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: orders dated Sept. 22, 2015 and October 1, 2015. ¶ 150. Without providing an explanation for the court's acceptance or denial of amicus briefs, we provide no guidance to lawyers and other interested persons wishing to file amicus briefs in future cases. The court should, in my opinion, take a more expansive view toward granting motions to file amicus briefs. f 151. For the reasons set forth, I concur and write separately. 1 See Ryan J. Reilly, Eric Holder Warns of Risks in 'Moneyballing' Criminal Justice, Huffington Post (11:28 AM Aug. 1, 2014), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/01/eric-holder-moneyball-criminal-justice_n_5641420.html. Wisconsin law also recognizes the need for individualized sentences. See State v. Gallion, 2004 WI 42, ¶ 48, 270 Wis. 2d 535, 678 N.W.2d 197 (<HOLDING>). University of Wisconsin Law Professor Cecelia Options: A. recognizing our jurisprudence in this area has been somewhat inconsistent and confusing B. holding that suspicion must be individualized C. holding that whether a person has a disability under the ada is an individualized inquiry D. recognizing that individualized sentencing has long been a cornerstone to wisconsins criminal justice jurisprudence E. recognizing that the rule of fundamental error applies when substantial justice has not been done

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that individualized sentencing has long been a cornerstone to wisconsins criminal justice jurisprudence
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 Borrowers and each other Credit Party agrees to, and to cause any other Credit Party to, take all further actions and execute all further documents as the Agent may (or at the direction of the Lender, shall) from time to time reasonably request to carry out the transactions contemplated by this First Amendment to Fifth Amendment and Waiver and all other agreements executed and delivered in connection herewith.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company may withhold and deduct from any benefits and payments made or to be made pursuant to this Agreement (a) all federal, state, local and other taxes as may be required pursuant to any law or governmental regulation or ruling, (b) all other normal employee deductions made with respect to Company’s employees generally, and (c) any advances made to Executive and owed to Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, the Notes and the other Loan Documents embody the entire agreement among the parties hereto and supersede all prior commitments, agreements, representations, and understandings, whether oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof, and may not be contradicted or varied by evidence of prior, contemporaneous, or subsequent oral agreements or discussions of the parties hereto. All Exhibits, Schedules and Annexes referred to herein are incorporated in this Agreement by reference and constitute a part of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Options under this Agreement are assignable at the discretion of the Consultant. Severability: If any provision of this Consulting Agreement is invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the balance of this Consulting Agreement shall remain in effect, and if any provision is inapplicable to any person or circumstance, it shall nevertheless remain applicable to all other persons and circumstances.

assistant: Assignments
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: evidence and determine the truth of the matter but to determine whether there is a genuine issue for trial.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). A genuine issue for trial exists only when there is sufficient “evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the plaintiff.” Id. at 252. B. Disability discrimination claim Gayer alleges disability discrimination under the Ohio anti-discrimination statute, Ohio Revised Code chapter 4112. “To establish a prima facie claim of handicap discrimination under [Ohio Rev.Code § ] 4112.02(A), the person seeking relief must establish that he or she 1) w tions by themselves do not constitute handicaps. Sadinsky v.. EBCO Mfg. Co., 134 Ohio App.3d 54, 730 N.E.2d 395, 398-99 (Ohio Ct.App.1999) (<HOLDING>). Nor did Gayer show that Continental believed Options: A. holding that restrictions that plaintiff not lift more than twentyfive pounds or bend repetitively are not evidence of a permanent impairment that substantially limits any major life activity B. holding that the plaintiffs inability to engage in frequent lifting of more than ten pounds would not significantly restrict her ability to perform a broad range of jobs in various classes C. holding that a lifting restriction did not substantially limit a computer technicians ability to engage in the major life activity of working D. holding that a twentyfive pounds lifting restriction did not substantially limit any major life activities E. holding that an employees inability to lift more than 30 to 40 pounds did not substantially limit his ability to engage in ordinary daily activities

