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: 791 P.2d 880, 887 (Utah Ct.App.1990) ("Once the defendant has been put on notice that the State claims the warrantless search was constitutional because [the defendant] has no expectation of privacy in the area searched, then the defendant must factually demonstrate that he does have standing to contest the warrantless search."), overruled on other grounds by State v. Bisner, 2001 UT 9 r passengers have a legitimate expectation of privacy in their coats or jackets found in cars. See People v. Armendarez, 188 Mich.App. 61, 468 N.W.2d 893, 900 (1991) (finding that car passenger had "standing to object to the search of his personal effects in the car, namely, his coat," where his coat was found on front seat of vehicle); State v. McCarthy, 258 Mont. 51, 852 P.2d 111, 112-13 (1993) (<HOLDING>). 1 11 Finally, other jurisdictions have found Options: A. holding that the owner of a shoulder bag located on the front seat of his girlfriends car had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the bag and its contents B. holding that car passenger whose purse was found on floor behind drivers seat and searched had standing because a purse is clearly a container in which a person has a legitimate expectation of privacy C. holding that car passenger had legitimate expectation of privacy in his jacket found crumpled on the back seat of car D. holding that a car passenger had a legitimate expectation of privacy in his closed plastic shopping bag found on the floor of the car E. holding that a car passenger had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his closed brown paper bag found on the floorboard of his companions car

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that car passenger had legitimate expectation of privacy in his jacket found crumpled on the back seat of car
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: if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred. It is well established that where a tort claim stems from a breach of contract, the cause of action is ultimately one arising in contract, and thus is properly within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims to the extent that damages exceed $10,000. See Wood v. United States, 961 F.2d 195, 198 (Fed.Cir.1992) (upholding a transfer of the plaintiffs claims from the district court to the United States Claims Court on the ground that negligence and conversion claims could not establish a cause of action in tort independent of the underlying contractual relationship); Blanchard v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 341 F.2d 351 (5th Cir.1965) (<HOLDING>); Woodbury v. United States, 313 F.2d 291, 295 Options: A. holding that section 2675a was satisfied by an administrative claim which identified the claimant the date of the incident the location of the incident the government agency involved and the type of injury alleged even if the claim did not specifically mention the ftca negligence or tort B. holding ftca claim barred bivens claim the moment judgment was entered against the government C. holding that a negligence claim is not a personal injury tort claim D. recognizing federal constitutional claim against the united states E. holding that the plaintiffs claim against the united states for negligence was not a tort claim within the ftca where it was founded upon an alleged failure to perform explicit or implicit contractual obligations

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the plaintiffs claim against the united states for negligence was not a tort claim within the ftca where it was founded upon an alleged failure to perform explicit or implicit contractual obligations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the district court erred in enhancing their sentence based upon a conviction subsequent to another conviction found in the same proceedings. The Smith court rejected the defendants’ argument that Apprendi required that the jury make specific findings as to whether the multiple counts qualified as subsequent offenses under § 924(c)(1)(C). Id. The Smith court averred that “[bjecause Ap-prendi does not apply to increases of the mandatory minimum, Harris, Deal, and McMillan preclude the Appellants’ argument.” Id. at 349; McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 2411, 91 L.Ed.2d 67 (1986) (upholding a statute that permitted a sentencing court to find facts that raised the mandatory minimum sentence); Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545,122 S.Ct. 2406, 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002) (<HOLDING>). We cannot hold that Deal has been overruled Options: A. holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively in florida in postconviction proceedings to cases that were final on direct review at the time of the apprendi decision B. holding that decision in penn survives lehmann C. holding that where a conviction survives an apprendi challenge under plain error review a sentence appropriate for that conviction also survives D. holding that the decision in mcmillan survives apprendi E. holding that the apprendi decision is not applicable on collateral review

