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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of California without giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision or rule (whether of the State of California or any other jurisdiction) that would cause the application of laws of any jurisdiction other than those of the State of California. Any dispute (a “Dispute”) concerning this Agreement will be submitted to and settled exclusively by binding arbitration, in accordance with the provisions of this section, subject only to any applicable requirement of law that the parties engage in a preliminary non-binding mediation or arbitration regarding fee disputes. Binding arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of ADR Services, Inc. (the “ADR Rules”) . Arbitration shall be held at the Century City office of ADR Services, Inc., before an arbitrator selected pursuant to the ADR Rules who will have no personal or pecuniary interest, either directly or indirectly, from any business or family relationship with either of the parties. All decisions of the arbitrator will be final, binding, and conclusive on the parties. During the pendency of the arbitration, the parties will equally share the costs of the arbitrator and the arbitration fee (if any). The prevailing party will be entitled to reimbursement by the other party of any of its fees or costs incurred in connection with the arbitration hereunder, regardless of any rule to the contrary in the applicable arbitration rules. Either party may seek confirmation of the arbitration award in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, and each party hereby consents to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the Los Angeles County Superior Court in any claim or action arising hereunder. By signing this Agreement containing this provision, the parties agree to waive any and all rights to a jury trial regarding any Dispute.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan is an unfunded compensation arrangement for a select group of management or highly compensated employees of the Company or a Subsidiary and any exemptions under ERISA applicable to such an arrangement shall be applicable to the Plan.

assistant: Erisa
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: fundraising service. Id. at 1110-11. The footage of the plaintiff constituted only six seconds of the entire eight minute video. Id. While the court noted the duration of the use was relatively short in relation to the rest of the publication, the court found that the use was “crucial” to the defendant’s advertisement because without it, the video would not have been as attractive to the target audience and because the plaintiffs hole-in-one was not fungible to that of any ot ur-second facial appearance of unidentified and unnamed plaintiff in a street scene, shot from a moving vehicle in low light, during the opening credits of a movie was incidental use because it contributed nothing to the movie’s storyline); Ladany v. William Morrow & Co., 465 F.Supp. 870, 881 (S.D.N.Y.1978) (<HOLDING>). In this case, under the circumstances in Options: A. holding that the premise underlying the action was that plaintiff was deceived by the words and actions of an employer the subject of the deception was pension benefits but that was only incidental and not essential to the cause of action B. holding that incidental use doctrine applied when plaintiff was one of 101 characters in a book discussing in detail the olympic massacre in munich and the book referred to plaintiff only when discussing one out of the many aspects of the tragedy C. holding the doctrine applied in a case of mistake D. holding that factor 10 should not be applied when the victim is the only one at risk E. holding that the ada plaintiff was unable to perform essential functions of job when the plaintiffs psychotherapist had told the employer that the plaintiff was unable to work in any position when the plaintiff did not disagree with that point and when the plaintiff in response to a request for admission conceded that she was no longer able to work

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that incidental use doctrine applied when plaintiff was one of 101 characters in a book discussing in detail the olympic massacre in munich and the book referred to plaintiff only when discussing one out of the many aspects of the tragedy
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: go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. . . . Such does not include mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other vicissitudes of daily living. Plaintiffs are expected to be hardened to a certain amount of rough language and to occasional acts that are definitely inconsiderate and unkind. (Footnotes omitted.) Jarrard, supra, 242 Ga. App. at 59. Here, Martin’s conduct, including the assignment of arduous labor, obstruction of Wilcher’s ability to complete her work, and comments such as “Lori Reaves, Wilcher, whatever” when calling her over the intercom simply do not, as a matter of law, meet this standard. See Everett v. Goodloe, 268 Ga. App. 536, 545 (602 SE2d 284) (2004) (<HOLDING>). While Martin’s conduct appears to be annoying Options: A. holding that the question of whether police had a reasonable basis for finding that a third party had authority to consent to search is a question of law B. holding that while the question of whether a reasonable person would believe his person was seized was normally a question of law that the district court was still entitled to deference because its determination in this case is inextricably intertwined with the credibility of the witnesses C. holding that the issue of whether distress was so extreme that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it is a question of law D. holding it is a question of fact E. holding that an alleged victim of sexual assault need not plead with graphic specificity any additional objective physical injury and clearly experiences severe emotional distress that no reasonable person could be expected to endure

