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: childhood friend would be used to commit robberies, including that the pump was advertised for “forcible entry” use and testimony that co-conspirators had discussed some of their robbery plans in front of Burgos, even asking him to join. A rational jury could conclude that Burgos was aware of such a probability and consciously avoided confirming that fact. Contrary to Burgos’s assertion at oral argument and in supplemental briefing, it was not necessary for the government to show that Burgos was aware of a high probability that the pump would be used for robberies of drug dealers (as charged in the indictment), only that he was aware of a high probability that the pump would be used for some of the conspiracy’s unlawful aims, such as robberies generally. See Lanza, 790 F.2d at 1022-23 (<HOLDING>). In any event, the charge as a whole made Options: A. holding that the government must demonstrate that the accused had some knowledge of the conspiracys unlawful aims emphasis in original B. holding that because original interception was not unlawful subsequent use by prosecutor could not be found unlawful C. holding that waiver by attorney was binding upon the accused when before the state introduced the evidence complained of on appeal counsel for the state in the presence of the accused and his counsel stated the agreement and the evidence of the witness was then read to the jury in the presence of the accused and his counsel without objection D. holding the government must demonstrate the defendant knew of the characteristics of the firearm that required it to be registered E. holding that the government must show only that a defendant had knowledge of the reporting requirements and acted to avoid them

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the government must demonstrate that the accused had some knowledge of the conspiracys unlawful aims emphasis in original
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: You will not, in any manner, directly or indirectly, make any oral or written statement to any Person that disparages or places any Company Group Member or any of their respective officers, shareholders, members or advisors, or any member of the Board, in a false or negative light; provided, however, that you will not be required to make any untruthful statement or to violate any law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Supply Agreement, each Party shall pay the fees and expenses of its respective lawyers and other experts and all other expenses and costs incurred by such Party incidental to the negotiation, preparation, execution and delivery of this Supply Agreement.

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: The EFH Parties shall cause each other Person that is or becomes a Subsidiary of EFH (other than any such Person or Subsidiary that is “ring fenced,” including the Oncor Entities) to execute a joinder to this Agreement (a) to become an EFH Party (effective as of the date such Person becomes a Subsidiary of EFH or ceases to be “ring fenced”) and (b) to be bound by the obligations of the EFH Parties under this Agreement on a joint and several basis. Reorganized TCEH shall cause each Reorganized TCEH Entity on the date of this Agreement (y) to execute a joinder to this Agreement to become a Reorganized TCEH Entity (effective as of the date of this Agreement) and (z) to be bound by the obligations of the Reorganized TCEH Entities under this Agreement on a joint and several basis.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement (i) constitutes the entire agreement between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior oral and written understandings, all contemporaneous oral negotiations and discussions, and all other writings and agreements relating to the subject matter of this Agreement and (ii) is not intended to confer any rights or remedies upon any Person other than the parties hereto and Cypress and their respective successors and permitted assigns.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Seller has all requisite corporate power, authority and capacity to carry on its business as it is now being conducted, to execute and deliver this Agreement and to perform all of its obligations hereunder. The Seller has all requisite power and authority to enter into this Agreement, and the agreements to which it is or will become a party contemplated by this Agreement, and to carry out the transactions contemplated hereby. The Seller does not believe, nor does it have any cause or reason to believe, that it cannot perform each and every covenant required of it contained in this Agreement.

