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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance by each Loan Party of each Loan Document to which it is a party (i) do not contravene any of the Governing Documents of such Loan Party, (ii) do not contravene any Requirement of Law, (iii) do not contravene any Material Contract, except as such contravention would not reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a Material Adverse Effect, and (iv) will not result in the imposition of any Liens upon any of its properties other than Permitted Liens.

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: U.S. at 831, 105 S.Ct. 1649. As a result, “the agency must not only assess whether a violation has occurred, but whether agency resources are best spent on this violation or another, whether the agency is likely to succeed if it acts, whether the particular enforcement action ... best fits the agency’s overall policies, and, indeed, whether the agency has enough resources to undertake the action at all.” Id. Further, “[a]n agency generally cannot act against each technical violation of the statute it is charged with enforcing.” Id. The Second Circuit has likewise stated that “decisions regarding enforcement discretion ... must reflect limited agency resources, enforcement priorities and other administrative constraints.” B.F. Goodrich Co. v. Murtha, 958 F.2d 1192, 1205 (2d Cir. 1992) (<HOLDING>). Thus, in the context of the DEC’S decision to Options: A. holding that potentially liable party could avoid all liability by proving its released hazardous substances did not contribute to response costs B. recognizing that the epa may selectively prosecute only the major contributors to a hazardous response site C. holding that parties liable for at least a portion of the costs of remediating a hazardous site are limited to the contribution scheme under section 9613f of cercla D. holding claim based on failure to disclose information to the epa preempted E. holding that certain dual purpose documents created in response to the epa information request and consent order were protected from discovery by the work product doctrine as they were created because of potential litigation with the epa

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the epa may selectively prosecute only the major contributors to a hazardous response site
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 agree that you will not, whether directly or indirectly, by name or innuendo, disparage or encourage or induce others to disparage the Company, the members of its Board of Directors, its officers, or any other member of the Company’s senior management team (collectively, the “ Company Representatives ”). The Company, by and through each of its Company Representatives, shall not disparage or encourage or induce others, including the Company, to disparage you to third parties. For the purposes of this letter agreement, the term “disparage” includes the making of false, defamatory or derogatory comments that could reasonably be expected to damage your reputation or the reputation of the Company or any of the Company Representatives; provided , however , that nothing in this letter agreement shall restrict communications protected as privileged under federal or state law, or any testimony or communications ordered and required by any administrative agency or court of competent jurisdiction.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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 set forth on Schedule 4.13 , the Borrower Parties and their Subsidiaries have filed all Federal, state, provincial, territorial and other Tax returns and reports required to be filed and except to the extent prohibited by the automatic stay of § 362 of the Bankruptcy Code (or applicable provision in Canada), and have paid all Federal, state, provincial and other Taxes, assessments, fees and other governmental charges levied or imposed upon them or their properties, income or assets otherwise due and payable, except those which are being Properly Contested or not otherwise required to be paid pursuant to Section 5.05 . There is no proposed Tax assessment against any Borrower Party or any Subsidiary thereof other than those for Taxes not yet payable or being Properly Contested or not otherwise required to be paid pursuant to Section 5.05 .

assistant: Taxes
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 provisions of this Agreement are intended to be interpreted and construed in a manner to make such provisions valid, legal, and enforceable. If any portion or term of this Agreement is held unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected and shall remain fully in force and enforceable. The terms of this Agreement are contractual, and not merely a recital.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive acknowledges that his violation of any of the Restrictive Covenants will cause immediate, substantial and irreparable harm to the Company which cannot be adequately redressed by monetary damages alone. If Executive breaches or threatens to breach the Restrictive Covenants, in addition to the forfeiture and recoupment remedies provided for in Section 2(f), the Company shall be entitled to temporary and permanent injunctive relief from a court of competent jurisdiction, without posting any bond or other security and without the necessity of proof of actual damage, in addition to, and not in lieu of, other such remedies as may be available to the Company for such breach, including the recovery of monetary damages. If any portion of the Restrictive Covenants contained herein, or the application thereof, is construed to be invalid or unenforceable, the other portions of the Restrictive Covenants or the application thereof shall not be affected and shall be given full force and effect without regard to the invalid or unenforceable portions to the fullest extent possible. If any covenant or agreement in the Restrictive Covenants is held to be unenforceable because of the duration or scope or geographic scope thereof, then the court making such determination shall have the power to reduce the duration and limit the duration or scope or geographic scope thereof, and the Restrictive Covenants shall then be enforceable in their reduced form. For purposes of the Restrictive Covenants, references to the Company shall include its affiliates and subsidiaries.