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the decision in mcmillan survives apprendi
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of criminal fines in those actions, do not trigger the statutory bar even, if the state laws under which the penalties were assessed were “comparable” to the Clean Water Act in a general sense. Nor do the 2008 consent orders trigger § 1319(g)(6)(A)’s bar to citizen enforcement. We have held that a state administrative action must seek and assess administrative penalties to trigger the § 1319(g)(6)(A) bar. Knee Deep, 94 F.3d at 516 (“[F]or § 1319(g)(6)(A) to apply, the comparable state law must contain penalty provisions and a penalty must actually have been assessed under the state law.” (citing Citizens for a Better Env’t-California v. UNOCAL, 83 F.3d 1111, 1115 (9th Cir.1996))); cf. Wash. Pub. Interest Research Grp. v. Pendleton Woolen Mills, 11 F.3d 883, 885-87 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). In other words, “the comparable state law Options: A. holding that an administrative compliance order issued by the epa did not trigger the 1319g6ai bar which applies if the epa has commenced federal administrative penalty proceedings under 1319g B. holding 2254 applies to administrative proceedings C. holding the epa has the discretion to consider an untimely certification by a state agency D. holding that epa regulations do not allow the agency to act contrary to federal statute E. holding that inadequate notice did not trigger plans time bar for administrative review

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an administrative compliance order issued by the epa did not trigger the 1319g6ai bar which applies if the epa has commenced federal administrative penalty proceedings under 1319g
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth on Schedule 6.1.(h), there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending (or, to the knowledge of any Loan Party, are there any actions, suits or proceedings threatened, nor is there any basis therefor) against or in any other way relating adversely to or affecting the Borrower, any other Loan Party, any other Subsidiary or any of their respective property in any court or before any arbitrator of any kind or before or by any other Governmental Authority which, (i) could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect or (ii) in any manner draws into question the validity or enforceability of any Loan Document.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as will be discharged in full by (and as will be the sole responsibility of) Purchaser, no person, firm, corporation or entity acting for or on behalf of Purchaser is or will be entitled to any broker’s or finder’s fee or any other commission or similar fee, directly or indirectly, from any parties in connection with any of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or the Transaction Documents.

assistant: Brokers
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: specifications were indeed part of the Federated-West Carrollton contract. The purchase order did not reference the printed-divider specifications, and West Carrollton’s President, Charles Huber, testified that these specifications were never intended to be a part of the pertinent contract. Moreover, genuine issues of fact remained as to whether Pillsbury’s claimed losses were caused by West Carrollton’s alleged breach of this contract or whether the losses resulted because Pillsbury improperly inserted the dividers with the ink-side facing downwards. Thus, we conclude that the jury’s verdict in favor of West Carrollton on Pillsbury’s breach of contract claim was not a “miscarriage of justice.” See Lipphardt v. Durango Steakhouse of Brandon, Inc., 267 F.3d 1183, 1186 (11th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we hold that the district court Options: A. holding that district court did not abuse discretion in denying motion for new trial because nonmovant presented sufficient evidence at trial for the district court to conclude that the outcome was not against the great weight of the evidence so as to constitute a miscarriage of justice B. holding that the trial court can and should grant a new trial if the manifest weight of the evidence is contrary to the verdict C. holding that the district court should grant a motion for a new trial when the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice emphasis added D. holding that a jurys award of compensatory damages will be set aside on the grounds of excessiveness only if the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice E. holding that a district court must compare and weigh the opposing evidence and it must set aside the verdict if it determines that the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the district court should grant a motion for a new trial when the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice emphasis added
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 not required to obtain any Consent from, authorization or order of, or make any filing or registration with (other than the filing with the SEC of a Form D and any other filings as may be required by any state securities agencies), any court, governmental agency or any regulatory or self-regulatory agency or any other Person in order for it to execute, deliver or perform any of its respective obligations under, or contemplated by, the Transaction Documents, in each case, in accordance with the terms hereof or thereof. All consents, authorizations, orders, filings and registrations which the Company is required to obtain at or prior to the Closing have been obtained or effected on or prior to the Closing Date, and the Company is not aware of any facts or circumstances which might prevent the Company from obtaining or effecting any of the registration, application or filings contemplated by the Transaction Documents. The Company is not in violation of the requirements of the Principal Market and has no knowledge of any facts or circumstances which could reasonably lead to delisting or suspension of the Common Stock in the foreseeable future..

