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: Establishment Clause for a public university to grant access to its facilities on a religion-neutral basis to a wide spectrum of student groups, including groups which use meeting rooms for sectarian activities, accompanied by some devotional exercises. Id. at-, 115 S.Ct. at 2523. 14 . Capitol Square involved a "full-fledged public forum” rather than a limited forum case. However, as the Court pointed out in Capitol Square by its reference to Lamb’s Chapel, the same principle applies in nonpublic forum cases. 15 . See, e.g., Chabad-Lubavitch v. Miller, 5 F.3d 1383 (11th Cir.1993) (en banc) (reversing to permit Chabad-Lubavitch to erect a menorah in Rotunda, a public forum); Americans United for Separation of Church & State v. City of Grand Rapids, 980 F.2d 1538 (6th Cir.1992) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). But see Chabad-Lubavitch v. City of Options: A. holding no violation of federal establishment clause B. holding that display of solitary semipermanent menorah in city hall park closely associated with seat of city government violates the establishment clause C. holding there was no establishment clause violation in displaying a privately funded menorah during chanukah in the public plaza on which city hall and county building are located D. holding that display of unattended menorah in city hall park quite close to seat of government violated establishment clause because its combination alongside a secular holiday display did not cause a viewer to see the exhibit as a whole or as a unitary symbol E. holding that a city owned creche and christmas tree erected in a public park adjacent to another park with a christmas tree lights and a privately owned menorah did not offend the establishment clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding there was no establishment clause violation in displaying a privately funded menorah during chanukah in the public plaza on which city hall and county building are located
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: Each of the three instances of possession followed a common pattern: Gales possessed a stolen firearm and then Gales or his friends sold the firearm, always to the same store. A common purpose underlay Gales’ possession of the firearms in each instance — selling the firearm. Just two months separated the sale of the Mossberg from the sale of the other two guns, a far shorter time span than the fourteen months that Faison upheld and the three and a half years that Gilbert upheld. See also U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3, cmt. n. 9(b); United States v. Powell, 50 F.3d 94, 104 (1st Cir.1995) (“[T]he ... nearly contemporaneous! ] possession of uncharged firearms is ... relevant conduct in the context of a felon-in-possession prosecution.”); United States v. Windle, 74 F.3d 997, 1000-01 (10th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). Attempting to overcome this conclusion, Gales Options: A. holding that two acts of mail fraud within five months constituted a pattern B. holding that a five month delay is unreasonable C. holding that the definition in 921a20 applied throughout the entire firearms chapter of the uscode D. holding that a five month delay was unreasonable E. holding that unlawful possession of five firearms throughout a four to five month period established a behavior pattern of unlawfully possessing firearms that meets the same course of conduct requirement

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that unlawful possession of five firearms throughout a four to five month period established a behavior pattern of unlawfully possessing firearms that meets the same course of conduct requirement
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: from September 4, 1998 to February 9, 2000. In addition, the plaintiff had been misled by the Clerk’s Office into believing that he had done everything required of him. Scary had filed his complaint well before the 90-day deadline and was in active communication with Clerk’s Office until he was told that his complaint would be heard, that there was no need to continue calling the court, and that he would be notified when a hearing date was set. Those statements do not amount to “active deception” by the Clerk’s Office, but they nevertheless had the effect of misleading the plaintiff, who, as a pro se plaintiff, can be expected to rely particularly heavily on the representations of court personnel. See Gonzalez-Aller Balseyro v. GTE Lenkurt, Inc., 702 F.2d 857, 859 (10th Cir. 1983) (<HOLDING>). Given this, it was natural for Scary to Options: A. holding that tolling the statute of limitations was appropriate when the eeoc acknowledged that it had advocated the mistaken interpretation relied upon by the plaintiff B. holding that a pro se prisoners incarceration before the enactment of the aedpa and his lack of notice of the statute of limitations does not present an extraordinary circumstance warranting equitable tolling C. holding that 2244d is subject to equitable tolling in appropriate cases D. holding that equitable tolling was appropriate where a pro se plaintiff had relied on the representations of the court clerk E. holding that the 120day filing period is subject to equitable tolling and addressing circumstances warranting equitable tolling

