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: premiums and assessments should be classified as taxes, courts have looked at whether a state’s workers’ compensation scheme allows an employer the option of subscribing to a state-administered insurance plan and whether such a plan is “monopolistic” (that is, the scheme requires payments only to a state-run insurance fund) or allows an employer the additional option of purchasing private insurance or of self-insuring. See In re Sacred Heart Hosp. of Norristown, 209 B.R. 650, 655-58 (E.D.Pa.1997) (discussing differences in courts’ treatment of workers’ compensation payments between states with varying workers’ compensation schemes). Where a system is monopolist lowing Payne and holding that Minnesota’s reimbursement claims were not “excise taxes”); Suburban II, 36 F.3d at 488-89 (<HOLDING>); In re Freymiller Trucking, Inc., 194 B.R. 914 Options: A. holding that oklahomas reimbursement claims met the lorber and feiring definitions of a tax but were not taxes under the anderson definition because they were not assessed at a fixed rate B. holding that reimbursement claims were excise taxes under lorber C. holding that ohios reimbursement claims met the lorber criteria but were not excise taxes because they were not universally applicable to similarly situated entities and in addition disadvantaged private creditors with like claims D. holding that michigan reimbursement claims were excise taxes under both lorber and suburban ii E. holding reimbursement claims were excise taxes under the lorber test without addressing the bankruptcy codes central policy of equal distribution

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that ohios reimbursement claims met the lorber criteria but were not excise taxes because they were not universally applicable to similarly situated entities and in addition disadvantaged private creditors with like claims
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: Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 297, 100 S.Ct. 559, 62 L.Ed.2d 490 (1980) (citations omitted). However, the usual due process analysis need not be done when a nonresident defendant contractually agrees to personal jurisdiction in a given state. See Alexander Proudfoot Co. World Headquarters v. Thayer, 877 F.2d 912, 921 (11th Cir.1989). Because personal jurisdiction is a waivable right, courts do not offend due process when they enforce “freely negotiated” agreements to submit controversies for resolution within a particular jurisdiction provided that the agreements are not “unreasonable and unjust.” See Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 473 n. 14, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985); see also M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1, 15, 92 S.Ct. 1907, 32 L.Ed.2d 513 (1972) (<HOLDING>); Nat’l Equip. Rental, Ltd. v. Szukhent, 375 Options: A. holding that a forum selection clause was not enforceable against defendants that were not parties to the contract B. holding that a forum selection clause should control absent a strong showing that it be set aside as unreasonable unjust or invalid C. holding that when action arising under contract containing venue selection clause is filed in court other than that specified in clause case will be transferred to forum selected by contract unless venue selection clause is unreasonable and unjust or invalid due to fraud or overreaching D. holding remand based on forum selection clause not within 1447c E. holding that a permissive forum selection clause containing a waiver of any claims of forum non conveniens amounts to a mandatory forum selection clause at least where the plaintiff chose the designated forum

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a forum selection clause should control absent a strong showing that it be set aside as unreasonable unjust or invalid
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, requests, demands or other communications provided for herein shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given five (5) days after the date sent by certified mail, addressed to the parties at their respective addresses hereinabove set forth, with a copy to Star Mountain Resources, Inc., 8307 Shaffer Parkway, Suite 102, Littleton, Coloardo 80127 Attn. Chief Financial Officer and to Legal & Compliance, LLC, 330 Clematis Street, Suite 217, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Attn. Laura Anthony, Esq. and Lazarus Rothstein, Esq. or at such other addresses as the parties may designate in writing. Debtor immediately shall notify Secured Party of any change in the address of Debtor or discontinuance of the place of business of Debtor.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All payments to be made by the Borrower shall be made without condition or deduction for any counterclaim, defense, recoupment or setoff. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all payments by the Borrower hereunder shall be made to the Administrative Agent, for the account of the respective Lenders to which such payment is owed, at the Administrative Agent’s Office in Dollars and in immediately available funds not later than 2:00 p.m. on the date specified herein. The Administrative Agent will promptly distribute to each Lender its applicable share as provided herein of such payment in like funds as received by wire transfer to such Lender’s Lending Office. All payments received by the Administrative Agent after 2:00 p.m. shall be deemed received on the next succeeding Business Day and any applicable interest or fee shall continue to accrue. If any payment to be made by the Borrower shall come due on a day other than a Business Day, payment shall be made on the next following Business Day, and such extension of time shall be reflected in computing interest or fees, as the case may be.