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an employees inability to lift more than 30 to 40 pounds did not substantially limit his ability to engage in ordinary daily activities
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 agree that each of them and/or their respective counsel have reviewed and had an opportunity to revise the Transaction Documents and, ther efore, the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of the Transaction Documents or any amendments thereto. In addition, each and every referen ce to share prices and shares of Common Stock in any Transaction Document shall be subject to adjustment for reverse and forward stock splits, stock dividends, stock combinations and other similar transactions of the Common Stock that occur after the date of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In connection with this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby, each Member shall promptly execute and deliver any additional documents and instruments and perform any additional acts that may be necessary or appropriate to effectuate and perform the provisions of this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: supplemented by regs. 3.1 and 4.1, nor (b) general constitutional principles, in the light of the Frank case, 359 U. S. 360, 367, required the code enforcement inspector to have resort to § 131 to obtain a warrant. He was free to make use either of a bill in equity or the criminal sanction of reg. 3.1. 6. The defendant does not argue that, by denying admission, he did not “wilfully impede or obstruct” the inspector. Cf. District of Columbia v. Little, 339 U. S. 1, 4, 6-7, where the Supreme Court of the United States construed a somewhat comparable District regulation (penalizing, see p. 5, “interfering with or preventing” any inspection authorized by the regulations) as not mailing it an offence merely to decline to permit health officers to inspect. Despite language of the Little case (<HOLDING>), we construe the somewhat different language Options: A. holding that threatening employee to mind her own business investigating her videotaping her without her permission and forcing her to take polygraph could not be considered adverse employment actions because they had no effect on conditions of employment B. holding that the word interfere in the regulation could not p 7 fairly be interpreted to encompass the respondents failure to unlock her door and her remonstrances on constitutional grounds C. holding that relative to the threat that she posed physically separating tina cortez from her telephone taking her by the arm escorting her from her home taking the keys to her home and locking the door and placing her in the locked back seat of a patrol car was excessive force as well as an unlawful seizure under the fourth amendment D. holding that the former wife did not waive her attorneyclient privilege simply because the credibility of her claim that she relied on her husbands representations could be impeached by deposing her former attorney E. holding that the word interfere in a dc regulation criminalizing the interfering with or preventing of building inspections by health officers could not be interpreted to encompass respondents failure to unlock her door and her remonstrances on fourth amendment grounds

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the word interfere in the regulation could not p 7 fairly be interpreted to encompass the respondents failure to unlock her door and her remonstrances on constitutional grounds
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 will not access or use ( or assist others to access or use ) our services in ways that : ( a ) violate , misappropriate , or infringe the rights of masquerade , our users , or others , including privacy , publicity , intellectual property , or other proprietary rights ; ( b ) are illegal , obscene , defamatory , threatening , intimidating , harassing , hateful , racially or ethnically offensive , or instigate or encourage conduct that would be illegal , or otherwise inappropriate , including promoting violent crimes ; ( c ) violate masquerade 's terms and policies , or facebook 's community standards ; ( d ) involve publishing falsehoods , misrepresentations , or misleading statements ; ( e ) impersonate someone ; ( f ) involve sending illegal or impermissible communications such as spam , bulk messaging , auto-messaging , auto-dialing , other unsolicited advertising or messages , and the like ; or ( g ) involve any non-personal use of our services not otherwise authorized by us .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of laws. Any action brought by either party against the other concerning the transactions contemplated by this Note shall be brought only in the state courts or federal courts located in Orange County, California. The parties to this Note hereby irrevocably waive any objection to jurisdiction and venue of any action instituted hereunder and shall not assert any defense based on lack of jurisdiction or venue or based upon forum non conveniens . The Borrower and Holder waive trial by jury. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorney's fees and costs. In the event that any provision of this Note or any other agreement delivered in connection herewith is invalid or unenforceable under any applicable statute or rule of law, then such provision shall be deemed inoperative to the extent that it may conflict therewith and shall be deemed modified to conform with such statute or rule of law. Any such provision which may prove invalid or unenforceable under any law shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of any agreement. Each party hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any suit, action or proceeding in connection with this Agreement or any other Transaction Document by mailing a copy thereof via registered or certified mail or overnight delivery (with evidence of delivery) to such party at the address in effect for notices to it under this Agreement and agrees that such service shall constitute good and sufficient service of process and notice thereof. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any other manner permitted by law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event that you violate the terms of this Section 10, you understand and agree that in addition to the Company’s rights to obtain injunctive relief and damages for such violation, any and all rights to the Award under this Agreement, whether vested or unvested, shall be forfeited and extinguished.

