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: and (2) judicial estoppel. Neither of these two grounds involve an attack on the legal or factual basis for the Claims. In analyzing the affirmative defense of election of remedies, this court does not inquire into these matters. See Gorman, 811 S.W.2d at 546; Bocanegra, 605 S.W.2d at 850-52; Heggy, 123 S.W.3d at 779. After reviewing Horizon’s allegations in this case, we conclude that the remedies, rights, and facts Horizon alleges in this case are not inconsistent with the remedies, rights, and facts Horizon alleged in the English suit. In addition, to the extent there is any inconsistency, it is not so unconscionable, dishonest, contrary to fair dealing, or so stultifying to the legal process or trifling with justice as to be manifestly unjust. See Musick, 531 S.W.2d at 588-89 (<HOLDING>); Custom Leasing, Inc. v. Texas Bank & Trust Options: A. holding that dyfs was not required to try the title 9 action to conclusion before filing a title 30 action for the termination of parental rights B. holding that trespass to try title is the method for determining title to real property C. holding that claimant could recover all of his attorneys fees because declaratoryjudgment claim in boundary dispute was based on the same facts as his claims for adverse possession trespass and trespass to try title D. recognizing that most other courts apply title vii principles to title ix cases but refusing to apply title viis knew or should have known standard to a title ix claim E. holding that election of remedies did not apply because filing a trespass to try title action by the mortgageetrusteedeed grantee was not inconsistent with its successful settlement of claim against the title insurer

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that election of remedies did not apply because filing a trespass to try title action by the mortgageetrusteedeed grantee was not inconsistent with its successful settlement of claim against the title insurer
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is primarily a matter of administrative discretion.”) (citations omitted); see also Unisys Corp. v. Widnall, 98 F.3d 1325, 1327 (Fed.Cir.1996) (“In determining whether the agency has complied with the regulation authorizing best value procurements, the [reviewing authority] may overturn an agency’s decision if it is not grounded in reason.”). If an award decision is challenged as arbitrary, capricious, or lacking a rational basis, the trial court “must sustain an agency action unless the action does not evince rational reasoning and consideration of relevant factors.” Savantage Fin. Servs. v. United States, 595 F.3d 1282, 1287 (Fed.Cir.2010) (internal alterations, quotation marks, and citations omitted); see also Centech Grp., Inc. v. United States, 554 F.3d 1029, 1037 (Fed.Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). The court may set aside the procurement, but Options: A. holding that the moving party bears a heavy burden of proving the facts required for disqualification B. holding that the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that he has standing for each type of relief sought C. holding that the fee applicant bears the burden of showing that an adjustment is necessary to the determination of a reasonable fee D. recognizing that trial court has broad discretion in ruling on admissibility of evidence and party claiming abuse of that discretion bears a heavy burden E. holding that the trial court must determine whether the contracting agency provided a coherent and reasonable explanation of its exercise of discretion and the disappointed bidder bears a heavy burden of showing that the award decision had no rational basis

