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: recovery of warranty damages from suppliers for the failure of covered parts. Our conclusion that O’Neal has not shown himself to be incompetent is consistent with the decision of our court of appeals in Whatcott v. Whatcott, 790 P.2d 578 (Utah Ct.App.1990), where the plaintiff raised the same incompetence argument. In Whatcott, the court rejected the claim that repression and psychological trauma caused by sexual abuse could be the basis for a finding of incompetency that would toll a statute of limitations. To support its conclusion of mental competence, the court specifically noted that plaintiff Whatcott, like O’Neal in this case, participated in what could be characterized as more or less normal activities. Id. at 581; see also Strata v. Patin, 545 So.2d 1180, 1192 (La. Ct.App.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 550 So.2d 618 (La.1989); John Options: A. holding that negligently allowing a statute of limitations to run does not constitute an ethical violation B. holding that psychological trauma resulting from abuse that impedes disclosure does not constitute mental incapacity for purposes of statute of limitations C. holding in aggravated sexual assault case that testimony regarding psychological trauma suffered by child victim and its physical manifestations properly admitted D. holding that unauthorized disclosure of documents does not constitute a waiver of the applicable foia exemption E. holding that psychological conditions resulting from workrelated trauma are compensable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that psychological trauma resulting from abuse that impedes disclosure does not constitute mental incapacity for purposes of statute of limitations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Parent, the Borrower, any other Loan Party and any of their respective Subsidiaries has timely filed or caused to be filed all Tax returns and reports required to have been filed and has paid or caused to be paid all Taxes required to have been paid by it, except (a) Taxes that are being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and for which the Parent, the Borrower, any other Loan Party or any of their respective Subsidiaries, as applicable, has set aside on its books adequate reserves in conformity with GAAP or (b) to the extent that the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Change.

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: The exercise price for any shares purchased pursuant to the exercise of all or part of the Option will be paid in accordance with Section 10(c) of the Plan. The Company is authorized to withhold from any payment relating to the Option, including from a distribution of Common Stock, or any payroll or other payment to the Optionee, amounts of withholding and other taxes due or potentially payable in connection with any transaction involving the Option, and to take such other action as the Committee may deem advisable to enable the Company and the Optionee to satisfy obligations for the payment of withholding taxes and other tax obligations relating to the Option. This authority shall include authority to withhold or receive Common Stock or other property and to make cash payments in respect thereof in satisfaction of the Optionee’s tax obligations, either on a mandatory or elective basis in the discretion of the Committee.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: section 362(a), in enumerating which actions are stayed, differentiates between the debtor, property of the debtor, and property of the estate. In specifying the duration of the automatic stay, paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 362(c) distinguish between acts against property of the estate (the stay continues so long as property remains property of the estate) and all other acts (the stay continues until the case is closed or dismissed or until a discharge is granted or denied). The language “with respect to the debtor” in 11 U.S.C. section 362(c)(3)(A) has therefore been an occasion for some bankruptcy courts to “differentiate between the debtor, property of the debtor, and property of the estate”. See, e.g., Jumpp v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 356 Bankr. 789, 794 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2006) (<HOLDING>). Other courts do not see those distinctions Options: A. holding that the automatic stay did not bar the filing of a proof of claim where the debtor actively litigated a separate action during the pending bankruptcy proceeding because to permit the automatic stay provision to be used as a trump card played after an unfavorable result was reached would be inconsistent with the underlying purpose of the automatic stay B. holding that the automatic stay terminates as to the debtor personally and as to his nonestate property but that the stay persists as to property of the bankruptcy estate C. holding that if property is not part of the individuals estate at the time he files a bankruptcy petition no automatic stay provision applies to the property D. holding that the bankruptcy court relinquishes jurisdiction over estate property when it grants relief from the automatic stay E. holding that although the automatic stay only applies to proceedings against the debtor counterclaims seeking affirmative relief against a debtor implicate the automatic stay

