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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: this agreement does not convey to you any ownership interest in or to the services , but only a limited and revocable right of use in accordance with the terms of this agreement .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: § 8(a)(3) of the Act. Finally, the record lacks substantial evidence to support a § 8(a)(5) violation. Section 8(a)(5) prohibits an employer from bypassing the union to bargain directly with employees. 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(5); Medo Photo Supply Corp. v. NLRB, 321 U.S. 678, 684, 64 S.Ct. 830, 88 L.Ed. 1007 (1944); Holly Farms Corp. v. NLRB, 48 F.3d 1360, 1368 (4th Cir.1995). However, an employer is allowed to talk with employees and to communicate its position to them. Americare Pine Lodge Nursing & Rehab. Ctr. v. NLRB, 164 F.3d 867 (4th Cir.1999). The limit of these communications is offering a quid pro quo that is not before the union. Id. The employer’s § 8(a)(5)-duty is to present proposals to the union before communicating them to employees. See Ameri-care, 164 F.Sd at 876-77 (<HOLDING>). There is, however, no “rule requiring Options: A. recognizing that union members interests are adequately represented by the union B. holding that a rico action by union members was properly dismissed where any financial improprieties occurred with union funds and directly injured solely the union C. holding union members state law claims for defamation against union preempted D. holding that a union officials comments may be used to infer the object of union activity E. holding that an employer could only distribute its proposal to union employees when the proposal was properly before the union

