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: intend to allow him to build his own ramp sometime during the early 1990s, when ODOT is alleged to have repeatedly refused to grant Barack permission to build his own ramp, whether through an outright denial of permission or inaction on his requests. Even giving plaintiffs the benefit of the doubt, Barack was certainly on notice that there would be no new ramp in 1998, when ODOT was prepared to stand by and allow the bridge to be razed following the Coast Guard’s demolition order. Consequently, the plaintiffs had reason to know of their injury in the early 1990s, and in 1998 at the latest, and the statute of limitations therefore accrued much longer than two years before plaintiffs commenced suit in 2005. Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 239-41, 250, 109 S.Ct. 573, 102 L.Ed.2d 594 (1989) (<HOLDING>); Browning v. Pendleton, 869 F.2d 989, 992 (6th Options: A. holding that the statute of limitations for 1983 claims is the most closely analogous state limitations period for general personal injury claims B. holding that federal courts apply the forum states personal injury statute of limitations for section 1983 claims C. holding that statute of limitations governing the most closely analogous state substantive claim controls rather than the forum states borrowing statute D. holding that 1522 is the most analogous limitations period for 1983 actions E. holding that the virginia disabilities act constitutes the most analogous state statute of limitations for claims brought under the ada

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the statute of limitations for 1983 claims is the most closely analogous state limitations period for general personal injury claims
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 302 Ga. App. 111, 114 (2) (690 SE2d 242) (2010) (citation and punctuation omitted); see also Robertson v. State, 245 Ga. App. 649, 650 (1) (538 SE2d 755) (2000); Pace v. State, 239 Ga. App. 506, 509 (6) (521 SE2d 444) (1999). 13 Walker v. State, 304 Ga. App. 45, 47 (695 SE2d 373) (2010) (citation and punctuation omitted); see also Lilly v. State, 285 Ga. App. 427, 429 (646 SE2d 512) (2007). 14 See Walker, 304 Ga. App. at 47; Bright v. State, 301 Ga. App. 204, 205-06 (1) (687 SE2d 208) (2009). 15 Quiroz v. State, 291 Ga. App. 423, 425 (1) (662 SE2d 235) (2008) (footnote and punctuation omitted). 16 DePalma v. State, 225 Ga. 465, 469-70 (3) (169 SE2d 801) (1969) (citation and punctuation omitted). 17 Quiroz, 291 Ga. App. at 425 (1) (footnote and punctuation omitted). 18 See id. at 424-26 (<HOLDING>); Nash v. State, 222 Ga. App. 766, 766-67 (1) Options: A. holding that indictment alleging defendant committed attempted murder by stabbing with a knife was proper notice of intent to seek deadly weapon finding B. recognizing that evidence may be legally insufficient where there is variance between indictment allegations and proof C. holding that variance between indictment alleging that defendant threw a knife at the victim and proof that the knife fell out of the defendants hand as he was stabbing the victim was not fatal to conviction for aggravated assault D. holding a knife to the drivers neck E. holding that variance between indictment alleging that defendant held knife to victims neck and proof that defendant only pointed knife at victim was not fatal to conviction for aggravated assault

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that variance between indictment alleging that defendant held knife to victims neck and proof that defendant only pointed knife at victim was not fatal to conviction for aggravated assault
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: | ^possibility that there may be a complete failure of payment — that the subcontractor is to bear the risk of the owner’s nonpayment. Nor, contrary to RCI’s suggestion, does the Subcontract contain “unless and until” language. If the Subcontract did contain “unless and until,” “condition precedent,” or similar conditional language, RCI’s argument might be persuasive. In sum, the Subcontract contains no language that would qualify it as a “pay-if- paid” clause; it is a classic “pay-when-paid” provision. Indeed, as Tymeless points out, the language in the Subcontract is indistinguishable from the language in the J.A. Jones subcontract in Southern States. We thus find the trial court erred in construing the language in the Subcontract as a “pay-if-paid” clause. Southern States, supra, (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s Options: A. holding that instructions are sufficient which substantially follow the language of the statute or use equivalent language B. holding when ordinance language is clear courts must give language its plain meaning C. holding that essentially equivalent is unconstitutionally vague D. holding equivalent language is a paywhenpaid clause E. holding that language authorizing an agent to act in my name place and stead in any way which i myself could do is not functional equivalent of language in neill

