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: charge.” Thornton, 587 F.3d at 32. “Where the retaliatory act is claimed to have occurred prior to the filing of a charge, as is the case here, and the plaintiff fails to allege a retaliation claim in the subsequent charge, the retaliatory act will not reasonably relate to the charge.” Velazquez Rivera v. Danzig, 81 F.Supp.2d 316, 327 (D.P.R.2000) (citing Seymore v. Shawver & Sons, Inc., 111 F.3d 794 (10th Cir.1997), aff'd in part, 234 F.3d 790 (1st Cir.2000)); see Johnson v. Cleveland City Sch. Disk, 344 Fed.Appx. 104, 110 (6th Cir.2009) (“As a rule, we have found that retaliation does not reasonably grow out of a substantive claim of discrimination if the retaliation occurred before the EEOC charge was filed.”); Ndondji v. InterPark, Inc., 768 F.Supp.2d 263, 279 (D.D.C.2011) (<HOLDING>); Crooks v. Wal-Mart Stores of Texas, LLC, 2009 Options: A. holding that plaintiff who filed administrative charge for racial harassment and discrimination could add claim for retaliation because some of the same facts supported both types of claims B. recognizing similar analysis applies to discrimination and retaliation claims C. holding that discrimination and retaliation claims are considered distinct types of claims that must be raised independently if the retaliation occurred prior to the filing of the administrative charge D. holding that title vii retaliation claims must be proved according to traditional principles of butfor causation which requires proof that the unlawful retaliation would not have occurred in the absence of the alleged wrongful action or actions of the employer E. holding plaintiff did not exhaust his retaliation claim where his eeoc charge made no mention of retaliation

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that discrimination and retaliation claims are considered distinct types of claims that must be raised independently if the retaliation occurred prior to the filing of the administrative charge
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Third Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original. Any or all counterpart originals may be executed by facsimile signature, each such signature to be deemed an original signature.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you do not agree to this contract ( `` contract '' or `` user agreement '' ) , do not click `` join now '' ( or similar ) and do not access or otherwise use any of our services .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall be responsible for the payment of the Placement Agents’ fees. No Person will have, as a result of the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents, any valid right, interest or claim against or upon any Purchaser for any commission, fee or other compensation pursuant to any agreement, arrangement or understanding entered into by or on behalf of the Company, and no Purchaser shall have any obligation with respect to any fees or with respect to any claims made by or on behalf of other Persons for fees of a type contemplated in this Section 3.23 that may be due in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents and that arise out of any agreement, arrangement or understanding entered into by or on behalf of the Company. The Company shall pay, and hold each Purchaser harmless against, any liability, loss or expense (including, without limitation, reasonable attorney’s fees and out-of-pocket expenses) arising in connection with any such claim for fees arising out of the issuance of the Securities pursuant to this Agreement.

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: case by case analysis. See generally Love, supra, at 289; In re Marriage of Cargill, 843 P.2d 1335, 1341 (Colo.1993); Peters v. Peters, 214 N.W.2d 151, 157 (Iowa 1974). Under this fact-specific method, a court applies its general equitable powers to discern the intent of the parties. See Ferguson v. Ferguson, 564 P.2d 1380, 1383 (Utah 1977); In re Marriage of Williams, 208 Mont. 252, 677 P.2d 585, 587 (1984); Peters, 214 N.W.2d at 157. These jurisdictions have held that although participa 313, 317 (1981) (stating that husband never relied on his wife’s brief changed status so alimony was revived). Courts employing this approach have allowed the former spouse to assert equitable defenses against the reinstatement of alimony. See Glazer v. Silverman, 354 Mass. 177, 236 N.E.2d 199 (1968) (<HOLDING>). II. The Law in South Carolina Yon argues his Options: A. holding that a wife could be held liable for the negligent failure to prevent or warn the victims about her husbands sexually abusive behavior when the wife had actual knowledge or special reason to know that the husband was likely to abuse a particular person or persons B. holding that husbands obligation to pay premiums on a life insurance policy for five years with wife as the beneficiary was periodic alimony C. holding that equitable principles prevent the revival of alimony where it would be inequitable to allow wife to receive support from two husbands D. holding that the former husbands property from a noninterspousal gift may not be distributed under section 610751 although use of the former husbands separate property may be awarded to the former wife to satisfy the former husbands child support obligation E. holding that wife was entitled to prejudgment interest on alimony and child support arrearages from the date those payments were due

