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: finding is governed by the clearly erroneous standard. See State v. Warren, 169 Conn. 207, 211-12, 363 A.2d 91 (1975). A finding is clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. In applying the clearly erroneous standard to the findings of a trial court, we keep constantly in mind that our function is not to decide factual issues de novo. Our authority ... is circumscribed by the deference we must give to decisions of the trier of fact, who is usually in a superior position to appraise and weigh the evidence.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Jacob, supra, 680; see also United States v. Steil, 916 F.2d 485, 487-88 (8th Cir. 1990) (<HOLDING>); People v. Lang, 189 Ill. App. 3d 384, 390, Options: A. holding that clearly erroneous standard applies to review district courts determination of dangerousness under 18 usc 4246 B. holding that a finding of accommodation is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review instead of under a de novo standard C. holding that courts of appeals should review the facts necessary to determine whether an exemption to the flsa applies in a particular under the clearly erroneous standard D. holding that the finding of intent to discriminate is a factual determination subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review E. holding that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies to 3bllc determinations

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that clearly erroneous standard applies to review district courts determination of dangerousness under 18 usc 4246
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: Comptroller of the Treasury v. Armco, Inc., 70 Md.App. 403, 521 A.2d 785, 793, (Md.App.1987). In remanding the case to the Tax Court, Judge Pollitt, on behalf of this Court, explained that the court must inquire further into the intra-corporate relationship. Specifically, it must determine whether the taxpayer’s activities incident to earning the interest income were part of the taxpayer’s business activities in Maryland or merely a discrete business enterprise. Id. 521 A.2d at 795. In Armco, the corporate taxpayer asserted that because the interest income at issue was derived from an investment in a nonunitary corporation, that income could not be taxed by the State. The taxpayer sought support for this position in ASARCO, supra. Our review of ASARCO found nothing the 922 (Colo.1983) (<HOLDING>); Sperry and Hutchinson Company v. Department Options: A. holding there are three tests used to determine whether an employee was engaged in an activity that is part of the owners trade business or occupation B. holding that care of the grounds was part of the business of the hospital C. holding interest derived from shortterm notes is an integral part of lone stars business since the surplus finds are produced by that business the investments are shortterm liquid made with the intent that both the principal and interest are to be used in the regular course of the taxpayers trade or business D. holding that corporations interest from shortterm securities held pending use of funds in its regular business operation was apportionable E. holding where the defendants engaged primarily in the business of providing delivery services that onfoot delivery workers constituted an integral part of the defendants business

assistant: The best answer is C. holding interest derived from shortterm notes is an integral part of lone stars business since the surplus finds are produced by that business the investments are shortterm liquid made with the intent that both the principal and interest are to be used in the regular course of the taxpayers trade or business
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: (a) All fees and interest hereunder shall be calculated on the basis of a 360-day year for the actual days elapsed, except that (i) interest on Base Rate Loans calculated using clause (b) of the definition of “Base Rate”, (ii) interest on Prime Rate Loans calculated using clause (a) of the definition of “Prime Rate” and (iii) interest on Eurocurrency Loans denominated in Canadian Dollars shall, in each case, be calculated on the basis of a 365/366-day year, as the case may be, for the actual days elapsed. The Administrative Agent shall as soon as practicable notify the U.S. Borrower and the Lenders of each determination of each Eurocurrency Rate for any Eurocurrency Loans outstanding. Any change in the interest rate on a Loan resulting from a change in the Base Rate or Prime Rate shall become effective as of the opening of business on the day on which such change becomes effective. The Administrative Agent shall as soon as practicable notify the U.S. Borrower and the Lenders of the effective date and the amount of each such change in interest rate.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. City of Kotzebue, 627 P.2d 623, 630 n. 10 (Alaska 1981) (citing § 302B to reject a jury instruction that "[eJvery person who, himself, is exercising ordinary care, has a right to assume that every other person will perform his duty and obey the law"). 15 . Restatement (SEconp) or Torts § 302B emt. d. 16 . Restatement (SEconp) or Torts § 302B emt. e. 17 . Id. These examples have been paraphrased. Comment e would also hold an actor liable for the crimes of a third party if the actor has a special relationship with the victim, and the Restatement gives additional examples of such relationships. But as we have discussed above, no such special relationship was present here. 18 . Restatement (SEconp) or Torts § 302B cmt. eH. 19 . See, eg., Fiala v. Rains, 519 N.W.2d 386, 389 (Iowa 1994) (<HOLDING>); Taylor v. Louis, 349 S.W.3d 729, 737 Options: A. holding that a receiver is not liable when he acts as would an ordinarily prudent man in the management of his own affairs B. holding that the fourth amendment was not violated when police officers with probable cause to believe that a man had hidden marijuana in his home prevented that man from entering the home for about two hours while they obtained a search warrant C. recognizing exigency to permit warrantless home entry where officer entered home to protect victim of domestic battery who contacted police saying that she was afraid that her boyfriend would seriously harm her D. holding that it was not foreseeable that an abusive boyfriend would be waiting to attack another man that his girlfriend brought home one night E. holding defendants girlfriend had authority to consent to search as a joint occupant