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an employer could only distribute its proposal to union employees when the proposal was properly before the union
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: standing to challenge the validity of the rules. In addition to statutory standing, a petitioner must also have constitutional standing — that is, a petitioner must demonstrate that a decision in the case will have a practical effect on his or her rights. Kellas v. Dept. of Corrections, 190 Or App 331, 334, 78 P3d 1250 (2003), rev allowed, 337 Or 282 (2004) (for purposes of constitutional standing, “a petitioner seeking to challenge a rule under ORS 183.400 must demonstrate that he or she has a legally recognized interest at stake and that the relief sought — validation or invalidation of an administrative rule — would have a practical effect on that interest”); see also Doty v. Coos County, 185 Or App 233, 59 P3d 50 (2002), clarified on recons, 186 Or App 580, 64 P3d 1150 (2003) (<HOLDING>). Under certain circumstances, a petitioner may Options: A. holding land for speculation is a legitimate commercial use grazing on land so classified subject to a special use permit B. holding that a cause of action for damages to property resulting from a permanent nuisance accrues to the owner of the land at the time the injury begins to affect the land and mere transfer of the land by deed does not transfer the claim for damages C. holding that a petitioner in a judicial review from the land use board of appeals had constitutional standing because the land use decision would affect her use and enjoyment of a nearby estuary that she used for passive recreation D. holding that animal husbandry operations were included in the definition of farm even if the animals do not touch the ground graze on the land or feed from crops grown on the land and holding that land used to support buildings used in the production of agricultural products is a productive use of the land E. holding where exempt organization was in possession of real property under land contract obligating organization to pay the purchase price and use land for exempt purpose the association was the owner of the land within the meaning of the statute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a petitioner in a judicial review from the land use board of appeals had constitutional standing because the land use decision would affect her use and enjoyment of a nearby estuary that she used for passive recreation
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: To the knowledge of the Company, the Company has filed all reports required to be filed by it under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, including pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) thereof, for the twelve months preceding the date hereof (or such shorter period as the Company was required by law to file such reports) (the foregoing materials being collectively referred to herein as the “SEC Reports” ) on a timely basis or has timely filed a valid extension of such time of filing and has filed any such SEC Reports prior to the expiration of any such extension. As of their respective dates, the SEC Reports complied in all material respects with the requirements of the Securities Act and the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations of the Commission promulgated thereunder, and none of the SEC Reports, when filed, contained any untrue statement of a material fact or omitted to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The financial statements of the Company included in the SEC Reports comply in all material respects with applicable accounting requirements and the rules and regulations of the Commission with respect thereto as in effect at the time of filing. Such financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP applied on a consistent basis during the periods involved, except as may be otherwise specified in such financial statements or the notes thereto, and fairly present in all material respects the financial position of the Company and its consolidated Subsidiaries as of and for the dates thereof and the results of operations and cash flows for the periods then ended, subject, in the case of unaudited statements, to normal, immaterial, year-end audit adjustments.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: vague assertion that Stephens was unduly critical of Car ter does not indicate that Kline was mistreated because of her gender. 2. Kline’s Testimony Regarding Workplace Comments Kline testified regarding two inappropriate comments Stephens made, directly to her, and comments she overheard him make to others. Stephens does not dispute that he made two very inappropriate comments directly to Kline. In addition, the sexually charged comments Kline apparently overheard around the office were clearly inappropriate, even if they were not directed at her. While we obviously do not condone such activity, two inappropriate jokes and a few overheard comments which contained sexual innuendo are not severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment. Trujillo, 157 F.3d at 1214 (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted). Our conclusion is further Options: A. holding that federal law does not guarantee a utopian workplace or even a pleasant one B. holding that federal law governs res judicata effect of an earlier federal judgment based on federal law C. holding that state courts failure to discuss or even to be aware of federal precedent does not in itself render the decision contrary to federal law D. holding that merely alluding to federal law does not raise a federal question E. holding that just because a claim implicates a federal issue or involves construction of federal law does not necessarily give rise to a federal question and confer removal jurisdiction on a federal court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that federal law does not guarantee a utopian workplace or even a pleasant one
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 defense counsel then corrected the record to show that one of the charges had been dropped. Neither defense counsel nor petitioner, when given the opportunity, made any.other comment about alleged inaccuracies in the presentence report. Finally, the trial judge apparently did not rely on the allegedly false information. Petitioner’s claim has no merit. B. Premeditation and Deliberation Petitioner notes that he was not charged with murder by premeditation or deliberation (first-degree murder). He claims, however, that his sentencing guidelines were scored as if he had committed a crime with premeditation and deliberation. A federal court may entertain a petition from a state prisoner “only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or t Mich.1987) (<HOLDING>). Even if petitioner’s claim were cognizable, Options: A. holding that sentencing court could consider whether the applicable guidelines were outdated and disproportionate but that imposing sentence based on the guidelines did not render sentence substantively unreasonable B. holding a sentence is not based on the guidelines unless the plea agreement itself expressly uses a guidelines sentencing range to establish the term of imprisonment C. holding that defendant entitled to resentencing if the sentence imposed under the unconstitutional 1995 sentencing guidelines would constitute an impermissible departure sentence under the 1994 guidelines D. holding defendant sentenced to term equal to maximum guidelines sentence under improperly calculated sentencing guidelines scoresheet was not entitled to be resentenced because defendant was habitualized such that sentencing guidelines score sheet was irrelevant and the sentence imposed was not illegal E. holding that the petitioner had no statecreated interest in having state sentencing guidelines applied rigidly in determining his sentence