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that equitable principles prevent the revival of alimony where it would be inequitable to allow wife to receive support from two husbands
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: district court sentenced Ross to 121 months. B We find no fault with the district court’s consideration of the defendant’s role in the underlying wire fraud offense to adjust the money laundering counts. In our first opinion, we observed the related nature of the wire fraud and money laundering conduct: Ross’ wire fraud convictions were predicated on facsimile transmissions of various documents to potential borrowers (e.g., FCAs, letters promising to fund loans, and a letter terminating a loan agreement). The money laundering convictions arose from related, but separate and distinct transactions, namely the deposit of wire fraud proceeds and subsequent acts promoting the carrying on of illegal activity. Ross, 210 F.3d at 920. We concluded by stating [w]e believe that th (8th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). But these cases do not completely forbid such Options: A. recognizing money laundering as a predicate act under rico B. holding that defendants state conviction for carrying a concealed weapon was not part of the instant federal money laundering offense even though the concealed weapon was found at the time of defendants arrest for attempting to carry out money laundering scheme C. holding that venue did not he in virginia for money laundering that occurred in florida de spite the fact that the money was embezzled in virginia D. holding that the loss of money from a bank account does not constitute irreparable harm because that loss can be compensat ed by money damages E. holding that fraud and money laundering counts are not so closely related as to permit loss and value grouping under 3d12d

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that fraud and money laundering counts are not so closely related as to permit loss and value grouping under 3d12d
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to retain his money, he may be entitled to release of the seized funds pending trial. See United States v. James Daniel Good Property, 971 F.2d 1376, 1384 (9th Cir.1992) (providing that if seizure of claimant’s home violated due process, claimant would be entitled to the rents accrued during the illegal seizure), rev’d on other grounds, 510 U.S. 43, 114 S.Ct. 492, 126 L.Ed.2d 490 (1993); see also Krimstock v. Kelly, 306 F.3d 40, 50 (2d Cir.2002) (probable cause of continued validity to retain vehicles held for forfeiture). Finally, we affirm the district court’s grant of the government’s motion to amend its complaint. Leave shall be freely given to amend a complaint when justice so requires. Fed.R.Civ.P. 15; see also Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182, 83 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed.2d 222 (1962) (<HOLDING>). Medina argues that the motion to amend the Options: A. recognizing several reasons to deny leave to amend a complaint B. holding the district court is not required to grant a plaintiff leave to amend his complaint sua sponte when the plaintiff who is represented by counsel never filed a motion to amend nor requested leave to amend before the district court C. holding that leave to amend should be freely given unless there is a good reason such as futility to the contrary D. recognizing that courts freely grant pro se litigants leave to amend E. holding that leave shall be freely given to amend a complaint is a mandate to be heeded

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that leave shall be freely given to amend a complaint is a mandate to be heeded
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: There is no pending Action against the 12RT Shareholders that involves the 12RT Shares or that challenges, or may have the effect of preventing, delaying or making illegal, or otherwise interfering with, any of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or the business of 12RT and, to the knowledge of the 12RT Shareholders, no such Action has been threatened, and no event or circumstance exists that is reasonably likely to give rise to or serve as a basis for the commencement of any such Action.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you represent and warrant that if you are an individual , you are of legal age to form a binding contract , or that if you are registering on behalf of an entity , that you are authorized to enter into , and bind the entity to , these terms of use and register for the service .