assistant: The best answer is D. holding equivalent language is a paywhenpaid clause
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 shall pay Manager an annual base salary of $167,493.04 per fiscal year, payable in accordance with the Company’s customary payroll practices for management employees. The Chief Executive Officer or his designee may review and adjust Manager's base salary from year to year; provided, however, that during the term of Manager's employment, the Company shall not decrease Manager's base salary.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except for any agreements relating to currently outstanding equity awards as of the date of this Agreement (which remain outstanding, but subject to the terms of this Agreement), this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and, as of the Effective Date, terminates and supersedes any and all prior agreements and understandings (whether written or oral) between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. Executive acknowledges and agrees that neither the Company nor anyone acting on its behalf has made, and is not making, and in executing this Agreement, Executive has not relied upon, any representations, promises or inducements except to the extent the same is expressly set forth in this Agreement. The Company represents that it has due authority to enter into this Agreement and has taken all necessary corporate action to enter into this Agreement and provide the compensation set forth herein.

assistant: Authority
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 addition to the remedies of Entergy and the System Companies set forth in Section 15(g) herein, in the event of a breach by Grantee of any of the provisions of Sections 15(a), (b), (c) or (d), Grantee shall immediately forfeit all unvested Restricted Units and all vested and unpaid Restricted Units and shall repay to Entergy all shares of Common Stock paid to Grantee pursuant to this Agreement and, if Grantee has sold, transferred, or otherwise disposed of any shares of Common Stock received in respect of the Restricted Units, Grantee shall pay to Entergy an amount equal to the aggregate Fair Market Value of such shares of Common Stock on the date on which such shares of Common Stock were paid to Grantee pursuant to this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and each of the Transactional Documents by the Purchaser and its Subsidiaries, and the consummation by Purchaser and its Subsidiaries of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby, do not violate and will not result in or cause (upon the giving of notice or the passage of time or both) a default or violation under (i) the Organizational Documents of Purchaser or any of its Subsidiaries, (ii) any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation of, any agreement, indenture or instrument to which Purchaser or any of its Subsidiaries is a party or (iii) any Applicable Law applicable to Purchaser or any of its Subsidiaries or by which any property or asset of the Purchaser or any of its Subsidiaries is bound or affected, including without limitation Applicable Law of the International Jurisdictions to which the Purchaser or any of its Subsidiaries is subject.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: while awaiting trial — is meritorious. Section 15-18-5, Ala.Code 1975, provides: “Upon conviction and imprisonment for any felony or misdemeanor, the sentencing court shall order that the convicted person be credited with all of his actual time spent incarcerated pending trial for such offense. The actual time spent incarcerated pending trial shall be certified by the circuit clerk on forms to be prescribed by the Board of Corrections.” The facts in this case appear to present a case of first impression in Alabama: whether a minor, transferred to stand trial as an adult, is entitled to credit on prison time for the time spent in the youth detention facility. Adcock was a minor when the crime was committed and most of his pretrial incarceration was in a youth detention facili 4 (1975) (<HOLDING>). In order to determine whether § 15-18-5 Options: A. holding that a defendant who does not receive concurrent sentences on multiple charges is not entitled to have his jail time credit pyramided by being given credit on each sentence for the full time he spends in jail awaiting disposition he is only entitled to jail credit on the first of the consecutive sentences quoting daniels v state 491 so2d 543 545 fla1986 B. holding that a defendant must be granted credit for time served in any institution serving as the functional equivalent of a county jail C. holding defendant who received treatment in a state hospital was not entitled to jail credit for that time D. holding that jail records can properly be considered in determining jail credit issues raised pursuant to rule 3800a E. holding that a youth detention facility was a jail for purposes of statute requiring credit for time served in jail while awaiting trial

