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: in order to adduce “the answers that will either confirm IBM’s claims of complete innocence or implicate them in procedures and knowledge which they are understandably reluctant to reveal”). If IBM’s motion were predicated upon the argument that the plaintiff has failed to prove IBM’s involvement in the alleged attacks, then the plaintiffs contention that this is a matter appropriately resolved by way of summary judgment would have some merit. However, this is not what IBM argues in support of its motion. Rather, IBM contends that the plaintiff “has [not] even alleged the essential elements of its claim.” Def.’s Opp. at 3 (emphasis added). IBM’s motion is therefore appropriately brought as a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). See Swierkiewicz, 534 U.S. at 514, 122 S.Ct. 992 (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation marks and citation Options: A. holding that rule 12b1 insubstantiality dismissal is appropriate if based on the judges disbelief of a complaints factual allegations whereas a rule 12b6 dismissal is appropriate where while operating under the assumption that all or a set of facts in the complaint are true without regard to whether it is based on an outlandish legal theory or on a close but ultimately unavailing one it is clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations B. holding that a court may dismiss a claim under 12b6 only if it appears to a certainty that no relief can be granted under any set of facts provable in support of its allegations or if the allegations accepted as true do not present a claim upon which relief legally can be obtained C. holding in an appeal from the dismissal of the plaintiffs complaint pursuant to rule 12b6 that when the papers before the sixth circuit indicate that the plaintiff could submit an amended complaint that would state a claim upon which relief can be granted the proper course is to remand to permit the plaintiff to amend D. holding that rule 12b6 dismissal is proper where it is clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations E. holding that dismissal pursuant to rule 12b6 is appropriate if the plaintiff is unable to articulate enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that rule 12b6 dismissal is proper where it is clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations
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: “most damaging” to Vos’ case — Vos’ alleged use of Florida’s banking system to facilitate its sales to A & V. Our review of the evidence on this issue reveals that in the transactions involving A & V, CommerzBank Nederland sent shipping documents to SunBank, Sun-Bank notified A & V of the documents’ arrival, A & V signed the trade acceptance forms and submitted payment to SunBank. SunBank then transferred the funds and paperwork to CommerzBank. Vos’ involvement in the process was virtually non-existent, and SunBank merely operated to facilitate the international transfer of money under a letter of credit. Such contacts are clearly insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction over Vos. See Banco Continental, S.A. v. Transcom Bank (Barbados) Ltd., 922 So.2d 395, 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (<HOLDING>); La. Reunion Franqaise, S.A. v. La Costeña, Options: A. holding the bank liable where the bank had almost complete control over the operation of the company during its last three quarters of operation and where withheld taxes were not paid to the irs on instructions from the bank B. holding that a bank owed no duty of care to a noncustomer who was defrauded by a bank depositer since the bank had no direct relationship with the noncustomer C. holding that the mere maintenance of a correspondent account in new york is insufficient to establish minimum contacts with the united states D. holding that defendants bank account and open line of credit in florida utilized to transfer money in international commerce was insufficient to confer jurisdiction under section 481932 florida statutes where defendant operated its business in honduras had no employees or agents in florida and did not advertise or solicit business in florida E. holding that a correspondent relationship with a florida bank where the bank merely facilitates the international transfer of monies under a letter of credit is insufficient to meet the minimum contacts requirement

