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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 417 U.S. 279 94 S.Ct. 2246. 41 L.Ed.2d 68 Richard E. GERSTEIN et al.v.Nancy COE et al. No. 73—1157. June 3, 1974. PER CURIAM. 1 A three-judge District Court entered a declaratory judgment holding unconstitutional a Florida statute, Fla.Stat.Ann. § 458.22(3) (Supp.1974—1975), which forbids an abortion without the consent of the husband, if the woman is married, and if unmarried and under the age of 18, without the consent of a parent. Because it was anticipated that the State would respect the declaratory judgment, the court declined to issue an injunction against the enforcement of the statute. The State of Florida appeals from the declaratory judgment invalidating the statute. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1253, under which this appeal is sought to be taken, does not authorize an appeal from the grant or denial of declaratory relief alone. Gunn v. University Committee, 399 U.S. 383, 90 S.Ct. 2013, 26 L.Ed.2d 684 (1970); Mitchell v. Donovan, 398 U.S. 427, 90 S.Ct. 1763, 26 L.Ed.2d 378 (1970); Rockefeller v. Catholic Medical Center of Brooklyn & Queens, Inc., Division of St. Mary's Hospital, 397 U.S. 820, 90 S.Ct. 1517, 25 L.Ed.2d 806 (1970); see also Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 123, 93 S.Ct. 705, 711, 33 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973). The declaratory judgment is appealable to the Court of Appeals, and we are informed that an appeal to that court has already been taken. It is suggested that we treat the statement of jurisdiction as a petition for certiorari before judgment to the Court of Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1). The petition for certiorari is denied. 2 Appeal dismissed; petition for certiorari denied.

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: The Borrower and each of the Restricted Subsidiaries have obtained all material intellectual property that is necessary for the operation of their respective businesses as currently conducted and as proposed to be conducted, except where the failure to obtain any such rights could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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: repeatedly retained by benefits plans may have an incentive to make a finding of "not disabled" in order to save their employers money and to preserve their own consulting arrangements. But the assumption that the opinions of a treating physician warrant greater credit than the opinions of plan consultants may make scant sense when, for example, the relationship between the claimant and the treating physician has been of short duration, or when a specialist engaged by the plan has expertise the treating physician lacks. And if a consultant engaged by a plan may have an incentive to make a finding of "not disabled," so a treating physician, in a close case, may favor a finding of "disabled.” Nord, 538 U.S. at 832, o., No. 02-10067-CIV, 2004 WL 2674352, at *4 (S.D.Fla. August 31, 2004) (<HOLDING>). However, plaintiff has cited no authority, Options: A. holding that plan administrator could appropriately require objective medical evidence supporting disability claim where such a requirement is not contradicted by any provision of the administrators own policy B. holding that it was error for a plan administrator to require the claimant to submit clinical findings to support his diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome when the plan did not require such evidence C. holding that it was wrong for an administrator to require a claimant suffering from fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome to submit objective medical evidence in support of her claim for benefits when the plan did not require such evidence D. holding that plan administrator cannot exclude a claim for lack of objective medical evidence unless the objective medical evidence standard was made clear plain and conspicuous enough in the policy to negate layman sic plaintiffs objectively reasonable expectations of coverage E. holding that an insurance company could not deny a claim for longterm disability benefits based on a lack of objective medical evidence when the original policy did not refer to the objective medical evidence standard and never defined that term

