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: limited by either, the state constitution or the legislature itself. Robbins v. Rapid City, 71 S.D. 171, 176, 23 N.W.2d 144, 147 (1946) (citation omitted). Municipalities are precluded from engaging in ultra vires acts for which there is no antecedent legislative authority. Ericksen v. City of Sioux Falls, 70 S.D. 40, 53, 14 N.W.2d 89, 95 (1944). [¶ 28.] “Our Court has a history of not interfering with municipal governments unless their actions are palpably arbitrary, unreasonable,, or beyond their authority.” City of Marion v. Schoenwald, 2001 SD 95, ¶ 7, 631 N.W.2d 213, 216 (citations omitted). We have on several occasions upheld a municipality’s incidental acts exercised in the course of its express authority. See Snow Land, Inc. v. City of Brookings, 282 N.W.2d 607, 608 (S.D.1979) (<HOLDING>); City of Vermillion v. Hugener, 75 S.D. 106, Options: A. holding opinion testimony of sales should have been excluded because opinion not based on comparable sales B. holding that the fact that defendants sales in forum were less than 5 percent of its total sales volume was irrelevant so long as its sales were part of a regular course of dealing and were not isolated or exceptional events C. holding municipalitys express authority to prohibit all sunday liquor sales under sdcl 35630 included implied authority to also ban lowpoint beer sunday sales despite states proscription under sdcl 35481 which prohibited sales of lowpoint beer sales on sunday between certain hours D. holding property lien for nonpayment of sales tax was beyond boroughs authority to collect sales tax E. holding that exercising general jurisdiction over defendant was improper where its actual sales in florida were a small percentage of the total sales and therefore these sales were de minimis

assistant: The best answer is C. holding municipalitys express authority to prohibit all sunday liquor sales under sdcl 35630 included implied authority to also ban lowpoint beer sunday sales despite states proscription under sdcl 35481 which prohibited sales of lowpoint beer sales on sunday between certain hours
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: Capital Stock . As of the Closing Date, there are no Unrestricted Subsidiaries other than those specifically disclosed in Schedule 5.12 , and all of the outstanding Capital Stock in each Restricted Subsidiary that is owned by a Loan Party has been validly issued, is fully paid and non-assessable (other than for those Restricted Subsidiaries that are limited liability companies and limited partnerships and to the extent such concepts are not applicable in the relevant jurisdiction) and are owned free and clear of all Liens except (i) those created under the Collateral Documents and (ii) any nonconsensual Lien that is permitted under Section 7.02 .

assistant: Subsidiaries
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: court reasonably found them unhelpful when submitted after the hearing on the motion to dismiss. 7 . See also Hoover v. Rortwin, 466 U.S. 558, 567-68, 104 S.Ct. 1989, 80 L.Ed.2d 590 (1984) ("When the conduct is that of the sovereign itself, ... the danger of unauthorized restraint of trade does not arise.”); Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341, 350-51, 63 S.Ct. 307, 87 L.Ed. 315 (1943) ("We find nothing in the language of the Sherman Act or in its history which suggests that its purpose was to restrain a state or its officers or agents from activities directed by its legislature.”). 8 . A hybrid regulation is only potentially preempted because the private discretionary conduct it incorporates may not "in all cases [be] a per se violation.” Sanders, 504 F.3d at 910-11; see also id. at 919 (<HOLDING>); Fisher, 475 U.S. at 270, 106 S.Ct. 1045 Options: A. holding negligence per se not applicable to violation of railroad commission regulation B. holding such agreements to be per se illegal C. holding that to be preempted as a per se illegal hybrid restraint a regulation must involve a delegation of market power to private parties that is per se illegal because otherwise the hybrid restraint could not be attacked as facially invalid D. holding that a maximum vertical price maintenance scheme is not per se illegal E. holding only that a particular ancillary restraint did not constitute a per se violation of the sherman act and remanding for a determination of the case under a rule of reason analysis

