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: through their representatives, have expressly disaffirmed the alleged arbitration agreement. See id. (third-party beneficiaries generally have the right to disclaim benefits proffered by a contract). The minor children are neither bringing claims in a lawsuit that seek direct benefits from the contract containing an arbitration clause, nor are they deliberately seeking and obtaining substantial benefits from the contract itself outside of litigation. In re Weekley Homes, L.P., 180 S.W.3d at 131-33. Cf. In re Ford Motor Co., 220 S.W.3d at 24 (binding children to arbitration clause signed by parents in breach of warranty case where children sued on contract). The children’s claims are separate and distinct from those asserted by Garcia under the contract. Cf. Kepka, 178 S.W.3d at 295 (<HOLDING>). The children are bringing claims for loss of Options: A. holding that threatening employee to mind her own business investigating her videotaping her without her permission and forcing her to take polygraph could not be considered adverse employment actions because they had no effect on conditions of employment B. holding that nonsignatory wife asserting in her individual capacity claims for damages such as her own mental anguish and loss of consortium earnings companionship society and inheritance lacked the type of privity contemplated for the contracting parties to bind her to a contract that she did not sign in her individual capacity C. holding that the former wife did not waive her attorneyclient privilege simply because the credibility of her claim that she relied on her husbands representations could be impeached by deposing her former attorney D. holding that an amendment by a plaintiff to allege a claim in her representative capacity as adminis trator of estate under federal law related back to claims brought in her individual capacity under state law such an amendment was not equivalent to the commencement of a new cause of action so as to subject the amendment to the statute of limitations E. holding plaintiff stated claim in his individual capacity

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that nonsignatory wife asserting in her individual capacity claims for damages such as her own mental anguish and loss of consortium earnings companionship society and inheritance lacked the type of privity contemplated for the contracting parties to bind her to a contract that she did not sign in her individual capacity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: List Fusion understands and agrees that the List is a very valuable asset of Raphael and at all times the exclusive property of Raphael. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall, by express grant, implication, estoppel or otherwise, create in either party any right, title, interest or license in or to the inventions, patents, technical data, computer software or software documentation of the other party.

assistant: No
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: (i) All communications described in Section 10.02(a) and all other notices, demands, requests and other communications made in connection with any Loan Document shall be effective and be deemed to have been received (i) if delivered by hand, upon personal delivery, (ii) if delivered by overnight courier service, one Business Day after delivery to such courier service, (iii) if delivered by mail, three Business Days after deposit in the mail, (iv) if delivered by facsimile (other than to post to an E-System) during normal business hours, upon sender’s receipt of confirmation of proper transmission, (v) if delivered by facsimile (other than to post to an E-System) after normal business hours, upon the later of (A) sender’s receipt of confirmation of proper transmission and (B) the next Business Day, and (vi) if delivered by posting to any E-System, on the later of the Business Day of such posting and the Business Day access to such posting is given to the recipient thereof in accordance with the standard procedures applicable to such E-System; provided , that that no communications to Agent pursuant to ARTICLE I shall be effective until received by Agent.

assistant: Effectiveness
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: three, and five. State v. Ferrier, 136 Wn.2d 103, 111, 960 P.2d 927 (1998); State v. Boland, 115 Wn.2d 571, 576, 800 P.2d 1112 (1990). As for the fourth factor, we examine preexisting state law to determine what level of protection this state has historically accorded this subject. Ferrier, 136 Wn.2d at 111. And in doing so, we reject Aase’s argument — Washington cases have been consistent in finding that absent a showing of prejudice to the defendant, procedural noncompliance does not compel invalidation of an otherwise sufficient warrant or suppression of its fruits. State v. Kern, 81 Wn. App. 308, 311, 914 P.2d 114, review denied, 130 Wn.2d 1003 (1996). See State v. Parker, 28 Wn. App. 425, 426-27, 626 P.2d 508 (1981) (citing United States v. McKenzie, 446 F.2d 949 (6th Cir. 1971)) (<HOLDING>); State v. Bowman, 8 Wn. App. 148, 150, 504 Options: A. holding that search of backpack constituted a search of defendants person and was not authorized by search warrant for premises B. holding that evidence obtained in objectively reasonable reliance on a subsequently invalidated search warrant is not barred by the exclusionary rule C. holding that search not invalidated by defendant receiving unsigned and undated copy of warrant D. holding suppression of evidence obtained in objectively reasonable reliance on a subsequently invalidated search warrant is not required E. holding that failure to deliver a copy of search warrant and itemized copy of the warrant return to defendant in absence of showing of injury reveals no error