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: Article and Section headings used herein are for convenience of reference only, are not part of this Limited Waiver and shall not affect the construction of, or be taken into consideration in interpreting, this Limited Waiver.

assistant: Headings
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: have construed the phrase “unable to stand trial” as including within the article VI tolling provision only those periods of delay occasioned by the defendant’s physical or mental incapacity. See, e.g., Birdwell v. Skeen, 983 F.2d 1332, 1340-41 (5th Cir.1993); Stroble v. Anderson, 587 F.2d 830, 838 (6th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 940, 99 S.Ct. 1289, 59 L.Ed.2d 499 (1979). A majority of the federal courts, on the other hand, have defined the “unable to stand trial” language as including within the article VI tolling provision “all those periods of delay occasioned by the defendant, and specifically, the periods of delay occasioned by the ... motions filed on behalf of the defendants.” United States v. Dawn, 900 F.2d 1132, 1136 (7th Cir.1990) (internal quotation marks omitted) (<HOLDING>) (citing United States v. Nesbitt, 852 F.2d Options: A. holding that the limitations period is likewise not tolled during the pendency of a certiorari petition to the supreme court B. holding that the oneyear statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of petition for certiorari to the united states supreme court seeking review of denial of state postconviction relief C. holding that aedpas oneyear limitations period is not tolled during the pendency of a petition for certiorari to the united states supreme court that seeks review of a state courts denial of postconviction relief D. holding that tolling of the statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of a claim dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution E. holding that time period of article iii of the iad tolled during the pendency of defendants motion to dismiss

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that time period of article iii of the iad tolled during the pendency of defendants motion to dismiss
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: For value received , Maker promises to pay to Holder at such place as Holder may designate in writing, in currently available funds of the United States, the principal sum of Two Hundred Ten Thousand Dollars ($210,000) . Maker ’ s obligation under this Note shall accrue interest at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum from the date hereof until paid in full. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 365-day year or 366-day year, as applicable and actual days lapsed.

assistant: Interests
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: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, up to an aggregate of $1,152,220 of Shares and Warrants. Each Purchaser shall, on or prior to the Closing Date, deliver to the Escrow Agent, via wire transfer or a certified check, immediately available funds equal to such Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser, and he Company shall deliver to each Purchaser its respective Shares, a Class A Warrant and a Class B Warrant as determined pursuant to Section 2.2(a), and the Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of EGS or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Neither the Borrower nor Parent will, and will not permit any of its Subsidiaries to, sell, lease or otherwise transfer any property or assets to, or purchase, lease or otherwise acquire any property or assets from, or otherwise engage in any other transactions with, any of its Affiliates, except (a) in the ordinary course of business at prices and on terms and conditions not less favorable to the Borrower or such Subsidiary than could be obtained on an arm’s-length basis from unrelated third parties, (b) transactions between or among the Borrower and its wholly owned Subsidiaries not involving any other Affiliate, (c) transactions related to the closing of and ongoing activities necessary to implement the loan obligations and requirements of this Agreement, and (d) any Restricted Payment permitted by Section 6.05 .

