flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in the purse with which Appellant might harm either herself or him. We assume, without deciding, that this justifies Officer Stewart’s seizure of Appellant’s purse. ¶ 12 But the State must also justify the immediate search of the purse after it was in Officer Stewart’s control. After the purse’s seizure, the danger of Appellant using something in it to harm herself or others was removed. Generally, once a purse is no longer in its owner’s possession, a protective search of the purse is not justified pursuant to Terry. See State v. Schellhorn, 95 Or. App. 297, 769 P.2d 221, 223 (1989) (“[O]nce the officer had seized the purse, he no longer had any reason to believe that it still posed an immediate threat to him.”); People v. Stewart, 166 Mich.App. 263, 420 N.W.2d 180, 181-82 (1988) (<HOLDING>); State v. Wynne, 552 N.W.2d 218, 222 Options: A. holding that while search incident to arrest could not justify search in that case probable cause plus exigency justified search B. holding that the search of purses could not be justified as a protective search for weapons when police had control of the purses C. holding that the defendants consent to allow the officer to search her purse by way of holding it open for the officer was for consent to a limited view of the purses interior not to surrender possession for an unrestricted search and thus the officer exceeded the scope of the defendants consent D. holding that long authorizes protective search of vehicle for weapons during terry stop even when suspect is outside vehicle and effectively under police control E. recognizing that a protective search of a residence may be justified when the defendant is arrested outside of the home

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the search of purses could not be justified as a protective search for weapons when police had control of the purses
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, together with the Plan and the Partnership Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter contained in this Agreement. Any oral or written agreements, representations, warranties, written inducements, or other communications with respect to the subject matter contained in this Agreement made prior to the execution of this Agreement shall be void and ineffective for all purposes.

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: defense largely pertains to the performance of a physical act.”), Publicker Indus. v. Union Carbide Corp., 17 UCC Rep. Serv. 989 (E.D.Pa.1975) (finding that a loss of $5.8 million did not render contract impracticable or excuse performance under the force majeure clause) (“Increased cost alone does not excuse performance unless the rise in cost is due to some unforeseen contingency which alters the essential nature of the performance.”). In fact, “the unforeseen cost increase that would excuse performance ‘must be more than merely onerous or expensive. It must be positively unjust to hold the parties bound.’ ” La. Power & Light Co. v. Allegheny Ludlum Indus., 517 F.Supp. 1319, 1325 (E.D.La.1981); see also Iowa Elec. Light & Power Co. v. Atlas Corp., 467 F.Supp. 129 (N.D.Iowa 1978) (<HOLDING>), rev’d on other grounds, 603 F.2d 1301 (8th Options: A. holding that the district court failed to comply with rule 32c1 because its oral finding regarding the value of loss resulting from monuss offense was stated in general terms and did not explain how it calculated the amount of loss or respond to the defendants specific factual objections to the methods of calculation included in the psr B. holding that the loss of a contract failed to constitute ascertainable loss under cutpa C. holding that loss of an arm includes loss of the hand D. holding that an unconsented increase in an indemnity obligation from 150000 to 5 million was a material modification sufficient to discharge indemnitors liability E. holding that an increase in sellers costs by 522 resulting in the sellers loss of approximately 267 million failed to con stitute commercial impracticability

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an increase in sellers costs by 522 resulting in the sellers loss of approximately 267 million failed to con stitute commercial impracticability
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: Status/Subsequent Employment . NOTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT WILL GIVE ANY SUBSCRIBER ANY RIGHT TO EITHER EMPLOYMENT OR CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT WITH THE COMPANY OR IN ANY WAY CHANGE ANY EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF SUBSCRIBER.