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the petitioner had no statecreated interest in having state sentencing guidelines applied rigidly in determining his sentence
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: attenuated way. As explained, the VCA burdens the quantity of political speech only indirectly, and certainly no more than other contribution limits to which reduced scrutiny has consistently applied. See Nixon, 528 U.S. at 387, 120 S.Ct. 897 (applying a reduced level of exacting scrutiny to limits on contributions by political action committees); Buckley, 424 U.S. at 23-38, 96 S.Ct. 612 (applying less stringent exacting scrutiny to several forms of contribution limits). Nor is it true, as the Unions contend, that this level of scrutiny applies only to contributions made directly to a candidate or political party and not to contributions intended to influence elections generally. See Cal. Med. Ass'n v. FEC, 453 U.S. 182, 197-98, 101 S.Ct. 2712, 69 L.Ed.2d 567 (1981) (plurality opinion) (<HOLDING>). 9 . We recognize that Utah municipal and Options: A. holding that it violated the first amendment to prohibit announcement of views on disputed legal and political issues by candidates for judicial election B. holding compelled contributions in beef promotion violated first amendment C. holding that limits on contributions to political committees which advocate the views and candidacies of a number of candidates induce no greater first amendment scrutiny than limits on contributions to an individual candidate D. holding that a complete ban on contributions to federal candidates by corporations may consistent with the first amendment be applied to nonprofit advocacy corporations E. holding that there is no difference between financial contributions to reduce the mortgage principal and those to improve the property itself and that both types of active contributions entitle the marital estate to a proportionate return on its investment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that limits on contributions to political committees which advocate the views and candidacies of a number of candidates induce no greater first amendment scrutiny than limits on contributions to an individual candidate
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 proper. The NJCFA provides, as pertinent, that The act, use or employment by any person of any unconscionable commercial practice, deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or the knowing, concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression or omission, in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise ... or with the subsequent performance of such person as aforesaid, whether or not any person has been damaged thereby, is declared to be an unlawful practice. N.J.S.A. 56:8-2. As Defendants point out, the private remedy provisions of both statutes require a plaintiff to have suffered an ascertainable loss. See Weinberg v. Sprint Corp., 173 N.J. 233, 801 A.2d 281 (2002) (<HOLDING>); Weinberg v. Sun Co., Inc., 565 Pa. 612, 618, Options: A. holding that a grant of summary judgment in favor of one party creates a final judgment allowing appellate review of denial of opposing partys summary judgment motion B. holding that in order to have standing under the act a private party must plead a claim of ascertainable loss that is capable of surviving a motion for summary judgment C. holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion D. holding a ruling on a motion for summary judgment adjudicating the rights of a party is a final judgment subject to appeal E. holding that a deposition is the time for the plaintiff to make a record capable of surviving summary judgment not a later filed affidavit

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that in order to have standing under the act a private party must plead a claim of ascertainable loss that is capable of surviving a motion for 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: are not engaged in federal action. Thus, the appellees reason, Orleans established not only that community action agencies are not arms of the federal government, but that such agencies are never engaged in federal action for constitutional purposes. Accordingly, they conclude, the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and its dismissal should be affirmed. III. The threshold issue is whether the district court properly dismissed the appellants’ complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Our resolution of that issue depends on the distinction between lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. This is an area of some disagreement among the circuits. For example, compare Robinson v. Bergstrom, 579 F.2d 401, 404 (7th Cir. 1978) (<HOLDING>) with Meredith v. Allen County War Memorial Options: A. holding that the proper ground for dismissal of a 1983 action in which the plaintiff has failed to establish state action is lack of jurisdiction B. holding state is not a proper defendant under 1983 C. holding that plaintiff had failed to state a claim for relief under section 1983 D. holding that while the fourteenth amendment is directed against state action and not private action the state action requirement is met in a civil action where state law is applied whether by statute or common law E. holding that dismissal is proper for a derivative cause of action but not for a direct cause of action

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the proper ground for dismissal of a 1983 action in which the plaintiff has failed to establish state action is lack of jurisdiction
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors and permitted assigns; provided, however, that no party may assign this Agreement or any of its rights under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other parties.