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a youth detention facility was a jail for purposes of statute requiring credit for time served in jail while awaiting trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: evaluated as a whole, [it] is in substantial compliance with the applicable requirements [of the NCP] and results in a CERCLA-quality cleanup.” 40 C.F.R. § 300.700(c)(3)(i). See 40 C.F.R. § 300.700(c)(4) (a party that “substantially complies” with the requirements of the NCP may pursue a cost-recovery action); Waste Management of Alameda County, Inc. v. East Bay Regional Park District, 135 F.Supp.2d 1071, 1100 (N.D.Cal.2001) (stating that the EPA shifted to this flexible “case-by-case” standard “to avoid discouraging private parties from cleaning up hazardous wastes for fear that recovery of their costs would later be precluded by less than perfect compliance with the NCP,” citing 55 Fed.Reg. 8792-94). See also Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. ASARCO, Inc., 24 F.3d 1565, 1576 (9th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Actions are not consid ered inconsistent with Options: A. holding that notice not required because cercla is a strict liability statute B. holding that strict compliance is not required C. holding that waiver of federal tort claims act sovereign immunity is conditioned upon strict compliance with exhaustion requirement D. recognizing that strict compliance with 1557 is required E. holding that strict compliance with the 30180day time limit set forth in krs 4392651 is required

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that strict compliance is not required
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, including Exhibit A hereto and any copies thereof executed by the parties, (a) contains the entire Agreement of the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement and supersedes any prior agreements or understandings with respect thereto and (b) shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Company, its successors and assigns and the Participant, his or her heirs, devisees and legal representatives. In the event of the Participant's death or a judicial determination of his or her incompetence, reference in this Agreement to the Participant shall be deemed to refer to his or her legal representative, heirs or devisees, as the case may be. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the Plan, the terms of the Plan shall govern.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the time for notice provisions of Section 5.3 above, in the event of a default by Subtenant, Sublandlord shall have all of the rights and remedies against Subtenant as are set forth in Article 19 of the Master Lease as though Sublandlord were the landlord named therein and Subtenant, was the tenant named therein.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: court ordered Father to pay a percentage of the remainder of his irregular income on a periodic basis. We cannot say that the trial court's finding regarding Mother and Father's weekly gross income is clearly erroneous. To the extent that Mother is challenging the inclusion of her irregular income in the calculation of her weekly gross income, she has waived that argument on appeal. When Mother submitted her child support worksheet to the trial court, she expressly recommended to the trial court that her overtime pay be included in her weekly gross income. Thus, any error Mother alleges to exist in the trial court's inclusion of irregular income in her weekly gross income is invited error and not reviewable on appeal. In re Adoption of B.C.S., 793 N.E.2d 1054, 1061 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (<HOLDING>). In calculating Father's weekly gross income, Options: A. holding that where counsel failed to articulate below the arguments they urged on appeal regarding sufficiency of the evidence the arguments were waived B. holding that arguments not raised before the trial court are waived C. holding appellants waived arguments regarding trial courts consideration of hearsay documents when they offered two of them for admission themselves D. holding that we would not review a claim of error regarding the admission of evidence when the defendant stipulated to its admission at trial E. holding that defendant waived error of admission of hearsay testimony when he elicited it himself

assistant: The best answer is C. holding appellants waived arguments regarding trial courts consideration of hearsay documents when they offered two of them for admission themselves
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: subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent, waiver, or estoppel at any stage of a proceeding and may be recognized by an appellate court on its own motion or raised by a party for the first time on appeal). 26 . See Tex. Ass’n of Bus., 852 S.W.2d at 445-46; Trojacek, 2009 WL 909591, at *3; Somers, 295 S.W.3d at 8, 10, 13. 27 . See Tex. Bus. Orgs.Code Ann. § 21.562; Arkoma Basin Exploration Co. v. FMF Assoc. 1990-A, Ltd., 249 S.W.3d 380, 387 (Tex.2008); In re Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc., 2013 WL 5470089, at *6; Connolly, 257 S.W.3d at 839; Pate v. Elloway, No. 01-03-00187-CV, 2003 WL 22682422, at *1-2 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 13, 2003, pet. denied) (mem. op.). 28 . See Tex. Bus. Orgs.Code Ann. § 21.562; Arkoma Basin Exploration Co., 249 S.W.3d at 387 (<HOLDING>); In re Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc., Options: A. holding that federal law governs remedies available under title ix B. recognizing rule that state law governs the substance of claims in bankruptcy proceedings C. holding texas law governs procedural matters D. holding texas law governs the procedural matter of preservationoferror requirements even if another jurisdictions law governs substantive issues E. holding state law governs disputed ownership of lands