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that to be preempted as a per se illegal hybrid restraint a regulation must involve a delegation of market power to private parties that is per se illegal because otherwise the hybrid restraint could not be attacked as facially invalid
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event the Escrow Agent becomes involved in any claims, controversies, or legal proceedings in connection with this escrow, Purchaser and Seller jointly and severally agree to indemnify and hold the Escrow Agent harmless from all losses, costs, damages and expenses, including attorneys' fees suffered or incurred by the Escrow Agent as a result thereof, but excluding consequential, special or exemplary damages, including, but not limited to lost profits (collectively, “Losses”), except to the extent such Losses result from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Escrow Agent. Payment of such costs, damages, expenses or fees shall b e made by Purchaser and Seller within a reasonable period of time not to exceed thirty (30) days after billing. In the event that payment is not received by the Escrow Agent within thirty (30) days after billing, the Escrow Agent's costs, damages, expense s and fees will accrue simple interest at an annual rate of five percent (5%)may be deducted from the Escrow Fund, if any. The obligations of Purchaser and Seller under this Section 8 shall be performable at the office of the Escrow Agent in Dallas, Texas , and shall survive the resignation or removal of the Escrow Agent or the termination of this Agreement by lapse of time or otherwise. Notwithstanding this Section 8, all fees and costs of the Escrow Agent shall be paid in accordance with the provisions o f this Agreement.

assistant: Indemnity
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: Key Employee will refrain from making statements that criticize, disparage or ridicule the Gevo Parties (which, for purposes of this Section 6(c) , shall include their directors, agents, officers, employees, members, or assigns) or that are detrimental to the reputation or image of any Gevo Party. Key Employee agrees that if Key Employee receives an inquiry from a third party that seeks to elicit an opinion of Key Employee regarding any Gevo Party, Key Employee shall respond by stating that there is no existing relationship between Key Employee and such Gevo Party and that Key Employee is unable to comment further. Such statements (or words to that effect) shall not constitute a statement that criticizes, disparages or ridicules any Gevo Party or that is detrimental to the reputation or image of any Gevo Party. Key Employee shall reasonably cooperate with any reasonable requests, from the Company or a party negotiating with the Company , for information concerning the Company in connection with any transaction or proposed transaction involving the Company with respect to which the Board requests Key Employee ’s cooperation, and shall, in the course of such cooperation, make no statement and take no action that could reasonably be viewed as intending to impede or discourage the transaction or proposed transaction. Key Employee agrees and acknowledges that the foregoing provisions of this Section 6(c) are reasonably designed to carry out the purposes of this Agreement, and do not constitute an unreasonable or overly broad limitation on Key Employee ’s speech or action.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: claim first be classified as “an allowed secured claim” within the meaning of Section 1325(a)(5). Under Nobelman and Zimmer, as discussed above, when a creditor is wholly unsecured after application of Section 506(a), the creditor has only an unsecured claim for purposes of Section 1322(b)(2). The creditor is not the holder of a secured claim, and as such, Section 1325(a)(5), which, by its language applies only to secured claims, does not apply to the wholly unsecured creditor. Hill, when considering this issue, reached this very conclusion. After considering many of the same decisions that this court has considered, and after the same analysis of the statutory text that this court has engaged in, the court found that Section 1325(a)(5) “has no applicability to unsecured claims, whi ) (<HOLDING>); In re Frazier, — B.R. -, 2011 WL 1206198, *6 Options: A. holding that if 506 does not apply to an allowed claim such claim cannot become a secured claim B. holding that the meaning of allowed secured claim in 506a does not determine the meaning of allowed secured claim in 506d C. holding that the words allowed secured claim in 506d refer to a claim that is secured by a lien and allowed under 502 D. holding that if claim is not an allowed secured claim pursuant to section 506a by its terms section 1325a5b is inapplicable E. holding that where there was no value in the collateral to secure the claim after application of section 506a creditor did not hold a secured claim and therefore lacked basis for asserting rights under 11 usc 1325a5