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: offense committed as to violate the Constitution” (emphasis added)). In this case, however, Howerin presented no evidence that a fine was imposed as part of his Florida sentence. Relatedly, the fact that a forfeiture within the congressionally mandated range of fines is presumptively constitutional does not mean that a forfeiture outside of that range is presumptively unconstitutional. Congress has authorized both a fine and forfeiture as part of the punishment for many offenses, thus suggesting that it does not consider a punishment somewhat above the statutory fine range to be excessive. A forfeiture far in excess of the statutory fine range, however, is likely to violate the Excessive Fines Clause. See United States v. 18755 N. Bay Rd., 13 F.3d 1493, 1498-99 & n. 6 (11th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>) 10 . Howerin, in his deposition in this case, Options: A. holding that the sentence was reasonable in part because it was well below the statutory maximum B. holding that forfeiture of property valued at 150000 was excessive where the maximum statutory fine was 20000 C. holding in a case where the maximum time of imprisonment was extended because an indigent defendant was unable to pay a fine and court costs that a state may not constitutionally imprison beyond the maximum duration fixed by statute a defendant who is financially unable to pay a fine D. holding that forfeiture of 357144 in currency was excessive where the maximum statutory fine was 250000 and the maximum fine under the sentencing guidelines was 5000 E. holding that forfeiture of property valued at 65000 was not excessive where the maximum fine under the sentencing guidelines was 40000