assistant: The best answer is D. holding texas law governs the procedural matter of preservationoferror requirements even if another jurisdictions law governs substantive issues
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, requests and demands pursuant hereto shall be made in accordance with Section 7.7 of the Collateral Trust Agreement. All communications and notices hereunder to any Pledgor shall be given to it in care of the Borrower at the Borrower’s address set forth on Schedule 14.02 to the Credit Agreement.

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: that, on remand, the trial court could consider house maintenance and repairs performed by wife’s cohabitant, as well as “any other reductions in wife’s household expenses, or expenditures she incurs by the addition of [the cohabitant] to her household” to determine to what extent, if any, wife’s spousal maintenance should be reduced. Id. at 1384. ¶ 47. In Lombardo v. Lombardo, 992 S.W.2d 919, 923 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999), another case cited by the majority, the court recognized that “trial courts should be allowed to take into account the third party’s support of the receiving spouse, and the receiving spouse contributions to the support of the third party” in determining whether a cohabitation arrangement has resulted in a substantial and continuing economic change of circumst Wis. 1983) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 48. Here, the trial court acted within its Options: A. recognizing that where cohabiting couple share expenses it may be appropriate to decrease or terminate maintenance payments because under some circumstances two people living together can live more cheaply than if they lived separately but noting that certain living expenses such as rent would in many cases be the same whether the recipient spouse lived alone or not B. holding that an award for medical expenses is proper when the expenses have been incurred but not paid C. recognizing that sharing of household expenses may produce some measure of financial improvement but holding that this improvement alone cannot be changed circumstances unless court is prepared to hold that former spouse who takes in a roommate to reduce expenses will similarly lose such savings because of an offsetting reduction in maintenance D. holding that necessary expenses such as living expenses are not considered a squandering or secreting of marital property such that reimbursement or a setoff should be ordered E. holding that in an agreement where the father agreed to pay reasonable expenses to the extent that such expenses are not provided by any scholarship grant or other assistance for his sons education those expenses did not include loan repayment because it was not one of the forms of enumerated assistance

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that where cohabiting couple share expenses it may be appropriate to decrease or terminate maintenance payments because under some circumstances two people living together can live more cheaply than if they lived separately but noting that certain living expenses such as rent would in many cases be the same whether the recipient spouse lived alone or not
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 jury to be “fair,” although he did not explain what such treatment might entail. Notably, Clark did not articulate any defense to felony murder or to the predicate felonies of sexual conduct or attempted sexual conduct with a minor beyond referring vaguely to Dr. Bolduc’s testimony, despite the prosecutor’s emphasis on evidence supporting those crimes in his closing argument immediately prior. After deliberating for just two hours, the jury found Gallegos guilty of both first-degree murder and sexual conduct with a minor. The jury was unanimous as to first-degree murder but split (to a degree not recorded) as to whether Gallegos committed premeditated murder or only felony murder. Cf. Schad v. Arizona, 501 U.S. 624, 644-45, 111 S.Ct. 2491, 115 L.Ed.2d 555 (1991) (plurality opinion) (<HOLDING>). 2. The First Sentencing Hearing Gallegos had Options: A. holding constitutional arizonas scheme of providing general verdicts for firstdegree murder based on either premeditation or felony murder without requiring jury unanimity B. holding that where both firstdegree and felony murder were possible bases for a murder conviction a jury instruction that suggested the jury could rely on felony murder as the predicate offense for a conviction for conspiracy to commit murder was improper because under arizona law a conviction for conspiracy to commit firstdegree murder requires a specific intent to kill C. holding that first and seconddegree intentional murder verdicts are consistent with a felony murder verdict because lack of intent is not an element of seconddegree felony murder D. holding that although premeditation is outside the heartland of seconddegree murder guideline upward departure from seconddegree murder guideline based on premeditation was improper because commission considered the defendants state of mind in assigning a higher base offense level to firstdegree murder than to seconddegree murder E. holding error is not harmless when the accused is convicted of firstdegree murder on a general verdict after a trial in which premeditation and felony murder theories are espoused if the felony underlying the felony murder charge is based on a legally unsupportable theory