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: v. Timm, 502 U.S. 410, 427, 112 S.Ct. 773, 116 L.Ed.2d 903 (1992) (Scalia, L, dissenting) ("If possible, [courts] should avoid construing the statute in a way that produces ... absurd results.”). 16 . Notwithstanding the enactment of New § 1-201(37), some courts continue to apply the Percentage Tests to determine whether the option price contained in a purported lease agreement is nominal. See, e.g., Triplex Marine, 258 B.R. at 670 (option price representing 10% of the original purchase price of the leased goods and 5% of aggregate rental payments made by the debtor held to be nominal); In re Super Feeders, Inc., 236 B.R. 267, 270-71 (Bankr.D.Neb.1999) (option price that is 5% of original property cost and 3.6% of total rental payments found to be nominal); Wakefield, 217 B.R. at 971 (<HOLDING>). See generally Dicker & Compo, 7 Am. Options: A. holding that the cost of capital equipment is not recoverable under the terms of the miller act B. holding that option amount is nominal where it is 10 of original equipment cost C. holding that factors cited by the debtor including the fact that present value of total rental payments exceeds the equipments cost and the agreement contains net lease provisions do not establish that the lessor relinquished its reversionary interest D. holding that option prices contained in two purported lease agreements are nominal where they constitute 10 of original equipment cost and total payments exceed the initial cost of the equipment under agreement 1 by approximately 50 and under agreement 2 by approximately 29 E. holding that the government could not charge contractor excess cost of relet contract where government caused a delay in contract performance in which contractor was to use his own equipment original contractors costs increased and government refused to allow original contractor to perform at cost but allowed new contractor to use government equipment and paid new contractor a different rate

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that option prices contained in two purported lease agreements are nominal where they constitute 10 of original equipment cost and total payments exceed the initial cost of the equipment under agreement 1 by approximately 50 and under agreement 2 by approximately 29
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties mutually agree to conduct themselves with a spirit of harmony and mutual cooperation. I agree to refrain from expressing (or causing others to express) to any third party any derogatory or negative opinions concerning the Companies or their affiliates or their respective officers, directors, operations, services or employees. On behalf of itself, its officers and directors, the Company agrees to refrain from expressing (or permitting others to express) to any third party any derogatory or negative opinions concerning me or my service to the Company. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall be construed to prevent or restrict me from responding truthfully to questions or requests as a part of an inquiry conducted by a court, government or law enforcement agency or in response to a subpoena or as otherwise required by law, or as otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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: should be dismissed. The Jewell case the majority cites does not support its holding. In Jewell v. Moser, 2012 Ark. 267, we said that while we have required only substantial compliance with the procedural steps of Rule 3(e) the notice of appeal did not contain a scrivener’s error because the final order was filed after the notice of appeal. Jewell, 2012 Ark. 267. The cases where we found substantial compliance dealt with ancillary procedural requirements such as the financial-arrangement language and the ordering of the trial transcript. See, e.g., Helton v. Jacobs, 346 Ark. 344, 57 S.W.3d 180 (2001) (noting that failure to include finan cial-arrangements language in a notice of appeal no longer renders that notice invalid); Phillips v. LaValle, 293 Ark. 364, 737 S.W.2d 652 (1987) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, in Jewell, we noted that a Options: A. holding that it was not fatal when the notice of appeal did not state that the transcript had been ordered when in actuality it had been ordered B. holding appeal moot where tests that had been ordered under the preliminary injunction had already been car ried out C. holding that where a witness had been convicted seventeen years earlier but had been given probation and had not been confined the date of the conviction controlled D. holding that because the restitution was ordered as part of a state criminal prosecution it was excepted from discharge in bankruptcy E. holding that state had waived argument because it could have been raised in an earlier appeal but was not and because it fell outside the scope of remand