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that equitable tolling was appropriate where a pro se plaintiff had relied on the representations of the court clerk
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any term or other provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal, or incapable of being enforced by any rule of law or public policy, all of the other conditions and provisions of this Agreement will nevertheless remain in full force and effect, so long as the economic or legal substance of the transactions contemplated hereby is not affected in any adverse manner to either party. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, illegal, or incapable of being enforced, the parties hereto will negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to reflect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible in an acceptable manner to the end that the transactions contemplated hereby are fulfilled to the extent possible.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the employment of Employee by the Company, excluding any Nondisclosure Agreement previously signed by Employee, the Proprietary Rights Agreement, the written policies adopted by the Company from time to time, and a Dispute Resolution and Mutually Binding Arbitration Agreement to be executed by the parties contemporaneous herewith, and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to that employment in any manner whatsoever. Each party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, other than those set forth herein, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, and that no other agreement, statement, or promise between the parties not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or binding on the parties. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only if it is in writing signed by the party to be charged.

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 execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by the Company and the consummation by the Company of the transactions contemplated hereby (including the issuance of the New Preferred) do not and will not (a) result in a violation of the Restated Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws of the Company, (b) conflict with, or constitute a default (or an event which with notice or lapse of time or both would become a default) under, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation of, any agreement, indenture or instrument to which the Company or any of its subsidiaries is a party, or (c) assuming the accuracy of the Holder’s representations and warranties set forth in Section 3 hereof, result in a violation of any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment or decree (including, without limitation, U.S. federal and state securities laws and regulations) applicable to the Company, or by which any property or asset of the Company is bound or affected, except, in the case of the foregoing clauses (b) and (c), for such conflicts, defaults, violations, terminations, amendments, accelerations, and cancellations as would not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, operations, financial condition or properties.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: REVERSE the district court’s determination that McCormack did not have standing to enjoin enforcement of Idaho Code § 18-608(2) in conjunction with § 18-606. Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal. AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED. 1 . It is about 138 miles from Bannock County, Idaho to Salt Lake City, Utah. This Court takes "judicial notice of a Google map and satellite image as a 'sourcef] whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned,' " at least for determining the approximate distance from Idaho to Utah. See United States v. Perea-Rey, 680 F.3d 1179, 1182 n. 1 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting Fed.R.Evid. 201(b)). 2 . The criminal complaint does not allege which trimester McCormack was in when she had the alleged abortion. It also does not state the estim 2 (1968) (<HOLDING>). Although these cases generally find that a Options: A. recognizing that a court is without jurisdiction to issue an injunction which would interfere with the rights of those who are not parties to the action B. holding that acts of oral anal and vaginal penetration as prescribed by statute defining lewd and lascivious battery are distinct criminal acts such that separate punishments for those acts do not violate double jeopardy despite the fact that they occurred in the same criminal episode C. holding that criminal defendant was not entitled to a jury trial on the issue of restitution under the oregon vehicle code D. recognizing that a reading of the oregon criminal statute indicates that the acts prohibited are those which are performed upon the mother rather than any action taken by her E. holding that the acts of a corporate officer done in his or her official capacity are acts of the corporation

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that a reading of the oregon criminal statute indicates that the acts prohibited are those which are performed upon the mother rather than any action taken by her
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to satisfaction of the condition precedent set forth in Section 2 below, the second recital of the Intercreditor Agreement is hereby amended to delete the definition “Floorplan Facility Borrowers”, and to substitute the following new definition: “Insight Public Sector, Inc., an Illinois corporation, Insight Direct USA, Inc., an Illinois corporation, Calence, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and Datalink Corporation (as successor by merger with Reef Acquisition Co., a Minnesota Corporation), a Minnesota corporation (collectively, the ‘ Floorplan Facility Borrowers ’),”.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Chicago, 242 F.3d 737 (7th Cir.2001) (finding “a reasonable officer would have thought [the defendant] was trying to flee, thereby justifying the use of a higher degree of force to protect the community and the officers than that needed for someone who committed only a minor traffic violation” where the defendant did not pull over after being followed by police cars playing their sirens); Brooks v. City of Aurora, Ill., 653 F.3d 478, 486-87 (7th Cir.2011) (“An officer, faced with a suspect fleeing toward his home and ignoring police commands, is not obliged to give that suspect an opportunity to retreat into his home and, perhaps, to fortify himself or to escape before the officer employs reasonable means of incapacitation); cf. United States v. Norris, 640 F.3d 295, 303 (7th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). Officer Drumm’s actions were also reasonable Options: A. holding that transportation of arrestee to police station is service of police under the ada B. holding that an officers single use of a taser was reasonable where used to subdue an arrestee who had failed to accede to repeated police commands to stop his retreat into his home C. holding that there was reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant based on his presence in an area known for heavy narcotics trafficking and his flight upon seeing police officers D. holding that a police officers rape of an arrestee was outside the scope of his employment E. holding that an unconstitutional seizure occurred when police officers discovered that a suspect illegally sold alcohol from his home and ordered him to open the door involuntarily to be arrested inside his home