assistant: The best answer is A. holding constitutional arizonas scheme of providing general verdicts for firstdegree murder based on either premeditation or felony murder without requiring jury unanimity
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 Parent and Merger Sub is a legal entity duly organized, validly existing and in good standing (where such concept is recognized under applicable Law) under the Law of its respective jurisdiction of organization and has all requisite corporate or similar power and authority to carry on its business as presently conducted and is duly qualified or licensed to do business and is in good standing (where such concept is recognized under applicable Law) in each jurisdiction where the nature of its business or the ownership, leasing or operation of its properties makes such qualification or licensing necessary, other than where the failure to be so qualified, licensed or in good standing would not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to prevent, materially delay or impair the ability of Parent or Merger Sub to consummate the Merger and the other transactions contemplated by this Agreement. Parent has made available to the Company prior to the date of this Agreement a true and complete copy of the organizational documents of Parent (the “ Parent Organizational Documents ”), and the comparable organizational documents of Merger Sub, in each case as amended and in effect as of the date of this Agreement. Parent and Merger Sub are not in material violation of any of the provisions thereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been, and each other Loan Document, when delivered hereunder, will have been, duly executed and delivered by each Loan Party that is party thereto. This Agreement constitutes, and each other Loan Document when so delivered will constitute, a legal, valid and binding obligation of such Loan Party, enforceable against each Loan Party that is party thereto in accordance with its terms, except as enforceability may be limited by applicable Debtor Relief Laws or similar laws affecting creditors’ rights generally or by general principles of equity.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with the second manufacturing count. The State responds that the two counts relate to two separate crimes and the merger argument must, accordingly, fail. We agree with the State. Although both the first and second counts charged Dittmer with crimes that included the date of December 20, 1999, the assistant county attorney explained that the conspiracy to manufacture charge stemmed from a different act with different people at a different time than did the manufacturing charge. Dittmer did not contest this explanation and the district court accepted it, stating “they are two separate and distinct offenses.” Under these circumstances, we conclude the merger argument is inapplicable. See State v. Walker, 610 N.W.2d 524, 526-27 (Iowa 2000). Cf. State v. Maghee, 573 N.W.2d 1, 7 (Iowa 1997) (<HOLDING>). III. Disposition We vacate the judgment and Options: A. holding that there was sufficient evidence of intent to sell or deliver where the defendant was in possession of one large cocaine rock and eight smaller rocks B. holding that trial court may arrest judgment on conviction for possession with intent to deliver and enter judgment of guilt on simple possession C. holding that the manner a controlled substance is packaged may be considered in establishing intent to sell and deliver D. holding that trial court could properly determine that evidence of a gun was relevant to the charge of possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine because as a practical matter firearms are frequently involved for protection in the illegal drug trade E. holding defendant could only be sentenced to a single offense under section 1244011 not both conspiracy with intent to deliver and possession with intent to deliver

assistant: The best answer is E. holding defendant could only be sentenced to a single offense under section 1244011 not both conspiracy with intent to deliver and possession with intent to deliver
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 invoices, notices, requests and other communications given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and sent by email or nationally recognized overnight courier. A notice shall be deemed to have been received when transmitted by email to any of the other Parties’ email addresses set forth in Schedule M of the Supply and Offtake Agreement, or on the following Business Day if sent by nationally recognized overnight courier to any of the other Parties’ addresses set forth in Schedule M of the Supply and Offtake Agreement and to the attention of the persons or departments indicated. A Party may change its address or email address by giving written notice in accordance with this Section, which is effective upon receipt.

