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: basis, but displayed poor focus, grandiosity and religiosity, id. at 448, and appeared to display disorganized thought pattern and loose associations, id. at 449. The ALJ explained that he gave very little weight to Dr. Johnson-Miller’s evidence because it was quite conclusory and provided very little explanation of the evidence relied upon, and because her opinions departed substantially from the rest of the evidence. Mr. Akers argues on appeal that Dr. Johnson-Miller’s report was not conclusory. We disagree. Dr. Johnson-Miller expressly relied quite heavily on Mr. Akers’ subjective complaints and provided little or no explanation of the basis of her conclusions, thus, the ALJ was entitled to give her report little weight. See Bernal v. Bowen, 851 F.2d 297, 301 (10th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). We find no merit in Mr. Akers’ claim that the Options: A. holding that a treating physicians diagnosis could be rejected for specific and legitimate reasons that are supported by substantial evidence in the record B. holding that the weight given to a treating physicians opinion is limited if the opinion consists only of conclusory statements C. holding that a conclusory opinion may be rejected D. holding that the weight given a treating physicians opinion is limited if the opinion consists only of conclusory statements E. holding that a treating physicians opinion may be rejected if it is brief conclusory and unsupported by medical evidence

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a treating physicians opinion may be rejected if it is brief conclusory and unsupported by medical evidence
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 headings of this Amendment No. 4 are used for convenience of reference only, are not part of this Amendment No. 4 and shall not affect the construction of, or be taken into consideration in interpreting, this Amendment No. 4.

assistant: Headings
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 Section 8.04 , this Agreement shall continue to be effective until the Discharge of Senior Obligations shall have occurred. This is a continuing agreement of Lien subordination and the other matters addressed herein, and the Senior Secured Parties may continue, at any time and without notice to the Second Priority Representatives or any Second Priority Debt Party to extend credit and other financial accommodations and lend monies to or for the benefit of the Borrowers or any Subsidiary constituting Senior Obligations in reliance hereon. The terms of this Agreement shall survive and continue in full force and effect in any Insolvency or Liquidation Proceeding. Any provision of this Agreement that is prohibited or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall not invalidate the remaining provisions hereof, and any such prohibition or unenforceability in any jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction. The parties shall endeavor in good-faith negotiations to replace the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provisions with valid provisions the economic effect of which comes as close as possible to that of the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provisions.

assistant: Severability
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 outstanding shares of capital stock of KEC has been duly and validly issued and are fully paid and non-assessable (other than any assessment on the shareholders of KEC that may be imposed as a matter of law) and are owned by Parent. KEC does not have outstanding any capital stock or other securities convertible into or exchangeable for its capital stock or any rights to subscribe for or to purchase, or any options for the purchase of, or any agreement providing for the issuance (contingent or otherwise) of, or any calls, commitments or claims of any character relating to, its capital stock.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without reference to its conflicts of law provisions. Any dispute regarding this Agreement shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, and the parties hereby irrevocably agree to submit to personal jurisdiction and venue of such court. The parties hereby expressly waive the right to a trial by jury in any action or proceeding brought by or against either of them relating to this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: because she and other employees asked Carballo to not lift heavy objects. While the Rineharts claim they terminated Carballo because of her poor attitude, they also admit she was an good waitress, was well liked in the restaurant, and that they wanted to give her a good recommendation. The Rineharts also admit they feared that she would intentionally hurt herself and sue the restaurant. Carballo emphatically denies saying she would sue the restaurant if she had a miscarriage. Clearly, a fact-finder can reach different conclusions of whether Carballo was discriminated against because of her pregnancy. The Court finds that these types of credibility issues, discussed by Reeves, are for the fact-finder to decide. See Palasota v. Haggar Clothing Co., 342 F.3d 569, 576 (5th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>) (citing Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Options: A. holding that a petitioner is certainly permitted to use evidence eliminating other potential causes to help carry the burden on causation and may find it necessary to do so when the other evidence on causation is insufficient to make out a prima facie case and in such instances clearly the special master must evaluate what evidence a claimant presents as part of determining whether the claimant makes a prima facie case B. holding that a prima facie case is subject to independent review C. holding that the establishment of a prima facie case and evidence casting doubt on the veracity of the employers explanation is sufficient to find liability D. holding the plaintiff satisfies the burden of a prima facie case by a preponderance of the evidence E. holding that a plaintiff s prima facie case combined with sufficient evidence to find that the employers asserted justification is false may permit the trier of fact to conclude that the employer unlawfully discriminated emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the establishment of a prima facie case and evidence casting doubt on the veracity of the employers explanation is sufficient to find liability
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: need not determine whether either the commissioner or the superior court correctly computed the time under CR 6(a), however, because here the doctrine of equitable tolling brings Iturribarria’s claim within the one-year deadline. ¶27 Federal courts have applied the doctrine of equitable tolling where a parent has concealed the removal of their child. Thus, the one-year limit under article 12 did not begin until the petitioner, here Iturribarria, confirms the child’s new residence. As noted by the 11th Circuit: We agree with the district court that equitable tolling may apply to ICARA petitions for the return of a child where the parent removing the child has secreted the child from the parent seeking return. See Mendez Lynch v. Mendez Lynch, 220 F.Supp.2d 1347, 1362-63 (M.D.Fla.2002) (<HOLDING>) .... Furnes v. Reeves, 362 F.3d 702, 723 (11th Options: A. holding that equitable tolling applied to icara petitions because otherwise a parent who abducts and conceals children for more than one year will be rewarded for the misconduct by creating eligibility for an affirmative defense not otherwise available B. holding 727d1 complaint was untimely and noting the one year period for filing runs from discharge rather than discovery of the fraud but not addressing expressly equitable tolling C. holding that a prior north carolina conviction was for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year if any defendant charged with that crime could receive a sentence of more than one year D. holding that equitable tolling is available for petitions filed pursuant to 28 usc 2255 E. recognizing that the court sanctions more harshly for cumulative misconduct than for isolated misconduct