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it was wrong for an administrator to require a claimant suffering from fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome to submit objective medical evidence in support of her claim for benefits when the plan did not require such 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that his debt was $11,538. R. at 627 (“[Y]ou were paid $11,538.00 more than you were entitled to receive.”). The appellant’s February 2010 NOD contained a clear expression of disagreement with the RO’s calculation of the debt amount, which was sufficient to initiate an appeal of that issue. R. at 77 (“I feel I should only have to pay back the money paid to me after the letter I received in September [2009].”); see Jarvis v. West, 12 Vet.App. 559, 562 (1999) (reviewing the language and context of an NOD to determine its scope); see also 38 C.F.R. § 20.201 (2015) (requiring that an NOD be written “in terms which can be reasonably construed as disagreement with [an adverse AOJ] determination and a desire for appellate review”). Yet, the RO failed to recognize his disagreem 0-41 (1999) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the debt continues to be in Options: A. holding that the boards finding that a matter was not before it because a substantive appeal had not been filed was error and determining that because a timely nod had been submitted and the ro never responded by issuing an soc as required by law and regulation the proper remedy was to vacate the board decision as to the matter and remand to the board for appropriate procedural compliance specifically the issuance of an soc B. holding that a board affirmance of an ro decision subsumes that decision C. holding that because the appellant had filed an nod the board should have remanded that issue to the ro not referred it there ifor issuance of an soc D. holding that the ros failure to issue an soc prevented the disputed ro decision from becoming final and appealable to the board and the claim therefore remained pending E. holding the board must either obtain a waiver or determine whether a claimant will be prejudiced by the boards adjudication of a question or issue in an appeal not otherwise decided by the ro otherwise it must remand for the ro to decide the question in the first instance

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because the appellant had filed an nod the board should have remanded that issue to the ro not referred it there ifor issuance of an soc
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: Provided that Consultant is in compliance with this Consulting Agreement, the Company shall list Consultant as additional insured on its Directors and Officer’s insurance policy and shall indemnify and hold harmless Consultant from and against all losses, judgments, damages, expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees and costs provided that the Company consents to Consultant’s attorneys which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld), liabilities, judgments, and amounts paid in settlement (collectively “ Damages ”) incurred by or asserted against Consultant arising from Consultant’s performance of the Services, except for any Damages arising from any act(s) that was caused by Consultant’s dishonesty, willful misconduct, or gross negligence in performing the Services.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: meaning of the language is plain, we apply that meaning. State ex rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane Cnty., 2004 WI 58, ¶ 45, 271 Wis. 2d 633, 681 N.W.2d 110. "Statutory language is given its common, ordinary, and accepted meaning, except that technical or specially-defined words or phrases are given their technical or special definitional meaning." Id. Our analysis of statutory language also may be aided by considering prior decisions examining the relevant statutory provisions. See DeHart v. Wis. Mut. Ins. Co., 2007 WI 91, ¶ 15, 302 Wis. 2d 564, 734 N.W.2d 394. ¶ 24. Wisconsin Stat. § 893.80(4) was enacted in response to our decision in Holytz v. City of Milwaukee, 17 Wis. 2d 26, 39, 115 N.W.2d 618 (1962). See Coffey v. City of Milwaukee, 74 Wis. 2d 526, 532, 247 N.W.2d 132 (1976) (<HOLDING>). In Holytz, 17 Wis. 2d at 39, we abrogated the Options: A. recognizing that what is now 893804 is the codification of holytz B. holding that communication was initiated by the question well what is going to happen to me now C. holding that what is a threat must be distinguished from what is constitutionally protected speech D. recognizing the supreme courts articulation of the new test and stating that the sole question now is whether there is clear evidence that congress intended to provide such a remedy E. holding that what is important is not simply that the element at issue is defined in terms of what it does but that the term as the name for a structure has a reasonably well understood meaning in the art

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that what is now 893804 is the codification of holytz
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: Tenant warrants and represents that it has dealt with no brokers in connection with this Lease other than Newmark Grubb Knight Frank ("Tenant's Broker") and Stream Realty Partners-Houston, L.P. ("Landlord's Broker"). Landlord warrants and represents that it has dealt with no brokers in connection with this Lease other than Tenant's Broker and Landlord's Broker. Landlord shall pay commissions to Tenant's Broker and Landlord's Broker in connection with this Lease pursuant to separate written agreements between Landlord and Tenant's Broker and Landlord and Landlord's Broker. Tenant is hereby advised that Affiliates of Landlord's Broker have ownership interests in Landlord.