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that it was not foreseeable that an abusive boyfriend would be waiting to attack another man that his girlfriend brought home one night
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: policy expired at the end of 1969, and because Galaxy knew that Canadian denied coverage in the 1970 personal injury actions resulting from the plant fumes, Canadian asserts that this declaratory judgment action should have been brought to determine liability for coverage before now. Galaxy knew in 1969 that Canadian contested coverage regarding the fumes, and in fact filed a declaratory judgment action to determine the parties’ rights. That action was settled. Canadian now asserts that plaintiffs should have proceeded to judgment in that action, and that the present action is time-barred. Canadian argues that the action accrued when Galaxy discovered that Canadian would not perform, under the “discovery rule” adopted in Maryland, see Levin v. Friedman, 271 Md. 438, 317 A.2d 831 (1974) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs argue that the statute of Options: A. holding that the cause of action accrued on the date of sale B. holding that the right of action accrued upon failure to perform contract C. holding that the payments accrued D. recognizing the right of a defendant to comment upon the failure of the state to produce evidence E. holding that mutuality of obligation is essential for contracts based on mutual promises and that a contract is unenforceable where a party is free to perform or not perform the contract

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the right of action accrued upon failure to perform contract
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 Credit Party hereby releases, acquits, and forever discharges Agent and each of the Lenders, and each and every past and present subsidiary, affiliate, stockholder, officer, director, agent, servant, employee, representative, and attorney of Agent and the Lenders, from any and all claims, causes of action, suits, debts, liens, obligations, liabilities, demands, losses, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) of any kind, character, or nature whatsoever, known or unknown, fixed or contingent, which such Credit Party may have or claim to have now or which may hereafter arise out of or connected with any act of commission or omission of Agent or the Lenders existing or occurring prior to the date of this Amendment or any instrument executed prior to the date of this Amendment including, without limitation, any claims, liabilities or obligations arising with respect to the Credit Agreement or the other of the Financing Documents, other than claims, liabilities or obligations caused by Agent's or any Lender's own gross negligence or willful misconduct. The provisions of this paragraph shall be binding upon each Credit Party and shall inure to the benefit of Agent, the Lenders, and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Purchaser acknowledges that except as expressly provided in Article 2 of this Agreement, Seller has not made, and Seller hereby expressly disclaims and negates, and the Purchaser hereby expressly waives, any other representation or warranty, express, implied, at Law or otherwise relating to the Acquired Interests, Seller or Seller Affiliates, the Project Company, the Wind Project or this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: whether the jury found that the Duderstadts breached the contract by increasing the rent during the trial period, we reverse the directed verdict and remand the case for a retrial on the merits of the breach of contract claim relating to the purchase portion of the contract. See Kirkpatrick v. Introspect Healthcare Corp., 114 N.M. 706, 713, 845 P.2d 800, 807 (1992) (remanding for trial on merits of breach of contract claim noting that the appellate court will not determine questions of fact on appeal). However, we hold that, upon retrial of the breach of contract claim, Gilmore’s expectancy damages, if any, should not include the amounts of the bonus and the escrow deposit awarded to Gilmore in the first trial. See Hood v. Fulkerson, 102 N.M. 677, 680, 699 P.2d 608, 611 (1985) (<HOLDING>). To prevent a claim of double recovery on Options: A. holding that because liquidated damages under the adea are punitive in nature a jurys award of state punitive damages and adea liquidated damages constitutes a double recovery and therefore reducing the total recovery by the amount of the liquidated damages award B. holding that recovery is limited to actual compensatory damages C. holding that no recovery exists for speculative damages D. holding that it is wellsettled that although a plaintiff is entitled to full recovery for its damages it is not entitled to a double recovery for the same loss or injury E. holding that duplication of damages or double recovery is impermissible