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: The Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2671, et seq., provides a limited waiver of sovereign immunity for certain tort claims against the United States and its agencies. Section 2675 provides unequivocally that no claim under the FTCA may be brought unless the claimant has first filed an administrative claim with the federal agency involved. This exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional and cannot be waived. Gregory v. Mitchell, 634 F.2d 199, 204 (5th Cir.1981). Plaintiff argues that a letter sent by its counsel to counsel for the FDIC on March 31, 1989 is sufficient to meet the exhaustion requirement. This argument must fail, however, because the letter in question does not meet the “sum certain” requirement. See Molinar v. United States, 515 F.2d 246 (5th Cir.1975) (<HOLDING>). The argument must also fail because the Options: A. holding that where jurisdiction was based on 28 usc 2201 venue was determined as per 28 usc 1391 B. holding that venue for litigation was proper based on 28 usc 1441 regardless of whether defendant was doing business in the district within the meaning of 28 usc 1391 C. holding that under the fsia personal jurisdiction depends upon the district court finding subject matter jurisdiction under 28 usc 1330a and proper service under 28 usc 1608 D. holding dismissal is proper for noncompliance with 28 usc sec 2675 E. holding sum certain requirement of 28 cfr 142a applies to 28 usc 2675

assistant: The best answer is E. holding sum certain requirement of 28 cfr 142a applies to 28 usc 2675
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All deliveries of Shares pursuant to the Award shall be subject to withholding of all applicable taxes. The Company shall have the right to require the Participant (or if applicable, permitted assigns, heirs and Designated Beneficiaries) to remit to the Company an amount sufficient to satisfy any tax requirements prior to the delivery date of any Shares in connection with the Award. Except as otherwise provided by the Committee, such withholding obligations may be satisfied (a) through cash payment by the Participant, (b) through the surrender of Shares that the Participant already owns or (c) through the surrender of Shares to which the Participant is otherwise entitled under the Plan; provided , however , that except as otherwise specifically provided by the Committee, such Shares under clause (c) may not be used to satisfy more than the maximum individual statutory tax rate for each applicable tax jurisdiction.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: they are not offered by the parties.” Presley, — U.S. at-, 130 S.Ct. at 724, 175 L.Ed.2d at 681. We distinguish, however, defense counsel’s option to advocate a less restrictive alternative from defense counsel’s failure to request a voir dire of the witness. We reject the Court of Special Appeals’ assertion that Longus conceded to the State’s proffer by failing to request a voir dire examination of the witness. Presenting evidence in support of the State’s overriding interest in closure is the State’s burden. Waller, 467 U.S. at 48,104 S.Ct. at 2216, 81 L.Ed.2d at 39. The defense is not required to ask the State to meet its burden, and the defense’s failure to request a voir dire examination of the witness does not waive or reduce the State’s burden. See Tinsley, 868 A.2d at 883-84 (<HOLDING>). Findings on the Record In this case, Longus Options: A. holding that because the appellant did not present to the administrative agency the argument it raised before this court the issue was not preserved and holding that even if preserved the argument failed B. recognizing that the specific argument regarding an issue must be made in the trial court to preserve that issue for appellate review C. holding that although tinsley did not make a specific argument about overbreadth of the closure at trial objecting to the closure put the prosecutor and the trial court on notice of his basic claim that the order of exclusion was not justified and preserved the issue for review D. holding that issue is preserved if the objections at the trial were sufficiently specific to notify the trial court at the time of the nature and character of the objections and the reasons for them E. holding the issue of recusal of the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review must be raised in the trial court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that although tinsley did not make a specific argument about overbreadth of the closure at trial objecting to the closure put the prosecutor and the trial court on notice of his basic claim that the order of exclusion was not justified and preserved the issue for review
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and walked out slamming the door. Arredondo testified that he had never formally married the children’s mother. They had lived together intermittently at her great-grandmother’s house. He claimed to have worked at various jobs and that he provided for his children. However, the only time the children did not live at their great-grandmother’s house was for a few mo lustrating that Arredondo was unable or failed to provide a safe environment because of his vague and unstable employment history, lack of a permanent residence when out of prison, failure to obtain proper medical assistance for one child’s urinary tract infections and a prosthesis for another child, recurrent alcohol abuse, and failure to abide by the conditions necessary to stay out of prison. In re P.R., 994 S.W.2d at 416 (<HOLDING>). In summary, and without viewing the evidence Options: A. holding that in computing time to determine whether an act was performed within a specified period of time under the statute of limitations the first day is excluded and the last day of the period is included B. holding that a child has a 1983 action against the state while in foster care where the state is deliberately indifferent to the likelihood that a foster home is unsafe yet places the child there or allows the child to remain there C. recognizing that an injury arises out of the employment relationship if it can be traced to the nature of employment or the workplace environment D. holding there was a showing of an inability to provide a safe environment because of living at 13 to 17 different places in the last year an unstable employment history failure to obtain immunizations for the child and use of methamphetamines and marijuana the day before a courtordered psychologist evaluation E. holding that the affiants profession of an intent to return to the places they had visited before is simply not enough because such some day intentions without any description of concrete plans or indeed any specification of when the some day will be do not support a finding of the actual or imminent injury that our cases require emphasis in original