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that if claim is not an allowed secured claim pursuant to section 506a by its terms section 1325a5b is inapplicable
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: you must send your opt-out notice to one of the following physical or email addresses : headspace , inc. , attn : arbitration opt-out , 2415 michigan avenue , santa monica , ca 90404 ; adr@headspace.com

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: This Agreement shall be binding upon Executive and on Old Point, its successors and assigns, effective on the date first above written subject to the approval by the Holding Company Board and the Board of Directors of the Bank. Old Point will require any successor to all or substantially all of the business and/or assets of Old Point to assume expressly and agree to perform this Agreement in the same manner and to the same extent that Old Point would be required to perform it if no such succession had taken place. This Agreement shall be freely assignable by Old Point.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement is prohibited by law or otherwise determined to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the provision that would otherwise be prohibited, invalid or unenforceable shall be deemed amended to apply to the broadest extent that it would be valid and enforceable, and the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Agreement so long as this Agreement as so modified continues to express, without material change, the original intentions of the Parties as to the subject matter hereof and the prohibited nature, invalidity or unenforceability of the provision(s) in question does not substantially impair the respective expectations or reciprocal obligations of the Parties or the practical realization of the benefits that would otherwise be conferred upon the Parties. The Parties will endeavor in good faith negotiations to replace the prohibited, invalid or unenforceable provision(s) with a valid provision(s), the effect of which comes as close as possible to that of the prohibited, invalid or unenforceable provision(s).

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: Based on the financial condition of the Parent as of the closing date (and assuming that the closing shall have occurred but without giving effect to any funding requirement of the Company or any of the Company’s subsidiaries), (i) the Parent’s fair saleable value of its assets exceeds the amount that will be required to be paid on or in respect of the Parent’s existing debts and other liabilities (including known contingent liabilities) as they mature, (ii) the Parent’s assets do not constitute unreasonably small capital to carry on its business for the current fiscal year as now conducted and as proposed to be conducted including its capital needs taking into account the particular capital requirements of the business conducted by the Parent, and projected capital requirements and capital availability thereof, and (iii) the current cash flow of the Parent, together with the proceeds the Parent would receive, were it to liquidate all of its assets, after taking into account all anticipated uses of the cash, would be sufficient to pay all amounts on or in respect of its debt when such amounts are required to be paid. The Parent does not intend to incur debts beyond its ability to pay such debts as they mature (taking into account the timing and amounts of cash to be payable on or in respect of its debt).

assistant: Solvency
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: (11th Cir. 2006)). “The Bankruptcy Code provides that property of the debtor estate includes ‘all legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the case.’ ” Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of PSA, Inc., 437 F.3d at 1149 (quoting 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)). Ms. Herendeen could pursue the malpractice claim because it belonged to the estate upon filing of the Chapter 7 petition. Mandelbaum asserts that Mr. Hutchins was not damaged by the punitive damages award because the bankruptcy court discharged that debt. However, the discharge of Mr. Hutchins’ personal liability under the wrongful death judgment did not eliminate the debt of the bankruptcy estate. See Camp v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 616 So.2d 12, 15 (Fla. 1993); Stanley, 500 F.3d at 425 (<HOLDING>). But, Mandelbaum asserts, the bankruptcy Options: A. holding that effect of bankruptcy discharge under arizona law is not an extinguishment of the debt but only a bar to enforcement of the debt as a personal obligation of the debtor B. holding that effect of discharge of debt under bankruptcy code is the same as it was under the 1898 bankruptcy act it is not an extinguishment of the debt but only a bar to enforcement of the debt as a personal obligation of the debt or C. holding that bankruptcy discharge eliminates only a debtors personal liability and not the debt itself and that a bankruptcy trustee stands in the shoes of the debtor and can bring a legal malpractice claim as trustee D. holding that trustee and personnel liability policy only covered the trustees and not the school itself E. holding that a chapter 7 trustee was the only person with authority to bring a cause of action after the appointment of a trustee