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: The Servicer will use reasonable efforts to collect all payments due under each Lease in the 2017-B Reference Pool. The Servicer may waive late payment charges or other fees that may be collected in the ordinary course of servicing a Lease. The Servicer may grant extensions, refunds, rebates or adjustments on a Lease or amend a Lease according to the Servicing Procedures. However, if the Servicer (a) grants a Payment Extension or Term Extension on a Lease in the 2017-B Reference Pool resulting in the final payment date of the Lease being later than the Final Scheduled Payment Date of the most junior Class of Notes issued by the Issuer or (b) modifies the amount of the Base Payment due on a Lease, it will reallocate the Lease and the related Leased Vehicle to the Revolving Facility Pool under Section 3.3, unless it is required to take the action by law or court order.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any of the terms or provisions of this Plan, or awards made under this Plan, conflict with the requirements of Section 162(m) or Section 422 of the Code with respect to awards subject to or governed by Section 162(m) or Section 422 of the Code, then such terms or provisions shall be deemed inoperative to the extent they so conflict with the requirements of Section 162(m) or Section 422 of the Code. With respect to an Incentive Stock Option, if this Plan does not contain any provision required to be included herein under Section 422 of the Code (as the same shall be amended from time to time), such provision shall be deemed to be incorporated herein with the same force and effect as if such provision had been set out herein.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is limited to damages”). To the extent we suggested otherwise in Doe, see 1996 WL 670414, at *4, we decline to follow, and are not bound by, that unpublished opinion, see 5th Cir. 47.5.4 (providing that "[unpublished opinions issued on or after January 1, 1996, are not precedent”). 45 . See Imperial, 37 F.3d at 1028 ("To assure that hospitals and doctors cooperate with the system and engage in meaningful professional , 1202 (D.Colo.2000) (concluding that the emergency provision was applicable where "the Executive Committee found that Dr. Pfenninger had exercised poor judgment in three recent cases; that he had a history of similar problems, and that summary suspension was 'necessary to protect patients' ”). 48 . See Payne v. Harris Methodist HEB, 44 Fed.Appx. 652 n. 1 (5th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). 49 . Rogers v. Columbia/HCA of Cent. La., Options: A. holding that because the allegations purportedly suppressed by the government were not material an evidentiary hearing further exploring the allegations themselves and the governments knowledge of the allegations is unnecessary B. holding in considering the emergency provision that given the serious allegations of incompetence made against payne we agree with the district court that the hospital was permitted to suspend him temporarily while sorting out the truth of the allegations C. holding that conclusory allegations are not entitled to the assumption of truth D. holding that the district court did not err in finding that the plaintiff failed to provide adequate notice of new allegations where the plaintiffs complaint gave the defendants no notice of the specific factual allegations presented for the first time in the plaintiffs opposition to summary judgment E. holding that evidence of other allegations of torture was inadmissible in part because it was not similar to the allegations made by defendant

assistant: The best answer is B. holding in considering the emergency provision that given the serious allegations of incompetence made against payne we agree with the district court that the hospital was permitted to suspend him temporarily while sorting out the truth of the allegations
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: Jose Jesus Delgadillo-Dominguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming without opinion the immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. Petitioner contends that no asylum case could ever properly be streamlined by the BIA because such cases invariably involve a “novel fact situation.” We reject this contention because not every fact-based case is “novel in the eyes of the law.” See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 852 (9th Cir.2003). Petitioners’ contention that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate due process is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche, 350 F.3d at 849-52 (<HOLDING>). Pursuant to Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 Options: A. holding that the bias streamlining procedure does not violate an aliens due process rights B. holding that the defendant bears the burden of proof and that such a disposition does not violate the due process clause C. holding that negligent inaction by a jail officer does not violate due process D. holding that imposition of more severe sentence following trial de novo does violate defendants due process rights E. holding that doctrine does not violate due process