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the automatic stay terminates as to the debtor personally and as to his nonestate property but that the stay persists as to property of the bankruptcy estate
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 school’s administration refused to take action”; (4) “[h]e continued to experience discrimination following his graduation from college”; and (5) “he was denied employment on account of his religious affiliation.” Based on these incidents, the BIA found that Soccer failed to demonstrate past persecution because the “discrimination” he faced “in his school, neighborhood, and employment opportunities concerned harassment from private individuals” and because it did not “rise to the level of persecution.” Admittedly, the BIA did not attempt to reconcile its conclusion that the school-related conduct was carried out by “private individuals” with the uncertainty about whether Soccer attended private or government schools. Cf. Sotelo-Aquije v. Slattery, 17 F.3d 33, 37 (2d Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). But regardless of whether Soccer’s Options: A. holding that delays by the government in processing an immigration application did not qualify as affirmative misconduct B. holding that when the government takes property by flooding it the government is also liable for the cost of protective measures by landowners in preventing erosion caused by raised water levels C. holding that an applicants wealth in the absence of evidence to suggest other motivations will not support a finding of persecution within the meaning of the immigration and nationality act D. holding that in order to demonstrate a pattern and practice of persecution against a particular group petitioner must demonstrate that persecution is systemic pervasive or organized and is committed by the government or forces the government is either unable or unwilling to control E. holding that the immigration and nationality act protects against persecution not only by government forces but also by nongovernmental groups that the government cannot control

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the immigration and nationality act protects against persecution not only by government forces but also by nongovernmental groups that the government cannot control
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any warranty or representation made in the Loan Documents or with respect to the Property to Agent by Borrower, Guarantor or their respective agents on their behalf shall prove to be false or misleading in any material respect and the failure of Borrower to remedy same within 20 days after Agent’s written demand to Borrower requesting that Borrower cure the underlying condition resulting in such failure, or any warranty or representation is withdrawn by Borrower, any Guarantor or their respective agents on their behalf; provided, however if Agent reasonably determines that such default can be cured, Borrower shall have 10 days after from the date Agent delivers written notice to Borrower of the default to cure such default,(or (A) if Borrower immediately commences and diligently pursues the cure of such default and delivers (prior to the end of the initial grace period) to Agent a written request for more time, and (B) Agent reasonably determines that (1) such default cannot be cured within the initial grace period but can be cured within 30 days after the default, 20 days (for a total of 30 days from the date Agent delivers written notice to Borrower of the default).

assistant: Representations
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: law, to establish such priority. Therefore, a security interest comes into existence only at the time prescribed in the preceding sentence notwithstanding any rule or principle of local law which permits the relation back of any requisite action to a date earlier than the date on which it is actually performed. H.R.Rep. No. 89-1884, at 49 (1966) (emphasis added). Our conclusion that the Treasury Regulation is a reasonable construction of 26 U.S.C. § 6323(h)(1)(A) is bolstered by the fact that federal courts have, with one exception, uniformly applied it to bar state laws that would otherwise permit later actions to relate back in time, without any suggestion that it might be an impermissible construction of the statute. See Haas v. IRS (In re Haas), 31 F.3d 1081, 1091 (11th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); Flagstar Bank, FSB v. Eerkes, No. C12 Options: A. holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage B. holding that the note and the mortgage must coexist to give the mortgage validity C. holding that state equitable principles would retroactively reinstate an erroneously released mortgage but that those principles were nonetheless barred by treas reg 301 6323hla2s prohibition against relation back D. holding that a mortgage transfer does not take effect until the mortgagee gives value in exchange for the mortgage E. holding that although alabama state law would give a mortgagee who erroneously recorded a release of a mortgage an equitable right to have the mortgage retroactively reinstated reinstatement would have resulted in relating back the perfection of the mortgage to the original recording date in violation of treas reg 3016323hla2