assistant: The best answer is D. holding there was a showing of an inability to provide a safe environment because of living at 13 to 17 different places in the last year an unstable employment history failure to obtain immunizations for the child and use of methamphetamines and marijuana the day before a courtordered psychologist evaluation
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: unless it is first factually established that [the lawyer’s] neglect was occasioned by some extenuating circumstances of sufficient significance to render it excusable. Unexplained neglect, standing alone and without more, whether it be of a party or of his attorney, will not automatically excuse noncompliance with orderly procedures.” Id. at 157, 235 A.2d at 875. There were no extenuating circumstances in this case to excuse defendants' counsel’s neglect in failing to contact Murray after his conversation with her client or her failure to attend the hearing. Therefore, that neglect was not excusable, and even if grossly negligent, it would be insufficient as a basis for vacating the default decree. See Bailey v. Algonquin Gas Transmission Co., 788 A.2d 478, 488 (R.I.2002) (<HOLDING>). As we said in Bailey, ”[t]hat fundamental law Options: A. holding that an attorneys filing a notice of appearance on behalf of his or her client constitute a waiver of service of process by the client B. holding that when counsel was present when a trial date was announced and received written notice of the date even though the client did not receive notice the attorneys knowledge was imputed to the client C. holding an attorney is an agent of the client and therefore cannot conspire with the client D. holding that an attorneys unexplained and willful conduct was imputed to his client and that his neglect was not so extraordinary as to justify vacating the default judgment entered against the client E. holding that an attorney may only undertake to represent a new client against a former client where there is no confidential information received from the former client that is in any way relevant to representation of the current client