assistant: Authority
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 the course of interpreting the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ("RFRA"), which required the application of strict scrutiny to government policies that imposed a "substantial burden” on religious beliefs. See Pub.L. No. 103-141, 107 STAT. 1488 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb et seg.), invalidated by City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507, 117 S.Ct. 2157, 138 L.Ed.2d 624 (1997). In Jolly v. Coughlin, 76 F.3d 468, 477 (2d Cir.1996), we defined a substantial burden as a situation where "the state 'puts substantial pressure on an adherent to modify his behavior and to violate his beliefs.' " 5 . For other applications of the substantial burden requirement in the prison religious free exercise context, see, for example, Cane.ll v. Lightner, 143 F.3d 1210 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>), and Weir v. Nix, 114 F.3d 817 (8th Cir.1997) Options: A. holding that docs may place reasonable limitations on an inmates right to the free exercise of religion including a requirement that the inmate register his religious affiliation B. holding that relatively shortterm and sporadic intrusions on an inmates prayer activities did not constitute a substantial burden on inmates free exercise of his religion C. holding that corrections officers mockpreaching and espousal of religious views did not constitute a substantial burden on inmates free exercise of religion D. holding that religious exercise is any exercise of religion whether or not compelled by or central to a system of religious belief and that the use building or conversion of real property for the purpose of religious exercise shall be considered religious exercise E. recognizing a religious institutions right to free exercise of religion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that corrections officers mockpreaching and espousal of religious views did not constitute a substantial burden on inmates free exercise of religion
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: swamp any common issues and defeat predominance.’ ” Id. (quoting Castano v. Am. Tobacco Co., 84 F.3d 734, 741 (5th Cir.1996)). It is settled that in reviewing a class certification order, we must evaluate “ ‘the claims, defenses, relevant facts, and applicable substantive law.’ ” Bernal, 22 S.W.3d at 435 (quoting Castano, 84 F.3d at 744). In so doing, we have required “trial courts [to] abandon the practice of postponing choice-of-law questions until after certification, as courts can hardly evaluate the claims, defenses, or applicable law without knowing what that law is. ” Compaq, 135 S.W.3d at 672 (citing Tracker Marine, L.P. v. Ogle, 108 S.W.3d 349, 351-52 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, no pet.)) (emphasis added); see also Spence v. Glock, 227 F.3d 308, 313 (5th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); Citizens Ins. Co. of Am. v. Daccach, 217 Options: A. holding that we lacked jurisdiction to review the veterans courts determination that equitable tolling did not apply in the case before it B. holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be raised for the first time before this court C. holding that where the party does know that the filing and signing is sic wrongful and the attorney reasonably should know then sanctions against both are appropriate D. holding that the district court is required to know which law will apply before it makes its predominance determination E. holding that role in the offense is a factual determination albeit complex a district courts decision not to apply an adjustment based on such a determination is reversed only for clear error

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the district court is required to know which law will apply before it makes its predominance determination
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 execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents to which Borrower and/or Master Tenant is a party by Borrower and/or Master Tenant, as applicable, will not conflict with or result in a breach of any of the terms or provisions of, or constitute a default under, or result in the creation or imposition of any lien, charge or encumbrance (other than pursuant to the Loan Documents and the Master Lease Documents) upon any of the property or assets of Borrower and/or Master Tenant pursuant to the terms of any indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, loan agreement, partnership agreement, management agreement or other agreement or instrument to which Borrower and/or Master Tenant is a party or by which any of the Property, Borrower’s or Master Tenant’s assets is subject, nor will such action result in any violation of the provisions of any statute or any order, rule or regulation of any Governmental Authority having jurisdiction over Borrower or Master Tenant or any of Borrower’s or Master Tenant’s properties or assets, and any consent, approval, authorization, order, registration or qualification of or with any court or any such Governmental Authority required for the execution, delivery and performance by Borrower and/or Master Tenant of this Agreement or any other Loan Documents has been obtained and is in full force and effect.

assistant: No Conflicts
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 Administrative Agent shall have received evidence of insurance coverage in form, scope, and substance reasonably satisfactory to Administrative Agent and otherwise in compliance with the terms of Section 5.10 and Section 4.12 of the Security Agreement.

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: (a) Each Pledgor shall keep its insurable property insured at all times by financially sound and reputable insurers, and maintain such other insurance, to such extent and against such risks as is customary with companies in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations, including insurance with respect to Mortgaged Properties (if any) and other properties material to the business of the Company and its Subsidiaries against such casualties and contingencies and of such types and in such amounts with such deductibles as is customary in the case of similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations, including, to the extent applicable to such Pledgor’s business, (i) physical hazard insurance on an “all risk” basis, (ii) commercial general liability against claims for bodily injury, death or property damage covering any and all insurable claims, (iii) explosion insurance in respect of any boilers, machinery or similar apparatus constituting Collateral, (iv) business interruption insurance, (v) worker’s compensation insurance and such other insurance as may be required by any Legal Requirement and (vi) such other insurance against risks as the Noteholder Collateral Agent may from time to time require acting upon the instructions of the percentage of Holders required under the Indenture (in each case, such policies to be in such form as may be reasonably satisfactory to the Noteholder Collateral Agent); provided that with respect to physical hazard insurance, (x) neither the Noteholder Collateral Agent nor the applicable Pledgor shall agree to the adjustment of any claim in excess of $500,000 thereunder without the consent of the other (such consent not to be unreasonably conditioned, withheld or delayed), and (y) no consent of any Pledgor or any of such Pledgor’s Subsidiaries shall be required during the existence of an Event of Default.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you do not open the door or respond to telephonic correspondence within 10 minutes of our delivery drivers physically reaching your address , we reserve the right to leave the premises , and you will be charged for the meal .

