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: “multiple sentences for multiple crimes arising out of a single behavioral incident if: (1) the crimes affect multiple victims; and (2) multiple sentences do not unfairly exaggerate the criminality of the defendant’s conduct.” State v. Skipintheday, 717 N.W.2d 423, 426 (Minn.2006) (citations omitted). Both requirements are met here. The district court convicted and sentenced Wallace for two distinct crimes committed upon two distinct victims: once for attempting to rape R.L. and once for stabbing and killing Kenneth Williams. And Wallace does not argue, nor have we found any legal basis to conclude, that the multiple sentences imposed by the district court in this case unfairly exaggerate the criminality of his conduct. See, e.g., State v. Marquardt, 294 N.W.2d 849, 850-51 (Minn.1980) (<HOLDING>). In fact, we squarely rejected the precise Options: A. holding that consecutive sentences were warranted because of the multiple separate and distinct criminal acts B. holding that the district court did not err by sentencing a defendant to consecutive prison terms for seconddegree manslaughter and aggravated assault committed against two separate victims because the multiple sentences did not unfairly exaggerate the criminality of the defendants conduct C. holding that trial court did not err D. holding in assault and involun tary manslaughter case that district court has discretion to impose concurrent or consecutive sentences based on finding of whether multiple counts involved the same harm E. holding that separate sentences for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and with intent to rob were barred

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the district court did not err by sentencing a defendant to consecutive prison terms for seconddegree manslaughter and aggravated assault committed against two separate victims because the multiple sentences did not unfairly exaggerate the criminality of the defendants conduct
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: determines first what constitutes “adequate compensation,” “reasonable care,” or “customary or ordinary payments.” Such determinations require evidence which consists of similar factual situations which can be compared to the case at hand. If the case at hand falls outside the bounds permitted in the comparison cases, that result is deemed “excessive,” “negligent,” or “extraordinary.” Absent a definition from Congress, “we interpret the words using their ‘ordinary, contemporary, and common meaning[s].’ ” United States v. Migi, 329 F.3d at 1088. As is suggested in the district court’s order, the statute’s qualifying term “extraordinary” necessarily implies proof that the payments deviate from the ordinary. See Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles, 796 F.2d 1205, 1215 (9th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). A reasonable interpretation of the common Options: A. holding that the trial court properly added a party defendant to conform to the evidence presented at the trial B. holding that counsels success was not extraordinary in light of the evidence presented at trial and the noncomplexity of the case C. holding that the trial judges misconduct at trial did not prejudice the defendant in light of the courts curative instructions D. holding that where the meaning of the jurys verdict was not clear in light of the trial courts jury instructions the court of appeals erred in directing entry of judgment for respondent the case should have been remanded to the trial judge who was in the best position to pass upon the question of a new trial in light of the evidence his charge to the jury and the jurys verdict E. recognizing that the value of brady evidence must be evaluated in light of the other evidence admitted at trial

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that counsels success was not extraordinary in light of the evidence presented at trial and the noncomplexity of the 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The terms of this Agreement are intended by the Parties to be the final expression of their agreement with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all prior understandings and agreements, whether written or oral (including, without limitation, the Prior Agreement). The Parties further intend that this Agreement shall constitute the complete and exclusive statement of their terms and that no extrinsic evidence whatsoever may be introduced in any judicial, administrative, or other legal proceeding to vary the terms of this Agreement.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: we are driven to create services that enhance the lives and performance of all athletes everywhere , and that 's why we refer to online and offline community members as `` athletes . ''

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: (applying finality and res judicata to agency decisions when the requirements of statutory and legal exceptions are not met); Strott v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 114, 117 (1991) (determining that the rules of issue and claim preclusion can form “a rational basis for a jurisdictional date denying judicial review to some and granting it to others” and that “ ‘issue and claim preclusion’ ... historically called ‘res judicata’ ... means that decisions once made are not subject to reexamination except for compelling reasons”). Traditionally, the principles of finality include two subdoctrines: (1) “Claim preclusion,” which addresses the preclusive effect of a judgment upon the subsequent relitigation of a claim or cause of action, see Bissonnette v. Principi 18 Vet.App. 105, 110-11 (2004) (<HOLDING>); Link v. West, 12 Vet.App. 39, 44 (1998) Options: A. holding the relitigation exception was limited to those situations in which the state court has not yet ruled on the merits of the res judicata issue B. holding that because relitigation of issue was barred by collateral estoppel res judicata determination of finality of judgment dismissed for lack of standing was not relevant C. holding that res judicata precludes relitigation of issue that was or could have been decided in enforcement order that was not appealed D. holding that res judicata did not apply where a trial courts order was not a final judgment E. holding that res judicata prevents relitigation of a claim that was previously the subject of a valid and final decision of this court