assistant: Forfeitures
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: widely refused to apply conflict preemption to bar an ongoing state process, and have instead relied upon field preemption when it is appropriate. 16 . See also Neal v. United States, 516 U.S. 284, 295, 116 S.Ct. 763, 769, 133 L.Ed.2d 709 (1996) (“Absent ... compelling evidence bearing on Congress’ original intent, our system demands that we adhere to our prior interpretations of statutes.”); Maislin Indus., U.S., Inc. v. Primary Steel, Inc., 497 U.S. 116, 131, 110 S.Ct. 2759, 2768, 111 L.Ed.2d 94 (1990) (“Once we have determined a statute's clear meaning, we adhere to that determination under the doctrine of stare decisis, and we judge an agency’s later interpretation of the statute against our prior determination of the statute’s meaning.’’). 17 . See also Freehold, 44 F.3d at 1189 (<HOLDING>); Middle South Energy, Inc. v. Arkansas Pub. Options: A. holding that a field preemption claim was ripe because the plaintiff did not challenge the states ultimate substantive decision but rather its authority to conduct proceedings B. holding that in light of the presumption against preemption there is no field preemption of state unfair competition claims that rely on a substantial question of federal patent law because congress has not expressed its clear and manifest intention to preempt that area of law C. holding that a party did not waive its preemption defense where its answer did not specifically mention preemption but contained a broader defense that was capable of encompassing preemption D. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing because the case was not ripe for adjudication E. holding that in the field preemption context the hardship is the process itself

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a field preemption claim was ripe because the plaintiff did not challenge the states ultimate substantive decision but rather its authority to conduct 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: provides: (a) A person commits the offense of distributing material ere are not “words of art or words connected with a particular trade or subject matter,” we look to the ordinary meaning of those words at the time the General Assembly enacted the statute in deciding whether the sending of an intangible text message comes within the scope of the statute. See OCGA § 1-3-1 (b) (“In all interpretations of statutes, the ordinary signification shall be applied to all words, except words of art or words connected with a particular trade or subject matter, which shall have the signification attached to them by experts in such trade or with reference to such subject matter.”); Collins, 198 Ga. at 22. See also Sandifer v. U. S. Steel Corp.,_U. S._,__ (134 SCt 870, 187 LE2d 729, 738) (2014) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, under the canon of noscitur a Options: A. holding that statutory words must be given their ordinary contemporary meaning B. holding that unless otherwise defined words will be interpreted as taking their ordinary contemporary common meaning at the time congress enacted a statute and reviewing dictionaries from the era of the statutes enactment to assist in determining its meaning citation omitted C. holding that bribery must be given its ordinary meaning at the time of the enactment of the relevant statute D. holding that courts give the words of a statute their ordinary contemporary common meaning absent an indication congress intended them to bear some different import E. recognizing that undefined words in a statute ordinarily should be interpreted as taking their ordinary contemporary common meaning

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that unless otherwise defined words will be interpreted as taking their ordinary contemporary common meaning at the time congress enacted a statute and reviewing dictionaries from the era of the statutes enactment to assist in determining its meaning citation omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in their closing arguments and may advance all legitimate arguments and draw logical inferences from the evidence. See McArthur, 801 So.2d at 1039^40. Moreover, prosecutors in specific are not limited to a robotic presentation on behalf of the State. See Diaz v. State, 797 So.2d 1286, 1287 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). However, “[a] criminal trial is a neutral arena wherein both sides place evidence for the jury’s consideration; the role of counsel in clos ing argument is to assist the jury in analyzing that evidence, not to obscure the jury’s view with personal opinion, emotion, and nonrecord evidence.” Ruiz, 743 So.2d at 4. Unfortunately, prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument is neither a new nor fading phenomenon. See, e.g., Crew v. State, 146 So.3d 101, 111 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (<HOLDING>); Freeman v. State, 717 So.2d 105, 106 (Fla. Options: A. holding that the cumulative effect of the prosecutors comments which as seen above are welldocumented errors denied appellant a fair trial B. holding that cumulative effect of multiple errors worked to deprive defendant of fair trial although some errors standing alone would be subject to plain error review and others might be harmless C. holding that although neither of the trial courts errors when considered in isolation were necessarily sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial the cumulative effect of the errors created sufficient prejudice to deny defendant a fair trial D. holding that plain error is the appropriate standard of review when a defendant objects to a prosecutors comments at trial does not move for a mistrial and then on appeal argues that the comments deprived him of a fair trial E. holding that a number of errors may be deemed harmful in their cumulative effect