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it was not fatal when the notice of appeal did not state that the transcript had been ordered when in actuality it had been ordered
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: authorized in the approved county solid waste management plan. — U.S.-, 112 S.Ct. 2019, 2022, 119 L.Ed.2d 139 (1992). In Fort Gratiot the Court also discussed a city ordinance it had previously struck down as discriminating against interstate commerce. That ordinance made it unlawful to sell pasteurized milk in a particular city unless the milk had been processed at a plant located within five miles of the city. Id. at 2025 (citing Dean Milk Co. v. Madison, 340 U.S. 349, 71 S.Ct. 295, 95 L.Ed. 329 (1951)). The Court explained that the fact that the ordinance discriminated against in-state processors as well as out-of-state processors "did not mitigate its burden on interstate commerce.” Id., see also Waste Sys. Corp. v. County of Martin, Minn., 985 F.2d 1381, 1386-87 (8th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Waste Recycling, Inc. v. Southeast Alabama Options: A. holding that an arkansas statute discriminated against interstate commerce by banning the importation of most outofstate waste even though a small amount of outofstate waste was allowed into arkansas under the statute B. holding that commerce clause authorizes congress to punish any particular criminal action even without proof of a relation to interstate commerce when the activity is part of a class of activities determined by congress to affect interstate commerce C. holding that three municipal flow control ordinances similar to the one here at issue discriminated against interstate commerce D. holding that ordinance requiring all municipal solid waste generated within county to be delivered to a particular facility discriminated against interstate commerce E. holding that merely because some instate outofcounty waste would also be discriminated against does not render the law valid under the commerce clause

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that ordinance requiring all municipal solid waste generated within county to be delivered to a particular facility discriminated against interstate commerce
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 debtor may only do so “subject” to 11 U.S.C. § 365. See 1322(b)(7). Consequently, the Debtor has the option of assuming the Lease in his Plan but, in opting to do so, he obligates himself to satisfy the requirements of § 365 which he has not done. There is no provision in his Plan for curing his default or providing adequate assurance of his future performance under the Lease. See 11 U.S.C. § 365(b). Furthermore, while the Bankruptcy Code permits a Chapter 13 debtor to modify the rights of certain holders of secured claims, since the Movants are parties to an unexpired lease and not a security agreement, the Debtor is not entitled to modify the terms of the Lease and force Movants to finance his purchase of the Vehicle. In re Calloway, 2010 WL 5597723 (Bankr.M.D.N.C. Oct.28, 2010) (<HOLDING>); In re Pittman, 289 B.R. 448, 450 Options: A. holding debtor could include property because the bank accepted payments directly from the debtor and had previously allowed the debtor to cure default B. holding that since property of the chapter 7 estate relates back to what was property of the bankruptcy estate when the chapter 13 was commenced and since the debtor still has the vehicle in his possession the present equity in the vehicle does not belong to the chapter 7 trustee or to unsecured creditors of this estate C. holding that the debtor could not treat a lessor as a secured creditor by paying the present value of the purchase option price of the lease through her chapter 13 plan D. holding that since motor vehicle contract between the debtor and fifth third bank was a lease and not a security agreement the debtor was required to treat fifth third banks claim in his chapter 13 plan as a lease and not as a secured debt which meant that the debtor could not obligate fifth third bank to finance the purchase of his vehicle E. holding debtor could cure after the debtor had previously made payments to the bank

