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: is a cause of the event if the event would not have occurred but for that conduct.' It is sometimes stated as 'sine qua non ’ causation, i.e., 'without which not....’” Boeing Co. v. Cascade Corp., 207 F.3d 1177, 1183 (9th Cir.2000). "In determining whether a particular factor was a but-for cause of a given event, we begin by assuming that that factor was present at the time of the event, and then ask whether, even if that factor had been absent, the event nevertheless would have transpired in the same way." Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228, 240, 109 S.Ct. 1775, 104 L.Ed.2d 268 (1989) (plurality opinion), superseded in part by statute on other grounds as recognized in Raytheon Co. v. Hernandez, 540 U.S. 44, 124 S.Ct. 513, 157 L.Ed.2d 357 (2003). 7 . A n 52 (8th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>); New Directions Treatment Servs. v. City of Options: A. holding unambiguous release executed by literate intelligent party could not be nullified absent vice of consent B. holding that when the contract language is unambiguous we take these words to represent the parties intent and the plain meaning of this language governs its interpretation C. holding that the interpretation of an unambiguous contract is a question of law D. holding that the language by reason of having executed any bond is unambiguous and sets forth a simple causeinfact or butfor causation test E. recognizing language that an exclusion applies regardless of any other cause or event that contributes concurrently or in any sequence to the loss constitutes an adequate anticoncurrent causation provision and evidences the parties intent to contract around the concurrent causation doctrine

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the language by reason of having executed any bond is unambiguous and sets forth a simple causeinfact or butfor causation test
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in good faith. (PL’s Am. Answer, EOF No. 88 at 10.) The government cites authorities for the proposition that the defense may never be asserted against the government or private parties in suits to vindicate the public interest. (Def.’s Mot. to Compel, ECF No. 89 at 6 (citing McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publ’g Co., 513 U.S. 352, 360, 115 S.Ct. 879, 130 L.Ed.2d 852 (1995) (citing Perma Life Mufflers, Inc. v. International Parts Corp., 392 U.S. 134, 138, 88 S.Ct. 1981, 20 L.Ed.2d 982 (1968) (exempting private parties who vindicate the public interest from defense))); SEC v. Gulf & Western Indus., Inc., 502 F.Supp. 343, 348 (D.D.C.1980) (citing United States v. Second Nat’l Bank, 502 F.2d 535, 548 (5th Cir.1974)); United States v. W. Processing Co., 734 F.Supp. 930 (W.D.Wash.1990) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Southern Motor Carriers Rate Options: A. holding unclean hands defense unavailable against the government B. holding qualified immunity defense unavailable to the united states in ftca action C. holding that the government did not waive an affirmative defense not pleaded in the answer because it raised the defense at a pragmatically sufficient time by listing the defense in the joint pretrial order D. holding that it would not accept defendant babbitts argument regarding unreasonable delay due to budgetary constraints in terms of breach of statutory duty but that instead the agency defense of unavailable resources must be reserved as a defense against contempt if an injunction issues E. holding qualified immunity unavailable because there was no government interest to balance

assistant: The best answer is A. holding unclean hands defense unavailable against the government
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: would be future restrictions on his ability to reenter the United States, nor informed of any right to retain counsel. His counsel stated that the expedited removal order was invalid and improper inasmuch as Shunaula had possessed a valid visa at the time of his 1997 entry. The IJ concluded that he was not in a position to entertain a collateral attack on the 1997 expedited removal order. The IJ ruled that Shunaula was (1) inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(C)(i)(II), which renders inadmissible any alien who enters the United States illegally after having been ordered removed pursuant to, inter alia, an order of expedited removal; and therefore (2) ineligible for adjustment of status. See IJ Decision at 5-6, Admin. R. 65-66 (citing Delgado v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 65 (2d Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>)). On appeal to the BIA, Shunaula pressed the Options: A. holding that a district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the apa to review the denial of an aliens application for adjustment of status where the alien is in removal proceedings B. holding that aliens inadmissible under 1182a 9c i i are ineligible for adjustment of status under 1255f C. holding that refugees who have already acquired lpr status are ineligible for a 209c waiver in light of the language in that adjustment of status can be granted to an alien who has not acquired permanent resident status D. holding ineligible for adjustment of status alien who was inadmissible due to reentry after prior removal E. recognizing that an alien is ineligible for relief under 212c if he was not actually admissible at the time he received an adjustment of status