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that bankruptcy discharge eliminates only a debtors personal liability and not the debt itself and that a bankruptcy trustee stands in the shoes of the debtor and can bring a legal malpractice claim as trustee
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: years, Harris ... rejected the deal.” Dyer, 287 Ga. at 140. Based on her prior felony convictions, appellant contends that Harris was subject to recidivist punishment and would never get out of jail if convicted of the victim’s murder. And he contends that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to cross-examine Harris about this recidivist punishment and that appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to raise this ineffectiveness issue on appeal. For purposes of this claim, we assume that it would have been error for the trial court to not allow trial counsel to cross-examine Harris about the possibility of recidivist punishment and that trial counsel performed deficiently in not pursuing that line of cross-examination. But see Jackson v. State, 294 Ga. 34, 37 (751 SE2d 63) (2013) (<HOLDING>). Having presumed deficient performance, we Options: A. holding that accused has right to crossexamine witness on issue of a witness potential bias that stemmed from the fact that the witness had instituted a civil action for damages against the defendant arising from the crime charged B. holding that waiver by attorney was binding upon the accused when before the state introduced the evidence complained of on appeal counsel for the state in the presence of the accused and his counsel stated the agreement and the evidence of the witness was then read to the jury in the presence of the accused and his counsel without objection C. holding that where a states witness has not gained a concrete benefit for his testimony by way of a deal with the state and the accused is permitted broad scope in exposing the potential for bias in the witnesss testimony the trial court did not err in not allowing the accused to crossexamine the witness about possible recidivist penalties that he faced D. holding that in order to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to call a witness to testify the claimant must allege 1 the identity of the potential witness 2 that the witness was available to testify at trial 3 the substance of the witnesss testimony and 4 an explanation of how the omission of the testimony prejudiced the case E. holding that if the reason the victim cannot testify at trial is that the accused murdered her then the accused should be deemed to have forfeited the confrontation right even though the act with which the accused is charged is the same as the one by which he allegedly rendered the witness unavailable

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where a states witness has not gained a concrete benefit for his testimony by way of a deal with the state and the accused is permitted broad scope in exposing the potential for bias in the witnesss testimony the trial court did not err in not allowing the accused to crossexamine the witness about possible recidivist penalties that he faced
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 party hereto or beneficiary hereof may by written notice to the other parties ( A ) extend the time for the performance of any of the obligations or other actions of the other parties under this Agreement, ( B ) waive compliance with any of the conditions or covenants of the other parties contained in this Agreement and ( C ) waive or modify performance of any of the obligations of the other parties under this Agreement. Except as provided in the preceding sentence, no action taken pursuant to this Agreement, including, without limitation, any investigation by or on behalf of any party or beneficiary, shall be deemed to constitute a waiver by the party or beneficiary taking such action of compliance with any representations, warranties, covenants or agreements contained herein. The waiver by any party hereto or beneficiary hereof of a breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach and no failure by a party or beneficiary to exercise any right or privilege hereunder shall be deemed a waiver of such party’s or beneficiary’s rights or privileges hereunder or shall be deemed a waiver of such party’s or beneficiary’s rights to exercise the same at any subsequent time or times hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the Sponsored Research Agreement (BIDMC Agreement No. A8755) and its Amendment No. 1 (BIDMC Agreement No. A8755) between the Parties, dated January 1, 2015 and February 2, 2016 respectively with continuing obligations, non-disclosure agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: circumstantial evidence to raise a reasonable inference of intentional discrimination. See Hamilton, 680 F.3d at 1320; see also Smith, 644 F.3d at 1328 (“[T]he plaintiffs failure to produce a comparator does not necessarily doom [her] case.”). Here, the record contains enough non-comparator evidence for a jury to reasonably infer that Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff because she was pregnant. See Chapter 7 Trustee v. Gate Gourmet, Inc., 683 F.3d 1249, 1256 (11th Cir.2012). á) Discriminatory Comments The discriminatory comments of Ms. Thistlethwaite are strong circumstantial evidence of a discriminatory intent. A plaintiff can demonstrate a dis criminatory animus of a decisionmaker by showing that the decisionmaker made discriminatory remarks. See Damon, 196 F.3d at 1362 (<HOLDING>). A discriminatory statement can be probative Options: A. holding that a plaintiff would have to show that he was not promoted because of his race not that he was a member of a protected group and was not promoted B. holding that supervisors statement that he wanted aggressive young men like himself to be promoted was highly suggestive circumstantial evidence of discriminatory animus C. holding that evidence which suggests but does not prove a discriminatory motive is circumstantial evidence by definition D. holding that circumstantial evidence alone may establish discriminatory intent E. holding that employers statement was not direct evidence where accepting statement as evidence of age animus depended on an inference