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an attorneys unexplained and willful conduct was imputed to his client and that his neglect was not so extraordinary as to justify vacating the default judgment entered against the client
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: have”). Yet, the mere presence of a lawyer does not satisfy the Sixth Amendment’s mandate; ultimately, “the right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel.” McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771 n. 14, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763 (1970). The fact that “a person who happens to be a lawyer is present at trial alongside the accused ... is not enough to satisfy the constitutional command.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 685, 104 S.Ct. 2052; see also United States v. Ash, 413 U.S. 300, 309, 93 S.Ct. 2568, 37 L.Ed.2d 619 (1973) (noting that the “core purpose of the counsel guarantee was to assure ‘Assistance’ at trial”); Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, 31-32, 92 S.Ct. 2006, 32 L.Ed.2d 530 (1972); Avery v. Alabama, 308 U.S. 444, 446, 60 S.Ct. 321, 84 L.Ed. 377 (1940) (<HOLDING>). Inasmuch as an effective attorney is required Options: A. holding that burden of clear and convincing proof cannot be satisfied by mere conjecture or speculation B. recognizing that the constitutions guarantee of assistance of counsel cannot be satisfied by mere formal appointment of an attorney C. recognizing a constitutional claim for ineffective assistance of counsel D. recognizing that a criminal defendants right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel E. holding that the sixth amendments guarantee of the assistance of counsel is made obligatory upon the states by the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the constitutions guarantee of assistance of counsel cannot be satisfied by mere formal appointment of an attorney
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: CURIAM. David Michael Prickett appeals the order revoking his probation and consequent ten-year sentence. We reverse. Proof that he spoke to a young woman under the age of eighteen while she was working as a cashier in a grocery store did not establish a willful, substantial violation of the probation condition that he “have no unsupervised contact with minors.” See Smith v. State, 711 So.2d 100, 102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>). For one thing, the State failed to prove that Options: A. holding that the defendant failed to place before the trial court evidence of such weight as to establish that his prior sworn statement of satisfaction with his attorney should be disregarded B. holding that the revocation of probation and the imposition of a term of total confinement was not violative of the double jeopardy clause since the defendant was given one conditional sentence which merely deferred sentencing the defendant to a fixed term of total confinement until such time as he violated the conditions of his probation C. holding that the state must establish by the greater weight of the evidence that a defendant violated a term of his probation D. holding that the evidence that the defendant violated a probation condition was not competent and substantial because the state presented only hearsay evidence E. holding that while a trial court has broad discretion to determine whether a term of probation has been violated findings of fact must rest on competent substantial evidence

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the state must establish by the greater weight of the evidence that a defendant violated a term of his probation
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: Consultant represents that Consultant is not currently a party to, and covenants that Consultant will not, during the term of this Agreement, become a party to, any contractual or other obligation or restriction that would cause Consultant to be unable to fulfill Consultant’s obligations under this Agreement. Consultant represents that neither Consultant’s execution of this Agreement nor the performance by Consultant of this Agreement will breach any agreement, arrangement or understanding to which Consultant is a party or by which Consultant is bound.

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: The execution, delivery and performance by Borrower of each Loan Document executed or to be executed by it, are within Borrower’s corporate, limited liability company, partnership or other similar powers, as applicable, have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate, limited liability company, partnership or other similar action on behalf of it, and do not (a) contravene Borrower’s certificate of incorporation or other organizational documents, as the case may be; (b) contravene any material contractual restriction, law or governmental regulation or court decree or order binding on or affecting Borrower or any Subsidiary; or (c) result in, or require the creation or imposition of, any Lien, not permitted by Section 7.1 , on any of Borrower’s or any Subsidiary’s properties. Each Loan Document executed by Borrower will, on the due execution and delivery thereof, constitute, the legal, valid and binding obligations of Borrower enforceable in accordance with their respective terms subject as to enforcement only to bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditor rights generally and to general principles of equity.

assistant: Authorizations
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: fitbit may change or discontinue , temporarily or permanently , any feature or component of the fitbit service at any time without notice .

assistant: Unilateral change, Unilateral termination
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 party shall, on the reasonable request of any other party, execute such further documents, and perform such further acts, as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate to give full effect to the allocation of rights, benefits and Liabilities contemplated by this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby.

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: 194 F.3d 37, 48 (2d Cir.1999). In other words, the analysis is the same for pretrial and convicted detainees. 3 . To the extent Defendants would rely on this fact to assert the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies, (see Defs.' Reply Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. To Dismiss (“Defs.’ Reply.”) 3 (Dkt No. 72) (asserting that "the [C]omplaint does not indicate that Plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies as required by the Prison Litigation Reform A WL 3808813, at *7 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2010) ("Courts have consistently held ... that an inmate's general claim that his grievance was lost or destroyed does not excuse his exhaustion requirement.”), adopted by 2010 WL 3809991 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 21, 2010); Veloz v. New York, 339 F.Supp.2d 505, 516 (S.D.N.Y.2004) (<HOLDING>), aff'd, 178 Fed.Appx. 39 (2d Cir.2006). In any Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs evidence that his back injury precluded him from performing at least 50 of the jobs previously available to him was enough to classify him as disabled under the ada B. holding the plaintiffs allegation that correction officers either prevented or discouraged him from filing his complaint on the same day the event occurred raises estoppel as a second potential excuse for nonexhaustion C. holding that the plaintiffs allegation that these particular grievances were misplaced or destroyed by correctional officers ultimately does not relieve him of the requirement to appeal these claims to the next level once it became clear to him that a response to his initial filing was not forthcoming D. holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion to substitute counsel on the strength of gonzalezs sworn responses at the pleataking that no one was threatening him or forcing him to plead where the defendant alleged that his attorney forced him to plead guilty and threatened him if he did not take the plea E. holding that inmates allegation that guards destroyed his legal materials in retaliation for his filing of suits and grievances stated a cognizable first amendment claim