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the cumulative effect of the prosecutors comments which as seen above are welldocumented errors denied appellant a fair 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: Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan or this Agreement, unless there is an available exemption from such registration, qualification or other legal requirement applicable to the Shares, the Company shall not be required to deliver any Shares issuable upon vesting of the Performance Units prior to the completion of any registration or qualification of the Shares under any local, state, federal or foreign law or under rulings or regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or of any other governmental regulatory body, or prior to the obtaining of any approval or other clearance from any local, state, federal or foreign governmental agency, which registration, qualification or approval the Company shall, in its absolute discretion, deem necessary or advisable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Without in any way limiting the foregoing, immediately upon receipt by any Loan Party of proceeds of any sale of any Collateral, the Borrower shall cause such Loan Party to deliver such proceeds to the Agent, or deposit such proceeds in a deposit account subject to a Deposit Account Control Agreement. All of such proceeds shall be applied as set forth above or otherwise as provided in Section 2.19 . Nothing in this Section 2.16 shall be construed to constitute Agent’s or any Lender’s consent to any transaction that is not permitted by other provisions of this Agreement or the other Loan 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: unnecessary because § 1983 allows for injunctive relief against state officials, and when sued for prospective injunctive relief in his official capacity, a state officer is a “person” for the purposes of § 1983. Will, 491 U.S. at 71 n. 10, 109 S.Ct. 2304, citing Graham, 473 U.S. at 167 n. 14, 105 S.Ct. 3099 and Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. at 159-160, 28 S.Ct. 441. Nonetheless, a plaintiff seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal courts in order to seek prospective injunctive relief must demonstrate, inter alia, that “a federal court decision is likely to redress the injury.” Deshawn E. v. Safir, 156 F.3d 340, 344 (2d Cir.1998), citing Northeastern Fla. Chapter of Associated Gen. Contractors of Am. v. City of Jacksonville, 508 U.S. 656, 663, 113 S.Ct. 2297, 124 L.Ed.2d 586 (1993) (<HOLDING>) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Options: A. holding the class too imprecise and speculative to be certified B. holding that in order to establish standing a plaintiff must show 1 it has suffered an injury in fact 2 the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and 3 it is likely as opposed to merely speculative that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision C. holding that in order to establish standing the prospect of obtaining relief from the injury as a result of a favorable ruling must not be too speculative D. holding that defendants claim that the cost of injunctive relief would exceed 75000 was too speculative E. holding that to have standing a plaintiff must establish an injury in fact a casual connection between the injury and that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that in order to establish standing the prospect of obtaining relief from the injury as a result of a favorable ruling must not be too speculative
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: During the remainder of Executive’s employment with Cimpress and for a period of one (1) year following the termination of his employment, Executive agrees that he will reasonably cooperate with Cimpress and its counsel, at Cimpress’ expense, in connection with any investigation, administrative proceeding or litigation conducted or defended by Cimpress. Executive agrees that, in the event that he is subpoenaed or otherwise required by any person or entity to give testimony (in a deposition, court proceeding or otherwise) that in any way relates to his employment with Cimpress, Executive will give prompt written notice of such request to the Cimpress general counsel and will make no disclosure until Cimpress has had a reasonable opportunity to contest the right of the requesting person or entity to such disclosure. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Section 12 does not apply to any investigation, administrative proceeding or litigation described or contemplated in Section 8 above.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, together with the other agreements referred to herein, constitute the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede and shall supersede all prior agreements and understandings (whether written or oral) between the Company and the Stockholders, or any of them, with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to Invest in Company Stock Plaintiffs make no specific allegations that Jamesley or the Investment Committee knew of the alleged dire circumstances, including the withdrawals of prime brokerage deposits following Lehman’s collapse, what amount of withdrawals the Company considered catastrophic, and that the Federal Reserve loaned Morgan'Stanley money. Accordingly, Jamesley and the Investment Committee could not have breached their duty because the Complaint never claims they knew or should have known of those events. Gearren, 660 F.3d at 610; In re UBS AG ERISA Litig., No. 08 Civ. 6696, 2012 WL 1034445, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 23, 2012), aff'd, 513 Fed.Appx. 19, 24 (2d Cir.2013); In re Lehman Bros. Secs. & ERISA Litig., No. 09 MD 2017, 2011 WL 4632885, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 5, 2011) (<HOLDING>). Even if Jamesly and the Investment- Committee Options: A. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant B. holding that one who is named in documents as plan administrator signs documents as plan administrator and assumes discretionary authority in the administration of the pension plan is a fiduciary C. holding that similar language conferred discretion on the plan administrator D. holding the plan administrator who worked in human resources was not aware of lehmans imminent collapse despite similar warning signs and circumstances E. holding that because no plan document granted discretion to the plan administrator and because the fiduciaries had not expressly delegated their discretionary authority to the plan administrator the district court properly employed the de novo standard of review