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the trial court must determine whether the contracting agency provided a coherent and reasonable explanation of its exercise of discretion and the disappointed bidder bears a heavy burden of showing that the award decision had no rational basis
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 consent, approval, authorization or order of, or filing, registration or qualification with, any court, governmental authority or other third party is required to be obtained or made by the Maker in connection with the Maker’s execution, delivery or performance of this Note that has not been obtained or made.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Payments Free of Taxes; Obligation to Withhold; Payments on Account of Taxes . (i) Any and all payments by or on account of any obligation of the Borrowers hereunder or under any other Loan Document shall to the extent permitted by applicable Laws be made free and clear of and without reduction or withholding for any Taxes. If, however, applicable Laws require an applicable withholding agent to withhold or deduct any Tax, such Tax shall be withheld or deducted in accordance with such Laws as determined by Newpark or the Administrative Agent, as the case may be, upon the basis of the information and documentation to be delivered pursuant to subsection (e) below.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the closing of the transactions contemplated hereby (the “Closing”) shall occur at such place and at such time, if any, as agreed to by the Parties.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: CURIAM. Petition denied. Cubelo v. State, 41 So.3d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (<HOLDING>); Salonko v. State, 42 So.3d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA Options: A. holding jury instruction on lesser included offense of attempted voluntary manslaughter by act which required finding of intent to kill constituted fundamental error and required reversal of defendants conviction for seconddegree murder B. holding that erroneous manslaughter instruction that defendant intentionally caused the death of the victim did not constitute fundamental error certifying question if a jury returns a verdict finding a defendant guilty of seconddegree murder in a case where the evidence does not support a theory of culpable negligence does a trial court commit fundamental error by giving a flawed manslaughter by act instruction when it also gives an instruction on manslaughter by culpable negligence C. holding that the trial court committed fundamental error by giving the standard jury instruction for attempted manslaughter by act D. holding erroneous jury instruction on manslaughter by intentional act not fundamental error where trial court also instructed jury on manslaughter by culpable negligence E. holding that fundamental error can be waived when defense counsel requests an erroneous jury instruction

assistant: The best answer is D. holding erroneous jury instruction on manslaughter by intentional act not fundamental error where trial court also instructed jury on manslaughter by culpable negligence
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: 968, 971 (1949) (“[A] party having an option to declare a note due and payable cannot simply by his own secret intention, never disclosed by act or word, claim that he declared the note due and payable. The addition of the words ‘without demand or notice’ does not alter the requirement of an affirmative act of the holder of the note for the valid exercise of the option.”); see also United States v. Rollinson, 866 F.2d 1463, 1467 (D.C.Cir.1989) (following precedent holding that, “because acceleration was optional on the part of the holder, affirmative action ... must be taken to make it known to the debtor that he has exercised his option to accelerate”) (internal quotations and citation omitted) (alterations in original); United States v. Feterl, 849 F.2d 354, 357 (8th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted); United States v. Hosko, Options: A. holding that as a general rule affirmative action by the creditor must be taken to make it known to the debtor that the creditor has exercised his option to accelerate B. recognizing need to balance interests of debt or and creditor in determining nature of protection to be afforded creditor C. holding that creditor did not have actual knowledge of the bankruptcy filing where the debtor informed creditor of the possibility that a bankruptcy case would be filed D. recognizing that when a creditor does not receive adequate notice the creditor is not bound by the confirmation order E. holding that the creditor must prove the elements of actual fraud

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that as a general rule affirmative action by the creditor must be taken to make it known to the debtor that the creditor has exercised his option to accelerate
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: imposed was consistent with that of a class B misdemeanor is unconstitutional because maximum possible sentence, not sentence actually imposed, controls right to a jury trial). Id. at 357-59 (footnotes omitted). Here, Azille was charged with aggravated assault, which carries with it a one year maximum possible sentence. See 14 V.I.C. § 298(5). Accordingly, Azille was charged with a serious offense which guaranteed him a right to a jury trial. As we stated in Murrell, the Superior Court’s invocation of 14 V.I.C. § 4 did not transform that serious offense into a petty one, and therefore the Superior Court violated Azille’s Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. Furthermore, as we found in Murrell, this error meets all of the requirements of plain error. See Murrell, 54 V.I. at 359-60 (<HOLDING>). Therefore, we must reverse the conviction for Options: A. holding objection unnecessary where violation of rights guaranteed by fifth amendment is so improper and prejudicial as to amount to plain error effecting a defendants substantial rights B. recognizing under plain error review that the burden to show that substantial rights have been prejudiced is on the party that failed to raise the issue below and for an error to have affected substantial rights the error must have affected the outcome of the district court proceedings C. holding that constitutional error cannot be premised on error in a charge unless the error violated some right which was guaranteed to the defendant by the fourteenth amendment D. holding that plain error exists when 1 an error was committed 2 that was plain 3 that affected the defendants substantial rights and 4 the error seriously affects the fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings E. holding that the error was plain based on binding constitutional doctrine and affected the defendants substantial rights by completely depriving him of his constitutionally guaranteed jury trial