assistant: The best answer is D. holding ineligible for adjustment of status alien who was inadmissible due to reentry after prior removal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall use the net proceeds from the sale of the Notes hereunder for working capital purposes, and shall not be used for (a) the redemption of any Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents or (b) the settlement of any outstanding litigation.

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: Tenant and Subtenant each hereby warrants, represents, and covenants that: (a) Subtenant's use of the Sublease Premises is not prohibited under any applicable terms of the Prime Lease (including, without limitation, Article 5 thereof): and (b) no broker, realtor, agent or finder was involved in any way in connection with the Sublease except for __________________ .

assistant: Representations
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: custodial examinations, prior testimony that the defendant was unable to cross-examine, or similar pretrial statements that declarants would reasonably expect to be used prosecutorially; (2) extrajudicial statements contained in formalized testimonial materials, such as affidavits, depositions, prior testimony, or confessions; (3) statements that were made under cireumstances which would lead an objective witness reasonably to believe that the statement would be available for use at a later trial. Pendergrass v. State, 913 N.E.2d 703, 706 (Ind.2009) (quoting Crawford, 541 U.S. at 51-52, 124 S.Ct. 1354), cert. denied 130 S.Ct. 3409, 177 L.Ed.2d 3283, 2010 WL 197668 (June 14, 2010); see also Melen-des-Diaz v. Massachusetts, - U.S. --, , 129 S.Ct. 2527, 2539-40, 174 L.Ed.2d 314 (2009) (<HOLDING>). The booking information printout introduced Options: A. holding the confrontation clause applies only to testimonial statements B. holding that testimonial statements are subject to the requirements of the confrontation clause even if they are otherwise admissible under the hearsay exception for excited utterances C. holding inculpatory forensic lab certificates testimonial but noting that blusiness and public records are generally admissible absent confrontation becausehaving been created for the administration of an entitys affairs and not for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at trialthey are not testimonial D. holding forensic laboratory experts statement that substance was cocaine is testimonial for sixth amendment confrontation clause purposes E. holding that the confrontation clause applies only to testimonial hearsay

assistant: The best answer is C. holding inculpatory forensic lab certificates testimonial but noting that blusiness and public records are generally admissible absent confrontation becausehaving been created for the administration of an entitys affairs and not for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at trialthey are not testimonial
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 shall use the proceeds of the Loan to (a) acquire the Property or repay and discharge any existing loans relating to the Property, (b) pay all past due basic carrying costs, if any, with respect to the Property, (c) make deposits into the Reserve Funds on the Closing Date in the amounts provided herein, (d) pay costs and expenses incurred in connection with the closing of the Loan, as approved by Lender, and (e) fund any working capital requirements of the Property.

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: There are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or, to the best knowledge Knowledge of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, threatened (i) with respect to any Document or (ii) that could reasonably be expected, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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: of marijuana), and 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(A)© (money laundering). Petitioner contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction of up to one year for having completed a residential drug abuse program. He complains that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) is illegally denying him eligibility for this sentence credit based on its erroneous determination that his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is not a “nonviolent offense,” as required for eligibility under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(e)(2)(B). 1. STANDARD OF REVIEW Significant deference is due regulations promulgated in accordance with the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). See Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843-44, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984) (<HOLDING>). However, Congress explicitly excluded 18 Options: A. holding the court will not disturb the decision of the abcmr unless it was arbitrary capricious contrary to law or unsupported by substantial evidence B. holding that regulations promulgated pursuant to an express congressional grant of rulemaking authority will be upheld unless they are arbitrary capricious or manifestly contrary to the statute C. holding that policies whether governmental or private are not contrary to the disparateimpact requirement unless they are artificial arbitrary and unnecessary barriers D. holding that legislative regulations are given controlling weight unless they are arbitrary capricious or manifestly contrary to the statute E. holding that under chevron step two courts may not disturb an agency rule unless it is arbitrary or capricious in substance or manifestly contrary to the statute internal quotations omitted