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a correspondent relationship with a florida bank where the bank merely facilitates the international transfer of monies under a letter of credit is insufficient to meet the minimum contacts 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: jury never heard. The jury was not told that when Howard released the bag, Weldon grabbed it, held it over Ms. Le’s head, and reapplied pressure. Because of this omission, the sentencing jury was not allowed to hear Howard’s assertion that Weldon likely committed the act that killed Ms. Le. Howard argues that the jury was required to consider whether this mitigated his own moral responsibility for the murder. Howard is correct that moral culpability is always relevant to sentencing: “Our capital eases have consistently recognized that’[f]or purposes of imposing the death penalty ... [the defendant’s] punishment must be tailored to his personal responsibility and moral guilt.’ ” South Carolina v. Gathers, 490 U.S. 805, 810, 109 S.Ct. 2207, 2210, 21, 95 L.Ed.2d 347 (1987) (Scalia, J.) (<HOLDING>). Howard must be allowed to present his side of Options: A. holding that resentencing hearing in capital case is not barred by double jeopardy when appeals court rejects sole aggravating factor found by sentencer failure of sentencer to find other alleged aggravating factors is not an acquittal of these factors for double jeopardy purposes B. holding that defendants relatively minor participation in the crime is a mitigating factor that sentencer must consider C. holding that trial court must consider both statutory and nonstatutory mitigating factors D. holding for a unanimous court that sentencer in capital case must consider an extensive list of nonstatutory mitigating factors E. holding that a sentencer may not refuse to consider as a matter of law any relevant mitigating evidence

assistant: The best answer is D. holding for a unanimous court that sentencer in capital case must consider an extensive list of nonstatutory mitigating factors
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 will be automatically effective as of the Effective Date and will continue in effect thereafter until the earlier to occur of (a) its termination by the written agreement of the undersigned parties hereto (other than the Company) or their respective successors in interest, (b) its termination by the unanimous written consent of all Stockholders of the Company, (c) the dissolution, liquidation or winding up of the Company, (d) the occurrence of an IPO and (e) the consummation of an Approved Sale in which, for whatever reason, all of the Stockholder Group Members participate either as Dragging Stockholders or Drag-Along Sellers. This Article VI shall survive any termination of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Pursuant to rules and procedures that the Company establishes, tax or other withholding obligations arising upon vesting and settlement (as applicable) of the RSUs may be satisfied, in the Committee’s sole discretion, by having the Company withhold Common Shares, tendering Common Shares or by having the Company withhold cash if the Company provides for a cash withholding option, in each case in an amount sufficient to satisfy the tax or other withholding obligations. Common Shares withheld or tendered will be valued using the Fair Market Value of the Common Shares on the date the RSUs settle. In order to comply with applicable accounting standards or the Company's policies in effect from time to time, the Company may limit the amount of Common Shares that the Participant may have withheld or that the Participant may tender. The Participant acknowledges that, if he or she is subject to taxes in more than one jurisdiction, the Company may be required to withhold or account for taxes in more than one jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: From the Effective Date until the Closing or the earlier termination of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, each of the Company and NHL will each afford to the officers and authorized representatives of the other full access to the properties, books and records of the Company or NHL, as the case may be, in order that each may have a full opportunity to make such reasonable investigation as it shall desire to make of the affairs of the other, and each will furnish the other with such additional financial and operating data and other information as to the business and properties of the Company or NHL, as the case may be, as the other shall from time to time reasonably request.

assistant: Records
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: Holdings waives any right to assert against any Secured Party as a defense, counterclaim, set-off, recoupment or cross claim in respect of Holdings’ Obligations, any defense (legal or equitable) or other claim which Holdings may now or at any time hereafter have against any Borrower or any other Loan Party or any or all of the Secured Parties without waiving any additional defenses, set-offs, counterclaims or other claims otherwise available to Holdings. Holdings agrees that each Secured Party shall have a Lien for all Holdings’ Obligations upon all deposits or deposit accounts, of any kind, or any interest in any deposits or deposit accounts, now or hereafter pledged, mortgaged, transferred or assigned to such Secured Party or otherwise in the possession or control of such Secured Party for any purpose (other than solely for safekeeping) for the account or benefit of Holdings, including any balance of any deposit account or of any credit of Holdings with the Secured Party, whether now existing or hereafter established, and hereby authorizes each Secured Party from and after the occurrence of an Event of Default at any time or times with or without prior notice to apply such balances or any part thereof to such of Holdings’ Obligations to the Secured Parties then due and in such amounts as provided for in this Agreement or otherwise as they may elect. For the purposes of this Section 13.8 , all remittances and property shall be deemed to be in the possession of a Secured Party as soon as the same may be put in transit to it by mail or carrier or by other bailee.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. It may be changed only by an agreement in writing signed by the party against whom enforcement of any waiver, change, modification, extension or discharge is sought. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Nevada without giving effect to principles of conflicts of laws. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same 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 (together with the Exhibits attached hereto) embodies all of the representations, warranties, and agreements between the parties hereto relating to the Employee’s employment with the Company. No other representations, warranties, covenants, understandings, or agreements exist between the parties hereto relating to the Employee’s employment. This Agreement shall supersede all prior agreements, written or oral, relating to the Employee’s employment. This Agreement may not be amended or modified except by a writing signed by each of the parties hereto.

