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: safety.” While this particular piece of evidence does indicate a concern for safety rather than- “conscious indifference,” it does not in itself present overwhelming evidence contradicting the evidence provided by plaintiff. Oregon law makes no special exception relieving manufacturers from punitive damages if they issue product warnings. Second, Crown refers us to evidence properly excluded by the district court at trial, such as the military specifications and independent engineering reports. The jury cannot be said to have reached an erroneous verdict because of evidence that was not before it at trial. Evidence not admitted at trial cannot be used in a review of the district court’s denial of judgment as a matter of law. Elbert v. Howmedica, Inc., 143 F.3d 1208, 1209 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). As a result, Crown is left to support its Options: A. holding that a motion for rule 37 sanctions should be promptly made thereby allowing the judge to rule on the matter when it is still fresh in his mind and that the motion should normally be deemed waived if it is not made prior to trial B. holding that the court should make factual findings from the record evidence as if it were conducting a trial on the record C. holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion D. holding that trial court did not err in ruling on appellees motion for summary judgment before appellees complied with appellants discovery request when the record reflected that appellant filed a motion to compel three days before the hearing and the record did not reveal any effort on the part of appellant to secure a ruling from the trial court on its motion to compel or object at the trial court hearing the motion for summary judgment prior to ruling on the motion to compel E. holding that when ruling on a rule 50 motion the record should be taken as it existed when the trial was closed

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that when ruling on a rule 50 motion the record should be taken as it existed when the trial was closed
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 enforcement of this Agreement or the assertion by any Indemnitor of any defense to the obligations of an Indemnitor hereunder, whether any of such matters arise before or after foreclosure of the Mortgage or other taking of title to or possession of all or any portion of the Property by Agent or any other Indemnified Party, and specifically including therein, without limitation, the following: (i) costs incurred for any of the matters set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement; and (ii) costs and expenses incurred in ascertaining the existence or extent of any asserted violation of any Environmental Laws relating to the Property and any remedial action taken on account thereof including, without limitation, the reasonable costs, fees and expenses of engineers, geologists, chemists, other scientists, attorneys, surveyors, and other professionals, or testing and analyses performed in connection therewith. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement shall require Indemnitors to indemnify for any matter caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of any Indemnified Party.

assistant: General
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 Administrator is a validly existing partnership in good standing under the laws of the State of Delaware and has full power and authority to own its properties and conduct its business as presently owned or conducted, and to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement and each other Transaction Document to which it is a party.

assistant: Organizations
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: Florida Supreme Court held that: The adversary nature of the proceeding, its complexity, the need for an evidentia-ry hearing, or the need for substantial legal research are all important ele ments which may require the appointment of counsel. This appointment authority is discretionary, with any doubts being resolved in favor of an indigent defendant. There is no absolute duty to appoint counsel for an indigent defendant. in a post-conviction relief proceeding unless the application on its face reflects a colorable or justiciable issue or -a meritorious grievance. The court has the authority to summarily deny relief without appointment of counsel when the petition and record reflect it is without merit. Graham, 372 So.2d at 1366; see also Russo v. Akers, 724 So.2d 1151, 1153 (Fla.1998)(<HOLDING>). While section 924.051(9) prohibits the use of Options: A. holding because right to counsel is constitutionally guaranteed in parental termination proceeding effective assistance of counsel is also constitutionally required B. holding on equal protection grounds that meaningful first appeal requires appointment of counsel for indigent defendants C. holding that when counsel is constitutionally mandated under weeks and graham section 9240519 does not prohibit or preclude appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in seeking collateral review D. holding that an indigent litigants right to appointed counsel has been recognized to exist only where she may be deprived of her physical liberty that the constitution does not require the appointment of counsel for indigent parents in every parentalstatus termination proceeding and that the decision whether due process calls for the appointment of counsel is to be answered in the first instance by the trial court subject to appellate review E. holding that the constitution does not require the appointment of two attorneys for indigent capital defendants