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the issue of whether distress was so extreme that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it is a question of 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: if they had a defense. They were confronted. That was their opportunity to give all these defenses.” He then implied that defense counsel would fabricate new explanations for their clients’ behavior that their clients did not offer a year earlier and that the new explanations were lies. The defense objected on the ground that Lassar’s statements punished the defendants for invoking their Fifth Amendment right not to testify. The district court agreed, finding Lassar’s closing to be improper under the standard announced in United States v. Cotnam, 88 F.3d 487, 497 (7th Cir.1996). Judge Manning strongly rebuked the government for this error, but ultimately found the remarks to be harmless. Cf. id. at 499-500 (applying harmless error review); Rodriguez v. Peters, 63 F.3d at 562 (<HOLDING>). She instructed the jury to disregard the Options: A. holding that prosecutors comment on defendants failure to testify constituted plain error affecting the defendants substantial rights B. recognizing that the fifth amendment forbids comment by the prosecution on a defendants failure to testify C. holding that comment by prosecutor in closing argument that defense counsel did not produce evidence of the defendants innocence was not a comment on the defendants failure to testify D. holding that defendant suffered no prejudice from allegedly improper comment on defendants refusal to testify E. holding the prosecutors statements were not an inappropriate comment on the defendants failure to testify but rather a comment on the defendants failure to present convincing evidence to support his defense

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that defendant suffered no prejudice from allegedly improper comment on defendants refusal to testify
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 98 (5th Cir.1995). We have pointed out in our cases, however, that "[excluding even just some of the public is considered to be a closure of the courtroom and may affect a defendant's right to a public trial.” Tharp v. State, 362 Md. 77, 102 n. 14, 763 A.2d 151, 164 n. 14 (2000); Watters v. State, 328 Md. 38, 45, 612 A.2d 1288, 1293 (1992); see also Walker v. State, 121 Md.App. 364, 373, 709 A.2d 177, 181-82 (1998). 2 . The charges against Longus were: Count 1: Robbery with a deadly weapon; Count 2: Robbery; Count 3: Theft of $500 value or more; Count 4: Assault, first degree; Count 5: Assault, second degree. 3 . By opposing the State’s motion to exclude Myers and Norris, Longus preserved his claim for appellate review. See Robinson v. State, 410 Md. 91, 110, 976 A.2d 1072, 1083 (2009) (<HOLDING>). 4 . Longus also argued in his brief to the Options: A. holding that in order to preserve an issue for review a party must make a timely and specific objection at trial B. holding an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the trial court in order to be preserved for review C. holding that a claimed violation of the right to a public trial must be preserved for review by a timely objection at trial D. holding the issue of recusal of the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review must be raised in the trial court E. holding party must make timely and specific objection at trial to preserve issue for appellate review

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a claimed violation of the right to a public trial must be preserved for review by a timely objection at 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: relationship.” Solo Sales, Inc. v. North America OMCG, Inc., 299 Ill.App.3d 850, 234 Ill. Dec. 312, 702 N.E.2d 652, 653 (Ill.App.Ct. 1998) (internal quotation marks omitted). The doctrine is “designed to protect a salesperson who, although no longer an agent or employee when a sale is made, has done everything necessary to effect the sale.” Id., 234 Ill.Dec. at 315-16, 702 N.E.2d at 653-54. Vantage alleges that the procuring cause doctrine entitles it to perpetual commissions on all of De Amertek’s sales of electronic display and control boards to Dixie-Narco. As the district court held, however, the procuring cause doctrine is based upon the procurement of particular sales, not the procurement of customers. See, e.g., Furth v. Inc. Publ’g Corp., 823 F.2d 1178, 1180-81 (7th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); Dahly Tool Co. v. Vermont Tap & Die Co., 742 Options: A. holding that jurisdiction must be resolved before applying the act of state doctrine because that doctrine is a substantive rule of law B. holding that procuring cause doctrine creates entitlement to procurement of particular sales as opposed to procurement of customers C. holding rookerfeldman doctrine inapplicable to claims that do not require review of a judicial decision in a particular case D. recognizing doctrine E. holding that the existence of probable cause for an arrest is a complete defense to a first amendment retaliation claim under the doctrine of qualified immunity