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that supervisors statement that he wanted aggressive young men like himself to be promoted was highly suggestive circumstantial evidence of discriminatory animus
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: was that he was homeless. See ORS 151.505(3) (“The court may not require a person to pay costs under this section unless the person is or may be able to pay the costs.”); ORS 161.665(4) (“The court may not sentence a defendant to pay costs under this section unless the defendant is or may be able to pay them.”). Defendant urges us to review and correct the error as “an error of law apparent on the record.” ORAP 5.45(1); Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc., 312 Or 376, 381-82, 823 P2d 956 (1991). The state concedes that the trial court committed plain error when it imposed court-appointed attorney fees. We accept the state’s concession that the trial court plainly erred in imposing attorney fees of $416 on this record. See State v. Coverstone, 260 Or App 714, 716, 320 P3d 670 (2014) (<HOLDING>). Further, we conclude that, for reasons Options: A. holding that it is plain error for a trial court to require a defendant to pay courtappointed attorney fees in the absence of legally sufficient evidence that defendant has the ability to pay the amount imposed B. holding that a trial court commits plain error by imposing courtappointed attorney fees where the record is silent as to the defendants ability to pay the fees ordered C. holding that a trial court cannot decide the issue of attorneys fees without findings as to one spouses ability to pay and the others need D. holding because an award of attorney fees is discretionary court may consider attorney fees in relation to the underlying equities in the case E. holding that trial court properly assessed mothers attorneys fees as necessaries against father in case in which trial court ordered father to pay mothers attorneys fees as child support but did not state that the fees were necessaries

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a trial court commits plain error by imposing courtappointed attorney fees where the record is silent as to the defendants ability to pay the fees ordered
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: J. Jose Corkidi, Max Carlos Lederman, Michael Levin, Hannah Levin, I 98) (<HOLDING>); Loiselle v. Gladfelter, 160 So.2d 740 (Fla. Options: A. holding a selfrepresentation request untimely where made after voir dire had begun but before the jury had been empaneled B. holding that failure to inform the defendant of the constitutionally mandated right to a sixperson jury when one juror became ill after the jury had been sworn but before trial had begun and the defendants attorney waived his rights without consulting defendant mandates a new trial C. holding that the failure to inform the defendant of his right to a sixperson jury and the failure to consult the defendant as to his wishes was an error for which a new trial was the only remedy D. holding that the defendant by not bringing his knowledge of possible juror bias to the attention of the district court prior to verdict waived his right to a new trial E. holding batson claim untimely because it was not made before the jury or the last juror including the alternates is sworn but remanding for new trial in interests of justice