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that res judicata prevents relitigation of a claim that was previously the subject of a valid and final decision of this 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If, at least one month after the Grant Date but prior to the Vesting Date, the Grantee’s employment is terminated due to the Grantee’s Disability, a Prorated Number of RSUs shall become Vested RSUs (as determined in Section 6(f) below). The Company shall settle any RSUs that become Vested RSUs under this Section 6(b) by paying the Grantee a cash amount equal to the Fair Market Value of one Share for each Vested RSU as soon as administratively practicable after the last day of the Performance Period, but in any event, by March 15th of the year following the year in which the Performance Period ends. For purposes of this Section 6(b), the Fair Market Value shall be determined as of the last day of the Performance Period.

assistant: Disability
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: 119 S.Ct. 1402. 4 . Id. at 405, 414, 119 S.Ct. 1402. 5 . United States v. Vasquez, 677 F.3d 685, 692 (5th Cir.2012) (per curiam) (citing United States v. Campbell, 52 F.3d 521, 522 (5th Cir.1995) (per curiam)). 6 . Id. (citing United States v. Ortega Reyna, 148 F.3d 540, 543 (5th Cir.1998) (per curiam)). 7 . United States v. McCauley, 253 F.3d 815, 818 (5th Cir.2001) (citing United States v. Odiodio, 244 F.3d 398, 400-01 (5th Cir.2001)). 8 . Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255, 274, 112 S.Ct. 1881, 119 L.Ed.2d 57 (1992) (Kennedy, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment). 9 . See United States v. Wilson, 322 F.3d 353, 363-64 (5th Cir.2003). 10 . United States v. Chapman, 435 F.2d 1245, 1247 (5th Cir.1970). 11 . See United States v. Santos, 589 F.3d 759, 764 (5th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). 12 . 18 U.S.C. § 201(a)(3). 13 . United Options: A. recognizing that informing the jury that testifying witness has agreed to cooperate with the government is a doubleedged sword as the existence of such agreement may suggest either that the witness will testify in accordance with the governments wishes regardless of the truth or that the witness will not he under threat of revocation of the agreement should the witness commit perjury B. holding that in order to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to call a witness to testify the claimant must allege 1 the identity of the potential witness 2 that the witness was available to testify at trial 3 the substance of the witnesss testimony and 4 an explanation of how the omission of the testimony prejudiced the case C. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting testimony to only one witness where additional witnesses would have provided the same testimony D. holding that the trial courts admonition of a witness even though detailed and strongly stated did not coerce the witness because the court did not threaten or badger the witness and the court provided the witness with her own counsel to ensure that the decision was voluntary E. holding that the district court did not err in instructing the jury not to draw any adverse inferences from the governments failure to call a witness because the witness did not have a relationship with the government such that one would expect him to give testimony in favor of the government

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district court did not err in instructing the jury not to draw any adverse inferences from the governments failure to call a witness because the witness did not have a relationship with the government such that one would expect him to give testimony in favor of the government
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall pay all expenses, and reimburse Manager for Manager’s expenses incurred on its behalf, in connection with any such services to the extent such expenses are reimbursable by the Company to Manager pursuant to Section 8 hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AMENDMENT NO. 7 AND ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT AND ANY DISPUTE, CLAIM OR CONTROVERSY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AMENDMENT NO. 7 OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT (WHETHER ARISING IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE) SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REGARD TO CONFLICTS OF LAW RULES THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICATION OF A DIFFERENT GOVERNING LAW (OTHER THAN ANY MANDATORY PROVISIONS OF THE UCC RELATING TO THE LAW GOVERNING PERFECTION AND THE EFFECT OF PERFECTION OR PRIORITY OF THE SECURITY INTERESTS) .