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: course of investigation. The instant case involves an alleged “seizure” that occurred well after the point in time where Place is directly relevant. The plaintiff here is not challenging any action of the defendants until over four months after the plaintiff’s license was removed from a vehicle pursuant to an inventory search, inventoried, and stored. 7 . See, e.g., Riley v. Dorton, 115 F.3d 1159, 1162-64 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 631, 139 L.Ed.2d 611 (1997) (rejecting concept of "continuing seizure” and holding that Fourth Amendment does not apply after a person has been arrested but has not yet been tried; also collecting cases on "continuing seizure”); Wilkins v. May, 872 F.2d 190, 192 (7th Cir.1989) (same); McDowell v. Rogers, 863 F.2d 1302, 1306 (6th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>); see also Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, Options: A. holding that fourth amendment seizure continues throughout the time the person remains in the custody of the arresting officers B. holding that the fourth amendment right implicated in a malicious prosecution action is the right to be free of unreasonable seizure of the person C. holding fourth amendment protects against use of force while in arresting officers custody until arraignment or formal charge D. holding seizure of evidence in plain view reasonable under fourth amendment E. holding arresting a person for refusing to provide his or her name violates the fourth amendment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that fourth amendment seizure continues throughout the time the person remains in the custody of the arresting 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: receive a fair rate of return. It is reasonable to conclude that the Legislature conferred on the Commissioner of Insurance the necessary implied authority to satisfy the constitutional standard that it expressly acknowledged in the statute. [Id. at 45-46, 590 A.2d 191.] As applied to the corporation business tax context, the State Farm analysis indicates that the Director’s obligation under N.J.S.A. 54:10A-8 to ensure that the allocation of income to New Jersey is fair under the Due Process and Commerce Clauses in itself provides a basis for sustaining the facial constitutionality of a statute that might, under certain circumstances, result in an unfair apportionment of income to this State. See Delmarva Power & Light Co. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 23 N.J.Tax 188, 208-210 (2006) (<HOLDING>). I turn now to a discussion of the contention, Options: A. recognizing that the internal consistency standard is satisfied where the formula if applied by every jurisdiction would result in no more than all of the unitary businesss income being taxed B. holding that the statute as applied violates the commerce clause C. holding that if the allocation formula under njsa 5410a6 produces a result that is unconstitutional under the commerce clause then njsa 5410a8 operates as a safety valve permitting the director to modify the formula so that it satisfies constitutional requirements D. holding 13981 constitutional under the commerce clause E. holding that sornas registration requirements and criminal enforcement provision are proper under the commerce clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that if the allocation formula under njsa 5410a6 produces a result that is unconstitutional under the commerce clause then njsa 5410a8 operates as a safety valve permitting the director to modify the formula so that it satisfies constitutional requirements
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: To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Grantor hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives and releases (a) all benefits that might accrue to the Grantor by virtue of any present or future moratorium law or other law exempting the Collateral from attachment, levy or sale on execution or providing for any appraisement, valuation, stay of execution, exemption from civil process, redemption or extension of time for payment and (b) any right to a marshalling of assets or a sale in inverse order of alienation. If any law referred to in this Deed of Trust and now in force, of which the Grantor or its successor or successors might take advantage despite the provisions hereof, shall hereafter be repealed or cease to be in force, such law shall thereafter be deemed not to constitute any part of the contract herein contained or to preclude the operation or application of the provisions hereof. If the laws of any state which provides for a redemption period do not permit the redemption period to be waived, the redemption period shall be specifically reduced to the minimum amount of time allowable by statute.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice, request, approval, consent or other communication required or contemplated by this Lease must be in writing, unless otherwise in this Lease expressly provided, and may be given or be served by depositing the same in the United States Postal Service, postpaid and certified and addressed to the party to be notified, with return receipt requested, or by delivering the same in person to such party (or, in case of a corporate party, to an officer of such party), or by prepaid telegram or express overnight mail service, when appropriate, addressed to the party to be notified. Notice deposited in the mail in the manner hereinabove described shall be effective from and after three (3) days (exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and postal holidays) after such deposit. Notice given in any other manner shall be effective only if and when delivered to the party to be notified or at such party’s address for purposes of notice as set forth herein. For purposes of notice the addresses of the parties shall, until changed as herein provided, be as provided on the first page of this Lease; provided, that any notices sent to Landlord will only be effective if copies thereof are simultaneously sent to Paragon Centre Holdings, LLC, 6060 Dutchmans Lane, Suite 100, Louisville, Kentucky 40205, Attention: Mr. David Nicklies; and provided, that any notices sent to Tenant will only be effective if copies thereof are simultaneously sent to the attention of Tenant at 6040 Dutchmans Lane, Louisville, Kentucky 40205, Attention: Legal Department. The parties hereto shall have the right from time to time to change their respective addresses by giving at least fifteen (15) days’ written notice to the other party in the manner set forth in this Section 10.3 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 551, 570, 92 S.Ct. 2219, 33 L.Ed.2d 131 (1972); " 'Nor does property lose its private character merely because the public is generally invited to use it for designated purposes"" Wilhoite, 640 N.E.2d at 387. Donovan argues that Wilhoite is distinguishable, in that the patron in Wilkhoite simply wanted to shop at the mall, involving an activity and premises not subject to comprehensive regulations. According to Donovan, the common law has been supplanted in this instance, because in 1993 our Indiana Legislature chose to legalize and regulate riverboat gambling, a formerly-prohibited activity. "Historically, the State of Indiana has prohibited gambling." Am. Legion Post No. 113 v. State, 656 N.E.2d 1190, 1192 (Ind.Ct.App.1995) (citing State v. Nixon, 270 Ind. 192, 384 N.E.2d 152 (1979) (<HOLDING>)), trams. denied. However, in 1988, the Indiana Options: A. holding political discharges were unconstitutional B. holding that an unconstitutional act of congress has no legal effect C. holding mere deviation unconstitutional D. holding section 61137 unconstitutional on its face E. holding that parimutuel wagering on horse races was unconstitutional