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: that the finding instruction adequately stated the elements of the offense. Accordingly, I would reverse the conviction and remand for a new trial. The majority opinion also holds that the last paragraph of Hall’s proposed instruction was improper because it was derived from civil model jury instructions. In so finding, the majority relies on Hubbard v. Commonwealth, 243 Va. 1, 413 S.E.2d 875 (1992). Hubbard, however, does not stand for the principle that language which properly defines a criminal law concept is improper simply because it is drawn from a civil jury instruction. The Supreme Court rejected Hubbard’s proposed jury instructions because they inappropriately injected definitions of civil negligence in a case concerning criminal negligence. See id. at 15, 413 S.E.2d at 882-83 (<HOLDING>). Hall merely relied on the applicable language Options: A. holding that documents that are created in the ordinary course of business or would have been created irrespective of litigation are not protected by the work product doctrine B. holding that even in separate trial other crimes evidence would not have been admissible and identification testimony would have been admissible C. holding that by attempting to inject inapplicable principles of civil negligence into a criminal trial instructions b and c would have created confusion and would have been misleading D. holding that trial court did not abuse discretion in denying motion to sever because trial of three defendants would not create confusion E. holding that to prove ineffectiveness where defendant rejected plea offer upon advice of counsel defendant must show he would have accepted the offer had counsel advised correctly the state would not have withdrawn its offer the court would have accepted the offer and the resulting sentence would have been less severe

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that by attempting to inject inapplicable principles of civil negligence into a criminal trial instructions b and c would have created confusion and would have been misleading
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: Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, Landlord may exercise all rights and remedies under this Lease and the laws of the state where the Premises is located that are available to a Landlord of real and personal property in the event of a default by its Tenant, and as to the Tenant Property, all remedies granted under the laws of such state(s) to a secured party under its Uniform Commercial Code. Landlord shall have no duty to mitigate damages unless required by applicable law and shall not be responsible or liable for any failure to relet the Premises or to collect any rent due upon any such reletting. Tenant shall pay Landlord, promptly upon demand, all expenses incurred by it in obtaining possession and reletting any of the Premises, including fees, commissions and costs of attorneys, architects, agents and brokers.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to entry and the terms of the Interim Financing Order (or the Final Financing Order, when applicable), (a) this Agreement has been, and each other Loan Document, when delivered hereunder, will have been, duly executed and delivered by each Loan Party that is party thereto and (b) this Agreement constitutes, and each other Loan Document when so delivered will constitute, a legal, valid and binding obligation of each Loan Party party thereto, enforceable against each Loan Party that is party thereto in accordance with its terms, except to the extent that the enforceability thereof may be limited by (i) applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other similar laws generally affecting creditors’ rights, (ii) equitable principles (regardless of whether enforcement is sought in equity or at law) and (iii) the effect of foreign Laws, rules and regulations as they relate to pledges, if any, of Equity Interests in Foreign Subsidiaries.

assistant: Binding Effects
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: context, courts examine whether the relevant files were password-protected or whether the defendant otherwise manifested an intention to restrict third-party access.” United States v. Aaron, 33 Fed.Appx. 180, 184 (6th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (unpublished opinion); see also United States v. Buckner, 473 F.3d 551, 554 (4th Cir.2007) (using a password showed that defendant affirmatively intended to exclude others from his password-protected files); Trulock v. Freeh, 275 F.3d 391, 403 (4th Cir.2001) (distinguishing joint access to the computer and its hard drive, for which co-user had authority to consent to search, from password-protected files; with respect to those files, co-user had no common authority where there was no access to the passwords); see also Conklin, 63 M.J. at 337 (<HOLDING>). But in this case, neither the computer nor Options: A. holding that defendants had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the common areas of an apartment building B. holding that a roommate with shared access to anothers computer has common authority over the computer and can grant consent to search C. holding that an agents use of filesharing program to access child pornography files on the defendants computer did not constitute an illegal warrantless search because the defendant had made those files accessible to others and thus lacked any reasonable expectation of privacy in files D. holding appellant failed to show any expectation of privacy in files stored on the computer system in his office was one that society accepts as objectively reasonable E. holding that where there is no evidence of shared use or common authority an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the files kept on a personally owned computer