assistant: Successors
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: possessed by the Secretary of the Interior by reason of the trust and restriction-so that thereafter all questions pertaining to the title were subject to examination and determination by the courts, appropriately those in Nebraska, the land being there.” Catawba Indian Tribe, 476 U.S. at 508 n. 19, 106 S.Ct. 2039 (quoting Larkin v. Paugh, 276 U.S. 431, 439, 48 S.Ct. 366, 72 L.Ed. 640 (1928)). Based on this language in the Indian General Allotment Act, courts have determined that “the protections of the Nonin-tercourse Act do not apply to land which has been rendered freely alienable by Congress, held by private parties, and subsequently acquired by an Indian tribe.” Cass Cnty., 643 N.W.2d at 696; see also Lummi Indian Tribe v. Whatcom Cnty., Wash., 5 F.3d 1355, 1359 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Mashpee Tribe v. Watt, 542 F.Supp. 797, 803 Options: A. holding that county law enforcement officers lacked jurisdiction to arrest indian at ballpark located on indian trust land B. holding that the state did not have jurisdiction over crime committed on land held by the bureau of indian affairs for the use and benefit of a discrete indian community C. holding that a nevada state court had no jurisdiction to entertain a civil action filed by a nonindian against an indian for events that occurred on indian land D. holding that once congress removes restraints on alienation of indian land the protections of the nonintercourse act no longer apply E. holding that the arrest of an indian on indian land was illegal because the state had no jurisdiction over the reservation to enforce its laws including the execution of a search warrant unless congress consented to the states jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that once congress removes restraints on alienation of indian land the protections of the nonintercourse act no longer apply
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: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, up to an aggregate of 3,366,667 Shares. Each Purchaser shall deliver to the Escrow Agent via wire transfer, immediately available funds equal to such Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser and the Company shall deliver to each Purchaser its respective Shares as determined by Section 2.2(a), and the Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of Company Counsel or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree.

assistant: Closings
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: By the execution of this Agreement, the Participant agrees to pay to the Company the amount of federal, state and local taxes that the Company is required to withhold and remit to the taxing authorities applicable to the Participant as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement (collectively, " Taxes "). The Participant shall pay to the Company an amount equal to the Taxes the Company is required to withhold and remit as calculated by the Company in accordance with the rules and regulations of applicable taxing authorities governing the calculation of such withholding. The Participant shall make such withholding payment to the Company on the vesting date(s) or upon the Participant making an 83(b) Election. If the Participant does not make a Section 83(b) Election, the withholding can be satisfied by having the Company retain from the Shares Common Stock having a fair market value equal to the amount of the withholding obligation.

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: Each party may disclose the other party’s Confidential Information to its employees, contractors and Affiliates who have a legitimate “need to know,” have been advised of the obligations of confidentiality under this Agreement and are bound to obligations of confidentiality substantially similar to those set out in this Agreement.

assistant: Yes
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: Cash Collateral (or the appropriate portion thereof) provided to reduce Fronting Exposure or to secure other obligations shall be released promptly following (i) the elimination of the applicable Fronting Exposure or other obligations giving rise thereto (including by the termination of Defaulting Lender status of the applicable Revolving Credit Lender (or, as appropriate, its assignee following compliance with Section 10.06(b)(vi) )) or (ii) the determination by the Administrative Agent and the L/C Issuer that there exists excess Cash Collateral; provided , however, the Person providing Cash Collateral and the L/C Issuer may agree that Cash Collateral shall not be released but instead held to support future anticipated Fronting Exposure or other obligations.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is understandable, this concern does not necessarily require a remand, as our holding could be expressly limited to the issues properly before us on appeal. Because I would not allow a party to start over in the trial court with a completely new legal theory after the case has been fully litigated and argued on appeal, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion. I join the remainder of the opinion. 1 . I agree with the remand of the issue regarding software transferred to franchise stores, and further acknowledge that even if the motion for rehearing had not been granted, the State would not be precluded from arguing its new legal theory on remand in connection with software transferred to franchise stores. See Hudson v. Wakefield, 711 S.W.2d 628, 631 (Tex.1986) (<HOLDING>). I join in the remand of that issue only Options: A. holding that we will not review the pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment after a full trial and judgment on the merits B. holding that party may not appeal summary judgment in favor of opponent when grounds opposing summary judgment asserted on appeal were not raised before trial court C. holding we will not review a pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment after a full trial and judgment on the merits D. holding that summary judgment may be reversed when it is based on an error of law E. holding that if summary judgment is reversed and remanded parties are not limited to theories asserted in original summary judgment at later trial on merits