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that parimutuel wagering on horse races was unconstitutional
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: No Event of Default or, to the best of the Borrower’s knowledge, Default exists under or with respect to any Loan Document and neither the Borrower nor any other Covered Party is in default in any material respect beyond any applicable grace period under or with respect to any other material agreement, instrument or undertaking to which it is a party or by which it or any of its property is bound in any respect, the existence of which default is likely to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: No Defaults
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 above factors. First, the officers’ alleged “threats” do not rise to the level of coercion or duress necessary to negate consent. During their brief encounter with Ms. Sugura, one officer truthfully informed her that she could be arrested for harboring a fugitive or aiding a felon if she was lying about Mr. Miles’ presence in the apartment. II R. at 31, 71. Even generously construed as a “threat,” this statement was not the type of threat that negates an otherwise voluntary consent. See, e.g., United States v. Morrow, 731 F.2d 233, 236 (4th Cir.1984) (“Although [the officer] did tell [the defendant] ... that she could be charged as an accessory ... that statement alone hardly amounts to duress or coercion .... ”); see also United States v. Donaldson, 793 F.2d 498, 502 (2d Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). In this case, the officer’s statement did not Options: A. holding that the searehincidenttoalawfularrest rule does not apply to a warrantless search that provides the probable cause for the subsequent arrest because one cannot justify the arrest by the search and then simultaneously justify the search by the arrest B. holding on similar facts that when an investigation on the scene develops probable cause to arrest the third party resident of those premises for harboring the fugitive a warrantless search incident to the arrest may then be made C. holding that in a situation where the police have probable cause to arrest one party and reasonably mistake a second party for that first party the arrest of the second party is still a valid arrest D. holding that a warrantless arrest does not violate the fourth amendment if at the time of the defendants arrest police had probable cause to believe that an offense has been is being or will be committed E. holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding on similar facts that when an investigation on the scene develops probable cause to arrest the third party resident of those premises for harboring the fugitive a warrantless search incident to the arrest may then be made
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 subject to general rules of evidence but is "generally inadmissible"). Justice WALLACE, JR., concurring and dissenting. In my view, the Court is not required to address the difficult issue of whether the reasonable and articulable suspicion standard is a prerequisite to a consent search of a home. Defendant did not raise that issue at his suppression hearing or before the Appellate Division. We have frequently “expressed our reluctance to decide issues that were not addressed in the trial court or the Appellate Division.” Gac v. Gac, 186 N.J. 535, 547, 897 A.2d 1018 (2006). Moreover, “[w]e have applied that principle even when a constitutional issue is presented.” Ibid. Although the majority opinion recognizes that the issue of the standard for a consent search 2d 793 (1990) (<HOLDING>); State v. Novembrino, 105 N.J. 95, 145-58, 519 Options: A. holding state has burden of showing exception to prohibition against warrantless searches applies B. holding tacit consent to search of person was insufficient to prove consent to search bags where bags were not in defendants actual possession defendant merely pointed out bags at officers request and officer never specifically asked for consent to search bags C. holding that random searches of subway passengers carryon bags which include the visual inspection of the contents of such bags to be minimal D. holding that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of plastic garbage bags left on or at the side of a public street E. holding warrantless searches of garbage bags left on curb for collection invalid under state constitution

