicion and probable cause should be reviewed de novo on appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding appellate courts should review findings of historical fact for clear error only giving due weight to inferences drawn from those facts by resident judges and local law enforcement officers while as general matter determinations of reasonable suspicion and probable cause should be reviewed de novo on appeal