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an officers single use of a taser was reasonable where used to subdue an arrestee who had failed to accede to repeated police commands to stop his retreat into his home
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is the product of negotiations among the Parties, and the enforcement or interpretation of this Agreement is to be interpreted in a neutral manner; and any presumption with regard to interpretation for or against any Party by reason of that Party having drafted or caused to be drafted this Agreement or any portion of this Agreement, shall not be effective with regard to the interpretation of this Agreement.

assistant: Interpretations
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: 524 U.S. 775, 118 S.Ct. 2275, 141 L.Ed.2d 662 (1998)). The “ ‘mere utterance of an ... epithet which engenders offensive feelings in an employee does not sufficiently affect the conditions of employment.’ ” Id. (quoting Harris, 510 U.S. at 21, 114 S.Ct. 367). Peterson’s behavior, while somewhat inappropriate, was not frequent, severe, or physically threatening. Indeed, the “Big Kahuna” fax was not even aimed at Lamb. It is uncontroverted that Peterson sent the fax as a joking reprimand to a (male) dispatcher who was watching television on the job. See Long v. Eastfield College, 88 F.3d 300, 309 (5th Cir.1996) (distinguishing the “mere offensive utterance” from “physically threatening or humiliating conduct”); DeAngelis v. El Paso Police Officers Ass’n, 51 F.3d 591, 593 (5th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Cf. Farpella-Crosby v. Horizon Health Care, Options: A. holding that a single incident in which a coworker squeezed an employees buttocks was not sufficiently severe or pervasive so as to alter the conditions of the victims employment and create an abusive working environment B. recognizing that an injury arises out of the employment relationship if it can be traced to the nature of employment or the workplace environment C. holding that language in employee handbook stating that it was not to be considered as creating terms and conditions of an employment contract and that the employment relationship was employment atwill was sufficiently explicit to preclude the creation of implied contractual obligations as a matter of law D. recognizing that conduct amounts to actionable sexual harassment only when it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victims employment and create an abusive working environment alteration in original citation omitted E. holding that conduct that sporadically wounds or offends is not so egregious as to alter the conditions of employment and destroy womens equal opportunity in the workplace

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that conduct that sporadically wounds or offends is not so egregious as to alter the conditions of employment and destroy womens equal opportunity in the workplace
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: Commencing April 1, 2017, the Company shall pay Meikle a base salary at the rate of $135,000.00 (One hundred thirty-five thousand dollars) per year, payable once a month on the first of each month while this Agreement shall be in force. Said salary payments will be subject to withholding taxes e.g. Federal Income Tax, FICA, and State and/or local Withholding Taxes. Whereas such salary shall not be decreased during the term of this Agreement without the consent of Meikle, it shall be subject to increase by the Company’s Board of Directors, which shall review the salary periodically, and at least annually.

assistant: Base Salary
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: State’s objection); Foxx v. State, 680 So.2d 1064, 1065 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)(finding the State’s comment that “We would ask for a Neil inquiry” sufficient where it was clear from the record that the venire person was a member of a distinct racial group and that the trial court was aware of this fact); Joseph v. State, 636 So.2d 777, 781 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)(where the State contended that there was no showing that a juror was, in fact, Jewish, finding that the defendant had met the threshold requirement of Neil because the transcripts of voir dire indicated that “[tjhere is no question that the trial judge understood the basis of the defendant’s objection”). Failure to conduct a Neil inquiry in this case therefore mandates reversal and remand for a new trial. See Johans, 613 So.2d at 1322 (<HOLDING>); Vasquez v. State, 711 So.2d 1305, 1306 (Fla. Options: A. holding that the proper remedy in all cases where the trial court errs in failing to hold a neil inquiry is to reverse and remand for a new trial B. holding that it is error for court of appeals to reverse trial courts ruling that had not been objected to at the trial court level C. holding that the appropriate remedy for a trial courts refusal to consider an indigent defendants request for new counsel is to remand for a hearing D. holding that even if a trial court errs in a ruling on the admissibility of evidence we will reverse only if the error is inconsistent with substantial justice and that the error was harmless E. holding that remand for new trial is remedy for factual insufficiency of evidence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the proper remedy in all cases where the trial court errs in failing to hold a neil inquiry is to reverse and remand for a new 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: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Employer shall engage Employee, and Employee hereby accepts employment, in the position of Chief Operating Officer, with all the duties, responsibilities and authority normally associated with such position. Employer and Employee acknowledge that, as Chief Operating Officer, Employee shall report to the Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”) of the Employer.