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that procuring cause doctrine creates entitlement to procurement of particular sales as opposed to procurement of customers
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 TPG and the Company agrees to execute and deliver all such further documents and do all acts and things that from time to time may reasonably be required to effectively carry out or better evidence or perfect the full intent and meaning of this Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: taxable. In reaching this conclusion, we place considerable emphasis on the nature of the funds that the Commissioner found taxable. Section 104(a)(2) excludes from taxation “the amount of any damages received ... on account of personal injury or sickness.” (emphasis supplied). Language is not infinitely elastic, and here, the disputed prejudgment interest simply does not comprise “damages” within the meaning of section 104(a)(2). We explain briefly. Under the applicable Rhode Island statute, prejudgment interest is awarded in all civil cases, not just in personal injury cases. See R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-21-10. This interest is separate and distinct from damages, and is awarded mainly to compensate for delay in payment. See Foster v. Quigley, 94 R.I. 217, 179 A.2d 494, 495 (1962) (<HOLDING>); accord Balian v. Allstate Ins. Co., 610 A.2d Options: A. recognizing private right of action B. holding that the right to drive is not a fundamental right C. recognizing that a person has been seized within the meaning of the fourth amendment only if in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave D. holding that the fourth amendment right implicated in a malicious prosecution action is the right to be free of unreasonable seizure of the person E. holding that prejudgment interest for damages to the person is not of the substance of the right of action but exclusively an incident attached thereto by legislative fiat after such right has been adjudicated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that prejudgment interest for damages to the person is not of the substance of the right of action but exclusively an incident attached thereto by legislative fiat after such right has been adjudicated
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: B, Part 2 as necessaries, but it has not done the same for attorney’s fees awarded to a party in a Chapter 156 modification suit. Id. § 107.023. Because Chapter 156 is devoid of similar authorization, we conclude that the Legislature did not intend to provide trial courts with discretion to characterize attorney’s fees incurred by a party in a non-enforcement modification suit as necessaries. Cf. Quick v. City of Austin, 7 S.W.3d 109, 122-23 (Tex.1998) (“[W]hile the Legislature clearly was well-versed in drafting statutes that explicitly provided that a local act was not effective until approved by the Commission, the Legislature chose not to include such an express provision [here]. We presume that this omission has a purpose.”); see also In re V.L.K., 24 S.W.3d 338, 343 (Tex.2000) (<HOLDING>). III. Conclusion The Legislature has provided Options: A. holding denial of motion to convert from chapter 11 to chapter 7 is interlocutory B. holding provisions of chapter 156 of texas family code governing modifications clearly apply to suits that attempt to effect change in custody after entry of initial custody order C. holding tort action accruing after original chapter 7 petition not part of estate when case converted to chapter 13 and then back to chapter 7 D. holding that chapter 153s statutory presumption that a childs best interest is served by awarding custody to the parent in original custody proceedings does not apply in chapter 156 modification proceedings in the absence of a similar provision in chapter 156 E. recognizing that the child custody act required that the natural parent presumption must be seriously considered and heavily weighted in favor of the parent but that the presumption is rebutted if the clear and convincing evidence establishes that the best interest of the child is served by awarding custody to the third party

