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: as “murder which is ... wilful, deliberate or premeditated ... or which is committed ... in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, ... robbery.” (Quoting Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 13-452 (Supp. 1973).) At trial, the prosecution sought to prove the capital murder offense by advancing both a theory of premeditated murder and one of felony murder. Schad, 501 U.S. at 629, 111 S.Ct. 2491. The jury returned a general verdict of guilty, witho Ill.Dec. 830, 841, 525 N.E.2d 1137, 1148 (stating that the jury must be unanimous on the ultimate question of guilt or innocence, not on the theory applied), appeal denied, 122 Ill.2d 590, 125 Ill.Dec. 232, 530 N.E.2d 260 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1024, 109 S.Ct. 1149, 103 L.Ed.2d 209 (1989); State v. Fuhrmann, 257 N.W.2d 619, 626 (Iowa 1977) (<HOLDING>); State v. Wilson, 220 Kan. 341, 345, 552 P.2d Options: A. holding that counsel did not admit the defendant was guilty of a crime when counsel noted that if the evidence established the commission of any crime that crime was voluntary manslaughter not murder B. holding that conspiracy to commit murder is not lesserincluded offense of firstdegree murder C. holding that unlike the specificintent crime of firstdegree murder seconddegree murder is a generalintent crime for which the defense of voluntary intoxication is not available D. 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 E. holding that firstdegree murder is one crime although the defendant can commit the crime in several ways

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that firstdegree murder is one crime although the defendant can commit the crime in several ways
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 Seller is a limited partnership duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Delaware. The Seller has full power, authority and capacity to execute and deliver this Agreement and the Transaction Documents to which it is a party and to perform its obligations hereunder and thereunder and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: conditions of supervised release” under § 3583(e)), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 827, 117 S.Ct. 90, 136 L.Ed.2d 46 (1996); United States v. Spinelle, 41 F.3d 1056, 1058 (6th Cir.1994) (stating that under § 3583(e), the sentencing court oversees the post-confinement monitoring of the defendant). Additionally, the committee notes to Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure state specifically that a defendant ought to have an opportunity to obtain from the district court a clarification of a term or condition of supervised release so that the defendant may have an opportunity to comply with the court’s order without first having to violate it. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.1(b) advisory committee’s note; see also United States v. Dempsey, 180 F.3d 1325, 1325-26 (11th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Thus, when restitution is one of the Options: A. holding in favor of a defendant who on a rule 321b motion had sought to have the conditions of his supervised release modified or clarified by the district court B. holding that further supervised release may be ordered as a sentence for violation of supervised release C. holding that courts failure to tell defendant in rule 11 plea hearing that he faced a mandatory period of supervised release was harmless error because the defendant was on notice of the supervised release requirement set out in the plea agreement and the defendant did not claim he was unaware of the requirement only that court technically had failed to comply with requirements of rule D. holding that 3583e2 allows a district court to modify the conditions of supervised release without extending the term of that release E. recognizing district courts wide latitude in imposing supervised release conditions

assistant: The best answer is A. holding in favor of a defendant who on a rule 321b motion had sought to have the conditions of his supervised release modified or clarified by the district court
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: injury to U.S. purchasers of media advertising.” CCC relies upon a district court holding that a foreign company had to show injury within the United States before the court would have subject matter jurisdiction under the Sherman Act, and that such a company could not do so merely by showing injury to an unrelated American firm. See The ‘In’ Porters, S.A. v. Hanes Printables, Inc., 663 F.Supp. 494 (M.D.N.C.1987). Even if we were bound by that court’s holding, we would not think the that the complaint fails to allege either harm to U.S. commerce or a relevant market. We find neither part of this argument persuasive. The complaint both describes a relevant market—the market for English-language radio broadcast adver y & Chemical Corp., 382 U.S. 172, 86 S.Ct. 347, 15 L.Ed.2d 247, (1965) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the complaint alleges specifically Options: A. holding that a plaintiff may state a claim under the sherman act for a defendants enforcement of a patent procured by fraud on the pto where the plaintiff alleges deliberate fraud and the other elements of a monopolization claim under section 2 of the sherman act B. holding a nonparty to a patent infringement suit who funded an unsuccessful challenge to a patent could not file a subsequent lawsuit again challenging the patent C. holding patent policy incorporated by reference into patent agreement D. holding that plaintiffs complaint failed to state a claim under section 1 of the sherman act E. holding that complaint alleging defendant attempted to monopolize by threatening to and pursuing legal enforcement of patent procured by fraud on patent office stated claim under 2 of sherman act