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that duplication of damages or double recovery is impermissible
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 contains the entire understanding between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, inducements, and conditions, express or implied, oral or written (including without limitation the Prior Agreement), except as herein contained, and excluding the Proprietary Rights Agreement and the equity award agreements and Company’s equity plan(s) under which the Executive’s outstanding equity awards were granted, with such agreements incorporated by reference into this Agreement. The express terms hereof control and supersede any course of performance and/or usage of the trade inconsistent with any of the terms hereof. This Agreement may not be modified or amended other than by an agreement in writing signed by both 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: Assembly to study this issue and enact legislation, as other states have done, to protect a co-tenant’s investment in property held in a joint tenancy with right of survivorship. For these reasons, I dissent from- the Court’s decision. 1 . Tennessee Code Annotated section 66-1-107 provides: In all estates, real and personal, held in joint tenancy, the part or share of any tenant dying shall not descend or go to the surviving tenant or tenants, but shall descend or be vested in the heirs, executors, or administrators, respectively, of the tenant so dying, in the same manner as estates held by tenancy in common. 2 . Michigan and Pennsylvania common law allow for the creation of a survivorship interest through express language. See Albro v. Allen, 434 Mich. 271, 454 N.W.2d 85, 88 (1990) (<HOLDING>); In re Estate of Quick, 588 Pa. 485, 905 A.2d Options: A. holding that when a husband first acquired property and then conveyed it to his wife they could not hold the property as tenants by the entirety or joint tenants because the four unities did not coincide so the deed created a tenancy in common with a right of survivorship B. holding a joint tenancy with right of survivorship is created by express language in the granting instrument C. holding each share in a joint tenancy is presumed to be equal for purposes of alienation D. holding that a debtors interest in a tenancy by the entirety is property of the bankruptcy estate under section 541 because of debtors undivided present interests in the use possession income and right of survivorship of the property E. holding that where deed purports to create tenancy by entireties between two people who are not husband and wife joint tenancy with right of survivorship is created