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that where there is no evidence of shared use or common authority an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the files kept on a personally owned computer
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: between the parties, for USL must still prove the existence of such a contract to the trier-of-fact. As the U.C.C. clearly commands, its provisions are to “be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies,” which include “the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage, and agreement of the parties.” Minnesota Statutes Section 366.1-102(1). We believe that our reading of USL’s letter is not only consistent with common commercial practices, but is a faithful application of the U.C.C. “Justice would be thwarted by denying enforceability upon the basis of a lack of a specific quantity[,J [as] [t]he code was enacted to prevent just such an inequitable result.” O.N. Jonas Co., Inc. v. Badische Corp., 706 F.2d 1161, 1165 (11th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, we recommend that Mylan’s Motion Options: A. holding that our use of the subjunctive in mentioning an argument in passing suggests that we knew that we were not addressing and that we could not address that argument B. holding that the phrase a potential program utilizing our yarn was discussed in 1977 and we indicated that we would supply the yam if we were provided a heller guarantee on our form sufficiently evidenced a requirements contract for statute of frauds purposes C. holding that we must first determine our jurisdiction before proceeding to the merits of the appeal D. recognizing that we may not substitute our judgment for that of the alj E. holding the district courts noconsent finding was not clearly erroneous because the individual felt she was under arrest and had to submit to the patdown search in part based on the officers saying this is what we do we talk to people we search peoples bags we pat search people this is what we do everyday

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the phrase a potential program utilizing our yarn was discussed in 1977 and we indicated that we would supply the yam if we were provided a heller guarantee on our form sufficiently evidenced a requirements contract for statute of frauds purposes
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: special verdict form did not provide the jury with an opportunity to communicate whether the contract had been breached. 4 . See All v. John Gerber Co., 36 Tenn.App. 134, 138, 252 S.W.2d 138, 139(1952). 5 . Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-18-109(a)(3) (1995) provides that the trial court may award three times the amount of actual damages sustained if it finds that the defendant's use of the unfair or deceptive act or practice under the Act S.C. 255, 359 S.E.2d 532, 536 (App.1987) (upholding an award of punitive damages based on common law fraud and of treble damages pursuant to the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practice Act only because the defendants never filed a motion requiring the plaintiff to elect her remedy); Berry Property Management, Inc. v. Bliskey, 850 S.W.2d 644, 665 (Tex.Ct.App.1993) (<HOLDING>). 7 . See, e.g., Tenn.Code Ann. § 8-50-603 Options: A. holding that statutory damages were appropriate for each discrete violation of that states deceptive trade practices act B. holding that where plaintiffs were entitled to recover both treble damages and punitive damages under the illinois nursing home care reform act both issues could be submitted to the jury and the plaintiff could choose which award to be reflected in the judgment C. holding that where a plaintiff is entitled to treble damages under its state unfair trade practices act and to punitive damages under common law claims of fraud trial court should have submitted each theory of recovery to the jury and then allowed plaintiff to elect between the awards with duplicative elements D. holding that both punitive and treble damages were recoverable under the texas deceptive trade practices act because each of the plaintiffs claims resulted from a distinct act however because the plaintiff suffered only one compensable injury she could only be awarded one recovery for actual compensatory damages E. holding consumer claims under the texas deceptive trade practices act nonassignable

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that both punitive and treble damages were recoverable under the texas deceptive trade practices act because each of the plaintiffs claims resulted from a distinct act however because the plaintiff suffered only one compensable injury she could only be awarded one recovery for actual compensatory damages
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No waiver by any party hereto of any failure or refusal by any other party hereto to comply with its obligations hereunder shall not be deemed a waiver of any other or subsequent failure or refusal to so comply. Any party hereto may waive compliance by any other party, the other with respect to any of the other’s agreements or obligations set forth herein.