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that when counsel is constitutionally mandated under weeks and graham section 9240519 does not prohibit or preclude appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in seeking collateral review
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: From and after the date of this Agreement, at any time and from time to time, the Purchaser shall have the right to request that the Company reimburse all documented out-of-pocket expenses (including attorneys’ fees) incurred by the Purchaser or its Affiliates in connection with their evaluation of the Company and the transactions contemplated pursuant to this Agreement, including all expenses related to the due diligence review and the structuring, drafting, negotiating and entry into this Agreement and the other Transaction Agreements, up to one million two hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000) in the aggregate, which the Company shall do promptly and in any event within three (3) Business Days of such request. As of the Closing (and without duplication with the deduction for expenses contemplated in the definition of Purchase Price), the Company shall reimburse all such fees incurred by the Purchaser and its Affiliates in connection with the foregoing to the extent not previously paid pursuant to the first sentence of this Section 6.06.

assistant: Expenses
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 be filed). GMX contends that it seeks to enforce the bankruptcy court’s prior orders regarding the sale of the Debtors’ assets and confirmation of the Debtors’ Chapter 11 plan. GMX claims that, in order for the plaintiffs in the Texas case to prevail in that suit, they must prove that the bankruptcy court’s orders regarding the sale of the Debtors’ assets and the assumption and assignment of the executory contracts did not extinguish their interests in the property purchased by GMX from the Debtors. GMX’s interests in this regard may have been sufficient to confer standing for purposes of filing the motion to reopen, but the mere denial of that motion does not directly and adversely affect GMX’s pecuniary interests. In re Lawrence United Corp., 221 B.R. 661, 667 (Bankr.N.D.N.Y.1998) (<HOLDING>). The order denying the motion to reopen Options: A. holding that because a valid arbitration clause existed the parties had to arbitrate all disputes when the subject matter of the dispute has a reasonable relationship to the subject matter of the contract B. holding that a court may review any evidence such as affidavits and testimony to resolve factual disputes concerning the existence of jurisdiction C. holding that resolution of tribal law disputes are not within federal court jurisdiction D. recognizing the courts jurisdiction to resolve disputes between competing permanency plans that are reasonably plausible E. recognizing that generally disputes between purchasers of a debtors assets and third parties are not within the bankruptcy courts jurisdiction but recognizing that disputes concerning the sale order itself may be sufficient for subject matter jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that generally disputes between purchasers of a debtors assets and third parties are not within the bankruptcy courts jurisdiction but recognizing that disputes concerning the sale order itself may be sufficient for subject matter jurisdiction
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: not necessary. And in its “Technical Support Document,” the EPA explained why it believed the revised MVEB was adequate for conformity purposes. Although the explanations may not have been as detailed as the Petitioner would have liked, we nonetheless conclude that through these documents the EPA adequately addressed the somewhat general comments of the Petitioner and sufficiently explained the basis and purpose of its actions. See Reytblatt v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n, 105 F.3d 715, 722-23 (D.C.Cir. 1997) (“Although the NRC did not directly respond to Dr. Reytblatt’s suggested alternatives ..., its explanation was adequate in light of the general nature of Dr. Reyt-blatt’s comments.... ”); National Recycling Coalition, Inc. v. Browner, 984 F.2d 1243, 1252 (D.C.Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). VI. To summarize, we conclude that nothing in Options: A. holding that a court may not substitute its own construction of a statutory provision for a reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency B. holding the rule of lenity inapplicable where the defendants interpretation failed to give meaning to each statutory provision C. holding epas interpretation of an ambiguous statutory provision unreasonable where it was inconsistent with the clean air acts purpose D. holding that the epas explanation in five different documents of its interpretation of a specific statutory provision satisfied the apas basisandpurpose requirement E. holding that to the extent the petition challenges the application of epas regulatory interpretation to petitioners plants the challenge is unripe

