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: makes more sense if costs are covered, the Seventh Circuit nevertheless held that the parenthetical was an exclusion within an exclusion, and thus a nullity under Illinois law. Id. at 300. Accord Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, No. 85-3163 (D.D.C. Oct. 16, 1991) (construing similar policy and finding no obligation to pay for defense costs). The Second Circuit, in declaring that a policy similar to the one at issue here did not provide for payment of defense costs, found the parenthetical ambiguous but immaterial because the parties did not dispute that in-house expenses were not covered under the policy. Home Ins. Co. v. American Home Prods. Corp., 665 F.Supp. 193 (S.D.N.Y.1987), aff'd in part, rev’d in part, 902 F.2d 1111, 1114 (2d Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). The application of Ohio law leads to a result Options: A. holding that punitive damages may be imposed against employer for tortious conduct of employee B. holding that a further finding that the insured intended to injure the defendant would preclude any liability for the insurer for indemnification of compensatory or punitive damages C. holding that indemnification by excess liability insurer for punitive damages imposed on drug manufacturer contrary to public policy D. holding on policy grounds that a strict liability claim should not lie against drug manufacturer E. holding that liability insurance policy that expressly excluded coverage for the insureds intentional acts did not cover punitive damages award assessed against the insured and stating in dictum that public policy forbids insurance coverage for punitive damages

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that indemnification by excess liability insurer for punitive damages imposed on drug manufacturer contrary to public policy
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: properly exercised [its] discretion when [it] excluded [the evidence] as cumulative.”). Second, if the Court allowed the Defendant to bring a wealth of evidence of his “loving relationship” with C.T., the jury might have been misled or confused into believing that the Defendant could rebut the Government’s evidence of intent by bringing a larger amount of evidence supporting an alternative purpose. Considering these interests, the Court finds that the probative value of such evidence was “substantially outweighed by a danger of.. .confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time [and] needlessly presenting cumulative evidence,” in violation of F.R.E, 403. Therefore, excluding the additional evidence was within the Court’s discretion. See Miles, 207 F.3d at 993 (<HOLDING>). The Defendant also argues that the Court Options: A. holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony B. holding that trial court abused its discretion in permitting the testimony of a witness who was not listed in the pretrial order and no reason was given for the failure to list the witness C. holding that the court has the discretion to bar a defendant from introducing documents that would have served no purpose other than to repeat the testimony given by the witness D. holding that a trial court abused its discretion by excluding the testimony of an expert witness where the testimony would have been relevant to show that the defendant breached a duty of care E. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting testimony to only one witness where additional witnesses would have provided the same testimony