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that although alabama state law would give a mortgagee who erroneously recorded a release of a mortgage an equitable right to have the mortgage retroactively reinstated reinstatement would have resulted in relating back the perfection of the mortgage to the original recording date in violation of treas reg 3016323hla2
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 provision of this Agreement may be modified, waived or discharged unless such waiver, modification or discharge is agreed to in writing and signed by the Executive and such officer as may be specifically designated by the Board. No waiver by either party hereto at any time of any breach by the other party hereto of, or of any lack of compliance with, any condition or provision of this Agreement to be performed by such other party shall be deemed a waiver of similar or dissimilar provisions or conditions at the same or at any prior or subsequent time. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties concerning the specific subject matter addressed by this Agreement and supersedes all prior agreements addressing the terms and conditions contained herein. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to amend or otherwise alter the change in control provisions or any other provisions of any (a) stock option or other compensation or incentive award that may heretofore have been or may hereafter be granted to the Executive, or (b) employee benefit or fringe benefit plan in which the Executive may heretofore have been or may hereafter be a participant. The validity, interpretation, construction and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York. All references to sections of the Code or the Exchange Act shall be deemed also to refer to any successor provisions to such sections and to IRS or SEC regulations and official guidance published thereunder. Any payments provided for hereunder shall be subject to any applicable withholding required under federal, state or local law and any additional withholding to which the Executive has agreed. The obligations of the Company and the Executive under this Agreement which by their nature may require either partial or total performance after the expiration of the Term (including, without limitation, those under Sections 6 and 7 hereof) shall survive such expiration.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement 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, and shall become effective as provided in Section 6.04 of the Collateral Agreement. Delivery of an executed signature page to this Agreement by facsimile transmission or other electronic transmission (including by .pdf, .tif or similar format) shall be as effective as delivery of a manually signed counterpart of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: breach of contract against insurance broker, since, “[u]nlike a recipient of the services of a doctor, attorney or architect, as to whom the doctrine has been applied, the recipient of the services of an insurance broker is not at a substantial disadvantage to question the actions of the provider of services”), modified on other grounds, 58 N.Y.2d 1026, 462 N.Y.S.2d 439, 448 N.E.2d 1350 (1983); Flora’s Card Shop Inc. v. Paul Krantz & Co., 111 Misc.2d 907, 908-09, 445 N.Y.S.2d 392 (New York County 1981) (declining to apply doctrine to insurance broker in action for negligence and malpractice), aff’d, 91 A.D.2d 938, 458 N.Y.S.2d 880 (1st Dep’t 1983); see also Port Auth. of New York and New Jersey v. Evergreen Int’l Aviation, 179 Misc.2d 674, 678-79, 686 N.Y.S.2d 269 (Queens County 1999) (<HOLDING>); but see Ben Heller, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Options: A. holding that a police department is not a person within the meaning of section 1983 B. holding that insurance agents and brokers are not professionals within meaning of malpractice statute C. holding that a state is not a person within the meaning of 1983 D. recognizing that corporations are persons within the meaning of the fourteenth amendment E. holding individual defendants are not an employer within meaning of title vii

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that insurance agents and brokers are not professionals within meaning of malpractice 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: v. Spokane Ambulance, 131 Wn.2d 484, 494, 933 P.2d 1036 (1997). However, the court may impose only the least severe sanction that will be adequate to serve its purpose in issuing a sanction. Wash. State Physicians Ins. Exch. & Ass’n v. Fisons Corp., 122 Wn.2d 299, 355-56, 858 P.2d 1054 (1993). A trial court may impose only the most severe discovery sanctions upon a showing that (1) the discovery violation was willful or deliberate, (2) the violation substantially prejudiced the opponent’s ability to prepare for trial, and (3) the court explicitly considered less severe sanctions. Burnet, 131 Wn.2d at 494, 496-97. Discovery sanctions that trigger consideration of the Burnet factors include exclusion of witness testimony. Mayer v. Sto Indus., Inc., 156 Wn.2d 677, 690, 132 P.3d 115 (2006) (<HOLDING>). ¶17 Findings regarding the Burnet factors Options: A. holding that while imposition of the most serious sanctions such as witness exclusion triggers a burnet analysis imposition of lesser sanctions like monetary compensation does not B. holding deathpenalty sanctions inappropriate where party inadvertently failed to comply with courts order and nothing in the record even approaches the flagrant bad faith or abuse necessary for the imposition of such sanctions C. holding that due process requires notice and an opportunity to respond before imposition of rule 11 sanctions D. holding sanctions order not final where the amount of sanctions had not yet been determined E. holding that the imposition of sanctions is reviewed for abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that while imposition of the most serious sanctions such as witness exclusion triggers a burnet analysis imposition of lesser sanctions like monetary compensation does not
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: 5. Upon the written request of the Disclosing Party with respect to any Confidential Information disclosed by it hereunder, the Recipient Party shall return to the Disclosing Party any or all of such information and all copies, contracts or other reproductions in whole or in part thereof or, with the written permission of such Disclosing Party, effect the destruction of all of same and certify such destruction in writing to the Disclosing 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: In connection with this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby, each Member shall execute and deliver any additional documents and instruments and perform any additional acts that may be necessary or appropriate to effectuate and perform the provisions of this Agreement and those transactions.

assistant: Further Assurances
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: but here 's a big warning : if you lose or forget your memories passcode , or if you enter the wrong one too many times , you will lose access to any content you saved in the restricted area of memories .