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that forfeiture of property valued at 150000 was excessive where the maximum statutory fine was 20000
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: conjunction with the use of FLEXLINE the significance of the relatedness factor is significantly diminished. 3. Similarity a. In evaluation the similarity of trademarks, a superficial side-by-side comparison is not the appropriate test. Wynn Oil, 839 F.2d at 1188. Rather, “the marks must be viewed in their entirety and in context.” Homeowners Group, 931 F.2d at 1109. “A court must determine, in the light of what occurs in the marketplace, whether the mark will be confusing to the public when singly presented.” Id. (citations omitted). The addition of words can be sufficient to distinguish marks. See In re Hearst Corp., 982 F.2d 493 (1992) (finding presence of term GIRL in VARGA GIRL sufficient to distinguish from VARGAS for identical goods); Frisch’s Restaurants, 759 F.2d 1261, 1266-67 (<HOLDING>). Slight modifications of a mark do not Options: A. holding that since we have already held that the concurrent use of plaintiffs mark by the defendants creates the likelihood of confusion the inescapable conclusion is that there was also irreparable injury B. holding that as in an action alleging infringement of a mark likelihood of confusion is the essence of an unfair competition claim C. holding that the use of the shoneys name over any subsidiary product line mark reduces the likelihood of confusion D. holding that concurrent use of same mark on similar product was sufficient to demonstrate a likelihood of confusion E. holding that even several isolated incidents of actual confusion are insufficient to support a finding of likelihood of confusion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the use of the shoneys name over any subsidiary product line mark reduces the likelihood of confusion
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: From and after the Operative Date, the Administrative Agent shall make all payments in respect of [the][each] Assigned Interest (including payments of principal, interest, fees and other amounts) to [the][the relevant] Assignor for amounts which have accrued to but excluding the Operative Date and to [the][the relevant] Assignee for amounts which have accrued from and after the Operative Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: By accepting this Award, the Grantee acknowledges that the Grantee has read this Agreement and understands that the future value of any shares of Stock issued pursuant to this Award cannot be predicted and Occidental does not assume liability in the event such shares of Stock have no value in the future; and the Grantee will be solely responsible for the payment or nonpayment of taxes imposed or threatened to be imposed by any authority of any jurisdiction. In consideration of the grant of this Award, no claim or entitlement to compensation or damages shall arise from termination of this Award or diminution in value of this Award or Stock issued pursuant to this Award resulting from termination of the Grantee’s service as a member of the Board and the Grantee irrevocably releases Occidental and its affiliates from any such claim that may arise; if, notwithstanding the foregoing, any such claim is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to have arisen, then, by accepting this Award, the Grantee shall be deemed irrevocably to have waived his or her entitlement to pursue such claim.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: on a trial. Pleas v. State, 766 So.2d 41, 43 (¶ 7) (Miss.Ct.App.2000) (citing Bell v. State, 751 So.2d 1035, 1038 (¶ 14) (Miss.1999)). ¶ 15. Williams testified under oath at his plea hearing that he was satisfied with the services provided by his attorney. We note that “solemn declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of verity.” Thomas, 883 So.2d at 1199 (¶ 13) (quoting Brasington v. State, 760 So.2d 18, 24 (¶ 32) (Miss.Ct.App.1999)). Further “[a] trial court is entitled to place great weight upon a defendant’s initial plea under oath.” Id. (citing Templeton v. State, 725 So.2d 764, 767 (¶ 10) (Miss.1998)). Williams failed to present any evidence to support his claim that his prior sworn statements regarding his satisfaction with his attorney should be disregarded. See id. (<HOLDING>). Therefore, this claim is without merit. Options: A. holding that a defendant had shown extraordinary circumstances where his attorney disregarded his instructions and purposefully deceived him about the progress of the proceedings B. holding that a defendant must demonstrate that the governments intrusion upon his relationship with his attorney created a possibility of either injury to his defense or benefit to the government in order to establish a violation of the right to counsel C. holding that the state must establish by the greater weight of the evidence that a defendant violated a term of his probation D. holding that the trial court can and should grant a new trial if the manifest weight of the evidence is contrary to the verdict E. holding that the defendant failed to place before the trial court evidence of such weight as to establish that his prior sworn statement of satisfaction with his attorney should be disregarded

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the defendant failed to place before the trial court evidence of such weight as to establish that his prior sworn statement of satisfaction with his attorney should be disregarded
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There is no action, suit, proceeding or investigation pending or, to the best of Borrower’s knowledge, threatened against Borrower, Owner, Guarantors, the Manager, the Collateral or the Property in any court or by or before any other Governmental Authority which, if adversely determined, could reasonably be expected to materially and adversely affect the condition (financial or otherwise) or business of Borrower (including the ability of Borrower to carry out the transactions contemplated by this Agreement), Owner, Guarantors, Manager or the condition or ownership of the Collateral or the Property.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (alterations in original). As discussed above, the Kinseys’ claims against Gould arise out of his representation of them in negotiating a settlement agreement and his refusal to continue that representation after the rejection of that agreement. In contrast, the federal claims the Kinseys attempted to bring against CitiFinancial and TranSouth allege wrongdoing in connection with loans the Kinseys had with these companies. These federal and state claims do not share a common nucleus of operative facts. See Palmer, 22 F.3d at 1566. In light of the foregoing, the district court’s dismissal of the Kinseys’ amended complaint is AFFIRMED. 1 . On appeal, the Kinseys have abandoned their claims against CitiFinancial and Tran-South. Although pro se pleadings are liberally cons (5th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>); see also Bayro v. Reno, 142 F.3d 1377, 1379 Options: A. holding in counseled case that listed issue was abandoned where it was not discussed in the argument portion of the brief B. holding an issue abandoned in a counseled case where although the defendant made passing references to issues in his brief he did not devote a discrete section of his brief to the argument and the references were undertaken as background to claims that he had expressly advanced C. holding that the petitioners failure to address an issue in the argument portion of his opening brief waived the issue D. holding in counseled appeal that an issue was abandoned where it was referred to in the statement of the case but no arguments on the merits were raised E. holding an issue listed in statement of issues on appeal but not addressed in brief is abandoned