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the plan administrator who worked in human resources was not aware of lehmans imminent collapse despite similar warning signs and circumstances
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: “good cause for delay.” United States v. Occhipinti, 851 F.Supp. at 526; United States v. El-Gabrowny, 844 F.Supp. 955, 959 (S.D.N.Y.1994). Next, a “sufficient” affidavit must satisfy the following requirements: (1) the facts must be material and stated with particularity; (2) the facts must be such that if true they would convince a reasonable man that a bias exists; and (3) the facts must show the bias is personal, and not judicial, in nature. McClelland v. Gronwaldt, 942 F.Supp. 297, 300 (E.D.Tex.1996) (citation omitted). To be found sufficient as a matter of law, the affidavit must show “ ‘a true personal bias and allege specific facts’ as opposed to mere conclusions and generalizations.” United States v. Occhipinti, 851 F.Supp. at 525; see United States v. Sykes, 7 F.3d at 1339 (<HOLDING>). This Circuit has observed that “judicial Options: A. holding that unsupported affidavits setting forth ultimate or conclusoiy facts and conclusions of law are insufficient to either support or defeat a motion for summary judgment B. recognizing that an implied contract must result from a meeting of the minds of the parties in mutual assent to the terms and must be based upon a sufficient consideration free from fraud or undue influence not against public policy and sufficiently definite to be enforced C. holding that course of dealing may render uncertain terms sufficiently definite D. holding that the facts averred must be sufficiently definite and particular to convince a reasonable person that bias exists simple conclusions opinions or rumors are insufficient E. holding that unsupported affidavits setting forth ultimate or conclusory facts and conclusions of law are insufficient to either support or defeat a motion for summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the facts averred must be sufficiently definite and particular to convince a reasonable person that bias exists simple conclusions opinions or rumors are insufficient
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: its claimed violation; but as stated, the benchmark for objective reasonableness is that which existed at the time of the alleged violation — we look to the clearly established law at that time.” 114 . See Ba 22 (5th Cir.1997), (upholding against equal protection and due process challenges the "three strikes” provision of the PURA, which bars prisoners form proceeding In Forma Pauperis without advance permission from the court if they have previously filed three or more federal civil lawsuits or appeals that were adjudged frivolous, malicious, or legally insufficient to state a cause of action). 154 . Carson v. Johnson, 112 F.3d at 821-22. 155 . Carson v. Johnson, 112 F.3d at 822. 156 . Carson v. Johnson, 112 F.3d at 822. 157 . See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. at---, 116 S.Ct. at 2179-82, (<HOLDING>); Johnson v. Rodriguez, 110 F.3d 299, 310-11 Options: A. holding that a prisoners right of access to the courts encompasses only a reasonably adequate opportunity to file nonfrivolous legal claims challenging his conviction or conditions of confinement B. holding habeas petition challenging denial of custody credits is not related to the conditions of confinement and was properly brought in the district of conviction C. recognizing right of prisoners to seek relief under 42 usc 1983 for denial of access to the courts D. holding that mentally retarded individuals who are involuntarily committed to a state institution have a constitutional right to reasonably safe conditions of confinement under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment because pjersons who have been involuntarily committed are entitled to more considerate treatment and conditions of confinement than criminals whose conditions of confinement are designed to punish E. recognizing a liberty interest in reasonably safe conditions of confinement