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: If any portion or provision of this Agreement is declared illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of that portion or provision in circumstances other than those as to which it is so declared illegal or unenforceable, will not be affected by that declaration, and each portion and provision of this Agreement will continue to be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.

assistant: Enforceability
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 Plan was adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company on March 18, 2011, effective as of July 1, 2011 (the “ Effective Date ”), and shall apply to any purchase right granted, or stock transferred pursuant to any purchase right granted, on or after the Effective Date. This Plan shall continue until the earlier to occur of (a) termination of this Plan by the Board (which termination may be effected by the Board at any time), (b) issuance of all of the shares of Common Stock reserved for issuance under this Plan, or (c) April 27, 2021.

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: judge’s determination of probable cause in the issuance of a search warrant that is ultimately found to be invalid. The officer’s reliance on the magistrate judge’s probable cause determination must be objectively reasonable. Id. at 922-23, 104 S.Ct. at 3420-21. Four circumstances exist in which the Leon good faith exception does not apply and suppression remains an appropriate remedy: (1) the magistrate judge issuing the warrant was misled by statements made by the affiant that were false or made “in reckless disregard for the truth”; (2) “the issuing magistrate judge wholly abandoned his [or her] judicial role”; (3) the affidavit in support of the warrant is “so lacking in indicia of probable cause L.Ed.2d 373 (1984); United States v. Portillo-Reyes, 529 F.2d 844, 848 (9th Cir.1975) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 899, 97 S.Ct. 267, 50 Options: A. holding that a drug sniff outside the front door of the defendants residence was not a fourth amendment search because the defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy at the entrance to property that is open to the public including the front porch B. holding that passengers lacked any reasonable expectation of privacy and therefore had no standing to challenge the search of the vehicle C. holding that mere insertion of key was not a search or at least not an unreasonable search protected by the fourth amendment D. holding that the insertion of a key into the door of a car to see if it fit constituted the beginning of a search because there is a reasonable expectation of privacy E. holding that insertion of a crowbar into the door of a suspects house by officers before they announced their presence constitutes an unreasonable search

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the insertion of a key into the door of a car to see if it fit constituted the beginning of a search because there is a reasonable expectation of privacy
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is raised in a 60-1507 motion, as here. This view holds some support in Kansas law. Kansas case law ... plainly holds that constitutional challenges to presumptive sentences under the KSGA cannot be reviewed on direct appeal and must be raised in post-conviction proceedings under K.S.A. § 60-1507. Id. at 7-8 (citing State v. Lewis, 27 Kan.App.2d 134, 140-42, 998 P.2d 1141 (Kan.Ct.App.) (“[Because the issue is not one that could have been presented on direct appeal, it necessarily is one whose only chance of review is by collateral attack, i.e., a K.S.A. 60-1507 motion.”)), rev. denied, 269 Kan. 938 (Kan.2000). Hopper v. Cline, 2011 WL 6372960, *3 (D.Kan.2011). See State v. Mitchell, 45 Kan.App.2d 592, 605, 252 P.3d 586 (2011); State v. Lewis, 27 Kan.App.2d 134, 998 P.2d 1141 (2000) (<HOLDING>). And here, the KCOA addressed this claim on Options: A. holding cruel and unusual punishment complaint not preserved B. holding the constitutional right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment may be waived C. holding that the claim of not being able to interview jurors was procedurally barred because the claim should and could have been raised on direct appeal D. holding defendants claim that the presumptive sentence was cruel and unusual punishment was statutorily barred from being considered on direct appeal but could be raised in a postsentence collateral attack E. holding that a cruel and unusual punishment claim is not jurisdictional and therefore may not be raised for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding defendants claim that the presumptive sentence was cruel and unusual punishment was statutorily barred from being considered on direct appeal but could be raised in a postsentence collateral attack
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: — U.S. -, -, 113 S.Ct. 2050, 2054, 124 L.Ed.2d 138 (1993). For example, Congress could have drafted the statute to read: Whoever uses fire or an explosive to commit any arson which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States shall be sentenced to imprisonment for five years. Congress chose not to do so. Instead, Congress chose to punish those who use fire to commit any felony. That dictate applies to the facts of this case. The defendants used fire to burn two crosses in order to commit the felony of violating the civil rights of the inhabitants of the house. 18 U.S.C. § 241. Accordingly, we find the language of section 844(h)(1) to be clear and unambiguous and the statute applicable to the facts of this case. Cf. United States v. Worthy, 915 F.2d 1514, 1516-17 (11th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); accord United States v. Gresser, 935 F.2d 96, Options: A. holding that the rule of lenity applies to sentencing guidelines B. holding that arson of an owneroccupied residence not used for any commercial purpose does not qualify as property used in commerce and is not subject to federal prosecution under federal arson statute C. holding that pre1990 sentencing guidelines section 2k14b4use of fire or explosives to commit a federal felonyis not restricted to arson crimes and applies to cross burnings designed to interfere with anothers civil rights D. holding that blakely does not apply to the federal sentencing guidelines E. holding that the bankruptcy code does not interfere with criminal sentencing schemes