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: injuries while engaged in what might be characterized as “conduct frolics.” Although the injury-causing conduct occurred during business hours and on the business premises, some frolics have been found to fall outside the scope of employment. See, e.g., Medlin v. Bass, 327 N.C. 587, 398 S.E.2d 460 (1990) (sexual assault on student by school principal in his office during school hours); Wegner v. Delly-Land Delicatessen, Inc., 270 N.C. 62, 153 S.E.2d 804 (1967) (store employee’s shooting of a customer over personal dispute unrelated to employment); Stanley v. Brooks, 112 N.C.App. 609, 436 S.E.2d 272 (1993) (sexual assault of customer by ear salesman during test drive), rev. denied, 335 N.C. 772, 442 S.E.2d 521 (1994); but see Edwards v. Akion, 52 N.C.App. 688, 279 5.E.2d 894, 898 (1981) (<HOLDING>). Jones’ alleged negligence is altogether Options: A. holding intentional assault by coworker to be outside the course and scope of employment B. holding that an assault that occurred immediately after the employee was discharged was in the course of the employment C. holding as unambiguous under iowa law the insurance policys exclusion of coverage to any obligation of the insured to indemnify another because of damages arising out of a bodily injury to any employee of the insured arising out of and in the course of his employment by the insured D. holding that assault by employee against customer arising out of dispute concerning services that employee was performing not outside scope of employment as a matter of law E. holding that a sexual assault on a female employee was of a personal nature and not directed against the employee as part of the employment relationship

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that assault by employee against customer arising out of dispute concerning services that employee was performing not outside scope of employment as a matter of law
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: aid of his proportionality/disparity argument. There, the appellate court affirmed a sentence identical to Raymonde’s based on Defoor’s commission of a violent aggravated assault in violation of supervised release. Raymonde argues his violations are minimal in comparison. We are not persuaded for several reasons. First, while sentencing disparity is still a factor to be considered, see U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6), district courts now have wide latitude in imposing sentences at variance with the guidelines, see Gall, 552 U.S. at 46-47, 128 S.Ct. 586 (citing United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)), and to disagree with the Sentencing Commission’s policy considerations. See Spears v. United States, 555 U.S. 261, 129 S.Ct. 840, 843-844, 172 L.Ed.2d 596 (2009) (<HOLDING>); see also Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. Options: A. holding district courts are entitled to vary from the guidelines based on a policy disagreement with those guidelines B. recognizing district courts ability to vary from guidelines based on policy disagreement with sentencing range in cases involving child pornography C. holding that sentencing judges can vary from guidelines ranges based on policy considerations including disagreements with the guidelines D. holding that sentencing courts may vary based solely on policy considerations including disagreements with the guidelines E. holding a district court has authority to vary from the crack cocaine guidelines based on a policy disagreement with them italics omitted