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the epas explanation in five different documents of its interpretation of a specific statutory provision satisfied the apas basisandpurpose requirement
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: Court of Appeals courtroom in Indianapolis. We thank counsel for their informative and illustrative oral advocacy. 3 . In the State's brief, it argued that this Court lacked jurisdiction insofar as a conditional admission agreement is not a final order. However, the State withdrew this position during oral argument. 4 . While we acknowledge our colleague's concern that our holding is too broad, we emphasize that juveniles are not simply youthful adults. Indeed, they are children, and to the extent that they are children, their decision-making ability is underdeveloped. This is one of the reasons that the "juvenile court system is founded on the notion of parens patriae, which allows the court to step into the shoes of the parents.” In re M.T., 928 N.E.2d 266, 268 (Ind.Ct.App.2010) (<HOLDING>). BARNES, Judge, concurring. I concur fully Options: A. holding trial court did not err by failing to consider amended petition filed after hearing without leave of court B. holding that party may challenge revocation of certificate by filing either mandamus petition or other appropriate action in trial court C. holding that a trial court may not modify a juveniles disposition without a hearing at which the state presents evidence supporting the allegations listed in the revocation petition D. holding that trial court is without authority to modify a settlement agreement but may enforce and interpret it E. holding that before denying petition trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing and state specific reasons for denying the petition

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a trial court may not modify a juveniles disposition without a hearing at which the state presents evidence supporting the allegations listed in the revocation petition
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: than file a request for an enlargement of time, petitioner’s counsel simply elected to file nothing and instead appeared at oral argument to present petitioner's position orally. 14 . 8 C.F.R. § 1245.2(a)(1) (emphasis added); see also id. § 245.2(a) ("USCIS has jurisdiction to adjudicate an application for adjustment of status filed by any alien, unless the immigration judge has jurisdiction to adjudicate the application under 8 CFR 1245.2(a)(1)”); Rotimi v. Holder, 577 F.3d 133, 134 n. 2 (2d Cir.2009) (per curiam) ("Once an order to show cause had been issued in Rotimi's case, the [immigration judge] acquired exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate Rotimi’s application for adjustment of status in deportation proceedings.”); Perez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 478 F.3d 191, 194 (4th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); Wellington v. INS, 108 F.3d 631, 635 (5th Options: A. holding the district court did not have jurisdiction to review denial of adjustment of status where removal proceedings are pending B. holding that a district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the apa to review the denial of an aliens application for adjustment of status where the alien is in removal proceedings C. recognizing that the attorney general has vested immigration judges with exclusive jurisdiction over applications for adjustment of status in cases of deportation or removal D. holding that the bias denial of a motion to reopen based on the merits of the underlying application for adjustment of status was a discretionary decision under the adjustment of status statute and this court therefore did not have jurisdiction over an appeal of the bias ruling E. holding that adjustment boards have exclusive jurisdiction over minor disputes under rla

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that the attorney general has vested immigration judges with exclusive jurisdiction over applications for adjustment of status in cases of deportation or removal
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 any term or other provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced by rule of law or public policy, all other conditions and provisions of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect so long as the economic or legal substance of the transactions contemplated hereby is not affected in any manner adverse to any party. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced, the parties shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible.

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 Borrower agrees to reimburse the Agent for all reasonable and documented out-of-pocket expenses incurred by it in connection with this Amendment, including the reasonable fees, charges and disbursements of Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties recognize that a dispute may arise out of or relate to this Agreement ( "Dispute" ). Any Dispute among the parties or their respective Affiliates will be resolved in accordance with this Section 10.15 and Section 10.16 .