assistant: The best answer is B. holding a joint tenancy with right of survivorship is created by express language in the granting instrument
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: tripadvisor and some of its affiliates act as marketplaces to allow travelers to enter into vacation rental agreements or rental transactions with property owners and managers ( each , an `` advertiser '' ) .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will, and will cause the Company and each of the Company’s Subsidiaries to, maintain, with financially sound and reputable insurers, insurance with respect to their respective properties and businesses against such casualties and contingencies, of such types, on such terms and in such amounts (including deductibles, co-insurance and self-insurance, if adequate reserves are maintained with respect thereto) as is customary in the case of entities of established reputations engaged in the same or a similar business and similarly situated.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Clarks’ property. Although some of the off-duty officers acknowledged that they had their guns with them during the surveillance period, there was no evidence from which a jury could find that the guards were authorized to use a firearm or that Lloyd’s knew they had guns. To the contrary, testimony indicated that the guards were expressly instructed that “no guns” were allowed. Based on this evidence, a jury could not reasonably find that the guards were authorized to shoot the Clarks’ dog. Shooting the Clarks’ dog also could not reasonably be considered incidental to and in furtherance of an authorized act. Shooting the dog was not related to nor would it have advanced the guards’ limited employment duties of watching for and reporting signs of fire. Cf. Tulsa General, 288 P.2d at 753 (<HOLDING>). The guards were not instructed to conceal Options: A. holding that despite the inclusion of negligencebased counts because sexual assault was the only act alleged in the writ as a cause of bodily injury the injuries alleged had to be viewed as repercussions of the assault B. holding that a healthcare power of attorney includes the authority to bind the principal to an optional arbitration agreement because among other reasons an agent has authority to do everything necessary or proper and usual in the ordinary course of business for effecting the purpose of his agency and that the decision to enter into such agreements in connection with placement in a healthcare facility is a proper and usual exercise of an agents powers internal quotation marks and citation omitted C. holding that the insurer is not bound by acts of the agent which are beyond the scope of his authority when the insured has notice of the limitations upon an agents authority or when the circumstances are sufficient to suggest that an inquiry should be made as to such limitations D. holding that an agents assault on the target of a picketline could not properly be contemplated as an incident to the exercise of ordinary authority to act as a peaceable picket E. holding that the principal is liable for an agents acts committed within the scope of the agents employment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an agents assault on the target of a picketline could not properly be contemplated as an incident to the exercise of ordinary authority to act as a peaceable picket
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: (5th Cir.2001) (internal citation omitted). “An issue is material if its resolution could affect the outcome of the action. A dis pute as to a material fact is genuine if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” DIRECTV Inc. v. Robson, 420 F.3d 532, 536 (5th Cir.2005) (internal citations omitted). In deciding whether a genuine and material fact issue has been created, the court reviews the facts and inferences to be drawn from them in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Reaves Brokerage Co. v. Sunbelt Fruit & Vegetable Co., 336 F.3d 410, 412 (5th Cir.2003). The non-movant’s burden is not met by mere reliance on the allegations or denials in the non-movant’s pleadings. See King v. Dogan, 31 F.3d 344, 346 (5th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Likewise, “eonclusory allegations” or Options: A. holding that unverified pleadings do not constitute competent summary judgment evidence B. holding that unverified complaints cannot be considered as evidence at the summary judgment stage C. holding that pleadings cannot be regarded as summary judgment evidence D. holding that unverified pleadings and unauthenticated documents did not constitute proper summary judgment evidence E. holding that unsworn pleadings do not constitute proper summary judgment evidence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that unverified pleadings do not constitute competent summary judgment evidence
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 supersedes any statements, representations or agreements of the Company with respect to the grant of the RSUs, any other equity-based awards or any related rights, and the Participant hereby waives any rights or claims related to any such statements, representations or agreements. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall insure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective executors, administers, heirs, successors and assigns.

assistant: Binding Effects
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: if a statute requires an authorization or limitation to be set forth in the certificate of incorporation, an action setting it forth in the bylaws will be insufficient); Jones v. Wallace, 291 Or. 11, 628 P.2d 388, 391 (1981) (invalidating, pursuant to the Oregon Business Corporation Act, O.R.S. 57.165, a bylaw amendment altering the corporation’s shareholder-quorum requirement when no such amendment was made to the entity’s articles of incorporation). Allowing the Board to change the shareholder-quorum requirement through a bylaw amendment would effectively reduce the rights of shareholders without their consent or participation. We find such a result to run contrary to the Legislature’s intent in adopting the Act. See Vergopia v. Shaker, 191 N.J. 217, 235-36, 922 A.2d 1238 (2007) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, we reverse the motion judge’s Options: A. recognizing privilege for corporate officers directors and shareholders to influence the actions of their corporation B. holding a shareholders cause of action accrued for statute of limitations purposes when shareholders and directors of a company asserted a right to stock which was hostile to the plaintiffs claim to the stock C. holding only that although a party cannot interfere with its own contract a supervisor who is not an officer of a plaintiffs employer is not a party to the plaintiffs employment contract and therefore can interfere with it D. holding that where approval of the board of directors was not formally requested a demand would have been futile for it could hardly be expected that if approval of the board of directors were sought defendant who controlled 50 of the board would have authorized the action against himself E. holding that a board of directors cannot create bylaws that will substantially interfere with the statutory rights given to shareholders