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that chapter 153s statutory presumption that a childs best interest is served by awarding custody to the parent in original custody proceedings does not apply in chapter 156 modification proceedings in the absence of a similar provision in chapter 156
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: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, up to an aggregate of $410,788.00 in principal amount of the Debentures corresponding to an aggregate Subscription Amount of $375,000. Each Purchaser shall deliver to the Company immediately available funds, via wire transfer or a certified check, equal to such Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser, and the Company shall deliver to each Purchaser its respective Debenture, as determined pursuant to Section 2.2(a), and the Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of EGS or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: On or prior to each Purchase Date, the Seller shall have caused its records (including electronic ledgers) relating to each Related Consumer Loan to be conveyed by it on such Purchase Date to be clearly and unambiguously marked to reflect that such Related Consumer Loan was conveyed by it to the Debtor.

assistant: Records
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: During the Term, Executive shall be entitled to twenty (20) days paid vacation or Paid Time Off (“PTO”) per year, or such greater amount as may be earned under the Company’s standard PTO policy, to be earned ratably throughout the year. PTO days may be carried from one year to the next in accordance with the Company vacation policy, provided that the Executive shall not be entitled to accrue a balance of more than five PTO days.

assistant: Vacations
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 Depositor makes the following representations and warranties upon which the Issuer is deemed to have relied in acquiring the Depositor Conveyed Assets. Such representations are made as of the date of the execution and delivery of this Agreement and as of the Closing Date, and shall survive the transfer of the Depositor Conveyed Assets to the Issuer and the pledge thereof to the Indenture Trustee in accordance with the terms of the Indenture.

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: commerce. United States v. Lane, 883 F.2d 1484, 1492 (10th Cir.1989). Therefore, this claim is without merit. In his supplemental pro se brief, Lysaith contends that his sentence was imposed in violation of Apprendi because no drug quantity was alleged in the indictment. Because Lysaith did not object to or raise this issue below, review is for plain error. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(b); United States v. Pinckney, 938 F.2d 519, 522 (4th Cir.1991). The district court did not commit plain error. Lysaith’s sentence of 63 months imprisonment does not exceed the statutory maximum of 240 months set forth in § 841(a). Thus, his sentence does not implicate Apprendi. See United States v. Kinter, 235 F.3d 192, 199-202 (4th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 937, 121 S.Ct. 1393, 149 L.Ed.2d 316 (2001) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, because Lysaith’s sentence does not Options: A. holding that apprendi does not apply to judges exercise of sentencing discretion within statutory range so long as defendants sentence is not set beyond maximum term specified in substantive statute B. holding statutory error harmless where district court imposed the highest available sentence under guidelines range and considered sentencing to the statutory maximum C. holding apprendi is not implicated by an application of the sentencing guidelines that increases the sentencing range so long as the sentence imposed does not exceed the statutory maximum D. holding apprendi is not implicated where sentence does not exceed statutory maximum sentence authorized for the offense in its simplest form E. holding that apprendi does not apply to a judges exercise of sentencing discretion within a statutory range so long as a defendants sentence is not set beyond the maximum term specified in the substantive statute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding apprendi is not implicated by an application of the sentencing guidelines that increases the sentencing range so long as the sentence imposed does not exceed the statutory maximum
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 parties bear the same substantive burden of proof as would apply at a trial on the merits, including plaintiffs burden to establish any element essential to his case. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. at 252; Celotex, 477 U.S. at 322; Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir.1989). y The plaintiffs complaint against defendant WNS alleges that it violated his Fourth, Eighth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendment rights by “caus[ing] and allowing him] to be sexually ass[a]ulted and brutalized ... through policies, customs, procedures and unlawful practices.” Complaint at 3. Although the plaintiff cites the Fourth, Eighth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, his claim properly arises solely under the Fourth Amendment. See Pierce v. Multnomah County, Oregon, 76 F.3d 1032, 1043 (9th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 506, 136 Options: A. holding neither a phone call by the police requesting an arrestee to come to the station for questioning nor the questioning of an arrestee at the station was a seizure within the meaning of the fourth amendment B. holding fourth amendment protects right to be free from arrest without probable cause C. holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment D. holding that the fourth amendment sets the applicable constitutional limitations on the treatment of an arrestee detained without a warrant up until the time such arrestee is released or found to be legally in custody based upon probable cause for arrest E. holding that a warrantless arrest does not violate the fourth amendment if at the time of the defendants arrest police had probable cause to believe that an offense has been is being or will be committed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the fourth amendment sets the applicable constitutional limitations on the treatment of an arrestee detained without a warrant up until the time such arrestee is released or found to be legally in custody based upon probable cause for arrest
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: At the Closing, the Company shall reimburse Buyer for no more than $2,000.00 of expenses incurred by them in connection with the negotiation, preparation, execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the other agreements to be executed in connection herewith (“Documents”), including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ and consultants’ fees and expenses, transfer agent fees, fees for stock quotation services, fees relating to any amendments or modifications of the Documents or any consents or waivers of provisions in the Documents, fees for the preparation of opinions of counsel, escrow fees, and costs of restructuring the transactions contemplated by the Documents. When possible, the Company must pay these fees directly, otherwise the Company must make immediate payment for reimbursement to the Buyer for all fees and expenses immediately upon written notice by the Buyer or the submission of an invoice by the Buyer. The Company shall also be responsible for all costs, other than share issuance taxes, if any, relating to the issuance of the shares issuable upon conversion of the Note.