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the court has the discretion to bar a defendant from introducing documents that would have served no purpose other than to repeat the testimony given by the witness
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: Executive hereby acknowledges that, during the course of Executive’s employment, Executive has and will learn or develop Confidential Information in trust and confidence. Executive agrees to use the Confidential Information solely for the purpose of performing his duties hereunder and not for his own private use or commercial purposes. Executive acknowledges that unauthorized disclosure or use of Confidential Information, other than in discharge of Executive’s duties, will cause the Lawson Entities irreparable harm. Except to the extent permitted pursuant to Section 10(p), Executive shall maintain Confidential Information in strict confidence at all times and shall not divulge Confidential Information to any Unauthorized Person or Entity, or use in any manner, or knowingly allow another to use, any Confidential Information, without the Company’s prior written consent, during the term of employment or thereafter, for as long as such Confidential Information remains confidential. Executive further acknowledges that the Lawson Entities operate and compete internationally and that the Lawson Entities will be harmed by the unauthorized disclosure or use of Confidential Information regardless of where such disclosure or use occurs, and that therefore this confidentiality agreement is not limited to any single state or other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be transferred to a new lower court case number (case number 09-15176). Thereafter, the mother and father entered into an agreement providing the father would consent to termination of his parental rights and the mother would agree to withdraw the action for child support. The trial court subsequently entered an order in the custody case approving the parties’ stipulated agreement and terminating the father’s parental rights. Several months later, the mother filed a “Motion to Intervene” in both lower court case n 991). The trial court correctly ruled, however, that intervention in the concluded child custody case is not the proper vehicle for the mother or the child to challenge the agreement and resulting order. See In re Adoption of a Minor Child, 593 So.2d 185, 189-90 (Fla.1991) (<HOLDING>). The motion for intervention filed in the DOR Options: A. recognizing intervention is generally impermissible after entry of final judgment and exception allowing postjudg ment intervention in the interests of justice is limited to permitting intervention by affected persons so that an appeal can be taken B. holding that article iii standing is necessary for intervention C. holding that article iii standing is not a prerequisite to intervention D. holding that pursuant to rule 2a2 a party may appeal an order denying a motion for permissive intervention E. holding that as applied to case in which applicants for intervention are already plaintiffs in another ongoing lawsuit and that the matter on which they wish to expound is squarely before the other court section 21g bars intervention noting that allowing intervention would effectively allow coordination of enforcement action with lawsuit already pending in another jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing intervention is generally impermissible after entry of final judgment and exception allowing postjudg ment intervention in the interests of justice is limited to permitting intervention by affected persons so that an appeal can be taken
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: Act surety to avoid liability on the payment bond based on an unsatisfied “pay when and if paid” clause in the subcontract would, for all practical purposes, prohibit a subcontractor from exercising its Miller Act rights until the prime contractor has been paid by.the government. In cases where the government does not pay the prime contractor within the one year statute of limitations period, the subcontractor would be barred from asserting its Miller Act rights. Walton has performed its obligations under the subcontract and waited the requisite ninety days. Permitting Defendants to avoid liabilit iller Act case, the Fifth Circuit emphasized that the Miller Act conditions the right of recovery on the passage of time, not payment by the government. See T.M.S. Mech., 942 F.2d at 949 n. 6 (<HOLDING>). 3 . Congress has recently expressed a similar Options: A. holding that a paywhenpaid clause does not preclude a subcontractors recovery under the miller act payment bond because the federal legislation conditions payment of the subcontractor not on payment by the government to the contractor but rather on the passage of time from completion of the work or provision of materials B. holding that it was not essential to an action by a supplier on a payment bond under the miller act that a demand be made on the general contractor for payment although there was evidence in the case from which it could be found that the materialman looked to the general contractor for payment since the statute does not require a demand for payment but merely requires written notice of the claim C. holding that an agreement which required the submission of an affidavit of payment to subcontractors or lien waivers before payment was made by the general contractor was for the direct benefit of the subcontractors D. holding that a clause making payment by the owner an express condition precedent to payment by the general contractor to the subcontractor was enforceable E. holding that surety was liable to subcontractor on payment bond because payment bond applied to any claimant who among other things supplied materials that were reasonably required for use in the performance of the subcontract

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a paywhenpaid clause does not preclude a subcontractors recovery under the miller act payment bond because the federal legislation conditions payment of the subcontractor not on payment by the government to the contractor but rather on the passage of time from completion of the work or provision of materials
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 tax returns of every kind (including returns of real and personal property taxes, intangible taxes, withholding taxes, and unemployment compensation taxes) relating to the Business that Purchaser was required to file in accordance with any applicable law have been duly filed, and all taxes shown to be due on such returns have been paid in full.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: General and Department of Highways); Haas Carriage. Inc. v. Berna, 651 N.E.2d 284 (Ind.App.1995) (determining that employee stated claim for retaliatory discharge where he alleged termination in retaliation for failure to commit an unlawful act); Pepsi-Cola Gen’l Bottlers. Inc. v. Woods, 440 N.E.2d 696, 697 (Ind.App.1982) (stating that retaliatory discharge claim applies when employee is discharged “solely for exercising a right conferred on him by a statute, constitution, or other positive law.”). Indiana’s retaliatory discharge claim, like Illinois’, also embraces claims that an employer interfered with a worker’s employment to prevent the worker’s rights to file for compensation benefits, as well as for threats of discharge. Stivers v. Stevens, 581 N.E.2d 1253, 1254 (Ind.App.1991) (<HOLDING>); see also Frampton, 297 N.E.2d at 428 (stating Options: A. recognizing retaliatory discharge tort implied by the workers compensation act B. recognizing the tort of retaliatory discharge C. recognizing retaliatory discharge claim where employer prevented employees exercise of workers compensation rights because of employees intention to file claim D. holding that because maryland law expressly creates right to file workers compensation claim action exists for wrongful discharge for termination based solely on the filing of a workers compensation claim E. holding that employees retaliatory discharge based on employees election to public office did not violate public policy