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that legislative regulations are given controlling weight unless they are arbitrary capricious or manifestly contrary to the statute
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 TERMS AND PROVISIONS HEREOF SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF [REDACTED], EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED HEREIN.

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: This Agreement constitutes the sole and entire agreement among the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and no modification of this Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and signed by all parties hereto. No prior agreement or understanding pertaining to the subject matter hereof (including, without limitation, any letter of intent executed prior to this Agreement) shall be valid or of any force or effect from and after the date hereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 1134 (4th Cir.1993). Prousalis’ complaint alleged malicious abuse of process, malicious prosecution, conspiracy under the Virginia Business Conspiracy Statute, and civil conspiracy. Virginia law applies to each claim. See Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938). In his complaint, Prousalis alleged the Appellees filed two frivolous complaints against him alleging, inter aha, legal malpractice in a malicious effort to “humble and embarrass” him. These actions, Prousalis further claimed, resulted in damage to his “reputation, trade, business and profession.” We find Prousalis failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under any of the legal theories advanced in his complaint. See Ross v. Peck Iron & Metal, Co., 264 F.2d 262, 268 (4th Cir.1959) (<HOLDING>); Ely v. Whitlock, 238 Va. 670, 385 S.E.2d 893 Options: A. holding that judicial privilege does not apply to the appellants claims for wrongful use of civil proceedings and abuse of process B. holding that continued possession and unrestricted use constitutes regular use C. holding regular use of process cannot constitute abuse of process D. holding that to establish a claim for abuse of process a claimant must demonstrate an act in the use of the process not proper in the regular prosecution of the proceedings E. holding substantial evidence supported jury finding of abuse of process

assistant: The best answer is C. holding regular use of process cannot constitute abuse of process
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: Expenses of the Company or of any Member occasioned by transfers of Company Interests held by Members (including, but not limited to such Member’s proportionate share of any transfer or recordation taxes for which the Company may become liable) shall be reimbursed to the Company or Member, as the case may be, by the transferring Member (or upon the failure thereof, by the transferee).

assistant: Expenses
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: Brian Zahn appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment for defendant following a bench tri 1080, 1093 (9th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); Coons v. Sec’y of U.S. Dep’t of Treasury, 383 Options: A. holding title vii analysis applies in ada case B. holding consortium claim unavailable under title vii and ada C. holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii D. recognizing that the ada is interpreted in a manner similar to title vii E. recognizing the same analysis applies under the wlad and title vii

assistant: The best answer is A. holding title vii analysis applies in ada case
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: Department of Transportation v. Renwick, 543 Pa. 122, 669 A.2d 934 (1996), our Supreme Court revisited this subject of conflict when they considered the appeal from this court’s Renwick opinion. Justice Zappala, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, framed the question presented in Renwick as whether “a licensee’s refusal to sign a consent form after she orally agreed to submit to a blood test constitutes a refusal pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. § 1547.” The Court held “that the failure to sign a consent form does not per se constitute a refusal to submit to chemical testing.” 669 A.2d at 935. In reaching this conclusion, the Court reviewed numerous Commonwealth Court cases in this area, beginning with Maffei v. Department of Transportation, 53 Pa.Cmwlth. 182, 416 A.2d 1167 (1980) (<HOLDING>), and divided the cases into two categories: Options: A. holding that a license suspension under section 1547 may not be supported by a licensees refusal to satisfy a pretest procedure impermissibly linked to the testing B. holding that a refusal to sign an implied consent form is not a refusal to submit to a breathalyzer test for purposes of section 1547 C. holding refusal to sign hospital waiver of liability form is not a refusal under section 1547 D. holding that a district court did not clearly err in crediting agents testimony that a defendant had orally consented despite his refusal to sign consent form E. holding gratuitous transfer of real property to hospital did not trigger right of first refusal