assistant: Employment
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 general experience as to how much time a case requires. In order to exercise its discretion fairly, a district court needs flexibility in deciding whether to reduce a fee request and, if so, by how much. B. In the instant case, the defendants’ challenge to the amount of time spent by Gross tests the outer limits of the specificity requirement. Although the issue is a close one, we hold that the challenge meets this requirement. We also hold, with less difficulty, that the challenge to the fee award requested by McGahen was raised with sufficient clarity. However, we hold that the district court erred by reducing the fee request for Gross’s law clerk, because it was never challenged by the defendants. Cf. Missouri v. Jenkins, — U.S. —, 109 S.Ct. 2463, 2469-70, 105 L.Ed.2d 229 (1989) (<HOLDING>). The district court reduced the time spent by Options: A. holding that attorneys fees awards are available under 1988 for frivolous actions B. holding that a law clerks time is recoverable as part of attorneys fees under 1988 C. holding that lexis fees are not taxable as costs but reserving ruling on whether such fees are recoverable as attorneys fees D. holding attorneys fees not generally recoverable unless party prevails under cause of action for which attorneys fees are recoverable and damages are recovered E. holding that punitive damages are not recoverable against municipalities under 1988

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a law clerks time is recoverable as part of attorneys fees under 1988
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: (2009) ("Because vicarious liability is inapplicable to Bivens and § 1983 suits, a plaintiff must plead that each Government-official defendant, through the official’s own individual actions, has violated the Constitution.”). Second, the United States has not consented to be sued for monetary damages based on constitutional violations. See FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 476-78, 114 S.Ct. 996, 127 L.Ed.2d 308 (1994). Third, the Court would lack jurisdiction over any potential claim for damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) because there is no indication that plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies by "first presenting] the claim to the appropriate Federal agency....” 28 U.S.C. § 2675. See Simpkins v. District of Columbia Gov’t, 108 F.3d 366, 371 (D.C.Cir. 1997) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, because plaintiff was released from Options: A. recognizing that issue exhaustion is a mandatory although not jurisdictional requirement B. holding that exhaustion of issues is jurisdictional C. holding that issue exhaustion is mandatory even if not a statutory jurisdictional requirement D. holding that exhaustion is mandatory and jurisdictional E. holding that the ftcas exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the ftcas exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional
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: from a final judgment entered in a civil or criminal case by a circuit court.” See also § 12-101(f) (defining “final judgment” as “a judgment ... or other action by a court ... from which an appeal, application for leave to appeal, or petition for certiorari may be taken”). “[T]o be appealable, an order or judgment ordinarily must be final.” Baltimore Police Dep’t v. Cherkes, 140 Md.App. 282, 298, 780 A.2d 410 (2001) (internal citations omitted). When an order of summary judgment does not resolve all claims, any “appeal must be dismissed as prematurely taken, since ... the [summary] judgment remain[s][] interlocutory.” Brooks v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 261 Md. 278, 282, 274 A.2d 345 (1971). See also County Com’rs for St. Mary’s County v. Lacer, 393 Md. 415, 427, 903 A.2d 378 (2006) (<HOLDING>). The crux of appellees’ argument is that Options: A. holding that a district court judgment is not a final judgment appealable by the defendant unless it includes the final adjudication and the final sentence B. holding that denial of motion for summary judgment not appealable because did not determine any rights and liabilities C. holding that partial summary judgment is not a final appealable judgment when it did not settle completely any of the matters in controversy or adjudicate completely the rights and liabilities of the parties D. holding summary judgment order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of the defendants claim for attorneys fees E. holding that a bankruptcy courts partial summary judgment order that established the priority of one creditor relative to another but did not completely resolve the particular adversary proceeding was interlocutory in nature and therefore not directly appealable