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing retaliatory discharge claim where employer prevented employees exercise of workers compensation rights because of employees intention to file claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been delivered to Lender and accepted by Lender in the State of Minnesota. If there is a lawsuit, Grantor agrees upon Lender's require to submit to the jurisdiction of the courts of Lyon County, the State of Minnesota. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota.

assistant: Applicable 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: Each Credit Document executed, or to be executed, by each Credit Party has been, or will be, duly executed and delivered by such Credit Party and constitutes, or will constitute, a legal, valid and binding obligation of such Credit Party, enforceable against such Credit Party in accordance with its terms, except as limited by bankruptcy, insolvency or other laws of general application relating to or affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally and general principles of equity.

assistant: Enforceability
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 his father’s name. Further, Huggins’s father testified that he authorized his son to put the Denali in his name, but that it was Huggins’s car, that he did not make payments on it, and that he did not regularly drive it. After hearing this evidence, the jury could reasonably conclude that Huggins knew the transactions were designed to conceal the nature of the proceeds used to purchase the vehicles. C. Sentencing Issues 1. Sentencing Enhancement Next, Huggins contends that the District Court abused its discretion during sentencing by increasing his offense level by two levels for his leadership role in the offense, arguing that there was no evidence to support a finding that he was a leader of five or more people. See United States v. Tomko, 562 F.3d 558, 567 (3d Cir.2009) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). This argument is without merit because the Options: A. recognizing that we review the sentence imposed by a district court under the abuse of discretion standard B. recognizing abuse of discretion rather than de novo standard of review C. holding that appellate courts should review district court determinations of the adequacy of damage awards under an abuse of discretion standard D. holding that the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion E. holding that the standard of review under rule 60 is abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that we review the sentence imposed by a district court under the abuse of discretion standard
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: Grantor will comply promptly with all laws, ordinances, regulations and orders of all public authorities having jurisdiction over the Property relating to the use, occupancy and maintenance thereof, and shall upon request promptly submit to the Bank evidence of such compliance. Nothing herein shall be deemed to prohibit Grantor from contesting the enforceability or applicability of any law, ordinance, regulation or order; provided, however, that the Bank, in its sole discretion, may require that Grantor comply with any such law, ordinance, regulation or order during the pendency of any such contest and all appeals therefrom. Grantor will not permit the Property or any portion thereof to be used for any unlawful purpose.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Repurchase Documents and all Transactions shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and their successors and permitted assigns. All of Sellers’ representations, warranties, agreements and indemnities in the Repurchase Documents shall survive the termination of the Repurchase Documents and the payment in full of the Repurchase Obligations, and shall apply to and benefit all Indemnified Persons, Buyer and its successors and assigns, Eligible Assignees and Participants. No other Person shall be entitled to any benefit, right, power, remedy or claim under the Repurchase Documents.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was sparsely furnished and was without electricity. This evidence, in the expert opinion of Officer Trogdon, indicated that the house was being used as a base for a drag operation in which the appellants played a role. Therefore, despite the lack of proof that appellants had a proprietary or possessory interest in the house, the evidence was sufficient to permit the jury to conclude that appellants exercised joint and constructive possession of the cocaine. Id. at 134-35, 578 A.2d 283 (emphasis added). See also Suddith, 379 Md. at 443, 842 A.2d 716 (finding the evidence sufficient to sustain the passenger’s convictions for possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia found “strewn throughout” the inside of a stolen vehicle); In re Ondrel M., 173 Md.App. 223, 236, 918 A.2d 543 (2007) (<HOLDING>); Larocca v. State, 164 Md.App. 460, 482, 883 Options: A. holding that search of area under front passenger seat of a validly stopped vehicle was justified for officer safety B. holding the evidence insufficient to support a finding that the defendant a front seat passenger in a car owned by the driver possessed cocaine recovered from inside a box of pots and pans in the trunk of the vehicle C. holding that the arresting officer lacked probable cause to arrest defendant a rear seat passenger of a car for possession of marijuana based on the discovery of two marijuana seeds in the front of the vehicle D. holding the evidence sufficient to support a finding that the juvenile a front seat passenger of a vehicle occupied by four persons was in possession of marijuana recovered from a crumpled piece of newspaper behind the drivers seat E. holding the evidence sufficient to support a finding that the defendant a front seat passenger of a vehicle occupied by three individuals was in constructive possession of marijuana found in white bag directly under the defendants seat