assistant: The best answer is C. holding refusal to sign hospital waiver of liability form is not a refusal under section 1547
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: J., dissents with separate written opinion joined by THOMAS, P.J., COLEMAN, and DIAZ, JJ. HINKEBEIN, J., dissenting: ¶ 13. Since neither of the parties have ever disputed the property settlement agreement’s validity, the only issue in this case is whether Mr. Prine abandoned the personal .property settlement agreements, our supreme court has held that “[w]hen the parties have reached agreement and the chancery court has approved it, we ought to enforce it and take as dim a view of efforts to modify it as we ordinarily do when persons seek relief from their improvident contracts.” Bell v. Bell 572 So.2d 841, 844 (Miss.1990). Accordingly, it is reversible error for a chancellor to attempt to modify the terms of a valid property settlement agreement. See Mount, 624 So.2d at 1005 (<HOLDING>); Bowe v. Bowe, 557 So.2d 793, 795 (Miss.1990) Options: A. holding that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find that an oral agreement existed and that it was not modified B. holding that a settlement agreement is not a court order and therefore a violation of the settlement agreement would not subject a party to contempt C. holding that the plaintiffs lawsuit which was filed despite a general release in the parties settlement agreement constituted a material breach of the settlement agreement D. holding that chancellor committed manifest error when he modified property settlement agreement E. holding that it was error for the court to enter a modified agreement which materially altered the agreement reached by the parties

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that chancellor committed manifest error when he modified property settlement agreement
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 a proceeding.” Sawyer v. Smith, 497 U.S. 227, 242, 110 S.Ct. 2822, 111 L.Ed.2d 193 (1990) (internal quotations omitted)(emphasis original). Apprendi is not of this • magnitude because it is not clear that a jury would reach a substantially different conclusion than would a judge on drug quantity, and the elements of a possessory drug offense that are most difficult to prove, such as intent to distribute, have always needed to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. See e.g., Goode, 39 Fed. Appx. at 158; Sanders, 247 F.3d at 149. Supreme Court precedent suggests that Apprendi does not satisfy the watershed exception. First, in Saffle v. Parks, 494 U.S. 484, 495, 110 S.Ct. 1257, 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990), the Court cited Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S.Ct. 792, 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963) (<HOLDING>) as an example of the type of new Options: A. holding that a parents statutory right to counsel in termination proceedings guarantees the right to effective counsel B. holding no right to counsel for capital defendants in state habeas proceedings C. recognizing that a criminal defendants right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel D. holding that defendants have a right to counsel in criminal proceedings E. holding that a defendant does not have the right to be represented by counsel in postconviction proceedings which are civil proceedings

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that defendants have a right to counsel in criminal proceedings
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: petition if this Court eventually affirmed the grant of visitation rights to Vest, I find the quoted passage to be possible support for granting Vest visitation rights, rather than for denying them. 2 . My preference would be to remand to the children’s court for further findings on the issue of visitation. See State ex rel. Human Servs. Dep't v. Coleman, 104 N.M. 500, 505, 723 P.2d 971, 976 (Ct.App.1986). As already noted, the children’s court's inquiry into this issue was too limited in scope. Additionally, there has been a significant lapse of time since the children’s court’s determination. This appellate delay may have had a crucial effect on the issues before the children’s court. See generally State ex rel. Juvenile Dep’t v. Geist, 310 Or. 176, 796 P.2d 1193, 1200-01 (1990) (<HOLDING>). Because the paramount concern here is the Options: A. recognizing that the department is required to present clear and convincing evidence to support termination of a parents parental rights B. holding parental rights are constitutionally protected fundamental interest C. recognizing this substantial interest in context of termination of parental rights D. recognizing that protracted litigation regarding parental rights is detrimental to children E. holding that evidence did not support termination of parental rights to two children despite mothers prior conviction for killing her stepchild