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the error was plain based on binding constitutional doctrine and affected the defendants substantial rights by completely depriving him of his constitutionally guaranteed jury trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of credit for which we have already held was error — Appellant’s possible service is eight days shy of the maximum sentence, we disagree that Appellant is constitutionally entitled to credit for time served prior to sentencing. For these reasons, we overrule the second part of Appellant’s first issue as it relates to time served between his arrest on June 16, 2014, and sentencing on June 8, 2015. C. Imposition of community supervision In his second issue, Appellant argues that the trial court erred in imposing community supervision because he had waived his right to community supervision. The State argues that Appellant forfeited this argument by failing to appeal the original judgment imposing community supervision. See, e.g., Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (<HOLDING>). Appellant conceded at oral argument that he Options: A. holding that issues related to a conviction such as evidentiary sufficiency must be raised at the time community supervision is originally imposed B. holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered C. holding issues related to subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time D. holding that issues not raised before the trial court cannot be raised on appeal E. holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be raised for the first time before this court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that issues related to a conviction such as evidentiary sufficiency must be raised at the time community supervision is originally imposed
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 proceeds of the Loans shall be used solely to repay amounts outstanding under the Existing Credit Agreement, fund repayment of the GE Credit Agreement, to pay the cash portion of the Acquisition consideration and pay fees and expenses in connection with the Acquisition and related transactions.

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: The Plan shall become effective as of the Effective Date, provided that the Plan is approved by the Company’s stockholders on such date. The expiration date of the Plan, on and after which date no Award may be granted hereunder, shall be the tenth anniversary of the Effective Date; provided , however , that such expiration shall not affect Awards then outstanding, and the terms and conditions of the Plan shall continue to apply to such Awards.

assistant: Effective Dates
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 no event will rovio , rovio 's affiliates , rovio 's licensors or channel partners be liable for special , incidental or consequential damages resulting from possession , access , use or malfunction of the rovio services , including but not limited to , damages to property , loss of goodwill , computer failure or malfunction and , to the extent permitted by law , damages for personal injuries , property damage , lost profits or punitive damages from any causes of action arising out of or related to this eula or the software , whether arising in tort ( including negligence ) , contract , strict liability or otherwise and whether or not rovio , rovio 's licensors or channel partners have been advised of the possibility of such damages .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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: when listing a social impact experience you ( i ) represent and warrant that you are duly authorized to act on behalf of your nonprofit and ( ii ) acknowledge and agree that all payouts will be directed to an account owned by your nonprofit .

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: For a period of two years following the Separation Date, the Executive shall make himself reasonably available to the Company and its affiliates following the Separation Date to assist them, as may be reasonably requested by the Company at mutually convenient times and places, with respect to pending and future inquiries relating to matters that arose during the Executive’s employment with the Company. The Company shall provide the Executive with a reasonable, mutually agreed rate of compensation for each hour of service hereunder and shall reimburse the Executive for all reasonable out-of-pocket expenses and costs he actually incurs as a result of providing assistance under this paragraph, upon receipt of proper documentation thereof.

assistant: Cooperation
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: request, he argues that at the time “he understood [it] to be a narrowing quite different than the eviscerating construction now advanced.” Id. at 4. In its reply, the CIA argues that the plaintiff “agreed to narrow the scope of his FOIA request such that it plainly covers only records that originate with the CIA,” and that pursuant to this narrower request, the CIA searched only CIA reports. Def.’s Reply at 4. Thus, the CIA concludes that the non-production of Department of State records does not “impugn the adequacy of the CIA’s search.” Id. at 5. As a preliminary matter, the court must decide whether the plaintiffs initial or amended FOIA request is controlling. An agency can ask a FOIA requestor to clarify or narrow an overly broad request. See Nation Magazine, 71 F.3d at 891-92 (<HOLDING>); Kenney v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 603 Options: A. holding that when an agency has not reached an issue the proper course is to remand to the agency in the first instance to address B. holding that application for and denial of a permit is necessary to a ripe takings claim absent futility or a showing that the permitting procedure is so burdensome as to effectively deprive the plaintiff of his property rights C. holding that where the appellant has failed to demonstrate error the court is not required to search the record for an error D. holding that an agency is not required to undertake a search that is so broad as to be unduly burdensome E. holding that deference to an agency interpretation is not appropriate where a statute is administered by more than one agency