assistant: Positions
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 failure of either Party at any time to enforce any of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement or to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the same or affect that Party’s right thereafter to enforce the same.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as disclosed in the SEC Documents, the Company and its Subsidiaries have good and marketable title in fee simple to all real property owned by them and good and marketable title in all personal property owned by them that is material to the business of the Company and its Subsidiaries, in each case free and clear of all liens, encumbrances and defects (“ Liens ”) and, except for Liens as do not materially affect the value of such property and do not materially interfere with the use made and proposed to be made of such property by the Company and its Subsidiaries and Liens for the payment of federal, state or other taxes, the payment of which is neither delinquent nor subject to penalties. Any real property and facilities held under lease by the Company and its Subsidiaries are held by them under valid, subsisting and enforceable leases with which the Company and its Subsidiaries are in compliance with such exceptions as are not material and do not interfere with the use made and proposed to be made of such property and buildings by the Company and its Subsidiaries.

assistant: Titles
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 or waiver of compliance with any provision hereof or consent pursuant to this Agreement shall be effective unless evidenced by an instrument in writing signed by the party against whom enforcement of such amendment, waiver, or consent is sought.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: zynga and any zynga affiliate disclaim any warranties of title or implied warranties , conditions or other terms of non-infringement , merchantability , quiet enjoyment or fitness for a particular purpose .

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: Optionee hereby explicitly and unambiguously consents to the collection, use and transfer, in electronic or other form, of Optionee’s personal data as described in this Grant (“ Personal Data ” ) by and among, as applicable, the Employer, the Company and any Subsidiary or Affiliate for the exclusive purpose of implementing, administering and managing Optionee’s participation in the Plan.

assistant: Consents
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 Executive acknowledges that in the event of any breach or threatened breach of this Section 7 , the business interests of the Company and the Company Affiliates will be irreparably injured, the full extent of the damages to the Company and the Company Affiliates will be impossible to ascertain, monetary damages will not be an adequate remedy for the Company and the Company Affiliates, and the Company will be entitled to enforce this Agreement by a temporary, preliminary and/or permanent injunction or other equitable relief, without the necessity of posting bond or security, which the Executive expressly waives. The Executive understands that the Company may waive some of the requirements expressed in this Agreement, but that such a waiver to be effective must be made in writing and should not in any way be deemed a waiver of the Company’s right to enforce any other requirements or provisions of this Agreement. In addition, the Company shall be entitled to immediately cease paying any amounts remaining due pursuant to Section 9 (other than the Accrued Benefits) in the event that the Executive has committed a breach of this Section 7 . The Executive agrees that each of the Executive’s obligations specified in this Agreement is a separate and independent covenant and that the unenforceability of any of them shall not preclude the enforcement of any other covenants in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: The court’s final decision also will incorporate this reasoning to evidence consideration of California Federal Bank. CONCLUSION For the aforegoing reasons, the Government’s November 17, 2003 Motion for Reconsideration is denied; the Government’s March 12, 2004 Motion for Reconsideration is granted in part and denied in part; and the Government’s February 25, 2005 Motion for Reconsideration is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiffs will advise the Government and the court no later than May 6, 2005 whether the pending claims brought under the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution should be set for trial or voluntarily dismissed, without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. 1 . Compare, e.g., Strougo v. Bassini, 282 F.3d 162, 171 (2d Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>); Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Options: A. holding that a shareholder lacks standing to bring a suit based on loss in value to his or her shares as this injury derives from and thus is not distinct from the injury to the corporation B. holding under maryland law that a breach of fiduciary duty claim alleging loss in share value shareholder must allege an injury distinct from an injury to the corporation C. holding that to state a subsection 1962a claim plaintiffs must allege a use or investment injury that is distinct from any injury resulting from the racketeering predicate acts themselves D. holding that unless a shareholder can show personal cause of action and personal injury claims for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty belong to the corporation and not the shareholder E. holding that an inmate alleging denial of access to the courts must show an actual injury