assistant: General
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: insurer pursuant to an earlier version of NRS 616C.025(2). We noted in Bally’s that the statute gives “broad discretionary powers to employers as to whether they should accept or reject employees’ excuses for failing to comply.” Id. at 929-30 n.4, 948 P.2d at 1203 n.4. Nonetheless, we stated that this “does not, mean, however, that the insurer’s decision is inviolate.” Id. Thus, the insurer’s decision to deny an excuse is reviewable de novo by an administrative officer. See id. Because it was unclear from the record whether the insurer actually considered the employee’s excuse, we remanded the matter to the insurer for a reconsideration of the employee’s excuse. See id. at 929, 948 P.2d at 1203; see also Bullock v. Pinnacle Risk Mgmt., 113 Nev. 1385, 1389, 951 P.2d 1036, 1039 (1997) (<HOLDING>). Essentially, Barrick argues that under Options: A. holding insureds firstoccurring immaterial breach of them insurance policy did not excuse insurer from its obligation to perform under the contract B. holding that a prima facie case of retaliation requires a causal link between the employees protected activity and the employers adverse employment action C. holding that a claim against an insurer for vexatious refusal to pay cannot be maintained where the court finds that the insurer has no duty to defend under the policy D. holding that employers insurer who provided workers compensation benefits to employee but did not consent to employees settlement with thirdparty tortfeasor may maintain an action for payments that become payable in the future E. holding that ballys requires remanding to the employers insurer to consider the employees excuse under nrs 616c0252

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that ballys requires remanding to the employers insurer to consider the employees excuse under nrs 616c0252
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 and vivino agree that any cause of action arising out of or related to the service must commence within one ( 1 ) year after the cause of action arose ; otherwise , such cause of action is permanently barred .

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: aff'd, 683 So.2d 1042 (Ala.1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1171, 117 S.Ct. 1438, 137 L.Ed.2d 545 (1997), quoting Ex parte Wilson, 571 So.2d 1251, 1261 (Ala.1990). In Brooks v. State, 695 So.2d 176 (Ala.Cr.App.1996), aff'd, 695 So.2d 184 (Ala.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 893, 118 S.Ct. 233, 139 L.Ed.2d 164 (1997), this Court stated: “[A] prosecutor has the right to indicate to the jury those parts of the evidence or testimony presented by the State that the defense has failed to contradict; that process is not an infringement of the defendant’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Duncan v. Stynchcombe, 704 F.2d 1213, 1215-16 (11th Cir.1983); Ex parte McWilliams, 640 So.2d 1015 (Ala.1993); Griffin v. State, 393 So.2d 523, 528 (Ala.Cr.App.1981).” 695 So.2d at 180 (<HOLDING>). “ ‘ “A prosecutor’s statement that the Options: A. holding that it was permissible for prosecutor to comment on the general failure of the defense to produce any evidence B. recognizing the right of a defendant to comment upon the failure of the state to produce evidence C. holding that comment by prosecutor in closing argument that defense counsel did not produce evidence of the defendants innocence was not a comment on the defendants failure to testify D. holding the prosecutors statements were not an inappropriate comment on the defendants failure to testify but rather a comment on the defendants failure to present convincing evidence to support his defense E. holding a prosecutor may not comment on a defendants silence

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that comment by prosecutor in closing argument that defense counsel did not produce evidence of the defendants innocence was not a comment on the defendants failure to testify
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: (“[T]he specific intent to commit robbery is the intent to steal, i.e., to deprive an owner of property either permanently or temporarily.”); § 812.13(1), Fla. Stat. (2008). Appellant relies on Thomas v. State, 526 So.2d 183, 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), which recognized that a well-founded belief in one’s right to the allegedly stolen property constitutes a complete defense to a charge of theft, Rodriguez v. State, 396 So.2d 798 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), and cases cited, and because the demonstration of a theft is indispensable to a robbery conviction, Arnold v. State, 83 So.2d 105, 108 (Fla. 1955), to a robbery case as well. Accord, Alfaro v. State, 837 So.2d 429, 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (error to deny claim-of-right instruction); Owens v. State, 866 So.2d 129, 131 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (<HOLDING>). Owens further explained that [a]s to how the Options: A. holding that the constitutional guarantee of a right to trial by jury includes the right to a complete and correct charge of the law so that each issue of fact raised by the evidence will be submitted to the jury on proper instructions B. holding that trial court was obliged to instruct jury that a wellfounded belief in ones right to possess property constitutes a complete defense to a charge of theft C. holding that insanity is a complete defense to the criminal charge D. recognizing a criminal defendants right to present a complete defense E. holding that the failure to properly instruct the jury on the burden of proof required a new trial