assistant: The best answer is A. holding in counseled case that listed issue was abandoned where it was not discussed in the argument portion of the brief
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or treatment of hazardous waste; and (4) any person who accepted or accepts hazardous waste for the purpose of transporting it to a disposal facility. Bancroft-Whitney, California Civil Practice, Environmental Litigation, § 3:28 (1993); 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a)(l)-(4); 40 C.F.R. § 35.6015(a)(32). We have interpreted CERCLA to hold PRPs strictly liable for the investigation and remediation of hazardous waste sites. Moreover, like many of our sister circuits, we have also held that CERCLA liability is joint and several. Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Brown & Bryant, Inc., 159 F.3d 358, 362 (9th Cir.1998). This means that all PRPs are assigned liability for the whole amount of the cleanup costs, and then permitted to allo Suburban Sanitary Comm’n, 66 F.3d 669, 675-80 (4th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Under CERCLA, the cleanup of listed hazardous Options: A. recognizing that city may be liable for negligent maintenance of sewer system even though doctrine of res ipsa loquitor was inapplicable B. holding that a municipal sewer system that leaked hazardous waste could rely on a thirdparty defense to avoid liability under cercla C. holding that a municipal sewer system is liable for the acts of a third party that discharged hazardous waste into the system D. holding a city liable for a dangerous condition caused by a submerged municipal sewer pipe in federal waters E. holding county liable for false arrests when it has no system to check validity of warrants on computer system

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a municipal sewer system is liable for the acts of a third party that discharged hazardous waste into the system
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: drugs or alcohol, he did not pose a danger of harm to the child, and unsupervised visitation was in the child's best interests. AS 25.24.150(}). 18 . Tracy did not make this precise argument in her first or second motion for reconsideration. She there linked her "self-executing'"' change-of-visitation argument to AS 25.24.150(g). But she preserved her core factual and legal contentions that the change required no further court action and no proof of compliance, and erroneously put the burden of proof on Tracy. 19 . Thomas v. Thomas, 171 P.3d 98, 102 (Alaska 2007) ("We give the superior court broad discretion to determine custody awards in a divorce proceeding so long as the determination is in a child's best interests."). 20 . See McClain v. McClain, 716 P.2d 381, 386 (Alaska 1986) (<HOLDING>); see also Farrell v. Farrell, 819 P.2d 896, Options: A. holding that cooperation between parents is essential if the arrangement is to be in the best interests of the child B. holding that a modification of custody should not be based on one parents default because it is the childs best interests that are at stake C. holding that paramount consideration in terminationofparentalrights proceeding is best interests of the child D. holding that requiring a petitioner to establish by clear and convincing evidence that visitation is in the best interests of the child would provide effective protection for a parents choice except where the choice is plainly contrary to a childs best interests E. holding that a parents right to appeal the change of permanency plan is limited by the sound discretion of the court taking into account the best interests of the child