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that equitable tolling applied to icara petitions because otherwise a parent who abducts and conceals children for more than one year will be rewarded for the misconduct by creating eligibility for an affirmative defense not otherwise available
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: Section 2.18 of the Seller Disclosure Schedule sets forth a list, as of the date hereof, of all casualty, general liability and other insurance maintained by any Acquired Entity or Seller with respect to the Business or any of the Acquired Assets (the “ Insurance Policies ”). Each of the Insurance Policies is in full force and effect and no written notice has been received by any Acquired Entity or Seller from any insurance carrier purporting to cancel coverage under any of the Insurance Policies. Except as set forth in Section 2.18 of the Seller Disclosure Schedule, there are no pending claims against the Insurance Policies with respect to the Business, any Acquired Entity or any Acquired Asset as to which the insurers have denied liability.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Grandmother’s end-run around the proper statutory procedures. [¶ 13.] 2. Whether Mother was deprived of her constitutional right to procedural due process when the trial court allowed a non-parent to use the South Dakota Guardianship Act to involuntarily terminate her custodial rights. [¶ 14.] The use of the Guardianship Act in this case to effect a change of custody is not merely a procedural flaw. SDCL chapters 26-7A and 26-8A exist for the protection of the children, the parents and the family unit. Because these chapters deal with the fundamental right of parents to the care, custody, and control of then-children, they employ multiple constitutional safeguards that are not present in the Guardianship Act. See Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 120 S.Ct. 2054, 147 L.Ed.2d 49 (2000) (<HOLDING>); Lassiter v. Dept. of Social Services, 452 Options: A. holding care custody and control of children is a fundamental right B. recognizing parents fundamental liberty interest in the care custody and management of their children C. recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children D. recognizing that the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care custody and control of their children E. holding that although parents have a fundamental right to the care and custody of their children they have no fundamental right to allocate support to their children as they see fit

assistant: The best answer is A. holding care custody and control of children is a fundamental right
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: power to borrow so that it includes the power to loan. See Gouldy, 12 S.W. at 831. Therefore, as Edythe’s agent under the power of attorney, Richard had neither the power to make, nor the power to execute an agreement authorizing him to make, loans to himself from Edythe’s funds. In further support of his argument, Richard cites Neill v. Kleiber, 51 Tex.Civ.App. 552, 112 S.W. 694 (1908). In that case, the agent named in a power of attorney was authorized to “sell, contract and convey all or any part” of a specified tract of land. Id. at 695. He also was granted “full power by this to do with the said land as if the same was his own property.” Id. But the language in Edythe’s power of attorney is not the “functional equivalent” of the language in Neill. See Cohen, 2008 WL 1728234, at *6 (<HOLDING>). Therefore, Neill is inapposite. Conclusion Options: A. holding that instructions are sufficient which substantially follow the language of the statute or use equivalent language B. holding when ordinance language is clear courts must give language its plain meaning C. holding that when language is exactly the same in two statutory provisions the meaning of that language is also identical D. holding equivalent language is a paywhenpaid clause E. holding that language authorizing an agent to act in my name place and stead in any way which i myself could do is not functional equivalent of language in neill