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that trial court was obliged to instruct jury that a wellfounded belief in ones right to possess property constitutes a complete defense to a charge of theft
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: Employee is employed to serve as a part‑time Research & Development Advisor and shall perform such duties as Mast’s Chief Executive Officer, or his designee, assigns from time to time. Employee acknowledges that he reports to Mast’s Chief Executive Officer who will be Employee’s supervisor. As part of Employee’s duties, Employee acknowledges and understands that: (a) Employee will devote his utmost knowledge and best skill to the performance of his duties; and (b) Employee shall devote sufficient time to complete the duties of this position, subject to absences for temporary illness.

assistant: Duties
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 any of the Collateral shall be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of by any Grantor in a transaction permitted by the Credit Agreement, then the Administrative Agent, at the request and sole expense of such Grantor, shall promptly execute and deliver to such Grantor all releases or other documents reasonably necessary for the release of the Liens created hereby on such Collateral, made without recourse, representation, warranty or other assurance of any kind. At the request and sole expense of the Borrowers, a Grantor shall be released from its obligations hereunder in the event that all the equity interests of such Grantor shall be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of in a transaction expressly permitted by the Credit Agreement; provided that the Borrower Agent shall have delivered to the Administrative Agent, at least ten Business Days before the date of the proposed release, a written request for release identifying the relevant Grantor and the terms of the sale or other disposition in reasonable detail, including the price thereof and any expenses in connection therewith, together with a certification by the Borrower Agent stating that such transaction is in compliance with the Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery, and performance by each Grantor of this Agreement will not (i) result in the violation of the provisions of the organizational documents of such Grantor, (ii) violate any provision of any existing material Law applicable to such Grantor or (iii) conflict with, result in any breach of, constitute a default under, or result in the creation or imposition of any Lien upon any of such Grantor’s Collateral pursuant to (A) any order, judgment, award, or decree of any Governmental Entity to which such Grantor is a party or by which such Grantor may be bound or to which any of the Collateral is subject or (B) any material Contract to which such Grantor is a party or by which such Grantor may be bound or to which any of the Collateral is subject except, in the cases of subsections (ii) and (iii), for such violations, conflicts, breaches, or defaults as would not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to prevent such Grantor from performing its obligations under either of the Notes and this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 1002(32). The City established and sponsored a health care benefit for its employees. The City contracted with private providers of health care coverage, including Principal, and offered various plans to its employees. Because the City paid the insurance premiums under the health care plan selected by the employees, the plan is deemed to be established and maintained by the City. See Silvera v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 884 F.2d 423, 426 (9th Cir.1989) (concluding that behavior inconsistent with any of the criteria in 29 C.F.R. § 2510.3 — l(j), such as paying the premiums, would constitute establishment” of a plan). Despite the fact that Principal is a private company administering the plan, it is still a “governmental plan” exempt from ERISA. See id. (<HOLDING>); Simac v. Health Alliance Medical Plans, Inc., Options: A. holding that where a governmental entity purchases a benefit plan on behalf of government employees and dele gates the administration to a private insurer the plan is a government plan exempt from erisa B. holding that county governments healthcare plan qualified for governmental plan exclusion C. holding that a group benefits policy purchased by the city for employees was a governmental plan even though the plan was offered and administered by a private insurer D. holding that healthcare plan established by the state of vermont for eligible employees qualified for governmental plan exclusion E. holding that disability plan established by state university for benefit of employees qualified for governmental plan exclusion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a group benefits policy purchased by the city for employees was a governmental plan even though the plan was offered and administered by a private insurer
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT ANY CONTROVERSY WHICH MAY ARISE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IS LIKELY TO INVOLVE COMPLICATED AND DIFFICULT ISSUES AND, THEREFORE, EACH SUCH PARTY IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY WAIVES ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY LEGAL ACTION DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT. EACH PARTY TO THIS AGREEMENT CERTIFIES AND ACKNOWLEDGES THAT (A) NO REPRESENTATIVE OF ANY OTHER PARTY HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PARTY WOULD NOT SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER IN THE EVENT OF A LEGAL ACTION, (B) SUCH PARTY HAS CONSIDERED AND UNDERSTANDS THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS WAIVER, (C) SUCH PARTY MAKES THIS WAIVER VOLUNTARILY AND (D) SUCH PARTY HAS BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION 13 .