assistant: Applicable 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: The terms of this Agreement may be waived, altered or amended only by an instrument in writing duly executed by each applicable Obligor and the Administrative Agent (with the consent of the Lenders as specified in Section 9.01 of the Credit Agreement). Any such amendment or waiver shall be binding upon the Secured Creditors and each Obligor.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to defendant] by the trial judge submitting to the jury, with or without the presence of ... counsel, correct excerpts of limited trial testimony.” Id. at 617. Similarly, other circuits courts of appeal have found that even court staffs ex parte actions regarding the substantive law of the case may be harmless error. Notably, in United States v. Patterson, 644 F.2d 890 (1st Cir.1981), the First Circuit held that a court clerk’s unilateral action to deny the jury’s request to make transcripts of witnesses available to them was not prejudicial because only one witness’ testimony had been transcribed at that time, and it was “improbable” that the judge would have furnished that one transcript anyway. Id. at 897-98. See also United States v. Fulcher, 626 F.2d 985, 989 (D.C.Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). At the outset, given the controlling Options: A. holding that sales puffery cannot constitute mail fraud to support rico claim B. holding that a plaintiff cannot avoid the securities fraud exception by pleading mail fraud or wire fraud if the conduct giving rise to those offenses also amounts to securities fraud C. holding that the prosecution may establish the intent element of mail fraud by proving that the defendant was reckless D. holding direct misrepresentations were not required for mail fraud conviction E. holding clerks action in giving requested mail fraud and contract documents to jury without consulting counsel or judge was error but defendant was not prejudiced because virtually all exhibits were either contract or mail fraud documents

assistant: The best answer is E. holding clerks action in giving requested mail fraud and contract documents to jury without consulting counsel or judge was error but defendant was not prejudiced because virtually all exhibits were either contract or mail fraud documents
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: cogently observed, “[TJhere are clear judicial days on which a court can foresee forever and thus determine liability but none on which that foresight alone provides a socially and judicially acceptable limit on recovery of damages for that injury.” Thing v. La Chusa, 48 Cal. 3d 644, 668, 771 P.2d 814, 257 Cal. Rptr. 865 (1989). 9 A number of other jurisdictions have employed forms of the prior similar incidents approach, though some of them employ that approach to the exclusion of others. See, e.g., Baptist Mem’l Hosp. v. Gosa, 686 So. 2d 1147, 1152-53 (Ala. 1996); Ann M. v. Pac. Plaza Shopping Ctr., 6 Cal. 4th 666, 679, 863 P.2d 207, 25 Cal. Rptr. 2d 137 (1993), disapproved on another point in Reid v. Google, Inc., 50 Cal. 4th 512, 527 n.5, 235 P.3d 988, 113 Cal. Rptr. 3d 327 (2010) (<HOLDING>); Drayton v. Kroger Co., 297 Ga. App. 484, 485, Options: A. holding that in determining whether to impose a duty the following factors must be balanced 1 the relationship between the parties 2 the reasonable foreseeability of harm to the person injured and 3 public policy concerns B. holding no duty and noting that foreseeability bears on the scope of a duty and not whether it exists in the first place C. holding that a reference to the violent crime sentencing statute in the second degree assault statute required automatic imposition of violent crime sentencing for a defendant convicted of second degree assault D. holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely if ever can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowners premises E. holding that an aggrieved party is not required to prove that his property would in fact suffer the requisite degree of harm before he can seek judicial assistance

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely if ever can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowners premises
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: States ex rel. Sanders v. East Ala. Healthcare Auth., 953 F.Supp. 1404, 1413 (M.D.Ala.1996). Even after having given due weight to the liberal requirements of notice pleading discussed above, the court finds that Morrow’s pleading of fraudulent concealment is inadequate. Morrow’s allegation consists of one sentence and provides no “details of the defendant’s allegedly fraudulent acts, when they occurred, and who engaged in them.” Cooper v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., 19 F.3d 562, 568 (11th Cir.1994) (finding claim that made only general, conclusory allegations of fraud to be inadequate). Some further level of precision, other than a blunderbuss allegation, is necessary. See, e.g., Seville Indus. Mach. Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp., 742 F.2d 786, 791 (3d Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, Morrow does not assert that her Options: A. holding that a complaint satisfied rule 9b because it identified the misrepresentations at issue the specific dates on which they were made and the specific persons responsible for making them B. holding that a plaintiff satisfied rule 9b by pleading which machines were the subject of alleged fraudulent transactions and the nature and subject of the alleged misrepresentations C. holding that although plaintiff did not list dates places or times of fraudulent acts he nonetheless adequately satisfied the requirements of rule 9b by incorporating into the complaint a list identifying with great specificity the pieces of machinery that were the subject of the alleged fraud D. holding that documents affixed to complaint that contained alleged misrepresentations satisfied rule 9b E. recognizing that where fraud counts incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs of complaint an examination of the entire complaint is necessary to determine if pleading requirements of rule 9b are satisfied