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that partial summary judgment is not a final appealable judgment when it did not settle completely any of the matters in controversy or adjudicate completely the rights and liabilities of the parties
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or not the claimant has left employment for good cause attributable to the employer and is entitled to unemployment compensation benefits is a mixed question of law and fact to the extent that, if competent substantial evidence is insufficient to support a factual finding then, as a matter of law, the unemployment appeals referee’s conclusion cannot stand. Mattice, 992 So.2d at 430-31 (citing Tourte v. Oriole of Naples, Inc., 696 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)). The un-rebutted testimony was that Viera told bot .2d 1058, 1058 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (reversing because employer’s testimony completely failed to address, much less rebut, claimant’s testimony about the risk of person al injury in delivering a piano); Crosby v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 711 So.2d 260, 262 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>); Chery v. Flagship Airlines, Inc., 692 So.2d Options: A. holding that if an employee reasonably refuses to perform a required act the employee is still eligible to receive unemployment compensation benefits B. holding that an employer is accountable to a discharged employee for unpaid compensation if the employee was terminated in bad faith and the compensation is clearly connected to work already performed C. holding that when an employee suffers an injury from an unexplained fall while the employee is on the job and performing the duties of his employment that injury is eligible for compensation under the workers compensation act D. holding that claimant may simultaneously receive unemployment benefits and workers compensation for temporary partial disability where statute only precludes receipt of workers compensation for temporary total or permanent total disability if claimant is receiving unemployment benefits E. holding that in absence of statute prohibiting recovery claimant may receive workers compensation and unemployment benefits simultaneously

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that if an employee reasonably refuses to perform a required act the employee is still eligible to receive unemployment compensation benefits
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 the Commitment of any Lender is increased in accordance with this Section , the Administrative Agent and the Lender shall determine the effective date with respect to such increase (such date, the “ Commitment Increase Effective Date ”). Upon the occurrence of each such Commitment Increase Effective Date, the parties hereto shall amend the Agreement to reflect any changes effected thereby to the Commitment of each Lender.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement (including, without limitation, Article 5 ), the representations, warranties, indemnification obligations and covenants of the parties set forth in this Agreement will merge into the Deed and not survive consummation of the transaction contemplated by this Agreement and the delivery and recordation of the Deed.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (noting as factors relevant to the showing “whether the party has a possessory interest in the things seized or the place searched; whether the party can exclude others from that place; whether the party took precautions to maintain the privacy; and whether the party had a key to the premises”). To meet the first part of the test with regard to items seized, the defendant must show by his conduct that he sought to preserve the items as private. Stallings, 28 F.3d at 60. Here, Defendant expressly disclaims having any ownership interest in the premises or the bag seized. As such, he lacks a sufficient privacy interest to support a motion to suppress the trash bag or the items located therein. See Pierson, 219 F.3d at 806; United States v. Sanders, 130 F.3d 1316, 1317-18 (8th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); accord United States v. Porter, 107 F.3d 582, Options: A. holding that a dog sniff during a legitimate traffic stop does not constitute a search because there is no expectation of privacy in contraband and a dog sniff does not violate any privacy interest B. holding that the driver of a borrowed car had the requisite legitimate expectation of privacy to support standing for fourth amendment purposes C. holding that the owner of a shoulder bag located on the front seat of his girlfriends car had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the bag and its contents D. holding that a car passenger had a legitimate expectation of privacy in his closed plastic shopping bag found on the floor of the car E. holding that the defendants statements disclaiming ownership of bag constitute a surrender of any legitimate expectation of privacy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the defendants statements disclaiming ownership of bag constitute a surrender of any legitimate 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: third party which are otherwise subject to state control.”); Ayotte, 488 F.3d at 533 (discussing New York regulations at issue in Franklin National Bank v. New York, 347 U.S. 373, 74 S.Ct. 550, 98 L.Ed. 767 (1954), that prohibited any banks other than New York’s charter savings banks from advertising that they accepted “savings,” and reasoning that “we do not believe that the regulation at issue in Franklin National Bank would have presented any less of a conflict with the National Bank Act if it indirectly restricted a national bank’s power by prohibiting New York advertising firms from using the word ‘savings’ when preparing advertising for a bank, or if it had prohibited billboard owners from posting signs for banks that included the word ‘savings’ ”); Bank One, 190 F.3d at 847-50 (<HOLDING>). Next, the State argues that even if the Options: A. holding that statutory notice provisions for notice of default and opportunity to cure were waived by provisions of note as to one obligor though provisions applied to coobligor who used property as residence B. holding that such provisions are valid C. holding that the hearing provisions of the ina supersede the provisions of the apa D. holding provisions of the iowa efta that restricted outofstate banks from operating atms within iowa were preempted by nba even though the state of iowa attempted to enforce provisions of the iowa efta against thirdparty retailer E. holding the same under iowa law