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that complaint alleging defendant attempted to monopolize by threatening to and pursuing legal enforcement of patent procured by fraud on patent office stated claim under 2 of sherman act
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: census.” Although it is certainly possibly that Congress may seek to prevent the Department from conducting its plan to utilize sampling, there is no legal significance to this observation. Congress may always moot out a controversy by passing new legislation, but that fact does not shield agency action from judicial review. There is always the possibility that settlement or some external event will render a case moot, but that hardly renders the litigation nonjusticiable before that event occurs. If the government’s view were correct, then no agency action could ever be reviewed so long as Congress might intervene by passing new legislation that might overrule the final agency determination. See New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144, 175, 112 S.Ct. 2408, 120 L.Ed.2d 120 (1992) (<HOLDING>); see also Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Options: A. holding that a seller could enforce an arbitration provision against a buyer even though only the buyer had signed the provision B. holding that fehbas complete preemption provision closely resembles erisas express preemption provision and precedent interpreting the erisa provision thus provides authority for cases involving the fehba provision C. holding that plaintiff could not have been surprised that trial court would scrutinize liquidated damages provision prior to enforcement even though the issue of the enforceability of the provision was not raised as an affirmative defense D. holding that a provision of the constitution is to be construed in the sense in which it was understood by the framers and the people at the time of its adoption but that if new products or circumstances that did not exist at the time the constitutional provision was enacted fall within the meaning of the provision the constitutional provision applies to them E. holding case ripe for review even though provision at issue would not take effect until three and a half years after the courts decision during which time congress could have repealed the provision

assistant: The best answer is E. holding case ripe for review even though provision at issue would not take effect until three and a half years after the courts decision during which time congress could have repealed the provision
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 352 U.S. 280 77 S.Ct. 307 1 L.Ed.2d 314 Robert W. JAFFKE, Petitioner,v.William C. DUNHAM, Trustee of the Estate of Robert L. Knetzer, Bankrupt. No. 60. Argued Dec. 12, 1956. Decided Jan. 14, 1957. Mr. Herbert J. Miller, Jr., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Mr. G. William Horsley, Springfield, Ill., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 We granted certiorari in this case to review a judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 229 F.2d 232, reversing an order of the District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, sitting in bankruptcy, which required respondent as trustee of a bankrupt's estate to pay $27,400 to petitioner. 351 U.S. 949, 76 S.Ct. 847. The District Court's order was based on a finding that, subsequent to the date of the adjudication of bankruptcy, the bankrupt had obtained money by fraud from the petitioner and had turned over $27,400 of that money to respondent. At the hearing before the District Court, petitioner had sought to introduce into evidence an affidavit in which the bankrupt stated that he had paid $36,000 of the money he had received from petitioner to the respondent. At the conclusion of the hearing, the District Court sustained respondent's motion to strike the affidavit. 2 On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that petitioner had failed to prove that any specific portion of the money that he had given the bankrupt became a part of the funds in the hands of respondent. Because petitioner had not cross-appealed, the Court of Appeals held that it could not consider the action of the District Court in striking the bankrupt's affidavit from the record. 3 A successful party in the District Court may sustain its judgment on any ground that finds support in the record. If the District Court was in error in striking an admissible affidavit, a cross-appeal was not a prerequisite for the Court of Appeals to rule on the admissibility of the affidavit, and finding it admissible, to find that it afforded evidence in support of the District Court judgment. United States v. American Railway Express Co., 265 U.S. 425, 435—436, 44 S.Ct. 560, 563—564, 68 L.Ed. 1087; Langnes v. Green, 282 U.S. 531, 538—539, 51 S.Ct. 243, 246, 75 L.Ed. 520. Since the Court of Appeals did not consider the admissibility and weight of the affidavit, we remand to the Court of Appeals for its consideration of those issues. 4 The claim in this case is that relevant, admissible evidence established a constructive trust. Whether it did so or not is a question of Illinois law. The Court of Appeals, in the view it took of the case before it, did not reach this local question. On remand, that question too must be considered by the Court of Appeals. 5 Reversed and remanded.