assistant: The best answer is E. holding warrantless searches of garbage bags left on curb for collection invalid under state constitution
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and voluntary waiver of Miranda rights, those statements are “irrebuttably presumed involuntary” and must be suppressed. United States v. Mashburn, 406 F.3d 303, 306 (4th Cir.2005) (citing Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298, 307, 105 S.Ct. 1285, 84 L.Ed.2d 222 (1985)). This case requires further delineation of the line between questions relating to the processing of an arrest that are biographical and questions of an investigatory nature. The latter, but not the former, constitute “interrogation” and implicate the Fifth Amendment and the attendant Miranda warning requirement. Compare Avery, 717 F.2d at 1024 (question was part of a “routine procedure to secure biographical data” and thus not interrogation), and United States v. King, 165 F.3d 29, 1998 WL 708707 (6th Cir.1998) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>), with United States v. Soto, 953 F.2d 263 (6th Options: A. holding that defendants inculpatory statements were not the product of interrogation where a detective could not have known his words would elicit an incriminating response B. holding that a defendants response to a question about his address was not protected by miranda notwithstanding the fact that pohce made use of the statement because it was not intended to elicit incriminating statements C. holding that a comment made by one police officer to another in the presence of the accused expressing concern that handicapped children might come across a shotgun is not a statement designed to elicit an incriminating response D. holding that examining defendants luggage for contraband in front of her was not the type of activity that was likely to elicit an incriminating response citation omitted E. holding that although defendants voluntarily given initial statement was inadmissible because of miranda violation subsequent statement made after careful miranda warnings were given and waiver was obtained was admissible

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a defendants response to a question about his address was not protected by miranda notwithstanding the fact that pohce made use of the statement because it was not intended to elicit incriminating statements
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: no occasion to consider the issue presented here: Whether knowingly causing physical injury to another by means of a deadly or dangerous weapon satisfies Be-gay’s “purposeful” requirement. Rather, in those contexts, we considered whether crimes committed with gross negligence or recklessness were sufficiently purposeful and concluded they were not. Id. at 710; Femandez-Ruiz, 466 F.3d at 1129-30. Today we reaffirm that more than recklessness or gross negligence is required, and more specifically hold that Begay can be satisfied by knowing conduct. In addition, we note that every circuit to have addressed the issue has held that Begay’s “purposeful conduct” requirement is satisfied where the underlying state offense requires the defendant to act knowingly. See Johnson, 587 F.3d at 211 (<HOLDING>); Wilson, 568 F.3d at 674 (“We conclude that Options: A. holding that a state election law is preempted only to the extent that it conflicts with federal law B. holding to the effect that section 341 fifth as impliedly amended by title vii preempts state law to the extent but only to the extent that it conflicts C. holding that to the extent simple assault under pennsylvania law is committed intentionally or knowingly it is by definition purposeful D. holding that a debtors attorney is not liable to creditors for mishandling a bankruptcy except to the extent that his conduct was fraudulent or otherwise intentionally wrongful E. holding outside of the context of title vii or the adea that section 24 fifth preempts state law to the extent but only to the extent that it conflicts

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that to the extent simple assault under pennsylvania law is committed intentionally or knowingly it is by definition purposeful
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: Without prejudice to any other rights that the Parties have pursuant to this Supply Agreement, every provision of this Supply Agreement is intended to be severable. If any provision of this Supply Agreement shall be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the other provisions of this Supply Agreement, which shall remain in full force and effect. The Parties hereto agree to consult each other and to agree upon a new stipulation which is permissible under applicable Law and which comes as close as possible to the original purpose and intent of the invalid, void or unenforceable provision.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The waiver by the Company of a breach or threatened breach of any obligation of this Agreement by the Employee shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach by the Employee. The refusal or failure of the Company to enforce any obligation of this Agreement (or any similar agreement) against any other employee, agent, or independent contractor, for any reason, is not a defense to the Company's enforcement of any similar obligation, nor shall it give rise to any claim or cause of action by the Employee against the Company.