assistant: The best answer is D. holding provisions of the iowa efta that restricted outofstate banks from operating atms within iowa were preempted by nba even though the state of iowa attempted to enforce provisions of the iowa efta against thirdparty retailer
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: concealed in a travel bag and his presence in a room containing marijuana smoke were insufficient to convict him.” Id. at 463, 697 A.2d 462. As we shall discuss, infra, in the instant case, appellant resided at the premises where the marijuana and cocaine were in plain view. An examination of the cases relied on in Taylor supports our view that the Taylor holding was not intended to encompass the facts of this case. In Taylor, the Court of Appeals reviewed the cases in which Maryland appellate courts have found that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for possession of a controlled dangerous substance. In each of the cases addressed by Taylor, the controlled substance was in a closed container or outside of the plain view of the accused. Garrison, supra, a 24 (1969) (<HOLDING>); Wimberly v. State, 7 Md.App. 302, 308, 254 Options: A. holding evidence insufficient to support conviction when none of the defendants had any proprietary interest nor previous association with the premises and there was no evidence of how long the defendants had been on the premises prior to the arrival of the police B. holding the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the premises owner when the evidence showed no one had been injured by the condition in question and the premises owner had received no complaints about the condition in question during a tenyear period C. holding that defendants adult son who was living on defendants property had equal control over use of premises and had authority to consent to a search D. holding that the trial court committed no error in sustaining objection to plaintiffs testimony that the water had been there for some time because the plaintiff had no personal knowledge of how long the puddle had been there E. holding premises owner had no duty to protect when the risk the police officer was subjected to was one inherent in that occupation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding evidence insufficient to support conviction when none of the defendants had any proprietary interest nor previous association with the premises and there was no evidence of how long the defendants had been on the premises prior to the arrival of the police
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 Partnership Agreement, as amended hereby, constitutes the full and complete agreement of the Partners with respect to the subject matter hereof and thereof and supersede all prior contracts or agreements with respect to the Partnership and the matters addressed or governed hereby and thereby, whether oral or written.