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that search not invalidated by defendant receiving unsigned and undated copy of warrant
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: Following any expiration or termination of this Agreement and Executive’s employment hereunder, in addition any amounts owed pursuant to Section 5 hereof, the Company shall pay to Executive all amounts earned by Executive hereunder prior to the date of such expiration and termination, as soon as administratively practicable following the date of termination of Executive’s employment, in the normal course consistent with the provisions of this Agreement. Additionally, subject to Executive’s continued compliance with Sections 7, 8 and 9 of this Agreement, if Executive terminates his employment with the Company without Good Reason on or after the date Executive attains age 62 (provided Executive has no less than 10 years of actual continuous service with Company following the date hereof as of such termination), all of Executive’s stock options and equity awards outstanding at termination of Executive’s employment shall continue to vest for four (4) years after the termination as if Executive remained employed through such time, and such stock options shall remain outstanding through the original expiration date of the stock options (disregarding any earlier expiration date based on Executive’s termination of employment).

assistant: Payments
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: whatsapp inc. ( `` whatsapp , '' `` our , '' `` we , '' or `` us '' ) provides messaging , internet calling , and other services to users around the world .

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: 7.1.5 the placement and ranking of listings in search results on the airbnb platform may vary and depend on a variety of factors , such as guest search parameters and preferences , host requirements , price and calendar availability , number and quality of images , customer service and cancellation history , reviews and ratings , type of host service , and/or ease of booking .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the interests of the group of claimants as .a whole necessitates the setting of deadlines to dislodge claims stalled in the claims resolution process. Finally, the Court notes that this conclusion is completely consistent with prior decisions of this Court. Indeed, the Court has, on several occasions, upheld Trust deadlines. See Almalich v. Dalkon Shield Claimant’s Trust, Docket No. 19103 (July 29,1994) (deadline regarding submission of claims material within day-to-day operations); Gunnell, Docket No. 19331 (ADR deadlines within day-to-day operations). Moreover, the Court has affirmed the Trust’s disallowance authority. See e.g., Almalich, Docket No. 19103 (affirming disallowance of claims for failure to submit final claim materials by the stated deadline); Mantush, Docket No. 18298 (<HOLDING>); Besag, Docket No. 19492 (affirming Trust Options: A. holding that the beneficiary of a trust was not the real party in interest regarding rights owned by the trust B. holding that statutory grounds for recusal can be waived both by failing to object and by failing to assert error on appeal C. recognizing where naked trust created the division of naked legal title and equitable title which may be united at option of cestui que trust D. recognizing trust authority to disallow claims for failing to select an option by july 1 1991 deadline E. holding that a third party who receives trust property on inquiry notice that a trustee has misappropriated trust funds is also liable for breach of trust