assistant: Expenses
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 disability (i) as determined under The Atmos Energy Corporation Group Long-Term Disability Plan, as in effect from time to time, or (ii) a determination of total disability for purposes of eligibility for Social Security disability benefits, if such Group Long-Term Disability Plan is not then in existence. If a Participant’s Disability is based on his eligibility for Social Security disability benefits, such Participant shall not be treated as having suffered a Disability unless he shall provide the Plan Administrator, or a committee which may be established pursuant to Section 6.1, with written proof, in a form and within the time determined by the Plan Administrator, or a committee which may be established pursuant to Section 6.1, to be satisfactory, that such Participant is receiving Social Security disability benefits.

assistant: Disability
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: such as the instant case, federal courts must apply the substantive law of the forum state. Id. at 1515 (citing Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938) and Keller v. Miami Herald Publ’g Co., 778 F.2d 711 (11th Cir.1985)). This principle extends to the forum state’s choice of law rules. LaFarge, 118 F.3d at 1515 (citations omitted). We are thus bound to apply Florida’s choice of law rules in determining which state’s law governs this case. The district court held that Florida’s choice of law rules mandate the application of Florida law to a dispute over a contract to insure real property located within the state. The Sadikis concede, as they must, that the district court’s holding is entirely consistent with two prior opinions of this court. Id. at 1516 (<HOLDING>); Shapiro v. Associated Int'l Ins. Co., 899 Options: A. holding that by selling approximately eighteen percent of its product to florida importers moving nearly all of its product through the state purchasing equipment and supplies from florida suppliers utilizing storage facilities in florida and establishing essential business relationships in this state all within its ongoing commercial relationship with florida defendant engaged in substantial and not isolated activity within the state B. holding that where florida state court had not addressed choiceoflaw issues with regard to directors liability federal court could presume that florida court would follow the restatement second of conflict of laws based on the florida courts past reliance on the treatise C. holding that florida courts would apply florida law to contracts insuring real property located within the state D. holding that when an accident occurs outside florida workers compensation benefits are payable only if the contract of employment was made in florida or if the employees employment is principally located in florida E. holding new york could lawfully modify a florida custody decree because florida court had right under florida law to change the decree