assistant: Waivers
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: defendant is on parole rather than to the acts constituting a violation of parole for purposes of 'the same transactions or occurrences’ clause in guideline § 5G1.3.” United States v. Chasmer, 952 F.2d 50, 52 (3d Cir.1991) (cit ing United States v. Nottingham, 898 F.2d 390, 393 (3d Cir.1990), limited on other grounds, United States v. Higgins, 128 F.3d 138, 141 (3d Cir.1997)). If we were to analyze the issue, we would certainly consider the fact that the guideline language in both Nottingham 8 L.Ed.2d 1011 (2001), United States v. Alexander, 100 F.3d 24, 26-27 (5th Cir.1996) (same), United States v. Gondek, 65 F.3d 1, 2-3 (1st Cir.1995) (same), and United States v. Bernard, 48 F.3d 427, 430-32 (9th Cir.1995) (same), with United States v. Tisdale, 248 F.3d 964, 976-80 (10th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>), and United States v. Maria, 186 F.3d 65, Options: A. holding unconstitutional the mandatory application of the federal sentencing guidelines B. holding that because a mortgage provides the security for the repayment of the note the person having standing to foreclose a note secured by a mortgage may be either the holder of the note or a nonholder in possession of the note who has the rights of a holder C. holding that application note 6 is not mandatory D. holding that the statute is mandatory E. holding that applica tion note 6s language is mandatory

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that application note 6 is not mandatory
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 contains the entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes all prior agreement Parts, understandings and writings between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. Each party hereto acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, verbal or otherwise, have been made by either party, or anyone acting with authority on behalf of either party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement or promise may be relied upon or shall be valid or binding. Neither this Agreement nor any term hereof may be changed, waived, discharged or terminated verbally. This Agreement may be amended or any term hereof may be changed, waived, discharged or terminated by an agreement in writing signed by each of the parties hereto.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive shall refrain from any criticisms or disparaging comments about any of the FINV Entities or its officers, directors, or employees; provided, however, that this obligation shall be subject to Section 5 below and shall not apply to or restrict the communication of information by Executive to any state or federal law enforcement agency or testimony or disclosure compelled or required by law or regulation or process of law. The Company agrees to instruct its human resources and executive officers to refrain from any criticisms or disparaging comments about Executive; provided, however, that the parties understand that it would be impracticable for the Company to monitor all statements or commentary by its global workforce. Furthermore, the parties agree that obligation shall not apply to or restrict the communication of information to any state or federal law enforcement agency or testimony or disclosure compelled or required by law or regulation or process of law. The rights afforded under this Section 3 are in addition to any and all rights and remedies otherwise afforded by applicable law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower, on a consolidated basis with its Subsidiaries, is Solvent and neither the Borrower nor any of its Subsidiaries presently intends to or presently anticipates it will (a) be or become subject to a voluntary case under any debt relief law, (b) make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors or (c) have a custodian, conservator, receiver or similar official appointed for such Person or any substantial part of such Person’s assets, , and no such Person presently expects or presently anticipates it will to (w) be or become subject to an involuntary case under any debt relief law, (x) be subject to a forced liquidation or otherwise be adjudicated as, or determined by any Governmental Authority having regulatory authority over such Person or its assets to be, insolvent or bankrupt, (y) make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors as a result of any direct action by any other Person or (z) have a custodian, conservator, receiver or similar official appointed for such Person or any substantial part of such Person’s assets as a result of any direct action by any other Person.

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: you and duolingo acknowledge that , in the event of any third-party claim that any app or your possession and use of that app infringes that third party 's intellectual property rights , duolingo , not apple , will be solely responsible for the investigation , defense , settlement and discharge of any such intellectual property infringement claim to the extent required by these terms and conditions .

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 OF THE GUARANTOR AND MINNETRONIX, BY ITS ACCEPTANCE OF THIS GUARANTY, IRREVOCABLY WAIVES ANY AND ALL RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS GUARANTY OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY.