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: counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the defense of impossibility since the person he sent the images to was not actually a child. However, “criminal liability for attempt is appropriate when the defendant has done everything in his power to commit the crime but did not complete the crime due to a factual impossibility.” State v. Cearley, 2004-NMCA-079, ¶ 22, 135 N.M. 710, 92 P.3d 1284 (citing State v. Lopez, 100 N.M. 291, 292, 669 P.2d 1086, 1087 (1983)). Cummings also asserted that his counsel was ineffective for failing to argue that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction since he was in Texas at the time he sent the images that were received in New Mexico. This argument, too, lacks merit. See State v. Jones, 39 N.M. 395, 399-400, 48 P.2d 403, 405-06 (1935) (<HOLDING>); see also People v. Ruppenthal, 331 Ill.App.3d Options: A. recognizing that new mexico courts will enforce a contractual choiceoflaw provision unless to do so would violate fundamental principle of justice or deeprooted traditions of new mexico B. holding that texas district court had subjectmatter jurisdiction over paternity proceeding regarding minor born in texas and taken to mexico by mother a mexican citizen one day before putative father commenced paternity action C. holding that where the entity was incorporated in texas and the shareholders reside in texas and the bankruptcy case is pending in texas texas law not arizona law should be applied D. holding that defendants could be convicted of bribery in new mexico even though the actual transaction occurred in texas since defendants attempted to obstruct justice in new mexico E. recognizing the validity of the singlelarceny doctrine in new mexico

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that defendants could be convicted of bribery in new mexico even though the actual transaction occurred in texas since defendants attempted to obstruct justice in new mexico
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: could be liable under § 1981 for causing an employer (under a “cat’s paw” theory) to take retaliatory action against an employee. We have not gone so far, however, as to suggest that a plaintiffs fellow employees violate the implied retaliation prohibition in § 1981 by not seeking out the plaintiff to collaborate on professional projects. Moreover, Katz’s decisions about what research projects to pursue — and with whom — are protected by the First Amend ment and would not serve as a proper basis for holding him liable for violating Shott’s civil rights. See Trejo v. Shoben, 319 F.3d 878, 884 (7th Cir. 2003) (First Amendment protects faculty member’s right to participate in “academic debates, pursuits, and inquiries”); Dow Chemical Co. v. Allen, 672 F.2d 1262, 1275 (7th Cir. 1982) (<HOLDING>); McElearney v. University of Ill. at Chicago Options: A. recognizing the right to counsel on appeal B. holding that the constitutional right to a speedy trial includes the right to a reasonably prompt sentencing C. holding right to testify was federal constitutional right D. recognizing defendants right to due process includes the right to present a defense by crossexamining witnesses E. recognizing that right to academic freedom includes right to carry on research without interference from fellow faculty members