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that cooperation between parents is essential if the arrangement is to be in the best interests of the child
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 and the agreements described in the attached Exhibits contain the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous negotiations, correspondence, understandings and agreements between the parties, regarding the subject matter 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: he argues, the temporary order would have abated and he would have had no continuing obligation to make the unallocated payments required by that order. In Colorado, as in most jurisdictions, it is true that, upon the death of a party during the pendency of a divorce action and before a final decree of dissolution is entered, “ ‘the general rule of laW is that a divorce action immediately abates.’ ” In re Marriage of Connell, 870 P.2d 632, 633 (Colo.Ct.App.1994) (emphasis added) (quoting Estate of McLaughlin v. Craig, 117 Colo. 67, 184 P.2d 130, 132 (Colo.1947)). However, Colorado law provides that “provisions for the support of a child are [not] terminated ... by the death of a parent obligated to support the child.” Colo.Rev.Stat. § 14-10-122(3); see also Abrams, 781 P.2d at 656-57 (<HOLDING>). It is not clear under Colorado law which rule Options: A. holding the foster parents responsible for support where the childs natural parents are unknown and noting that an earlier new york case held that an agreement to adopt did not terminate the natural parents duty of support but that in that earlier case the natural parent was alive and capable of providing for the child B. holding that parents may not voluntarily terminate their rights in a child to avoid child support payments or contract away a child support obligation C. holding that custodial parents death does not terminate noncustodial parents child support obligations set forth in dissolution decree D. holding that the trial court had not erred in including the cost of health insurance covering both the custodial parent and the parties child in determining the noncustodial parents childsupport obligation E. recognizing that at common law a parents liability to support his child terminated at the parents death the terms of the support order could not be enforced against his estate unless provisions allowing for such enforcement were included in the order

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that custodial parents death does not terminate noncustodial parents child support obligations set forth in dissolution decree
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 Side Letter may not be amended or otherwise modified without the prior written consent of each party hereto. This Side Letter constitutes the sole agreement, and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings and statements, written or oral, among us and any of our Affiliates, and each of you and any of your Affiliates (other than the GSO Commitment Letter, the Investor Agreement to be entered into as of the date hereof by, inter alia, CF Corp and GSO, and the fee letter agreement to be entered into as of the date hereof by CF Corp and GSO). You agree that no changes to the transaction structure as set out in the Structure that are adverse to GSO shall be made thereto without the prior written consent of GSO.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: subscriber may not ( a ) select or use as a 9gag , inc url a name of another person with the intent to impersonate that person ; or ( b ) use as a 9gag , inc url a name subject to any rights of a person other than subscriber without appropriate authorization .

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: victim at bay with a gun and the other relieves the victim of his properties, or, as in the instant case, the unarmed assailant has knowledge of the use of the gun and by his actual presence participates in the robbery, the unarmed offender benefits from the use of the other robber’s weapon, adopting derivatively its lethal potential. . . . [T]he possession necessary to justify statutory enhancement may be actual or constructive; it may be exclusive or joint. Constructive or joint possession may occur only where the unarmed participant has knowledge of the other offender’s being armed, and where the unarmed offender has, as here, the ability to exercise control over the firearm. (Citations omitted.) (Emphasis added.) Cf. Walters v. State, 106 Nev. 45, 48-49, 786 P.2d 1202, 1204 (1990) (<HOLDING>), superseded on other grounds by 108 Nev. 186, Options: A. holding that the defendants sentence had been improperly enhanced where there was no evidence that the defendant constructively possessed or exercised control over the weapon B. holding that the defendants sentence for armed burglary in violation of section 810022b was improperly enhanced pursuant to section 775087 because the use of a weapon or a firearm is an essential element of armed burglary C. holding that although there was evidence of discrimination by the employer based on race there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the employer had constructively discharged the plaintiff D. holding that the cumulative effect of the evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant constructively possessed the methamphetamine laboratory discovered in a bedroom she shared with a renter E. holding that because the plaintiff no longer managed others and had other job responsibilities reduced there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable factfinder to conclude that he had been constructively discharged