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the plaintiffs allegation that these particular grievances were misplaced or destroyed by correctional officers ultimately does not relieve him of the requirement to appeal these claims to the next level once it became clear to him that a response to his initial filing was not forthcoming
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 AND ENFORCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTERNAL LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO THE PRINCIPLES OF CONFLICTS OF LAW THEREOF.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO WAIVES ITS RESPECTIVE RIGHTS TO A TRIAL BY JURY OF ANY CLAIM OR CAUSE OF ACTION BASED UPON OR ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY IN ANY ACTION, PROCEEDING OR OTHER LITIGATION OF ANY TYPE BROUGHT BY ANY OF THE PARTIES AGAINST ANY OTHER PARTY OR PARTIES, WHETHER WITH RESPECT TO CONTRACT CLAIMS, TORT CLAIMS OR OTHERWISE. EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO AGREES THAT ANY SUCH CLAIM OR CAUSE OF ACTION SHALL BE TRIED BY A COURT TRIAL WITHOUT A JURY. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO FURTHER AGREES THAT ITS RESPECTIVE RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY IS WAIVED BY OPERATION OF THIS SECTION AS TO ANY ACTION, COUNTERCLAIM OR OTHER PROCEEDING THAT SEEKS, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, TO CHALLENGE THE VALIDITY OR ENFORCEABILITY OF THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY PROVISION HEREOF. THIS WAIVER SHALL APPLY TO ANY SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS, RENEWALS, SUPPLEMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS AGREEMENT.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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: tell the jury to disregard the accomplice’s testimony, See 10 Minnesota Practice, CRIMJIG 3.18, it does require that corroborating evidence “affirm the truth of the accomplice’s testimony and point to the guilt of the defendant in some substantial degree.” Sorg, 275 Minn. at 5, 144 N.W.2d at 786. First, we consider that the requirement for the instruction is based on the fact that the “credibility of an accomplice in inherently untrustworthy.” Lee, 683 N.W.2d at 316. Chapman agreed to cooperate with officers and do a controlled buy in order to avoid criminal charges and jail. Therefore, it is relevant that Chapman was afforded leniency in exchange for his cooperation because he could have been charged with possession or second-degree manslaughter. See Rodriguez, 2007 WL 1412880, at *2 (<HOLDING>). Second, the prosecutor relied heavily on Options: A. holding that seconddegree manslaughter was not a crime of violence and thus was not an aggravated felony warranting an aliens removal B. holding on rehearing that the interests of justice would be better served by remanding for new trial on the offenses of seconddegree murder and voluntary manslaughter C. holding that the lower court properly charged the jury on voluntary manslaughter where defendant testified he was in fear of the threat of physical assault D. holding that erroneous manslaughter instruction that defendant intentionally caused the death of the victim did not constitute fundamental error certifying question if a jury returns a verdict finding a defendant guilty of seconddegree murder in a case where the evidence does not support a theory of culpable negligence does a trial court commit fundamental error by giving a flawed manslaughter by act instruction when it also gives an instruction on manslaughter by culpable negligence E. holding that drug user was properly charged with seconddegree manslaughter after he cooked a lethal dose of heroin for the victim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that drug user was properly charged with seconddegree manslaughter after he cooked a lethal dose of heroin for the victim
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: Whenever notice is required to be given under this Note, unless otherwise provided herein, such notice shall be given in accordance with Section 9(f) of the Securities Purchase Agreement. The Company will give written notice to the Holder and the Trustee at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date on which the Company closes its books or takes a record for determining rights to vote with respect to any Fundamental Transaction, dissolution or liquidation, provided in each case that such information shall be made known to the public prior to or in conjunction with such notice being provided to the Holder. All notices to be provided to the Trustee hereunder shall be delivered to the Trustee by facsimile (303-262-0608) or via hard copy to the Trustee at its Corporate Trust Office (as defined in the Indenture) located in Highlands Ranch, Colorado.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: [INSERT IN HUDSON BAY WAIVER ONLY: The Company shall reimburse Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, counsel to the Holder, for its fees and expenses in connection with the structuring, documentation, negotiation of this Waiver, and all other outstanding amounts owed by the Company to Kelley Drye & Warren LLP pursuant to any other agreement by and between the Company and the Holder, in an aggregate amount equal to $8,000] [OTHERS: [INTENTIONALLY OMITTED].