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that protracted litigation regarding parental rights is detrimental to children
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 Borrower has full power, authority and legal right to enter into this Agreement and the Other Documents and to perform all its respective Obligations hereunder and thereunder. This Agreement, the Subordination Agreement and the Other Documents have been duly executed and delivered by each Borrower, and this Agreement, the Subordination Agreement and the Other Documents constitute the legal, valid and binding obligation of such Borrower enforceable in accordance with their terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by any applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, moratorium or similar laws affecting creditors’ rights generally. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and of the Other Documents (a) are within such Borrower’s limited liability company powers, have been duly authorized by all necessary company action, are not in contravention of law or the terms of such Borrower’s operating agreement, certificate of formation or other applicable documents relating to such Borrower’s formation or to the conduct of such Borrower’s business or of any material agreement or undertaking to which such Borrower is a party or by which such Borrower is bound, including the Subordinated Loan Documentation (b) will not conflict with or violate any law or regulation, or any judgment, order or decree of any Governmental Body, (c) will not require the Consent of any Governmental Body or any other Person, except those Consents set forth on Schedule 5.1 hereto, all of which will have been duly obtained, made or compiled prior to the Closing Date and which are in full force and effect and (d) will not conflict with, nor result in any breach in any of the provisions of or constitute a default under or result in the creation of any Lien except Permitted Encumbrances upon any asset of such Borrower under the provisions of any agreement, charter document, instrument, operating agreement or other instrument to which such Borrower is a party or by which it or its property is a party or by which it may be bound.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Each party hereto will receive by delivery or by facsimile or other electronic transmission a duplicate original of the Agreement executed by each party, and each party agrees that the delivery of the Agreement by facsimile or other electronic transmission will be deemed to be an original of the Agreement so transmitted.

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: (4th Cir.1995); EEOC v. Hansa Products, Inc., 844 F.2d 191, 192 n. 1 (4th Cir.1988). The Virginia Council on Human Rights is charged with administering the provisions of the Virginia Human Rights Act (“VHRA”), Va.Code § 2.1-714 et seq. Virginia is a “deferral state” and the Virginia Council on Human Rights is a “deferral agency.” Tinsley v. First Union Nat’l Bank, 155 F.3d 435 (4th Cir.1998); Capps v. City of Lynchburg, 67 F.Supp.2d 589, 590 (W.D.Va.1999). Although Virginia law does not create a specific cause of action for disability discrimination, the VHRA broadly prohibits discriminatory employment practices and allows the VCHR to investigate claims of discrimination, bringing it within the parameters of § 2000e-5(c). Tinsley, 155 F.3d at 440. Thus, for this C d 501 (W.D.Va.1999) (<HOLDING>). This case presents a slightly-different Options: A. holding that the pleading standard set forth in twombly applies to all civil actions B. holding that pleading was insufficient where the plaintiff failed to among other things set forth the dates of any fraudulent statements C. holding that plaintiff had no jurisdiction in federal court because she failed to allege a state law claim but declining to discuss pleading requirement to set forth charge of discrimination D. holding that because the plaintiff did not allege facts indicating what specific medical information she provided to dps she failed to state a constitutional claim E. holding that a plaintiff had not established a prima facie case of race discrimination because she failed to show valid comparators and presented no other circumstantial evidence of discrimination