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that since motor vehicle contract between the debtor and fifth third bank was a lease and not a security agreement the debtor was required to treat fifth third banks claim in his chapter 13 plan as a lease and not as a secured debt which meant that the debtor could not obligate fifth third bank to finance the purchase of his vehicle
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 validity, interpretation and effect of the Plan, and the rights of all persons hereunder, shall be governed by and determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Michigan, other than the choice of law rules thereof. With respect to Incentive Bonuses granted to Participants who are foreign nationals or who are employed outside the United States, the Plan and any rules and regulations relating to the Plan shall be governed by the laws of the State of Michigan (without reference to principles of conflicts of laws) and, to the extent that applicable foreign law differs from Michigan law, in accordance with applicable foreign law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notices and all other communications contemplated by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when personally delivered or when mailed by U.S. registered or certified mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid. In the case of Executive, mailed notices shall be addressed to him or her at the home address which he or she most recently communicated to the Company in writing. In the case of the Company, mailed notices shall be addressed to its corporate headquarters, and all notices shall be directed to the attention of its Chief Legal Officer.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The “Restricted Period” is the period beginning on the Grant Date and ending on the date the Restricted Shares, or such applicable portion of the Restricted Shares, are deemed vested under the schedule set forth in the Notice. The Restricted Shares shall be deemed vested and no longer subject to forfeiture under Paragraph 4 in accordance with the vesting schedule set forth in the Notice or earlier, if specified in the Notice, in the event of a Change in Control.

assistant: Vesting
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 and other communications provided for hereunder shall be given in the form and manner provided in Section 11 of the Credit Agreement, and, if to Agent, shall be mailed, sent, or delivered to Agent in accordance with Section 11 in the Credit Agreement, if to Borrowers, shall be mailed, sent, or delivered to Administrative Borrower in accordance with Section 11 in the Credit Agreement, and, if to Specified Bank Products Provider, shall be mailed, sent or delivered to the address set forth below, or, in each case as to any party, at such other address as shall be designated by such party in a written notice to the other party.

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: During the Term, the Executive’s annual base salary shall be $355,000. The Executive’s base salary shall be re-determined annually by the Board or the Compensation Committee of the Board and shall be subject to increase but not decrease while Executive is serving in the Chief Scientific Officer role. The annual base salary in effect at any given time is referred to herein as “Base Salary.” The Base Salary shall be payable in a manner that is consistent with the Company’s usual payroll practices for senior executives.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and each other Loan Document may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery by facsimile transmission or other electronic transmission (including a .pdf or .tif copy) of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Agreement and each other Loan Document shall be effective as delivery of an original executed counterpart of this Agreement and such other Loan Document; provided that original signatures shall be promptly delivered thereafter, it being understood that that the failure to request or deliver the same shall not limit the effectiveness of any document or signature delivered by facsimile or electronic transmission.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: test, and given that the issue has been forfeited, there is no reason to partially overrule Helzer in the case before us. II. CONCLUSION I concur with the majority that the order granting defendant a new trial should be vacated and that defendant’s conviction should be reinstated, although I reach this result on the ground that defendant forfeited his right to separately empaneled juries. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision to partially overrule Helzer, which has served as precedent for more than 30 years in this state, because it is unnecessary to reach the issue whether Helzer was correctly decided. 1 MCL 750.335a (indecent exposure); MCL 767.61a (sexual delinquency). 2 See also Spencer v Texas, 385 US 554, 567-569; 87 S Ct 648; 17 L Ed 2d 606 (1967) (<HOLDING>). 3 Helzer, 404 Mich at 424. 4 People v Options: A. holding that there is no federal constitutional right to a bifurcated criminal trial B. holding that it is well settled that there is no constitutional right to an appeal C. holding that there is no federal or colorado constitutional right to postconviction counsel but there is a limited statutory right D. holding that there is no constitutional right to appeal a criminal conviction E. holding right to testify was federal constitutional right

