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: CURIAM. We sua sponte dismiss the appeal of John W. Childs (Childs) as untimely filed. The trial court denied Childs’ Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion on January 18, 1994. Childs then filed a pleading styled “answer to state’s response to defendant’s motion for postconviction relief’ on February 9,1994. The trial court treated this pleading as a motion for reconsideration, and denied it on April 15, 1994. The fact however that Childs filed a notice of appeal on May 3, 1994, is irrelevant, because, having filed an untimely “motion for rehearing,” see Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.850(g), Childs was required to file his appeal within thirty days of the January 1994 order to preserve the jurisdiction of this court. Cf. Griffis v. State, 593 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (<HOLDING>). Childs’ appeal accordingly is dismissed. It Options: A. holding that an unauthorized motion for rehearing does not toll defendants time for filing a notice of appeal B. holding a motion for rehearing from an appealable nonfinal order is not authorized and thus does not toll the time for filing an appeal C. holding filing of motion for reconsideration does not toll the 30day deadline for filing petition for review D. holding that an untimely postjudgment motion does not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal and that this court has no jurisdiction over an untimely filed appeal E. holding that the filing of an opening brief within the time period for filing a notice of appeal could constitute notice of appeal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an unauthorized motion for rehearing does not toll defendants time for filing a notice of appeal
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: a reasonable person in her circumstances would fear persecution if returned to her native country. Gao v. Ashcroft, 299 F.3d 266, 272 (3d Cir.2002); Elnager v. INS, 930 F.2d 784, 786 (9th Cir. 1991). The applicant must show “a subjective fear of persecution that is supported by objective evidence that persecution is a reasonable possibility.” Abdulrahman v. Ashcroft, 330 F.3d 587, 592 (3d Cir.2003) (quoting Chang v. INS, 119 F.3d 1055, 1066 (3d Cir.1997)). Whether an applicant has demonstrated a well-founded fear of future persecution and qualifies for asylum, withholding of removal, or relief under CAT, is generally a factual determination, which this court will review under the substantial evidence standard. Shardar v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 318, 323 (3d Cir.2004); Dia, 353 F.3d at 239 (<HOLDING>); Gao, 299 F.3d at 272; Abdille v. Ashcroft, Options: A. holding that the district courts finding of no discrimination under title vii was not clearly erroneous because the finding was supported by the record B. holding that if a reasonable fact finder could make a particular finding on the administrative record then the finding is supported by substantial evidence C. holding that a finding of fact is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole if it would have been possible for a reasonable jury to reach the boards conclusion D. holding that the district courts finding of no discrimination was not clearly erroneous because the finding was supported by the record E. holding substantial evidence supported jury finding of abuse of process

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that if a reasonable fact finder could make a particular finding on the administrative record then the finding is supported by substantial evidence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by Debtor and Lender, this Agreement will be terminated upon (i) termination of Lender's obligations to make loans under the Business Credit Agreement, dated as of the date hereof, by and between Debtor and Lender and repayment of all loans outstanding thereunder and (ii) payment in full of all amounts payable under the Business Note, dated as of the date hereof, executed by Debtor in favor of Lender and (iii) payment of all other indebtedness and obligations owed by Debtor under such agreements or instruments or hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all payments by Borrower under the Loan Documents shall be made to Collateral Agent for the benefit of the Lenders (or, if there are only one (1) or two (2) Lenders, Borrower shall make payment directly to such Lenders), at such Person’s office in immediately available funds on the date specified herein. Unless otherwise provided, interest is payable monthly on the Payment Date of each month. Payments of principal and/or interest received after 12:00 noon Eastern time are considered received at the opening of business on the next Business Day. When a payment is due on a day that is not a Business Day, the payment is due the next Business Day and additional fees or interest, as applicable, shall continue to accrue until paid. All payments to be made by Borrower hereunder or under any other Loan Document, including payments of principal and interest, and all fees, expenses, indemnities and reimbursements, shall be made without set‑off, recoupment or counterclaim, in lawful money of the United States and in immediately available funds. Collateral Agent may at its discretion and with prior notice of at least one (1) Business Day (three (3) Business Days in the case of clause (ii) so long as no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing), initiate debit entries to the Borrower’s account as authorized on the ACH Letter (i) initiate debit entries to the Borrower’s account as authorized on the ACH Letter on each payment date of all Obligations then due and owing, (ii) and initiate debit entries to the Borrower’s account as authorized on the ACH Letter at any time any payment due and owing with respect to Lender Expenses, and (iii) upon an Event of Default, any other Obligations outstanding.