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing trust authority to disallow claims for failing to select an option by july 1 1991 deadline
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: Brown v. Pyatt (In re Pyatt), 486 F.3d 423, 428 (8th Cir.2007). After discussing the Eighth Circuit’s reasoning and finding it unpersuasive, the Ninth Circuit concluded: “Section 542(a)’s plain language, pre-Code practice, and other Code provisions compel our holding that a trustee may seek turnover from an entity that had ‘possession, custody, or control’ of the subject property during the bankruptcy case whether or not the entity had ‘possession, custody, or control’ at the time the turnover motion is filed.” Shapiro, 739 F.3d at 1199, 1204. More recently the Ninth Circuit wrote: “The trustee is not required to make any demand for turnover of estate property.” APJL Consulting, LLC v. Treasures, Inc. (In re Treasures, Inc.), 2015 WL 925957, *21 (9th Cir. BAP Mar. 3, 2015) (slip copy) (<HOLDING>). As noted in Collier’s: “By its express terms, Options: A. holding that section 890041 is not a jurisdictional requirement rather a requirement to maintain suit B. holding that this time requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional C. holding that turnover requirement of 542 is selfexecuting D. holding requirement nonjurisdictional and remanding for a possible eeoc waiver of that requirement E. holding that the words without notice or demand in an optional acceleration clause do not negate the requirement that the holder affirmatively elect to accelerate the debt because the option is not selfexecuting it is mandatory that some definitive action be made on the part of the lender citation omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that turnover requirement of 542 is selfexecuting
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: bond for title, and, therefore, that he can sue Elaty and Guiee for breach of contract. We agree with Elaty and Guiee. It is undisputed that the mortgage company had priority over the Whatleys’ mortgage and the bond of title. It is also undisputed that Cameron never exercised his right to redeem the property pursuant to Ala.Code 1975, § 6-5-248. “If foreclosure of a valid mortgage is properly conducted, all interests arising after the time the senior mortgage was created and all subordinate interests will be cut off unless the junior lienors redeem during the specified time period provided by statute.” Bailey Mortgage Co. v. Gobble-Fite Lumber Co., 565 So.2d 138, 144 (Ala.1990). See Dewitt Apparel, Inc. v. Four Seasons of Romar Beach Condominium Owners’ Ass’n, 678 So.2d 740 (Ala.1996) (<HOLDING>); and Mid-State Homes, Inc. v. Butler, 287 Ala. Options: A. holding that a mortgage or modification of a mortgage is not a good or a service under the dtpa B. holding that the note and the mortgage must coexist to give the mortgage validity C. holding that foreclosure of a prior mortgage extinguished a declaration of condominium and interests in a parking lot that were subject to the mortgage D. holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage E. holding that despite foreclosure judgment providing that the holder of a junior mortgage had no interest in or lien on or claim to said premises the lack of foreclosure sale meant that the junior mortgage was not extinguished

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that foreclosure of a prior mortgage extinguished a declaration of condominium and interests in a parking lot that were subject to the mortgage
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision hereof shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, the Parties shall negotiate in good faith a valid, legal and enforceable substitute provision that most nearly reflects the original intent of the Parties and all other provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect in such jurisdiction and shall be liberally construed in order to carry out the intentions of the Parties hereto as nearly as may be possible. Such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect the validity, legality or enforceability of such provision in any other jurisdiction.

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: The Company shall use the net proceeds from the sale of the Securities hereunder for working capital purposes and shall not use such proceeds for: (a) the satisfaction of any portion of the Company's debt (other than payment of trade payables in the ordinary course of the Company's business and prior practices), (b) the redemption of any Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents or (c) the settlement of any outstanding litigation.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise determined by the Committee, upon termination of a Participant’s Continuous Service during the applicable deferral period or portion thereof to which forfeiture conditions apply (as provided in the Award Agreement evidencing the Restricted Stock Unit Award), the Participant’s Restricted Stock Unit Award that is at that time subject to a risk of forfeiture that has not lapsed or otherwise been satisfied shall be forfeited; provided that, subject to the limitations set forth in Section 6(j)(ii) hereof, the Committee may provide, by resolution or other action or in any Award Agreement, or may determine in any individual case, that forfeiture conditions relating to a Restricted Stock Unit Award shall be waived in whole or in part in the event of terminations resulting from specified causes, and the Committee may in other cases waive in whole or in part the forfeiture of any Restricted Stock Unit Award.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: agreement retains language proposed in section 329 of the Senate bill limiting review of certain elements in the land management plan for the Tongass National Forest.” H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-10, at 1032 (2003); 149 Cong. Rec. S340-05, at S588 (daily ed. Jan 15, 2003) (Senate report submitted by Sen. Stevens) ("Limits the review of certain aspects of the Tongass Land Management Plan.”). 19 . Alternatively, even if Congress intended in the 2003 Appropriations Act to preclude judicial review of the entire 1997 Plan, we would retain jurisdiction over NRDC's appeal because appropriations acts are generally only “in force during the fiscal year of the appropriation and do not work a permanent change in the substantive law.” Seattle Audubon Soc’y v. Evans, 952 F.2d 297, 304 (9th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). To rebut this presumption takes a clear Options: A. holding that inadequate notice did not trigger plans time bar for administrative review B. holding that a rider that limited judicial review of national forest management plans expired at the end of the appropriation year C. holding that in its review of the irs exercise of discretion the court is limited to a review of the administrative record D. holding that where the statutory scheme is clear the inquiry should end E. holding that because here the statutes in issue provide for judicial review via citizen suit provisions yet do not set forth a standard for that review judicial review is limited to apa review on the administrative record