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that pre1990 sentencing guidelines section 2k14b4use of fire or explosives to commit a federal felonyis not restricted to arson crimes and applies to cross burnings designed to interfere with anothers civil rights
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: policies. 24 . 182 La. 551, 162 So. 177. 25 . No. 6829, 1917 WL 1628 (La.App. Jan. 9, 1917). 26 . A “constructive total loss" occurs when a covered peril renders something economically, if not physically, useless. See Hart, 162 So. at 180 (finding a constructive total loss when building was 75% destroyed by fire, rendering it useless, and thus, demolished by city order); Briede, 1917 WL 1628, *3 (building insured for $10,000 was gutted by fire, requiring $8,330 to repair it to state before fire or $10,830 to repair it to pass current code, court concluded homeowner suffered constructive total loss). 27 . In both Langston v. La. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., No. 53-219, slip op. (La. 25th Jud. Dist. Ct., Plaquemines Parish, Feb. 8, 2007) (unp 77 So.2d 774, 775-76 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2004) (<HOLDING>). 30 . Compare Fla. Stat. § 627.702(1) (2003) Options: A. holding that causation is a coverage question for the court when an insurer wholly denies that there is a covered loss and an amountofloss question for the appraisal panel when an insurer admits that there is a covered loss the amount of which is disputed B. holding that the vpl requires an insurer to pay the full value of the policy only when a covered peril causes a total loss C. holding that the repair or replace limitation of liability capped the insurers liability at the amount necessary to return the car to substantially the same condition as before the loss and did not include liability for loss due to stigma on resale D. holding that if the insurer has any liability at all to the owner for a building damaged by a covered peril and deemed a total loss that liability is for the face amount of the policy citation omitted emphasis in original E. holding that when an insurer files suit to cancel a policy the entire liability of the insurer both on the policy and under the statute is put in issue

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that if the insurer has any liability at all to the owner for a building damaged by a covered peril and deemed a total loss that liability is for the face amount of the policy citation omitted emphasis in original
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: 484 U.S. 1 108 S.Ct. 252 98 L.Ed.2d 1 Ronald W. REAGAN, et al., petitioners,v.James ABOUREZK et al. No. 86-656 Supreme Court of the United States October 19, 1987 On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment below is affirmed by an equally divided Court. 2 Justice BLACKMUN took no part in the decision of this case. Justice SCALIA took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 2
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: Subject to the provisions of this Lease, the covenants, conditions, and agreements contained herein shall bind and inure to the benefit of Landlord and Tenant and their respective successors, heirs, and assigns.

assistant: Successors
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: no ownership of numbers : if skype allocates to you a skype number ( previously known as `` online number '' ) or skype to go number , you do not own the number or have a right to retain that number forever .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the transactions contemplated herein shall be conditioned upon the closing of the transactions contemplated by the Contribution Agreement. In the event that the Contribution Agreement terminates prior to the closing of the transactions contemplated thereby, this Agreement shall terminate automatically without any further action by any party and shall be void ab initio.