assistant: Payments
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: for Writ of Certiorari at ii, Maxwell-Jolly, 2010 WL 599171 (Feb. 16, 2010) (No. 09-958). The Court is not persuaded, as the Commissioner’s argument appears to run contrary to a body of cases involving freestanding claims brought under the Supremacy Clause. For instance, the Supreme Court has reached the merits of a preemption claim concerning a statute enacted pursuant to Congress’s spending clause authority. See PhRMA v. Walsh, 538 U.S. 644, 123 S.Ct. 1855, 155 L.Ed.2d 889 (2003) (plurality opinion) (involving Medicaid Act). Although PhRMA was a plurality decision, “seven Justices assumed both that the federal courts have jurisdiction and that a claim was stated for spending clause preemption.” Planned Parenthood of Houston, & Se. Tex. v. Sanchez, 403 F.3d 324, 331-32 (5th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); see also Thompson, 362 F.3d at 819 n. 3 Options: A. holding that no federal court other than the supreme court may entertain a proceeding to reverse or modify a judgment of a state court B. recognizing that the statute vesting this court with the supreme judicial power of the territory implicitly repealed 1 vic 4 C. holding that the petitioners federal habeas action accrued when a witness executed an affidavit recanting the testimony he gave during a prisoners murder prosecution not on the date that the state supreme court rejected the prisoners claim D. recognizing that supreme court implicitly rejected the contention that asserting the preemptive force of federal spending clause legislation is itself no claim E. recognizing as foreclosed the contention that recent supreme court decisions limit almendareztorres holding to cases where a defendant has admitted the prior convictions during a guilty plea

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that supreme court implicitly rejected the contention that asserting the preemptive force of federal spending clause legislation is itself no claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 376 U.S. 222 84 S.Ct. 709 11 L.Ed.2d 656 Crawford MARTIN, Secretary of State of Texas, et al.,v.George H. W. BUSH et al. No. 675. Supreme Court of the United States March 2, 1964 Waggoner Carr, Atty. Gen. of Texas, Albert P. Jones and Hawthorne Phillips, First Asst. Attys. Gen., Mary K. Wall, Asst. Atty. Gen., Will D. Davis and Frank C. Erwin, Jr., for appellants. William B. Cassin and Thad T. Hutcheson, for appellees. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed on the authority of Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 84 S.Ct. 526, without prejudice to the right of the appellants to apply by April 1, 1964, to the District Court for further equitable relief in light of the present circumstances including the imminence of the forthcoming election and 'the operation of the election machinery of Texas' noted by the District Court in its opinion.* The stay heretofore granted by Mr. Justice Black is continued in effect pending timely application for the foregoing relief and final disposition thereof by the District Court. 2 Mr. Justice CLARK joins this disposition, but upon the grounds stated in his separate opinion in Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S., p. 18, 84 S.Ct., p. 535. 3 Mr. Justice HARLAN and Mr. Justice STEWART would reverse the judgment below for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S., pp. 20, 50, 84 S.Ct., pp. 536, 552. * 224 F.Supp. 499, 513.

assistant: 2
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Agreement may be executed in separate counterparts, none of which need contain the signatures of all parties, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which taken together constitute one and the same instrument. The Agreement or any counterpart may be executed via facsimile or other electronic transmission, and any such executed facsimile or other electronic copy shall be treated as an original. It shall not be necessary in making proof of the Agreement to produce or account for more than the number of counterparts containing the respective signatures of, or on behalf of, all of the parties hereto.