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that florida courts would apply florida law to contracts insuring real property located within the state
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: unfair prejudice. See United States v. Downing, 297 F.3d 52, 59 (2d Cir.2002). b.Heroin Sales Evidence The district court acted within its discretion in concluding that Serrano’s involvement in four heroin sales between December 2012 and January 2013 was not being offered to prove propensity but, rather, as direct evidence of the 2012 to July 2013 conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute one kilogram or more of heroin. See United States v. Eppolito, 543 F.3d 25, 47 (2d Cir.2008) (“Where, as here, the indictment contains a conspiracy charge, uncharged acts may be admissible as direct evidence of the conspiracy itself.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). As such, this evidence was highly probative, see United States v. Concepcion, 983 F.2d 369, 392 (2d Cir. 1992) (<HOLDING>), and not unfairly prejudicial so as to Options: A. recognizing high probative value of act done in furtherance of conspiracy because it is part of the very act charged B. holding criminal conspiracy is sustained where the commonwealth establishes the defendant entered into an agreement to commit or aid in an unlawful act with another person with a shared criminal intent and an overt act was done in furtherance of the conspiracy a coconspirator may commit the overt act and conspirators are liable for acts of the coconspirators committed in furtherance of the conspiracy C. recognizing requirement that defendant conspired to commit an overt act in state in furtherance of the conspiracy D. holding that venue is proper in any district where any act in furtherance of the conspiracy took place E. recognizing high probative value of evidence providing conduct that was part of the very act charged

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing high probative value of act done in furtherance of conspiracy because it is part of the very act charged
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: prejudice. State v. Filippi, 335 N.W.2d 739, 743 (Minn.1983). Sebasky argues M.B.’s testimony that Sebasky sexually abused M.B. numerous times after 1981 is not relevant because the events described are insufficiently similar to the current allegations. See id. (determining relevancy based on the prior bad act’s similarity to the charged offense); State v. Buhl, 520 N.W.2d 177, 181 (Minn.App.1994) (same), review denied (Minn. Oct. 27, 1994). In determining relevance and materiality, the trial court should consider the relation in time, place, or modus operandi between the charged offense and the other crime. Filippi, 335 N.W.2d at 743. The crimes do not have to be identical. State v. DeWald, 464 N.W.2d 500, 503 (Minn.1991); see also State v. Crocker, 409 N.W.2.d 840, 843 (Minn.1987) (<HOLDING>); Buhl, 520 N.W.2d at 181 (stating the Options: A. holding that allegations of sexual assault by an employee of the church fell within coverage for sexual misconduct B. holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse C. holding that sexual harassment need not take the form of sexual advances or other explicitly sexual conduct in order to be actionable under title vii D. holding that the trial court did not err by excluding the victims earlier reports of sexual abuse because too many sexual details remain unaccounted for after consideration of what defendant hoped to prove with the prior sexual conduct E. holding a conviction for lewd conduct with a sevenyearold was sufficient when presented with evidence of other sexual misconduct to establish a pattern of sexual misconduct with vulnerable young women

assistant: The best answer is E. holding a conviction for lewd conduct with a sevenyearold was sufficient when presented with evidence of other sexual misconduct to establish a pattern of sexual misconduct with vulnerable young women
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: whatsoever. See (SOF 12, DE #33 at 4) (“Plaintiff has produced only his March 12, 2008 ‘Statement of Claim’ (and attached documents) in support of his alleged claim for damages”); (DE #57 at 4) (“Plaintiff has sworn that his ‘Statement of Claim’ ... completely sets forth his alleged claim for damages.”); (DE #85) (Court’s Notice of Consideration of Motion for Summary Judgement). A factfinder would have to engage in impermissible speculation in order to create a causal link between Plaintiffs alleged emotional distress injuries— which occurred over an eight-year period — and Bank of America’s alleged failure to properly investigate its reporting of a charged off account — which occurred over a three-month period. See Cousin v. Trans Union Corp., 246 F.3d 359, 370-71 (5th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). d. Plaintiffs Substantial Emotional Distress Options: A. holding in the context of the fcra that a claim for emotional distress must be supported by evidence of genuine injury requiring a degree of specificity which may include corroborating testimony or medical or psychological evidence in support of the damage award B. holding that the corroborating evidence need not be medical evidence if the appellant explains why medical evidence is not available C. holding that evidence of prior similar acts was not proof of medical malpractice or whether the doctor lacked the proper degree of knowledge or skill D. recognizing that cue may be based on a showing that there was no evidence before the adjudicator that could have supported a denial of the claim on the merits that is that all of the evidence militated in support of the claim E. holding that there was no evidence or inferences to be drawn from the evidence to support the damage award