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: Wilcock agreed with him that there was probable cause to arrest Plaintiff supports that any mistake by Officer Stephens, as to whether he could arrest the Plaintiff for violating the TRO was reasonable. . Ultimately, Plaintiff simply has not presented any controlling legal authority that on May 10, 2001 would have informed Officer Stephens that the Plaintiff could not be arrested for falsely reporting a violation of the TRO at issue. ' Nor has Plaintiff shown that Officer Stephens’ conduct “lies so obviously at the very core of what the Fourth Amendment prohibits that the unlawfulness of the conduct was readily apparent to [Officer Stephens], notwithstanding the lack of fact-specific case law.” Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1355 (quoting Lee, 284 F.3d at 1199, internal quotation marks omitted) (<HOLDING>). Summary judgment in favor of Defendants is Options: A. holding that search of car was not incident to arrest where arrestee had exited and locked car before he was approached by officer and then arrested B. holding that no objectively reasonable police officer could believe that after vinyard was under arrest handcuffed behind her back secured in the back seat of a patrol car with a protective screen between the officer and the arrestee an officer could stop the car grab such arrestee by her hair and arm bruise her and apply pepper spray to try to stop the intoxicated arrestee from screaming and returning the officers exchange of obscenities and insults during a short fourmile jail ride C. holding that relative to the threat that she posed physically separating tina cortez from her telephone taking her by the arm escorting her from her home taking the keys to her home and locking the door and placing her in the locked back seat of a patrol car was excessive force as well as an unlawful seizure under the fourth amendment D. holding that the fourth amendment sets the applicable constitutional limitations on the treatment of an arrestee detained without a warrant up until the time such arrestee is released or found to be legally in custody based upon probable cause for arrest E. holding that a police officers rape of an arrestee was outside the scope of his employment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that no objectively reasonable police officer could believe that after vinyard was under arrest handcuffed behind her back secured in the back seat of a patrol car with a protective screen between the officer and the arrestee an officer could stop the car grab such arrestee by her hair and arm bruise her and apply pepper spray to try to stop the intoxicated arrestee from screaming and returning the officers exchange of obscenities and insults during a short fourmile jail ride
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive shall report directly to the Company’s Board of Directors (the “ Board ”) or CEO. The Company shall use its best efforts to convince the shareholders of the Company to elect and reelect Executive to the Board during the Employment Period. Within the limitations established by the Bylaws of the Company, Executive shall have each and all of the duties and responsibilities of those positions and such other or different duties on behalf of the Company, as may be assigned from time to time by the Board.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: assumes Borrower’s obligations under this Security Instrument in writing, and is approved by Lender, shall obtain all of Borrower’s rights and benefits under this Security Instrument....”)). Federal law has created certain exceptions to the enforceability of due-on-sale clauses. During the early 1980s, some courts criticized these clauses as unreasonable restraints on trade. See, e.g., Wellenkamp v. Bank of Am., 21 Cal.3d 943, 148 Cal.Rptr. 379, 582 P.2d 970 (1978), superseded by statute, 12 U.S.C. § 1701j-3. In response, Congress passed the Gann-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act, which generally prohibited state laws restricting due-on-sale clauses. 12 U.S.C. § 1701j-3; see also Fidelity Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. de la Cuesta, 458 U.S. 141, 102 S.Ct. 3014, 73 L.Ed.2d 664 (1982) (<HOLDING>). Congress also believed “that it would be Options: A. holding the state law claims were not preempted B. holding that a pregannst germain act federal regulation preempted a state law restricting the enforcement of dueonsale clauses C. holding that a state election law is preempted only to the extent that it conflicts with federal law D. holding that state law claim regarding breach of settlement agreement was preempted by federal labor law E. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a pregannst germain act federal regulation preempted a state law restricting the enforcement of dueonsale clauses
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 United States Supreme Court’s holding in Winstar). For these reasons, the Government’s November 17, 2003 Motion for Reconsideration concerning the authority of the FSLIC and FHLBB to enter contracts is denied. The second basis for reconsideration concerns the effect of Transohio Savings Bank v. Director, OTS, 967 F.2d 598, 620 (D.C.Cir.1992), a decision that the Government argues bars plaintiffs’ contract claims in this case. See 11/17/03 Gov’t Mot. to Reconsider at 1; see also id. at 6-10. As a threshold matter, the Government waived the defense of collateral estoppel by not asserting it in the September 22, 1999 Answer or raising this issue in any motion or brief prior to seeking reconsideration. See Arizona v. California, 530 U.S. 392, 410, 120 S.Ct. 2304, 147 L.Ed.2d 374 (2000) (<HOLDING>); see also RCFC 8(c), 12(b). In addition, since Options: A. holding that an affirmative defense is ordinarily lost if not timely raised B. holding that the exclusivity of workers compensation is an affirmative statutory defense which must be timely raised or it is waived C. holding that fair use is an affirmative defense D. holding mmpa is an affirmative defense to be raised at trial E. holding that the statute of limitations in a criminal case is a nonjurisdictional affirmative defense that is waived if not raised in the trial court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an affirmative defense is ordinarily lost if not timely raised
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: 1299 (Ind.1996). However, the United States Supreme Court recently held that the Virginia Supreme Court had erred in holding that the Lockhart decision had “modified or in some way supplanted the rule set down in Strickland.” Williams v. Taylor, — U.S. -, -, 120 S.Ct. 1495, 1512, 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000). As Hill was based upon Strickland, and our supreme court relied upon Lockhart as modifying Hill, the continued viability of Van Cleave ⅛ holding that a defendant must show “a reasonable probability of acquittal” at trial in order to prevail in a post-conviction attack based on an ineffective assistance claim following a guilty plea has been called into question, as another panel of this court recently noted. See Segura v. State, 729 N.E.2d 594, 596-97 (Ind.Ct.App.2000), trans. pending, (<HOLDING>). Thus, as there may presently be some Options: A. holding that ejxcept in matters governed by the federal constitution or by acts of congress the law to be applied in any case is the law of the state B. holding that van cleave is the law in indiana today and any change in the law as set forth in van cleave must be made by our supreme court C. holding that plea in bar may be based only on grounds set forth in statute D. holding that affidavits must set forth facts admissible in evidence and explain its conclusions E. recognizing the test set forth in strickland as clearly established law for aedpa purposes