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: does not have standing to maintain this action with respect to the alleged violations of Chapter 26, because, as conceded by appellant, such standing is not specifically granted by statute, and because the appellant has not shown that he has been damaged or injured as a result of the City’s actions other than as a member of the general public. In so holding, we are guided by the following decisions. Scott, 405 S.W.2d 55; Bolton v. Sparks, 362 S.W.2d 946, 951 (Tex.1962) (private individual cannot maintain a suit to enjoin alleged violation of a penal ordinance unless the activity complained of results in damages to such person, peculiar to him, and not common to the public in general); Tuck v. Texas Power & Light Co., 543 S.W.2d 214, 215 (Tex.Civ.App.—Austin 1976, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (<HOLDING>); Marshall v. City of Lubbock, 520 S.W.2d 553, Options: A. holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract B. holding that a resident seeking to annul an ordinance of a home rule city providing for an electric rate increase had no justiciable interest in the controversy and stating that to have standing he must have a justiciable interest distinguishable from the public in general C. holding that when an oversecured creditor seeks interest on its claim courts apply the interest rate provided for in the contract D. holding the question of standing is distinct from the question of proof and once the plaintiffs alleged an interest peculiar to themselves and distinguishable from the public generally they were entitled to a factual hearing E. holding despite contrary authority that husband debtor with a mere possessoiy interest was not entitled to claim a homestead exemption and stating it is a fundamental tenet of the law of exemptions that the debtor must have an ownership interest in the property before an exemption may be claimed a long line of illinois cases has required that a debtor have title or some ownership interest in property in order to claim a homestead exemption other courts deciding the issue under the federal exemption scheme have held that the key word is interest and that an interest in real property up to a specified amount implies a monetary interest more than just one spouses right to reside with the other

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a resident seeking to annul an ordinance of a home rule city providing for an electric rate increase had no justiciable interest in the controversy and stating that to have standing he must have a justiciable interest distinguishable from the public in 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of documents from debtor. I am unable to determine specifically what documents were produced because the bank has failed to detail the contents of the records it received from debtor. Nor did the bank provide any expert testimony that Wazeter’s financial history could not be constructed from the records he provided. See In re Wynn, 205 B.R. 97, 101 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 1997) (denying summary judgment and noting that the creditor had failed to present evidence that creditors were unable to ascertain the debtor’s financial condition from the debtor’s existing records) (citing In re Dolin, 799 F.2d 251, 253 (6th Cir.1986)). I acknowledge that various cases have suggested that certain categories of information may be essential to determining a debtor’s history. See In re Juzwiak, 89 F.3d at 428 (<HOLDING>); In re Pulos, 168 B.R. 682 (holding that Options: A. holding that chaotic and piecemeal records were insufficient to determine financial history B. holding that an automobiles title history was admissible under the public records exception C. holding a court may consider a defendants criminal history even if that history is included in the defendants criminal history category D. holding that records relating to a student court were not education records E. holding that municipal court records were admissible under official records or public documents exception

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that chaotic and piecemeal records were insufficient to determine financial history
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: was stopped by Des Moines police because he was driving a Chevrolet Blazer that matched the description of a Blazer that had been stolen the prior evening. Overbeck was found to be driving while barred and arrested. A subsequent search of his vehicle revealed six bottles of psuedo-ephedrine tablets, pipe fittings, hoses, three shotguns, and $9,000 in cash. The only issue raised in this appeal is whether the three shotguns found in Over-beck’s car should count as firearms for the purpose of enhancing his sentence pursuant to § 2Dl.l(b)(l)(A). We review a district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines for clear error. United States v. Hayes, 15 F.3d 125, 127 (8th Cir.1994). The pertinent guideline language states that “[i]f a dangerous weapon (includin 31-33 (8th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). In a conspiracy case such as this, “the Options: A. holding search of armed robbery defendants suitcases and between mattresses of hotel room proper where at time of arrest officers were aware that the defendants had used several different weapons during the robberies and that one weapon a loaded revolver was in plain view concluding officers reasonably feared that someone else was going to come to the room who knew where the other weapons were or that the defendants would position themselves to take advantage of any hidden weapons or instrumentalities B. holding that city ordinances ban on assault weapons was vague because the ordinance lacked a scienter requirement and its definitions of assault weapons inter alia unfairly required gun consumers to ascertain the developmental history of particular weapons or monitor the precise types of ammunition available for their weapons C. recognizing as reasonable an officers inference that a driver could be hiding weapons in his car when his passenger had an outstanding warrant for a weapons violation D. holding enhancement not appropriate because of two and onehalf month lapse between the criminal activity and the discovery of the weapons and no evidence that weapons were present when defendant committed charged offense E. recognizing innocent possession defense to a charge of criminal weapons possession