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: To the extent allowable pursuant to applicable law, each member of the Board, the Committee, the Administrator or any employee of the Company, a Designated Subsidiary, or a Designated Affiliate (each such person, a “Covered Person”) shall be indemnified and held harmless by the Company from any loss, cost, liability, or expense that may be imposed upon or reasonably incurred by such Covered Person in connection with or resulting from any claim, action, suit, or proceeding to which he or she may be a party or in which he or she may be involved by reason of any action or failure to act pursuant to the Plan and against and from any and all amounts paid by him or her in satisfaction of judgment in such action, suit, or proceeding against him or her; provided , however , that he or she has acted in accordance with his or her duties and responsibilities to the Company under applicable law, and provided that he or she gives the Company an opportunity, at its own expense, to handle and defend any claim, action, suit, or proceeding to which he or she is a party before he or she undertakes to handle and defend it on his or her own behalf. The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of any other rights of indemnification to which such Covered Persons may be entitled pursuant to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws, as a matter of law, or otherwise, or any power that the Company may have to indemnify them or hold them harmless.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Diggs v. Owens, 833 F.2d 439, 444-45 (3d Cir. 1987)). 20 . Doc, No, 97 (Petition) at 15. Although Petitioner states that his Certificates of Completion for these courses are attached to his Petition as "Exhibit A,” no such exhibits appear on the docket, Nonetheless, the Court takes as true' Petitioner's allegation that he has completed a number of educational courses while incarcerated. 21 . 562 U.S. 476, 481, 131 S.Ct. 1229, 179 L.Ed.2d 196 (2011). 22 . Although the Third Circuit affirmed Petitioner's convictions on Counts 1-11, Petitioner’s sentence on those counts was reduced from 360 to 235 months on resentencing. See Doc. Nos. 68, 95 (Judgment and Amended Judgment). 23 . See United States v. Renfro, Criminal No. 08-93-ART-CJS-2, 2017 WL 1416869, at *6 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 22, 2017) (<HOLDING>); McCullough v. United States, No. 12-1214, Options: A. holding that courts may only review claims for fundamental miscarriage of justice B. holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances of plain error or fundamental miscarriage of justice C. holding that federal court cannot review claim procedurally defaulted in state court absent showing of either cause and prejudice or a fundamental miscarriage of justice D. holding that request for resentencing based on pepper was not cognizable in a 2255 proceeding absent a showing of a complete miscarriage of justice E. holding that pepper did not allow petitioner to seek a resentencing under 2255

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that request for resentencing based on pepper was not cognizable in a 2255 proceeding absent a showing of a complete miscarriage of justice
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: opinion this way. The District Court noted only that DRPA's use of privilege prevented the District Court from effectively reviewing DRPA's conduct. Regardless of whether DRPA claimed privilege, DRPA still had the burden to provide a rational basis for its action. As we conclude below, it failed to do so. 15 . The parties rely on our previous bidding dispute cases without addressing a crucial distinction present here: nearly all of those cases involve challenges to contract awards by federal agencies brought under the Administrative Procedures Act. DRPA, however, is a bi-state corporate instrumentality created under the Compact Clause of the U.S. Constitution. See Allied Painting, Inc. v. Del. River Port Auth., No. CIV.A. 04-1032 (MAM), 2005 WL 724107, at *1 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 29, 2005) (<HOLDING>). For purposes of review in this diversity Options: A. holding that ejxcept in matters governed by the federal constitution or by acts of congress the law to be applied in any case is the law of the state B. holding a state workers compensation regime preempted by erisa to the extent state law applied to pension plans governed by federal law C. recognizing that it is an open question whether drpa is a federal agency governed by the apa or a state agency governed by state administrative law D. holding that the state police is a state agency E. holding that the admissibility of expert testimony was governed by state law