assistant: The best answer is A. holding in the context of the fcra that a claim for emotional distress must be supported by evidence of genuine injury requiring a degree of specificity which may include corroborating testimony or medical or psychological evidence in support of the damage award
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: Schedule 17(F) of Exhibit “D” , which is attached, and made part of, this Note, contains a true, correct and complete listing of all authorized, issued and outstanding equity interests in the Company, including all preferred, common, profit interests and any other equity interests (the “ Total Company Equity ”) and the corresponding beneficial owners of such Total Company Equity (the “ Shareholders ”). The Total Company Equity is lawfully owned by each of the Shareholders as set forth on Schedule 17(F) of Exhibit “D” , which is attached, and made part of, this Note, and all voting rights in the Company are vested exclusively with the Shareholders. Except as set forth on Schedule 17(F) of Exhibit “D” , which is attached, and made part of, this Note on the date hereof, there is no subscription, warrant, option, convertible security or other right (contingent or otherwise) to purchase or acquire from the Company any common, preferred or profit interests in the Company or any other interest, security or right in the Company. Except as set forth on of the Schedule 17(F) of Exhibit “D” , which is attached, and made part of, this Note, on the date hereof, the Company does not have an obligation (contingent or otherwise) to issue any subscription, warrant, option, convertible security or other such right, or to issue or distribute other equity interests in the Company or any assets of the Company. The Company does not have an obligation (contingent or otherwise) to purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire any common, preferred or profit interests in the Company or any other interest in the Company or to make any distribution in respect thereof. Except for the Stockholders Agreement (as defined below) among the existing shareholders of the Company, the Company has no knowledge that there is any agreement, written or oral, between the Company and any person or among any holders of its securities, relating to the sale or transfer (including agreements relating to rights of first refusal, co sale rights or “drag along” rights), registration under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “ Act ”), as amended, or voting, of the common, preferred or profit interests in the Company or other equity interests in the Company. The Company believes in good faith that any “nonqualified deferred compensation plan” (as such term is defined under Section 409A(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as amended, the “ Code ”) and the guidance thereunder) under which the Company makes, is obligated to make or promises to make, payments (each, a “409A Plan”) complies in all material respects, in both form and operation, with the requirements of Section 409A of the Code and the guidance thereunder. The Company has no knowledge that any payment to be made under any 409A Plan is, or will be, subject to the penalties of Section 409A(a)(1) of the Code.

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

user: Except as so limited all of the obligations of this Article 5 survive expiration or termination of this agreement. In the event of any termination arising as a result of a breach by ANUBIS: (a) SCAM shall not be relieved of any obligation to make further shipments of the Product hereunder and may not (even in the event that the contract was terminated as a result of a breach by ANUBIS) cancel all ANUBIS's unshipped orders for the Product. SCAM shall have an obligation to ANUBIS in connection with of any unshipped orders pursuant to this paragraph.

assistant: Yes
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: if it is determined that you retain moral rights ( including rights of attribution or integrity ) in the content , you hereby declare that ( a ) you do not require that any personally identifying information be used in connection with the content , or any derivative works of or upgrades or updates thereto ; ( b ) you have no objection to the publication , use , modification , deletion and exploitation of the content by tripadvisor or its licensees , successors and assigns ; ( c ) you forever waive and agree not to claim or assert any entitlement to any and all moral rights of an author in any of the content ; and ( d ) you forever release tripadvisor , and its licensees , successors and assigns , from any claims that you could otherwise assert against tripadvisor by virtue of any such moral rights .