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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 crime is reasonable, the trial court “must consider the totality of the circumstances as viewed by an experienced police officer.” Dewberry v. State, 905 So.2d 963, 966 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). A “mere ‘hunch’ that criminal activity may be occurring” is insufficient to constitute reasonable suspicion to justify stopping an individual. J.P. v. State, 855 So.2d 1262, 1264 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). The officer stopping the individual “must articulate in particular and objective terms his reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.” Daniels v. State, 543 So.2d 363, 365 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Case law indicates that walking behind a closed business in the evening is insufficient to justify a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. See, e.g., L.N.D. v. State, 884 So.2d 515, 515 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (<HOLDING>); Errickson v. State, 855 So.2d 700 (Fla. 4th Options: A. holding that the initial stop by officer was based on reasonable suspicion that defendant was impersonating a police officer although another officer arrested defendant for privacy act violation B. holding an officer may order a passenger to get out of a car during a traffic stop and may frisk a passenger for weapons if the officer reasonably suspects the passenger is armed and dangerous C. holding that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the car in which the defendant was a passenger when the officer saw the vehicle come out from behind a closed building at 330 am and the building had been recently burglarized D. holding that the police officer had reasonable suspicion when he saw a vehicle moving with its lights off in the parking lot of a closed business in a rural area at 300 am E. holding that a conclusion that reasonable suspicion supported the stop of a vehicle was subsumed within the trial courts ruling that the officer had probable cause for the stop

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the car in which the defendant was a passenger when the officer saw the vehicle come out from behind a closed building at 330 am and the building had been recently burglarized
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: requires disclosure of exculpatory evidence. The Government filed an answer to Mr. Morehead’s § 2254 application. In his response to the Government’s answer, Mr. Morehead relied on Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974), to argue he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to cross-examination. The district court refused to consider the argument because Mr. Morehead did not raise a Sixth Amendment claim in his § 2254 application. In his application to this court for a COA, Mr. Morehead abandons his Brady due process argument and focuses on his Davis Sixth Amendment argument. But the Sixth Amendment claim was absent from the initial § 2254 application and was therefore forfeited. See Pedockie v. Bigelow, 581 Fed.Appx. 698, 700 (10th Cir.2014) (unpublished) (<HOLDING>); Davis v. Workman, 695 F.3d 1060, 1077 (10th Options: A. holding that claims not raised in a timely postconviction motion are waived B. holding that issue not raised before the postconviction court was forfeited for the purposes of appeal C. holding a coa applicant forfeited a claim of error in district courts failure to hold an evidentiary hearing by not seeking a hearing in his 2254 proceeding D. holding claims not raised in 2254 application are forfeited E. recognizing that 1983 and 2254 proceedings are mutually exclusive so that if a claim can be properly raised in one of those proceedings it cannot be raised in the other type of proceeding