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that if summary judgment is reversed and remanded parties are not limited to theories asserted in original summary judgment at later trial on merits
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 Second Amended and Restated Guaranty Agreement is an amendment and restatement of, and not a novation or extinguishment of, the Original Guaranty Agreement and supersedes the Original Guaranty Agreement in its entirety. Each party hereto acknowledges and agrees that the guarantees granted by any Guarantor party hereto under the Original Guaranty Agreement shall continue under this Agreement, and shall not in any event be terminated, extinguished or annulled, but shall hereafter be governed by this Agreement. All references to the “Guaranty Agreement” in any Loan Document (other than this Second Amended and Restated Guaranty Agreement) or other document or instrument delivered in connection therewith shall be deemed to refer to this Second Amended and Restated Guaranty Agreement and the provisions hereof. It is understood and agreed that the Original Guaranty Agreement is being amended and restated by entry into this Second Amended and Restated Guaranty Agreement on the date hereof.

assistant: Amendments
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 may access and display material and all other content displayed on our services for non-commercial , personal , entertainment use on any computer , tablet , smart watch , or mobile device you own or control .

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: Should the Company fail to require strict compliance with any term or condition of this Agreement, such failure shall not be deemed a waiver of such terms or conditions, nor shall the Company’s failure to enforce any right it may have preclude it from thereafter enforcing its rights under this Agreement.

assistant: No 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: The Parties irrevocably agree that any legal action or proceeding with respect to this Agreement and the rights and obligations arising hereunder, or for recognition and enforcement of any judgment in respect of this Agreement and the rights and obligations arising hereunder brought by the other Party hereto or its successors or assigns, shall be brought and determined exclusively in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, if any such court declines to accept jurisdiction over a particular matter, any state or federal court within the State of Delaware) and any appellate court therefrom. Each of the Parties hereto hereby irrevocably submits with regard to any such action or proceeding for itself and in respect of its property, generally and unconditionally, to the personal jurisdiction of the aforesaid courts and agrees that it will not bring any action relating to this Agreement in any court other than the aforesaid courts. Each of the Parties hereto hereby irrevocably waives, and agrees not to assert in any action or proceeding with respect to this Agreement, (i) any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of the above-named courts for any reason, (ii) any claim that it or its property is exempt or immune from jurisdiction of any such court or from any legal process commenced in such courts (whether through service of notice, attachment prior to judgment, attachment in aid of execution of judgment, execution of judgment or otherwise) and (iii) to the fullest extent permitted by applicable legal requirements, any claim that (A) the suit, action or proceeding in such court is brought in an inconvenient forum, (B) the venue of such suit, action or proceeding is improper or (C) this Agreement, or the subject matter hereof, may not be enforced in or by such courts.

assistant: Jurisdictions
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: Participant authorizes the Company and/or its Subsidiaries, or their respective agents, at their discretion, to satisfy the Participant’s tax obligations that must be withheld by the Company and/or its Subsidiaries by withholding in Ordinary Shares to be issued upon vesting of the Units, or in the sole discretion of the Company, by any other appropriate method.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY OR THEREBY (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER THEORY). EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PERSON HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PERSON WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The validity, construction, and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by and construed first in accordance with the federal laws of the United States to the extent federal subject matter jurisdiction exists, and second in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, exclusive of its choice of law rules. Any disputes arising out of this Agreement shall be finally settled in arbitration. The arbitrator is to be appointed by the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) and the rules of the AAA are to be followed in the arbitration. The award shall be final and binding and enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction. The arbitration shall be held in New York, NY, USA, in the English language. The parties undertake and agree that all arbitral proceedings conducted with reference to this section shall be kept strictly confidential and all information disclosed in the course of such arbitral proceeding shall be used solely for the purpose of those proceedings.