assistant: The best answer is D. holding enhancement not appropriate because of two and onehalf month lapse between the criminal activity and the discovery of the weapons and no evidence that weapons were present when defendant committed charged offense
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: on changed circumstances arising in the country of nationality or in the country to which deportation has been ordered, if such evidence is material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the previous hearing.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii); INA § 240(c) (7) (C) (ii). Regarding the “material” element of the exception, we have explained that an alien who attempts to show that evidence is material to his removal proceedings “bears a ‘heavy burden/ and must ‘present! ] evidence of such a nature that the [BIA] is satisfied that if proceedings before the [IJ] were reopened, with all attendant delays, the new evidence offered would likely change the result in the case.’ ” Ali v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 443 F.3d 804, 813 (11th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). The instant motion is both time-and Options: A. holding that the bia does not err by denying a motion to reopen without an opposition from the government B. holding the bia did not err in denying aliens motion to stay voluntary departure period pending determination on the motion to reopen C. holding that the bia did not err in putting the burden of proof to demonstrate grounds for granting a motion to reopen on the alien D. holding that bia did not err in denying motion to reopen that was filed after expiration of aliens voluntary departure period because alien had failed to depart E. holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the bia did not err in putting the burden of proof to demonstrate grounds for granting a motion to reopen on the alien
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 sentencing proceedings, it-follows that the evidentiary rules do not apply to restitution hearings. This conclusion is consistent with persuasive authority from the federal courts. The corresponding Federal Rule of Evidence provides that the rules (except for those on privilege) do not apply to “miscellaneous proceedings such as ... sentencing.” Fed.R.Evid. 1101(d). Be cause the text of the federal rule is similar to our own, we may look to federal caselaw for guidance in construing the Minnesota rule. State v. Head, 561 N.W.2d 182, 186 (Minn.App.1997), review denied (Minn. May 28,1997). Federal courts have interpreted Fed. R.Evid. 1101(d) to mean that the rules of evidence do not. apply to restitution hearings. See, e.g., United States v. Ogden, 685 F.3d 600, 606 (6th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Yeung, 672 F.3d 594, 606 Options: A. holding that because the rules of evidence including the rule against hearsay do not apply to sentencing hearings the district court did not err in relying on hearsay in ordering restitution B. recognizing that sentencing facts are based on the evidence and testimony presented at sentencing under a preponderance of the evidence standard C. holding that because restitution hearings are a part of sentencing and have nothing to do with a defendants guilt or innocence the rules of evidence do not apply D. holding that disputes as to evidence admitted at a restitution hearing are meritless because the rules of evidence do not apply during sentencing proceedings E. recognizing that the federal rules of evidence do not apply to sentencing hearings

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that disputes as to evidence admitted at a restitution hearing are meritless because the rules of evidence do not apply during sentencing proceedings
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: Capitalized terms used in this Agreement and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan. Ce1tain other terms used herein have definitions given to them in the first place in which they are used.