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the evidence sufficient to support a finding that the juvenile a front seat passenger of a vehicle occupied by four persons was in possession of marijuana recovered from a crumpled piece of newspaper behind the drivers seat
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: 828 (1998)). A petitioner is actually innocent when he was convicted for conduct not prohibited by law. See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir.2001) (summarizing the tests employed by the circuit courts to determine actual innocence). Alaimalo has made a showing of actual innocence. He was convicted of importing methamphetamine from California to Guam, which Cabaccang held is not a crime. Cabaccang, 332 F.3d at 637. Further, we note that the government do r.1997); In re Dorsainvil, 119 F.3d 245 (3d Cir.1997). In contrast, a decision that simply “provides further clarification” of the statute of conviction without “materially vary[ing] from the statutory construction set forth” in previous case law does not effect such a change. See Harrison, 519 F.3d at 960 (<HOLDING>). We hold that Cabaccang effected a material Options: A. holding that the supreme courts decision in jones v united states 529 us 848 120 sct 1904 146 led2d 902 2000 did not effect a material change in the law but only clarified a prior supreme court decision and two ninth circuit opinions consistent with joness holding B. holding that an intervening change in state law allowed a result that would otherwise be inconsistent with a prior ninth circuit decision C. holding ninth circuit will not impose a federal question when valid provisions of local law justify cnmi supreme court decision D. holding that a prior us supreme court decision did not present a new rule of criminal procedure but merely interpreted a statute E. holding that apprendi v new jersey 530 us 466 120 sct 2348 147 led2d 435 2000 did not overrule almendareztorres v united states 523 us 224 118 sct 1219 140 led2d 350 1998

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the supreme courts decision in jones v united states 529 us 848 120 sct 1904 146 led2d 902 2000 did not effect a material change in the law but only clarified a prior supreme court decision and two ninth circuit opinions consistent with joness holding
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: Consultant represents, warrants and covenants that: (i) the Services will be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner and that none of such Services nor any part of this Agreement is or will be inconsistent with any obligation Consultant may have to others; (ii) all work under this Agreement shall be Consultant’s original work and none of the Services or Inventions nor any development, use, production, distribution or exploitation thereof will infringe, misappropriate or violate any intellectual property or other right of any person or entity (including, without limitation, Consultant); (iii) Consultant has the full right to allow it to provide Company with the assignments and rights provided for herein (and has written enforceable agreements with all persons necessary to give it the rights to do the foregoing and otherwise fully perform this Agreement; (iv) Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws and Company safety rules in the course of performing the Services; and (v) if Consultant’s work requires a license, Consultant has obtained that license and the license is in full force and effect.