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the defendants sentence had been improperly enhanced where there was no evidence that the defendant constructively possessed or exercised control over the weapon
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: no reasonable reader would interpret the photograph of the Knievels as a serious allegation of criminal wrongdoing. We acknowledge, like the district court did, that taken in isolation and given a literal interpretation, ESPN’s suggestion that Evel is a pimp is “sufficiently factual to be susceptible of being proved true or false.” See Underwager, 69 F.3d at 366. But we assess the meaning of the word in the context in which it was used. Because the caption cannot reasonably be interpreted literally in this context, the fact that its literal interpretation could be proven true or false is immaterial. The Knievels correctly point out that the fact that a statement is an attempt at humor does not immunize the speaker against liability for defamation. See Polygram, 216 Cal.Rptr. at 260 (<HOLDING>) (quoting Arno v. Stewart, 245 Cal.App.2d 955, Options: A. holding that it is not B. holding that the jocular intent of the publisher will not relieve him from liability if it is reasonable to not understand the utterance as a joke C. holding that if a declaratory judgment will not end the controversy it is not proper D. recognizing the holding in webb and stating operation of the plant for the city by a separate agency does not relieve the city from liability E. holding other lease provisions evidenced intent to relieve tenant from fire damage liability

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the jocular intent of the publisher will not relieve him from liability if it is reasonable to not understand the utterance as a joke
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 contents of the conversation took place was to look for evidence. To do that, the police should have had a warrant. There was no exigency, the tape was not about to leave their possession. Furthermore, Deputy Roed's inspection of the printout's contents constituted a search regardless of whether she was lawfully in possession of the printout. Legal possession of an article does not endow law enforcement officials with any concomitant authority to also search the contents of the article. See, e.g., Walter v. United States, 447 U.S. 649, 654 (1980) (Stevens, J. concurring), (stating that, "[t]he fact that FBI agents were lawfully in possession of the boxes of film did not give them authority to search their contents."); United States v. Khoury, 901 F.2d 948, 959-60 (11th Cir. 1990) (<HOLDING>). Robert Rewolinski had a legitimate Options: A. holding that a promise by fbi agents that defendant would serve no time on state charges if he cooperated in the federal investigation was unauthorized B. holding that a foia request sent to fbi headquarters and that made no reference to new york did not obligate the fbi to search records held in its new york field office C. holding that the plaintiffs ftca claims failed because the fbi agents were privileged to use reasonable force under texas law D. holding that the contents of a notebook were not protected speech based in part on the fact that appellant made no effort to communicate the contents of the notebook to the public E. holding that an fbi agents investigation of the written contents of a notebook that was lawfully in the possession of the fbi constituted a search that violated the defendants fourth amendment rights

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an fbi agents investigation of the written contents of a notebook that was lawfully in the possession of the fbi constituted a search that violated the defendants fourth amendment rights
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: Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 and § 5142; Puerto Rico Act No. 80 of May 31, 1976, as amended, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 29, § 185a et seq.; and Puerto Rico Act No. 115 of December 20, 1991, as amended, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 29, § 149 et seq. (Docket No. 1, at 7, ¶ 33.) Since all of plaintiffs federal claims were dismissed, the court will not exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Puerto Rico law claims which “posit novel and complex issues of state law....” Szendrey-Ramos v. First BanCorp., 512 F.Supp.2d 81, 88 (D.P.R.2007); see Del Toro-Pacheco v. Pereira-Castillo, 662 F.Supp.2d 202, 217 (D.P.R.2009); Meléndez v. Autogermana, Inc., 606 F.Supp.2d 189, 198-99 (D.P.R.2009). Accordingly, plaintiffs state law claims are dismissed without prejudice. Cao v. Puerto Rico, 525 F.3d 112, 116 (1st Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>). IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons set froth Options: A. holding that when a lanham act claim is dismissable upon motion state law claims should be dismissed without prejudice B. holding that when state law claims are dismissed without prejudice a plaintiff is free to assert them in the appropriate state forum C. recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties D. holding that if the federal claims are dismissed before trial the state claims should be dismissed as well E. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that when state law claims are dismissed without prejudice a plaintiff is free to assert them in the appropriate state forum
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In addition to being entitled to exercise all rights provided herein or granted by law, including recovery of damages, the Purchaser will be entitled to specific performance under the Transaction Documents. The parties agree that monetary damages may not be adequate compensation for any loss incurred by reason of any breach of obligations contained in the Transaction Documents and hereby agree to waive and not to assert in any action for specific performance of any such obligation the defense that a remedy at law would be adequate.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless the Compensation Committee directs otherwise before a Change of Control, in the event of a Change of Control, UGI shall require any successor or successors (whether direct or indirect, by purchase, merger, consolidation or otherwise) to all or substantially all of the business and/or assets of UGI, or a division or Affiliate thereof, (i) to acknowledge expressly that this SSP is binding upon and enforceable against such successor in accordance with the terms hereof, (ii) to become jointly and severally obligated with UGI to perform the obligations under this SSP, and (iii) to agree not to amend or terminate the SSP for a period of three years after the date of succession without the consent of the affected Participant.