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that there is no federal constitutional right to a bifurcated criminal 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: remedy for Microsoft’s antitrust violations. In particular, the court should consider which of the decree’s conduct restrictions remain viable in light of our modification of the original liability decision. While the task of drafting the remedies decree is for the District Court in the first instance, because of the unusually convoluted nature of the proceedings thus far, and a desire to advance the ultimate resolution of this important controversy, we offer some further guidance for the exercise of that discretion. F. On Remand As a general matter, a district court is afforded broad discretion to enter that relief it calculates will best remedy the conduct it has found to be unlawful. See, e.g., Woerner v. United States Small Bus. Admin., 934 F.2d 1277, 1279 (D.C.Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). This is no less true in antitrust cases. See, Options: A. holding that court reviews trial courts decision to release a defendant for abuse of discretion B. holding that the decision whether to grant a continuance lies in the sound discretion of the trial court and will not bedisturbed absent an abuse of discretion C. holding that an appellate court reviews a trial courts grant of a summary judgment motion de novo because it is a question of law D. recognizing that an appellate court reviews a trial courts decision whether or not to grant equitable relief only for an abuse of discretion E. holding that the decision whether to grant a continuance lies in the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that an appellate court reviews a trial courts decision whether or not to grant equitable relief only for an abuse of discretion
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 provision in this Note is held invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, the other provisions of this Note wilJ remain in full force and effect. Any provision of this Note held invalid or unenforceable only in part or degree remain in full force and effect to the extent not held invalid or unenforceable.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: State witness. Defendant argues that his Sixth Amendment right to cross-examine a witness was impermissibly compromised when the trial court excluded the witness’s juvenile record for impeachment purposes. The State maintains that the trial court properly excluded the juvenile record pursuant to Indiana Evidence Rule 609(d). Generally, evidence relating to juvenile delinquency proceedings cannot be used as evidence for purposes of impeachment. Ind. Evidence Rule 609(d) (1996). See also Goolsby v. State, 517 N.E.2d 54, 61 (Ind.1987) (recognizing that this Court has consistently held that juvenile delinquency proceedings are considered civil in nature and consequently are not to be used to impeach a defendant in a criminal proceeding); Perkins v. State, 483 N.E.2d 1379, 1384 (Ind.1985) (<HOLDING>). Despite this rule, Defendant argues on appeal Options: A. holding that statute allowing for transfer of juvenile to adult criminal court does not implicate apprendi because the judges transfer determination does not subject the juvenile to enhanced punishment it subjects the juvenile to the adult criminal justice system B. holding that the prior conviction exception should not extend to nonjury juvenile adjudications C. holding apprendi exception for prior convictions encompasses juvenile adjudications D. holding that juvenile adjudications may not be used for impeachment purposes because the disposition of a juvenile does not constitute a criminal conviction E. holding that a juvenile adjudication may be used as a prior conviction for apprendi purposes