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: Econ. Lab., Inc., 537 F.2d 210, 212 (5th Cir.1976); see also Flaksa v. Little Marine Const. Co., 389 F.2d 885, 887 (5th Cir.1968) (“[Djismissal of an action with prejudice and entry of judgment by default are drastic remedies which should be used only in extreme situations, as the court has a wide range of lesser sanctions.”); Durgin v. Graham, 372 F.2d 130, 131 (5th Cir.1967) (“The sanction of dismissal is the most severe sanction that a court may apply, and its use must be tempered by a careful exercise of judicial discretion.”). In rare cases, we have allowed a district court to dismiss a claim with prejudice based on a litigant’s egregious and continued refusal to abide by the court’s deadlines. See Callip v. Harris Cnty. Child Welfare Dep’t., 757 F.2d 1513, 1519-22 (5th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); see also Delta Theatres, Inc. v. Paramount Options: A. holding that failure to meet nine courtimposed deadlines meets the high standard warranting dismissal with prejudice B. holding that absent extraordinary circumstances a failure to comply with the statute requires a dismissal with prejudice C. holding that the plaintiffs failure to meet any one of the elements requires dismissal of claim D. holding that proper remedy for failure to exhaust is dismissal of the claim without prejudice E. holding that plaintiffs failure to respond to argument warranted dismissal with prejudice

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that failure to meet nine courtimposed deadlines meets the high standard warranting dismissal with prejudice
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: Defendant believed that he had permission to reenter the United States, including the facts that Defendant readily handed over the card without displaying nervousness and that the green card appeared to border agents to be valid and unaltered. See United States v. Garcia-Cruz, 978 F.2d 537, 540 (9th Cir.1992) (stating that we review for abuse of discretion whether there is some foundation in the evidence for a defendant’s proposed instruction). But Defendant’s theory of defense was adequately covered by the instructions given. See United States v. Bello-Bahena, 411 F.3d 1083, 1088-89 (9th Cir.2005) (explaining that we review de novo whether the district court’s instructions adequately cover the theory of defense); United States v. Martinez-Martinez, 369 F.3d 1076, 1083 (9th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Specifically, Instruction 12 correctly told Options: A. holding that an error is harmless if it was inconsequential to the ultimate nondisability determination internal quotation marks omitted B. holding that the jury need not agree on the theory supporting the conviction if there is sufficient evidence to support either theory C. holding that plaintiffs are ordinarily entitled to instructions consonant with their theory of the case where evidentiary support for the theory exists D. holding that the pretrial order did not adequately disclose a theory because it did not give notice of that theory E. holding that it is not reversible error to reject a defendants proposed instruction on his theory of the ease if other instructions adequately cover the defense theory internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that it is not reversible error to reject a defendants proposed instruction on his theory of the ease if other instructions adequately cover the defense theory internal quotation marks omitted
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: Looming Limitations requirement and the Inability Allegation). Because the Beaumont case is contrary to this court’s precedent, the majority errs in following it. In reaching its conclusion, the majority relies heavily on the Code Construction Act. The majority never says whether it believes the statute to be ambiguous but nonetheless reviews the legislative history. Because the statute is unambiguous, there is no sound reason to consider legislative history and many compelling reasons not to do so. And, even if the legislative history did support the majority’s interpretation, it would not be right to give effect to the legislative history if doing so would contradict the unambiguous language of the statute. See Fleming Foods of Texas, Inc. v. Rylander, 6 S.W.3d 278, 283-84 (Tex.1999) (<HOLDING>); St. Luke’s Episcopal Hosp., 952 S.W.2d at 505 Options: A. holding that court of appeals erred in relying on the plain meaning of a statute when the legislative history clearly indicated another meaning B. holding that even where there are contrary indications in the statutes legislative history we do not resort to legislative history to cloud a statutory text that is clear C. holding that legislative consent to suit must be by clear and unambiguous language in either a statute or by other express legislative permission D. holding that although section 311023 of the texas government code states that courts may consider the legislative history of unambiguous statutes the legislative history of a statute cannot be used to alter the unambiguous meaning of a statute except for the rare instance in which it is used to show a typographical error E. holding that when the language of a statute is clear and unambiguous no need exists for the court to examine the legislative histo ry and the court must give effect to the plain meaning of the statute

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that although section 311023 of the texas government code states that courts may consider the legislative history of unambiguous statutes the legislative history of a statute cannot be used to alter the unambiguous meaning of a statute except for the rare instance in which it is used to show a typographical error
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 the Compensation Committee directs otherwise before a Change of Control, in the event of a Change of Control, the Company shall require any successor or successors (whether direct or indirect, by purchase, merger, consolidation or otherwise) to all or substantially all of the business and/or assets of the Company thereof, (i) to acknowledge expressly that this Plan is binding upon and enforceable against such successor in accordance with the terms hereof, (ii) to become jointly and severally obligated with the Company to perform the obligations under this Plan, and (iii) to agree not to amend or terminate the Plan for a period of three years after the date of succession without the consent of the affected Participant.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you are a masquerade user located in the united states or canada , it requires you to submit to binding individual arbitration of all disputes , except for those that involve excluded disputes and except those that can be brought in small claims court .