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that language authorizing an agent to act in my name place and stead in any way which i myself could do is not functional equivalent of language in neill
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: schools with the proportions of the races in the district as a whole.” Id. at 474, 112 S.Ct. 1430. In historically segregated school systems, the Supreme Court has held, “where it is possible to identify a ‘white school’ or a ‘Negro school’ simply by reference to the racial composition of teachers and staff, the quality of school buildings and equipment, or the organization of sports activities, a prima facie case of violation of substantive constitutional rights under the Equal Protection Clause is shown.” Swann, 402 U.S. at 18, 91 S.Ct. 1267. The burden then shifts to the school district to demonstrate that the racial imbalances are “not the result of present or past discriminatory action on their part.” Id. at 26, 91 S.Ct. 1267; accord Freeman, 503 U.S. at 494, 112 S.Ct. 1430 (<HOLDING>); Jacksonville NAACP, 273 F.3d at 966; Manning, Options: A. holding that a school district was not liable for sexual molestation of plaintiffs daughter by a teacher even though the acts occurred on school property and during school hours B. holding school districts had standing to bring claims against the state asserting that school financing system had become unconstitutional C. holding the tlo standard governs school searches when school resource officers who although employed by the local police department are primarily responsible to the school district are acting in conjunction with school officials D. holding that in a formerly de jure segregated school system the school district bears the burden of showing that any current imbalance is not traceable in a proximate way to the prior violation E. holding that a school district owed the highest degree of care to a student on a school bus such that the district could be liable for the sexual abuse of the student by the school bus driver

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that in a formerly de jure segregated school system the school district bears the burden of showing that any current imbalance is not traceable in a proximate way to the prior violation
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 reasons discussed above, we will dismiss both appeals for lack of jurisdiction. 1 . Additionally, Appellees emphasize that the United States Courts of Appeals for the Sixth and Ninth Circuits have also concluded that plaintiffs may not appeal a dismissal for lack of prosecution where the plaintiffs caused that dismissal in order to appeal. See Huey v. Teledyne, Inc., 608 F.2d 1234, 1236 (9th Cir.1979) (concluding that reviewing the denial of class-action certification after plaintiff's action was dismissed for failure to prosecute would violate the spirit of Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463, 98 S.Ct. 2454, 57 L.Ed.2d 351 (1978), in which the Court held that a decertification order was not an appealable final order); Hughley v. Eaton Corp., 572 F.2d 556, 557 (6th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>). We read these cases as consistent with Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs failure to meet any one of the elements requires dismissal of claim B. recognizing that propriety of dismissal without warning for failure to prosecute although abuse of discretion and grounds for appeal was not basis for overturning denial of motion under rule 60b to set aside dismissal C. holding that because no class was certified at the time tender rendered moot haymans claims dismissal of the entire suit was warranted D. holding that dismissal for failure to prosecute rendered moot any prior ruling of the district court E. holding that a trial court may deny a confirmation motion when satisfaction has rendered the controversy moot

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that dismissal for failure to prosecute rendered moot any prior ruling of the district court
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: After giving effect to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, and before and after giving effect to each Credit Extension, the Loan Parties, on a consolidated basis, are, and will be, Solvent. No transfer of property has been or will be made by any Loan Party and no obligation has been or will be incurred by any Loan Party in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or the other Loan Documents with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud either present or future creditors of any Loan Party.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Appellant contends that the supplemental jury charge was unduly coercive because it gave the jurors the impression that deliberations could last indefinitely. We must review the instructions to a jury not “ ‘in artificial isolation, but ... in the context of the overall charge.’ ” United States v. Park, 421 U.S. 658, 674, 95 S.Ct. 1903, 44 L.Ed.2d 489 (1975) (quoting Cupp v. Naughten, 414 U.S. 141, 146-47, 94 S.Ct be coercive if it contained language urging the jurors to re-examine their own view but not to “surrender [their] honest conviction as to the weight or effect of evidence solely because of the opinion of [their] fellow jurors, or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.” Fioravanti, 412 F.2d at 420 n. 32; see also United States v. Alper, 449 F.2d 1223, 1234 (3d Cir.1971) (<HOLDING>); cf. also Gov’t of the Virgin Islands v. Options: A. holding that allen charge given by court was coercive and required a new trial B. holding that it is not C. holding that a supplemental jury charge was not unduly coercive because although it suggested jurors reexamine their views it told them not to surrender their honest convictions D. holding second modified allen charge coercive per se unless jury requests it E. holding that a statement that the jurors were not required to reach a verdict but should try to do so was not coercive