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the bias streamlining procedure does not violate an aliens due process rights
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: Within ten (10) days after the Closing Date, the Borrowers shall deliver to the Administrative Agent a certificate as to coverage under the general liability and property insurance policies required by Section 5.02 of the Credit Agreement, each of which shall be endorsed or otherwise amended to include a customary lender’s loss payable endorsement and to name the Collateral Agent as additional insured, in each case in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Administrative Agent. The Administrative Agent acknowledges that the foregoing insurance certificates and endorsements have been received as of the Restatement Date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with debtor information and CPA drafted and sent letters directing debtors to send their payments and all other communications directly to TCI. The court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), holding that plaintiff had stated a claim under § 1692a(6) by alleging that “TCI is merely renting or borrowing CPA’s name and letterhead to assist in its own debt collection activities.” Id. at *4. The court finds that plaintiff sufficiently alleges that defendant is operating as the debt collector when GCS mails the initial letter. The letter states that the debtor’s file “will be referred” for collection, indicating that it has not yet been referred to any collection agency. See, e.g., Maguire v. Citicorp Retail Services, Inc., 147 F.3d 232, 237 (2d Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the evidence reveals that GCS never Options: A. holding that the use of the phrase will be reported in a letter supports an inference that since the account may be reported to a collection agency the ostensible debt collector debtor assistance is not such an agency though the court noted that the unsophisticated consumer might just as easily draw the opposite inference B. holding that the notice requirement applies only to the first debt collector that communicates with the consumer C. holding that an entity engaged in collection activity on a defaulted debt acquired from another is a debt collector under the fdcpa even though it may actually be owed the debt D. holding that the fdcpa did not apply to a collection agency retained by a hospital seeking medicaid reimbursement because the underlying debt was not in default even though the agency identified itself as a debtcollector E. holding that a creditor could be liable for the misrepresentations in a letter mailed by a collection agency hired to send the letter

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the use of the phrase will be reported in a letter supports an inference that since the account may be reported to a collection agency the ostensible debt collector debtor assistance is not such an agency though the court noted that the unsophisticated consumer might just as easily draw the opposite inference
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 complaint were timely delivered to a deputy attorney general on June 2, 2009, copies were not delivered to the secretary of state until July 10, 2009, one month late. A. Quasi-Estoppel The Naranjos assert that the district court erred by rejecting their contention that the doctrine of quasi-estoppel precluded IDOC from obtaining dismissal for insufficient service of process. Estoppel theories generally present mixed questions o Idaho 259, 262, 899 P.2d 969, 972 (1995) (“Because we affirm the ... decision that Willig did not prove the necessary elements of equitable and quasi estoppel, we do not address the further question whether estoppel may ever be applied against [the government].”); Young v. Idaho Dep’t of Law Enforcement, 123 Idaho 870, 875, 853 P.2d 615, 620 (Ct.App.1993) (<HOLDING>). We find that to be the situation here. Even Options: A. holding that surety was not entitled to remission or excused of its obligation to take precautionary action to prevent defendant from leaving jurisdiction doctrine of impossibility of performance did not apply to the circumstances presented B. holding quasiestoppel did not apply when boards actions were not unconscionable without discussing whether the case presented extraordinary circumstance C. holding that because plaintiff did not apply for a job he could not be rejected in a title vii case D. holding quasiestoppel did not apply when department did not take an inconsistent position without discussing whether the case presented extraordinary circumstances E. holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to consider an argument not presented to the board in a motion for reconsideration