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: EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER THEORY). EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PERSON HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PERSON WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER, AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION.

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: in isolation from each other does not take into account the ‘totality of the circumstances,’ as our cases have understood that phrase. The court appeared to believe that each observation by [the arresting officer] that was by itself readily susceptible to an innocent explanation was entitled to ‘no weight.’ See [United States v. Arvizu,] 232 F.3d [1241] at 1249-1251 [(9th Cir.2000)]. Terry, however, precludes this sort of divide-and-conquer analysis. The officer in Terry observed the petitioner and his companions repeatedly walk back and forth, look into a store window, and confer with one another. Although each of the series of acts was ‘perhaps innocent in itself,’ we held that, taken together, they Warranted further investigation.’ 392 U.S., at 22. See also Sokolow, supra, at 9 (<HOLDING>).” “ ‘United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266, Options: A. holding that while each separate item standing alone did not provide reasonable suspicion a combination of factors clearly satisfied the reasonable suspicion requirement B. holding that factors that ordinarily constitute innocent behavior may provide a composite picture sufficient to raise reasonable suspicion C. holding innocent facts when considered together can give rise to reasonable suspicion D. holding that contradictory or implausible travel plans can contribute to a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity E. holding that factors which by themselves were quite consistent with innocent travel collectively amounted to reasonable suspicion

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that factors which by themselves were quite consistent with innocent travel collectively amounted to reasonable suspicion
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: Appellant, moreover, cites no authority other than Maryland Rule 16—732(f) in support of his argument that he should have had a hearing on the motion to quash, and we know of none. Certainly Maryland Rule 2-311, the general rule on motions, does not assist Appellant. We agree with the Commission that subsection (f) of Rule 2-311, which addresses hearings on motions other than motions filed under Maryland Rules 2-532, 2-533, and 2-534, does not entitle Appellant to a hearing on his motion. Rule 2-311(f) provides: Hearing—Other Motions. A party desiring a hearing on a motion, other than a motion filed pursuant to Rule 2-532, 2-533, or 2-534, shall request the hearing in the motion or response under the heading “Request for Hearing.” Except when a rule expr .2d 1235, 1239 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Phillips v. Venker, 316 Md. 212, 217, 557 Options: A. holding that district court was not required to hold an evidentiary hearing based on 2255 petitioners mere eonclusory allegations in his affidavit B. holding that court did not have to hold a hearing to determine attorneys fees where detailed affidavit was provided C. holding that the lower court was not required to hold a hearing on a motion to transfer D. holding that the trial court did not err by failing to hold an oral hearing on a motion to dismiss an appeal because the appellant was afforded a full opportunity to respond to the motion E. holding that transfer was proper remedy for improper venue even though the issue of transfer was not raised until the motion hearing in circuit court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the lower court was not required to hold a hearing on a motion to transfer
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless other arrangements have been made that are acceptable to the Company, the Company or any Affiliate thereof is authorized to deduct or withhold, or cause to be deducted or withheld, from any Award, from any payment due or transfer made under any Award, or from any compensation or other amount owing to a Participant the amount (in cash or Units, including Units that would otherwise be issued pursuant to such Award or other property) of any applicable taxes payable in respect of an Award, including its grant, its exercise, the lapse of restrictions thereon or any payment or transfer thereunder or under the Plan, and to take such other action as may be necessary in the opinion of the Company to satisfy its withholding obligations for the payment of such taxes. In the event that Units that would otherwise be issued pursuant to an Award are used to satisfy such withholding obligations, the number of Units which may be so withheld or surrendered shall be limited to the number of Units which have a Fair Market Value on the date of withholding equal to the aggregate amount of such liabilities based on the minimum statutory withholding rates for federal, state, local and foreign income tax and payroll tax purposes that are applicable to such supplemental taxable income.

assistant: Tax Withholdings