assistant: 9
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be terminated by any Purchaser, as to such Purchaser’s obligations hereunder only and without any effect whatsoever on the obligations between the Company and the other Purchasers, by written notice to the other parties, if the Closing has not been consummated on or before February 6, 2017; provided , however , that such termination will not affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party (or parties).

assistant: Terminations
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: § 1125(c)(1). The finding of a mark as famous is “a rigorous standard, as it extends protection only to highly distinctive marks that are well-known throughout the country.” Green v. Fornario, 486 F.3d 100, 105 (3d Cir. 2007). Plaintiffs “Mastermind” mark is not famous because as the Court discussed above, it is merely descriptive without secondary meaning. Plaintiff has failed to show that “Mastermind” is “widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States as a designation of source of the goods or services” of the mark Plaintiff owns. 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(1). While Plaintiff alleges he has used the mark for nearly eighteen years, Plaintiff fails to show the extent and geographic reach of advertising and publicity of the mark. See Jada Toys, Inc., 518 F.3d at 635 (<HOLDING>). Additionally, Plaintiff provided the Court Options: A. holding limited use of a mark did not constitute prior use in commerce sufficient to establish rights in the mark B. holding that the issue presented by a composite mark consisting of personal names is what the purchasing publie would think when confronted with the mark as a whole C. holding that 350 million dollars expended in advertising the mark three billion units bearing the mark having been sold and the units bearing the mark having been sold in all fifty states and throughout the work supported a finding that hot wheels was famous D. holding that there is nothing improper about the use of a trademark to communicate that goods bearing that mark were actually sold on defendants website E. holding that the essential wrong of trademark infringement the appropriation of the good will of anothers established mark may be effectively accomplished by advertising matter associating that others distinguishing mark with the product of defendant

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that 350 million dollars expended in advertising the mark three billion units bearing the mark having been sold and the units bearing the mark having been sold in all fifty states and throughout the work supported a finding that hot wheels was famous
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 become effective (other than Sections 2.01 and 2.16, which shall only become effective upon satisfaction of the conditions precedent set forth in Section 3.01) when it shall have been executed by the Borrowers and the Agent and when the Agent shall have been notified by each Initial Lender that such Initial Lender has executed it and thereafter shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Borrowers, the Agent and each Lender and their respective successors and assigns, except that no Borrower shall have the right to assign its rights hereunder or any interest herein without the prior written consent of the Lenders.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Comply with all Applicable Laws, including ERISA, Environmental Laws, FLSA, OSHA, Anti-Terrorism Law (in all material respects), and laws regarding collection and payment of Taxes, and maintain all Governmental Approvals necessary to the ownership of its Properties or conduct of its business, unless failure to comply (other than failure to comply with Anti-Terrorism Law Laws, which shall not be subject to the “Material Adverse Effect” qualification in this sentence) or maintain could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, if any Environmental Release occurs at or on any Properties of the Company or any Subsidiary, it shall act promptly and diligently to investigate and report to Agent and all appropriate Governmental Authorities the extent of, and to make appropriate remedial action to eliminate, such Environmental Release, whether or not directed to do so by any Governmental Authority, if, as required by Environmental Law or necessary to preserve the value as a whole of such Properties.