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that although plaintiff did not list dates places or times of fraudulent acts he nonetheless adequately satisfied the requirements of rule 9b by incorporating into the complaint a list identifying with great specificity the pieces of machinery that were the subject of the alleged fraud
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: Certificates of insurance issued on behalf of insurers of the Borrower and the other Credit Parties, describing in reasonable detail the types and amounts of insurance (property and liability) maintained by the Borrower and such other Credit Parties, in each case naming the Collateral Agent as loss payee or additional insured, as the case may be, together with lender’s loss payable endorsements for such property and liability policies in form and substance satisfactory to the Collateral Agent.

assistant: Insurances
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 member of the Board or the Committee (each such Person, a “ Covered Person ”) shall have any liability to any Person (including any Participant) for any action taken or omitted to be taken or any determination made in good faith with respect to the Plan or any Award. Each Covered Person shall be indemnified and held harmless by the Company against and from (i) any loss, cost, liability or expense (including attorneys’ fees) that may be imposed upon or incurred by such Covered Person in connection with or resulting from any action, suit or proceeding to which such Covered Person may be a party or in which such Covered Person may be involved by reason of any action taken or omitted to be taken under the Plan or any Award Agreement, in each case, in good faith and (ii) any and all amounts paid by such Covered Person, with the Company’s approval, in settlement thereof, or paid by such Covered Person in satisfaction of any judgment in any such action, suit or proceeding against such Covered Person, provided that the Company shall have the right, at its own expense, to assume and defend any such action, suit or proceeding and, once the Company gives notice of its intent to assume the defense, the Company shall have sole control over such defense with counsel of the Company’s choice. The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be available to a Covered Person to the extent that a court of competent jurisdiction in a final judgment or other final adjudication, in either case, not subject to further appeal, determines that the acts or omissions of such Covered Person giving rise to the indemnification claim resulted from such Covered Person’s bad faith, fraud or willful misconduct. The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of any other rights of indemnification to which Covered Persons may be entitled under the Company’s memorandum and articles of association (as may be amended from time to time), as a matter of law, or otherwise, or any other power that the Company may have to indemnify such Persons or hold them harmless.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: defendant’s counsel that the documents would be available at his office for review— clearly not what Magistrate Judge Waxse instructed. Defendant’s counsel then requested that plaintiffs counsel have the documents copied and sent to defendant, at defendant’s expense. As of July 27, 2004, the date this Motion to Dismiss was fully briefed, and more than two months after discovery was to have closed, defendant had not received the documents. As such, the court determines that a lesser sanction would not be effective in procuring plaintiffs constructive participation in the case. IV. Conclusion Upon consideration of the factors set forth in Gripe, the court concludes that dismissal of this action is warranted. See Dochterman v. Res. Realizations, 56 Fed.Appx. 455, 459-60 (10th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Willner v. Univ. of Kan., 848 F.2d 1023, 1030 Options: A. holding that sanction of dismissal was warranted when plaintiff had failed to appear for deposition on multiple occasions and following plaintiffs failure to comply with orders of the court including an order that plaintiff make medical records available to the defendant B. holding that dismissal for failure to appear at a deposition is on the merits C. holding dismissal for failure to comply with rule 8 was dismissal of entire action which was appealable final order D. holding that plaintiffs failure to respond to argument warranted dismissal with prejudice E. holding that dismissal for failure to comply with discovery orders is on the merits