assistant: Warranties
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 Closing for any such issuance shall take place as proposed by the Company with respect to the New Securities to be issued, at which Closing the Company shall deliver certificates for the New Securities in the respective names of the purchasing Stockholders against receipt of the consideration therefor.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: The franchisee and franchisor are in a more equitable bargaining situation than the typical employer-employee relationship. More importantly, New Jersey courts have emphasized that the primary characteristic of a franchise is the license given to the franchisee to trade upon and exploit the franchisor’s good will. Liberty Sales Assoc., Inc. v. Dow Corning Corp., 816 F.Supp. 1004, 1010 (D.N.J.1993) (“What distinguishes a franchise from an ordinary distributorship is that the goodwill inherent in the name and mark attaches to the entire business of the seller, not just to the goods themselves.”); Neptune T.V. & Appliance Serv., Inc. v. Litton Sys., Inc., 190 N.J.Super. 153, 160-61, 462 A.2d 595 (App.Div.1983); cf. Piercing Pagoda, Inc. v. Hoffner, 465 Pa. 500, 351 A.2d 207, 211 (1976) (<HOLDING>); see generally Annotation, supra (collecting Options: A. holding that restrictive covenants in franchise agreements are enforceable to protect the basic product which the franchisor has to sell namely the franchise itself B. holding that the restrictive covenants at issue are unenforceable as a matter of public policy C. holding that a restrictive covenant will be upheld where a franchisor has a protectable interest in the sale of his franchise D. holding that franchisor has an interest in the goodwill its franchise has created E. holding that state courts may not enforce racially restrictive covenants

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that restrictive covenants in franchise agreements are enforceable to protect the basic product which the franchisor has to sell namely the franchise itself
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: Indus., Inc., 383 S.C. 601, 607, 681 S.E.2d 885, 888 (2009). “Once a party has put forth a satisfactory explanation for the default, the trial court must also consider: (1) the timing of the motion for relief; (2) whether the defendant has a meritorious defense; and (3) the degree of prejudice to the plaintiff if relief is granted.” Id. at 607-08, 681 S.E.2d at 888 (citing Wham v. Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc., 298 S.C. 462, 465, 381 S.E.2d 499, 501-02 (Ct.App.1989)). “The trial court need not make specific , he had a meritorious defense, and the Bank would not be prejudiced. Because we find the master did not err in finding Owens failed to show good cause for failing to answer the complaint, we need not consider the Wham factors. See Sundown, 383 S.C. at 607-08, 681 S.E.2d at 888 (<HOLDING>); Dixon v. Besco Eng’g, Inc., 320 S.C. 174, Options: A. holding that the jury need only decide the ultimate issue of intentional discrimination and usually need not make findings on the prima facie case or whether the defendants explanation is pretextual B. holding appellate court need not consider argument where party has failed to support it with any authority legal or otherwise C. holding that once a trial court has set a date for a summaryjudgment hearing the court must allow the nonmoving party an opportunity to be heard D. holding the trial court is not required to make specific findings of fact on the record for each wham factor if the record contains sufficient evidentiary support for the finding of lack of good cause E. holding a court need only consider the wham factors once a party has put forth a satisfactory explanation for the default

assistant: The best answer is E. holding a court need only consider the wham factors once a party has put forth a satisfactory explanation for the default
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: CURIAM. In this workers’ compensation case, Claimant appeals an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) denying all claims on statute of limitations grounds. Claimant raises two points on appeal. We affirm the argument that entry of a prior order requiring the Employer/Carrier (E/C) to pay a bill revived the claim despite the statute of limitations, as that argument was not preserved for appellate review, and, even if preserved, would lack merit. See Medpartners/Diagnostic Clinic Med. Group, P.A. v. Zenith Ins. Co., 23 So.3d 202, 204 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (<HOLDING>); cf. Dixie Transp., Inc. v. Kellom, 507 So.2d Options: A. holding that a sealed indictment handed down before statute of limitations has run is valid even if it is not unsealed until after the limitations period has expired B. recognizing that revival causes the statute of limitations clock to run anew C. holding 1994 amendments to workers compensation law preclude revival of limitations period once it has run D. holding that once the workers compensation act provides a remedy it is exclusive and the employee has no right to bring an action in commonlaw negligence against his employer E. holding that a claim did not arise under a workers compensation law when it stated a right to relief in tort and sought common law damages distinct from statutory compensation scheme