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a board of directors cannot create bylaws that will substantially interfere with the statutory rights given to shareholders
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: 15.8 unless you reside in germany , if you or we terminate this agreement , the clauses of these terms that reasonably should survive termination of the agreement will remain in effect .

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: to cover contract-related tort and unjust enrichment claims. Finally, the fact that the choice-of-law provision is contained in a distinct paragraph titled “Governing Law,” which also includes the forum-selection clause designating a Virginia federal district court as the proper forum, “counsels] in favor of a broad interpretation”-because that combination “manifests the intent to reduce uncertainty and proceed in one forum under one body of law.” Zaklit v. Glob. Linguist Sols., LLC, No. 1:14-cv-314, 2014 WL 3109804, at *11 (E.D. Va. July 8, 2014). In sum, the text of the choice-of-law provision points persuasively to the conclusion that the parties intended that Virginia law apply to tort and unjust enrichment claims related to the Agreement. See Freedman, 325 F.Supp.2d at 641, 653-54 (<HOLDING>). This conclusion finds further firm support in Options: A. holding that where one party had received a written agreement and conformed his conduct to that agreement for an extended period of time but failed to sign the agreement he was equitably estopped from denying the validity of the agreement B. holding that an agreement providing this agreement when signed by author and publisher will cancel and supercede the previous agreements was clearly intended to terminate an earlier agreement C. holding that an arbitration agreement is separable from the underlying agreement D. holding that a choiceoflaw provision providing that virginia law would govern the parties agreement clearly foreclosed plaintiff from bringing a tort claim that arose from the plaintiffs rights under the agreement E. holding that the parties agreement was superseded by a subsequent agreement that stated that it comprises the entire agreement and supersedes all prior understandings and representations oral or written between the parties