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a prisoners right of access to the courts encompasses only a reasonably adequate opportunity to file nonfrivolous legal claims challenging his conviction or conditions of confinement
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: times, requiring them to change schools. Id. at 750. However, all of the moves resulted in their residence being in southeast Missouri. Id. In 1993, the mother informed the father that she intended to move, with the children, to Fulton, Missouri, because of her upcoming remarriage. Id. The father filed a motion to modify custody, which the trial court sustained, finding a substantial and continuing change of circumstances based, inter alia, on the mother’s remarriage and move to Fulton. Id. at 752. The judgment was reversed on appeal, the appellate court finding that the mother’s move from southeast Missouri to central Missouri was not a change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a change of custody. Id. at 752-53. See also Shoemaker v. Shoemaker, 812 S.W.2d 250, 254 (Mo.App.1991) (<HOLDING>). The one change in the residence of the Options: A. holding that evidence was sufficient to support trial courts best interest finding where mother allowed child to be in contact with individual who had physically abused her mother was not capable of caring for child on her own mother admitted at trial she had not found stable employment and child was doing well in her current placement B. holding that no substantial and continuing change in circumstances had occurred where there was no evidence of an adverse effect on the child even though the mother has moved six times since her marriage was dissolved C. holding that fundamental error occurred in the prosecution of a mother for aggravated manslaughter of her child when the prosecutor commented on the fact that the mother had contemplated having an abortion during the course of her pregnancy with the child D. holding that a mother and her two children failed to establish a 1983 claim where there was no evidence that threats made to the mother were directly aimed at the relationship between parent and child E. holding a mother on appeal must successfully challenge a trial courts finding that there was no substantial and continuing change of circumstances of the children or mother before she can succeed on her claim that the trial court erred in overruling her motion to modify custody

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that no substantial and continuing change in circumstances had occurred where there was no evidence of an adverse effect on the child even though the mother has moved six times since her marriage was dissolved
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 Guarantor hereby agrees and guarantees that payments hereunder will be paid to the Collateral Agent without set-off or counterclaim in dollars at the offices of the Collateral Agent specified pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Collateral Agency Agreement.

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: suffer personal injury in the course of his employment may, at his election, maintain an action for damages at law ... and in such action all statutes of the United States modifying or extending the common-law right or remedy in cases of personal injury to railway employees shall apply ...” Incorporated by reference is 28 U.S.C. § 1445(a), which states that a "civil action in any State court against a railroad [by an employee] ... may not be removed to any district court of the United States.” Romero v. Int'l Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354, 372, 79 S.Ct. 468, 3 L.Ed.2d 368 (1959)(stating that the policy of unremovability of maritime claims brought in state courts was incorporated by Congress into the Jones Act); See Loftus v. Delaware & H.R. Corp., 122 F.Supp. 829 (M.D.Pa.1954)(<HOLDING>). 3 . An action brought fraudulently under the Options: A. holding that in order for a defendant to remove a case to federal court based upon diversity jurisdiction there must be complete diversity of citizenship both at the time that the case is commenced and at the time that the notice of removal is filed B. holding that failure to allege plaintiffs citizenship in notice of removal amounted to defect in removal procedure under former version of 28 usc 1447c C. holding that for diversity purposes the citizenship of a llc is determined by the citizenship of all of its members D. holding that it is well established that whether an employees actions were within the scope of employment is a question of fact and even if some of the actions were unauthorized the question of whether the actions were within the scope of employment is for the jury E. holding that 28 usc 1445a prohibits removal of railroad employee actions even where there is diversity of citizenship or where actions involve a federal question