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a supplemental jury charge was not unduly coercive because although it suggested jurors reexamine their views it told them not to surrender their honest convictions
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: property owned by the defendant, when other evidence in the record indicated that another property was an equally likely source of the plaintiffs harm. Id. at 268-72, 160 A.3d 1207. In my view, when there are multiple potential sources of a plaintiffs exposure to lead-based paint and elevated blood lead levels, each of which is more than a mere possible source of the harm, and the plaintiff has claimed that only one of them was the source of his harm, the plaintiff must, at a minimum, show that the subject property was a more probable source of that exposure and elevated blood lead levels than the other potential source(s) in order to establish that the subject property was a substantial factor cause of his harm. Id. See also Peterson v. Underwood, 258 Md. 9, 17, 264 A.2d 851 (1970) (<HOLDING>). The Majority in this case asserts that the Options: A. holding plaintiff could not recover on nuisance action to recover for alleged damage to property he does not own or rent B. holding that where an express contract was in place between plaintiff and defendant that governed the compensation sought by plaintiff plaintiff may not recover under a theory of unjust enrichment C. recognizing that when a defendants negligence causes bodily injury the plaintiff can recover damages for past present and future medical expenses bodily injury and emotional distress D. holding plaintiff responsible for attorney error E. holding that where plaintiff by his own evidence shows two or more equally likely causes of the injury for only one of which defendant is responsible plaintiff can not recover

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that where plaintiff by his own evidence shows two or more equally likely causes of the injury for only one of which defendant is responsible plaintiff can not recover
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: 18.10 avc/h .264 notice : if the software is used to make video calls ( i ) between a personal computer and a device that is not a personal computer or ( ii ) between devices that are not personal computers , the avc/h .264 codec may be used to facilitate video functionality in which case the following notice applies : the avc video functionality in this product is licensed under the avc patent portfolio license for the personal and non-commercial use of a consumer to ( i ) encode video in compliance with the avc standard ( `` avc video '' ) and/or ( ii ) decode avc video that was encoded by a consumer engaged in a personal and non-commercial activity and/or was obtained from a video provider licensed to provide avc video .