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that juvenile adjudications may not be used for impeachment purposes because the disposition of a juvenile does not constitute a criminal conviction
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 of the disclosure furnished by or on behalf of Natur to the Purchasers regarding Natur and its Subsidiaries, their respective businesses and the transactions contemplated hereby, including the Disclosure Schedules to this Agreement, is true and correct and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. Natur acknowledges and agrees that no Purchaser makes or has made any representations or warranties with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby other than those specifically set forth in Section 3.2 hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and each other Note Document has been duly executed and delivered by each Obligor that is party thereto. This Agreement and each other Note Document constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of such Obligor, enforceable against each Obligor that is party thereto in accordance with its terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by Debtor Relief Laws and by general principles of equity.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 358 U.S. 270 79 S.Ct. 273 3 L.Ed.2d 289 HOTEL EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL NO. 255, et al., Petitioners,v.SAX ENTERPRISES, Inc.; Leevlans Corporation; R. S. Levy, Daniel Lifter and J. S. Lansburg, as Trustee, et al. HOTEL EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL NO. 255, et al., Petitioners, v. Harry LEVY et al., doing business as Sherry Frontenac Hotel, Stuyvesant Corporation, Abe Allenberg, et al. Nos. 5, 6. Argued Nov. 10, 1958. Decided Jan. 12, 1959. Rehearing Denied Feb. 24, 1959. See 359 U.S. 921, 79 S.Ct. 576. Messrs. Arthur J. Goldberg and David E. Feller, Washington, D.C., for the petitioners. Marion E. Sibley, Miami Beach, Fla., and Thomas H. Anderson, Miami, Fla., for the respondents. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgments of the Supreme Court of Florida in these twelve consolidated cases must be reversed. They all concern the power of the courts of Florida to enjoin organizational picketing at twelve Florida resort hotels. After a series of decisions in regard to these and related cases,* the Florida Supreme Court, in identical per curiam opinions, affirmed the issuance of permanent injunctions against the picketing. 2 The Florida courts were without jurisdiction to enjoin this organizational picketing, whether it was activity protected by § 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C § 157, 29 U.S.C.A. § 157, Hill v. Florida ex rel. Watson, 325 U.S. 538, 65 S.Ct. 1373, 89 L.Ed. 1782, or prohibited by § 8(b)(4) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b)(4), Garner v. Teamsters Union, 346 U.S. 485, 74 S.Ct. 161, 98 L.Ed. 228. See Weber v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 348 U.S. 468, at 481, 75 S.Ct. 480, 488, 99 L.Ed. 546. This follows even though the National Labor Relations Board refused to take jurisdiction, Amalgamated Meat Cutters v. Fairlawn Meats, 353 U.S. 20, 77 S.Ct. 604, 1 L.Ed.2d 613. The record does not disclose violence sufficient to give the State jurisdiction under United Automobile Workers, etc., v. Wisconsin Board, 351 U.S. 266, 76 S.Ct. 794, 100 L.Ed. 1162. In none of the twelve cases did the Florida trial courts make any finding of violence, and in some an affirmative finding of no violence was made. 3 Since it was stipulated below that a witness would testify that interstate commerce was involved in the Florida resort hotel industry, and since the parties asked that 'Final Decree be entered by the Chancellor upon the record as now made in the light of this Stipulation,' we find it unnecessary to remand for consideration of that question. See Hotel Employees Local No. 255 v. Leedom, 358 U.S. 99, 79 S.Ct. 150. Other questions raised by respondents are either without merit or irrelevant to this disposition of the cases. 4 Reversed. * Sax Enterprises, Inc., v. Hotel Employees Union, Fla., 80 So.2d 602; Boca Raton Club, Inc., v. Hotel Employees Union, Fla., 83 So.2d 11; and Fontainebleau Hotel Corp. v. Hotel Employees Union, Fla., 92 So.2d 415.

assistant: 10
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Subtenant acknowledges that, under the Master Lease, both Master Landlord and Sublandlord have certain termination and recapture rights. Nothing herein shall prohibit Master Landlord or Sublandlord from exercising any such rights, and neither Master Landlord nor Sublandlord shall have any liability to Subtenant as a result thereof. Subject to Sublandlord's obligations pursuant to Paragraph 9 above, in the event Master Landlord or Sublandlord exercise any such termination or recapture rights, this Sublease shall terminate without any liability to Master Landlord or Sublandlord.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT HAS BEEN EXECUTED OR COMPLETED AND/OR IS TO BE PERFORMED IN NEW YORK, AND IT AND ALL TRANSACTIONS HEREUNDER OR PURSUANT HERETO SHALL BE GOVERNED AS TO INTERPRETATION, VALIDITY, EFFECT, RIGHTS, DUTIES AND REMEDIES OF THE PARTIES THEREUNDER AND IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS BY THE LAWS OF NEW YORK, WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO THE CONFLICTS OF LAWS PRINCIPLES THEREOF, BUT INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-1401 AND 5-1402 OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of 1992, and legal review was the “main work” on the film through July of that year. This evidence, even when viewed in the light most favorable to appellee, does not raise a fact issue as to the existence of actual malice. The evidence, which we have reviewed in its entirety, shows only that the legal department took a protracted amount of time to review Women on Trial. It does not show that the legal review was based on fears that statements in the documentary were untrue and were known to be untrue by those involved in the production. Appellee’s suspicions about the reasons appellant’s legal department chose to “continuously” review the film and decided to indemnify Joseph Feu-ry Productions, Inc. is not sufficient to raise a material issue of fact. See Schauer, 856 S.W.2d at 450 (<HOLDING>) (citing International & G.N.R. Co. v. Options: A. holding that mere surmise or suspicion of malice does not carry the probative force necessary to form the basis of a legal inference of malice B. holding that a nonmovant cannot defeat a motion for summary judgment merely on the basis of conjecture or surmise C. holding that understandable misinterpretation of ambiguous facts does not show actual malice D. holding that a factual finding must be supported by more than mere surmise or suspicion E. holding a claimant must prove entitlement to benefits by the preponderance of the evidence which is not sustained by mere surmise or conjecture