assistant: Effectiveness
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: 31 . Id. 32 . Id. at 696. 33 . Id. at 697 (citation omitted). 34 .In contrast, the statute upheld in Village of Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc., 455 U.S. 489, 496-97, 102 S.Ct. 1186, 71 L.Ed.2d 362 (1982), only targeted the marketing of products "designed or marketed for use with illegal cannabis or drugs.” By its very terms, that speech would only propose an illegal transaction, id. at 496, 102 S.Ct. 1186, as the same products marketed for legal uses would not fall within the scope of the regulation. 35 . See Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 23-24, 93 S.Ct. 2607, 37 L.Ed.2d 419 (1973); Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147, 150, 80 S.Ct. 215, 4 L.Ed.2d 205 (1959). 36 . See K.S.A. § 21 — 4301(c)(3); see also State v. Hughes, 246 Kan. 607, 792 P.2d 1023, 1032 (1990) (<HOLDING>). 37 . See, e.g., Reliable Consultants, Inc. v. Options: A. holding floridas stalking statute which contained the language constitutionally protected activity is not included in the course of conduct definition and constitutional protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests was not impermissibly vague B. holding that a person has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment C. holding that false statements are constitutionally protected 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 the dissemination and promotion of such devices for purposes of medical and psychological therapy is a constitutionally protected activity

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the dissemination and promotion of such devices for purposes of medical and psychological therapy is a constitutionally 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THE PARTIES HEREBY WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED HEREBY, WHETHER NOW EXISTING OR HEREAFTER ARISING, AND WHETHER SOUNDING IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE. THE PARTIES AGREE THAT ANY OF THEM MAY FILE A COPY OF THIS PARAGRAPH WITH ANY COURT AS WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF THE KNOWING, VOLUNTARY AND BARGAINED-FOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES IRREVOCABLY TO WAIVE TRIAL BY JURY AND THAT ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING WHATSOEVER BETWEEN THEM RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED HEREBY SHALL INSTEAD BE TRIED IN A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION BY A JUDGE SITTING WITHOUT A JURY.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Consultant represents that, except as the Consultant has disclosed in writing to Company, the Consultant is not bound by the terms of any agreement with any employer or other party which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement. The Consultant further represents that the Consultant’s performance of the Services, and the grant of rights specified in this Agreement, do not and will not conflict with, or breach any, agreement with any prior or existing employer or other entity (including without limitation any nondisclosure or non-competition agreement), and that the Consultant will not disclose to Company or induce Company to use any confidential or proprietary information or material belonging to any employer or others unless Consultant has a license to use such information and materials and to allow Company to use such information and materials.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: From the Effective Date until the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement, Seller and Buyer shall use commercially reasonable efforts to take, or cause to be taken, all actions, and to do, or cause to be done, all things, necessary, proper or advisable to consummate the transactions described in this Agreement, including, without limitation (a) obtaining all necessary consents, approvals and Authorizations required to be obtained from any Governmental Authority or other Person under this Agreement or Applicable Law; and (b) effecting all registrations and filings required under this Agreement or Applicable Law. After Closing, Seller and Buyer shall use commercially reasonable efforts (at no cost or expense to such Party, other than any de minimis cost or expense or any cost or expense which the requesting Party agrees in writing to reimburse) to further effect the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. The immediately preceding sentence of this Section 7.9 shall survive the Closing as well as the termination 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: At any time prior to the Closing, the parties hereto may (a) extend the time for the performance of any of the obligations or other acts of the other parties hereto, (b) waive any inaccuracies in the representations and warranties contained herein or in any document delivered pursuant hereto and (c) waive compliance with any of the agreements or conditions contained herein. Any agreement on the part of a party hereto to any such extension or waiver shall be valid only if set forth in an instrument in writing signed on behalf of such party.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: whether that interest, as against the IRS, survived the levy. We turn to Massachusetts State law to answer these questions. 1. Her separate interest in the joint bank account A party to a Massachusetts joint bank account has the power to withdraw, assign, or transfer part or all of the funds in a joint account. Mass. Ann. Laws ch. 167D, sec. 5 (LexisNexis 2009). “Unlike a joint tenant of property held in a traditional joint tenancy, therefore, * * * [a title holder of a joint bank account] may effectively exercise control over the entire interest, or any part of it, and divest, totally or partially, the interest of the other.” Heffernan v. Wollaston Credit Union, 567 N.E.2d 933, 937 (Mass. App. Ct. 1991); see also United States v. U.S. Currency, $81,000, 189 F.3d 28, 34 (1st Cir. 1999) (<HOLDING>). While a joint hank account establishes the Options: A. holding that language in a merrill lynch customer account agreement that the plaintiff signed upon opening the first account providing for arbitration of any controversy arising out of its business applied to the disputed second account even though the plaintiff did not sign a separate customer account agreement for the second account B. holding that in a suit on a sworn account the petition with an attached sworn account and verified affidavit of the sworn account was a liquidated claim proved by written instruments C. holding that the rights conferred to a joint account holder by massachusetts statutes and case law in fact give a joint account holder legal title in a joint account D. recognizing ability of one or more joint tortfeasors to settle on behalf of themselves and another joint tortfeasor and then pursue that joint tortfeasor for its share of the settlement payment E. holding in a class action derivative suit that the joint defense privilege cannot be waived without the consent of all the parties to the defense except in the situation where one of the joint defendants becomes an adverse party in a litigation