assistant: Compliance With 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: in the event of any failure of the applications to conform to any applicable warranty , ( i ) you may notify the app provider and the app provider may refund the purchase price for the applications to you ( if applicable ) , ( ii ) to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law , the app provider will have no other warranty obligation whatsoever with respect to the applications , and ( iii ) any other claims , losses , liabilities , damages , costs or expenses attributable to any failure to conform to any warranty will be , as between under armour and the app provider , under armour 's responsibility ;

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: Magnum hereby agrees to employ Executive, and Executive hereby agrees to accept employment with Magnum, upon the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. Executive’s employment with Magnum under the terms of this Agreement shall be for a period beginning on the Effective Date and continuing until Executive’s employment is terminated as provided in Section 5 herein (the “ Employment Period ”).

assistant: Employment
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: declaration, the individual Plaintiffs provide over 91 years of experience at CUC’s main power plant. (Gary Camacho Deck, ECF No. 7-3 at 5.) Without their expertise, Camacho argues that there will continue, to be a “direct deterioration of service to the Utility’s customers and the general public of the CNMI.” (Id. at 6.) This includes an increase in overtime pay to cover the lack of manpower, delayed preventative scheduled maintenance on generators and other equipment, and delayed projects and other scheduled maintenance. (Id. at 7.) A plaintiff satisfies the irreparable harm requirement by demonstrating that irreparable injury is likely in the absence of an injunction. Winter, 555 U.S. at 22, 129 S.Ct. 365; Caribbean Marine Servs. Co. v. Baldrige, 844 F.2d 668, 674 (9th Cir. 1988) (<HOLDING>). “The possibility that adequate compensatory Options: A. holding that the district court erred when it failed to consider the presumption of irreparable harm B. holding that likelihood of irreparable harm must be based on evidence in the record not unsupported and conclusory statements regarding harm the plaintiff might suffer C. holding that a party who can show a significant risk of irreparable harm has demonstrated that the harm is not speculative D. holding that a plaintiff meets the injuryinfact requirement for standing if he faces a credible threat of harm and that harm is both real and immediate not conjectural or hypothetical E. holding that the threat of irreparable harm must be immediate

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the threat of irreparable harm must be immediate
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: depends upon the nature and character of the relief sought. Erie Ins. Group v. Fisher (1984), 15 Ohio St.3d 380, 382, 15 OBR 497, 498-499, 474 N.E.2d 320, 322-323; Gunsaullus v. Pettit (1888), 46 Ohio St. 27, 29, 17 N.E. 231, 231-232. When the relief sought is equitable, R.C. 2311.04 confers no right to a jury trial. Erie Ins. Group, supra, 15 Ohio St.3d at 382, 15 OBR at 498-499, 474 N.E.2d at 322; City Loan & Sav. Co. v. Howard (1984), 16 Ohio App.3d 185, 186, 16 OBR 195, 197, 475 N.E.2d 154, 156. When the pleadings seek a mixture of legal and equitable relief, the right to a jury trial depends upon the action’s primary and predominant objective. See, e.g., Murello Constr. Co. v. Citizens Home Sav. Co. (1985), 29 Ohio App.3d 333, 334, 29 OBR 461, 461-462, 505 N.E.2d 637, 638 (<HOLDING>); Huntington Natl. Bank v. Heritage Invest. Options: A. holding that claims for equitable relief under 502a3 are only available when a plaintiff has no other relief under erisa B. holding that where plaintiff sought only equitable relief up through the end of trial and only added claim for legal relief posttrial defendant was entitled to demand jury once legal claim was asserted C. holding damages do not constitute other equitable relief D. holding that a jury trial was not required when the money demand although specific was incidental and ancillary to the equitable relief requested and would ripen only if equitable relief were granted E. holding that equitable relief under rico is available only to the government