assistant: The best answer is A. holding district courts are entitled to vary from the guidelines based on a policy disagreement with those guidelines
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: F.3d 1166, 1182 (10th Cir.2002) (same), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1004, 123 S.Ct. 1911, 155 L.Ed.2d 835 (2003). The government introduced evidence of several threats Sampson made to correctional officers and others after he was charged in this case. Although a close question, the evidence of possession of a “shank” both before and after the murders, an attempted escape from prison, and threats to correctional officers and others, examined in the light most favorable to the government, was sufficient to permit a rational jury to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Sampson was likely to commit criminal acts of violence in the future which would be a continuing and serious threat to the lives and safety of prison officials and inmates. See Swisher v. True, 325 F.3d 225, 232 (4th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 971, 123 S.Ct. 2668, Options: A. holding that shank possession combined with threats was sufficient to show future dangerousness under virginia law and therefore petitioner did not demonstrate prejudice for strickland purposes B. holding that any reduction in sentence constitutes substantial prejudice for purposes of strickland analysis C. holding petitioner demonstrates actual and substantial prejudice by proving a claim under strickland D. holding petitioner has the burden of proof under the strickland test E. holding with little discussion that the oklahoma future dangerousness aggravator was not applicable to every murderer and therefore was not unconstitutionally overbroad

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that shank possession combined with threats was sufficient to show future dangerousness under virginia law and therefore petitioner did not demonstrate prejudice for strickland purposes
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 Purchaser has all requisite corporate power and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement and under each other Transactional Agreement to which the Purchaser is a party; and the execution, delivery and performance by the Purchaser of this Agreement and of each other Transactional Agreement have been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of the Purchaser and its board of directors. No vote of the Purchaser’s stockholders is needed to approve the Transactions. This Agreement and each other Transactional Agreement to which the Purchaser is a party constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of the Purchaser, enforceable against the Purchaser in accordance with its terms, except as they may be limited by: (i) laws of general application relating to bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, fraudulent conveyance or other similar Legal Requirements affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally; and (ii) rules of law governing specific performance, injunctive relief and other equitable remedies (whether considered at law or in equity).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice, claim, request, demand, consent, designation, direction, instruction, certificate, report or other communication to be given under or in connection with this Agreement must be given in writing and will be deemed duly given when (i) personally delivered; (ii) sent by facsimile transmission (with transmittal confirmation or acknowledgment of receipt, whether written or oral); (iii) sent by electronic mail (with electronic confirmation of receipt); or (iv) five days have elapsed after mailing by certified or registered mail, postage pre-paid, return receipt requested, in each case addressed to a Person at its address, e-mail address, or facsimile transmission number as indicated in Schedule 1 hereto or to such other address, e-mail address, or facsimile transmission number of which such Person has given notice. Each party may change its address, facsimile or telephone number for notices and other communications hereunder by notice to the other parties hereto.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to begin a trial under a rule intended to guarantee a defendant’s right to a speedy trial. Having determined that notice is a relevant consideration in this case, we turn to the question of whether the six-day notice by mail received by Defendant was sufficient. The State has offered no reason why Defendant should be offered less notice for his trial than the eight days by mail that would generally be required for a hearing on a motion, and we can think of none. See Rule 7-104(C), (D) (stating that notice of a motion hearing is not less than five days, generally, with three extra days for service by mail). Furthermore, because this case was re-filed after being dismissed, the notice sent to Defendant of his trial date is akin to a summons. See Black’s Law Dictionary 1436 (6th ed. 1990) (<HOLDING>). • A summons served by mail must be sent a Options: A. recognizing the cause of action B. holding that where a trial court directs a defendant to file a concise statement pursuant to parap 1925 any issues not raised in that statement shall be waived C. holding that trial court did not err in refusing to give charge because plaintiff failed to demonstrate that his requested charge was tailored to the evidence D. holding that the plain error review provided for in ocga 17858 is waived where the defendant requested the charge in question and made no objection to the charge at trial E. recognizing that a summons to a criminal defendant commences the states action and directs the individual to appear in court to answer the charge