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that it is an open question whether drpa is a federal agency governed by the apa or a state agency governed by state administrative law
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: non-Navajo Native Americans — for positions for which they were otherwise qualified. The EEOC argued that such conduct violated 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l), which prohibits employers from refusing to hire applicants because of their national origin. The complaint further alleged that Peabody had violated the record-keeping requirements of § 2000e-8(c). Questions arising out of transactions, including coal mining leases, on the. Navajo and Hopi reservations and on the tribes’ joint land have been extensively litigated. See, e.g., Navajo Nation, 537 U.S. at 493-513, 123 S.Ct. 1079 (rejecting claim by Navajo Nation that the Secretary of the Interior breached fiduciary duties owed to the Nation by approving the coal leases); Peabody Coal Co. v. Navajo Nation, 373 F.3d 945, 946 (9th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); see also Clinton v. Babbitt, 180 F.3d 1081, Options: A. recognizing that a district court has jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement reached either at the resolution meeting or during mediation B. holding that a court may only enforce a settlement agreement if it constitutes an enforceable contract C. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to enforce arbitration settlement agreement about lease royalty rates D. holding that a settlement agreement is not a court order and therefore a violation of the settlement agreement would not subject a party to contempt E. holding that trial court is without authority to modify a settlement agreement but may enforce and interpret it

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to enforce arbitration settlement agreement about lease royalty rates
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any costs associated with the services of a Referee shall be borne equally by the Seller and the Buyer in the event that agreement is reached by them on a particular issue. If an issue is decided by the Referee, the Party whose position was not selected shall bear all such costs, provided that, if the Referee finds that the other Party acted unreasonably in connection with the matter the Referee may, in his discretion, order that other Party pay all or any portion of such costs.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY HEREBY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ANY RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY OF ANY CLAIM, DEMAND, ACTION OR CAUSE OF ACTION (INCLUDING ALL CLAIMS, DEMANDS, CAUSE OF ACTIONS OR ACTIONS ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, IN EACH CASE, WHETHER NOW EXISTING OR HEREAFTER ARISING, AND WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, EQUITY, OR OTHERWISE.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or of nude women in sexually provocative poses would not be insulated from Title VII claims simply because the photos were observable by all office employees, White and Black, male and female.” 192 F.3d at 320 (Newman, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). The majority in Brennan found it unnecessary to reach this common-exposure issue to resolve that particular case, see id. at 319, but we now adopt Judge Newman’s reasoning and that of the Fourth Circuit in rejecting Bell Atlantic’s argument that the common exposure of male and female workers to sexually offensive material necessarily precludes a woman from relying on such evidence to establish a hostile work environment based on sex. See also Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., 760 F.Supp. 1486, 1522-23 (M.D.Fla.1991) (<HOLDING>). In sum, although all Bell Atlantic employees Options: A. holding that white female had standing under title vii to challenge her employees alleged racial discrimination against blacks B. holding that evidence established a municipal custom within the police department of a code of silence regarding sexual harassment of female officers and of retaliation against female officers who complained about same C. holding that an employers policy requiring female employees to make larger pension fund contributions than male employees was discriminatory on its face in violation of title vii D. holding that a class of all high school female athletes could not be certified even if the alleged conduct of the defendant school system was discriminatory when some female athletes did not share the same goals or interests as the named female plaintiffs because those unnamed female athletes were satisfied with andor benefitted from the alleged discriminatory treatment E. holding that sexually provocative pictures of nude and partially nude women which were put up before any female employees joined the workplace had a disproportionately demeaning impact on female employees and as such conveyed the message that women do not belong

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that sexually provocative pictures of nude and partially nude women which were put up before any female employees joined the workplace had a disproportionately demeaning impact on female employees and as such conveyed the message that women do not belong
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each person signing this Agreement as a party or on behalf of a party represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign this Agreement on such party's behalf, and is executing this Agreement voluntarily, knowingly, and without any duress or coercion.