assistant: The best answer is D. holding claims not raised in 2254 application are forfeited
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: Id. (citations omitted). To be sure, in making its analysis under Rule 19(a)(1), a court should consider the interests of “the public in avoiding repeated lawsuits on the same essential subject matter.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 19 advisory committee’s notes. Rule 19(a)(1), however, similarly “stresses the desirability of joining those persons in whose absence the court would be obliged to grant partial or ‘hollow’ rather than complete relief to the parties before the court.” Id. In this case, considering Pennsylvania’s joint and several liability rules which supply the governing substantive law, GRC’s failure to name the absent insurers to its suit plainly will not result in it obtaining “partial” or “hollow” relief if it is successful in its suit. See Janney Montgomery Scott, 11 F.3d at 406 (<HOLDING>). To this end, the advisory committee’s notes Options: A. recognizing that where liability is joint and several among multiple parties complete relief may be granted with respect to any one of them B. holding that one agreement cannot be taken to be several agreements and therefore several conspiracies because the agreement envisages the violation of several statutes rather than one C. holding that the surety of a joint and several bond has direct liability and may be sued individually or collectively D. recognizing forfeiture liability among criminal confederates to be joint and several E. holding that all partners are not indispensible parties defendant where state law provides for partners joint and several liability

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that where liability is joint and several among multiple parties complete relief may be granted with respect to any one of them
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Administrative Agent shall have received a certificate of the chief financial officer of the Borrower (or another authorized financial officer of the Borrower) certifying the solvency of the Borrower substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit E .

assistant: Solvency
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 understand that through your use of the services you consent to the collection and use ( as set forth in the privacy policy ) of this information , including the transfer of this information to the united states , ireland , and/or other countries for storage , processing and use by twitter and its affiliates .

assistant: Contract by using
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: Should any provision of this Agreement for any reason be declared invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction under the laws governing this Agreement, such decision shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any of the other provisions of this Agreement, which other provisions shall remain in full force and effect and the application of such invalid or unenforceable provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. The Parties further agree that if any provision contained herein is held invalid or unenforceable in any respect, they shall take any actions necessary to render the remaining provisions of this Agreement valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law and, to the extent necessary, shall amend or otherwise modify this Agreement to replace any provision contained herein that is held invalid or unenforceable with a valid and enforceable provision giving effect to the intent of the Parties.

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: Except to the extent this Agreement has been publicly filed, Employee will not disclose any information regarding the substance of this Agreement, except to his financial advisor, his accountant, his spouse, and any attorney with whom Employee consults regarding this Agreement, all of whom (prior to disclosure) are either ethically bound not to disclose or will likewise agree to maintain the confidentiality of such information, and Employee warrants that he has not made any such disclosures since this Agreement was presented to him. Pursuant to the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, the Parties agree that nothing in this Paragraph, Paragraph (ix) of the Agreement, or any other provision of this Agreement shall cause employee to be held criminally or civilly liable under any federal or state trade secret law for the disclosure of a trade secret that (a) is made (I) in confidence to a federal, state, or local government official, either directly or indirectly, or to an attorney; and (II) solely for the purpose of reporting or investigating a suspected violation of law; or (b) is made in a complaint or other document filed in a lawsuit or other proceeding, if such filing is made under seal.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: § 3B1.1(c), two levels are added. PSR ¶ 45 (emphasis added). As McCoy correctly notes, however, supervision of an unwitting individual cannot justify an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c). The guideline commentary requires supervision of one or more “participants,” and a “participant” is defined as a person who, although not necessarily convicted, “is criminally responsible for the commission of the offense.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1, comment., n.1. Because an individual cannot be criminally responsible for making a false statement unless she is witting, see 18 U.S.C. § 1014 (requiring that false statement be made “knowingly”), the fact that McCoy’s employees were unwitting would appear to render this enhancement inapplicable. See United States v. Bapack, 129 F.3d 1320, 1325 (D.C.Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). The government does not dispute this reading Options: A. holding that if a crime is broadly defined the court can look beyond the elements of the crime B. holding that the prosecution must present sufficient evidence to support a reasonable belief that defendant committed a crime emphasis added C. holding that an application is pending from the time it is first filed emphasis added D. holding that a person is criminally responsible under 3b11 only if he commitfs all of the elements of a statutory crime with the requisite mens rea internal quotations omitted emphasis added E. holding that the statute incorporated all the rights and obligations of the contract emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a person is criminally responsible under 3b11 only if he commitfs all of the elements of a statutory crime with the requisite mens rea internal quotations omitted emphasis added
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: conflict preemption of the EPPs’ state law claims such that they “frustrate ‘the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.’ ” Id. at 1335 (quoting Hines, 312 U.S. at 67, 61 S.Ct. 399). If the alleged state law claims are premised on conduct protected or governed by federal patent law, the actions are preempted. Id. “Conversely, if the conduct is not so protected or governed, then the remedy is not preempted.” Id. Courts have held that when the state law cause of action provides a remedy for conduct that occurs entirely before the PTO—such as inequitable conduct before the PTO—or for “patent-like protection,” it is preempted by federal patent law. See, e.g., Semiconductor Energy Lab. Co. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 204 F.3d 1368, 1380-83 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (<HOLDING>); Brennan, 952 F.2d at 1357 (holding that state Options: A. holding that if the underlying conduct is wrongful only by virtue of the labor laws then the rico claim is preempted B. recognizing that pennsylvania had no interest in denying its residents the greater damages available under new jersey consumer fraud statutes for claims against a new jersey seller C. recognizing israel had no interest in denying its citizens the substantive advantages of new jersey defamation law in new jersey residents claims for defamation published in new jersey D. holding that the nlra preempts a rico claim when the underlying conduct of the plaintiffs rico claim is wrongful only by virtue of the labor laws E. holding new jersey rico claim preempted because it occupies a field identical in scope with the inequitable conduct defense