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that 28 usc 1445a prohibits removal of railroad employee actions even where there is diversity of citizenship or where actions involve a federal question
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: night, and thus they tried to use the DWI unit whenever possible so that patrol cars would be available for their primary responsibility of responding to service calls and emergencies. He also stated that the DWI unit officers were more experienced in DWI investigations, were usually able to conduct a DWI investigation more quickly than patrol officers, and had primary responsibility for conducting DWI investigations. We conclude that the delay in Bullock’s detention furthered legitimate law enforcement purposes — specifically, ensuring that an adequate number of patrol cars are available to respond to emergency calls and utilizing a DWI unit that has greater experience in investigating DWIs and can perform such investigations with greater expediency. See Belcher, 244 S.W.3d at 539-41 (<HOLDING>); Hartman, 144 S.W.3d at 573-74 (holding that Options: A. holding that legitimate law enforcement interests were served by local police officers delay while waiting for state police officer to arrive to conduct dwi investigation because state officers had more dwi experience and local officers needed to be available to respond to emergencies B. holding delay in dwi investigation primarily for arrival of rookie officer for purpose of training was reasonable because delay furthered legitimate law enforcement purposes C. holding approximately twentyminute delay in dwi investigation primarily to await arrival of dwi enforcement officer was reasonable because delay furthered reasonable law enforcement purposes D. holding that delay while awaiting arrival of dwi enforcement officer was for legitimate law enforcement purposes because dwi officer was more experienced and could complete dwi investigation faster E. holding fiveto fifteenminute delay in dwi investigation primarily so that another officer could bring a video camera to the scene was reasonable because delay furthered legitimate law enforcement purposes

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that delay while awaiting arrival of dwi enforcement officer was for legitimate law enforcement purposes because dwi officer was more experienced and could complete dwi investigation faster
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: unless you cancel your membership before your monthly billing date , you authorize us to charge your next month 's membership fee to your payment method ( see `` cancellation '' below ) .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, make, execute, endorse, acknowledge and deliver any amendments, modifications or supplements hereto and restatements hereof and any other agreements, instruments or documents and to effect, confirm or further assure or protect and preserve the interests, rights and remedies of the Administrative Agent and the Lenders under this Agreement and the other Credit Documents.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you also understand and agree that the yahoo services may include certain communications from yahoo , such as service announcements , administrative messages and the yahoo newsletter , and that these communications are considered part of yahoo membership and you will not be able to opt out of receiving them .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of his debts the payment should apply in the event she prevailed on them all. Furthermore, there is nothing in the record to support this argument, nor did the former wife ever make it at trial. She is therefore precluded from raising it for the first time here because it “must [have been] presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must [have been] part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved [for appeal].” Tillman v. State, 471 So.2d 32, 35 (Fla.1985). The former wife argues that the former husband in his financial affidavits admitted a $550,000 marital debt, completely disregarding that the affidavits themselves identify the amount as “estimated.” See West v. West, 399 So.2d 428, 431 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (<HOLDING>). The former wife also argues that the $422,000 Options: A. holding that a search warrant is invalid if not based on an affidavit B. holding that restrictions for the public welfare were permissible even though the restrictions resulted in serious financial loss to the owner C. holding that an affidavit did not provide probable cause sufficient to validate a warrant where the affidavit stated an incorrect date uncontradicted by any other specific fact in the affidavit D. holding that penalty clauses are enforceable unless they are found to be grossly unreasonable E. holding that estimated figures in a financial affidavit are permissible if not grossly overstated or reasonable

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that estimated figures in a financial affidavit are permissible if not grossly overstated or reasonable
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: an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 944 (9th Cir.2007), and we deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of asylum because Serrano failed to demonstrate that the harms he experienced at the hands of the police were on account of a protected ground, see Alonzo v. INS, 915 F.2d 546, 548 (9th Cir.1990), or that he has a well-founded fear of future persecution by either the police or gang members on account of a protected ground, see Sanchez-Trujillo v. INS, 801 F.2d 1571, 1579-81 (9th Cir. 1987); Arteaga, 511 F.3d at 945-46 (<HOLDING>). Because Serrano failed to establish Options: A. holding that young men who resist gang recruitment do not constitute a particular social group and refusal to join a gang does not amount to a political opinion B. holding that former members of the mara 18 gang in el salvador who have renounced their gang membership does not constitute a particular social group because it lacks particularity because it is too diffuse as well as being too broad and subjective C. holding that former gang members do not comprise a particular social group D. holding that government material witnesses do not constitute a particular social group E. holding that government informants are not members of a particular social group

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that former gang members do not comprise a particular social group