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an agency is not required to undertake a search that is so broad as to be unduly burdensome
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “no additional proof of discrimination is required.” Thus, [plaintiff] did not fail to offer sufficient evidence of discrimination by not presenting more evidence after [defendant] endeavored to provide a nondiscriminatory reason for his actions. Cabrera v. Jakabovitz, 24 F.3d 372, 385 (2d Cir.) (quoting Hicks, 509 U.S. at 511, 113 S.Ct. at 2749) (emphasis and alterations to Hicks quotation in original), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 205, 130 L.Ed.2d 135 (1994). Moreover, the trier of fact can decide not only that the reasons proffered by defendant are pretextual but can also “generally infer discrimination when it finds that the employer’s explanation is unworthy of credence.” Binder v. Long Island Lighting Co., 57 F.3d 193, 200 (2d Cir.1995). See also, Ethan Allen, 44 F.3d at 120 (<HOLDING>); Saulpaugh v. Monroe Community Hosp., 4 F.3d Options: A. holding that if factfinder rejects employers proffered nondiseriminatory reasons as unbelievable it may infer the ultimate fact of intentional discrimination without additional proof of discrimination B. holding that a finding of pretextuality allows a juror to reject a defendants proffered reasons for a challenged employment action and thus permits the ultimate inference of discrimination C. holding that plaintiff need only point to sufficient evidence to support an inference that the employer did not act for its proffered nondiscriminatory reasons D. holding that the conflicting explanations given by defendants agents for the plaintiffs termination were also sufficient to raise a reasonable inference that defendants proffered reasons for the termination were pretextual the inconsistent testimony regarding the motivating reasons for plaintiffs termination cast doubts on the asserted nondiscriminatory legitimate reasons and may alone be sufficient to preclude summary judgment on plaintiffs claim E. holding that discriminatory remarks made nearly a year before the challenged employment decision could not support an inference of discrimination