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that a summons to a criminal defendant commences the states action and directs the individual to appear in court to answer the charge
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 its ruling, the circuit court essentially found that there could have been a partial ademption, akin to the situation in Williamson v. Merritt, supra. The court also found, however, that another possibility is that there was no issue of ademption because appellant would receive the land as a devise. Under either scenario, the court found, the proceeds from the sale of the timber would become part of the residuary estate. First, addressing the possibility that there is no issue of ademption in this case, we agree with appellant that the removal of merchantable timber from real property is analogous to the removal of a portion of funds from a savings account as in Williamson, thus there is an issue of partial ademption. See also Taylor v. Goddard, 265 S.C. 327, 218 S.E.2d 246 (1975) (<HOLDING>); Bynum v. McDowell, 3 Tenn.App. 340 (1926) Options: A. recognizing that sale of a cutting of timber from devised real estate was a partial ademption B. holding the real estate sale proceeds C. holding witness not licensed as real estate appraiser could not testify as expert on real estate valuation where statute made it unlawful to engage in real estate appraisal without license D. holding that the new jersey real estate licensing act is applicable to the sale of a company through a stock sale E. holding that a contract for sale of real estate was not void where the broker failed to obtain the required licenses

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that sale of a cutting of timber from devised real estate was a partial ademption
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 Service Provider agrees to execute and deliver such instruments and take such further actions as the Owner may, from time to time, reasonably request in order to effectuate the purposes and to carry out the terms of this Agreement.

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 consolidated financial statements of the Company included in the SEC Reports comply in all material respects with applicable accounting requirements and the rules and regulations of the Commission with respect thereto as in effect at the time of filing (or to the extent corrected by a subsequent amendment). Such consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP applied on a consistent basis during the periods involved, except as may be otherwise specified in such financial statements or the notes thereto and except that unaudited financial statements may not contain all footnotes required by GAAP, and fairly present in all material respects the financial position of the Company and its consolidated Subsidiaries taken as a whole as of and for the dates thereof and the results of operations and cash flows for the periods then ended, subject, in the case of unaudited statements, to normal, immaterial year-end audit adjustments.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Employee shall be entitled to five weeks paid vacation during each calendar year commencing during the Term. Employee shall also be entitled to all paid holidays and other perquisites and fringe benefits that are enjoyed by similarly situated personnel, provided that Employee shall not be entitled to participate in any perquisite or fringe benefit that has been frozen to new participants as of the Effective Date.

assistant: Vacations
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, provision, covenant or restriction of this Amendment is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the terms, provisions, covenants and restrictions set forth herein shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated, and the parties hereto shall use their commercially reasonable efforts to find and employ an alternative means to achieve the same or substantially the same result as that contemplated by such term, provision, covenant or restriction. It is hereby stipulated and declared to be the intention of the parties that they would have executed the remaining terms, provisions, covenants and restrictions without including any of such that may be hereafter declared invalid, illegal, void or unenforceable.

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 term of the Director's retainer under this Agreement (the “Term”) shall commence on the Date herein (also called the “Effective Date”) and shall expire upon termination through a duly executed resolution of the Board of Directors, as set forth in the Bylaws, or upon the occurrence of an event under Section 5.