assistant: Fees
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: “clean hands.” Matter of Little Creek Development Co., 779 F.2d at 1072. A Chapter 11 petition filed in bad faith may be “cause” for a court to grant relief from the automatic stay under section 362(d)(1), as well as for dismissal of a case under section 1112 of the Code. See In re Phoenix Piccadilly, Ltd., 849 F.2d at 1394; In re Albany Partners, Ltd., 749 F.2d at 674; Matter of Oakbrook Village, Inc., 108 B.R. at 844. Although it is clear that a bankruptcy court possesses the power to grant appropriate relief when it finds that a Chapter 11 petition has been filed in bad faith, there is some disagreement between the Circuits as to the standard to be employed when determining whether a petition has in fact been filed in bad faith. Compare In re Phoenix Piccadilly, Ltd., 849 F.2d 1393 (<HOLDING>) with Carolin Corp. v. Miller, 886 F.2d 693 Options: A. holding congress did not intend categorically to foreclose the benefit of chapter 13 reorganization to a debtor who previously has filed for chapter 7 relief B. holding that a court should focus solely upon the subjective good faith of the debtor at the time it filed its chapter 11 petition regardless of the debtors prospects for reorganization C. holding that interest on postpetition taxes incurred by the debtor during chapter 11 reorganization is an administrative expense D. recognizing the more narrow focus of a good faith analysis E. holding that the good faith analysis for evaluating a chapter 11 petition and that in evaluating a chapter 11 plan are distinct

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a court should focus solely upon the subjective good faith of the debtor at the time it filed its chapter 11 petition regardless of the debtors prospects for reorganization
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 monthly installment of Rent or Operating Expenses, or any other amount payable by Tenant hereunder is not received by Landlord by the date when due, it shall bear interest at the Default Rate from the date due until paid. All interest, and any late charges imposed pursuant to Paragraph 12(g) below, shall be considered additional rent due from Tenant to Landlord under the terms of this Lease.

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: no more speech than.necessary to serve a significant government interest.” Madsen v. Women’s Health Ctr., 512 U.S. 753, 765, 114 S.Ct. 2516, 129 L.Ed.2d 593 (1994). Although this standard is very close to strict scrutiny, it does not require that the prior restraint serve a “compelling state' interest,” but merely a significant one. Perry Educ. Ass’n v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n, 460 U.S. 37, 45, 103 S.Ct. 948, 74 L.Ed.2d 794 (1983) (reciting the strict scrutiny standard). This standard is the minimum scrutiny applied to all prior restraints; if the content of the restriction — not mérely its manner of enforcement as a prior restraint — itself triggers strict scrutiny, then strict scrutiny applies. See Perry Educ. Ass’n v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n, 460 U.S. at 45, 103 S.Ct. 948 (<HOLDING>). Holding otherwise would result in the Options: A. recognizing that strict scrutiny applies to facial discrimination against a suspect class B. holding that strict scrutiny applies C. holding that an ordinance exempting certain signs from a general sign ban was an unconstitutional contentbased restriction on speech D. holding that prior restraint analysis applies to commercial speech but that the general health claim regulation 21 cfr 10114 was sufficiently welldefined to survive prior restraint analysis E. holding that strict scrutiny applies to a prior restraint enforcing a contentbased restriction on speech in a traditional public forum