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a finding of pretextuality allows a juror to reject a defendants proffered reasons for a challenged employment action and thus permits the ultimate inference of discrimination
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: Employee shall return to Company all Company property and confidential and proprietary information including, but not limited to, computer(s), files, documents, passcodes, documents, designs, plans and any and all other Company property, confidential or proprietary information in any form or medium. In addition, Employee agrees that he will, upon Limelight’s request, provide reasonable written certification to Limelight that he has complied with this provision.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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: Florida Commission’s actions have burdened it or operated to its detriment. For instance, the Tribe does not allege that the Florida Commission’s actions prevented the Tribe from conducting any particular boxing match. The Tribe also does not allege that the Florida Commission prevented or even hindered its ability to hire, train, or procure boxing officials from within or outside of Florida for its matches. Nor does it allege that the Florida Commission’s activities will have such an effect in the future. Nowhere in the complaint does the Tribe identify any particularized injury resulting from the Florida Commission’s alleged misconduct. Instead, the Tribe’s complaint only sets forth abstract injuries. Cf. Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154, 167-68, 117 S.Ct. 1154, 137 L.Ed.2d 281 (1997) (<HOLDING>). Even though the Tribe’s complaint sets forth Options: A. holding that a plaintiffs claim of injury stemming from alleged procedural harm is insufficient to ground standing where the harm is uncoupled from any injury in fact or tied only to an undifferentiated injury common to all members of the public B. holding that even if the inability to pay was the result of government regulation it would not excuse the tax liability and that there is no requirement that the united states consider whether it will receive any revenue from the levy C. holding that the plaintiff adequately alleged an injury in fact where it alleged that it would receive less irrigation water from a bureau as a result of restrictions imposed on the bureau from the challenged agency opinion D. holding that the lack of evidence of the alleged principals control over the alleged agent precludes the finding of an agency relationship E. holding that in order to establish standing a plaintiff must show 1 it has suffered an injury in fact 2 the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and 3 it is likely as opposed to merely speculative that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the plaintiff adequately alleged an injury in fact where it alleged that it would receive less irrigation water from a bureau as a result of restrictions imposed on the bureau from the challenged agency opinion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In consideration of the payments and benefits provided to the Executive pursuant to this Agreement, and after consultation with counsel, the Executive and each of the Executive’s respective heirs, executors, administrators, representatives, agents, insurers, successors and assigns (collectively, the “ Releasors ”) hereby irrevocably and unconditionally release and forever discharge the Company, its subsidiaries and affiliates and each of their respective officers, employees, directors, attorneys, shareholders and agents (“ Releasees ”) from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, rights, judgments, obligations, damages, demands, accountings or liabilities of whatever kind or character (collectively, “ Claims ”), including, without limitation, any Claims under any federal, state, local or foreign law, that the Releasors may have, or in the future may possess, arising out of (i) the Executive’s employment relationship with and service as an employee, officer or director of the Company or any subsidiaries or affiliated companies and the termination of such relationship or service, and (ii) any event, condition, circumstance or obligation that occurred, existed or arose on or prior to the date the Executive signs this Agreement; provided , however , that the Executive does not release, discharge or waive any rights to (i) payments and benefits provided under this Agreement and (ii) any indemnification rights the Executive may have under the Executive Employment Agreement, in accordance with the Company’s governance instruments or under any director and officer liability insurance maintained by the Company with respect to liabilities arising as a result of the Executive’s service as an officer and employee of the Company. This paragraph 2(a) does not apply to any Claims arising under the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, and the applicable rules and regulations promulgated thereunder (“ ADEA ”). Claims arising under ADEA are addressed in paragraph 2(b) of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In connection with the Services to be performed hereunder, a Recipient may provide to a Provider information about it, the funds, accounts or clients to which such Recipient provides investment management or advisory services, as applicable, their investors or other third parties that is confidential or proprietary in nature (the “ Confidential Information ”), which may include, but is not limited to, information of a technical, administrative and/or financial nature relating to the business operations of such Recipient. The Recipient shall, except to the extent necessary for the Services, not disclose to the Provider Confidential Information about any issuer of securities to the public in the United States. Notwithstanding the foregoing, with respect to any Provider, Confidential Information shall not include information that: (a) has come into the public domain through no breach of this Article 5 by such Provider or any related Provider Representative; (b) is or becomes available to such Provider from any third party not known to be breaching an obligation of confidentiality to the Recipient; or (c) is independently developed by such Provider without reference to or use of the Confidential Information of the Recipient.

assistant: Definitions
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 Financial Statements of the Loan Parties and their respective Subsidiaries which have been delivered to Agent and the Lenders (i) are in accordance with the Books and Records of the Loan Parties and their respective Subsidiaries, which have been maintained in accordance with good business practice; (ii) have been prepared in conformity with GAAP (other than, with respect to interim Financial Statements, the absence of footnotes and normal year-end adjustments); and (iii) fairly present in all material respects the consolidated financial position of the Loan Parties and their respective Subsidiaries as of the dates presented therein and the results of operations, cash flows, and, if applicable stockholders’ equity, for the periods presented therein. As of the Closing Date, none of the Loan Parties nor any of their respective Subsidiaries has any contingent obligations, liability for taxes or other outstanding obligations which are material in the aggregate, except as disclosed in the most recent audited Financial Statements (including the notes thereto) furnished by Borrower to the Lenders prior to the date hereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Esparaza, in both her individual and official capacities, is entitled to summary judgment on Count Three because Plaintiff has failed to produce any evidence that she took any adverse action against him. The remaining Defendants argue that they are entitled to summary judgment on Count Three because the Arbitrator’s 1998 decision included factual findings which eliminated all support for Plaintiffs claim pursuant to the Michigan Constitution. For the reasons discussed below, the Court does not agree. The Court has serious doubts that the arbitration proceeding, or the Arbitrator’s findings, are capable of precluding a claim brought pursuant to the Michigan Constitution on a retaliation theory. See Arslanian v. Oakwood United Hospitals et al., 2000 WL 461585 (Mich.App. April 21, 2000) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, even if the Arbitrator’s Options: A. holding that antidiscrimination rights under title vii cannot be waived by a collective bargaining agreement B. holding that res judicata and collateral estoppel apply to arbitration award C. holding that the claim accrued after the employer denied a request for arbitration as untimely under the collective bargaining agreement D. holding that arbitration pursuant to collective bargaining agreement is not res judicata and cannot collaterally estop a civil rights claim E. holding that collective bargaining agreements cannot compel the arbitration of statutory rights