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: other grounds, 997 S.W.2d 229 (Tex.1999) (corr. op. on motion for reh’g.) (quoting Delp v. Douglas, 948 S.W.2d 483, 495 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 1997), rev’d on other grounds, 987 S.W.2d 879 (Tex.1999)) (adopting rule previously applied in medical malpractice cases that expert testimony not required in cases where lay person competent to determine causation). Weatherspoon offered summary-judgment evidence through Judge Nelms’s affidavit that Weatherspoon had nothing to do with Rodgers’s bond being held insufficient. The judge stated that he made the decision to hold Rodgers’s bond insufficient on his own. After Weatherspoon produced this evidence, Rodgers then had the burden of introducing his own evidence to raise an issue of material fact about causation. See Arce, 958 S.W.2d at 253-54 (<HOLDING>). Rodgers failed to meet this burden. He Options: A. holding that once movant established right to summary judgment burden shifts to nonmovant to demonstrate otherwise B. holding that burden shifts to nonmovant to raise issue of fact C. holding that section 523a2c shifts the burden of production and not the burden of proof on the issue of intent only D. holding that the nonmovant failed to raise a fact issue on mitigation by not raising a fact issue as to the amount of damages that could have been avoided had the movantproperly mitigated his damages E. holding that in a traditional motion for summary judgment the burden shifts to the nonmovant to raise a fact issue after the movant has facially established its right to judgment as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that burden shifts to nonmovant to raise issue of fact
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: correctly points out, confidentiality is for the protection of a respondent. See Baker, 293 N.W.2d at 576. Yet, we do not think the presence of an attorney for a witness during the disciplinary proceeding should be disallowed based upon confidentiality concerns. Like counsel for a respondent, counsel for a witness is subject to the confidentiality requirements of our court rules. While our rules only require witnesses to take an oath of confidentiality and there is no similar provision pertaining to an attorney, we think it is clear that a witness’s counsel is bound by the confidentiality provisions of our court rules and, as a result, any oath would be redundant. See State ex rel. Individual Subpoenaed to Appear at Waukesha Cnty. v. Davis, 281 Wis.2d 431, 697 N.W.2d 803, 810-11 (2005) (<HOLDING>); see also Disciplinary Counsel v. Pullins, 127 Options: A. holding such statements created genuine issue of fact only because matters involved were by nature shrouded in secrecy B. holding the requirement that an attorney take a secrecy oath was redundant in light of an order requiring secrecy C. holding policy provision requiring an insured to submit to an examination under oath is a condition precedent to suit rather than a cooperation clause D. holding that an attorney was subject to disbarment based on his willful disobedience of a probate court order requiring him to return excess attorney fees paid to the executor of an estate E. holding that an order imposing sanctions against an attorney for one of the parties in a pending case is final and therefore immediately appealable by the attorney

assistant: The best answer is B. holding the requirement that an attorney take a secrecy oath was redundant in light of an order requiring secrecy
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 343 U.S. 390 72 S.Ct. 842 96 L.Ed. 1022 PALMER OIL CORP. et al.v.AMERADA PETROLEUM CORP. et al. FARWELL et al. v. AMERADA PETROLEUM CORP. et al. Nos. 301, 302. Argued April 25, 1952. Decided May 12, 1952. Mr. Mark H. Adams, Wichita, Kan., for Palmer Oil Corp. and others. Mr. Reford Bond, Jr., Chickasha, Okl., for Farwell and others. Mr. R. M. Williams, Oklahoma City, Okl., for Amerada Petroleum Corp. and others. PER CURIAM. 1 These two appeals challenge the constitutionality of Okla.Stat. 1941 (Cum.Supp.1949) Tit. 52, §§ 286.1—286.17, providing for unitized management of common sources of supply of oil and gas in Oklahoma. This statute was repealed by the Oklahoma Legislature on May 26, 1951, Okl.Laws 1951, c. 3a, § 16, p. 142, and we ordered the causes continued in order to determine the effect of this repeal on the matters raised in these appeals. 1951, 342 U.S. 35, 72 S.Ct. 11. After being advised by the Supreme Court of Oklahoma that this repeal had no effect on these causes, we noted probable jurisdiction and heard argument. 2 Appellants contend that this statute and an order issued thereunder by the Oklahoma Corporation Commission impair their contractual rights in violation of U.S.Const., Art. 1, § 10, and amount to a denial of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Specifically, appellants argue that the statute is an unreasonable exercise of the State's police power and an unreasonable delegation of legislative and judicial power to private groups. In addition, appellants maintain that the statute is too vague and indefinite to furnish the Commission with any reasonable guide for the issuance of orders approving unitization plans, and that the evidence does not support the Commission's findings of fact. 3 In the light of our previous decisions, appellants have failed to raise any substantial federal questions and the appeals are therefore dismissed. Cities Service Gas Co. v. Peerless Oil & Gas Co., 1950, 340 U.S. 179, 71 S.Ct. 215, 95 L.Ed. 190; Railroad Commission of Texas v. Rowan & Nichols Oil Co., 1941, 311 U.S. 570, 61 S.Ct. 343, 85 L.Ed. 358; Railroad Commission of Texas v. Rowan & Nichols Oil Co., 310 U.S. 573, 60 S.Ct. 1021, 84 L.Ed. 1368, as amended, 1940, 311 U.S. 614, 615, 61 S.Ct. 66, 85 L.Ed. 390; Patterson v. Stanolind Oil & Gas Co., 1939, 305 U.S. 376, 59 S.Ct. 259, 83 L.Ed. 321; Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 1934, 290 U.S. 398, 435, 436, 437, 54 S.Ct. 231, 239, 240, 78 L.Ed. 413; Champlin Refining Co. v. Corporation Commission, 1932, 286 U.S. 210, 52 S.Ct. 559, 76 L.Ed. 1062. 4 Dismissed.