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a choiceoflaw provision providing that virginia law would govern the parties agreement clearly foreclosed plaintiff from bringing a tort claim that arose from the plaintiffs rights under the agreement
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 favor of Defendant Pima County under Title VII and the Equal Pay Act of 1963. We review de novo, Dietrich v. John Ascuaga’s Nugget, 548 F.3d 892, 896 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm. 1. The district court permissibly deemed Defendant’s statement of facts to be true because Plaintiff failed to comply with Local Rule 56.1(b). See Local Rule 56.1(b) (requiring that the non-moving party file a statement of facts that, paragraph by paragraph, states whether it disputes each paragraph of the moving party’s statement of facts). 2. Summary judgment was proper on both the Equal Pay Act claim and the Title VII claim because the work of the proposed comparator, James Casanova, was not substantially equal to Plaintiffs work. See Stanley v. Univ. of S. Cal., 178 F.3d 1069, 1074 (9th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); see also Forsberg v. Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co., Options: A. holding that the mere allegation that a female professor was paid less than a male colleague for equal work stated a claim under the equal pay act B. holding plaintiff must make concrete showing of a prima facie claim of actionable harm denying motion to quash subpoena to undercover identity of doe defendants where inter alia plaintiff offered sufficient evidence to show it could establish prima facie claim C. holding that a plaintiff who cannot establish an equal pay act claim likewise cannot establish a paybased title vii claim D. holding to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination a plaintiff must show he 1 E. holding that to establish a prima facie equal pay act claim the plaintiff must show that the jobs being compared are substantially equal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that to establish a prima facie equal pay act claim the plaintiff must show that the jobs being compared are substantially equal
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 has not created a ‘magic number’ number that, once overcome, raises a presumption that numerosity is satisfied.”). Moreover, such an approach would be contrary to the United States Supreme Court’s holding in General Tel. Co. of the Northwest, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 446 U.S. 318, 100 S.Ct. 1698, 64 L.Ed.2d 319 (1980), that “[t]he numerosity requirement requires examination of the specific facts of each case and imposes no absolute limitations.” Id. at 330, 100 S.Ct. 1698; see also Moore’s Federal Praotioe § 23.22[l]|b] (“To the extent that any ‘presumption’ effectively alters the b , however, has never had difficulty dealing with hundreds of party plaintiffs or with single plaintiff ‘test’ cases.”); O’Hanlon v. United States, 7 Cl.Ct. 204, 206-207 (1985) (<HOLDING>) In addition, “the ease of identifying [class] Options: A. holding it appropriate for the purposes of developing an analysis of the potential damages at issue to include some request for information or an appropriately designed questionnaire which could be made part of the notice itself B. holding that de facto dismissal without prejudice was appropriate where a plaintiffs certificate failed to state with specificity that a defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiffs injury C. holding joinder appropriate for 39 potential plaintiffs D. holding that dismissal without prejudice was appropriate where a plaintiff failed to name each of the persons alleged to have violated the appropriate standard of care E. recognizing contribution in the appropriate case

assistant: The best answer is C. holding joinder appropriate for 39 potential plaintiffs
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 provisions of Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10 and 11 of this Agreement shall survive any termination of this Agreement in accordance with the terms of such sections.

assistant: Survival
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: BORROWER, ON BEHALF OF ITSELF AND EACH OTHER LOAN PARTY, ALL LENDERS, AND ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY WITH RESPECT TO, AND HEREBY WAIVE, RELEASE AND AGREE NOT TO SUE FOR ANY SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR ARISING OUT OF ITS ACTIVITIES IN CONNECTION HEREWITH OR THEREWITH (WHETHER BEFORE OR AFTER THE CLOSING DATE).

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: Upon termination of this Agreement, Buyer, at its sole option, shall return to Seller or shall destroy all title, engineering, environmental assessments or reports, maps and other information furnished by or on behalf of Seller to Buyer or prepared by or on behalf of Buyer in connection with its due diligence investigation of the Assets, in each case, in accordance with the Confidentiality Agreements (and subject to such retention rights as are provided in the Confidentiality Agreements) and an officer of Buyer shall certify same to Seller in writing.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Neither Seller nor the Project Company nor any Person acting on either of their behalf has paid or become obligated to pay any fee or commission to any broker, finder or intermediary for or on account of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Borrowers and the other Credit Parties irrevocably and unconditionally submits, for itself and its property, to the exclusive jurisdiction of any court of the State of New York sitting in New York, New York and of the United States District Court of the Southern District of New York, and any appellate court from any thereof, in any action, litigation or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or any other Loan Document, or for recognition or enforcement of any judgment, and each of the parties hereto irrevocably and unconditionally agrees that all claims in respect of any such action, litigation or proceeding may be heard and determined in such New York state court or, to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law, in such Federal court. Each of the parties hereto agrees that a final judgment in any such action, litigation or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: payments made with payments instruments based outside of the united states will be charged by tilia branch uk ltd. , which is located at 11-12 st. james 's square , suite 1 , 3rd floor , london , united kingdom sw1y 4lb .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the Closing Date, except as disclosed in Parent’s Form S-11 registration statement as filed with the SEC on or prior to the Closing Date, there are no actions, suits, proceedings or investigations pending as to which the Borrower or the Restricted Subsidiaries have been served or have received notice or, to the best knowledge of the Borrower, threatened against or affecting the Borrower or the Restricted Subsidiaries or any Property of any of them before any Governmental Authority which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this or the application of any such provision to any Party or circumstance shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof or the application of such provision to any other Parties or circumstances.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: his case and have its merits fairly judged.” Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 433, 102 S.Ct. 1148, 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982). This is where the claim founders. New Vision does not, because it cannot, complain that it was not afforded adequate process in the termination proceedings; the record plainly demonstrates that it was given the “full panoply of due process protections.” Sloan v. Dep’t of Hous. & Urban Dev., 231 F.3d 10, 19 (D.C.Cir.2000). New Vision had several opportunities to informally resolve its problems before termination, including a follow-up PCR after its initial failure, the ability to submit corrective policies to the agency, and the opportunity to present evidence to DHCF before termination. See Proposed Notice at 1; see also Patchogue, 797 F.2d at 1144 (<HOLDING>); see also GOS Operator, LLC v. Sebelius, 843 Options: A. holding informal process is sufficient because medicaid providers are not entitled under constitutional due process standards to a full administrative hearing prior to termination of their provider agreement B. holding that foreign states are not persons entitled to rights under the due process clause C. holding that an alien is entitled to the fifth amendment guarantee of due process which is satisfied by a full and fair hearing D. holding that district court may order hearing as remedy for termination of public employee without due process E. recognizing due process right to notice and informal hearing in school disciplinary process