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a rider that limited judicial review of national forest management plans expired at the end of the appropriation year
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: lack of enumeration is dispositive. Expanding on the “otherwise” clause, the application notes explain that “[o]ther offenses are included where ... the conduct set forth (i.e., expressly charged) in the count of which the defendant was convicted ..., by its nature, presented a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.” Id. Against this backdrop, the lens of judicial inquiry narrows to a determination of whether larceny from the person is a category of crime that, by its nature, presents a substantial risk of personal injury even though its statutorily defined elements do not include the use or threat of force. Appellant contends that because the crime potentially embraces a broad range of non-violent conduct, see, e.g., Commonwealth v. Dimond, 57 Mass. 235, 236-38 (1849) (<HOLDING>), larceny from the person cannot be shoehorned Options: A. holding that in certain circumstances fraud can be prosecuted under the statute B. recognizing that in certain circumstances inquiry notice may be determined as a matter of law C. holding that a dismissal in the interest of justice can be a favorable termination under certain circumstances D. recognizing that there can be compelling circumstances in which a trial court can determine that neither party prevailed in a contract case E. holding consumer debtors may be eligible for chapter 11 under certain circumstances

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that in certain circumstances fraud can be prosecuted under the statute
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: her appeal from an Immigration Judge’s denial of her application for asylum and withholding of deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a), 1253(h). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). We deny the petition for review. We review factual determinations concerning a petitioner’s eligibility for asylum for substantial evidence and must uphold the BIA’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary result. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Because Sakultheeraphong failed to show that she suffered extortion on account of a protected ground, the evidence did not compel the conclusion that she was persecuted. Id.; cf. Borja v. INS, 175 F.3d 732, 736 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). Because Sakultheeraphong did not suffer Options: A. holding that harm purely motivated by wealth is not persecution B. holding that fathers military service alone was neither political opinion nor sufficient to establish imputed political opinion C. holding that extortion motivated in part by political opinion could qualify as persecution D. holding that attempted conscription by a guatemalan guerrilla group did not constitute persecution on account of a political opinion where petitioner failed to show that the group was motivated by his political opinion E. holding that persecution was on account of political opinion because petitioners prosecutorial investigation into acts of political corruption was by its very nature political