assistant: 9
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may not be modified, amended or terminated except by an instrument in writing, signed by you and by a duly authorized representative of the Company. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be amended solely by the Company by a writing which specifically states that it is amending this Agreement, so long as a copy of such amendment is delivered to you, and provided that no such amendment adversely affecting your rights hereunder may be made without your written consent. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Section 19 limits the authority or power of the Compensation Committee to reduce the number of shares of common stock to be received as set forth in the PSU Vesting Criteria. Without limiting the foregoing, the Company reserves the right to change, by written notice to you, the provisions of this Agreement in any way it may deem necessary or advisable to carry out the purpose of the grant as a result of any change in applicable tax or securities laws or regulations or any future tax or securities law, regulation, ruling, or judicial decision.

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: damages, costs and attorney’s fees become available remedies for non-payment of claims against any insurer that does business in Florida and also against any affiliated insurer. 3 . I reject the Commissioner’s assertion that plaintiffs cannot raise their federal constituJ tional claims in federal court. This is an action seeking injunctive relief against the Commissioner in his official capacity. The longstanding doctrine of Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), squ act is a citizen of the state at issue at the time when the contract is entered, the state does not, for that reason alone, obtain jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes arising under the contract. See, e.g., Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 478-79, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985) (<HOLDING>); Francosteel Corp. v. M/V Charm, 19 F.3d 624, Options: A. recognizing that even entry into contract with citizen of state does not necessarily subject party to jurisdiction in state B. holding that a limited liability company is a citizen of any state of which a member of the company is a citizen C. holding that person who is not party to contract does not have standing to challenge contract D. recognizing that a citizen can sue the state in state court to attempt to obtain a discharge of a student loan and allowing the debtor to refile in state court E. holding that state senator who was attorney for party to contract with state was in violation of 109

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that even entry into contract with citizen of state does not necessarily subject party to jurisdiction in state
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: and that male co-workers interfered with various aspects of her work. Although Boeing insists that the basis for such treatment was unrelated to her gender and instead was because her co-workers disliked her, “a counterweight is not enough to eliminate the need for a fact-finder to weigh the facts on both sides.” Davis v. Team Elec. Co., 520 F.3d 1080, 1093 (9th Cir.2008). In our view, the EEOC similarly raises a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Boeing adequately responded to Miles’ complaints of harassment. While Boeing terminated one offending male employee and disciplined another, a reasonable jury could find that these two employees were part of a much larger problem with respect to Miles’ treatment. See McGinest v. GTE Serv. Corp., 360 F.3d 1103, 1118-19 (9th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). There was evidence in the record that the Options: A. holding that the district court improperly limited the claims according to the preferred embodiment B. holding that the appeals court may affirm the ruling of the district court on any basis which the record supports C. holding the order is only reviewable if actually considered by the district court D. holding that district court improperly considered the sufficiency of employers remedial measures on eventbyevent basis E. holding that district court erred in dismissing the indictment based on sufficiency of evidence