assistant: Authorizations
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 potential class members provided appears overbroad, as it identifies parties who allegedly own land adjacent to the Thornton Industrial Lead, without regard for the nature of the parties’ interest in the property. Id. at 7. Under Iowa law, simply owning property adjacent to a railroad right-of-way is not sufficient to establish the requisite reversionary interest necessary to sustain a takings claim: “To establish a compensable interest in a railroad line under Iowa law, Plaintiffs must prove either: (1) that each held some enforceable reversionary or executory interest in the railroad line; or (2) that each holds title to land adjacent to an abandoned portion of a railroad line that the operator used under a mere easement.” Id. (citing Jacobs v. Miller, 253 Iowa 213, 111 N 985) (<HOLDING>). In short, there is no presumption, as a Options: A. holding that the commission did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in denying a rulemaking petition because it considered several factors to determine whether an amendment to the regulations was appropriate or necessary such as the potential benefits of the requested amendment potential costs and the relation between the potential benefits and costs B. holding that an opinion of a potential danger to others is not sufficient to support a commitment under this standard C. holding 39 potential members was not sufficient D. holding 50 potential members was not sufficient E. holding that when ruling on a rule 50 motion the record should be taken as it existed when the trial was closed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding 50 potential members was not 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: indication that they were designed to convey rights on depositors of presenting banks.” Id. at 1361. 3 . The Supreme Court recently addressed this issue in Cherokee Nation in the context of a contract case and concluded that the presence of sufficient unrestricted lump-sum appropriations (not specifically appropriated for the program in issue) to meet the government’s contractual obligation qualified as available appropriations. See 543 U.S. at 641, 125 S.Ct. 1172; see also Oglala Sioux, 194 F.3d at 1376, 1378 (finding available appropriations limited to $95,823,000 because the $1.5 billion general appropriation act expressly limited payments for contract support costs to this amount); Highland Falls-Fort Montgomery Cent. Sch. Dist. v. United States, 48 F.3d 1166, 1171 (Fed.Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). 4 . Most of the cases Greenlee County cites Options: A. holding that congress suspended operation of statute by restricting use of appropriated funds B. holding that this court has power under 28 usc 1651 to issue all writs necessary and appropriate in aid of its jurisdiction and agreeable to the usages and principles of law C. holding that by knocking out 506 the hanging paragraph leaves the parties to their contractual entitlements governed by state law D. holding that money appropriated by congress for entitlements under other sections of the impact aid act were not available appropriations for a program that provided aid to school districts financially burdened by federal ownership of real property E. holding that the validity of government officials claim of absolute immunity for statement allegedly defamatory under state law must be judged by federal standards to be formulated by the courts in the absence of legislative action by congress

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that money appropriated by congress for entitlements under other sections of the impact aid act were not available appropriations for a program that provided aid to school districts financially burdened by federal ownership of real 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: fault than Owens-Illinois, which commissioned Saranac Lake Laboratories to test Kaylo and did not share the results with Defendant until 1958. Alternatively, Owens Corning and Owens-Illinois might be equally at fault, yet each could share considerably less than fifty percent of the total fault for Hagan’s illness, given that other asbestos-containing insulation products likely played a role in the illness. Thus, the district court is free to suggest a remittitur which reflects an allocation of less than fifty percent fault to Defendant, if that is what the evidence supports. We note that one federal circuit has called into question the adjustment of a jury’s apportionment of fault by the device of remitti-tur. See Akermanis v. Sea-Land Service, Inc., 688 F.2d 898, 902-03 (2nd Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>). However, we believe the view of the Seventh Options: A. holding that contributory negligence in the sense of mere carelessness or inadvertence is not a defense in strict liability cases B. holding that plaintiff could not be asked to accept an increase in the contributory negligence percentage and thus a decrease in the judgment as the price of avoiding a new trial C. holding that in a fela case where the jury found negligence per se the defendant railroad could not challenge the validity of the verdict through postverdict discussions indicating that the jury believed the total award would be reduced by the plaintiffs contributory negligence D. holding that defendants bear the burden of proving contributory negligence by a preponderance of the evidence E. holding invalid an instruction regarding intervening cause of act of plaintiff as a defense to strict liability in a case when the former contributory negligence may have been a defense