assistant: Successors
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 constitutes the entire contract among the Subordinated Debtors, the Senior Lenders and the Subordinated Lenders relating to the subject matter hereof and there are no promises or representations by the Subordinated Debtors, the Senior Lenders or the Subordinated Lenders hereto regarding the subject matter hereof not reflected herein.

assistant: Integration
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 (including the documents and the instruments referred to herein) constitutes the entire agreement and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, among the parties hereto 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower acknowledges that it is currently in default under the Loan Agreement by its failure to comply with the minimum EBITDA financial covenant contained in Section 6.9(a) of the Loan Agreement for the compliance period ended September 30, 2015 (the “ Existing Default ”). Bank hereby waives Borrower’s Existing Default for the compliance period indicated above. Bank’s waiver of Borrower’s compliance with said Existing Default shall apply only to the foregoing specific compliance period. The Borrower hereby acknowledges and agrees that except as specifically provided in this Section, nothing in this Section or anywhere in this Loan Modification Agreement shall be deemed or otherwise construed as a waiver by the Bank of any of its rights and remedies pursuant to the Existing Loan Documents, applicable law or otherwise.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Remand from Supreme Court of Florida BLUE, Chief Judge. Cleveland Jones appealed his burglary conviction and prison releasee reoffender sentence, which this court affirmed. Jones v. State, 779 So.2d 516 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). By unpublished order, the Florida Supreme Court vacated the decision and remanded for reconsideration in light of State v. Huggins, 802 So.2d 276 (Fla.2001) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we reverse the prison releasee Options: A. holding that a defendant has the right both to present evidence to prove that the defendant does not qualify for sentencing under the act and to challenge the states evidence regarding the defendants eligibility for sentencing as a prison releasee reoffender B. holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively C. holding that prison releasee reoffender sentence does not apply to burglary of unoccupied dwelling D. holding that a district judge does not enjoy the benefit of a legal presumption that the guidelines sentence should apply E. holding that 1447c does not apply to counsel

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that prison releasee reoffender sentence does not apply to burglary of unoccupied dwelling
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 this Stock Option (and the Option Shares upon exercise of this Stock Option) 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 of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the respective rules and regulations promulgated thereunder) and any other law or regulation applicable thereto. The Company shall not be obligated to issue this Stock Option or any of the Option 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The proceeds of the Loans made on the Effective Date will be used solely for the payment of fees and expenses payable in connection with the Transactions and other general corporate purposes of Murphy USA, the Company and the other Restricted Subsidiaries.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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: You shall be entitled to all rights and benefits for which you are otherwise eligible under any health, life and disability insurance plans, vacation policies, sick leave policies and 401(k) elections that Oaktree generally provides to senior executive officers. You agree that Oaktree may deduct the premiums for your long-term disability insurance from the compensation otherwise payable to you.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: for any claim in which you seek u.s. $ 10,000.00 or less , you shall have the choice as to whether the hearing is conducted in person , by telephone , or instead the arbitrator may decide the dispute without a hearing .