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that arbitration pursuant to collective bargaining agreement is not res judicata and cannot collaterally estop a civil rights claim
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 may otherwise be provided herein, subject to Participant’s continued employment, the Restricted Stock shall vest and become nonforfeitable upon the later of (i) the third anniversary of the Date of Grant (the “ Service Condition ”) and (ii) the Stock Price (as defined in Section 2(b) below) of a Share equaling or exceeding [___] per Share (“ Stock Price Goal ”) prior to the fifth anniversary of the Date of Grant (the “ Performance Condition ”).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 26C et al, 226 Or 263, 278, 360 P2d 282 (1961). In that historical context, it is clear that a plaintiffs remedies against a public body created by the state to perform functions on behalf of the state would have been understood by the drafters to have been entirely dependent on the will of the legislature. That is, in 1857, a plaintiff would not have had any absolute rights against such a body; rather, the legislature would have had the ability, when creating a public body to operate as an instrumentality of the state, to determine the scope of the public body’s liability. See Hale, 308 Or at 518 (at the time of statehood, instrumentalities of the state government, performing state government functions, partook “fully of the state’s immunity from suit”) (citing Vendrell, 226 Or 263 (<HOLDING>), and Templeton v. Linn County, 22 Or 313, 29 P Options: A. holding that school districts do not share in the commonwealth of pennsylvanias eleventh amendment sovereign immunity because they are not alter egos of the commonwealth B. recognizing the districts duty of care for the protection of school children in its schools C. recognizing application of sovereign immunity to school districts D. recognizing that school districts may not enter agreements which are inconsistent with state law E. recognizing that municipal corporations can include under the missouri constitution in addition to cities and towns counties school districts townships under township organization special road districts and drainage districts

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing application of sovereign immunity to school districts
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: to dismiss all the causes of action.” Id. at 454. 2 . See Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Adcock, 412 S.W.3d 492, 495 (Tex.2013) (explaining that "the Legislature devised a comprehensive workers’ compensation system, with specific benefits and procedures based on the public policy of the State of Texas. We concluded in Ruttiger that the Court should not alter the Act's comprehensive scheme, and we reaffirm that principle today.”). 3 . We likewise held that the claimant could not recover on his DTPA claim because that claim, "as pled and submitted to the jury[,] depended on the validity of his Insurance Code claim[s].” Ruttiger, 381 S.W.3d at 446. 4 . See, e.g., Davis v. Am. Cos. Co. of Reading, Pa., No. 07-13-00190-CV, 2014 WL 2553379, at *2 (Tex.App.-Amarillo June 4, 2014, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>); Hopper v. Argonaut Ins. Co., No. Options: A. holding that erisa preempts claims for breach of contract breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing and negligent misrepresentations B. holding that where the conduct forming the basis of the plaintiffs breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing claim is the same conduct forming the basis for the breach of contract claim the claims merge and there is no separate cause of action for breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing C. holding that ruttiger precludes claims for breach of contract breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing insurance code and dtpa violations and negligence because all claims arise out of the carriers handling of the workers compensation claim D. holding plaintiffs causes of action for breach of contract breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing intentional infliction of emotional distress and violations of the arizona insurance code were preempted by erisa E. holding that breach of good faith and fair dealing claim requires showing of breach of contract