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a jury trial was not required when the money demand although specific was incidental and ancillary to the equitable relief requested and would ripen only if equitable relief were granted
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 constitutes the entire and final agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. It is the complete and exclusive expression of the parties’ agreement on the matters contained in this Agreement. All prior and contemporaneous negotiations, term sheets, and other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties on the matters contained in this Agreement are expressly merged into and superseded by this Agreement. No provisions of this Agreement may be explained, supplemented, or qualified through evidence of trade usage or a prior course of dealings.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All federal, state and other material tax returns of the Parent, the Borrower, each other Loan Party and each other Subsidiary required by Applicable Law to be filed have been duly filed, and all federal, state and other material taxes, assessments and other governmental charges or levies upon, each Loan Party, each other Subsidiary and their respective properties, income, profits and assets which are due and payable have been paid, except any such nonpayment or non-filing which is at the time permitted under Section 7.6. As of the Agreement Date, no Loan Party (or any of its Subsidiaries) has been notified that any of its United States income tax returns are under audit. All charges, accruals and reserves on the books of the Parent, the Borrower, the other Loan Parties and the other Subsidiaries in respect of any taxes or other governmental charges are in accordance with GAAP.

assistant: Taxes
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: brands to ensure consistency”). However, because private label goods offer a strong value benefit, if a national customer wishes to purchase such goods and have them available across all of its locations, it can do so most efficiently through a broadliner with national geographic scope. See Hr’g Tr. 600 (George Holm of PFG stating that one reason national customers prefer to contract with Sysco or USF is that “[w]here they have a preference for a private brand, [] it is the same product [across] their system”). ’ c. Defendants’ Operations Both Sysco arid USF operate dedicated sales groups from their national headquarters that are responsible for negotiating and managing contracts with customers who use multiple distribution centers. See Grinnell, 384 U.S. at 572-74, 86 S.Ct. 1698 (<HOLDING>). Sysco refers to these customers as “corporate Options: A. holding that centralized station security services operated on a national level is a relevant product market B. holding that whether a product is within comment k should be determined on a case by case basis where it is shown that the product is unavoidably unsafe and product of exceptional social need C. holding that proof of relevant market is essential under 2 D. holding that changes in the baseball card market between 1965 and 1980 foreclosed any argument that a definition of the relevant market by the federal trade commission could preclude relitigation of the market definition issue E. holding that a contract for an exclusive agency to market a product contains an implied promise to use all reasonable efforts to market the product

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that centralized station security services operated on a national level is a relevant product market
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 appellant had acted with particular cruelty. The district court thereafter sentenced appellant to a double upward durational departure of 300 months. ISSUES 1. Did the district court commit reversible error by allowing Dr. Roe to testify regarding the laboratory test results and to render an opinion based in part on those results because admission of that evidence violated appellant’s right to confront witnesses? 2. Did the district court err or abuse its discretion with respect to the other issues raised by appellant? ANALYSIS I. “[E]videntiary rulings — including the admission of chemical or scientific test reports — are within the discretion of the district court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” State v. Caulfield, 722 N.W.2d 804, 308 (Minn.2006) (<HOLDING>). “But whether the admission of evidence Options: A. holding that the confrontation clause applies only to testimonial hearsay B. holding that bureau of criminal apprehension bca laboratory report identifying a substance as cocaine was testimonial and implicated defendants right to confrontation C. holding the confrontation clause applies only to testimonial statements D. holding forensic laboratory experts statement that substance was cocaine is testimonial for sixth amendment confrontation clause purposes E. holding that state bureau of criminal apprehension laboratory report offered at trial to prove that substance seized from defendant was cocaine was clearly prepared for litigation and was testimonial

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that bureau of criminal apprehension bca laboratory report identifying a substance as cocaine was testimonial and implicated defendants right to confrontation
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 extent provided in the Company’s By-Laws and Certificate of Incorporation, the Company shall indemnify the Executive for losses or damages incurred by the Executive as a result of all causes of action arising from the Executive’s performance of duties for the benefit of the Company, whether or not the claim is asserted during the Employment Period. This indemnity shall not apply to the Executive’s acts of willful misconduct or gross negligence. The Executive shall be covered under any directors’ and officers’ insurance that the Company maintains for its directors and other officers in the same manner and on the same basis as the Company’s directors and other officers.