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that sanction of dismissal was warranted when plaintiff had failed to appear for deposition on multiple occasions and following plaintiffs failure to comply with orders of the court including an order that plaintiff make medical records available to the defendant
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 constitutes the entire agreement between and among the Parties regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes any other agreements, whether written or oral, that may have been made or entered into by or between the Parties relating to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be for the ensuing year, effective as of the date of this Agreement. Your term as director shall continue subject to the provisions in Section 8 below or until your successor is duly elected and qualified. The position shall be up for re-election each year at the annual stockholders’ meeting and upon re-election, the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or issues remanded.” United States v. Moore, 131 F.3d 595, 597-98 (6th Cir.1997) (internal citations omitted). “[A]bsent explicit limitations in the appellate court’s mandate, an order vacating a sentence and remanding the case for re-sentencing directs the sentencing court to begin anew, so that fully de novo resentencing is entirely appropriate^]” United States v. Moored, 38 F.3d 1419, 1422 (6th Cir.1994) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted, emphasis added). Accordingly, when no express lim t court violated § 3553(c) when it failed to explain the reasons underlying his sentence “in open court.” Indeed, the Second Circuit has held that upon resentencing, the reasons supporting the sentence must be pronounced by the district court from the bench. See DeMott, 513 F.3d at 58 (<HOLDING>). We agree and hold that upon general remand, Options: A. holding that states procedure providing for jury evaluation of voluntariness of a defendants confession violates fourteenth amendment due process B. recognizing that deference to an agencys interpretation of the written law is appropriate only when that interpretation is within the written laws language C. holding that upon resentencing providing only a written opinion violates the open court requirement of 3553c D. holding that school policy prohibiting written material of a religious nature violates the fust amendment E. holding that 172545hs written notice requirement is mandatory

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that upon resentencing providing only a written opinion violates the open court requirement of 3553c
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: Executive agrees not to criticize, make any negative comments about or otherwise disparage UnitedHealth Group or those associated with it, whether orally, in writing or otherwise, directly or by implication, to any person or entity, including UnitedHealth Group customers or agents. The foregoing shall not prohibit Executive from making statements or disclosures required under applicable law.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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 law. The relationship between an employer’s obligations under its collective bargaining agreement and potentially conflicting obligations under an anti-discrimination statute like Title VII is more complex than the district court’s decision indicates. Title VII and collective bargaining agreements each represent important congressional policies: preventing discrimination in the workplace, and “effecting workable and enforceable agreements between management and labor,” Trans World Airlines, 432 U.S. at 79, 97 5.Ct. 2264. Given the important national policies underlying both Title VII and collective bargaining agreements, it is incorrect to hold, as the district court did, that obligations under Title VII always trump obligations that exist under valid labor agreements. See id. (<HOLDING>); Eckles v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 94 F.3d Options: A. holding no violation of title vii by the union in refusing to alter its seniority lists to accommodate a sabbatarian B. holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii C. holding that individual employees are not liable under title vii D. holding that an agreedupon seniority system did not give way to an employers duty to reasonably accommodate religious observance under title vii E. holding that there is no individual liability under title vii

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an agreedupon seniority system did not give way to an employers duty to reasonably accommodate religious observance under title vii
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: Enter into any transaction, including any purchase, sale, lease or exchange of property, the rendering of any service or the payment of any management, advisory or similar fees, with any Affiliate (other than any Borrower or any Subsidiary Guarantor) unless such transaction is (a) otherwise permitted under this Agreement, (b) in the ordinary course of business of the relevant Group Member, and (c) upon fair and reasonable terms no less favorable to the relevant Group Member than it would obtain in a comparable arm’s length transaction with a Person that is not an Affiliate; provided that (i) so long as no Event of Default under Section 8(a) or (f) shall have occurred and be continuing or would result therefrom and to the extent permitted under the Management Subordination Agreement, the requirements of this Section 7.9 shall not apply to transactions under the Management Agreement and the payment of management fees to the Manager pursuant to the Management Agreement and (ii) the requirements of this Section 7.9 shall not apply to (A) transactions subject to the restrictions set forth in Section 7.6 or 7.7 that are permitted pursuant to Sections 7.6 or 7.7, as applicable or (B) payments by the Parent Borrower to the REIT Entity to the extent required to fund administrative and operating expenses of the REIT Entity.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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 invoke his right to remain silent. Doody argues that Caratachea waived his right by testifying under oath at Doody’s juvenile transfer hearing. We disagree. A waiver of the fifth amendment privilege affects only the particular proceed ing in which the waiver occurs. Nelson v. Hannah, 122 Ariz. 296, 297, 594 P.2d 550, 551 (App.1979) (citing Ottomano v. United States, 468 F.2d 269 (1st Cir.1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1128, 93 S.Ct. 948, 35 L.Ed.2d 260 (1973)). Caratachea’s waiver of his fifth amendment right at the juvenile transfer hearing, a proceeding separate from the trial, did not constitute a waiver of his right to refuse to testify at trial. See United States v. Licavoli, 604 F.2d 613, 623 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 935, 100 S.Ct. 2151, 64 L.Ed.2d 787 (1980) (<HOLDING>). Juvenile transfer hearings, like grand jury Options: A. recognizing commonlaw privilege against selfincrimination B. holding that a witness may invoke the privilege against selfincrimination at trial despite testifying previously before a grand jury in the same case C. holding that waiver of privilege against selfincrimination is proceeding specific D. holding that the drug tax violated the privilege against selfincrimination E. holding that miranda warnings were not required for suspect testifying at inquest when suspects lawyer had previously advised him of his privilege against selfincrimination

