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: up a story similar to hers about touching, [A.H.] being touched by the Defendant.” This is the first and only time in the record any suggestion appears about the victim allegedly admitting to lying about her claims against Swint, and there was no follow up to clarify how this additional component to A.H.’s claimed testimony would somehow have been included in the scope of the court’s prior ruling in limine. On appeal to the Court of Appeals, Swint asserted the district court’s error encompassed the evidence that the victim both admitted falsifying her claims about Swint and asked A.H. to malee up a similar story. And complicating the matter further, Swint also altered the legal basis for the claimed error by relying on State v. Barber, 13 Kan. App. 2d 224, 227, 766 P.2d 1288 (1989) (<HOLDING>). The panel unanimously held that Swint failed Options: A. holding that in reviewing confrontation clause challenge appellate courts must first determine whether the confrontation clause is implicated B. holding that any confrontation right is found in the fourteenth amendments due process clause not the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment C. holding victim in sex crime case may be crossexamined about prior false accusations based on constitutional confrontation clause rights despite ksa 60422d restrictions D. holding errors based on the constitutional rights to confrontation and due process may be waived by failure to object at trial E. holding that hearsay argument for admission of evidence did not preserve confrontation clause challenge on appeal argument could have referred either to rules of evidence or confrontation clause but failed to identify confrontation clause as basis and thus did not put trial court on notice of issue

assistant: The best answer is C. holding victim in sex crime case may be crossexamined about prior false accusations based on constitutional confrontation clause rights despite ksa 60422d restrictions
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: Use the proceeds of the Credit Extensions for (i) working capital, (ii) any Permitted Acquisition, (iii) Capital Expenditures, (iv) to refinance certain existing Indebtedness on the Closing Date and (v) for other general corporate purposes and, in each case, in a manner not in contravention of any Loan Document.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: claim because the constitutional mandate is “self-executing.” See United States v. Clarke, 445 U.S. 253, 257, 100 S.Ct. 1127, 63 L.Ed.2d 373 (1980); Hendler v. United States, 952 F.2d 1364, 1371 (Fed.Cir.1991). Therefore, ask the plaintiffs, if Congress lacks the constitutional power to take private property without paying for it, how can it suddenly get the power after six years or any other designated period of elapsed time? The correct answer, we are told, must be that an eminent-domain taking cannot be foreclosed except by a judicial proceeding on the merits. There are several flaws in plaintiffs’ argument. First is that the premise on which it is based is wrong. Second is the absence of any law in support of the theory — plaintiffs do not favor us with any Cir.1996) (en banc) (<HOLDING>); Brown v. United States, 73 F.3d 1100 Options: A. holding that the plaintiff could not complain that it was unable to comply with the trial courts order to respect the defendants easement because of its lease with a third party where plaintiff had entered into lease knowing that property was subject to an easement B. holding in case where railroad grant was an easement and not a right of way that title vested in abutting landowner once railroad abandoned land C. holding that an easement agreement and an unrecorded easement plan created an easement D. holding that governments lease of former railroad easement to state for conversion to trail was a taking E. holding that plaintiff was entitled to compensation for governments taking of option to renew a lease

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that governments lease of former railroad easement to state for conversion to trail was a taking
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 plaintiff exhibited an antalgic gait, moved slowly, and used double-braced canes to assist him. These observations, without more, are not the type of information from a treating physician which will be provided great weight under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1513(b). Additionally, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(a)(2) defines medical opinions as assertions involving judgments about a patient’s “symptoms, diagnosis and prognosis.” Dr. Naum diagnosed plaintiff with spondylolisthesis, bulging at L5-S1, obesity, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiac dysrhythmias, and tobacco addiction. Dr. Naum recorded medical evidence of a slight spasm of the left paraspinal muscle on palpatation as well as decreased sensory to light touch i Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 482 F.3d 873, 877 (6th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). Since Dr. Naum made no medical judgments, the Options: A. holding that doctors opinions are not due much weight when based solely on reports made by a patient that the alj found to be incredible B. holding that alj properly rejected opinions based on invalid objective studies C. holding that nontreating physicians opinions are entitled to little weight when contradictory to treating physicians opinions and will not constitute substantial evidence standing alone D. holding that the alj erred by rejecting a treating physicians opinion in favor of opinions issued by nontreating doctors without providing a sufficient rationale E. holding that the alj did not err in discounting a claimants reports of pain where they were not supported by the medical record