assistant: Indemnifications
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: Unless the Grantee makes alternative arrangements satisfactory to the Company to personally remit required withholding amounts, then, as of the date that all or a portion of the Cash Award becomes paid pursuant to Section 4.1 hereof, the Company shall withhold a portion of the Cash Award so paid as required by law to be withheld by the Company in connection with such payment for applicable federal, state, local and foreign taxes of any kind. To the extent taxes are to be withheld upon vesting for purposes of federal FICA, FUTA or Medicare taxes, such withholding shall be taken from other income owed by the Company to the Grantee and the Grantee hereby agrees to such withholding. For all purposes, the amount withheld by the Company pursuant to this Section 6.3 shall be deemed to have first been paid to the Grantee.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: These trades involved interstate commerce. See, e.g., Wachovia Securities LLC v. Emery, 186 S.W.3d 107, 112 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, no pet.). Thus, the Bryce Interests partnership agreement “turn[ed] out to involve interstate commerce,” and as such, “evidenc[es] a transaction involving interstate commerce.” Therefore, the arbitration provision falls within the bounds of the FAA. See 9 U.S.C. § 2; Dobson, 513 U.S. at 277, 115 S.Ct. at 841. Moreover, the partnership agreement provides that it “shall be construed and enforced according to the laws of the State of Texas and the courts of that state, except as may otherwise be required by the laws of any other jurisdiction.” Generic language such as this invokes both federal and state law. See Wilson, 196 S.W.3d at 778-79 (<HOLDING>); In re L & L Kempwood Assocs., L.P., 9 S.W.3d Options: A. holding that both faa and taa applied where contracts stated they shall be governed by the law of the place where the project is located B. holding that the meaning of the coverage limit is governed by the law of place of contracting because it goes to the substance of obligation C. holding that a dispute is governed by both the convention and the faa because nothing in the convention or its history or in the implementing legislation or its history suggests exclusivity from the faa D. holding that agreement to employ arbitration organized under the statutes or the courts of the states in which the complaining party is domiciled invokes both faa and taa E. holding that ejxcept in matters governed by the federal constitution or by acts of congress the law to be applied in any case is the law of the state

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that both faa and taa applied where contracts stated they shall be governed by the law of the place where the project is located
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: Serv. Co., 210 A.D.2d 207, 620 N.Y.S.2d 255, 256 (1994) (emphasis added). The purpose of this limitation is to ensure that the tort of conversion—a property tort—is applied only where a plaintiff alleges interference with money in which he has a property interest, as contrasted with a mere right to receive payment. See High View Fund, 27 F.Supp.2d at 429; Selinger Enters., Inc. v. Cassuto, 50 A.D.3d 766, 860 N.Y.S.2d 533, 536 (2008) (“The mere right to payment cannot be the basis for a cause of action alleging conversion; the essence of such a cause of action is the ‘unauthorized dominion over the thing in question.’ ” (quoting Fiorenti v. Cent. Emergency Physicians, 305 A.D.2d 453, 762 N.Y.S.2d 402, 403 (2003))); Horn v. Toback, 44 Misc.3d 42, 989 N.Y.S.2d 779, 782 (App. Term 2014) (<HOLDING>). That determination often turns on whether the Options: A. holding that proceeds of a litigation settlement were an identifiable fund and thus a proper subject of a misappropriation and conversion claim B. holding that contract debt was not subject to an act in tort for conversion C. holding plaintiff could not recover on nuisance action to recover for alleged damage to property he does not own or rent D. holding that defendant was entitled to summary judgment on conversion claim because the claim seeks merely to recover an allegedly unpaid debt and does not seek to recover money from a discrete identifiable fund E. holding that carrier was entitled to summary judgment on claim regarding false statements that claimants were not entitled to coverage because the claim was limited to complaints about delays claim handling and disputes regarding entitlement to benefits

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that defendant was entitled to summary judgment on conversion claim because the claim seeks merely to recover an allegedly unpaid debt and does not seek to recover money from a discrete identifiable fund
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 contains the entire understanding of Employer and Executive with respect to the subject matter herein. The Release Benefits shall be in lieu of any severance, notice, termination pay or the like that may be payable under any plan or practice of Employer, or that may be payable by any Federal, state, local, or foreign law, statute, regulation, ordinance, or the like (including the WARN Act or any similar state or foreign law). Any Release Benefits shall be offset against any severance, notice, or termination pay required to be paid by Employer pursuant to federal, state, or local law or ordinance.