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that mere surmise or suspicion of malice does not carry the probative force necessary to form the basis of a legal inference of malice
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: conclude that Defendants’ nonretaliatory reasons for selecting the other candidates conceal retaliation. To reiterate, the selection committee interviewed nearly twenty applicants and determined that there were better people for the position. Plaintiff invites the Court to infer that the panel truly selected Plaintiff for the position because Defendants failed to produce the selection packet. To so infer would be unreasonable because, inter alia, Carrio sat on the panel and testified that, although Plaintiff was a “decent presenter” and “performed well,” “there were others that ... performed better.” Id. at 23-24. No evidence suggests that these neutral reasons serve to suppress retaliatory animus. Accordingly, no reasonable juror could conclude that Def pp.2d 500, 515 (D.Md.2011) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, there is no evidence that Lt. Options: A. holding that a similar written reprimand provided to an architect of the capitol employee was not materially adverse because it merely criticized his job performance B. holding that allegations that employee was yelled at for complaining about his discriminatory treatment and criticized were not materially adverse actions C. holding that the actions were not actions of public and general applicability but were actions directed principally and primarily at plaintiffs D. holding that potentially indefinite suspension of employee from work without pay could constitute materially adverse employment action even where employer awards full backpay for the entire period and that reassignment of responsibilities could constitute materially adverse employment action even absent demotion E. holding that the plaintiffs letter to the human resources department complaining of unfair treatment in general and not specifically complaining about age discrimination did not constitute protected activity

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that allegations that employee was yelled at for complaining about his discriminatory treatment and criticized were not materially adverse actions
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: board’s determination that former lawyers for the board were not disqualified from representing a property owner regarding a piece of property before the board, when the lawyers had dealt with issues relating to that same property while they were working for the board. The facts and rationale of Brown II are quite different from the facts of the instant case. In Brown II, the zoning board did not oppose its former lawyers’ representation of the property owner about matters that the board considered to be unrelated to the lawyers’ former work for the board — whereas, in the instant ease, the BZA’s position is that Mr. Cassell is working on the same matter about which he advised and represented the BZA. In State ex rel. Keenan v. Hatcher, 210 W.Va. 307, 313, 557 S.E.2d 361, 365 (2001) (<HOLDING>), this Court identified a core principle that Options: A. holding that a prosecutor was disqualified from bringing a recidivist proceeding even though the prior offenses in which the prosecutor served as defense counsel were public matters B. holding that the district court abused its discretion in denying the defendants timely motion for the substitution of the participating prosecutor in order to permit the defense to call the prosecutor as a witness C. holding that the race of the prosecutor is irrelevant D. holding counsel must examine public information like prior conviction records prosecutor is likely to use E. holding parttime prosecutor barred from acting as defense counsel