assistant: The best answer is B. holding under maryland law that a breach of fiduciary duty claim alleging loss in share value shareholder must allege an injury distinct from an injury to the corporation
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 issuance of the Restricted Share Units or unrestricted Share Units pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to, and shall comply with, any applicable requirements of any foreign and U.S. federal and state securities laws, rules and regulations (including, without limitation, the provisions of the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the Corporations Act, and in each case any respective rules and regulations promulgated thereunder) and any other law or regulation applicable thereto. The Company shall not be obligated to issue the Restricted Share Units or any of the Shares pursuant to this Agreement if any such issuance would violate any such requirements.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 130. This alternative definition, when viewed in the charge as a whole, properly informed the jury of the prosecution’s burden. Id. at 43, 524 A.2d 130. Here, immediately following the offending clause, the trial court provided an alternative definition of reasonable doubt: “a doubt which arises from a fair and rational consideration of the evidence or perhaps the lack of evidence, it means a doubt as would cause a man of ordinary prudence to pause or hesitate when called upon to act in the most important aspects of life.” This clause more accurately describes the State’s burden. It leads us to believe that the offending language was unlikely to have lessened the State’s burden of proof in the eyes of the jury. See Victor, supra, 511 U.S. at-, 114 S.Ct. at 1249-50, 127 L. Ed.2d at 599 (<HOLDING>). Defendant next alleges error in the part of Options: A. holding that charge defining reasonable doubt as a doubt for which you can conscientiously express a reason was neither confusing nor inaccurate B. holding that harmless beyond a reasonable doubt analysis not applicable in habeas cases C. holding that beyond reasonable doubt standard not required in termination cases D. holding potential prejudice caused by equating reasonable doubt with a substantial doubt mitigated by providing an alternate definition of reasonable doubt as a doubt that would cause a reasonable person to hesitate to act E. holding that proof of a criminal charge beyond a reasonable doubt is required by the constitution

assistant: The best answer is D. holding potential prejudice caused by equating reasonable doubt with a substantial doubt mitigated by providing an alternate definition of reasonable doubt as a doubt that would cause a reasonable person to hesitate to act
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: 30 days after the judgment or order appealed from is entered, fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). The test for when the period, under which an appeal must be taken or a petition for certiorari filed, begins to run anew is “whether the lower court, in its second order, has disturbed or revised legal rights and obligations which, by its prior judgment, had been plainly and properly settled with finality.” Fed. Trade Comm’n v. Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Co., 344 U.S. 206, 211-12, 73 S.Ct. 245, 97 L.Ed. 245 (1952). We find that the district court did not, by its Rule 70 order, disturb, revise or alter the legal rights or obligations plainly and properly settled in its final judgment. As a result, the time to take an appeal of the underlying judgment in this case does not run anew. See id. (<HOLDING>). We find, therefore, that Baldwin will not be Options: A. holding that supreme court need not consider issue not raised in petition for certiorari B. holding that the applicable rate is that in existence at the time of judgment C. holding that the solicitor generals ratification of an unauthorized petition for certiorari could not cure a failure to meet the mandatory and jurisdictional 90day deadline to file a petition D. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to alteramend judgment where the plaintiff raised the choice of law issue for the first time after the entry of summary judgment E. holding that the judgment at issue did not meet the test for whether the time to file a petition for certiorari ran anew as the judgment at issue simply reiterated without change everything which had been decided previously

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the judgment at issue did not meet the test for whether the time to file a petition for certiorari ran anew as the judgment at issue simply reiterated without change everything which had been decided previously
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: Aquarius, constituting the Certificate Majority, does hereby (i) consent to, approve, and authorize in all respects the issuance of New Securities in the Qualified Financing and the issuance of any Interim Preferred in any Interim Financing, in each case including, but not limited to, for purposes of (a) Sections 3(d) and 4 of the Certificate of Designation and (b) any applicable provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law, and (ii) waive in all respects the application of Section 7(b) of the Certificate of Designation with respect to the issuance of New Securities in the Qualified Financing and the issuance of Common Stock, Common Stock Equivalents, and/or Interim Preferred in the Interim Financing.