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that failure to inform the defendant of the constitutionally mandated right to a sixperson jury when one juror became ill after the jury had been sworn but before trial had begun and the defendants attorney waived his rights without consulting defendant mandates a new trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or event.” (735 ILCS 5/8 — 201(a) (West 1992).) La Salle called no witnesses to testify on its behalf, but the petitioner contends that La Salle opened the door for her testimony about the deceased’s care and physical condition by stipulating to the admissibility of documents she offered that contain references to these matters, such as the guardian accounts. Even assuming that La Salle stipulated to the admissibility of these documents without limitation, it did not waive the protection of the Dead-Man’s Act. We cannot expand the language of the Dead-Man’s Act to provide an exception when the representative merely allows the adverse party to enter exhibits which contain references to an event in the decedent’s presence. Cf. Hoem v. Zia (1992), 239 Ill. App. 3d 601, 606 N.E.2d 818 (<HOLDING>); aff’d (1994), 159 Ill. 2d 193, 636 N.E.2d 479 Options: A. recognizing exception B. recognizing such an exception C. holding that 1983 is not an exception to the state tax injunction act D. recognizing the rule and the exception but holding facts did not support claim to exception E. holding that the deadmans act does not provide an exception when the representative merely introduces notes of a conversation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the deadmans act does not provide an exception when the representative merely introduces notes of a conversation
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: we must reinstate her negligent retention claim. She argues that her negligent retention claim failed based solely on the failure to establish an underlying tort. J&J contends that the jury heard all the evidence and that Tomczyk simply failed to prove a negligent retention claim. Under Georgia law, “a defendant employer has a duty to exercise ordinary care not to hire or retain an employee the employer knew or should have known posed a risk of harm to others where it is reasonably foreseeable from the employee’s ‘tendencies’ or propensities that the employee could cause the type of harm sustained by the plaintiff.” Munroe v. Universal Health Servs., Inc., 277 Ga. 861, 596 S.E.2d 604, 606 (2004); see also Eckhardt v. Yerkes Reg’l Primate Ctr., 254 Ga.App. 38, 561 S.E.2d 164, 166 (2002) (<HOLDING>). As we have discussed, the jury checked the Options: A. holding that a negligent retention claim was properly dismissed when there was no underlying tort upon which it could have been based B. holding that negligent retention and supervision claims based upon a pastors sexual contact with parishioners was barred by the first amendment C. recognizing a tort action when employee was dismissed for filing a workers compensation claim D. holding that because no class was certified at the time the individual claims were dismissed the class action was properly dismissed E. recognizing as viable actions in tort negligent hiring and negligent retention

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a negligent retention claim was properly dismissed when there was no underlying tort upon which it could have been based
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: As of the Effective Date, Schedule 3.11 sets forth all of the Loan Parties’ directly-owned Subsidiaries, the jurisdiction of organization of each of such Subsidiaries and the identity of the holders of all shares or other interests of each class of Equity Interests of each of such Subsidiaries.

assistant: Subsidiaries
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 a condition to each Award under the Plan that a Participant or his or her successor shall make arrangements satisfactory to the Company for the satisfaction of any federal, state, local or foreign withholding tax obligations that arise in connection with any Award granted under the Plan. The Company shall not be required to issue any Common Shares or make any cash payment under the Plan unless such obligations are satisfied.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Frommert, 559 U.S. 506, 512, 130 S.Ct. 1640, 176 L.Ed.2d 469 (2010) (indicating that the appropriate standard for reviewing an administrator’s benefits determination depends on these three variables). Regardless, apart from his argument that MetLife operated under a conflict of interest, see infra pp. 217-18, Roganti does not dispute that we should review MetLife’s decision under the arbitrary- and-capricious standard. Any such argument is therefore forfeited. See Presidential Gardens Assocs. v. United States ex rel. Sec’y of Hous. & Urban Dev., 175 F.3d 132, 141 (2d Cir.1999). 8 . The nature of a claimant’s burden may depend in part on the specific terms of the plan at issue. See Gaither v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 394 F.3d 792, 804 (10th Cir.2004); see also Hobson, 574 F.3d at 88 (<HOLDING>). In this case, the parties have not called our Options: A. holding that metlife abused its discretion by requiring the plaintiff meet an additional requirement for eligibility beyond those imposed by the plan the administrator cannot exclude a claim for lack of objective medical evidence unless the objective medical evidence standard was made clear plain and conspicuous enough in the policy to negate plaintiffs objectively reasonable expectations of coverage B. holding that it was wrong for an administrator to require a claimant suffering from fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome to submit objective medical evidence in support of her claim for benefits when the plan did not require such evidence C. holding that plan administrator cannot exclude a claim for lack of objective medical evidence unless the objective medical evidence standard was made clear plain and conspicuous enough in the policy to negate layman sic plaintiffs objectively reasonable expectations of coverage D. holding that plan administrator could appropriately require objective medical evidence supporting disability claim where such a requirement is not contradicted by any provision of the administrators own policy E. holding that an insurance company could not deny a claim for longterm disability benefits based on a lack of objective medical evidence when the original policy did not refer to the objective medical evidence standard and never defined that term