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that extortion motivated in part by political opinion could qualify as persecution
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 communications and notices hereunder shall (except as otherwise expressly permitted herein) be in writing and given as provided in Section 9.1 of the Credit Agreement. All communications and notices hereunder to any Grantor shall be given to it in care of the Borrower as provided in Section 9.1 of 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except to the extent required by law (e.g., to submit a tax return or compliance with a lawful subpoena), Employee warrants that he has not disclosed, and promises that he will not disclose, the offer or payment of severance benefits for any reason to any person other than members of his immediate family and professional representatives, who shall be informed of and bound by the same promise of confidentiality.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth below, no public release or announcement concerning the transactions contemplated hereby shall be issued by the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries without the prior consent of the Lead Lender (which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld), except as such release or announcement may be required by law or the applicable rules or regulations of any securities exchange or securities market, in which case the Borrower (or its Subsidiaries), as the case may be, shall allow the Lead Lender to the extent reasonably practicable in the circumstances, reasonable time to comment on such release or announcement in advance of such issuance.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: further reduced the damages by the per centage settlement credit of $377,383.53. Based on our holding above, the judgment should not be reduced by the pereentage-of-responsibility settlement credit of $377,383.53, but nonetheless must be reduced pursuant to either section 33.012, subsection (b) or subsection (d), by the dollar-for-dollar settlement credit amount of $183,000. Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the trial court’s judgment applying the $377,383.53 percentage settlement credit and render judgment applying the $183,000 dollar-for-dollar settlement credit. See Tex.R.App. P. 43.2(c), 43.3. B. Sufficiency of Evidence to Support Joint Enterprise Finding; No Evidence of Community of Pecuniary Interest in the Common Purpose of the Enterprise Between Appellees 13-14 (Tex.2000) (<HOLDING>); Blount v. Bordens, Inc., 910 S.W.2d 931, 932 Options: A. holding that evidence of representations outside the contract was legally sufficient evidence to support a section 1746b12 claim B. holding slight circumstantial evidence of fraud in combination with failure to perform as promised was legally sufficient to support finding of fraudulent intent C. holding evidence legally insufficient D. holding evidence legally sufficient under sections d and e E. holding evidence legally sufficient

assistant: The best answer is E. holding evidence legally sufficient
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 obligations of the Company under the expense reimbursement, indemnification, confidentiality, and governing law, submission to jurisdiction, jury trial waiver and related provisions of this Commitment Letter shall survive the expiration and termination of this Commitment Letter.

assistant: Survival
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: unconstitutional is a determination that the scheme or statute is invalid, void, and unenforceable. Funk v. Rent-All Mart, Inc. (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 78, 79-80, 742 N.E.2d 127; see also State ex rel. Maurer v. Sheward (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 513, 523, 644 N.E.2d 369. But a holding that a scheme or statute is unconstitutional does not and cannot remove the offending statutes or statute from the Revised Code. Removal of statutes from the Revised Code can be achieved only through repeal. {¶ 46} A holding that an unconstitutional statute or statutory provision is subject to severance does nothing more than state that a statute within a multistatute scheme or a section of a multipart statute is invalid, void, and unenforceable. Bodyke, 126 Ohio St.3d 266, 2010-Ohio-2424, 933 N.E.2d 753, ¶ 66 (<HOLDING>). Severance is merely a judicially imposed Options: A. recognizing that the two statutes are nearly identical B. holding that two statutes that are part of the general assemblys adam walsh act are unconstitutional and are severed and that after severance they may not be enforced C. holding that arguments that are not raised or that are not accompanied by factual and legal support are deemed waived D. holding these two statutes are not criminal offenses and only affect sentencing E. holding that when regulations are intended to have different purposes and are not dependent on each other they are not intertwined

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that two statutes that are part of the general assemblys adam walsh act are unconstitutional and are severed and that after severance they may not be enforced
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 Borrowers Each Borrower and each Australian Borrower irrevocably and unconditionally submit, for itself and its property, to the nonexclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the State of New York sitting in New York County and of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and any appellate court from any thereof, in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or any other Loan Document, or for recognition or enforcement of any judgment, and each of the parties hereto irrevocably and unconditionally agrees that all claims in respect of any such action or proceeding may be heard and determined in such New York State court or, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, in such Federal court. Each of the parties hereto agrees that a final judgment in any such action or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law. Nothing in this Agreement or in any other Loan Document shall affect any right that the Administrative Agent, any Issuing Lender or any Lender may otherwise have to bring any action or proceeding relating to this Agreement or any other Loan Document against any Borrower or any Australian Borrower or any of its respective properties in the courts of any jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No Event of Default, or to such Borrower’s knowledge, Default, has occurred and is continuing. No Credit Party is in breach or default under or with respect to any contract, agreement, lease or other instrument to which it is a party or by which its property is bound, which breach or default could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: No Defaults
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: Peru art. 75(g), “[i]n cases of conventional separation and subsequent divorce, neither father or mother is suspended its parental authority.” Id. art. 76. Bustamante testified that, in such instances, parental authority can only be suspended through a legal proceeding and with a court order that expressly suspends those rights. Although Velarde and Correa had separated, no judge had ordered the suspension of either party’s parental authority over the Children at the time of removal. See Bader v. Kramer (Bader I), 445 F.3d 346, 351 (4th Cir.2006) (concluding that a father seeking the return of his daughter retained joint custody rights “because no competent German court has entered an order granting [the mother] sole custody”). Cf. Fawcett v. McRoberts, 326 F.3d 491, 499 (4th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>), abrogated on other grounds by Abbott v. Options: A. holding that patria potestas rights under mexican law are custody rights under the hague convention B. recognizing that termination of parental rights can be accomplished only by resort to chapters 63 adoption and 39 termination of parental rights and any attempt by a parent to contract away the childs right to support is void and unenforceable as contrary to public policy C. holding that rights under vienna convention are not the equivalent of fundamental rights such as the right to counsel D. holding that when a scottish court issued a decree modifying parental rights and rescinding the right to determine the childs residence the parent had no custody rights under the hague convention E. holding that a parents rights must yield to the childs right to have proper parenting and fulfillment of his or her potential in a permanent healthy safe environment a parent cannot protect his parental rights by merely stating that he does not wish to have his rights terminated internal citations omitted