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a witness may invoke the privilege against selfincrimination at trial despite testifying previously before a grand jury in the same 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you are a california resident , you may have the agreements mailed to you electronically by sending a letter to spotify , attn : general counsel , 45 west 18th street , 7th floor , new york , new york 10011 , usa with your email address and a request for the agreements .

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: This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding of the Company and you regarding the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings and inducements, whether express or implied, oral or written; provided , however , this Agreement does not impact, alter, modify, amend or otherwise supersede any of the rights or obligations of either party under the Retention Agreement, the Employment Agreement, or the Incentive Awards, except as expressly set forth herein, which shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with their terms. No modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be effective without a prior written agreement signed by you and the Company.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of Salisbury and Glycotech and its affiliates, agents, owners, successors, and assigns, hereby fully release and waive against the Purchaser and its affiliates, agents, successors, and assigns, any and all rights, claims, actions, causes of action, damages, and liabilities whatsoever, including costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees, whether known or unknown, accrued or unaccrued, that arise out of or relate to the migration or similar movement of any Hazardous Materials (which existed at any time prior to the Closing at, on or under the Real Property or the Facility) from the Real Property or the Facility to any of the Adjacent Parcels or any portion thereof, or any other property, whether such migration occurred or occurs before or after the Closing. Salisbury agrees that it shall not convey or otherwise transfer any interest in the Adjacent Parcels to any party without first obtaining a release substantially identical to the release set forth in this Section 12.15 which is binding and enforceable against the transferee by and for the benefit of the Purchaser and its successor and assigns including any successor or assign to the Real Property.

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: All unexercised and unvested stock options issued hereunder shall, in addition to any provisions relating to exercisability contained in this Agreement, become immediately fully vested and exercisable by the Optionee upon the termination of Optionee’s employment with the Company by the Company without Cause (as defined below) or by Optionee for Good Reason (as defined below), in either case within 12 months following the occurrence of a Change of Control (as defined below).

assistant: Change In Control
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 Subscription Agreement contain the entire understanding of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and thereof and supersedes all previous and contemporaneous verbal and written agreements, representations and warrantees with respect to such subject matter. This Agreement (or any provision or term hereof) may be released, waived, changed or supplemented only by a written agreement signed by an officer or other authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of any release, waiver, change or supplement is sought.

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: in granting summary judgment in favor of the Newmont Defendants. Defendants also fail to establish that Plaintiffs could not have survived a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), nor do they present certain facts which would permit this Court to enter into a more detailed analysis of the law. Although Defendants do not adequately brief this Court with regard to whether or not the issue of law on which the state court granted summary judgment was “well-settled,” the Court has considered the state court’s opinion carefully. The decision primarily relies on a 1983 ease where a landowner-contractee was sued by an employee of the landowner’s contractor while working on a job on the property. See Sierra Pacific Power Co. v. Rinehart, 665 P.2d 270, 99 Nev. 557 (<HOLDING>). This Court notes, however, that several Options: A. recognizing duty of care owed by business invitor to invitee B. recognizing that a construction contract implicitly imposes a duty on contractors to perform work according to the standard of due care C. holding that the citys acceptance or nonacceptance of the contractors work would have no bearing on the issue of the contractors liability since it was his primary and active negligence that created the dangerous situation and the citys negligence in failing to remedy the situation would be only secondaiy and passive D. holding that a landowner owed no duty of care to a contractors employee in the situation posed by the parties E. holding that a landowner may be liable for injuries to an independent contractors employee if the hazard ous condition was not open and obvious if the condition was not a necessary consequence of the construction and if the landowner maintained possession and control of the premises