assistant: The best answer is D. holding quasiestoppel did not apply when department did not take an inconsistent position without discussing whether the case presented extraordinary circumstances
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: prevail on a bad faith claim against Defendant, Plaintiff must establish by clear and convincing evidence: “(1) that the insurer lacked a reasonable basis for denying benefits; and (2) that the insurer knew or recklessly disregarded its lack of reasonable basis.” Klinger v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 115 F.3d 230, 233 (3d Cir.1997) (citing Terletsky, 649 A.2d at 688). To meet the clear and convincing evidence standard, the evidence must be “so ‘clear, direct, weighty and convincing’ so as to enable the court to make its decision with ‘a clear conviction.’ ” Polselli v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 23 F.3d 747, 752 (3d Cir.1994) (citing In re Estate of Fickert, 461 Pa. 653, 337 A.2d 592, 594 (1975)); see also U.S. Fire Ins. Co. v. Royal Ins. Co., 759 F.2d 306, 309 (3d Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). B. Analysis To determine whether Defendant’s Options: A. holding that a bad faith claim must be met through the clear and convincing evidence standard B. holding that despite the lack of a statutory requirement that severe child abuse be shown by clear and convincing evidence due to the consequences of such a finding the clear and convincing standard must be applied C. holding that even if the standard for waiver is clear the standard was not met D. holding that bad faith andor prejudice must be shown by clear and convincing evidence E. holding that release status must be proven by clear and convincing evidence through reliable documentary evidence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a bad faith claim must be met through the clear and convincing evidence standard
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 hereto shall not assign this Agreement or their interest in the PSAs, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other party, except to an affiliate. Neither Griffin, Tenant nor Subtenant (nor their applicable affiliates) shall assign their respective interests under the PSA without the prior written consent of the other party except (i) pursuant to the Assignment or (ii) with respect to a further assignment to an affiliate.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any and all notices or other communications or deliveries required or permitted to be provided hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given and effective on the earliest of: (a) the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile at the facsimile number set forth on the signature pages attached hereto at or prior to 4:00 p.m. (New York City time) on a Trading Day, (b) the next Trading Day after the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile at the facsimile number set forth on the signature pages attached hereto on a day that is not a Trading Day or later than 4:00 p.m. (New York City time) on any Trading Day, (c) the second (2 nd ) Trading Day following the date of mailing, if sent by U.S. nationally recognized overnight courier service or (d) upon actual receipt by the party to whom such notice is required to be given. The address for such notices and communications shall be as set forth on the signature pages attached hereto.

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: Borrower shall not, and shall not permit any of its Subsidiaries to, directly or indirectly, enter into any transaction, including, without limitation, the purchase, sale, or exchange of property, the rendering of any service or the payment of any management, advisory or similar fees, with any Affiliate of Borrower or such Subsidiary (excluding Borrower or any other Subsidiary), except in the ordinary course of and pursuant to the reasonable requirements of Borrower’s or such Subsidiary’s business, pursuant to a transaction which is otherwise expressly permitted under this Agreement, and upon fair and reasonable terms no less favorable to Borrower or such Subsidiary than would be obtained in a comparable arm’s-length transaction with a Person not an Affiliate of Borrower or such Subsidiary.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: As previously noted, the parties dispute when Tri-Etch alerted Cincinnati of Young’s death and the resulting lawsuit. Cincinnati asks us to find Tri-Etch’s notice unreasonably late as a matter of law and affirm the trial court’s summary judgment order on this basis. However, regardless of when Cincinnati received notice of Young’s death and the Estate’s lawsuit, Cincinnati has always contended that Young’s death was not an “occurrence” entitled to coverage under its policies. Thus, we first must discern whether Cincinnati can show that it was prejudiced by Tri-Etch’s allegedly faulty notice. In Miller v. Dilts, our Supreme Court held that an insurer may not avoid liability under a policy’s cooperation and notice clauses unless the insured’s noncompliance with tho 2d 430, 435 (1992) (<HOLDING>). We will assume for the sake of the argument Options: A. holding that when the insurer takes the position that the policy does not cover the complaint the insurer must 1 defend the suit under a reservation of rights or 2 seek a declaratory judgment that there is no coverage if the insurer fails to take either of these actions it will be estopped from later raising policy defenses to coverage B. holding that an immaterial breach does not deprive the insurer of the benefit of the bargain and thus cannot relieve the insurer of the contractual coverage obligation C. holding that under montana common law an insurer cannot be held liable for bad faith in denying a claim if the insurer had a reasonable basis for contesting the claim D. holding that if an insurer denies coverage based on an assertion that the underlying claim is excluded from coverage there is a presumption that the insurer did not suffer prejudice because prompt notice would have merely resulted in an earlier denial of coverage E. holding that in light of evidence that the insurer would have denied coverage even if it had received suit papers on a timely basis the insurer could not show prejudice

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that in light of evidence that the insurer would have denied coverage even if it had received suit papers on a timely basis the insurer could not show prejudice