assistant: The best answer is C. holding 1994 amendments to workers compensation law preclude revival of limitations period once it has run
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: rules apply depending on whether the cause of action sounds in contract or in torf’); Buchanan v. Doe, 246 Va. 67, 71, 431 S.E.2d 289, 291 (1993) (“forum state applies its own law to ascertain whether the issue is one of tort or contract”). See, also, Eugene F. Scoles et al., Conflict of Laws §§ 3.3 to 3.5 (4th ed. 2004) (discussing, generally, importance of initial subject matter characterization in conflict analysis). “[I]t is well-settled Nebraska law that an insurance policy is a contract between the insurer and the insured, whose respective rights and obligations must be determined by application of contract principles.” Volquardson v. Hartford Ins. Co., 264 Neb. 337, 344, 647 N.W.2d 599, 606 (2002). See, also, Schrader v. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 259 Neb. 87, 608 N.W.2d 194 (2000) (<HOLDING>). The right of an insured to recover benefits Options: A. holding that in order for insured to qualify for uim benefits there must have been a liability policy in effect um coverage does not satisfy this requirement B. holding that um carriers are subrogated to any substantive defense that the tortfeasor may have been able to assert against the insured C. holding that neb rev stat 446413le reissue 2004 barring actions for um or uim coverage when insureds underlying claim against tortfeasor expires is inapplicable when insured timely files action against tortfeasor in that circumstance applicable statute of limitations on claim against insurer for um or uim benefits is statute governing actions on written contracts D. holding that because plaintiff released the tortfeasor plaintiff may not assert a claim against the uim carrier because of the derivative nature of the uim carriers liability E. holding that the sixyear statute of limitations on a written contract is applicable to a cause of action based on a um policy

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that neb rev stat 446413le reissue 2004 barring actions for um or uim coverage when insureds underlying claim against tortfeasor expires is inapplicable when insured timely files action against tortfeasor in that circumstance applicable statute of limitations on claim against insurer for um or uim benefits is statute governing actions on written contracts
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: days before the Government’s expert reports were due. By that time, the Government had deposed all of Plaintiffs fact and expert witnesses and prepared its expert damages reports. To allow Plaintiff to include 2010 damages in its claim at this juncture would require the Government to conduct significant extra discovery and potentially delay the evidentiary hearing on damages set for October 24-28, 2011. In addition, Plaintiff has not shown how it would be prejudiced, since Plaintiff may bring a future action to seek damages incurred in 2010 and beyond. Therefore, the court has determined that Plaintiff may only supplement the September 4, 2009 Complaint to allege a claim for damages incurred through December 31, 2009. III. CONCLUSION. For the reasons s 0 Fed.Cl. 332 (2006) ("SMUD II") (<HOLDING>); Sacramento Mun. Util. Dist. v. United States, Options: A. holding that because plaintiffs failed to prove that their incurred fuel characterization and loading costs would not have been incurred in the nonbreach world plaintiffs were not entitled to recovery for these costs B. holding that smud was entitled to 39796234 in damages C. holding that smud was entitled to mitigation damages for costs incurred from may 15 1997 to december 31 2003 D. holding that bankruptcy court could not enter judgment for 7402564 under 107a for incurred costs when such costs had not been incurred E. holding that smud is entitled to 53159863 in mitigation costs but staying entry of judgment pending the outcome of this proceeding