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: should be strictly construed. Bergmann v. Boyce, 109 Nev. 670, 679, 856 P.2d 560, 565-66 (1993). Accordingly, we conclude that the district court erred in awarding IOV2 percent interest on the judgment rather than the statutory rate, and reverse and remand this portion of the judgment with instructions to amend the award by applying the statutory rate. Prejudgment interest on costs Appellants maintain that the district court order can be read to require prejudgment interest on the award of costs since it provides that interest on the entire judgment should be awarded from the date of service of the complaint. First, appellants argue that interest should not be awarded on costs at all. See National Educators Life Insurance Company v. Apache Lanes, Inc., 555 P.2d 600, 602 (Okla. 1976) (<HOLDING>); Cajun Electric Power Cooperative v. Options: A. recognizing general rule that prejudgment interest may be awarded in claims for liquidated amounts B. holding that a proper determination of the questions of law cannot be made in the absence of suitable findings C. holding that no interest is paid on benefits awarded based on a finding of cue D. holding that in the absence of statutory authorization interest cannot be awarded on costs E. holding that credit cannot be awarded for time served on community control

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that in the absence of statutory authorization interest cannot be awarded on costs
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 the courts do not intrude into the determination of the doctrinal issues.” Ibid. In appropriate circumstances a court may apply neutral principles of law to determine disputed questions that do not implicate religious doctrine. Ibid. “ ‘Neutral principles’ are wholly secular legal rules whose application to religious parties or disputes does not entail theological or doctrinal evaluations.” Id. at 414-15, 593 A2d 725. Defendants have couched their argument in terms of the Free Exercise Clause. They contend, in effect, that jurisdiction over this employment dispute would unconstitutionally interfere with Seton Hall’s right freely to exercise its religious beliefs. See Hernandez v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 490 U.S. 680, 698, 109 S.Ct. 2136, 2148, 104 L.Ed.2d 766, 786 (1989) (<HOLDING>); Kedroff v. Saint Nicholas Cathedral, 344 U.S. Options: A. holding that docs may place reasonable limitations on an inmates right to the free exercise of religion including a requirement that the inmate register his religious affiliation B. holding that religious exercise is any exercise of religion whether or not compelled by or central to a system of religious belief and that the use building or conversion of real property for the purpose of religious exercise shall be considered religious exercise C. holding that a prisoner stated a valid free exercise of religion claim where he alleged that prison officials refused to allow him to receive certain religious books D. holding that corrections officers mockpreaching and espousal of religious views did not constitute a substantial burden on inmates free exercise of religion E. recognizing a religious institutions right to free exercise of religion