assistant: Consents
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: were neglected and placed them in the temporary custody of CCDCFS. The subsequent motion filed by CCDCFS was a motion to modify temporary custody to permanent custody, filed pursuant to R.C. 2151.413 and 2151.414. Such proceedings are governed by Juv.R. 34, which specifically provides that: {¶ 58} “ ‘Hearings to determine whether temporary orders regarding custody should be modified to orders for permanent custody shall be considered dispositional hearings and need not be bifurcated.’ Juv.R. 34(1). {¶ 59} “Because the hearing regarding the motion to modify temporary custody to permanent custody was a dispositional hearing, rather than an adjudicatory hearing, Juv.R. 29 did not apply.” Id. at ¶ 6-9. See also In re Lakes, 149 Ohio App.3d 128, 2002-Ohio-3917, 776 N.E.2d 510, at ¶ 34 (<HOLDING>). {¶ 60} In the instant case, Juv.R. 29(D) was Options: A. holding the trial court was not required to engage in a colloquy with a parent in an rc 2151414 proceeding such as that required by juvr 29 at adjudicatory hearings B. holding that a parent must exercise some control over the subsidiarys activities which does not require that the subsidiary be controlled to an ultimate degree by its parent although something more than mere passive investment by the parent is required the parent must have and exercise control and direction over the affairs of its subsidiary in order for venue to be proper C. holding that trial court was required to give full effect to supreme courts judgment and that by failing to do so the trial court abused its discretion D. holding that trial court could take judicial notice of the contents of the court files to the extent it considered previous court orders evidence admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule and testimony and evidence admitted at any previous adjudicatory proceedings such as when the children were determined to be dependent E. holding that consistent with due process telephone hearings may be conducted to resolve interstate unemployment compensation claims because abolition of such hearings would not materially reduce the risk of erroneous deprivations and such hearings are a reasonable means of conserving fiscal and administrative resources

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the trial court was not required to engage in a colloquy with a parent in an rc 2151414 proceeding such as that required by juvr 29 at adjudicatory hearings
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: taken away by government regulation”) (quoting Allen v. City and County of Honolulu, 58 Haw. 432, 571 P.2d 328, 329 (1977)); Life of the Land, Inc. v. City Council of City & County of Honolulu, 61 Haw. 390, 606 P.2d 866, 902 (1980) ("The doctrine of equitable estoppel is based on a change of position on the part of a land developer by substantial expenditure of money in connection with his project in reliance, not solely on existing zoning laws or on good faith expectancy that his development will be permitted, but on official assurance on which he has a right to rely that his project has met zoning requirements, that necessary approvals will be forthcoming in due course, and he may safely proceed with the project.”); Denning v. County of Maui, 52 Haw. 653, 485 P.2d 1048, 1051 (1971) (<HOLDING>). 11 . See Pioneer Trust and Savings Bank v. Options: A. holding that a plaintiff could not show that she engaged in protected activity because she did not present evidence that she informed her employer that her complaints were based on race or age discrimination B. holding that a person has standing to bring suit under the civil rights act if she or he can show that she or he was punished for trying to vindicate the rights of minorities C. holding that an individual can waive any process to which he or she has a right D. holding that a plaintiff can show that she is qualified by presenting credible evidence that she continued to possess the objective qualifications she held when she was hired E. holding that a zoning estoppel plaintiff must show that he or she has been given assurances of some form by the county that his or her proposed construction met zoning requirements and that he or she had a right lo rely on such assurances