assistant: The best answer is A. holding informal process is sufficient because medicaid providers are not entitled under constitutional due process standards to a full administrative hearing prior to termination of their provider agreement
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: 106(b). In addition to requiring petitions filed after May 11, 2005 to be filed in the courts of appeals, the Act also requires district courts to transfer any case or part of any case challenging an order of removal, deportation or exclusion pending on the date of the Act’s enactment to the Court of Appeals for the Circuit in which a petition for review could have been filed. While Congress specifically eliminated the district courts’ habeas corpus jurisdiction over review of removal orders, the REAL ID Act does not affect the district courts’ jurisdiction over review of other habeas corpus claims. Section 106(a)(1) only eliminates district courts’ habeas jurisdiction over review of orders of removal. See id. at § 106(a)(1) (a petition for revie ist. LEXIS 25753 (D.Conn. Oct.24, 2005) (<HOLDING>). Because Petitioner’s habeas claim was pending Options: A. holding that we do not have jurisdiction to consider the underlying final order upon petition for review of a motion to reopen where the petitioner did not earlier seek review of that underlying final order B. holding the bias decision upholding the ijs finding of removability was the final order C. holding that a challenge to the ijs procedures and decision to deport the petitioner constituted a challenge to a final order of deportation stripping the district court of jurisdiction to review the habeas petition D. holding district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a challenge to a removal order because such challenges must be raised in a petition for review E. holding that the time limit for filing a petition for review of a final order of deportation is jurisdictional

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a challenge to the ijs procedures and decision to deport the petitioner constituted a challenge to a final order of deportation stripping the district court of jurisdiction to review the habeas 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: the appellate court until almost three years later. It was not until another six months later that the appellate court remanded the case. However, the remand was solely to determine whether Lee was still in custody. It then took almost a year for the lower court to reinstate its dismissal. As far as we know the appellate court still has not ruled on this dismissal. The arguments made in Petitioner’s initial PCRA petition have still not been considered by any court. This ping-pong game the state court was playing with Lee’s petition would almost be comical if Lee had not been in custody this entire time awaiting resolution. In deciding whether a delay is excessive, we do consider the degree of progress made in state court. See, e.g., Cristin v. Brennan, 281 F.3d 404, 411 (3d Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). In this case, however, we do not believe that Options: A. holding that a 13 month delay was unreasonable B. holding that a six month delay was unreasonable C. holding that a five month delay was unreasonable D. holding that a 14 month delay was unreasonable E. holding that a 27 month delay was not excessive given that a hearing was held and the petition was ruled upon