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that strict scrutiny applies to a prior restraint enforcing a contentbased restriction on speech in a traditional public forum
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 of (i) any dividend (other than regular cash dividends) or other distribution (whether in the form of cash, shares of Common Stock, other securities or other property), recapitalization, stock split, reverse stock split, reorganization, merger, consolidation, split-up, split-off, spin-off, combination, repurchase or exchange of shares of Common Stock or other securities of the Company, issuance of warrants or other rights to acquire shares of Common Stock or other securities of the Company, or other similar corporate transaction or event that affects the shares of Common Stock (including a Change in Control); or (ii) unusual or nonrecurring events affecting the Company, including changes in applicable rules, rulings, regulations or other requirements, that the Committee determines, in its sole discretion, could result in substantial dilution or enlargement of the rights intended to be granted to, or available for, Participants (any event in (i) or (ii), an “ Adjustment Event ”), the Committee shall, in respect of any such Adjustment Event, make such proportionate substitution or adjustment, if any, as it deems equitable, to any or all of (A) the Absolute Share Limit, or any other limit applicable under the Plan with respect to the number of Awards which may be granted hereunder; (B) the number of shares of Common Stock or other securities of the Company (or number and kind of other securities or other property) which may be issued in respect of Awards or with respect to which Awards may be granted under the Plan or any Sub-Plan; and (C) the terms of any outstanding Award, including, without limitation, (I) the number of shares of Common Stock or other securities of the Company (or number and kind of other securities or other property) subject to outstanding Awards or to which outstanding Awards relate; (II) the Exercise Price or Strike Price with respect to any Award; or (III) any applicable performance measures (including, without limitation, Performance Criteria and Performance Goals); provided , that in the case of any “equity restructuring” (within the meaning of the Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 718 (or any successor pronouncement thereto)), the Committee shall make an equitable or proportionate adjustment to outstanding Awards to reflect such equity restructuring. Any adjustment under this Section 12 shall be conclusive and binding for all purposes.

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: the plaintiff has presented no evidence suggesting the necessary causal connection to support his retaliation claim, and the plaintiff’s additional evidence could not lead a reasonable factfinder to find the defendant’s non-retaliatory reason to be pretextual, the court grants summary judgment for the defendant on the retaliation claim. IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the court grants the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is separately and contemporaneously issued this 10th day of August, 2009. 1 . To the extent necessary, the court relies on the undisputed factual assertions in the defendant’s motion for summary judgment and the defendant’s statement of facts. See DeMartino v. FBI, 511 F.Supp.2d 146, 151 (D.D.C.2007) (<HOLDING>); see also LCvR 7(h) (authorizing the court to Options: A. holding that the pjlaintiff does not contest and therefore concedes defendants facts in support of summary judgment B. holding that docket sheet which stated that plaintiff did not submit any evidence to contest elements of defendants motion for summary judgment when in fact plaintiff had timely filed two affidavits to contest motion could not be used to impeach judgment entered by trial court that stated that court had reviewed competent summary judgment evidence on file C. holding summary judgment was not warranted because material facts were in dispute D. holding that the facts as admitted through pleadings and documents placed before the court were sufficient to support a partys summary judgment motion E. holding summary judgment order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of the defendants claim for attorneys fees

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the pjlaintiff does not contest and therefore concedes defendants facts in support of summary judgment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: It is expressly understood that Participant has acted as an independent contractor for the Corporation and that the Corporation will be required to report the compensation delivered under this Agreement to the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”), that Participant will be responsible for Participant’s tax liability, if any, and that the Corporation will prepare or cause to be prepared an IRS Form 1099 on behalf of Participant. If at any time the Corporation is required to withhold tax on account of the RSUs, the Corporation will require Participant to pay such withholding to the Corporation in cash upon demand.

assistant: Tax Withholdings