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 Unitholder hereby represents and warrants, severally and not jointly, to the LLC and acknowledges that: ( i ) such Unitholder has reviewed and evaluated all information necessary to assess the merits and risks of his, her or its investment in the LLC and has had answered to such Unitholder’s satisfaction any and all questions regarding such information; ( ii ) such Unitholder is able to bear the economic and financial risk of an investment in the LLC for an indefinite period of time and could afford a complete loss of such investment; ( iii ) such Unitholder is acquiring interests in the LLC for investment only and not with a view to, or for resale in connection with, any distribution to the public or public offering thereof; ( iv ) to the extent that the Units are deemed to be securities under the Securities Act of 1933, the interests in the LLC have not been registered under the securities laws of any jurisdiction and cannot be disposed of unless they are subsequently registered and/or qualified under applicable securities laws or pursuant to an exemption therefrom or as otherwise provided in this Agreement have been complied with; ( v ) if such Unitholder is a natural person, such Unitholder has the natural capacity (or, if such Unitholder is an entity, such Unitholder has the corporate (or similar) power and authority) to execute and deliver this Agreement and each document referred to herein to be executed by such Unitholder (or counterparts thereof or joinders thereto) hereunder, and to perform its obligations hereunder and thereunder; ( vi ) the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement have been duly authorized by such Unitholder and do not require such Unitholder to obtain any consent or approval that has not been obtained and do not contravene or result in a default under any provision of any law or regulation applicable to such Unitholder or other governing documents or any agreement or instrument to which such Unitholder is a party or by which such Unitholder is bound; ( vii ) the determination of such Unitholder to purchase or otherwise acquire interests in the LLC has been made by such Unitholder independent of any other Unitholder and independent of any statements or opinions as to the advisability of such purchase, which may have been made or given by the LLC, any other Unitholder or by any agent or employee of any other Unitholder; ( viii ) this Agreement is valid, binding and enforceable against such Unitholder in accordance with its terms, except to the extent that such enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, fraudulent conveyance, reorganization, moratorium or other similar laws generally affecting creditors’ rights and general equitable principles (regardless of whether enforcement is sought in equity or at law); and ( ix ) the Units cannot be Transferred except in compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Neither the Board nor the Committee, nor any member of either or any delegate thereof, shall be liable for any act, omission, interpretation, construction or determination made in good faith in connection with the Plan, and the members of the Board and the Committee (and any delegate thereof) shall be entitled in all cases to indemnification and reimbursement by the Company in respect of any claim, loss, damage or expense (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees) arising or resulting therefrom to the fullest extent permitted by law and/or under the Company's governing documents, including its certificate of incorporation or bylaws, or any directors' and officers' liability insurance coverage which may be in effect from time to time and/or any indemnification agreement between such individual and the Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All agreements, covenants, representations, warranties, rights, duties and obligations of each Party set forth in this Agreement and each other Loan Document shall terminate in all respects at 5:00 p.m., New York City time on the Agreement Termination Date if the Closing Date has not occurred on or prior to such time. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement or in any other Loan Document, the provisions of Section 2.12 , Section 2.14 , Section 2.15 , Section 2.16 , Section 7.10 , ARTICLE X , Section 11.03 , Section 11.09 , Section 11.10 , Section 11.18 , and Section 11.19 shall survive and remain in full force and effect regardless of the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, the repayment of the Loans, the expiration or termination of the Commitments or the termination of this Agreement or any provision hereof.

assistant: Terminations
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 duly authorized and validly executed and delivered by or on behalf of the Partnership and constitutes a valid and legally binding agreement of the Partnership, enforceable against the Partnership in accordance with its terms; provided, that the enforceability thereof may be limited by (A) applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, fraudulent transfer, reorganization, moratorium or similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally or by equitable principles (whether considered in a proceeding at law or in equity) relating to enforceability and (B) public policy, applicable law relating to fiduciary duties and indemnification and an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (collectively, the “ Enforceability Exceptions ”).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: been expressly declared a professional service under KRS 413.245 at the time MLS performed its contract with GDD, land surveying is frequently necessary for the performance of engineering services. See KRS 322.010(4)(a)(5) (defining engineering work in part as “the services of a professional engineer who engages in the practice of land surveying incident to the practice of engineering that does not relate to the location or determination of land boundaries.”) In this regard, the relationship between engineering and land surveying is similar to the relationship between paralegals and lawyers and doctors and nurses — both relationships which have been held to be encompassed within the professional services statute of limitations. See Underhill v. Stephenson, 756 S.W.2d 459, 460 (Ky.1988) (<HOLDING>); Lapham v. Stewart, 137 Idaho 582, 51 P.3d Options: A. holding that nursing is a professional service subject to krs 413245 B. holding that service of a statecourt summons and complaint after removal to federal court is valid service C. recognizing that although provision of municipal service is not fundamental right inequitable provision of that service is subject to equal protection analysis D. holding focus is on the putative clients subjective belief that he is consulting a lawyer in his professional capacity and on his intent to seek professional legal advice E. holding that service is not avoided by service on a partys attorney as service on an attorney is ineffective unless he has been authorized to accept such service

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that nursing is a professional service subject to krs 413245
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 Lenders shall have received (i) projections with respect to the Guarantor’s and its consolidated Subsidiaries’ financial performance in form and substance reasonably acceptable to the Administrative Agent and (ii) audited consolidated financial statements of the Guarantor and its consolidated Subsidiaries for the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years.