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a prosecutor was disqualified from bringing a recidivist proceeding even though the prior offenses in which the prosecutor served as defense counsel were public matters
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: § 1983 claims are final. However, the instant case is not a § 1983 claim, it is a Title VII case, under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. Congress’s intent was for a claimant to have a trial de novo notwithstanding the administrative determinations. The Elliott Court held that: The legislative history of the 1972 amendments reinforces the plain meaning of the statute, and confirms that Congress intended to accord federal employees the same right to a trial de novo [following administrative proceedings’] as is enjoyed by private-sector employees, and employees of state governments and political subdivisions under the amended Civil Rights Act of 1964. Elliott, 478 U.S. at 795-796, 106 S.Ct. 3220. See also Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36, 44, 94 S.Ct. 1011, 39 L.Ed.2d 147 (1974) (<HOLDING>); Raniola v. Bratton, 243 F.3d 610, 623-624 Options: A. holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii B. holding that final responsibility for enforcement of title vii is vested with federal courts C. holding that there is no individual liability under title vii D. holding that relief granted under title vii is against the employer not individual employees whose actions constituted a violation of title vii emphasis in original E. holding that title vii provides the exclusive judicial remedy for claims of discrimination in federal employment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that final responsibility for enforcement of title vii is vested with federal courts
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: avoid prosecution on the Texas charge. When in August 2001, approximately one month before the scheduled forfeiture trial, the district court was apprised of Ms. Collazos’s indictment on the federal charge in Florida, its stay of the forfeiture trial was not, as Ms. Collazos suggests, a maneuver to ensure that she qualified for disentitlement. To the contrary, by waiting until October 2002, more than a year after Ms. Collazos learned of the Florida charges, before ordering disentitlement, the district court plainly afforded her every reasonable opportunity to submit to United States jurisdiction in the related criminal case and to avoid disentitlement pursuant to § 2466. See Europcar Italia, S.p.A. v. Maiellano Tours, Inc., 156 F.3d 810, 316-17 (2d Cir.1998) (and cases cited therein) (<HOLDING>). In sum, we conclude that the district court’s Options: A. holding that a clerks scheduling duties as part of a courts inherent power to control its docket is subject to absolute immunity B. recognizing that the court may take judicial notice of its own docket C. holding it is critical to the trial courts power of control over its own docket and its ability to serve effectively all litigants that it maintain control over progress of cases before it including requests for extensions of time D. recognizing the governments broad discretion to conduct criminal prosecutions including its power to select the charges to be brought in a particular case E. recognizing broad district court discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to control its docket

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing broad district court discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to control its docket
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Parties will use its reasonable best efforts to take all actions and to do all things necessary and advisable in order to consummate and make effective the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, including satisfaction, but not waiver, of the Closing conditions set forth in Section 9 below.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Control Agent shall have received duly executed copies of (i) this Amendment from the Borrower, each Guarantor and other Credit Party, the Control Agent and the other Lenders, (ii) the Consent and Affirmation by WCAS attached hereto, and (iii) a fully executed Amendment No. 1 to the Subordination Agreement between the Lenders and WCAS in form and substance acceptable to the Lenders in their sole discretion.

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: that it “undeniably involved an issue the BIA had not considered.” Id. at 1183. By contrast, in Fernandez-Ruiz, the BIA had considered whether the petitioner’s state conviction constituted a crime of domestic violence— it had simply conducted this inquiry under the categorical, rather than modified categorical, approach. Id. at 1134-35. We did not consider remanding the case for the government to supplement the record of the petitioner’s conviction because the government did not ask that we do so. Id. at 1135. This case, however, is ripe for remand. Our remand does not ask the BIA to consider whether evidence currently on the record is sufficient to demonstrate that Mrs. Kawashima’s conviction is an “aggravated felony.” Cf. Ruiz-Vidal v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 1072, 1080 (9th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). Instead, we remand to the BIA so that it may Options: A. holding that courts may consider a plea agreement and other documents contained in the record of conviction when applying the modified categorical approach B. holding that the categorical approach applies to 924c C. holding that we need not remand to the bia so that it may apply the categorical approach D. holding that the categorical approach applies to the identical definition of crime of violence in 18 usc 16 E. recognizing that a court may not apply the modified categorical approach if the statute proscribes only conduct that involves moral turpitude internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that we need not remand to the bia so that it may apply the categorical approach