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that plan administrator could appropriately require objective medical evidence supporting disability claim where such a requirement is not contradicted by any provision of the administrators own policy
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: we hereby grant you a limited , personal , non-exclusive , non-transferable , non-sublicensable , revocable license to use our applications downloaded directly from a legitimate marketplace , solely in object code format and solely for your personal use for lawful purposes .

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: The Transactions and the other transactions contemplated hereby (a) do not require any consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, except (i) such as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect, (ii) filings necessary to perfect Liens created under the Loan Documents and (iii) consents, approvals, registrations, filings or actions the failure of which to obtain or perform could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, (b) will not violate any Applicable Law or regulation or the charter, by-laws or other organizational documents of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or any order of any Governmental Authority, (c) will not violate or result in a default under any indenture, agreement or other instrument binding upon the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or their assets, or give rise to a right thereunder to require any payment to be made by the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries, except for violations, defaults or the creation of such rights that could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, (d) will not result in the creation or imposition of any Lien on any asset of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries, except Liens created under the Loan Documents and Liens permitted by Section 6.02, and (e) do not require any acknowledgement, agreement or consent under any indenture, agreement or other instrument binding upon the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or their assets, except for such acknowledgements, agreements and consents as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect, and such acknowledgements, agreements or consents the failure of which to obtain could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. Schedule 3.03 sets forth for the Borrower and each Subsidiary Loan Party a description of each license from a Governmental Authority which is material to the conduct of the business of such Loan Party as of the Closing Date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: When Asbill initially entered the hotel’s office, Cruel was the only employee present, which represented to third parties that she was in charge. Asbill testified that Patidar told him that he could leave the papers with Cruel or that he could come back. Patidar similarly testified that he told Asbill it was up to him whether to leave the papers. Under these facts, we find that Patidar knowingly permitted Cruel to exercise authority to accept service of process and further find that his manifestations to Asbill indicated that Cruel had such authority. For these reasons, we hold that evidence in the record supports the trial court’s finding that Cruel was authorized to accept service. Brown v. Carolina Emergency Physicians, P.A., 348 S.C. 569, 583, 560 S.E.2d 624, 631 (Ct.App.2001) (<HOLDING>). II. Rule 55(c) Appellants argue that the Options: A. holding that the decision of the appellate court establishes the law of the case and it must be followed by the trial court on remand B. holding an appellate court is not limited to the grounds offered by the trial court in support of its decision and may affirm on any ground on which additional factual findings are not required C. holding that lack of appellate jurisdiction is fundamental error D. holding unchallenged findings of fact are binding on an appellate court unless the contrary is established as a matter of law or there is no evidence to support the finding E. recognizing that the findings of the circuit court on factual issues arising on a motion to quash service of process for lack of jurisdiction are binding on the appellate court unless wholly unsupported by the evidence or controlled by error of law

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that the findings of the circuit court on factual issues arising on a motion to quash service of process for lack of jurisdiction are binding on the appellate court unless wholly unsupported by the evidence or controlled by error of law
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 Company, unconditionally and jointly and severally, agrees upon demand to pay to the Administrative Agent and the Lenders the amount of any and all out-of-pocket costs, expenses and disbursements for which reimbursement is customarily obtained, including reasonable fees and expenses of counsel (including the allocated costs of staff counsel), which the Administrative Agent or any of the Lenders may incur in connection with (a) the administration of this Agreement, (b) the exercise or enforcement of any of the rights of the Administrative Agent or the Lenders hereunder, or (c) the failure by any Company to perform or observe any of the provisions hereof.