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a landowner owed no duty of care to a contractors employee in the situation posed by the parties
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 approve immediate prepayment upon finding that the effect of prepayment would not "materially increase economic hardship for current tenants,” including a finding that alternative housing was available for current tenants and that the supply of vacant, comparable housing would not be affected. 12 U.S.C. § 4108(a). The Court of Federal Claims found that this was not a viable alternative for the markets involved here because "HUD could not make the factual findings that were a necessary predicate for prepayment approval.” Cienega IX, 67 Fed.Cl. at 467. The record supports this finding. We will not address this option further since it was not available to the owners as a practical matter. See also Cienega Gardens v. United States, 265 F.3d 1237, 1239 (Fed.Cir. 2001) (‘‘Cienega VI”) (<HOLDING>). 3 . The parties dispute precisely how long it Options: A. holding that claims are not ripe due to appellants failure to apply for a variance and receive a final decision from the board B. holding that the model plaintiffs claims were ripe even though they did not seek approval from hud to prepay the mortgages C. holding that the plaintiffs claims against volkswagen and others did not necessarily raise a federal question since they were also based on the assertion that the plaintiffs vehicle did not comply with state law D. holding state action comparable even though it did not seek monetary sanction E. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing because the case was not ripe for adjudication

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the model plaintiffs claims were ripe even though they did not seek approval from hud to prepay the mortgages
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: I agree and acknowledge that this Agreement supersedes prior agreements between me and the Company with respect to the subject matter addressed in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that this Agreement is found to be unenforceable by a court of law, then any prior agreement between the parties protecting the Company’s legitimate business interests (a “Prior Agreement”) may resume effect at the election of the Company; provided, however, that (a) the Company must make such election within ten (10) business days of such ruling of unenforceability becoming final, and (b) no post-employment conduct by me shall be deemed to have been in violation of a post-employment restriction in the Prior Agreement prior to the Company electing to resume the Prior Agreement and communicating such election to me in writing.

assistant: Integration
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 Optionee understands and agrees that in the Committee’s sole discretion, the Company may cancel all or part of the Option or require repayment by the Optionee to the Company of all or part of any cash payment or shares of Common Stock acquired at exercise pursuant to any recovery, recoupment, clawback and/or other forfeiture policy maintained by the Company, including a violation of paragraph 6 above, from time to time. In addition, any payments or benefits the Optionee may receive hereunder shall be subject to repayment or forfeiture as may be required to comply with the requirements under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “ Securities Act ”), the Exchange Act, rules promulgated by the Commission or any other applicable law, including the requirements of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or any securities exchange on which the Common Stock is listed or traded, as may be in effect from time to time.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided in the terms of the Award Agreement, upon termination of a Participant’s employment or consulting with the Company, the Partnership and their Affiliates or membership on the Board, whichever is applicable, for any reason during the applicable Restricted Period, all outstanding Restricted Stock awarded the Participant, and any unpaid dividends credited to the Participant, shall be automatically forfeited on such termination. The Committee may, in its discretion, waive in whole or in part such forfeitures with respect to a Participant’s Restricted Stock and dividends .

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: race to see which forum can resolve the same issues first.” San Carlos Apache Tribe, 463 U.S. at 567, 103 S.Ct. 3201. That concern militates against recognizing waiver-by-removal here. Finally, we note that our holding does not leave plaintiffs like Bodi without a forum for redress. Defendants conceded at oral argument that, like the State of Georgia in Lapides, the Tribe would likely have been amenable to Bodi’s suit in its own court system—here, Shingle Springs Tribal Court. Cf. Shingle Springs Tribal Court Ordinance, art. II, ch. 4, § 1(b) (2013) (setting forth the Tribe’s express waiver of sovereign immunity in tribal court for various purposes, including labor relations); William Wood, It Wasn’t an Accident: The Tribal Sovereign Immunity Story, 62 Am. U. L. Rev. 1587, 1666 (2013) (<HOLDING>); Catherine T. Struve, Tribal Immunity and Options: A. holding that indian tribes lack tribal jurisdiction over crimes committed by nonmember indians within the tribes reservation B. holding that indian tribes could only exercise criminal jurisdiction over tribal members and not other indians C. recognizing that many though not all indian tribes make tribal court remedies available for claims against their governments D. holding that an indian tribes claims of possessory rights were not political questions E. holding that a tribes waiver did not constitute a consent to suit in state court on negligence claims against it but instead specified that tribal court was the exclusive forum for the resolution of such claims

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that many though not all indian tribes make tribal court remedies available for claims against their governments