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: Corp., 191 F.3d 1010, 1016 (9th Cir.1999) (reviewing evi-dentiary ruling for plain error where party failed to raise the objection at trial). Under any standard, however, the evidence was not unduly prejudicial because the risk of jury confusion concerning the evidence was low, the evidence was straightforward and the time period of the evidence was made clear. Finally, the district court judge did not engage in judicial misconduct at trial. A new trial based on judicial misconduct is warranted only if, from the record, a judge’s action “shows actual bias or leaves an abiding impression that the jury perceived an appearance of advocacy or partiality.” United States v. Laurins, 857 F.2d 529, 537 (9th Cir.1988); see Shad v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 799 F.2d 525, 531 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). Although the district court judge interrupted Options: A. holding that prejudice existed when an attorney was both the trial counsel and a necessary witness B. holding that affidavit from a new witness was not newly discovered evidence because trial counsel knew of the existence of the witness before trial trial counsel with due diligence could have discovered the evidence C. holding that trial judges conduct was not improper when judge questioned witness criticized counsel and managed the pace of the trial D. holding that judge presiding at trial may not testify in that trial as witness E. holding appeal improper where trial judge did not rule upon question

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that trial judges conduct was not improper when judge questioned witness criticized counsel and managed the pace of the 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: so long as probable cause existed for the one offense). The fact that the offense was a misdemeanor is also immaterial to our Fourth Amendment analysis. See United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411, 418, 421-24, 96 S.Ct. 820, 46 L.Ed.2d 598 (1976) (a police officer is permitted to arrest without a warrant if a misdemeanor is committed in the officer’s presence). Thus, the officers in this case had, at least, arguable probable cause to conclude that Smithson had violated the city’s sound ordinance. Accordingly, we conclude that Brown, Westemeyer, McBride, and Richardson are entitled to qualified immunity on appellees’ Fourth Amendment false arrest claim. See Johnson v. Schneiderheinz, 102 F.3d 340 (8th Cir.1996); see also Hannah v. City of Overland, 795 F.2d 1385, 1389 (8th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). B. First Amendment To be successful on his Options: A. holding that in a 1983 action issue of probable cause is for the jury B. holding that arrest made with probable cause and without excessive force does not give rise to iied claim C. recognizing that warrantless arrests with probable cause do not give rise to 1983 claims D. recognizing the defense of good faith and probable cause in 1983 case involving unconstitutional warrantless arrest E. holding 1983 action lies for warrantless arrest without probable cause

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that warrantless arrests with probable cause do not give rise to 1983 claims
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: that he did not follow a Bloomington Police Department procedure for making the transition from lethal to less-lethal ammunition. Because there was no discretion involved in loading less-lethal ammunition and because a narrow standard on how to load less-lethal ammunition existed, we conclude that Officer Duerksen was performing a ministerial duty and is not entitled to the protection of official immunity from civil liability. When a public official is entitled to official immunity, a municipal employer is often extended vicarious official immunity also. See id. at 42. But when, as here, we conclude that the official (Officer Duerk-sen) is not entitled to official immunity, vicarious official immunity will not protect respondent City of Bloomington. See Wiederholt, 581 N.W.2d at 316 (<HOLDING>). We therefore reverse the district court’s Options: A. holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity B. holding that attorney who was retained by city to assist in conducting official investigation into firefighters potential wrongdoing was entitled to qualified immunity in firefighters 1983 claim because official investigation of state employee was activity of the type entitled to qualified immunity C. holding that because a city inspector was not entitled to official immunity the city was not entitled to vicarious official immunity D. holding that if official has violated clearly established law he is entitled to qualified immunity only if reasonable official could have believed conduct was lawful E. holding that defendants were entitled to official immunity and not addressing the merits

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because a city inspector was not entitled to official immunity the city was not entitled to vicarious official immunity