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plaintiff had no jurisdiction in federal court because she failed to allege a state law claim but declining to discuss pleading requirement to set forth charge of discrimination
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: effect. {18} Though the presumption against the retrospective application of a statute may seem straightforward, “confusion often arises as to what retroactivity means in particular contexts.” Morales, 2010-NMSC-026, ¶ 9 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Generally, “[a] statute ... is considered retroactive if it impairs vested rights ... or requires new obligations, imposes new duties, or affixes new disabilities to past transactions.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). However, a statute does not operate retroactively just because it is applied to facts and conditions existing on its effective date, even though the condition results from events that occurred prior to its enactment. Id.', see Howell v. Heim, 118 N.M. 500, 506, 882 P.2d 541, 547 (1994) (<HOLDING>); Hansman v. Bernalillo Cnty. Assessor, 95 N.M. Options: A. holding that pma process is not specific regulation because the requirements are not contained in formal regulation B. holding that dismissal was required where overall length of prosecution was 16 months state was responsible for 13 months of delay and six months of that delay was due to simple neglect C. holding that a new regulation limiting the number of consecutive months an individual could receive general disability benefits did not have retroactive effect even when it took into account months prior to the promulgation of the regulation D. holding that where a regulation could not fairly be read to have spoken at all on an issue an agencys proposed interpretation of the regulation as it pertained to that issue was not a reasonable interpretation of the regulation E. holding that the challenge to a university regulation was moot because the regulation had been substantially amended

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a new regulation limiting the number of consecutive months an individual could receive general disability benefits did not have retroactive effect even when it took into account months prior to the promulgation of the regulation
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 the property, as a result of the Cappses’ default on the installment land contract, Cedar Lane’s status changed from that of a bona fide purchaser to that of an innocent donee. In my view, Cedar Lane retained its status as a bona fide purchaser for value and, in regaining possession of the property and keeping the down payment, it was simply exercising the contractual rights for which it had bargained in an arms-length transaction. It was not unjustly enriched. While Cedar Lane did receive benefits, including some improvements to the property added by the Cappses, the benefits were not accepted or received under circumstances that would make it inequitable for Cedar Lane to retain them. See Ninth District Production Credit Ass’n v. Ed Duggan, Inc., 821 P.2d 788 (Colo.1991) (<HOLDING>). Finally, the majority concluded that American Options: A. holding a secured creditor has standing to appeal a ruling that impacted its financial interest in collateral B. recognizing that a secured creditor is not unjustly enriched by receiving collateral that has increased in value without expense to the second creditor C. recognizing that when a creditor does not receive adequate notice the creditor is not bound by the confirmation order D. holding that where a security agreement contained collateral other than collateral for which creditor advanced funds to debtor since it secured antecedent debts as well as new debt and the agreement provided that the security interest secured payment and performance of the debtors present and future debts to the creditor the creditor did not have a pmsi and the debtors could avoid the creditors lien on collateral claimed as exempt E. holding that property seized by a creditor prior to debtors bankruptcy was property of the estate even though creditor the irs held a secured interest a tax lien in the property

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that a secured creditor is not unjustly enriched by receiving collateral that has increased in value without expense to the second creditor
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a further purpose or different character, altering the first [work] with new expression, meaning or message.” Id. “[T]he more transformative the new work, the less will be the significance of other factors, like commercialism, that may weigh against a finding of fair use.” Id. (quoting Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579, 114 S.Ct. 1164). See also, Pac. & S. Co., Inc. v. Duncan, 744 F.2d 1490, 1496 (11th Cir.1984)(noting that the distinction between creative and non-creative uses can be helpful in calibrating the balance in the fair use analysis). In some cases, the transformative nature of a work overshadows and outweighs its commercial purpose. This is particularly true in the realm of parody, as “a parody’s aim is, by nature, to transform an earlier work.” Suntrust Bank, 268 F.3d at 1269. (<HOLDING>). See also, Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579, 114 Options: A. holding that the statutory definition of the term sell conspicuously excludes any requirement that the transfer be commercial in nature or conducted for a particular type of benefit or underlying purpose B. holding that the fact that the fire was communicated to other property may reasonably be inferred from common knowledge of the operation of the established laws of nature in the familiar forms of combustion and the effects of wind on fire C. holding a defense of alcoholism was outweighed by the seriousness of the offense and the appellants prior disciplinary record D. holding that the appropriate sanction was to require the defendant to disclose the nature of the agreement with the witness E. holding that the transformative nature of the wind done gone a parody of gone with the wind outweighed its commercial purpose