assistant: Definitions
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 and each of the Subsidiaries is duly incorporated or formed and validly existing and in good standing under the law of its jurisdiction of incorporation or formation. The Company and each of the Subsidiaries is duly qualified and in good standing as a foreign company in each other jurisdiction in which it owns or leases property or in which the conduct of its business requires it to be so qualified or licensed, except where the failure to be so qualified and in good standing would not, individually or in the aggregate, have or reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the business, properties, financial condition, results of operations, or prospects of the Company and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole (a “ Material Adverse Effect ”).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the Laws of the jurisdiction of its formation and has full corporate power and authority to enter into this Agreement, and to carry out the provisions hereof or thereof, as applicable.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Mrs. Edwards had a right to seek waiver of any amount owed. Because the duty to sympathetically read pro se pleadings applies, at a minimum, to pleadings related to the provision of VA benefits, and Mrs. Edwards’ May 2000 submissions were related to the provision of VA benefits, we need not decide if the duty to assist applies to a request for waiver or if the duty to sympathetically read pleadings applies to any and all pro se submissions to the Secretary, as opposed to those submissions that are related to VA benefits. Inasmuch as it is clear that the Board did not sympathetically read Mrs. Edwards’ May 2003 submissions related to her $2,366 indebtedness, this matter will be remanded for the Board to do so in the first instance. See Beverly v. Nicholson, 19 Vet.App. 394, 405 (2005) (<HOLDING>); Richardson v. Nicholson, 20 Vet.App. 64, 72 Options: A. holding that the interpretation of a veterans filings is a factual inquiry B. holding that when a defendant raises a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel the trial judge must conduct an inquiry into the claim C. holding that whether a sympathetic reading of a veterans filings raises a claim is a factual inquiry D. holding that whether the plaintiffs reliance on a negligent misrepresentation is justified generally raises a question of fact E. holding that a claim that is constitutional in name only does not create jurisdiction over an appeal from the veterans court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that whether a sympathetic reading of a veterans filings raises a claim is a factual inquiry
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: jury to conclude that the vehicle registration and inspection lane checklist, which indicated that a vehicle owned by Mendoza and bearing the license plate number 0285 had been inspected on June 4, 2009, was false. Moreover, Wheatley’s testimony that Mendoza physically deposited the 0285 license plates with the Commission when he sold the 0285 license plates and medallion in December 2008 would allow a reasonable jury to conclude that Mendoza knew the vehicle registration and inspection lane checklist were false. A jury could also reasonably infer from Mendoza’s possession of the false vehicle registration and inspection lane checklist that he had procured those documents and that he had the intent to file them at the BMV. See United States v. Hall, 632 F.2d 500, 502 (5th Cir. 1980) (<HOLDING>); People v. Rodriguez, 71 A.D.3d 450, 897 Options: A. holding evidence establishing the intent of the defendants to distribute drugs also permits the inference they intended to exercise dominion over them to demonstrate constructive possession B. holding jurys finding that money in bank safe deposit box was contraband was not supported by factually sufficient evidence when safety deposit box was located a distance away from marijuana despite fact that canine alerted to safety deposit box C. holding defendants possession of fake ids was sufficient to infer his intent to defraud or deceive D. holding defendants possession of forged checks was sufficient to allow inference of his intent to deposit them E. holding that an inference of intent to distribute was not warranted from the possession of one ounce of cocaine

assistant: The best answer is D. holding defendants possession of forged checks was sufficient to allow inference of his intent to deposit them
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: Scribante hereby reaffirms and restates his continuing obligations as set forth in Section 7(c) of the Employment Agreement with respect to the disclosure and assignment to Company of all Innovations (as defined in the Employment Agreement), which Section 7(c) is hereby incorporated by reference herein and shall remain in full force and effect unaffected by this Agreement and Release. Scribante recognizes and agrees that additional consideration to which he would not otherwise be entitled is being provided to him hereunder for him to reaffirm and agree to his foregoing obligations.