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that doctors opinions are not due much weight when based solely on reports made by a patient that the alj found to be incredible
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: because it did not state the necessary facts to support a charge of criminal contempt, it is clear from the record of the hearing that the order to show cause was based on Tsokos’s purchase of the properties. Because the circuit court acted in excess of its jurisdiction, it is not necessary to address this deficiency. It is well-established that “[o]ne may not be held in contempt of court for violation of an order or a provision of a judgment which is not clear and definite so as to make the party aware of its command and direction.” And, “implied or inherent provisions of a final judgment cannot serve as a basis for an order of contempt.” Cooley v. Moody, 884 So.2d 143, 145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (internal citations omitted). See also Keitel v. Keitel, 716 So.2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>). Here, as Tsokos argues in the petition, the Options: A. holding that a district court judgment is not a final judgment appealable by the defendant unless it includes the final adjudication and the final sentence B. holding that an order authorizing a sale is a final judgment C. holding that even an order that establishes entitlement to a judgment is not final unless it actually enters or renders a judgment or includes specific language of finality necessary for a judgment to be considered final for purposes of an appeal D. holding that even though the former husbands visitation rights were implicitly obstructed by the former wifes relocation to new york the final judgment did not contain an express provision prohibiting relocation and implied or inherent provisions of a final judgment cannot serve as the basis for an order of contempt E. recognizing that a final judgment may provide for a particular standard upon which to modify a final judgment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that even though the former husbands visitation rights were implicitly obstructed by the former wifes relocation to new york the final judgment did not contain an express provision prohibiting relocation and implied or inherent provisions of a final judgment cannot serve as the basis for an order of contempt
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 and the Subsidiaries have, or have rights to use, all patents, patent applications, trademarks, trademark applications, service marks, trade names, trade secrets, inventions, copyrights, licenses and other intellectual property rights and similar rights as described in the SEC Reports as necessary or required for use in connection with their respective businesses and which the failure to so have could have a Material Adverse Effect (collectively, the “ Intellectual Property Rights ”). None of, and neither the Company nor any Subsidiary has received a notice (written or otherwise) that any of, the Intellectual Property Rights has expired, terminated or been abandoned, or is expected to expire or terminate or be abandoned, within two (2) years from the date of this Agreement. Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(p) , neither the Company nor any Subsidiary has received, since the date of the latest audited financial statements included within the SEC Reports, a written notice of a claim or otherwise has any Knowledge that the Intellectual Property Rights violate or infringe upon the rights of any Person, except as could not have or reasonably be expected to not have a Material Adverse Effect. To the Knowledge of the Company, all such Intellectual Property Rights are enforceable and there is no existing infringement by another Person of any of the Intellectual Property Rights. The Company and its Subsidiaries have taken reasonable security measures to protect the secrecy, confidentiality and value of all of their intellectual properties, except where failure to do so could not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 410 U.S. 420 93 S.Ct. 1407 35 L.Ed.2d 397 State of MICHIGAN, Plaintiff,v.State of OHIO. No. 30, Orig. Supreme Court of the United States February 22, 1973 1 Charles F. Keeley, Lansing, Mich., for plaintiff. 2 Charles S. Rawlings, Columbus, Ohio, for defendant. 3 On exceptions to special master's report. 4 Upon consideration of the Report filed Nov. 9, 1971, by Senior Judge Albert B. Maris, Special Master, exceptions filed thereto, and argument thereon, it is now ordered, adjudged, and decreed as follows: 5 1. The exceptions filed by the State of Michigan to the report and recommendations of the Special Master are overruled. 6 2. The boundary line between the States of Ohio and Michigan in Lake Erie follows a line drawn from the point in Maumee Bay where the north cape of that bay was located in 1836 on a course having a bearing North 45° East measured from a true meridian, passing over the center of the existing circular concrete seawall on Turtle Island and continuing on the same course through the lake to the point where it intersects the boundary line between the United States and Canada. 7 3. In 1836 the north cape of Maumee Bay was located at the point in that bay where a line drawn North 87°49'44" East from Post 71 on the land boundary line between the States of Ohio and Michigan intersects a line drawn South 45° West from the center of the existing circular concrete seawall on Turtle Island, both bearings being measured from a true meridian. 8 4. The costs of this suit, including the expenses of the special master, shall be borne by the State of Michigan.

assistant: 11
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: circumstances and required by the Due Process Clause to insure that the state-created right is not arbitrarily abrogated. See also In re Grosh, 415 N.W.2d 824 (S.D.1987). In that ease, the trial court’s modification of its initial oral sentence did not, on its face, increase the length of the sentence; however, this court held that the elimination of a work release provision over five months after sentencing was an “impermissible augmentation of sentence.” Id. at 828. Moreover, whether a sentence has been increased is not a matter of degree- — even “technical” increases warrant the vacating of written judgments which do not comply with the oral sentence. See, e.g., Cook v. United States, 171 F.2d 567, 569 (1st Cir.1948), cert. denied, 336 U.S. 926, 69 S.Ct. 647, 93 L.Ed. 1088 (1949) (<HOLDING>); Bartone, supra (enhancement of sentence by Options: A. holding that district court was not empowered to increase sentence by amending judgment to include a fine of 100 not even the suspension of payment of the fine changed the fact that the sentence was illegally increased B. recognizing that because a district courts determination of the appropriate fine involves factual issues including the defendants ability to pay the fine imposedthe district courts calculation of the fine is entitled to deference and can be reversed on appeal only for clear error C. holding that when a fine is paid there is a full satisfaction of one of the alternative penalties of the law and that the fine cannot be reimbursed in order to punish the defendant instead with imprisonment D. holding that where the language of the statute required the imposition of both confinement of which a portion could not be suspended and a fine the court had the ability to impose a fine and then suspend it E. holding that the failure to impose a mandatory fine requires that the matter be remanded for imposition of that fine

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that district court was not empowered to increase sentence by amending judgment to include a fine of 100 not even the suspension of payment of the fine changed the fact that the sentence was illegally increased
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 action at law or in equity (including arbitration) is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement or any Transaction Document, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and necessary disbursements in addition to any other relief to which such party may be entitled as determined by such court, equity or arbitration proceeding.

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: supra, at 144, 118 S.Ct. 512 (district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling inadmissible expert testimony based on “seemingly far-removed” animal studies where party failed to explain why the extrapolation was scientifically proper); Domingo v. T.K., 289 F.3d 600, 606-607 (9th Cir.2002) (finding that district court’s exclusion of expert’s causation testimony was not an abuse of discretion, in part because expert did not provide “analytical support” for his extrapolation of animal study results to humans and also because there was no evidence that the expert had applied a valid scientific method in developing his theory and there were unexplained gaps between the expert’s premises and his conclusion); Turpin v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 959 F.2d 1349, 1360 (6th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); Hall v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 947 F.Supp. Options: A. holding that defendant did not preserve state constitutional challenge to experts testimony at punishment hearing because defendant relied exclusively on federal cases in arguing for exclusion of experts testimony B. holding that experts testimony was inadmissible where the record failed to make clear why the effects of bendectin in rats and rabbits could be extrapolated to humans C. holding presumption of strategy not rebutted when record was silent as to why appellants trial counsel failed to object to the states persistent attempts to elicit inadmissible hearsay D. holding that even if an experts testimony arguably embraced the ultimate issue such testimony is permissible as long as the experts testimony assists rather than supplants the jurys judgment E. holding that testimony of two experts was unreliable because they relied on the testimony of two other experts which was also unreliable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that experts testimony was inadmissible where the record failed to make clear why the effects of bendectin in rats and rabbits could be extrapolated to humans
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you do not comply with these terms , and we do n't take action right away , this does n't mean that we are giving up any rights that we may have ( such as taking action in the future ) .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: itself is invalid. In any event, GenCorp’s concerns are largely unfounded. Parties can protect themselves from unwanted modifications— through contract. Notice and right to cancel provisions, as well as provisions preventing post-loss endorsements, for example, can protect excess insurers from assuming unwanted risks arising from endorsements. In fact, many of the policies at issue co Ga. App. 58, 85 S.E.2d 40, 49 (1954) (“A party cannot take advantage of his own default in the performance of a contract. The provision of the contract sought to be invoked by the defendant, insofar as it related to a breach by him, was for the benefit of the plaintiff, and he cannot be heard to plead his own breach as a defense....”); Cussler v. Firemen’s Ins. Co., 194 Minn. 325, 260 N.W. 353, 356 (1935) (<HOLDING>). As the Excess Insurers point out, any notice Options: A. holding that a defendant should not profit from his own outburst B. holding insurer did not have to cover insured for a breach of contract because it was not an accident C. holding a personal profit exclusion applicable to an insured corporation where the purpose of the exclusion was to exclude coverage when the insured received profits to which the insured was not legally entitled D. holding despite a reservation of rights that when the insurer provides a defense to its insured the insured has no right to interfere with the insurers control of the defense and a stipulated judgment between the insured and the injured claimant without the consent of the insurer is ineffective to impose liability upon the insurer E. holding that law will not permit insured to profit from his own breach of contract when insured disregarded his contractual obligation to cooperate with insurer

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that law will not permit insured to profit from his own breach of contract when insured disregarded his contractual obligation to cooperate with insurer
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 his opposition, despite the defendant spending considerable time disputing the accuracy of the plaintiff’s account in its moving papers. See Def.’s Mem. Supp at 17-18. "It is well understood in this Circuit that when a plaintiff files an opposition to a dispositive motion and addresses only certain arguments raised by the defendant, a court may treat those arguments that the plaintiff failed to address as conceded.” Hopkins v. Women’s Div., Gen. Bd. of Global Ministries, 284 F.Supp.2d 15, 25 (D.D.C.2003) (citing FDIC v. Bender, 127 F.3d 58, 67-68 (D.C.Cir.1997). Consequently, "a court may treat those arguments that the plaintiff failed to address as conceded.” Buggs v. Powell, 293 F.Supp.2d 135, 141 (D.D.C.2003); see also Shankar v. ACS-GSI, 258 Fed.Appx. 344, 345 (D.C.Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>) (citing LCvR 7(b)); Schneider v. Kissinger, Options: A. recognizing the general principle that a party who fails to address an issue has conceded the issue B. holding that where parties did not respond to an issue in summary judgment motion parties relinquished any claim on the issue and conceded that summary judgment should be entered against them C. holding that the court may properly treat as conceded any exemptions and categories that plaintiff does not address in its opposition D. holding that plaintiff conceded the merits of an issue when he did not respond in any way to defendants argument on that issue in his opposition before the district court E. holding that when an appellant fails to offer an argument on an issue that issue is abandoned

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that plaintiff conceded the merits of an issue when he did not respond in any way to defendants argument on that issue in his opposition before the district 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and to protect their money and narcotics. Officer Merrill testified that assault rifles, like the AK-47, are capable of firing rounds that can pierce body armor worn by police officers. Sufficiency of the Deadly Weapon Finding In his sole issue, appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s finding that he used or exhibited a deadly weapon during the commission of the offense. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict to determine whether any rational fact finder could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893, 912 (Tex.Crim.App.2010) (<HOLDING>). The jurors are the exclusive judges of the Options: A. holding that the standard of proof for dischargeability actions is the preponderance of the evidence standard B. holding that jackson standard is only standard to use when determining sufficiency of evidence C. holding that the standard of review for the sufficiency of the evidence is the same as the standard for denying a motion for a directed verdict D. holding the applicable standard of review in addressing the sufficiency of the evidence is manifest error E. holding that appellate court could not review the sufficiency of the evidence based on a particular legal standard because that standard was not submitted to the jury and no party objected to the charge on this ground or requested that the jury be charged using this standard

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that jackson standard is only standard to use when determining sufficiency of evidence
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: It is expressly understood and agreed that if any provision of this Agreement or the application of any such provision to any party or circumstance shall be determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to any party or circumstance other than those to which it is so determined to be invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each provision hereof shall be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law so long as the economic or legal substance of the matters contemplated by this Agreement is not affected in any manner materially adverse to any party. If the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction declares or finds that any term or provision hereof is invalid or unenforceable, the parties hereto agree that the court making the determination of invalidity or unenforceability shall have the power to reduce the scope, duration or portion of the term or provision, or to delete specific words or phrases, and to replace any invalid or unenforceable term or provision with a term or provision that is valid and enforceable and that comes closest to expressing the intention of the invalid or unenforceable term or provision, and this Agreement shall be enforceable as so modified. If such court of competent jurisdiction does not so replace an invalid or unenforceable term or provision, the parties hereto will negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible in an acceptable manner to the end that the matters contemplated hereby are fulfilled to the fullest extent possible.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: ed.2005); see also Disability Advocates, Inc. v. N.Y. Coalition for Quality Assisted Living, Inc., 675 F.3d 149, 160-62 (2d Cir.2012) (“[I]f jurisdiction is lacking at the commencement of a suit, it cannot be aided by the intervention of a plaintiff with a sufficient claim.” (alterations omitted)). At the time thq Bureau filed this enforcement action, it had no standing because it had no executive authority to vindicate the .public interest in federal court. While the President subsequently properly appointed an Officer of the United States to the position of Director, who could then constitutionally bring, an .enforcement action, that official could not retroactively cure the Bureau’s lack of standing. Cf. FEC v. NRA Political Victory Fund, 513 U.S. 88, 90, 98-99, 115 S.Ct. 537 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Ill Because the Bureau lacked standing when Options: A. holding that even where postconviction petitioner reserved the option to file an amended petition in his opening petition simply filing an amended petition is insufficient to request leave to file an amended petition a motion for leave to file an amended petition was required before it was necessary for the district judge to consider the amended petition B. holding that the 180day filing deadline is jurisdictional and mandatory C. holding that supreme court need not consider issue not raised in petition for certiorari D. holding that time limit for filing petition for review is mandatory and jurisdictional E. holding that the solicitor generals ratification of an unauthorized petition for certiorari could not cure a failure to meet the mandatory and jurisdictional 90day deadline to file a petition

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the solicitor generals ratification of an unauthorized petition for certiorari could not cure a failure to meet the mandatory and jurisdictional 90day deadline to file a petition
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 otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, each Party shall bear its own costs and expenses incurred in connection with the preparation, execution and performance of this Agreement, including all fees and expenses of agents, representatives, financial advisors, legal counsel, and accountants.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: in no event shall onavo be liable to anyone for any indirect , punitive , special , exemplary , incidental , consequential or other damages of any type or kind ( including loss of data , revenue , profits , use or other economic advantage ) arising out of , or in any way connected with the services , including but not limited to the use or inability to use the services , or for any content obtained from or through the services , any interruption , inaccuracy , error or omission , even if onavo has been previously advised of the possibility of such damages .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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: misconduct depend on factual determinations that were resolved against him, we will not substitute our judgment for that of the hearing committee on questions of fact. See Bristol, 2006-NMSC-041, ¶ 15, 140 N.M. 317, 142 P.3d 905 (“Because the hearing committee directly observes witness testimony, it is in the best position to weigh the evidence, resolve matters of credibility, and choose between the conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the evidence.”). Moreover, other than general assertions of prejudice, Respondent failed to specifically demonstrate how any of disciplinary counsel’s purported misconduct prejudiced Respondent’s defense or would result in a different outcome if rectified. See In re Castellano, 119 N.M. 140, 144, 889 P.2d 175, 179 (1995) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). For all of the foregoing reasons, we reject Options: A. holding lack of prejudice to the defendant is not good cause B. holding that an assertion of prejudice is not a showing of prejudice C. holding that a showing of prejudice is generally required in the context of an ineffectiveassistance claim D. holding that prejudice or injury is a necessary element of standing E. recognizing that the burden of persuasion for a showing of prejudice was on the defendant

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an assertion of prejudice is not a showing of prejudice
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: applies simply because a reviewing court concludes that, even in the absence of any formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement, the questioning took place in a “coercive environment.” Any interview of one suspected of a crime by a police officer will have coercive aspects to it, simply by virtue of the fact that the police officer is part of a law enforcement system which may ultimately cause the suspect to be charged with a crime. But police officers are not required to administer Miranda warnings to everyone whom they question. Nor is the requirement of warnings to be imposed simply because the questioning takes place in the station house, or because the questioned person is the one whom the police suspect. See also United States v. Jones, 21 F.3d 165, 170 (7th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). We hold that Defendant was not in custody Options: A. holding defendant was in custody under miranda while being detained under terry B. holding a defendant was not in custody for purposes of miranda after he consented to go to police headquarters C. holding miranda inapplicable because defendant not in custody D. holding that miranda was constitutionally based but declining to go further than miranda to establish a constitutional right E. holding on habeas review that defendant was not in custody for miranda purposes and reciting among other facts that defendant was transported to a police station for questioning in an unmarked police car which was not equipped with a shield inside the car

assistant: The best answer is B. holding a defendant was not in custody for purposes of miranda after he consented to go to police headquarters
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 agrees that, from time to time upon the written request of the Administrative Agent, the Company will execute and deliver such further documents and do such other acts and things as the Administrative Agent may reasonably request in order fully to effect the purposes of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: However, he cites no authority in support of this proposition. The record shows that the INS did all it was obligated to do under the relevant statutes and regulations. In May 1991 it personally served Lemus-Hernandez with an Order to Show Cause, so that he was aware that proceedings had been initiated against him. Then it sent a notice of the date and time of his hearing to the only address he had provided for the purpose of receiving such mail. Moreover, the postal service attempted to deliver the notice, as corroborated by postal markings stamped on the envelope. As the IJ pointed out, Lemus-Hernandez is responsible for his failure to receive notice because he did not comply with his obligations under the postal regulations. See Sharif v. Ashcroft, 280 F.3d 786, 788 (7th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). The address Lemus-Hernandez provided was Options: A. holding that where the address problem is the fault of the alien there is no constitutional problem with the agencys procedures and no basis for judicial relief B. holding that the acpa presents no retroactivity problem because cybersquatting is a continuing wrong C. holding that notice to an alien at the most recent address provided by the alien is legally sufficient D. holding that where a sorna defendants travel and failure to register occurred after sornas enactment and the effective date of the act there is no ex post facto problem emphasis added E. holding that where all substantive claims are properly dismissed there is no basis for injunctive relief

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that where the address problem is the fault of the alien there is no constitutional problem with the agencys procedures and no basis for judicial relief
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 circumstances, a reasonably prudent and cautious police officer would be justified in believing that appellant would not go to such trouble if the box contained only matches. Id. at 559. The majority contends Wadley and Arnold are distinguishable, and therefore inapplicable, because the searches or seizures in those cases occurred in public places rather than a private residence. Hoffman v. State, Nos. 04-08-00614-CR & 04-08-00615-CR, 293 S.W.Sd 633 (Tex.App.-San Antonio May 13, 2009). However, the location of the search or seizure is of no moment in the probable cause determination. Location is important only in determining whether exigent circumstances are required for entry into a particular place without a warrant. See Parker v. State, 206 S.W.3d 593, 597 (Tex.Crim.App.2006) (<HOLDING>); Janicek v. State, 634 S.W.2d 687 Options: A. holding that state must prove exigent circumstances justifying immediate need to enter residence without warrant B. holding that in the absence of exigent circumstances the police may not enter a private residence to make a routine arrest C. recognizing that exigent circumstances do not excuse the failure to secure a warrant when those circumstances are created by government officials who unreasonably and deliberately delay or avoid obtaining the warrant D. recognizing exigent circumstance exception to warrant requirement E. holding that absent consent or exigent circumstances law enforcement officers cannot legally search for the subject of an arrest warrant in the home of a third party without first obtaining a search warrant

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that state must prove exigent circumstances justifying immediate need to enter residence without warrant
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: on FCC discussions of permissive detariffing as permitting off-tariff contracts fails for the same reasons. Permissive detariffing permits carriers to file tariffs and thus be bound by the rate established therein or, alternatively, to negotiate separate agreements in lieu of, or rather than, filing tariffs. See Hyperion, Hyperion Telecomms., Inc., 12 FCC Rcd 8596, at ¶27 (1997); 47 U.S.C. § 211(a); see also Second Order on Reconsideration and Erratum, Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace, 14 FCC Rcd 6004 at ¶ 2 (1999) (stating that one of the reasons to move toward a complete or permissive detariffing regime is to avoid the "potentially harsh consequences of the filed-rate doctrine”). 25 . See Central Office Tel., 524 U.S. at 226, 118 S.Ct. 1956 (<HOLDING>); Fax Telecommunicaciones Inc. v. AT & T, 138 Options: A. recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract B. holding party in breach could not maintain suit for breach of contract C. holding that a filed tariff bars a breach of contract claim for privileges not included in the tariff D. holding that trial court erred by dismissing breach of contract claim because appellee made promises to perform specific acts in contract the breach of which would give rise to a breach of contract action E. holding that a fundamental breach bars assertion of any further rights under the contract by the party guilty of the breach

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a filed tariff bars a breach of contract claim for privileges not included in the tariff
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: breach. As the trial court recognized, the parties stipulated to a particular remedy in the event of a breach. The court, however, relied upon Nebraska Wheat Growers Ass’n v. Norquest, 113 Neb. 731, 204 N.W. 798 (1925), to conclude that this provision did not prevent the Reicherts from seeking injunctive relief. In that case, this court held that a liquidated damages clause was an inadequate remedy at law and did not preclude injunctive relief. However, the damages clause in Nebraska Wheat Growers Ass’n did not specify that it was the sole and exclusive remedy under the lease. A contract will not be construed to limit the remedial rights of the parties unless that intention is clearly expressed. See, Roberts Constr. Co. v. State, 172 Neb. 819, 824, 825, 111 N.W.2d 767, 770, 771 (1961) (<HOLDING>); 17A Am. Jur. 2d Contracts § 748 (1991). In Options: A. holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur B. holding that extension of time provision was not sole remedy for highway improvement contractor against state when contract in the absence of a nodamage clause or other provision to the contrary in the contract emphasis supplied C. holding that an attorney approval clause in a contract for the sale of real estate was a part of that contract and would have to be satisfied for the underlying contract to be enforceable D. holding that the court was bound to consider a contract provision that was plainly relevant to the central issue of contract interpretation raised on appeal despite the parties failure to cite or discuss the provision E. holding that a provision of the constitution is to be construed in the sense in which it was understood by the framers and the people at the time of its adoption but that if new products or circumstances that did not exist at the time the constitutional provision was enacted fall within the meaning of the provision the constitutional provision applies to them

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that extension of time provision was not sole remedy for highway improvement contractor against state when contract in the absence of a nodamage clause or other provision to the contrary in the contract emphasis supplied
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 consolidated and consolidating balance sheet, and related statements of income, cash flow and shareholders’ equity, of Borrowers and their Subsidiaries that have been and are hereafter delivered to Lender, are prepared in accordance with GAAP, and fairly present the financial positions and results of operations of Borrowers and such Subsidiaries at the dates and for the periods indicated. All projections delivered from time to time to Lender have been prepared in good faith, based on reasonable assumptions in light of the circumstances at such time. Since December 31, 2016, there has been no change in the condition, financial or otherwise, of Borrowers or any Subsidiary that could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. No financial statement delivered to Lender at any time contains any untrue statement of a material fact, nor fails to disclose any material fact necessary to make such statement not materially misleading. Each Borrower and Subsidiary is solvent.

assistant: Financial Statements
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 demands which either Party is required or desires to give to the other shall be given in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested with appropriate postage paid, by personal delivery or by private overnight courier service to the address set forth below for the respective Party, or by fax with an electronic confirmation of delivery or by e-mail (followed by notice by mail or overnight courier as provided above); provided that if any Party gives notice of a change of name or address, notices to that Party shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice. All notices and demands so given shall be effective upon receipt by the Party to whom notice or demand is being given, except that any notice given by certified mail shall be deemed delivered three (3) business days after deposit in the United States Mails, and any notice given by overnight courier shall be deemed delivered one (1) business day after delivery to the overnight courier.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: than $1,000 in currency in Black’s bedroom, several guns in various parts of the house, and a pan, measuring cup, and plastic bags — all with traces of white residue — in the kitchen. Ms. Black also testified at the suppression hearing, and although she insisted that she executed the written consent only after the search ended and in fact had told the officers they could look only in Black’s bedroom, the district court found the two police officers more credible. As counsel correctly notes, the district court’s conclusion that authorities had probable cause to arrest Black when they first encountered him at the restaurant is unassailable. Probable cause exists when “the totality of the circumstances, viewed in a common sense manner, reveals a probability or substantial chance Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Thus, Black’s arrest and the search incident Options: A. holding probable cause exists based upon information received from a reliable eyewitness B. holding that where other evidence established probable cause to believe that the defendant possessed controlled substances investigating officers had probable cause to search the defendants purse for similar evidence C. holding that eyewitness accounts and an officers observations established probable cause D. holding that a probable cause determination must be viewed in light of the observations knowledge and training of the law enforcement officers involved in the warrantless search E. holding field sobriety tests are not mandatory as they merely are an aide to an officers other observations in determining whether he has probable cause for an arrest

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that eyewitness accounts and an officers observations established probable cause
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 (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same agreement. The exchange of a fully-executed Agreement (in counterparts or otherwise) by electronic transmission in .PDF format or by facsimile shall be sufficient to bind the parties to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. A facsimile or scanned ( e.g. , .PDF, etc.) signature shall be deemed to be an original.

assistant: Counterparts