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the rights conferred to a joint account holder by massachusetts statutes and case law in fact give a joint account holder legal title in a joint account
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: its claim against [the] debtor” but pursuant to § 727(a)(2)(A). Id. at 288. The complaints alleged various facts concerning loan transactions between the plaintiff and the debtor and conduct by the debtor. However, the facts did not present any allegations of “fraud in the execution of the note and subsequent guarantee, defalcation and/or injury to property by conversion.” Id. at 292. Therefore, when the plaintiff sought to amend the amended complaint beyond the bar date by adding new facts to support new claims under §§ 523(a)(2)(A), (a)(4) and (a)(6), the bankruptcy court denied leave to amend. Id. at 292. Other cases which have denied relation báck of a § 523 claim to an original § 727 complaint include: Rufenacht, Bromagen, and Hertz, Inc. v. Russell, 69 B.R. 394, 395 (D.Kan.1987) (<HOLDING>); In re McClellan, 60 B.R. 719, 721-22 Options: A. holding that causes of actions against directors of corporations for breach of fiduciary duty are contract actions B. holding that the actions were not actions of public and general applicability but were actions directed principally and primarily at plaintiffs C. holding that adea class actions are optin actions under 216b not optout actions subject to rule 23 D. recognizing that employment actions can be adverse even if such actions are subsequently withdrawn E. holding that actions under 727 are factually different from actions under 523

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that actions under 727 are factually different from actions under 523
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: facts which, together with objective and reasonable inferences, form the basis for suspecting that the particular person detained is engaged in criminal activity.” Id.; see also United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411, 417, 101 S.Ct. 690, 66 L.Ed.2d 621 (1981) (investigatory stops must be justified by some objective manifestation that person stopped is, or is about to be, engaged in criminal activity). It is ' reasonable under the Fourth Amendment for a police officer to stop an automobile and to detain the driver of that automobile to check his or her license and registration where “there is at least articulable and reasonable suspicion that” the driver “is unlicensed or the automobile is not registered.” Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 663, 99 S.Ct. 1391, 59 L.Ed.2d 660 (1979) (<HOLDING>); see also Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, Options: A. holding that police officers sued in their official capacity are not liable for a violation of a privacy interest where the police department did not have a policy of deliberately failing to train its officers with respect to the confidentiality of records B. holding only that persons in automobiles on public roadways may not for that reason alone have their travel and privacy interfered with at unbridled discretion of police officers C. holding that no detention occurred when the officers had not delayed or interfered with the normal processing of the package D. holding that individuals have no expectation of privacy in their license registration or insurance documents and citing outofstate cases that have held that individuals do not have a privacy interest in their registration records E. holding that police officers charge to protect the public differentiated them from the public