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing a religious institutions right to free exercise of religion
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: 3553(e)[,] asserting the defendant’s substantial assistance to the Government; or (2) the defendant meets the “safety valve” criteria set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f).’ Otherwise, post-Booker sentencing courts lack discretion to depart below relevant statutory mínimums.” In this case, the gov 606, 2008 WL 946065 (5th Cir.2008) (noting that alleged violations of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment are subject to harmless error analysis). 4 . Cruz v. New York, 481 U.S. 186, 189, 107 S.Ct. 1714, 95 L.Ed.2d 162 (1987) (quoting U.S. Const. amend. VI). 5 . Crawford, 541 U.S. at 68, 124 S.Ct. 1354. 6 . Id. at 51, 124 S.Ct. 1354. 7 . Id. at 53, 124 S.Ct. 1354. 8 . Id. at 68, 124 S.Ct. 1354. 9 . See Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 135-36, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968) (<HOLDING>). 10 . U.S. Const. amend. VI. 11 . Crawford, Options: A. holding that lesser sentence imposed on codefendant did not constitute abuse of discretion where defendant was sentenced within the statutory and guideline range and where codefendant received reduction for acceptance of responsibility and for being a minimal participant B. holding that a defendants sixth amendment confrontation clause rights are violated when a court admits into evidence an incriminating statement given by a nontestifying codefendant C. holding that admission of a postal inspectors testimony about an oral confession by a defendants codefendant violated the defendants sixth amendment right to crossexamine his codefendant who was unavailable because the codefendant asserted his right not to testify D. holding that the defendants allegations that his codefendant admitted that the defendant had no role in the robbery and that the codefendant had not testified on the defendants behalf because he had been coerced by the state were sufficient to state a prima facie claim of newly discovered evidence E. holding that the admission of a pretrial confession of a nontestifying codefendant that incriminates the defendant violates that defendants right to confront witnesses even if a limiting instruction is given

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that admission of a postal inspectors testimony about an oral confession by a defendants codefendant violated the defendants sixth amendment right to crossexamine his codefendant who was unavailable because the codefendant asserted his right not to testify
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 provisions of this Agreement shall be severable in the event that any of the provisions hereof (including any provision within a single section, paragraph or sentence) are held by a court of competent jurisdiction or a properly empaneled arbitrator to be invalid, void or otherwise unenforceable, and the remaining provisions shall remain enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. Furthermore, to the fullest extent possible, the provisions of this Agreement (including, without limitations, each portion of this Agreement containing any provision held to be invalid, void or otherwise unenforceable, which is not itself invalid, void or unenforceable) shall be construed so as to give effect to the intent manifested by the provision held invalid, illegal or unenforceable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Information obtained by Buyer and its Representatives in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of the Letter Agreement by and between the Company and Magellan Health, Inc., dated as of November 16, 2015 (the “ Confidentiality Agreement ”). The terms of the Confidentiality Agreement shall survive the termination of this Agreement and continue in full force and effect thereafter and the Confidentiality Agreement shall not be modified, waived or amended without the written consent of the Company.

assistant: Confidentiality
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: Comply in all material respects with the requirements of all Laws and all orders, writs, injunctions and decrees applicable to it or to its business or property, except in such instances in which (a) such requirement of Law or order, writ, injunction or decree is being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings diligently conducted; or (b) the failure to comply therewith could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Compliance With 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: Subject to Section 8.1 of the Plan, upon any distribution of Ordinary Shares in respect of the Share Units, the Company shall automatically reduce the number of shares to be delivered by (or otherwise reacquire) the appropriate number of whole shares, valued at their then fair market value (with the “fair market value” of such shares determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Plan, to satisfy any applicable withholding obligations of the Company or its Subsidiaries with respect to such distribution of shares at any applicable withholding rates. In the event that the Company cannot legally satisfy such withholding obligations by such reduction of shares, or in the event of a cash payment or any other withholding event in respect of the Share Units, the Company (or a Subsidiary) shall be entitled to require a cash payment by or on behalf of the Participant and/or to deduct from other compensation payable to the Participant any sums required by federal, state or local tax law to be withheld with respect to such distribution or payment.

assistant: Tax 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: This Agreement may be executed manually or by facsimile by the Parties, in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be considered one and the same agreement and shall become effective when a counterpart hereof shall have been signed by each of the Parties and delivered to the other Parties. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Agreement by facsimile transmission or by e-mail of a .pdf attachment shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Indemnitee represents that there is no agreement with any other party that would conflict with his obligations under this Agreement, and represents and warrants that he/she (i) has read and understands each and every provision of this Agreement, (ii) has had the opportunity to obtain advice from legal counsel of his/her choice in order to interpret any and all provisions of this Agreement and (iii) has had the opportunity to ask the Company questions about this Agreement and any of such questions he/she has asked have been answered to his satisfaction.

assistant: Representations