assistant: Disclosures
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: due diligence; (4) that it is material to the issue; and (5) that it is not merely cumulative or impeaching, unless it is clear that such impeachment would have resulted in a different verdict.” State v. Marshall, 491 A.2d 554, 559 (Me.1985) (quoting State v. Lord, 458 A.2d 432, 433 (Me.1983)). When the “newly discovered” evidence is “merely corroborative of evidence which [the defendant] could himself have presented, and which he elected not to disclose, to the jury,” the defendant is estopped “from seeking a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence.” State v. Harding, 408 A.2d 1003, 1005 (Me.1979). [¶ 26] Here, Kelly’s counsel admitted that he knew Kelly had previously worn the mask. Moreover, Kelly presumably knew that Bean, and perhaps others, had seen him wearing t 98) (<HOLDING>); McMullen v. State, 714 So.2d 368, 373 Options: A. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion B. holding it was not an abuse of discretion to deny funds C. holding that we review for abuse of discretion a decision to exclude a document for lack of authentication D. holding it was not an abuse of discretion to exclude testimony E. holding the courts ruling to admit or exclude evidence will only be reversed if it constituted an abuse of discretion amounting to an error of law

assistant: The best answer is D. holding it was not an abuse of discretion to exclude testimony
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: by the method of transmission error because it would have a substantial chance of receiving the contract award in a rebid. By conflating the standing requirements of prejudicial error and economic interest, Labatt would create a rule that, to an unsuccessful but economically interested offeror in a bid protest, any error is harmful. Under this radical formulation there would be no such thing as an error nonprejudicial to an economically interested offeror in a bid contest. We decline to adopt such a rule. Instead, we reiterate the established law in this circuit that nonprejudicial errors in a bid process do not automatically invalidate a procurement. Data Gen. Corp. v. Johnson, 78 F.3d 1556, 1562 (Fed.Cir.1996); Grumman Data Sys. Corp. v. Widnall, 15 F.3d 1044, 1048 (Fed.Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); Andersen Consulting v. United States, 959 Options: A. holding that it is an abuse of discretion to make errors of law or clear errors of factual determination B. holding inter alia that de minimis errors by the procuring agency are not sufficient grounds for overturning a contract award C. holding that where specific grounds for an objection are stated at trial all other grounds are waived and will not be considered for the first time on appeal D. holding that an error by the procuring agency must be clear and prejudicial to overturn an award decision E. holding that instructional errors that are trial errors are subject to harmless error analysis

assistant: The best answer is B. holding inter alia that de minimis errors by the procuring agency are not sufficient grounds for overturning a contract award
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: National Treasury Employees Union, 489 U.S. at 680-82, 109 S.Ct. 1384 (Scalia, J., dissenting). In National Treasury Employees Union, the contested search involved urine testing of Customs Service employees to protect the integrity of the agency by discharging employees who, through their own drug use, would allegedly be unable fully to perform their duty to interdict narcotics. Id. at 682, 109 S.Ct. 1384. Justice Scalia argued that the governmental purpose provided was too generalized and speculative to find the drug testing reasonable. See id. at 684, 109 S.Ct. 1384. Thus, when operating outside the warrant requirement, a “special needs” search must be narrowly tailored to achieve a legitimate purpose. See Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 659, 99 S.Ct. 1391, 59 L.Ed.2d 660 (1979) (<HOLDING>). D. Focusing the Appropriate Fourth Amendment Options: A. holding evidence including that insurer only charged life insurance premium that would ordinarily apply to onehalf the amount of coverage actually permitted by policy as written did not warrant retroactive reformation of policy to reduce coverage amount because it did not demonstrate mistake on insureds part and insurance company did not present evidence on what parties agreed to before the policy was issued B. holding that insurers failure to deny existence of insurance coverage under policy at issue was to admit that coverage existed C. holding that the plaintiffs asserted legal basis for coverage is irrelevant to the determination of whether the insurance policy provides coverage and instead looking to the facts underlying the claim for coverage D. holding random traffic stops for license and registration checks are contrary to fourth amendment E. holding that random spot checks were not narrowly tailored to the purpose of ensuring an adequate amount of insurance coverage