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the transformative nature of the wind done gone a parody of gone with the wind outweighed its commercial purpose
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 Holder, in addition to being entitled to exercise all rights granted by law, including recovery of damages, will be entitled to specific performance of its rights under this Class B Warrant. The Company agrees that monetary damages would not be adequate compensation for any loss incurred by reason of a breach by it of the provisions of this Class B Warrant and hereby agrees to waive and not to assert the defense in any action for specific performance 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: Borrower has obtained or has caused Mortgage Borrower to cause CPLV Tenant to obtain and Borrower has delivered to Administrative Agent certified copies of the Policies reflecting the insurance coverages, amounts and other requirements set forth in this Agreement. No claims have been made or are currently pending, outstanding or otherwise remain unsatisfied under any such Policy that would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, and neither Borrower nor Mortgage Borrower, nor, to Borrower’s Knowledge, any other Person, has done, by act or omission, anything which would impair the coverage of any such Policy.

assistant: Insurances
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 DOL and Aftermarket, including at least a letter, a fax, a phone call, and another communication involving payroll expenses. (See Def.’s Br. Supp.Mot.Summ.J.Exs. 7, 8; Pl.’s Resp. Br.Ex. C.) Mion argues that the DOL “clearly did not resolve Plaintiffs claim in accordance with the damage provisions of § [2] 617(a)(1)(A),” because the $310.18 is well below what “Plaintiff intends to prove at trial sed the settlement of Mion’s claim within the meaning of the FLSA. The Court must next determine whether Mion agreed to accept the DOL-supervised back wage payment of $310.18. In Walton, the court held that the mere cashing of a check issued under a DOL-supervised settlement did not release the employees’ claims where the DOL did not send out the applicable release forms. 786 F.2d at 307 (<HOLDING>). However, Walton noted that the DOL may Options: A. holding that the finding that entities constitute a single enterprise under 29 usc 203r is separate and distinct from whether an entity is an employer under 29 usc 203d B. holding that the authorization under 29 usc 1132a3 extends to a suit against a nonfiduciary party in interest to a transaction barred by 29 usc 1106a C. holding under flsa 29 usc 216c D. holding that the defendant is in the best position to prove and should bear the burden of establishing its entitlement to an exemption under 29 usc 1108 from 29 usc 1106b erisas prohibited transactions provision E. holding under flsa