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that when a scottish court issued a decree modifying parental rights and rescinding the right to determine the childs residence the parent had no custody rights under the hague convention
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: (2). 21 Old Republic filed its motion to exclude RM Kids’s expert’s testimony in July 2013; thus Georgia’s new Evidence Code applies. See Ga. L. 2011, pp. 99, 214, § 101. Regardless, because OCGA § 24-7-702 is “substantively identical” to “its predecessor stat ion omitted); accord Moore, 334 Ga. App. at 793 (1). 26 HNTB Ga., Inc., 287 Ga. at 643 (1) (punctuation omitted); accord Toler v. Ga. Dep’t of Transp., 328 Ga. App. 144, 152 (4) (761 SE2d 550) (2014). 27 Brady v. Elevator Specialists, Inc., 287 Ga. App. 304, 306 (1) (653 SE2d 59) (2007) (punctuation omitted). 28 Id. at 307 (punctuation omitted). 29 Id. (punctuation omitted). 30 Levine v. SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, 321 Ga. App. 268, 278 (4) (b) (740 SE2d 672) (2013) (punctuation omitted). 31 See Brady, 287 Ga. App. at 306-07 (1) (<HOLDING>). 32 Atlanta Emergency Serv., LLC v. Clark, 328 Options: A. holding that trial court didnot abuse its discretion in admitting experts opinion which was based primarily on his own experience in the field B. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in qualifying an expert witness in the area of gang identity and investigation based on his training and experience C. holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting gangrelated evidence D. holding that an experts opinion must be based on facts in evidence or within his or her knowledge and that the admission of an experts opinion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion E. holding juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that trial court didnot abuse its discretion in admitting experts opinion which was based primarily on his own experience in the field
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: The Confidential Information (as defined in Section 2), whether transmitted orally, in writing or in any other form, and whether prepared by a Party or its employees, agents, advisors or other representatives, shall be preserved in strict confidence by the receiving Party, shall not be disclosed, disseminated or distributed by the receiving Party other than as expressly authorized herein, and shall be used exclusively for the purposes or transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in a deferral of income” to Lindsay “to the termination of covered employment or beyond,” the deferred compensation plan is covered by ERISA. Accordingly, ERISA preempts state common law regarding the enforceability of the noncompete forfeiture provisions of the plan. Clark v. Lauren Young Tire Ctr. Profit Sharing Trust, 816 F.2d 480, 481 (9th Cir.1987); Noell v. Am. Design, Inc., Profit Sharing Plan, 764 F.2d 827, 831 (11th Cir.1985); Hepple v. Roberts & Dybdahl, Inc., 622 F.2d 962, 965 (8th Cir.1980); Bigda v. Fischbach Corp., 898 F.Supp. 1004, 1014-16 (S.D.N.Y.1995). To determine the effect of ERISA on the forfeiture provisions in the plan, we must define the type of deferred benefit plan entered into between C & B and Lindsay. The district court found this pla (9th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>), Clark, 816 F.2d at 481-82 (holding state law Options: A. recognizing the applicability of choice of law clauses in contracts B. holding new york law may prohibit noncompete forfeiture provisions but erisa statutes allow forfeiture of all deferred compensation benefits under noncompete forfeiture provisions in a top hat plan C. holding even though idaho law does not permit the enforcement of noncompete clauses in employment contracts erisa statutes allow forfeiture of pension benefits in excess of erisas minimum vesting requirements in noncompete clauses D. holding that under title vesting clauses overhead property allocated to government contracts becomes property of federal government E. holding that government contracts must be read as if they included clauses required by law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding even though idaho law does not permit the enforcement of noncompete clauses in employment contracts erisa statutes allow forfeiture of pension benefits in excess of erisas minimum vesting requirements in noncompete clauses
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: arbitration notice : except if you opt out and except for certain types of disputes described in the `` agreement to arbitrate '' section below , you agree that disputes between you and niantic will be resolved by binding , individual arbitration , and you are waiving your right to a trial by jury or to participate as a plaintiff or class member in any purported class action or representative proceeding .