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: of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the district court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C.A. § 1441(a). Section 1441 makes clear that removal of any civil action over which the federal district courts have original jurisdiction is allowed unless (1) expressly provided otherwise by (2) an act of Congress. Neither condition is met by the FLSA, and the First Circuit Court of Appeals so held in Cosme Nieves v. Deshler, 786 F.2d 445, 451 (1st Cir.1986). The ambiguity of Congress’s use of “maintain” is self-evident. That “maintain” can be interpreted to suggest congressional intent to bar removal falls short of the standard set in § 1441 that a bar on removal must be “expressly provided.” See, e.g., Cosme Nieves, 786 F.2d at 451 (<HOLDING>). There is also no “Act of Congress” which bars Options: A. holding that congress would have used express terms not ambiguous ones like maintain if its intent were to prevent removal of cases under the fsla B. holding contract with ambiguous terms should not be dismissed on pleadings C. holding exclusion was not ambiguous D. holding that parol evidence can be presented when the terms of the agreement are ambiguous E. recognizing ambiguous terms of plea agreement are construed against government

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that congress would have used express terms not ambiguous ones like maintain if its intent were to prevent removal of cases under the fsla
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 second (categorical) classification traditionally “comprises cases in which the Court implements the proportionality standard by certain categorical restrictions on the death penalty,” but was recently expanded by the Supreme Court to include term-of-years sentences in narrow instances. See id. Walker asserts that his sentence violates the Eighth Amendment both categorically and as-applied. A. Walker argues that his 180-month sentence categorically violates the Eighth Amendment under Graham. However, this court has concluded that Graham does not apply in cases where the defendant receives a sentence that is “less severe” than a life sentence. See United States v. Jones, 476 Fed.Appx. 651, 652 (6th Cir.2012) (unpublished); United States v. Moore, 643 F.3d 451, 457 (6th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). Further, this circuit’s holdings emphasize Options: A. holding that sentences imposing mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole on individuals who committed their crimes when under the age of 18 violates the eighth amendment to the united states constitution B. recognizing that njeither graham nor miller explicitly apply to the functional equivalent of life without parole ie de facto life sentences C. holding sentences of life without parole unique in their severity D. holding that mandatory life imprisonment without parole for those under the age of eighteen at the time of their crimes violates eighth amendment E. holding that life without parole sentences for nonhomicide offenses violates the eighth amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding sentences of life without parole unique in their severity
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 and the exhibits to this Agreement set forth the entire agreement and understanding of the Parties in respect of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, and supersede all prior contracts, term sheets, letters of intent, exclusivity agreements, and other arrangements and understandings relating to the subject matter hereof and thereof.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 77, 111 S.Ct. at 1704. Thus, in diversity cases, whether a state-law cause of action exists at all is a jurisdictional issue insofar as it relates to standing and injury-in-fact, not an issue of whether a claim for relief has been stated. 74 .Despite this unambiguous holding, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has allowed plaintiffs to recover medical monitoring costs for exposure to asbestos. See Simmons, 674 A.2d at 239-40. The court stated that such costs were properly awarded for meritorious exposure-only cases but that damages for increased risk , 192 (Ky.1994) (requiring manifestation of asbestos-caused injury before recognizing existence of cause of action for negligence based on exposure to asbestos); Larson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 427 Mich. 301, 399 N.W.2d 1, 2 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Locke v. Johns-Manville Corp., 221 Va. 951, Options: A. holding that a cause of action for breach of contract accrues at the time of the breach B. holding that cause of action for asbestosis accrues upon discovery of disease not at time of exposure to asbestos C. recognizing that breach of contract cause of action accrues at time of the breach D. recognizing in a latent disease case that an injured persons cause of action accrues either 1 E. holding that a cause of action for an unconstitutional taking accrues at the time the taking occurs

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that cause of action for asbestosis accrues upon discovery of disease not at time of exposure to asbestos
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 obligations of Guarantor under this Completion Guaranty are independent of Developer’s obligations under the Agreement, and a separate action or actions may be brought and prosecuted against or by the Guarantor to enforce this Completion Guaranty, irrespective of whether any action is brought against or by Developer or whether Developer is joined in any such action or actions. Any one or more successive and/or concurrent actions may be brought hereon against Guarantor either in the same action, if any, brought against Developer or in separate actions, as often as SCA, in its sole discretion, may deem advisable.