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that ruttiger precludes claims for breach of contract breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing insurance code and dtpa violations and negligence because all claims arise out of the carriers handling of the workers compensation claim
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 the termination of the Executive’s employment with the Company for any reason, the Executive shall not say, publish or do anything that casts the Company, or any Affiliated Entity, or any officer or director of the Company, or any Affiliated Entity, in an unfavorable light, or disparage or injure the goodwill, business reputation or relationship of the Company, or any Affiliated Entity, with existing or potential creditors, counterparties, bankers, analysts, investors, employees or the financial community in general, or the goodwill or business reputation of the employees, directors and/or contractors of the Company, or any Affiliated Entity.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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: adjudication. The Puerto Rico high court has at least discussed, and has seemingly signaled, the existence of an inverse condemnation remedy.... We think [that the appellants] must pursue that remedy before they can maintain a federal damages claim.... Id. at 514-15. So it is here. If the plaintiff were to pursue the inverse condemnation remedy, the local courts would be presented with an issue of first impression under Puerto Rico law. Until he travels that road, the availability vel non of the inverse condemnation remedy remains open to question. It is the claimant’s burden to prove that the potential state remedy is unavailable, and uncertainty prevents him from carrying that burden. Consequently, his section 1983 takings claims are unripe. See Gilbert, 932 F.2d at 64-65 (<HOLDING>). The plaintiffs second argument focuses on the Options: A. holding that plaintiff had failed to state a claim for relief under section 1983 B. holding that due process is not violated when a state employee intentionally deprives an individual of property or liberty so long as the state provides a meaningful postdeprivation remedy such as an article 78 proceeding C. holding that as long as the arbitrator is even arguably construing or applying the contract and acting within the scope of his authority a court should not vacate his decision D. holding as long as the defendant has an adequate opportunity to impeach the reliability of a scientific test and the qualifications of the person administering the test due process is not implicated by a states good faith failure to preserve a sample for independent testing E. holding that as long as the state provides an arguably adequate process for securing compensation for a taking federal intervention un der section 1983 before the claimant has resorted to that procedure is premature

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that as long as the state provides an arguably adequate process for securing compensation for a taking federal intervention un der section 1983 before the claimant has resorted to that procedure is premature
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: from Local 254’s alleged improper secondary activity. Plaintiff argues that the International encouraged, ratified, and knowingly tolerated Local 254’s prohibited behavior. However, the evidence adduced by plaintiff fails to support this argument. Liability for a local union’s actions does not attach to an international affiliate merely because of the hierarchical link between the two unions. See Carbon Fuel Co. v. United Mine Workers, 444 U.S. 212, 216-17, 100 S.Ct. 410, 62 L.Ed.2d 394 (1979). Rather, a plaintiff must satisfy the traditional rules of agency law to saddle an international union with responsibility for acts carried out directly by a local in violation of § 303 of the LMRA. See United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715, 736, 86 S.Ct. 1130, 16 L.Ed.2d 218 (1966) (<HOLDING>); see also 29 U.S.C. § 185(e). The United Options: A. holding that deference to an agency interpretation is not appropriate where a statute is administered by more than one agency B. holding that 303 liability is established according to ordinary doctrines of agency C. holding that an employment relationship allegedly terminated with fraud and malice may open employer to tort liability beyond the bounds of ordinary liability for breach of contract D. holding that agreements established agency relationship E. holding that coconspirator liability for a 924c offense may be established under pinkerton liability