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that van cleave is the law in indiana today and any change in the law as set forth in van cleave must be made by our supreme court
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: should have granted his motion for discharge under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 because the state filed its first formal charges more than 175 days after his arrest for the crimes of which he was convicted. He also contends the trial court should have granted his motion to dismiss because the statute of limitations had run on all counts. Prosecution for a second or third degree felony “must be commenced within 3 years after it is committed.” § 776.16(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2001). We reverse and remand with directions that he be discharged. An arrest warrant having issued in Leon County, Mr. Doctor was arrested on November 2, 2005, and booked on sixteen Leon County felonies on November 5, 2005, in Pasco County. See Trainer v. Broome, 666 So.2d 1019, 1020 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (<HOLDING>). A “person is taken into custody ... when the Options: A. holding that if evidence exists disclosing that an individual was booked into custody for a specific offense one must presume that the individual was in fact arrested for that offense citing perkins v state 457 so2d 1053 1055 fla 1st dca 1984 B. holding that that the trial court erred when it determined that firstdegree sexual offense was an aggravated offense C. holding that state and federal authorities can prosecute an individual for the same offense D. holding that the application of the enhancement for using a firearm in connection with another felony offense is proper only if there is a clear connection between the firearm that was used in the other offense and the one that was used in the offense of conviction E. holding that counsel was not ineffective in failing to request a charge on the lesserincluded offense when the evidence showed either the commission of the completed offense as charged or the commission of no offense such that the defendant was not entitled to a charge on the lesser offense

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that if evidence exists disclosing that an individual was booked into custody for a specific offense one must presume that the individual was in fact arrested for that offense citing perkins v state 457 so2d 1053 1055 fla 1st dca 1984
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 Seller shall pay to the Administrator certain fees in the amounts and on the dates set forth in a fee letter, dated the date hereof, among UGI, the Seller and the Administrator (as such letter agreement may be amended, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “ Fee Letter ”).

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: Rule of Evidence 404 prohibits evidence of other crimes, such evidence is admissible if offered to prove identity. Iowa R. Evid. 404(b); State v. Uthe, 542 N.W.2d 810, 814 (Iowa 1996). When evidence of other crimes is relevant and the probative value of such evidence is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, evidence of other crimes is admissible. Uthe, 542 N.W.2d at 814. We think the matching footprints at the Ripp residence are highly probative of the perpetrator of the burglaries at Twin Anchors. Moreover, the relevant nature of this evidence outweighs its prejudicial quality. Consequently, it would have been well within the district court’s discretion to admit this evidence even if the Twin Anchors case had not been consolidated with the Ripp case. See id. (<HOLDING>). Thus, the State did not have an unfair Options: A. holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting gangrelated evidence B. holding juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony C. holding that a district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the testimony of a witness that was not highly probative D. holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in its admitting extraneous evidence to rebut a defensive theory E. holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting highly probative and relevant evidence of other crimes

assistant: The best answer is E. holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting highly probative and relevant evidence of other crimes
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: but the case subsequently becomes non-justiciable, the court retains certain limited au thority to dispose of the case by dismissal. See Travelers Ins. Co. v. Joachim, B15 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex.2010). If the district court lacks jurisdiction in any of these senses, then its decision does not bind the parties. Gomez, 891 S.W.2d at 245. “[A] decision that does not bind the parties is, by definition, an advisory opinion prohibited by Texas law.” Id. Immunity from liability is an affirmative defense, as opposed to immunity from suit, which deprives a court of subject matter jurisdiction ab initio. See Miranda, 138 S.W.3d at 224. Thus, “[¡Immunity from liability and immunity from suit are two distinct principles.” Tex. Dep’t. of Transp. v. Jones, 8 S.W.3d 636, 638 (Tex.1999) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Immunity from liability does not protect a Options: A. holding that affirmative defenses are waived if not pled B. holding that mitigation of damages is an affirmative defense that must be pleaded C. holding that like other affirmative defenses to liability immunity from liability must be pleaded or else it is waived D. holding that a claim of exemption is an affirmative defense which must be specifically pleaded E. holding immunity from liability is not jurisdictional