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: You will be eligible to participate in all other Newell employee benefit plans available to other senior executives in accordance with the terms of such plans. These benefits include but are not limited to: wellness and disease management programs, Work-Life Support Program, dependent day care flexible spending, short- and long-term disability, critical illness, legal support program, adoption assistance, tuition assistance, NewellFlex, emergency evacuation and medical assistance while traveling abroad for business, long-term care insurance, employee discount programs, commuter transit flexible spending, identity theft protection, and more.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment may be executed in counterparts (and by different parties hereto on different counterparts), each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute a single contract. This Amendment and any separate letter agreements with respect to fees payable to the Administrative Agent constitute the entire contract among the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersede any and all previous agreements and understandings, oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof. . This Amendment shall become effective when it shall have been executed by the Administrative Agent and when the Administrative Agent shall have received counterparts hereof which, when taken together, bear the signatures of each of the other parties hereto, and thereafter shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Amendment by telecopy shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Amendment.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: this agreement , including the additional terms and policies referenced in this agreement , sets forth the entire understanding and agreement between you and linden lab with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior or contemporaneous agreements or understandings .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the case,” a juror will not be disqualified unless he cannot set aside the initial impressions). We find the members’ initial reactions to Appellant’s crimes to be neither unreasonable nor unexpected. Cf. Irvin, 366 U.S. at 722, 81 S.Ct. 1639 (noting that an “important case can be expected to arouse the interest of the public” so most jurors will have “formed some impression or opinion as to the merits of the case”). And importantly, the members’ voir dire responses indicated that their initial reactions would not impact their view of the case or affect their decisions in the course of the court-martial. Therefore, the members’ initial reactions did not provide the military judge with a sua • sponte basis to dismiss the challenged members. See Calley, 22 C.M.A. at 538, 48 C.M.R. at 23 (<HOLDING>). E. Venue Appellant asserts that his trial Options: A. holding after careful consideration of voir dire that none had formed unalterable opinions about appellants guilt from the publicity B. holding that the jurors failure to remember particular facts inquired about on voir dire and the jurors misunderstanding of voir dire questions do not constitute probable prejudice C. holding that defendants have a right to be present at voir dire D. holding that absence of defendants from part of voir dire discussing trial publicity with prospective jurors was error under rule 43 E. holding that the defendant must renew a motion for a change of venue after voir dire to preserve the issue for appeal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding after careful consideration of voir dire that none had formed unalterable opinions about appellants guilt from the publicity
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 in any Loan Document to the contrary, for purposes of this subsection 3.4(i), each notice or other communication required to be delivered or otherwise provided to the Administrative Agent (or its delegate) shall be deemed to have been given upon the Administrative Agent’s (or its delegate’s) actual receipt during normal business hours of such notice or communication; provided that any notice or communication actually received outside of normal business hours shall be deemed to have been given as of the opening of business on the next Business Day.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: process claim, also on the basis of Smith, and held that Durr’s Eighth Amendment challenge failed because the state has discretion to allow appellate review, so long as its system is consistent with due process and equal protection, and Ohio’s option of a discretionary appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court met that requirement. The district court rejected Durr’s ex post facto and retroactiv 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994) (affirming state courts’ dismissal of a prisoner’s § 1983 damages suit against prosecutors and police investigator based on an allegedly unlawful investigation leading to his arrest while state-court conviction was pending because a favorable judgment would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction); Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 117 S.Ct. 1584, 137 L.Ed.2d 906 (1997) (<HOLDING>); Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 81-92, 125 Options: A. holding that state prisoners challenges to the constitutionality of prison disciplinary proceedings that led to the deprivation of goodtime credits fell within the core of habeas B. holding that inmates serving life terms were not entitled to goodtime credits because state statute expressly foreclosed the granting of goodtime credits to such inmates C. holding that habeas was the sole vehicle for an inmates constitutional challenge to procedures employed by state officials to deprive him of goodtime credits D. holding that a prisoner who challenged prison procedures used to deny him goodtime credits and not actual denial of those credits stated a cognizable claim under 1983 E. holding that depriving inmates of statecreated right to goodtime credits in prison disciplinary proceedings requires due process