assistant: The best answer is B. holding only that persons in automobiles on public roadways may not for that reason alone have their travel and privacy interfered with at unbridled discretion of police officers
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 application must still be sufficiently detailed to allow the court to determine whether the hours claimed are reasonable. See Nat’l Ass’n of Concerned Veterans, 675 F.2d at 1327. Where adequate time records are not kept, the court may reduce the overall fee. See Hensley, 461 U.S. at 433,103 S.Ct. 1933. The defendants object to entries such as “Telephone w/DCPS,” “Conversation w/HOD,” “Visit to Kimball ES” and “spoke with grandmother in prep for hearing.” See PL’s Mot., Ex. A; Defs.’ Opp’n, Ex. A. These descriptions are unintelligible and therefore inadequate because they prevent the court from being able to make an independent determination of whether the hours expended behind such tasks are reasonable. See Dickens v. Friendship-Edison P.C.S., 724 F.Supp.2d 113, 124-25 (D.D.C.2010) (<HOLDING>); Clark v. District of Columbia, 674 F.Supp.2d Options: A. recognizing discretion of district court in determining a fee award B. holding that even after a ten percent reduction to the lodestar fee the district court abused its discretion by failing to adequately consider the result obtained relative to the attorneys fees requested C. holding that time entries such as preparation for hearing or preparation for school visit were too vague and reducing overall fee award by twentyfive percent D. holding that the ridings at whitpain does not require a reduction in an attorney fee award for an unsuccessful complaint but simply concluded that a trial court was justified in reducing the award if the record supported such a decision E. holding that entries such as conference with parent and telephone call to dcps were vague and reducing overall fee award by ten percent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that entries such as conference with parent and telephone call to dcps were vague and reducing overall fee award by ten percent
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or relies on a strong analogy to clear precedent, then there is reason to believe that reversal is unlikely. Conversely, delving into an area with little precedent increases the chances of a different ruling on appeal. Another objective factor to consider is the number of rulings involved in reaching the final conclusion. As the number of rulings increases, the likelihood that the final conclusion will be modified or reversed on appeal necessarily increases. Additionally, because the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction is limited to review of our interpretations of law and regulation, the focus is not on the specific facts of the case to be stayed. See 38 U.S.C. § 7292; Forshey v. Principi 284 F.3d 1335, 1359 (Fed.Cir.2002) (en banc); Prenzler v. Derwinski 928 F.2d 392, 393 (Fed.Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Simply put, because the Federal Circuit can Options: A. recognizing that the federal circuits review of our statutory and regulatory interpretation will be conducted de novo B. recognizing that the standard of review for issues of statutory interpretation and construction is de novo C. holding statutory interpretation is subject to de novo review D. recognizing de novo standard of review E. holding that we review issues of statutory interpretation de novo

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that the federal circuits review of our statutory and regulatory interpretation will be conducted de novo
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 captions used in this Exercise Notice are inserted for convenience and shall not be deemed a part of this agreement for construction or interpretation. Except when otherwise indicated by the context, the singular shall include the plural and the plural shall include the singular. Use of the term “or” is not intended to be exclusive, unless the context clearly requires otherwise.

assistant: Construction
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 plaintiffs employment severely enough to support a hostile work environment claim. Id. Other courts have also noted the severe impact of the use of the word. See Bailey v. Binyon, 583 F.Supp. 923, 927 (N.D.Ill.1984). “The use of the word ‘niggeP automatically separates the person addressed from every non-black person; this is discrimination per se.” Id. In addition, in the present case, it is undisputed that Vasilopulos not only used the word “nigger” in the exchange with Tutman but Vasilopulos also threatened to kill Tutman. This added physical threat makes the present case distinguishable from cases in which the Seventh Circuit has held that there was no hostile work environment as a matter of law. See McKenzie v. Illinois Dep’t of Transportation, 92 F.3d 473, 480 (7th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Drake v. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co., 134 Options: A. recognizing that the elements of title vii sexually hostile work environment claims apply to icra sexually hostile work environment claims B. holding that a three to four month period between the protected activity is not enough to show very close temporal proximity C. holding that a two month period might be enough to prove the causation prong D. holding that three sexually suggestive comments over a three month period were not frequent enough nor severe enough to be unreasonable interference with the plaintiffs work environment E. holding that plaintiffs work environment was not affected by comments and conduct of which she was not aware