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that like other affirmative defenses to liability immunity from liability must be pleaded or else it is waived
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment may be executed by one or more of the parties hereto in any number of separate counterparts, and all of such counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of this Amendment by facsimile or electronic (e.g. pdf) transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed original counterpart hereof.

assistant: Counterparts
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: effect of an admission by a defendant against a codefendant. {10} Although Rule 1-036 does not address whether a defendant’s deemed admissions can be used against a codefendant, this Court has held that such admissions may not be used against a codefendant. See Wilson v. Galt, 100 N.M. 227, 236, 668 P.2d 1104, 1113 (Ct.App.1983) (stating that Rule 1-036 admissions apply to and bind the party making the admissions, not codefendants). Moreover, other courts that have addressed this issue have likewise concluded that the admissions of a defendant cannot be used against a codefendant. See, e.g., Becerra v. Asher, 105 F.3d 1042, 1048 (5th Cir.1997) (“Deemed admissions by a party opponent cannot be used against a co-party.”); United States v. Wheeler, 161 F.Supp. 193, 198 (W.D.Ark.1958) (<HOLDING>); Darnall v. Petersen, 8 Neb.App. 185, 592 Options: A. holding that a plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies when his claim is deemed denied because of failure of administrator to respond in a timely manner B. holding that failure to file timely responses to a request for admissions renders them admitted C. holding that plaintiffs failure to respond to argument warranted dismissal with prejudice D. holding that facts deemed admitted as to one defendant because of his failure to respond to the plaintiffs request for admissions are not binding on a codefendant E. holding that requests for admissions seeking purely legal conclusions are inappropriate and the failure to respond to such a request may not be the basis for a summaiy judgment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that facts deemed admitted as to one defendant because of his failure to respond to the plaintiffs request for admissions are not binding on a codefendant
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: In addition to any specific survival references in Agreement, Articles 1, 11 and 12 and Sections 2.4, 2.5, 4.2, 4.7, 4.8, 5.3, 5.4, 6.4, 6.5, 7.6, 8.1, 8.2, 9.2, 9.3, 10.1 (in the case of expiration of Agreement in accordance with Section 10.1) 10.7, 10.8, 10.9 and 10.10 shall survive termination or expiration of Agreement. Any other rights, responsibilities, obligations, covenants and warranties which by their nature should survive Agreement shall similarly survive and remain in effect.

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: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts (including by facsimile or electronic transmission), all of which taken together shall constitute one contract. Alternatively, this Agreement may be granted to and accepted by the Participant electronically.

assistant: Counterparts
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 no evidence to show that they were motivated by racial discrimination in their participation in the decision not to hire Dr. Koch for a temporary full-time position in the KSU Political Science Department. Instead of stating their appellate issue in qualified immunity terms and addressing their affirmative defense with respect to the applicable clearly established law, they have presented the factual issue of no evidence to show their discriminatory intent to commit a constitutional tort. Because we lack jurisdiction, we DISMISS this appeal and REMAND the case for further proceedings in the district court. 1 . Dr. Koch obtained her Ph.D. degree from Ohio State University in 1985. See Deposition of Willoughby Jarrell, former chair of the KSU Political Science Department, at 66-67 (<HOLDING>). She taught as an Assistant Professor of Options: A. holding that the words school property do not include a college or university B. recognizing that property interest based on contractual relationship may arise when a student enrolls in a college or university pays his or her tuition and fees and attends such school C. holding that communications between the university of colorados counsel and former employees of the university concerning activities during their period of employment may be protected by the attorneyclient privilege under the rationale presented in upjohn but holding that the university waived the privilege by disclosing the documents D. recognizing that in the academic field a college or university strives for diversity of faculty degrees to provide different perspectives in the classroom E. holding that an identity of interest existed between the university and one of its doctors because the university took steps to provide counsel for the doctor and required that all communications concerning the plaintiffs claim be sent to the universitys risk management attorney or to the doctors counsel