assistant: The best answer is C. holding under flsa 29 usc 216c
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: plead adequately the basis for medical monitoring. Whether a cause of action or a part of damages requested, medical monitoring requires that the plaintiff have a present injury and a reasonable fear that the present injury could lead to the future occurrence of disease. Burton, 884 F.Supp. at 1523. Those two elements are not present with respect to this plaintiff. For these reasons, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs request for equitable relief, to the extent that it affects individuals other than Plaintiff, is not permissible under the rule of standing. Furthermore, any portions contained in this count relating solely to the Plaintiff are merely forms of damages to be requested in the prayer for relief. E.g., Burton v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 884 F.Supp. 1515, 1523 (D.Kan.1995) (<HOLDING>). Count IX, therefore, is dismissed. I. Motion Options: A. holding that government placement of groundwater monitoring wells was a taking B. holding that jury not required to award noneconomic damages merely because it has awarded economic damages C. recognizing that even when a prisoner files suit under section 1983 alleging medical malpractice against prison medical officials medical malpractice does not become a constitutional violation merely because the victim is a prisoner D. holding medical monitoring claim was merely component of damages E. holding that plaintiffs claim that medical providers did not comply with baker act was not subject to medical malpractice statutes ajlthough a medical diagnosis is necessary in order to involuntarily commit a patient the process of complying with the statute does not require medical skill or judgment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding medical monitoring claim was merely component of damages
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by [the motorist].” Freitas II, 108 Hawai'i at 44, 116 P.3d at 686 (citing Desmond, 91 Hawai'i at 219, 982 P.2d at 353) (brackets in original). In Desmond, the ICA noted that “it is advisable that, at the commencement of the administrative hearing, the Hearing Officer inform the parties what procedure he or she will follow.” 91 Hawai'i at 219, 982 P.2d at 353 (emphasis added). In rejecting Freitas’s argument, this court observed that “procedural due process requires that a person have an ‘opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.’ ” 108 Hawai'i at 44, 116 P.3d at 686 (quoting Farmer v. Admin. Dir. of the Courts, 94 Hawai'i 232, 238, 11 P.3d 457, 463 (2000)); cf. Padilla-Agustin v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 21 F.3d 970, 974 (9th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Since the hearing officer had advised Freitas Options: A. holding that due process requires not only notice but sufficient information to allow petitioner to prepare and present objection to the agencys preliminary action or decision B. holding that notice to the attorney of record constitutes notice to the petitioner C. holding that constitutional due process in civil contempt proceedings requires notice and a hearing but not the right to counsel D. holding that due process requires a hearing appropriate to the nature of the case E. holding that due process requires that notice be reasonably calculated under all circumstances to provide parties with notice of the pending action

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that due process requires not only notice but sufficient information to allow petitioner to prepare and present objection to the agencys preliminary action or decision
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No report, financial statement, certificate or other written information furnished by or on behalf of any Loan Party to any Agent or any Lender in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby and the negotiation of this Agreement or delivered hereunder or any other Loan Document (as modified or supplemented by other information so furnished) when taken as a whole contains any material misstatement of fact or omits to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not materially misleading; provided that, with respect to projected financial information and pro forma financial information, the Borrower represents only that such information was prepared in good faith based upon assumptions believed by the Borrower to be reasonable at the time of preparation; it being understood that such projections may vary from actual results and that such variances may be material.

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: The validity, construction and effect of the Plan and the Certificate, and any rules and regulations relating to the Plan and the Certificate, shall be determined in accordance with the internal laws, and not the law of conflicts, of the State of Delaware.

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: Gillman, supra; Liparoto Constr., supra. SSW Holding argues that the arbitration clauses violate public policy because they were part of a conspiracy to commit civil and criminal fraud. Additionally, SSW Holding contends that it “had absolutely no input as to the language of the arbitration provisions,” that BDO designed in a fraudulent manner to conceal its wrongful conduct, and that BDO never discussed the provisions with it. Further, SSW Holding asserts that BDO presented the DDS as a package deal and that SSW Holding had to enter into the Consulting Italia, S.p.A., 117 F.3d 655, 667 (2d Cir.1997) (case properly sent to arbitration when there was no fraud or misrepresentation directly relating to arbitration clause); Kowalewski v. Samandarow, 590 F.Supp.2d 477, 487 (S.D.N.Y.2008) (<HOLDING>). Because the circuit court found that the Options: A. holding that because respondents challenged a contract broadly without challenging the arbitration clause specifically challenge must be considered by an arbitrator B. holding that whether in federal or state court a challenge to the validity of the contract as a whole and not specifically to the arbitration clause within it must go to the arbitrator and not the court C. holding that courts should address a procedural unconscionability defense to the enforcement of an arbitration provision D. holding a challenge of unconscionability to the whole contract as opposed to the arbitration provision specifically is an arbitrable matter not properly considered by the court E. holding defenses concerning the contract as a whole must be referred to ah arbitrator while defenses to the arbitration provision itself are considered by the court

assistant: The best answer is D. holding a challenge of unconscionability to the whole contract as opposed to the arbitration provision specifically is an arbitrable matter not properly considered by the court
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 Issuers, the Guarantors and each of the Initial Purchasers hereby irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any and all right to trial by jury in any legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials