flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is effective as of the Effective Date and shall expire on the earlier of (a) six months following the termination of Executive’s employment with the Company or (b) the first anniversary of a Change in Control, subject to the survival of certain provisions as provided in Paragraph 9(i) . The Agreement supersedes any other oral or written agreement or understanding between the Company and the Executive as to the subject matter hereof.

assistant: Terms
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: benefits.”) (quotations omitted); see generally 29 U.S.C. § 1022(a) (summary plan description “shall be sufficiently accurate and comprehensive to reasonably apprise such participants and beneficiaries of their rights and obligations under the plan”). ¶ 9. As one court has observed, however, “[t]he SPD’s important role in disclosure goes both ways: just as employees may rely on the terms of the plan as described in the SPD, so may a clear description in the SPD put them on notice of that plan’s terms.” Bilello, 607 F. Supp. 2d at 593 (emphasis added). Consistent with the trial court’s conclusion here, courts have thus held that claims predicated upon provisions in an employee retirement plan may accrue — and trigger the statute of hmitations — upon receipt of an SPD. See id. at 596-97 (<HOLDING>); Hirt v. Equitable Retirement Plan for Options: A. holding that the court of federal claims lacked jurisdiction over claims arising from the violation of a criminal statute B. holding appealable dismissal without prejudice where sixyear statute of limitation would not bar plaintiff from bringing a subsequent action but where certain statutory notice prerequisites to filing an action arising out of pesticide application did C. holding that claims arising from employers conversion from defined benefit to cash balance retirement plan aeerued with the distribution of the spds and were barred by the expiration of the sixyear statute of limitation since the plaintiff was on clear notice through spds issued more than six years before the suit D. holding that the united states court of federal claims lacked jurisdiction over claims arising from the violation of a criminal statute E. holding that an employees claim for breach of a letter agreement was preempted by erisa where the agreement did not specify the amount or other terms of the employees retirement benefits and the court would have to refer to the employers erisagoverned retirement plan to determine the employees retirement benefits and calculate the damages claimed

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that claims arising from employers conversion from defined benefit to cash balance retirement plan aeerued with the distribution of the spds and were barred by the expiration of the sixyear statute of limitation since the plaintiff was on clear notice through spds issued more than six years before the suit
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: References in this Agreement to “this Agreement” and the words “herein,” “hereof,” “hereunder” and similar terms include all Exhibits and Schedules appended hereto, including the Plan. All references to “Sections” in this Agreement shall be to Sections of this Agreement unless explicitly stated otherwise. The word “include” and all variations thereof are used in an illustrative sense and not in a limiting sense. All decisions of the Committee upon questions regarding the Plan or this Agreement will be conclusive. Unless otherwise expressly stated herein, in the event of any inconsistency between the terms of the Plan and this Agreement, the terms of the Plan will control. The headings of the sections of this Agreement have been included for convenience of reference only, are not to be considered a part hereof and will in no way modify or restrict any of the terms or provisions hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Committee determines, in its sole discretion, that you have, at any time, willfully engaged in conduct that is harmful to the Company (or any Related Company), the Committee may declare that all or a portion of this Performance-Based Restricted Stock award is immediately forfeited. If the Committee determines, in its sole discretion, that you have willfully engaged in conduct that is harmful to the Company (or any Related Company), you shall repay to the Company all or any vested shares of Company Stock owned by you as a result of this Award Agreement or all or any of the amount realized as a result of the sale of Company Stock awarded to you under this Award Agreement, to the extent required by the Committee. Repayment or forfeiture required under this Section shall be enforced by the Board or its delegate, in the manner the Board or its delegate determines to be appropriate. Your acceptance of the Performance-Based Restricted Stock reflected in this Award Agreement constitutes acceptance of the forfeiture and repayment provisions of this Section.

assistant: Forfeitures
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: Fengxiang Gao, a. native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision dismissing his his claim that he practiced Falun Gong. See id. at 963 (<HOLDING>). In the absence of credible testimony, Gao’s Options: A. recognizing that using false documents that go to the heart of an asylum claim can indicate lack of credibility B. holding that inconsistencies in the aliens statements must go to the heart of the asylum claim to justify an adverse credibility finding C. holding that omissions in petitioners asylum application which go to the heart of the claim support adverse credibility finding D. holding that ij properly based adverse credibility finding on omission in asylum application where omitted fact went to the heart of the asylum claim citation omitted E. holding that minor discrepancies that do not involve the heart of the asylum claim are not an adequate basis for an adverse credibility finding

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that omissions in petitioners asylum application which go to the heart of the claim support adverse credibility finding
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to prior written approval by the Company, this Warrant may be transferred or assigned, in whole or in part, at any time and from time to time by the then Holder by submitting this Warrant to the Company together with a duly executed Assignment in substantially the form and substance of the Form of Assignment which accompanies this Warrant, as Exhibit B hereto, and, upon the Company’s receipt hereof, and in any event, within five (5) business days thereafter, the Company shall issue a warrant to the Holder to evidence that portion of this Warrant, if any as shall not have been so transferred or assigned.

assistant: Assignments
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: truecaller shall , however , not be under any obligation to provide support or maintenance for the services under these terms and reserves the right to limit or discontinue the support , upgrades and updates provided from time to time .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: With respect to stock of YUM or SpinCo delivered to any Person, YUM and the SpinCo Parties shall cooperate (and shall cause the members of their respective Groups to cooperate) so as to permit YUM to discharge any applicable Tax withholding and Tax reporting obligations, including the appointment of SpinCo or one or more of its Subsidiaries as the withholding and reporting agent if YUM or one or more of its Subsidiaries is not otherwise required or permitted to withhold and report under applicable Tax Law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Term, Executive shall serve as the Company’s Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and shall devote all of Executive’s business time, skill and energies to promote the interests of the Company and to serve such positions with the Company as may be reasonably assigned by the Chief Executive Officer of the Company consistent with the title of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Executive will also serve in such positions with Wingstop Inc. (“Parent”) as may be reasonably assigned by the Chief Executive Officer of Parent. Executive shall undertake to perform all of Executive’s duties and responsibilities for the Company, Parent and any current and/or future affiliates of the Company in good faith and on a full-time basis and shall at all times act in good faith in the course of Executive’s employment under this Agreement in the best interests of the Company and its affiliates.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the legal relations among the parties shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of Nevada, without regard to its conflict of laws rules. The Corporation and Director hereby irrevocably and unconditionally (i) agree that any action or proceeding arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be brought only in the State of Nevada (the “ Nevada Court ”), and not in any other state or federal court in the United States of America or any court in any other country, (ii) consent to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Nevada Court for purposes of any action or proceeding arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, and (iii) waive any objection to the laying of venue of any such action or proceeding in the Nevada Court and (iv) waive, and agree not to plead or to make, any claim that any such action or proceeding brought in the Nevada Court has been brought in an improper or inconvenient forum.

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: Any provision in this Amendment that is held to be inoperative, unenforceable, or invalid in any jurisdiction shall, as to that jurisdiction, be inoperative, unenforceable, or invalid without affecting the remaining provisions in that jurisdiction or the operation, enforceability, or validity of that provision in any other jurisdiction, and to this end the provisions of this Amendment are declared to be severable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the parties hereto hereby irrevocably and unconditionally submits, for itself and its property, to the exclusive jurisdiction of any New York State court or federal court of the United States of America sitting in New York City in the borough of Manhattan, and any appellate court from any thereof (collectively, “ New York Courts ”), in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the other Loan Documents, or for recognition or enforcement of any judgment, and each of the parties hereto hereby irrevocably and unconditionally agrees that all claims in respect of any such action or proceeding shall be heard and determined in such New York State or, to the extent permitted by law, in such federal court. Each of the parties hereto agrees that a final judgment in any such action or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law. Nothing in this Agreement shall affect any right that any party may otherwise have to bring any action or proceeding relating to this Agreement or any of the other Loan Documents in the courts of any jurisdiction, except that each of the Loan Parties agrees that (a) it will not bring any such action or proceeding in any court other than New York Courts (it being acknowledged and agreed by the parties hereto that any other forum would be inconvenient and inappropriate in view of the fact that more of the Lenders who would be affected by any such action or proceeding have contacts with the State of New York than any other jurisdiction), and (b) in any such action or proceeding brought against any Loan Party in any other court, it will not assert any cross-claim, counterclaim or setoff, or seek any other affirmative relief, except to the extent that the failure to assert the same will preclude such Loan Party from asserting or seeking the same in the New York Courts.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will execute and deliver to the Administrative Agent such amendments to the Collateral Documents or such other documents, as the Administrative Agent deems necessary or advisable to grant to the Administrative Agent, for the benefit of the Secured Parties, a legal, valid and enforceable security interest in the Collateral and proceeds thereof.

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: Kormanik v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., No. 5:01CV2122 (N.D.Ohio Oct. 19, 2001), a Scott-Pontzer case with facts substantially similar to those in the instant case. In the wake of Kormanik, a number of other courts in the Northern District, including this one, have adopted similar reasoning when remanding Scott-Pontzer cases. See Butler v. Zurich American Ins. Co., 184 F.Supp.2d 695 (N.D.Ohio 2002) (Katz, J.); Stubbins v. Nationwide Agribusiness, 181 F.Supp.2d 805 (N.D.Ohio 2002) (Carr, J.) (collecting cases); Comella v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co., 177 F.Supp.2d 704, (N.D.Ohio 2001) (O’Malley, J.); Kohus v. Hartford Ins. Co., No. 1:01CV01179 (N.D.Ohio Nov. 19, 2001) (Matia, C.J.); but see Redmon v. Sumitomo Marine Mgmt. (USA), Inc., 179 F.Supp.2d 787 (N.D.Ohio 2001) (Aldrich, J.) (<HOLDING>); Fidelity & Guar. Ins. Underwriters, Inc. v. Options: A. holding that shareholders had standing to bring derivative suit against the government but not direct suit due to lack of privity B. holding that a prior suit and a subsequent suit between the same parties did not involve the same claim because the evidence necessary to sustain the subsequent suit was insufficient to entitle the plaintiff to relief in the prior suit C. holding that scottrpontzer suit was not a direct action D. holding a suit against an agency of the state is a suit against the state E. holding that dismissal is proper for a derivative cause of action but not for a direct cause of action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that scottrpontzer suit was not a direct action
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: to justify the search.” United States v. Roberts, 274 F.3d 1007, 1011 (5th Cir. 2001) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). “Assuming the search was not routine, it is well established that, for inbound traffic, Customs Agents may conduct ‘non-routine’ searches at the border or its functional equivalent provided they reasonably suspect the traveler is smuggling contraband Roberts, 274 F.3d at 1012 (emphasis added). These non-routine border searches “are more intrusive and require a particularized reasonable suspicion before a search can be conducted.” United States v. Kelly, 302 F.3d 291, 294 (5th Cir. 2002). Non-routine border searches include body cavity searches, strip searches, and x-ray examinations. See United States v. Mejia, 720 F.2d 1378, 1381-82 (5th Cir. 1983) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Sandler, 644 F.2d 1163, 1166 Options: A. holding that evidence of defendants recruitment of single drug courier was sufficient to support section 3b11c enhancement B. holding that unknowing drug courier testimony was admissible in a complex drug importation case C. holding noknock entry justified where officers had reasonable suspicion that entering drug stash house would be dangerous and drug dealer frequenting house could not be found elsewhere D. holding that a canine sniff of an automobile need not be justified by reasonable articulable suspicion of drug activity E. holding that reasonable suspicion justified abdominal xray of suspected drug courier

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that reasonable suspicion justified abdominal xray of suspected drug courier
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: Your position is EVP - Chief Technology Officer. This position is based in our Customer Support Center, and you will report to Ed Stack, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer. We look forward to having you begin employment on a date to be determined.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same agreement. The signature of any party hereto to a counterpart shall be deemed to be a signature to, and may be appended to, any other counterpart.

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: no interest in the subject matter litigated” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Although the paradigmatic example of a nominal defendant is “a bank or trustee [that] has only a custodial claim to the property,” Colello, 139 F.3d at 677, the term is broad enough to encompass persons who are in possession of funds to which they have no rightful claim, such as money that has been fraudulently transferred by the defendant in the underlying securities enforcement action. See id. at 675; SEC v. Hickey, 322 F.3d 1123, 1130-32 (9th Cir.2003) (upholding the district court’s exercise of jurisdiction over a corporation nominally owned by the defendant’s mother and into which the defendant had channeled proceeds of his securities law violations); SEC v. Wencke, 783 F.2d 829, 838 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>); see also Cherif, 933 F.2d at 414. Bustos, Options: A. holding that the superior court had no jurisdiction over the division of marital property when the district court had properly invoked jurisdiction over the property B. holding that the court of federal claims had pendant jurisdiction over a state law contract claim that was part of the same case as a claim over which the court of federal claims had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 usc 1498b C. holding that court had no supplemental jurisdiction over claim by shareholder for breach of merger agreement that was the subject of the dispute between the merger partners over which the district court had subject matter jurisdiction D. holding that a district court may assert personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant to the extent permissible under the law of the state in which the district court sits E. holding that the district court had jurisdiction over the assets of a corporation into which the defendant in the underlying enforcement action had tunneled proceeds of his securities law violations

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district court had jurisdiction over the assets of a corporation into which the defendant in the underlying enforcement action had tunneled proceeds of his securities law violations
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 outstanding principal balance of this Note will bear interest until the Due Date (whether by acceleration or otherwise) during each Interest Period under this Note at the LIBOR Rate in effect for that Interest Period plus the Applicable Margin in effect on the first day of the relevant Interest Period (the “ LIBOR-based Rate ”), except at any time when interest shall be determined at the Prime-based Rate as further provided herein.

assistant: Interests
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 all branches of the law for generations,” and that it was sufficiently objective to save the ordinance from vagueness. Id. at 677, 683, 470 N.W.2d 296. Although there are cases to the contrary, see, e.g., Langford, 755 F.Supp. 1460, and Dupres v. City of Newport, 978 F.Supp. 429 (D.R.I.1997), anti-noise ordinances that incorporate a “reasonable person” standard have generally withstood constitutional scrutiny. Gruwell, supra, at 367; e.g., Howard Opera Assocs. v. Urban Outfitters, Inc., 322 F.3d 125, 128 (2d Cir. 2003) (upholding noise ordinance prohibiting “unreasonable noise,” defined as that which “disturbs, injures or endangers the peace or health of another or ... endangers the health, safety or welfare of the community”); Reeves v. McConn, 631 F.2d 377, 386. (5th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>); see also Jim Crockett Promotion, Inc. v. City Options: A. holding that statute prohibiting conduct that obstruets or unreasonably interfere with free ingress or egress to and from public buildings was not impermissibly vague B. holding that term unreasonably loud is not impermissibly vague C. holding factor b is not unconstitutionally vague D. holding that when a term is not defined in a contract the presumption is that the term is to be given its ordinary meaning and significance E. holding that term unreasonable noise was not vague

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that term unreasonably loud is not impermissibly vague
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 singular, and the sentence in which it is used contains no language that would expand the singular to plural. The parties did not use the word “a beneficiary” or “one of the beneficiaries” so as to show that Defendant had reserved the right to name more than one beneficiary. The clear and unequivocal meaning of the language is that Defendant was to name the parties’ son as the singular, thus only, beneficiary of his group life insurance policy. Id. at *2. Upon review, the Eighth Di d 1494, 1496-1497 (11th Cir.1986) (concluding that a divorce decree which required the insured to name his children as “irrevocable beneficiaries” of an insurance policy nullified the insured’s attempt to name another beneficiary); Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Spain, 556 F.2d 747, 749 (5th Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>); Principal Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Kamey, 5 Options: A. holding that feglia preempted a state divorce decree which ordered the insured to maintain his fegli policy for the benefit of his children from his first marriage B. holding that a husband unlawfully attempted to name a beneficiary other than his daughter who was the irrevocable beneficiary pursuant to a separation agreement in a divorce decree C. recognizing that a divorce decree which obligated the divorcing husband to name the children of his first marriage as the irrevocable beneficiaries of an insurance policy precluded him from naming his new wife as a beneficiary entitled to a portion of the insurance benefits D. recognizing that a property settlement and divorce decree which provided for a certain party to be named the irrevocable beneficiary of a life insurance policy was valid and enforceable against anyone subsequently named as a beneficiary E. holding that feglia preempted a divorce decree that ordered the insured to designate his children as beneficiaries on his fegli policy

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that a divorce decree which obligated the divorcing husband to name the children of his first marriage as the irrevocable beneficiaries of an insurance policy precluded him from naming his new wife as a beneficiary entitled to a portion of the insurance benefits
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 479 U.S. 388, 399-400, 107 S.Ct. 750, 93 L.Ed.2d 757 (1987); see also CC Distributors, 883 F.2d at 151. (b) Ripeness Although the ripeness doctrine is often understood to overlap with the standing doctrine, see Wyoming Outdoor Council v. United States Forest Serv., 165 F.3d 43, 48 (D.C.Cir.1999), it retains a separate analytical framework. The framework reveals the doctrine's dual pedigree-a pedigree that is partially traceable to Article III, but mostly traceable to the court's prudential goals of avoiding "abstract disagreements" and "premature adjudication." Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136, 148-49, 87 S.Ct. 1507, 18 L.Ed.2d 681 (1967); see also 13A Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller and Edward H. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 3532.1, at 118-19 (2d ed.1984) (<HOLDING>). In considering a claim’s ripeness, a court is Options: A. recognizing the dual underpinnings of the single analytical framework B. holding best interests are to be determined within statutory framework and not upon courts own perceptions C. recognizing that context under the pge analysis includes the preexisting common law and statutory framework within which the law was enacted D. holding best interests are to be determined within statutory framework and not upon judges own perceptions E. recognizing that irreparable harm is the single most important prerequisite for the issuance of a preliminary injunction

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the dual underpinnings of the single analytical framework
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: for a custodial parent in such a situation. Minn.Stat. § 611A.04. This provision does not allow jury trial. It may be that, in this sensitive area of family law, a judge’s discretion is better than a jury trial, at which a child would almost certainly have to testify. In any event, this would prevent additional litigation, which would place a burden of stress on the abducted child. In addition, our parental kidnapping statute may provide for an award of costs incurred in recovering the child. Minn. Stat. § 609.26, subd. 4 (1988). Further, emotional distress could possibly be recovered in egregious cases through the independent tort of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, which Minnesota recognizes. See Hubbard v. United Press International, 330 N.W.2d 428, 439-39 (Minn.1983) (<HOLDING>). Minnesota already recognizes the action for Options: A. recognizing this rule B. recognizing presumption C. recognizing iied D. recognizing change E. recognizing rule

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing iied
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: 359 U.S. 117 79 S.Ct. 720 3 L.Ed.2d 673 Donald JOSEPH et al., petitioners,v.INDIANA. No. 8. Supreme Court of the United States March 23, 1959 Mr. William S. Isham, for petitioners. Mr. Robert M. O'Mahoney, Deputy Atty. Gen. of Indiana (Messrs. Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen. and Owen S. Boling, Asst. Atty. Gen., on the brief), for respondent. Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Indiana. Former opinion, 355 U.S. 812, 78 S.Ct. 64; 355 U.S. 948, 78 S.Ct. 533. PER CURIAM. 1 The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.

assistant: 9
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 is duly formed, validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of Florida and has the corporate power and is duly authorized under all applicable laws, regulations, ordinances and orders of public authorities, to carry on its business in all material respects as it is now being conducted. Prior to the Closing Date (as hereinafter defined) the Company will deliver to Banjo complete and correct copies of the articles of organization and operating agreement of the Company as in effect on the date hereof. The execution and delivery of this Agreement does not, and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby will not, violate any provision of Company’s governance documents. The Company has taken all actions required by law, its governance documents, or otherwise to authorize the execution and delivery of this Agreement. The Company has full power, authority, and legal capacity and prior to the Closing Date will have taken all action required by law, its governance documents, and otherwise to consummate the transactions herein contemplated.

assistant: Organizations
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 Transactions (a) do not require any consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, except for (A) filings necessary to perfect or maintain the perfection of the Liens on the Collateral granted by the Loan Parties in favor of the Administrative Agent, (B) the approvals, consents, registrations, actions and filings which have been duly obtained, taken, given or made and are in full force and effect and (C) those approvals, consents, registrations or other actions or filings, the failure of which to obtain or make could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, (b) will not violate (i) any applicable law or regulation or order of any Governmental Authority or (ii) the charter, by-laws or other organizational documents of any Loan Party, (c) will not violate or result in a default under any indenture, agreement or other instrument binding upon any Loan Party or its assets, or give rise to a right thereunder to require any payment to be made by any Loan Party, and (d) will not result in the creation or imposition of any Lien on any material asset of any Loan Party (other than pursuant to the Loan Documents and Liens permitted by Section 6.02); except with respect to any violation or default referred to in clause (b)(i) or (c) above, to the extent that such violation or default could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the parties agrees and acknowledges that this Agreement, the Statement(s) of Work executed by the parties, including the attachments referred to in this Agreement, (a) constitutes the entire agreement and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, negotiations and discussions, whether oral or written, among the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and (b) is not intended to confer any rights or remedies, or impose any obligations, on any person other than the parties. Each of the parties expressly agrees and acknowledges that, other than those statements expressly set forth in this Agreement, it is not relying on any statement, whether oral or written, of any person or entity with respect to its entry into this Agreement or to the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, and each of the parties further waives any claim against the other party that the other party has failed to disclose any fact, occurrence or other matter that relates in any way to its entry into this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Section 2.19(a) of the Company Disclosure Schedule sets forth a true, correct and complete list of all insurance policies maintained by the Target Companies. The Company has made available to the Purchaser true, correct and complete copies of such insurance policies, including all amendments, waivers, supplements or modifications thereto. All such policies are in full force and effect, and all premiums with respect to such insurance policies have been paid in accordance with the terms and conditions of such insurance policies. The Target Companies are in compliance in all material respects with all other terms and conditions of such insurance policies; and: (a) no material dispute exists with any insurance carrier with respect to the scope of any insurance coverage; and (b) no Target Company has received any written notice of cancellation, termination or reduction in coverage or any other written indication that any such insurance policy is no longer in full force and effect or will not be renewed. To the Knowledge of the Company, (i) no Target Company has done or omitted to do anything that might render any such policy void or unenforceable or otherwise limit, prejudice or reduce recovery under any such policy and (ii) no other circumstance exists that might render any such policy void or unenforceable or otherwise limit, prejudice or reduce recovery under any such policy. Except as set forth on Section 2.19(b) of the Company Disclosure Schedule, none of the Target Companies has made any claim under any such policy since January 1, 2015 with respect to which an insurer has, in a written notice to a Target Company, questioned, denied or disputed or otherwise reserved its rights with respect to coverage.

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: § 3727 does not forbid assignments of claims against the government for the benefit of creditors). Furthermore, the transfer occurred pursuant to the bankruptcy court order dated April 15, 1996, which appointed the receiver of the claim against the government “for the benefit of those entitled thereto.” Price, 173 U.S. at 424-25, 19 S.Ct. 434. The Price court made clear that transfers to an appointed receiver for the benefit of creditors exempts the debt owed from the nullifying effects of § 3727. See id. Thus, the Court finds that any assignment or transfer of Mrs. Roger’s tax refund claims to the bankruptcy trustee arose by operation of law, a transfer not affected by the proscriptive demands of the Anti-Assignment Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3727. See Redfield v. U.S., 27 Ct.Cl. 393 (1892) (<HOLDING>). Second, the government maintains that a Options: A. recognizing federal constitutional claim against the united states B. holding that the eleventh amendment does not bar the united states from asserting an indemnity claim against a state C. holding a suit against an agency of the state is a suit against the state D. holding that an appointment by a state court in proceedings supplementary to execution against an insolvent effects a transfer of his claim against the united states by operation of law and does not come within the act prohibiting the assignment of claims E. holding that the accused item was used by the government under an older version of 1498 and that therefore the only remedy was a suit against the united states in the court of claims now the court of federal claims

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an appointment by a state court in proceedings supplementary to execution against an insolvent effects a transfer of his claim against the united states by operation of law and does not come within the act prohibiting the assignment of claims
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each calendar year the Board will review your base salary and make appropriate adjustments as needed and make its best efforts to accomplish such review within the first calendar quarter. In doing so, the Board will seek to adjust your base fee is to be competitively aligned to a range between the 25th (twenty-fifth) and 75th (seventy-fifth) percentile of the relevant market data of Chief Executive Officer positions of similarly situated publicly traded Biotech companies provided however, that such adjustment does not represent a reduction in base salary.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the prima facie case, a plaintiff must prove her employer’s retaliatory motive played a part in the decision to terminate her. Gilooly v. Mo. Dep’t of Health and Senior Servs., No. 04-2460, 2005 WL 2086428, 421 F.3d 734, 739, slip op. at 8 (8th Cir.2005) (citing Kipp v. Mo. Highway and Transp. Comm’n, 280 F.3d 893, 896-97 (8th Cir.2002)). A plaintiff may also satisfy the causation element by demonstrating a close temporal proximity between a sexual harassment complaint and discharge. See, e.g., Turner v. Gonzales, No. 04-3426, 2005 WL 2077090, 421 F.3d 688 (8th Cir.2005) (finding five days be tween filing of a sexual harassment complaint and discharge sufficient to meet the causation element of plaintiffs prima facie case of retaliation); Sherman v. Runyon, 235 F.3d 406 (8th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). Despite the two-month lapse between Options: A. holding that sufficient evidence of causation existed where adverse employment action occurred less than two months after protected activity B. holding two days is sufficient to prove causation C. holding that a two month period might be enough to prove the causation prong D. holding that by itself three and onehalf months was insufficient to prove causation E. holding that securities fraud plaintiffs do not have to prove loss causation to obtain class certification

assistant: The best answer is B. holding two days is sufficient to prove causation
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 and effect of this Policy shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, without regard to any conflict-of-law rule or principle that would give effect to the laws of another jurisdiction. Any dispute, controversy, or question of interpretation arising under, out of, in connection with, or in relation to this Policy or any amendments hereof, or any breach or default hereunder, shall be submitted to, and determined and settled by, litigation in the state or federal courts in Florida. The Executive and the Company hereby irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts sitting in Florida. Each of the Executive and the Company hereby irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent it may effectively do so, the defense of an inconvenient forum to the maintenance of any litigation in Florida.

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: from the OSHA inspection after this incident were for repeat offenses, the repeat offense that appears pertinent to this ease was the failure to mark a container of hazardous chemicals so as to identify the chemical. The prior citation for such an offense is not in the record, and we are unable to determine whether the “repeat” aspect of the citation pertains only to the type of citation or to the particular location of the offending container. In any event, our supreme court has not yet held that OSHA citations are evidence that compels the conclusion that a coemployee was substantially certain that injury or death would occur. In fact, in two cases involving OSHA citations, the court has held that such citations would not support that finding. See Ex parte Martin, 733 So.2d at 396 (<HOLDING>), and Harris v. Simmons, 585 So.2d 906, 908 Options: A. holding that witnesss testimony was sufficient to support the trial courts finding that defendant committed battery that resulted in bodily injury B. holding postaccident citation not sufficient to support finding that coemployee was substantially certain that injury or death would occur C. holding that preaccident citation would not support a finding that coemployees were substantially certain that injury or death would occur D. holding evidence sufficient to support trial courts finding in aggravation that the offense was planned E. holding governments position substantially justified where sufficient support existed in precedent

assistant: The best answer is B. holding postaccident citation not sufficient to support finding that coemployee was substantially certain that injury or death would occur
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Employee warrants that he has no known workplace injuries and that he has been paid and/or has received all leave (paid or unpaid), compensation, wages, bonuses, commissions, and/or benefits to which he may be entitled and that no other leave (paid or unpaid), compensation, wages, bonuses, commissions and/or benefits are due to him, except as provided in Paragraph (ii) of this Agreement, and Employee warrants that he is not entitled to any payments under the ANSYS Executive Severance Plan, as may be amended from time to time.

assistant: Warranties
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 the bankruptcy proceeding has the power to appeal from almost any order entered by the bankruptcy judge. 10 Collier on Bankruptcy § 8001.05, p. 8001-11 (Lawrence P. King ed., 15th ed. 998). Thus, for example, “a creditor has no independent standing to appeal an adverse decision regarding a violation of the automatic stay.” Pecan Groves, 951 F.2d at 245. A creditor does, however, have a direct pecuniary interest in a bankruptcy court’s order transferring assets of the estate. See Salomon v. Logan (In re International Envtl. Dynamics, Inc.), 718 F.2d 322, 326 (9th Cir.1983) (“[I]n a case involving competing claims to a limited fund, a claimant has standing to appeal an order disposing of assets from which the claimant seeks to be paid.”). See also Commercial W. Fin., 761 F.2d at 1335 (<HOLDING>); Johns-Manville, 843 F.2d at 642 (“As a Options: A. holding that the decedents estate had standing because the traditional requirement that the plaintiff show an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the conduct of the defendant is met by the allegation in the complaint that the defendants actions resulted in the diminishment of the assets of the estate B. holding that creditors could not seek relief from a bankruptcy stay because they were not the real parties in interest and lacked standing as they were not holders of the notes and failed to establish that mers was the holder or had authority to transfer the notes C. holding that the creditors had standing because the plan eliminated their interests in the borrower notes and deeds of trust and disposed of the assets in the estate from which they seek to be paid D. holding that a borrower lacks standing to challenge transfers of her promissory note to which the borrower is not a party E. holding creditors lacked standing to file an adversary action asserting the interests of the estate in seeking to prevent a former principal of the debtor from interfering with the chapter 11 reorganization given the lack of showing of the debtors consent and any determination by the bankruptcy court that the suit would be beneficial to the estate and necessary to a fair and efficient resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the creditors had standing because the plan eliminated their interests in the borrower notes and deeds of trust and disposed of the assets in the estate from which they seek to be paid