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: The Participant shall be responsible for any tax liability that may arise as a result of the payments contemplated by an LTIP Award or these LTIP Terms and Conditions in accordance with Section 20 of the Plan. The Participant acknowledges the Company is authorized to withhold taxes due, or potentially payable in connection with any LTIP Award Payment in accordance with Section 20 of the Plan. Further, the Participant agrees to any deduction or setoff by the Company as provided under Section 26 of the Plan.

assistant: 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Common Stock to be issued under this Plan is to be made available from the authorized but unissued Common Stock, shares of Common Stock held in the treasury or Common Stock purchased on the open market or otherwise. The maximum aggregate number of shares authorized to be issued under the Plan shall be 500,000. Upon forfeiture, expiration or termination of Options or Stock Units, the shares of Common Stock subject thereto shall again be available for awards under the Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Payments Free of Taxes . Any and all payments by or on account of any obligation of any Loan Party under any Loan Document shall be made without deduction or withholding for any Taxes, except as required by applicable law. If any applicable law (as determined in the good faith discretion of an applicable Withholding Agent) requires the deduction or withholding of any Tax from any such payment by a Withholding Agent, then the applicable Withholding Agent shall be entitled to make such deduction or withholding and shall timely pay the full amount deducted or withheld to the relevant Governmental Authority in accordance with applicable law and, if such Tax is an Indemnified Tax, then the sum payable by the applicable Loan Party shall be increased as necessary so that after such deduction or withholding has been made (including such deductions and withholdings applicable to additional sums payable under this Section 2.17) the applicable Recipient receives an amount equal to the sum it would have received had no such deduction or withholding for Indemnified Taxes been made.

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: that takes in excess of four to six hours” could not be “ready,” Dissenting Opinion (“Dissent.Op.”) at 427-28, this contention lacks meaning because it is too abstract and fails to consider what “readily restored” means in the context of a highly complex firearm. The decisions of several other courts make clear that the Defendant weapon, which would require, according to Alverson’s own expert, a maximum of six hours to convert to fire automatically, “can be readily restored” under the NFA. The Eighth Circuit held that a semiautomatic rifle that would take an eight-hour working day in a properly equipped machine shop to convert to shoot automatically qualified as a “machinegun” under the NFA. Smith, 477 F.2d at 400; cf. United States v. Shilling, 826 F.2d 1365, 1367 (4th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); S.W. Daniel, Inc., 831 F.2d at 254-55 Options: A. holding that public safety exception applied when police asked while handcuffing the defendant whether any guns were present B. holding that guns located in trunk of car were carried under statute C. holding that disassembled guns that could be made to shoot automatically were readily restorable D. holding the district court did not clearly err in applying the enhancement where guns were found on the same premises from which the defendant trafficked drugs and were readily accessible to the defendant E. holding that evidence of the defendants connection to the guns suggests possession of the drugs found next to the guns

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that disassembled guns that could be made to shoot automatically were readily restorable
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: benefit of creditor); Meisinger v. Johnson, 162 Neb. 360, 76 N.W.2d 267 (1956) (loan to be repaid out of first profits from land held to create mere contract relation, not a trust). Similarly, even where parties to a contract expressly characterize the contrac tual relationship as a trust, courts will look to the substance of the relationship rather than to the language chosen to express it, to determine whether a fiduciary relationship exists. Thus, Justice Cardozo observed, “It is not enough that by the very act of wrongdoing out of which the debt arose, the bankrupt has become chargeable as a trustee ex maleficio. He must have been a trustee before the wrong and without reference thereto.” David v. Aetna Acceptance Co., 293 U.S. 328, at 333, 55 S.Ct. 151, at 153, 79 L.Ed. 393 (1934) (<HOLDING>). See also Bloomingdale v. Dreher, 31 F.2d 93 Options: A. holding the assignment of the mortgage once the original grant by the mortgagor to the mortgagee has been perfected does not involve a transfer of the property of the debtor B. holding that it is evident that no harm is suffered when the mortgagor would have been in no better position had notice been fully proper and the mortgagor lost no potential opportunity to preserve some or any portion of his interest in the property C. holding that a mortgagor in possession is not a fiduciary of the mortgagee within the meaning of the bankruptcy act even though the mortgagor has obligated himself to keep the security intact D. holding that an insurers defenses against the mortgagor could not be asserted against the mortgagee E. holding that a mortgagor is not required to prove a grossly inadequate selling price in a situation where the bidding at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale was deliberately chilled by the affirmative acts of a mortgagee and the injured mortgagor seeks a recovery of damages rather than a setting aside of the sale itself emphasis omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a mortgagor in possession is not a fiduciary of the mortgagee within the meaning of the bankruptcy act even though the mortgagor has obligated himself to keep the security intact