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that right to academic freedom includes right to carry on research without interference from fellow faculty members
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 the proceedings: "We do not mean that the non-moving party must produce evidence in a form that would be admissible at trial in order to avoid summary judgment." Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.E.d.2d 265 (1986). Seizing in part on this declaration, a number of federal courts have found that evidence that would be inadmissible a , 520 U.S. 781, 117 S.Ct. 1734, 188 L.Ed.2d 1 (1997); Treff v. Galetka, 74 F.3d 191, 195 (10th Cir.1996) ("The nonmoving party is not required to produce evidence in a form that would be admissible at trial, but the content or substance of the evidence must be admissible.") (quotation omitted) (italies in original); Petruszi's IGA Supermarkets, Inc. v. Darling-Delaware Co., Inc., 998 F.2d 1224, 1284-85 n. 9 (3d Cir.19983) (<HOLDING>). We find particularly instructive the case of Options: A. holding that ijnadmissible evidence may be material if the evidence would have led to admissible evidence B. holding on the authority of celotex v catrett 477 us 317 106 sct 2548 91 led2d 265 1986 that hearsay evidence produced in an affidavit opposing summary judgment may be considered if the outofcourt declarant could later present that evidence through direct testimony ie in a form that would be admissible at trial C. holding that hearsay evidence may be considered on summary judgment if the same evidence would be admissible in another form at trial D. holding that hearsay in affidavit which would be inadmissible in evidence at trial could not be considered on motion for summary judgment E. holding that evidence in an inadmissible form may be considered at the summary judgment stage as long as the evidence is submitted in an admissible form at trial

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that hearsay evidence may be considered on summary judgment if the same evidence would be admissible in another form at trial
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 will cooperate reasonably with each other and with their respective Representatives in connection with any steps required to be taken as part of their respective obligations under this Agreement, and will (a) furnish upon reasonable request to each other such further information, (b) execute and deliver to each other such other documents, and (c) do such other acts and things, all as any other Party may reasonably request for the purpose of carrying out the intent of this Agreement and the Contemplated Transactions. In case at any time after the Closing any further action is necessary or desirable to carry out the purposes of this Agreement, each of the Parties will take such further action (including the execution and delivery of such further instruments and documents) as any other Party reasonably may request, all at the sole cost and expense of the requesting Party (unless the requesting Party is entitled to indemnification therefor under Section 7 or unless such cost or expense is the obligation of the non-requesting Party under this Agreement). Seller acknowledges and agrees that, from and after the Closing, Buyer will be entitled to possession of all documents, books, records (including Tax records), Permits, Governmental Authorizations, certificates of title, agreements, Company Contracts, Organizational Documents, financial data and all other documents of any sort relating to the Company (all of the forgoing, the “ Company Documents ”).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice required to be given or delivered to the Company under the terms of this Award Agreement shall be in writing and addressed to the Company at its principal corporate offices. Any notice required to be given or delivered to the Participant shall be in writing and addressed to the Participant at the address maintained for the Participant in the Company’s records or at the address of the local office of the Company or of any other Participating Company at which the Participant works.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: permitted those plaintiffs who were commercial fishermen, as well as owners of boats, tackle and bait shops, and marinas, to proceed on negligence and nuisance theories against the defendant although the damages claimed were purely economic and there was no direct physical impact on the plaintiffs’ property. Pruitt, however, constitutes an exception to the general rule prohibiting the recovery of purely economic losses absent physical impact. In cases in which a plaintiffs business is partially based upon the exercise of a public right, the plaintiff may be able to recover purely economic damages caused by a defendant’s negligence in polluting the public resource upon which the plaintiff relies. See, e.g., Louisiana ex rel. Guste v. M/V Testbank, 752 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir.1985) (en banc) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 903, 106 S.Ct. 3271, Options: A. holding that funds were unavailable for attachment under section 1610 because they were never used for or designated for use in commercial activity B. holding that the juvenile defendants who voluntarily left their homes in the middle of night to ride to the police department in patrol cars and who were told they were not under arrest were not in custody C. holding that defendants who were responsible for collision resulting in pollution of river were liable to commercial fishermen D. holding that the claims were not preempted by 7422 where the defendants were the plaintiffs employers responsible for tax collection because here plaintiff is not challenging defendants withholding of fica taxes rather he is challenging their failure to follow the special timing rule resulting in a reduction to his benefits and devastating tax consequences E. holding that private defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity but remanding for a determination of whether they were liable as government actors

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that defendants who were responsible for collision resulting in pollution of river were liable to commercial fishermen