assistant: Arbitration
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: Except as outlined below, “[a] municipality may be held liable for torts arising out of the performance of proprietary functions but no recovery is allowed for injuries which result from the performance of governmental functions.” Lamar v. City of St. Louis, 746 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Mo.App.1988). “A governmental duty is one which is performed for the common good of all. A duty will be deemed proprietary if it is performed for the special benefit or profit of the municipality as a corporate entity.” Oberkramer v. City of Ellisville, 650 S.W.2d 286, 295 (Mo.App.1983). In Jones v. State Highway Comm’n, 557 S.W.2d 225 (Mo. banc 1977), the Missouri Supreme Court abrogated the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity. The legislature reinstated the doctrine in a modifie 6, 774 (Mo.App.1987) (<HOLDING>). In Alexander at 542, the Missouri Supreme Options: A. holding construction company had actual notice of dangerous condition that its employees created B. holding that when a possessor knows that a dangerous condition frequently reoccurs plaintiffs had a right to go to the jury on the issue of defendants negligence even where plaintiffs could not show how long the condition remained on the stairs C. holding that the negligent placement of a folding room partition at the foot of a ladder on which plaintiff was working created a physical deficiency which constituted a dangerous condition D. holding that immunity is not waived for injury or death caused by negligent supervision E. holding that the negligent failure to remove debris on grounds contributed to creating a dangerous condition which resulted in death when debris was flung by lawn mower

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the negligent failure to remove debris on grounds contributed to creating a dangerous condition which resulted in death when debris was flung by lawn mower
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 Borrower will, and will cause each Subsidiary to, pay its Tax liabilities, that, if not paid, could result in a Material Adverse Effect before the same shall become delinquent or in default, except where (a) the validity or amount thereof is being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings, (b) the Borrower or such Subsidiary has set aside on its books adequate reserves with respect thereto in accordance with GAAP and (c) the failure to make payment pending such contest could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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: 118 L.Ed.2d 543 (1992). Thus, § 1823(e) and the D’Oench doctrine encourage “banks and their customers [to] include the entire extent of their obligations in the bank’s records.” Id.; see also Bell & Murphy & Assoc. v. Interfirst Bank Gateway, N.A., 894 F.2d 750, 754 (5th Cir.) (“The D’Oench, Duhme doctrine ... favors the interests of depositors and creditors of a failed bank, who cannot protect themselves from secret agreements, over the interests of borrowers, who can.”), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 895, 111 S.Ct. 244, 112 L.Ed.2d 203 (1990); In re NEW Commercial Paper Litigation, 826 F.Supp. 1448, 1461-62 (D.D.C.1992) (describing D’Oench and § 1823(e) as “a regime that places the risk on borrowers if they do not get all of .2d 206 (1994); Oliver v. RTC, 955 F.2d 583, 585-86 (8th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, as originally enacted, § Options: A. holding that doench applies to secret side agreements made by subsidiaries and subsubsidiaries of the failed institution in receivership B. holding that the doench doctrine extends to claims involving a wholly owned subsidiary of the failed financial institution in receivership C. holding that the commonlaw doench doctrine applies to bar suit even when the rtc does not acquire a specific asset whose value is affected by the alleged secret agreement D. holding receipt of cab fare sufficient financial interest E. holding that the doench doctrine extends broadly to cover any secret agreement adversely affecting the value of a financial interest that has come within the rtcs control as receiver of a failed financial institution including the financial interest of a whollyowned subsidiary