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that three sexually suggestive comments over a three month period were not frequent enough nor severe enough to be unreasonable interference with the plaintiffs work environment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you shall comply with all applicable international and national laws that apply to the software as well as end-user , end-use , destination restrictions issued by national governments or similar bodies , and restrictions on embargoed nations .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Nevada, without regard to the choice of law rules of that State. All lawsuits, any claim, demand, action or cause of action arising from or related to this Agreement shall exclusively be brought to and adjudicated in the courts of Clark County, Nevada.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 1990) (<HOLDING>); Molina, 520 So.2d at 321 (“This court has Options: A. holding trial court abused its discretion in finding violation where state presented no evidence that defendant ever received the instruction from probation officer and thus knew about the condition B. holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking defendants probation when urinalysis tested positive for use of morphine C. holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding violation was willful and substantial D. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the defendants probation before the defendant completed his executed sentence E. holding trial court abused its discretion in revoking probation where greater weight of evidence did not show violation was willful

assistant: The best answer is E. holding trial court abused its discretion in revoking probation where greater weight of evidence did not show violation was willful
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of his disability, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794; that defendant failed to provide, or to ensure Arshad was provided, appropriate special education services, in violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.; that defendant breached its contract with her by failing to uphold its assurances and promises that the school and its instructors were equipped, trained and qualified to educate Arshad with his disa , 697 (S.D.N.Y.2005) (defense of exemption under a remedial statute must be specifically pled or will be waived); see also Vore v. Colonial Manor Nursing Center, No. 3-03-CV-1660-BD(P), 2004 WL 2348229, at 3 (N.D.Tex. Oct. 19, 2004) (<HOLDING>). Defendant did not plead the religious Options: A. holding that as title vi is a remedial statute the zone of interests to be protected must be construed broadly B. recognizing that cjonsistent with the remedial purposes of the ada a charge of employment discrimination must be construed with the utmost liberality C. holding that the social security act is remedial and needs to be construed liberally D. recognizing that umuim statute is remedial in nature and should be liberally construed E. recognizing statutory abrogation of rule of liberality in workers compensation claims

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that cjonsistent with the remedial purposes of the ada a charge of employment discrimination must be construed with the utmost liberality
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 analyzed the Act’s provision that “ ‘no franchisor... may... terminate any franchise,’ except for an enumerated reason and after providing written notice.” Id. at 1257 (quoting 15 U.S.C. § 2802(a)-(b)). The Court explained that the term “terminate” means to “put an end to,” and that “cancel,” which the Act specifically incorporated into the term “termination,” means to “annul or destroy.” Id. (quotations omitted). Thus, the Court concluded, “a franchisee cannot recover for constructive termination under the [Act] if the franchisor’s allegedly wrongful conduct did not compel the franchisee to abandon its franchise.” Id. at 1255. The Court explained that “[requiring franchisees to abandon their franchises before claiming constructive termination is also consistent with th 99) (<HOLDING>). In Flaherty v. Metromail Corp., 235 F.3d 133, Options: A. holding that prison officials could prevent the issuance of an injunction by proving that they were no longer unreasonably disregarding an objectively intolerable risk of harm and that they would not revert to their obduracy upon cessation of litigation B. holding that a complaint satisfied rule 9b because it identified the misrepresentations at issue the specific dates on which they were made and the specific persons responsible for making them C. holding employees claims accrued on the dates they submitted their resignations because by those dates they were aware that conditions had become intolerable and that they felt compelled to resign D. holding that all claims submitted by defendant were false because they were acquired by kickback E. holding that neglect was not excusable where the defendants did not do all that they were required to do after they received the summons and complaint in that they did not contact a lawyer or make any other arrangements with respect to their defense

assistant: The best answer is C. holding employees claims accrued on the dates they submitted their resignations because by those dates they were aware that conditions had become intolerable and that they felt compelled to resign