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that in the academic field a college or university strives for diversity of faculty degrees to provide different perspectives in the classroom
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: theft by receiving is analogous to the civil tort of conversion, the court may award the victim of this crime the value of the property at the date it was converted plus the rental value of the vehicle from that date until the date of trial. Hodges v. State, 201 Ga. App. 729, [731 (2)] (411 SE2d 775) (1991); Lomax v. State, 200 Ga. App. 233, 234 (407 SE2d 462) (1991). In the Interest of C. B., 221 Ga. App. 102 (1) (470 SE2d 493) (1996). Thus, a trial court in a case involving a theft or theft by receiving case is authorized to award damages in an amount equal to the fair market value of the stolen goods as demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence, said value being determined as of the time of the conversion. Loggins v. Mitchell, 201 Ga. App. 358 (1) (411 SE2d 98) (1991) (<HOLDING>). In this case, Melanie Thompson, a State Farm Options: A. holding that the measure of damages of converted property is the market value at the time of conversion B. holding the measure of damages is the difference between the value of the automobile prior to the upset and its value when prepared and presented to the plaintiff for acceptance C. holding that fair market value was proper measure of damages for stock brokers breach of margin agreement caused by sale of plaintiffs shares without authorization noting that generally speaking fair market value is proper measure of damages for breach of contract relating to sale of goods which have an ascertamable value on the market D. holding that actual as opposed to special damages arising from a conversion consist of the fair market value of the property converted E. holding that if repairs to a firedamaged vehicle with parts of like kind and quality would not restore the vehicle to its former market value the proper measure of damages was the difference in market value before and after the loss

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the measure of damages of converted property is the market value at the time of conversion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive shall be entitled to four (4) weeks of vacation with pay during each year that ends during the Employment Term. Vacations shall not be taken in a manner which will unreasonably interfere with Executive’s duties hereunder. Executive shall also be entitled to all paid holidays and personal days given by the Company to its senior executives.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or absence thereof, in determining Gene's testamentary intent regarding the disposal of his estate. Thus, duty being the threshold requirement for a negligence claim, the Beckoms must first prove the existence of a relationship with Quigley. See Hacker v. Holland, 570 N.E.2d 951, 955 (Ind.Ct.App.1991), reh'g denied. This relationship need not be express; it may be implied from the conduct of the parties. Id. However, unlike the Beckoms, in the context of a will, we find Walker v. Lawson, 526 N.E.2d 968 (Ind.1988) to be controlling. In Walker, our supreme court clearly held that the breach of an attorney in drafting a will for a client can become the basis for a claim by a known beneficiary who suffers injury as a consequence of that breach. Id. at 970; see also Webb, 575 N.E.2d at 996 (<HOLDING>); Essex v. Ryon, 446 N.E.2d 368, 374 Options: A. holding professional malpractice claim not contractual B. holding that as a general matter membership or shareholder status in a professional corporation does not shield an attorney from individual liability for his own mistakes or professional misdeeds C. holding that an attorney owes a fiduciary duty to persons though not strictly clients who he knows or should know rely on him in his professional capacity D. holding a business owes a duty to protect invitees from reasonably foreseeable harm by third persons E. holding that a professional owes no duty to third persons unless the professional had actual knowledge that those persons would rely on his rendering of professional services

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a professional owes no duty to third persons unless the professional had actual knowledge that those persons would rely on his rendering of professional services
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 shall be construed, governed and administered in accordance with applicable provisions of the Code, ERISA and, to the extent not preempted by applicable federal law, the laws of the State of Maryland, without regard to any conflict of laws principles thereof.

assistant: Governing Laws