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that random spot checks were not narrowly tailored to the purpose of ensuring an adequate amount of insurance coverage
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: 2. Each party agrees that at all times until termination or expiration of this Agreement it will hold in strict confidence and not disclose to any third party Confidential Information of the other, except as approved in writing by the other party to this Agreement, and will use the Confidential Information for no purpose other than evaluating or pursuing a business relationship with the other party to this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Lenders and the Issuing Banks hereby irrevocably appoints the Administrative Agent as its agent and authorizes the Administrative Agent to take such actions on its behalf and to exercise such powers as are delegated to the Administrative Agent by the terms hereof, together with such actions and powers as are reasonably incidental thereto. The provisions of this Article are solely for the benefit of the Administrative Agent, the Lenders and the Issuing Banks , and none of the Loan Parties shall have rights as a third party beneficiary of any of such provisions; in each case subject to the rights of the Borrower under Section 8.06.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: presumptively unreasonable. Thus, in a case involving a level 18 offense committed by a category I offender, a more than minimal planning departure would be reasonable only if the sentence imposed did not exceed 41 months — the high end of the guideline range applicable to level 20 offenses committed by category I offenders. In order to justify a departure of a greater magnitude than that, the district court would have to explain why more than minimal planning should make a greater difference in the context before it than it makes under the various guidelines where it is deemed a specific offense characteristic, or else explain why the case involves aggravating factors other than a defendant’s more than minimal planning. Cf. United States v. Shuman, 902 F.2d 873, 876-77 (11th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). We do not suggest that this approach for Options: A. holding that defendants may agree to departure from sentencing guidelines in plea bargain B. holding that the degree of a departure based on conduct described as a specific offense characteristic in inapplicable guidelines was reasonable when the departure amounted to an increase in offense level no greater than that provided in the inapplicable guidelines C. holding that no offense alleged where affidavit described offense as felony D. holding that arithmetical error that resulted in an increase to a defendants base offense level pursuant to the sentencing guidelines affected his substantial rights even though the resulting sentence was within the range for the correct offense level E. holding that the defendants sentence was based on the career offender guidelines despite the fact that the district court calculated an offense level pursuant to the crack guidelines

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the degree of a departure based on conduct described as a specific offense characteristic in inapplicable guidelines was reasonable when the departure amounted to an increase in offense level no greater than that provided in the inapplicable guidelines
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No amendment of any provision of this Agreement will be effective unless made in writing and signed by an officer or a duly authorized representative of each party. No failure or delay by any party in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or further exercise of any other right, power or privilege. The rights and remedies herein provided shall be cumulative of any rights or remedies provided by law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Pursuant to the Credit Agreement, (a) this Guaranty has been delivered to the Administrative Agent and (b) the Administrative Agent is authorized to enforce this Guaranty on behalf of the Secured Parties. All payments by any Guarantor pursuant to this Guaranty shall be made to the Administrative Agent (and any amount received by the Administrative Agent for the account of a Secured Party shall, subject to the other provisions of this Guaranty, be deemed received by such Secured Party upon receipt by the Administrative Agent). All amounts due pursuant to this Guaranty shall be payable promptly (and in any event not later than thirty (30) days) after demand therefor.

assistant: Payments
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: By the issuance of a Letter of Credit (or an amendment to a Letter of Credit increasing the amount thereof) and without any further action on the part of the Issuing Bank or the Lenders, the Issuing Bank hereby grants to each Lender, and each Lender hereby acquires from the Issuing Bank, a participation in such Letter of Credit equal to such Lender’s Applicable Percentage of the aggregate amount available to be drawn under such Letter of Credit. In consideration and in furtherance of the foregoing, each Lender hereby absolutely and unconditionally agrees to pay to the Administrative Agent, for the account of the Issuing Bank, such Lender’s Applicable Percentage of each LC Disbursement made by the Issuing Bank and not reimbursed by the Borrowers on the date due as provided in paragraph (e) of this Section, or of any reimbursement payment required to be refunded to the Borrowers for any reason. Each Lender acknowledges and agrees that its obligation to acquire participations pursuant to this paragraph in respect of Letters of Credit is absolute and unconditional and shall not be affected by any circumstance whatsoever, including any amendment, renewal or extension of any Letter of Credit or the occurrence and continuance of a Default or reduction or termination of the Commitments, and that each such payment shall be made without any offset, abatement, withholding or reduction whatsoever.