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: however , vivino reserves the right to ( i ) remove , suspend , edit or modify any content in its sole discretion , including without limitation any user submissions at any time , without notice to you and for any reason ( including , but not limited to , upon receipt of claims or allegations from third parties or authorities relating to such content or if vivino is concerned that you may have violated these terms of use ) , or for no reason at all and ( ii ) to remove , suspend or block any user submissions from the service .

assistant: Content removal, Unilateral change, Unilateral termination
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 (including the documents and instruments referred to herein, including the Merger Agreement and Release) constitutes the entire agreement, and supersedes all other prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, among the parties, or any of them, with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: With respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, this Agreement, together with all exhibits and schedules to this Agreement and all agreements contemplated by this Agreement, supersedes all previous contracts and constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties, including that certain Non-Disclosure Agreement, dated as of December 15, 2016, by and between Parent and the Company. No oral statements or prior written material unless specifically incorporated in this Agreement shall be of any force and effect, and no changes in or additions to this Agreement shall be recognized unless incorporated in this Agreement by amendment as provided in this Agreement, such amendment(s) to become effective on the date stipulated in such amendment(s). The Parties specifically acknowledge that in entering into and executing this Agreement, the Parties relied solely upon the representations and agreements contained in this Agreement and has not relied on any other representations or warranties regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, express or implied.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any payments made by Merck pursuant to this Agreement (or any Milestone Payments or Royalty Payments made under the Option Agreement) are subject to withholding Taxes under Applicable Laws of any jurisdiction or Governmental Authority, Merck is authorized deduct and withhold the amount of such Taxes for the account of KalVista to the extent required by Applicable Law; such amounts payable to KalVista will be reduced by the amount of Taxes deducted and withheld; and treated as paid to KalVista for all purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing to the contrary, (i) Merck shall be responsible for any withholding Taxes imposed on any payments made pursuant to this Agreement (or any Milestone Payments or Royalty Payments made under the Option Agreement) by any jurisdiction or Governmental Authority outside of the United Kingdom, Switzerland or the United States as a result of Merck’s exploitation or use of any of the Purchased Assets through an Affiliate, branch or other place of business in such jurisdiction; and (ii) Merck shall increase the amounts payable to KalVista under this Agreement (or any Milestone Payments or Royalty Payments made under the Option Agreement) with respect to such withholding Taxes so that KalVista receives the same amount of payments after deduction of such withholding Taxes (including with respect to any additional payments under this Section 3.3(c)) as KalVista would have if such withholding Taxes had not been imposed.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “Bexar County Parties”) present the following issues: (1) Did the trial court violate Evans’s due process rights? (2) Did the trial court lack authority to designate Evans as a person responsible for providing outpatient mental health services to Campbell and to order the Bexar County Center to provide outpatient mental health services to Campbell? (3) Is the evidence legally and factually insufficient to support the commitment orders? (4) Is the commitment order improper because the trial court did not comply with the procedural requirements of the Texas Mental Health Code? The State asserts that this court lacks appellate jurisdiction. In his petition for writ of mandamus, Evans presents the following issues: (1) Did the trial court have jurisdiction to 5 S.W.2d 659, 662 (Tex.1996) (<HOLDING>); Robbins v. Limestone Cty., 114 Tex. 345, 268 Options: A. holding that the district had standing to raise claims on behalf of the appellant because the district had a direct financial stake in supporting the position that appellants former wife is the owner of the underlying funds B. holding that an attorney charged with misconduct had standing on the basis of reputational injury to appeal those portions of the district courts opinion that reflected unfavorably on the attorneys professional conduct even though the district court had otherwise dismissed the charges C. holding the government waived its standing argument when it was put on notice the defendant would claim a privacy interest D. holding that appraisal district had standing based on its interest in the validity of the statute that it is charged with implementing E. holding that passengers of a vehicle which they did not own had standing to challenge the validity of a traffic stop

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that appraisal district had standing based on its interest in the validity of the statute that it is charged with implementing