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a zoning estoppel plaintiff must show that he or she has been given assurances of some form by the county that his or her proposed construction met zoning requirements and that he or she had a right lo rely on such 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: did not advise Anderson that the answers he gave at the hearing could be used against him in a prosecution for perjury or false statement as required by Rule 11(b)(1)(A), we conclude such omission did not affect his substantial rights. We also conclude the district court properly classified Anderson as an armed career criminal and its imposition of the mandatory minimum sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) (2000) was reasonable. See United States v. Green, 436 F.3d 449, 457 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 2309, 164 L.Ed.2d 828 (2006). Anderson’s assertion that his prior conviction for failure to stop for a blue light cannot serve as a predicate offense for his armed career criminal classification is mer-itless. See United States v. James, 337 F.3d 387, 391 (4th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). We therefore find Anderson’s sentence was Options: A. holding that misdemeanor drunk driving by its very nature involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injuiy to another B. holding that attempted burglary under florida law qualified as a crime of violence under the armed career criminal act 18 usc 924e2biihereinafter acca because it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another C. holding that vehicular manslaughter qualifies as a violent felony under section 924e2bii in that it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another D. holding south carolina conviction for failure to stop for a blue light to be violent felony under acca because prohibited conduct creates potential for confrontation and violence E. holding that failure to stop for a blue light is a violent felony under armed career criminal statute because it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that failure to stop for a blue light is a violent felony under armed career criminal statute because it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower and the Restricted Subsidiaries have good and marketable title to, or a valid license or right to use, all patents, patent rights, trademarks, servicemarks, trade names, copyrights, technology, software, know-how database rights, rights of privacy and publicity, licenses and other intellectual property rights (collectively, “ IP Rights ”) that are necessary for the operation of their respective businesses as currently conducted and as proposed to be conducted, except where the failure to have any such rights, either individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. To the knowledge of the Borrower, the operation of the respective businesses of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries as currently conducted does not infringe upon, misuse, misappropriate or violate any rights held by any Person except for such infringements, misuses, misappropriations or violations individually or in the aggregate, that would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. No claim or litigation regarding any IP Rights is pending or, to the knowledge of the Borrower, threatened against any Loan Party or Subsidiary, that, either individually or in the aggregate, could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Employee agrees not to make any defamatory or derogatory statements concerning any of the Released Parties. Provided inquiries are directed to ID Systems’ Department of Human Resources, ID Systems shall disclose to prospective employers information limited to Employee’s dates of employment and last position held by Employee. Employee confirms and agrees that Employee shall not, directly or indirectly, disclose to any person or entity or use for Employee’s own benefit, any confidential information concerning the business, finances or operations of ID Systems or its customers; provided, however, that Employee’s obligations under this Section 7 shall not apply to information generally known in ID Systems’ industry through no fault of Employee or the disclosure of which is required by law after reasonable notice has been provided to ID Systems sufficient to enable ID Systems to contest the disclosure. Confidential information shall include, without limitation, trade secrets, customer lists, details of contracts, pricing policies, operational materials, marketing plans or strategies, security and safety plans and strategies, project development, and any other non-public or confidential information of, or relating to, ID Systems or its affiliates. Employee also agrees that the amounts paid to Employee and all of the other terms of this Agreement shall be kept confidential, unless ID Systems discloses them in a public filing. Employee acknowledges that he continues to be bound by that certain Employee Covenants Agreement, dated July 21, 2014, between ID Systems and Employee (the “ Covenants Agreement ”).

assistant: Confidentiality
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: Wiegand of a potential buyer or to approve the ultimate purchase agreement. And contrary to the panel’s findings, Welcome did far more than write a single letter to the realtor — the May 6,2003 letter, which set forth all of the liens on the property, reflects that Welcome had also done a title search. And since the April 24, 2003 deed of gift had not been recorded until May 20, 2003, the failure of the May 6, 2003 letter to reference that deed cannot be evidence of incompetence, given that it would not have appeared as part of Welcome’s title search. Likewise, the fact that Welcome did not attend the closing, despite being retained to do so, does not, without more, rise to the level of a Model Rule 1.1 violation. See, e.g., In re Mulhall, 159 Ariz. 528, 768 P.2d 1173, 1176 (1989) (<HOLDING>). But as noted above, Wiegand did not tell Options: A. holding statute of limitations began to run when plaintiffclient learned attorney negligently drafted contract not later when plaintiff lost on merits defending contract in lawsuit B. holding that allowing the statute of limitations to run on the clients claim is an example of obvious malpractice that does not require expert testimony to establish a standard of care C. holding that statute of limitations does not run until it was or should have been clear to the employee that the union would not pursue the grievance D. holding that negligently allowing a statute of limitations to run does not constitute an ethical violation E. holding that the statute of limitations does not run on a debtorinpossession

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that negligently allowing a statute of limitations to run does not constitute an ethical violation