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that habeas was the sole vehicle for an inmates constitutional challenge to procedures employed by state officials to deprive him of goodtime credits
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: purpose of the contract is tainted with illegality’ or ‘the illegality is collateral to [its] main purpose.’ ” Ingle v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 328 F.3d 1165, 1180 (9th Cir.2003). The Court finds that the unconscionable provisions of the Arbitration Agreement are not merely, “collateral.” Although some courts have severed unconscionable. forum selection provisions, see Haisha, 2015 WL 224407 at *10, Finish Line has cited no case where a court has enforced an arbitration agreement after severing. unconscionable forum selection, cost sharing, and mutuality provisions. In short, the unconscionable provisions included in the Arbitration Agreement are simply too numerous and too important to be. severed from the whole. See Armendariz, 24 Cal.4th at 124, 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 745, 6 P.3d 669 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the Court finds that the Options: A. holding that a later concession to strike an unconscionable term does not change the fact that the arbitration agreement as written is unconscionable and contrary to public policy B. holding that proposed invalidation of the entire arbitration agreement even if the court were convinced that the plaintiff could not afford to pay for the arbitration proceedings was unnecessarily radical because the court could instead simply nullify the fee provisions of the arbitration agreement and force the defendant employer to bear the expense of arbitration C. holding that where an arbitration agreement between an employer and employee does not specifically provide for the handling of arbitration costs california courts should interpret the arbitration agreement as providing that the employer must bear the arbitration forum costs D. holding that an arbitration clause was not unconscionable because it did not unreasonably favor the defendants E. holding that the existence of two unconscionable provisions weighed in favor of voiding the entire agreement becausemultiple defects indicate a systematic effort to impose arbitration on an employee not simply as an alternative to litigation but as an inferior forum that works to the employers advantage

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the existence of two unconscionable provisions weighed in favor of voiding the entire agreement becausemultiple defects indicate a systematic effort to impose arbitration on an employee not simply as an alternative to litigation but as an inferior forum that works to the employers advantage
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 Amendment constitutes the entire agreement between Borrower, Operating Lessee, Guarantor, Agent and Lender with respect to subject matter hereof and supersedes all other prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, among 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: in what the fraud consists”). Like the Sykes’ claim for negligent misrepresentation, however, their claims for fraud are not based on any specific allegations of fact. Since these claims do not comply with the requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), adding them would be futile. Fifth, the Sykes want to add a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. In Virginia, a claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress cannot succeed if a party does not “plead with specificity that [it] incurred a physical injury which was the natural result of fright or shock proximately caused by the defendant’s] alleged negligence.” Delk v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp., 259 Va. 125, 523 S.E.2d 826, 834 (2000); see Hughes v. Moore, 214 Va. 27, 197 S.E.2d 214, 220 (1973) (<HOLDING>). Here, neither Lisa nor Seth Sykes have Options: A. recognizing the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress B. holding that a party claiming negligent infliction of emotional distress cannot recover for emotional disturbance alone C. recognizing torts of intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress D. holding that a tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress is distinct from a claim for emotional distress damages under the employment discrimination statute E. holding that under south dakota law compensation for negligent infliction of emotional distress requires manifestation of physical symptoms and intentional infliction of emotional distress requires an extreme disabling emotional response

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a party claiming negligent infliction of emotional distress cannot recover for emotional disturbance alone
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 nature and terms of this Agreement are strictly confidential and they have not been and shall not be disclosed by Executive at any time to any person (including the Employer’s employees) except Executive’s lawyer, accountant, or immediate family without the prior written consent of an officer of the Employer, except as necessary in any legal proceedings directly related to the provisions and terms of this Agreement, to prepare and file income tax forms, or pursuant to court order after reasonable notice to the Employer. Executive may disclose that Executive is subject to an agreement not to disclose trade secrets and confidential information where necessary to comply with such confidentiality agreement. Executive agrees that Executive is responsible for informing these persons of the confidential nature of this Agreement and that any breach of this confidentiality provision by any of these persons shall be deemed a breach by Executive.

assistant: Confidentiality