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that smud was entitled to mitigation damages for costs incurred from may 15 1997 to december 31 2003
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: pronouncements of five of nine Justices — which forcefully are rejected by four others — may be reluctant to apply those standards more broadly than is absolutely required.”); Id. at 12-13 (Castille, C.J., concurring) (extension of existing federal retroactivity law should only come from U.S. Supreme Court; this Court is “properly reluctant” to go beyond affirmative commands of U.S. Supreme Court where argument is premised solely upon federal law). State courts should proceed cautiously when asked to be the engine of innovation in federal constitutional law, since mistaken predictive judgments can be disruptive of Pennsylvania law and can cause substantial injustice where the predictive judgments are erroneous. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Mouzon, 617 Pa. 527, 53 A.3d 738, 742-43 (2012) (<HOLDING>). See also Commonwealth v. Sanchez, 623 Pa. Options: A. holding that the supreme court of pennsylvania is a state entity for purposes of the eleventh amendment B. holding that we are required to predict the position which the pennsylvania supreme court would take in resolving this dispute and in the absence of a clear statement by the pennsylvania supreme court to the contrary or other persuasive evidence of a change in pennsylvania law we are bound by the holdings of previous panels of this court C. recognizing effect of pennsylvania supreme courts erroneous prediction that us supreme court would hold that government was required to bear burden of disproving selfdefense claim D. holding that even though petition for allowance of appeal was pending before the pennsylvania supreme court decision remained binding precedent as long as the decision had not been overturned by our supreme court E. holding that trial court was required to give full effect to supreme courts judgment and that by failing to do so the trial court abused its discretion

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing effect of pennsylvania supreme courts erroneous prediction that us supreme court would hold that government was required to bear burden of disproving selfdefense claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Circuit has repeatedly refused to hold that such comments constitute direct evidence of discrimination. See, e.g., Minton v. American Bankers Ins. Group, 2003 WL 21303330 *1 (11th Cir.2003)(finding that statements that the company needed “fresh new blood” and that it was about time the older employees stepped aside so the younger employees could also achieve a measure of wealth was not direct evidence of discrimination); Beaver v. Rayonier, Inc., 188 F.3d 1279, 1285-1286 (11th Cir.1999)(finding that decision-maker’s comment that he wanted to attract “younger, engineer-type employees or supervisors” in reduction-in-force case did not rise to the level of direct evidence of discrimination); Burrell v. Board of Trustees of Georgia Military College, 125 F.3d 1390, 1393-94 (11th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); see also Shook, 74 F.Supp.2d at 1177 (finding Options: A. holding that such circumstantial evidence may be used to prove discrimination B. holding that circumstantial evidence alone may establish discriminatory intent C. holding that evidence which suggests but does not prove a discriminatory motive is circumstantial evidence by definition D. holding that motive is circumstantial evidence of intent E. holding that circumstantial evidence maybe sufficient to prove venue

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that evidence which suggests but does not prove a discriminatory motive is circumstantial evidence by definition
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: Before and after giving effect to the making of each Advance and the issuance or increase of each Letter of Credit, in each case, after the Effective Date, the Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries are, when taken as a whole, Solvent.

assistant: Solvency
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 you access the service from a social network or download the service from another platform , such as apple or google , you must also comply with its terms of service/use as well as these terms .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: submit a claim under the Federal Erroneous Retirement Coverage Corrections Act because he had not been employed by HHS for three years. The Board accordingly dismissed Maiers’ remaining claims. B. The Board’s Final Decision Maiers filed a request for the full Board to review the Board’s initial decision. In his request, Maiers argued that: (1) the initial decision’s interpretation of FERS violates USERRA; (2) the initial decision suffered from numerous procedural problems, including improper dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, improper reliance on Labor’s findings, and failure by the administrative judge to clearly articulate his findings; and (3) the administrative judge failed to apply this court’s holding in Butterbaugh v. Department of Justice, 336 F.3d 1332, 1336 (Fed.Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). The Board affirmed the initial decision Options: A. holding that it is well established that whether an employees actions were within the scope of employment is a question of fact and even if some of the actions were unauthorized the question of whether the actions were within the scope of employment is for the jury B. recognizing that the necessary inquiry is not whether there was a warrant or whether there was time to get one but whether there was probable cause for the arrest C. holding that plaintiff must come forth with sufficient facts to permit a determination that his statements were a substantial motivating factor in his employment termination D. holding that the correct inquiry under 38 usc 4311 is whether employees were denied a benefit of employment not whether the military service was a substantial motivating factor for cases in which the benefits at issue are only available to the military E. holding that in determining whether an accident arose out of employment the issue is whether the employees employment brought him in contact with the risk that in fact caused his injuries