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that district court improperly considered the sufficiency of employers remedial measures on eventbyevent basis
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: Act, standing alone, is not protected conduct under the SOX.... Id. Further, Plaintiffs deposition testimony makes clear that the bulk of her complaints related to purported ethical lapses of Stifel employees, which Plaintiff deemed contrary to Stifel’s internal ethical policies — i.e., engaging in office romances, using office equipment for personal reasons, asking an assistant to fix personal computers of the supervisor’s family and friends, spending too much time on out-of-office travel, showing lack of enthusiasm in being a branch manager, meeting “undesirables” in the parking lot, and the like. But complaints about alleged violations of internal company policies are not protected activities under SOX. Wiest v. Lynch, No. 10-3288, 2011 WL 2923860, at *9 (E.D.Pa. July 21, 2011) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Marshall v. Northrup Gruman Options: A. holding that the fact that employer had knowledge of the employees protected activity was not sufficient to establish a prima facie case of retaliation where the timing of the discharge was not proximate to the protected activity B. holding that informal complaints to superiors about discrimination constitute protected activity C. recognizing that complaint to supervisor could constitute protected activity where employer was made aware of such complaint D. holding that a sixmonth gap between the protected activity and the employees termination was insufficient to infer that the protected activity was a contributing factor E. holding that raising a complaint about a violation of an internal policy is not considered protected activity

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that raising a complaint about a violation of an internal policy is not considered protected activity
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, however, entirely clear what ‘incident to a determination of other issues properly presented’ actually means.” (Footnote omitted.) (quoting Harris, 226 N.W.2d at 234)). Compare Feld, 790 N.W.2d at 78 n. 4 (declining to address issue not presented by the parties), with Feld, 790 N.W.2d at 84 (Appel, J., dissenting) (concluding issue not presented by the parties was “incident to” a determination of properly presented issues because they were inherently intertwined). In my opinion, the issue of whether any of the specific release conditions imposed in this case violated due process is not incident to the issue of whether the imposition of release with restrictions under the statute is constituti to do so and actually brief the issue. See State v. Hoeck, 843 N.W.2d 67, 71 (Iowa 2014) (<HOLDING>); cf. Lyle, 854 N.W.2d at 383 (“The Options: A. holding ineffective assistance of counsel claims may be decided on direct appeal where the district court has developed a record on the ineffectiveness issue B. holding that the court will not consider an issue not raised in the district court unless 1 it involves a pure question of law and refusal to consider it would result in a miscarriage of justice 2 the party raising the issue had no opportunity to do so before the district court 3 the interest of substantial justice is at stake 4 the proper resolution is beyond any doubt or 5 the issue presents significant questions of general impact or great public concern C. holding exception to the waiver rule exists when the issue presented is purely one of law and either does not depend on the factual record developed below or the pertinent record has been fully developed D. recognizing value of having a fully developed record and full briefing before addressing an issue and noting it would be a disservice to the defendant the state and our system of justice to decide these claims without a thorough vetting of the claims in the district court E. holding that to exhaust a claim the claims raised at the administrative appeal must be so similar that the district court can ascertain that the agency was on notice of and had an opportunity to consider and decide the same claims now raised in federal court

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing value of having a fully developed record and full briefing before addressing an issue and noting it would be a disservice to the defendant the state and our system of justice to decide these claims without a thorough vetting of the claims in the district court
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “Sophisticated means” is defined as: especially complex or especially intricate offense conduct pertaining to the execution or concealment of an offense. For example, in a telemarketing scheme, locating the main office of the scheme in one jurisdiction but locating soliciting operations in another jurisdiction ordinarily indicates sophisticated means. Conduct such as hiding assets or transactions, or both, through the use of fictitious entities, corporate shells, or offshore financial accounts also ordinarily indicates sophisticated means. U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1, comment. (n.8(B)). Although we have not fully delineated what qualifies as “sophisticated means,” we have held “sophisticated means involves more than minimal planning.” United States v. Humber, 255 F.3d 1308, 1314 (11th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Based on the repetition and complexity of Options: A. holding that more than notice to a defendant is required B. holding that appellate court should afford due deference to district court determination that defendant engaged in more than minimal planning C. holding that to grant a new trial the error must be more than harmless D. holding even minimal payment required by the icrp could be beyond the debtors means E. holding sophisticated means and the nowdefunct more than minimal planning enhancements could be applied cumulatively

assistant: The best answer is E. holding sophisticated means and the nowdefunct more than minimal planning enhancements could be applied cumulatively