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that 303 liability is established according to ordinary doctrines of agency
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: requirements of the law in requiring the presence of the file at the deposition. As to the communications covered by item (1), however, the trial court did depart from the essential requirements of the law in ordering disclosure. Under this item, the trial court allowed Airdata to question Jenney’s former attorney about his communications with Jenney during the negotiation of the retirement agreement and specifically about Jenney’s intent in negotiating certain terms of that agreement, finding that Jenney had waived any attorney-client privilege as to these communications. We do not address whether the individual questions asked are covered by the attorney-client privilege because Airdata did not raise that issue in the trial court. See Dober v. Worrell, 401 So.2d 1322, 1323 (Fla.1981) (<HOLDING>); Mendelson v. Great Western Bank, F.S.B., 712 Options: A. holding that a party may not raise a claim on appeal that was not presented to the trial court B. holding that court will not consider issue raised for first time on appeal C. holding that when defects in a petition raise a question of the trial courts subject matter jurisdiction over the action the issue may properly be raised for the first time on appeal D. holding that a party may not raise an issue for the first time on appeal E. holding that an issue raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a party may not raise an issue for the first time on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with intent....”). 14 . We mention Mr. Watson’s testimony on the matters here only to firmly underscore the point that knowledge and intent were at issue. When the court decided to admit Mr. Shuck’s testimony, there would not have been any certainty, of course, that Mr. Watson would testify and dispute these elements. However, on appeal, Mr. Watson does not contest that knowledge and intent were at issue. Moreover, even if he had, it is clear that they were at issue because the government had to prove them to obtain a guilty verdict and Mr. Watson at no time conceded at trial that they were met. Whether these elements were at issue is important because, had they not been, any Rule 404(b) evidence offered to prove their presence would not have been relevant. See Cherry, 433 F.3d at 701 (<HOLDING>). 15 . Mr. Watson’s heavy reliance on United Options: A. holding that a notguilty plea places defendants intent at issue and evidence of similar prior crimes can thus be relevant to prove intent to commit charged crime B. holding that admission of rule 404b evidence was proper C. holding where the prosecution had to prove the defendant had the intent to gratify his sexual desires that the intent exception to rule 404b is dispositive D. holding there was no rule 404b violation where the evidence was admitted to show knowledge and knowledge was an element of the crime charged E. holding that the rule 404b evidence admitted to prove intent was clearly relevant because intent was at issue in the trial

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the rule 404b evidence admitted to prove intent was clearly relevant because intent was at issue in the trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: D.E. Shaw Investment Group, LLC, D.E. Shaw Valence International, Inc., KBC Alternative Investment Management Ltd., and KBC Financial Products UK Ltd., and QVT Fund, LP)” via certified mail sent to the Bondholder entity or its corporate affiliate. (Aristocrat’s Letter 8/21/09.) The Bondholders do not contest corrected corporation may be served through an officer or agent explicitly or implicitly authorized to accept service of process.”); Boryk v. deHavilland Aircraft Co., 341 F.2d 666, 668-69 (2d Cir.1965) (finding service on the president of a subsidiary adequate and noting that the label attached to the agent and the agent’s lack of explicit authority to accept service was not determinative); In re Elec. & Musical Indus., Ltd., Middlesex, Eng., 155 F.Supp. 892, 893 (S.D.N.Y.1957) (<HOLDING>); accord Wright & Miller, supra, § 2454 Options: A. holding that arson committed by stockholder who was the principal managing agent precluded recovery by the corporation B. holding that a corporation could be served by delivering a copy of the subpoena to an officer or managing or general agent of the corporation and that the agent could be an individual a partnership or another corporation C. holding that travel by an agent of defrauded corporation is imputed to the victim D. holding that claims of corporation vest in corporation E. holding that corporation and sole owner of corporation were separate legal entities and corporation was not party to contract signed by owner in individual capacity

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a corporation could be served by delivering a copy of the subpoena to an officer or managing or general agent of the corporation and that the agent could be an individual a partnership or another corporation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Second Amendment may be executed in counterparts (and by different parties hereto on different counterparts), each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute a single contract. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Second Amendment by facsimile or other electronic transmission (e.g., “PDF” or “TIFF”) shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Second Amendment.

assistant: Counterparts