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 will the instagram parties total liability to you for all damages , losses or causes or action exceed one hundred united states dollars ( $ 100.00 ) .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement or in any other Loan Document, Administrative Agent and the Lenders each agree that any exercise or enforcement of the rights and remedies granted to Administrative Agent or the Lenders under this Agreement or at law or in equity with respect to this Agreement or any other Loan Documents shall be commenced and maintained by Administrative Agent on behalf of Administrative Agent and/or the Lenders to the fullest extent permitted by applicable Laws.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the government’s motion to dismiss the appeal and affirm the district court’s restitution order. AFFIRMED. 1 . With respect to restitution generally, the plea agreement stated that “defendant agrees to the entry of a Restitution Order for the full amount of the victims' losses as determined by the Court," and provided that within thirty days after sentencing Appellant and Aida Zia-deh would deliver a note payable to the government in the full amount of restitution ordered by the district court, and notes that the district court woul ir.1996) (stating issues not addressed in brief or oral argument are waived); 11126 Baltimore Blvd., Inc. v. Prince George’s County, Md„ 58 F.3d 988, 993 n. 7 (4th Cir.1995) (same); United States v. Williams, 378 F.2d 665, 666 (4th Cir.1967) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). 4 . Furthermore, at the sentencing hearing, Options: A. holding that claims made but not argued in a brief are waived B. holding issues argued orally but not addressed in brief were waived C. holding that issues not specifically raised and argued in a partys opening brief are waived D. holding that issues not argued in initial brief are deemed waived E. holding that an issue mentioned in a brief but not addressed is waived

assistant: The best answer is B. holding issues argued orally but not addressed in brief were waived
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 shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware (but not the law or principles of conflict of laws). The parties submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state or federal courts of Delaware for all disputes arising out of or relating to this Agreement, and hereby waive, and agree not to assert, in any action, suit, or proceeding between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement that the action, suit, or proceeding may not be brought or is not maintainable in such courts, that this Agreement may not be enforced by such courts, that the action, suit, or proceeding is brought in an inconvenient forum, that the venue of the action, suit, or proceeding is improper, or that the action, suit, or proceeding, if brought in Delaware state court, may be removed to federal courts.

assistant: Applicable 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: 285 P.3d 860 (2012). Because the City did not charge the public a fee for using the 1-90 trail, the only question is whether genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the trail was open for recreational purposes. I. A landowner cannot “open” land that is already open to the public and that the landowner lacks authority to close ¶29 The recreational immunity statute applies only to those landowners with “lawful possession and control” over land who “allow members of the public” to use it “for the purposes of outdoor recreation.” RCW 4.24.210(1). A landowner has “lawful possession and control” over land if it holds “continuing authority to determine whether the land should be open to the public.” Tennyson v. Plum Creek Timber Co., 73 Wn. App. 550, 557-58, 872 P.2d 524 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Absent that authority, a landowner cannot Options: A. holding that whether the public invitee may have some commercial purpose in mind was irrelevant to recreational immunity instead by opening up the lands for recreational use without a fee the landowner brought itself under the protection of the immunity statute B. holding that the court evaluating a claim of qualified immunity must first determine whether the plaintiff states a claim of a constitutional violation at all and then must determine whether the claimed right was clearly established before proceeding to the qualified immunity question C. recognizing that a landowner cancontrol who uses his land for recreational purposes and that sjuch discretion should not result in the forfeiture of the immunity that thehrus provides D. holding contractors could not claim recreational immunity because they had no continuing authority to determine whether the land should be open to the public E. holding that so long as seattle city light opened up the diablo dam to the public for recreation immunity applied despite a contractual provision compelling it to open land for public recreational purposes

assistant: The best answer is D. holding contractors could not claim recreational immunity because they had no continuing authority to determine whether the land should be open to the public
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 shall inure to the benefit of, be binding upon, and be enforceable by the Company and its successors and assigns. Subject to the restrictions on transfer set forth herein and in the Plan, this Agreement will be binding upon the Participant and the Participant's beneficiaries, executors, administrators and the person(s) to whom this Award may be transferred by will or the laws of descent or distribution.

assistant: Assignments