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that plaintiff could not be asked to accept an increase in the contributory negligence percentage and thus a decrease in the judgment as the price of avoiding a new 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is in satisfaction of and in lieu of all prior discussions and agreements, oral or written, between the Company and the Grantee regarding the subject matter hereof. The Grantee and the Company hereby declare and represent that no promise or agreement not herein expressed has been made and that this Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties hereto with respect to the Restricted Shares and replaces and makes null and void any prior agreements between the Grantee and the Company regarding the Restricted Shares. Subject to the restrictions set forth in Sections 11 and 17, this Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All of the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by, the Parties hereto and their respective successors, assigns, heirs, executors, administrators and legal representatives. Parent shall require and cause any direct or indirect successor (whether by purchase, merger, consolidation or otherwise) to all or substantially all of the business or assets of Parent, by written agreement, expressly to assume and agree to perform this Agreement in the same manner and to the same extent that Parent would be required to perform if no such succession had taken place.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All questions concerning the construction, validity, enforcement and interpretation of the Transaction Documents shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York, without regard to the principles of conflicts of law thereof. Each party agrees that all legal proceedings concerning the interpretations, enforcement and defense of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and any other Transaction Documents (whether brought against a party hereto or its respective affiliates, directors, officers, shareholders, partners, members, employees or agents) shall be commenced exclusively in the state and federal courts sitting in the City of New York. Each party hereby irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts sitting in the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan for the adjudication of any dispute hereunder or in connection herewith or with any transaction contemplated hereby or discussed herein (including with respect to the enforcement of any of the Transaction Documents), and hereby irrevocably waives, and agrees not to assert in any suit, action or proceeding, any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of any such court, that such suit, action or proceeding is improper or is an inconvenient venue for such proceeding. Each party hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any such suit, action or proceeding by mailing a copy thereof via registered or certified mail or overnight delivery (with evidence of delivery) to such party at the address in effect for notices to it under this Agreement and agrees that such service shall constitute good and sufficient service of process and notice thereof. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any other manner permitted by law. If any party shall commence a suit, action or proceeding to enforce any provisions of the Transaction Documents, then, in addition to the obligations of the Company under Section 4.8, the prevailing party in such suit, action or proceeding shall be reimbursed by the non-prevailing party for its reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs and expenses incurred with the investigation, preparation and prosecution of such suit, action or proceeding.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the Law and Order Code also explicitly recognizes causes of action for the types of claims asserted against Snooks. Thus, Bassetto’s causes of action are recognized and anticipated by the Washoe Tribe and by the Washoe Tribal Court. It is clear that the existence of tribal legislation in an area will exclude the state even if the tribal legislation differs greatly from the state’s, or offers no remedy. ... A tribe’s legislative jurisdiction over its own people and within its own territory must include the right not to legislate at all in an area, if self-government is to be meaningful. Felix Cohen’s Handbook of Federal Indian Law 351 (1982) (citing Littell v. Nakai, 344 F.2d 486 (9th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 986 (1966), Schantz v. White Lightning, 502 F.2d 67 (8th Cir. 1974) (<HOLDING>) and Enriquez v. Superior Court, 565 P.2d 522, Options: A. holding that oklahoma police officer was without jurisdiction to arrest indian inside indian reservation when the state has neither received by express grant nor acted pursuant to congressional authorization to assume criminal jurisdiction over indian country B. holding that a nevada state court had no jurisdiction to entertain a civil action filed by a nonindian against an indian for events that occurred on indian land C. holding that the state has no jurisdiction to pursue an indian onto an indian reservation for criminal offenses committed off the reservation D. holding that federal court has neither federal question nor diversity jurisdiction over civil action by nonindian against indian for events occurring on the reservation E. holding that state has no jurisdiction over civil suit by nonindian against indian where cause of action arises on indian reservation

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that federal court has neither federal question nor diversity jurisdiction over civil action by nonindian against indian for events occurring on the reservation
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: our cases dealing with reasonableness under Booker have emphasized again and again that for a sentence to be reasonable a district court must clearly articulate the reasons for its ultimate sentencing decision. Richardson further clarified that if a defendant provides mitigating evidence, the record must: (1) indicate that the court considered it and (2) provide the court’s reasons for rejecting the defendant’s argumen aining that the sentencing court’s consideration of “all of the relevant section 8558(a) factors” must be “clear from the record”). Even assuming, however, that the record indicates that the district court considered all of Vonner’s arguments, there is nothing in the record that explains why the district court rejected those arguments. See Richardson, 437 F.3d at 554 (<HOLDING>). The district court here merely provided a Options: A. holding that only a district judge in the charging district and not a magistrate judge in that district may review the release order of a magistrate judge in the arresting district B. holding that there is no error when a district judge does not explicitly discuss an argument if it is apparent from the record that the judge fully understood the argument on the point and implicitly considered and rejected it in imposing a lenient belowguidelines term of imprisonment C. holding that when a defendant raises a nonfrivolous argument for a lower sentence the record must show that the district court considered it and explained the basis for rejecting it D. holding that the fact that a judge had ruled against the defendant is not a basis for finding the judge prejudiced E. holding that the record must reflect both that the district judge considered the defendants argument and that the judge explained the basis for rejecting it

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the record must reflect both that the district judge considered the defendants argument and that the judge explained the basis for rejecting it