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a 27 month delay was not excessive given that a hearing was held and the petition was ruled upon
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 his own skill, which we interpret the law not to mean, as distinguished from the chance or unpredictability of the mechanism, which we construe the law to proscribe. Id. at 874-75. Additionally in State v. Broward Vending, Inc., 696 So.2d 851 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1997), the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that where “the game is set to play-itself and to record a certain win/loss ratio[,] ... the element of chance is inherent in the game.” Id. at 852. These prior Florida cases clearly put Plaintiffs on notice of the meaning of the phrase “outcome is determined by factors unpredictable by the player or games in which the player may not control the outcome of the game through skill.” See Fla. Stat. § 849.161(l)(a); see also Martin v. Lloyd, 700 F.3d 132, 136-37 (4th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). As, the Fourth Circuit stated in Martin v. Options: A. holding that a noticeofrights form that plainly affects more than one person and encompasses more than an immediate set of facts and is applicable to all inmates in a particular category is a rule B. holding that prior south carolina cases interpreting whether a device is a game of chance demonstrate a plainly legitimate sweep and more than a conceivable application which is all that is required to survive a facial challenge to a criminal statute where constitutional rights are not implicated C. holding that exhaustion of arbitration procedure is not necessary before the district court could consider a facial constitutional challenge D. holding that in deciding on a facial constitutional challenge it is improper to consider only limited hypothetical applications E. holding that more than notice to a defendant is required

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that prior south carolina cases interpreting whether a device is a game of chance demonstrate a plainly legitimate sweep and more than a conceivable application which is all that is required to survive a facial challenge to a criminal statute where constitutional rights are not implicated
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 and each other Credit Party irrevocably and unconditionally agrees that it will not commence any action, litigation or proceeding of any kind or description, whether in law or equity, whether in contract or in tort or otherwise, against the Administrative Agent, any Lender, any Issuing Lender, the Swingline Lender, or any Related Party of the foregoing in any way relating to this Agreement or any other Loan Document or the transactions relating hereto or thereto, in any forum other than the courts of the State of Illinois sitting in Cook County, and of the United States District Court of the Northern District of Illinois, and any appellate court from any thereof, and each of the parties hereto irrevocably and unconditionally submits to the jurisdiction of such courts and agrees that all claims in respect of any such action, litigation or proceeding may be heard and determined in such Illinois State court or, to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law, in such federal court. Each of the parties hereto agrees that a final judgment in any such action, litigation or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law. Nothing in this Agreement or in any other Loan Document shall affect any right that the Administrative Agent, any Lender, the Issuing Lender or the Swingline Lender may otherwise have to bring any action or proceeding relating to this Agreement or any other Loan Document against the Borrower or any other Credit Party or its properties in the courts of any jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: In an affirmative defense to Brown’s complaint, National alleged that because the car was rented in Georgia, National’s vicarious liability as owner of the car was governed by Georgia law, which provides no equivalent to our dangerous instrumentality doctrine. Brown moved to strike the defense and alleged that Florida law applied. On the above stated, agreed-upon facts, the court ruled that Georgia law applied to the issue of vicarious liability and National could not be held vicariously liable for Fanfair’s negligent driving. Because there are no disputed facts, and this case involves solely an application of the law, we are in as good a position as the trial judge to decide how to apply the law to the instant factual scenario. See Mansell v. State, 609 So.2d 679 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (<HOLDING>). We conclude that under the Significant Options: A. holding that as to the correction of an erroneous application of law a nondeferential standard of review applies B. holding that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies to 3bllc determinations C. holding that courts of appeals should review the facts necessary to determine whether an exemption to the flsa applies in a particular under the clearly erroneous standard D. holding that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies unless judgment is entered on the basis of documentary evidence alone E. holding that a finding of accommodation is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review instead of under a de novo standard

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that as to the correction of an erroneous application of law a nondeferential standard of review applies