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the doench doctrine extends broadly to cover any secret agreement adversely affecting the value of a financial interest that has come within the rtcs control as receiver of a failed financial institution including the financial interest of a whollyowned subsidiary
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: allegedly cannot afford the alimony payments. The husband appears to request that this court find error with the trial court’s award of periodic alimony based upon facts not in evidence — or in existence, for that matter — at the time the divorce judgment was entered. However, it is undisputed that the evidence regarding the husband’s loss of income was not before the trial court before the hearing on the husband’s motion for a new trial. We simply cannot hold that the trial court exceeded its discretion in entering its alimony award; the evidence that the husband relies on was not before the trial court at the time the divorce judgment was entered and thus could not be considered in determining the periodic-alimony award. Cf. Estrada v. Redford, 855 So.2d 551, 554 (Ala.Civ.App.2003) (<HOLDING>). The husband next argues that the trial court Options: A. holding that under uifsa alabama courts may modify an alabama childsupport order only if the obligor the obligee or the concerned child affected by that order reside in the state and all the parties who are individuals have not filed written consent for the tribunal of another state to exercise jurisdiction over the childsupport order B. holding that the trial court was without authority to modify a spousal support obligation when the modification proceeding was initiated ten years after the obligation to pay spousal support under the dissolution judgment had been terminated by order C. holding a mother on appeal must successfully challenge a trial courts finding that there was no substantial and continuing change of circumstances of the children or mother before she can succeed on her claim that the trial court erred in overruling her motion to modify custody D. holding in part that a change in the mothers income that occurred after the trial was new evidence and that when a party has new evidence related to his or her income he or she may be entitled to a modification of a childsupport obligation if he or she files a petition to modify however because the mother had filed a postjudgment motion rather than a petition to modify her childsupport obligation her request to modify child support was not properly before the trial court E. holding untimeliness of motion to modify medical insurance payment did not preclude motion to modify maintenance

assistant: The best answer is D. holding in part that a change in the mothers income that occurred after the trial was new evidence and that when a party has new evidence related to his or her income he or she may be entitled to a modification of a childsupport obligation if he or she files a petition to modify however because the mother had filed a postjudgment motion rather than a petition to modify her childsupport obligation her request to modify child support was not properly before the trial 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subtenant and Sublandlord each warrants to the other that in connection with this Lease it has not employed or dealt with any broker, agent or finder, other than Sublandlord’s broker, Serten Advisors, LLC (the “ Broker ”). Subtenant shall pay any commission or fee due to the Broker in connection with the New Lease pursuant to a separate agreement and that fee shall not be subject to the Metroplex Cap. There shall no additional fee due to Broker in connection with this Sublease. Sublandlord shall indemnify and hold Subtenant harmless from and against any claim for brokerage or other commissions asserted by any broker, agent or finder employed by Sublandlord, with whom Sublandlord has dealt with respect to the Subleased Premises, or asserts any claim any claim for brokerage or other commissions by, through or under Sublandlord, other than the Broker. Subenant shall indemnify and hold Sublandlord harmless from and against any claim for brokerage or other commissions asserted by any broker, agent or finder employed by Subtenant, with whom Subtenant has dealt with respect to the Subleased Premises, or asserts any claim any claim for brokerage or other commissions by, through or under Subtenant, other than the Broker. The provisions of this Paragraph 15 shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Sublease.

assistant: Brokers