assistant: Participations
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 Lease may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Facsimile and electronic signatures (including signature by PDF) shall constitute original signatures.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Credit Party and each Subsidiary thereof has duly filed or caused to be filed all federal, and all other material state, local and other material tax returns required by Applicable Law to be filed, and has paid, or made adequate provision for the payment of, all material federal, state, local and other taxes, assessments and governmental charges or levies upon it and its property, income, profits and assets which are due and payable (other than any amount the validity of which is currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which reserves in conformity with GAAP have been provided for on the books of the relevant Credit Party). Such material tax returns accurately reflect in all material respects all liability for taxes of any Credit Party or any Subsidiary thereof for the periods covered thereby. No Governmental Authority has asserted any Lien or other claim against any Credit Party or any Subsidiary thereof with respect to any material unpaid taxes which has not been discharged or resolved (other than (a) any amount the validity of which is currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which reserves in conformity with GAAP have been provided for on the books of the relevant Credit Party and (b) Permitted Liens).

assistant: Payments
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 execution, delivery and performance by the Borrower of each Loan Document to which the Borrower is party, have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate or other organizational action, and do not and will not (a) contravene the terms of any of the Borrower’s Organization Documents; (b) conflict with or result in any breach or contravention of, or the creation of any Lien under, or require any payment to be made under (i) any material Contractual Obligation to which the Borrower is a party or affecting the Borrower or the properties of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or (ii) any order, injunction, writ or decree of any Official Body or any arbitral award to which the Borrower or its property is subject; or (c) violate any Law.

assistant: Authorizations
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: events of the distant past. Barker, 407 U.S. at 532 (“Loss of memory, however, is not always reflected in the record because what has been forgotten can rarely be shown”). The Supreme Court, however, has stressed that “if witnesses die or disappear during a delay, the prejudice is obvious.” Barker, 407 U.S. at 532. Francis has not argued, nor has he suggested, that his defense has been prejudiced in any way. There is no evidence any of his potential witnesses died, suffered memory loss, or are otherwise unavailable to testify. Accordingly, the Court finds that Francis has failed to demonstrate that the delay in this case impaired his ability to defend himself in this criminal proceeding. See United States v. Cain, 671 F.3d 271, 297 (2d Cir. 2012) (opining that preju (8th Cir. 2009) (<HOLDING>). The delay between Francis’ arrest and the Options: A. holding that a twoyear postindictment delay presumptively prejudicial B. holding that a sixyear delay caused by negligence weighed heavily against the government C. holding threeyear delay without mitigating circumstances was unreasonable D. holding that the delay is presumptively prejudicial does not necessarily mean the first factor weighs against the state but requires further consideration of the extent of the delay beyond this period E. holding threeyear delay between indictment and arraignment caused by the serious negligence of the government presumptively prejudicial

assistant: The best answer is E. holding threeyear delay between indictment and arraignment caused by the serious negligence of the government presumptively prejudicial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 378 U.S. 547 84 S.Ct. 1900 12 L.Ed.2d 1032 Dale H. DREWS et al.v.MARYLAND. No. 3. Supreme Court of the United States June 22, 1964 Robert B. Watts, Francis D. Murnaghan, Jr., and Jack Greenberg, for appellants. Thomas B. Finan, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, and Joseph S. Kaufman, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals of Maryland for consideration in light of Griffin v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 130, 84 S.Ct. 1770, and Bell v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 226, 84 S.Ct. 1814. 2 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS would reverse outright on the basis of the views expressed in his opinion in Bell v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 242, 84 S.Ct. 1823. 3 Mr. Justice BLACK, Mr. Justice HARLAN and Mr. Justice WHITE dissent.

assistant: 2
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All issues and questions concerning the construction, validity, interpretation and enforceability of this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby and the exhibits and schedules hereto, and all claims and disputes arising hereunder or thereunder or in connection herewith or therewith, whether purporting to sound in contract or tort, or at law or in equity, shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the Laws of the State of New York, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law rules or provisions (whether of the State of New York or any other jurisdiction) that would cause the application of the Laws of any jurisdiction other than the State of New York.

assistant: Governing Laws