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the correct inquiry under 38 usc 4311 is whether employees were denied a benefit of employment not whether the military service was a substantial motivating factor for cases in which the benefits at issue are only available to the military
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: Rhino maintains insurance covering the properties, operations, personnel and businesses of the Partnership Entities. Such insurance insures against such losses and risks as are reasonably adequate to protect the Partnership Entities and their businesses. None of the Partnership Entities has received notice from any insurer or agent of such insurer that substantial capital improvements or other expenditures will have to be made in order to continue such insurance; all such insurance is outstanding and duly in force on the date hereof and will be outstanding and duly in force on the Exercise Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company has filed all reports, schedules, forms, statements and other documents required to be filed by the Company under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, including pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) thereof, for the two years preceding the date hereof (or such shorter period as the Company was required by law or regulation to file such material) (the foregoing materials, including the exhibits thereto and documents incorporated by reference therein, together with the Prospectus and the Prospectus Supplement, being collectively referred to herein as the “ SEC Reports ”) on a timely basis or has received a valid extension of such time of filing and has filed any such SEC Reports prior to the expiration of any such extension. As of their respective dates, the SEC Reports complied in all material respects with the requirements of the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, as applicable, and none of the SEC Reports, when filed, contained any untrue statement of a material fact or omitted to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The Company has never been an issuer subject to Rule 144(i) under the Securities Act. The consolidated financial statements of the Company, together with the related notes and schedules, included in the SEC Reports comply in all material respects with applicable accounting requirements and the rules and regulations of the Commission with respect thereto as in effect at the time of filing. Such financial statements, together with the related notes and schedules, have been prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis during the periods involved (“ GAAP ”), except as may be otherwise specified in such financial statements or the notes thereto and except that unaudited financial statements may not contain all footnotes required by GAAP, and fairly present in all material respects the financial position of the Company and its consolidated Subsidiaries as of and for the dates thereof and the results of operations and cash flows for the periods then ended, subject, in the case of unaudited statements, to normal, immaterial, year-end audit adjustments. There are no financial statements (historical or pro forma) that are required to be included or incorporated by reference in the Registration Statement, or the Prospectus that are not included or incorporated by reference as required; the Company and the Subsidiaries do not have any material liabilities or obligations, direct or contingent (including any off balance sheet obligations), not described in the Registration Statement, and the Prospectus which are required to be described in the Registration Statement or Prospectus.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: equitable relief pertaining to the enforcement of insurance policies, the face value of the policy is the measure of the amount in controversy. While Krell contends that the measure should be the cash surrender value or some other figure, courts have uniformly held that, where the validity of the policy is at issue, the proper measure is the face value. See, e.g., Bell v. Preferred Life Assurance Soc’y, 320 U.S. 238, 240, 64 S.Ct. 5, 6, 88 L.Ed. 15 (1943) ($1,000 face value of insurance certificate, not the $202 in premiums, satisfied amount in controversy requirement in action concerning certificate purchased as a result of fraudulent misrepresentations); Stephenson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y, 92 F.2d 406, 410 (4th Cir.1937) (life insuranc . 95-4393, at 5 (D.N.J. Dec. 19, 1996) (<HOLDING>) Lindsay v. Kvortek, 865 F.Supp. 264, 276 Options: A. holding that when all federal claims have been dismissed the court should decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims B. holding that district court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a coplaintiff claim that fails to meet the amount in controversy requirement C. holding that exercise of jurisdiction over plaintiffs state law claims was proper on the basis of supplemental jurisdiction even though the plaintiffs had erroneously claimed diversity jurisdiction because a legitimate federal question was also presented and the state law claims formed part of the same case or controversy as the federal claim D. holding that the district court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over related statelaw claims once it has dismissed all claims over which it had original jurisdiction E. holding minimum amount in controversy required for district court jurisdiction is 20001

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that district court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a coplaintiff claim that fails to meet the amount in controversy requirement