assistant: The best answer is E. holding new jersey rico claim preempted because it occupies a field identical in scope with the inequitable conduct defense
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: public interest is served by a grant of injunctive relief.” Centech Grp., Inc. v. United States, 554 F.3d 1029, 1037 (Fed.Cir.2009). See also PGBA, LLC v. United States, 389 F.3d 1219, 1228-29 (Fed.Cir.2004) (citing Amoco Prod. Co. v. Vill. of Gambell, 480 U.S. 531, 546 n. 12, 107 S.Ct. 1396, 94 L.Ed.2d 542 (1987)). In that SAIC has not prevailed on the merits of its substantive claims, the first hurdle prerequisite to injunctive relief, inquiry is over. Nevertheless, that deficit aside, if an offeror is improperly deprived of a level playing field or excluded from the bidding process, the contractor is irreparably injured because no adequate remedy exists to make up for the contractor’s potential loss of business. BayFirst Solutions, LLC v. United States, 102 Fed.Cl. 677, 696 (2012) (<HOLDING>); see also BINL, Inc. v. United States, 106 Options: A. holding that potential loss of a contract constitutes irreparable injury B. holding that lost opportunity to compete on level playing field is sufficient to establish irreparable harm C. holding that even a temporary deprivation of first amendment rights constitutes irreparable harm D. holding that loss of the opportunity to fairly compete for a contract constitutes irreparable harm E. holding that deprivation of constitutional rights unquestionably constitutes irreparable harm

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that loss of the opportunity to fairly compete for a contract constitutes irreparable harm
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 failure of the Company in any instance to exercise any right hereunder shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights that may subsequently arise under the provisions of this Agreement or any other agreement between the Company and Optionee. No waiver of any breach or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach or condition, whether of like or different nature.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is effective as of the Commencement Date and terminates on the fifth anniversary of the Commencement Date (the “Term”); provided that, (i) beginning on the fifth anniversary of the Commencement Date and each anniversary thereafter (each, an “ Anniversary Date ”) the Term shall be extended by 12 months unless either party provides notice (the “ Notice ”) at least 60 days before any such Anniversary Date of his or its intent to terminate this Agreement as of such Anniversary Date, and (ii) if a Change in Control occurs during the Term, this Agreement shall not expire until the later of (a) the expiration of the Term or (b) the end of the Change in Control Period.

assistant: Terms