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: is equal to the amount of the Trusts for Alison and Georgia.” However, this clause relates to Jae-quelin’s status as a beneficiary of the Trust and not as a third-party beneficiary of the property settlement agreement. Whether the Trust was in existence when the property settlement agreement was executed has no bearing on this analysis. Similar to the trust beneficiary in the above-noted fact pattern, Jacquelin is attempting to enforce a provision that requires funds to be contributed to a trust created for her benefit. Jaequelin’s status is not that of a third-party beneficiary, but that of a “beneficiary,” in the colloquial sense of the word, based on her status as the sole beneficiary of the Trust. Cf. Saks v. Damon Raike and Co., 7 Cal.App.4th 419, 8 Cal.Rptr.2d 869, 877 (1992) (<HOLDING>). We also note that cmt. £ emphasizes the Options: A. holding that nonsignatory settlor and trust beneficiaries could be compelled to arbitrate under account agreement between trustee and merrill lynch which contained an arbitration clause because agreement was the underlying basis for all the claims of the beneficiaries and there would have been no claims without the agreement B. holding that the settlor could divest the beneficiaries of their vested interests only by completely revoking the trust because she had limited her ability to eliminate the beneficiaries interests by including language in the trust stating that the interests of the beneficiaries shall continue until this trust is revoked or terminated internal quotation marks omitted C. holding that trust beneficiaries have no authority to maintain an action as third party beneficiaries of contracts between the trustee and agents of the trustee concerning the internal affairs of the trust D. holding that where grantee was named as trustee without identification of the beneficiaries or the nature and purposes of the trust and no trust agreement of record was identified the grantee received fee simple title E. holding that a third party who receives trust property on inquiry notice that a trustee has misappropriated trust funds is also liable for breach of trust

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that trust beneficiaries have no authority to maintain an action as third party beneficiaries of contracts between the trustee and agents of the trustee concerning the internal affairs of the trust
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 that case, the EEOC’s final decision dismissing plaintiffs ADEA claim stated that: “If any of your claims were based on the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ... AS TO THOSE CLAIMS ONLY, you MAY have up to six years after the right of action first accrued in which to file a civil action.” Id. The Second Circuit held that equitable tolling was not warranted because the “uncertainty reflected in the notice stems from the inconsistency in the case law between the circuits.” Id.; see also Lavery, 918 F.2d at 1028 (”[t]he arguably contradictory language — that claimant must file within thirty days and that age discrimination claimants may have up to six years — appears to be a reflection of the difference of judicial opinion ....); compare Lubniewski, 891 F.2d at 221 (<HOLDING>) with Edwards, 64 F.3d 601, 604-06 (holding Options: A. holding that the sixyear statute of limitations on a written contract is applicable to a cause of action based on a um policy B. holding that this courts sixyear statute of limitations is jurisdictional C. holding sixyear statute of limitations applies to adea actions involving federal employees D. recognizing a sixyear statute of limitations on claims filed under the coal act E. holding pennsylvanias similarly worded sixyear statute of limitations for paternity actions unconstitutional

assistant: The best answer is C. holding sixyear statute of limitations applies to adea actions involving federal employees
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts (one counterpart reflecting the signatures of all parties), each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and it shall not be necessary in making proof of this Amendment or its terms to account for more than one of such counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by each party upon a separate copy, and one or more execution pages may be detached from a copy of this Agreement and attached to another copy in order to form one or more counterparts.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: development of a filling station at the Sam’s Club location. This constitutes a statutorily authorized, direct attack on a land use decision by the City under Section 31-2-9. See also § 3-19-8; § 3-21-9; § 39-3-1.1 (providing for an appeal to the district court by any person in interest dissatisfied with an order or determination of a planning commission after review of the order or determination by the governing body of the municipality). Although the City, Wal-Mart, and the dissent assert that Petitioner was required to intervene in the litigation between them in order to protect his right to challenge the development, they cite no New Mexico authority to support this position, and we decline any invitation to create such author o., 92 N.M. 237, 241, 586 P.2d 318, 322 (Ct.App.1978) (<HOLDING>). It has no application to contractual Options: A. holding that a judgment establishing a partys exclusive light to use a trade name was not subject to collateral attack B. holding that dormant judgment is voidable and therefore not subject to collateral attack C. recognizing collateral attack on void order D. holding that prior ro decision that had not become final was not subject to cue collateral attack E. holding that a judgment as to the title in a prior litigation was not subject to collateral attack

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a judgment establishing a partys exclusive light to use a trade name was not subject to collateral attack
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) The Company hereby represents that this Agreement and the performance by the Company of its obligations hereunder (i) has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by the Company, and is a valid and binding obligation of the Company, enforceable against the Company in accordance with its terms, (ii) does not require the approval of the shareholders of the Company and (iii) does not and will not violate any law, any order of any court or other agency of government, the charter of the Company or the bylaws of the Company, or any stock exchange rule or regulation, or any provision of any indenture, agreement or other instrument to which the Company or any of its properties or assets is or are bound, or conflict with, result in a breach of or constitute (with due notice or lapse of time or both) a default under any such indenture, agreement or other instrument, or result in the creation or imposition of, or give rise to, any lien, charge, restriction, claim, encumbrance or adverse penalty of any nature whatsoever pursuant to any such indenture, agreement or other instrument.

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: the marital home during the minority of the children of the marriage. Section 61.075(l)(h), reads in relevant part: [T]he court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors, including: (h) The desirability of retaining the marital home as a residence for any dependent child of the marriage, or any other party, when it would be equitable to do so, it is in the best interest of the child or that party, and it is financially feasible for the parties to maintain the residence until the child is emancipated or until exclusive possession is otherwise terminated by a court of competent jurisdiction. (emphasis added). See Castillo v. Castillo, 626 So.2d 1035, 1037 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (<HOLDING>); Gallardo v. Gallardo, 593 So.2d 522, 524 Options: A. holding that a wife with a child from a prior relationship was not entitled to use and possession of the family home B. holding an award of possession of the marital home is an incident of support C. holding that a wife is not liable simply by virtue of the marital relationship for her husbands fraudulent acts D. holding trial court had no authority to award portion of the marital property to wifes children from another marriage even though money they received by way of social security benefits were commingled with the marital estate and used in part for the aequisition of marital property E. holding that the objective of maintaining the marital residence for the best interest of the minor children is properly accomplished not by granting exclusive ownership of the home to the wife but by granting the wife exclusive use and possession of the marital residence during the minority of the children

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the objective of maintaining the marital residence for the best interest of the minor children is properly accomplished not by granting exclusive ownership of the home to the wife but by granting the wife exclusive use and possession of the marital residence during the minority of the children
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 BORROWER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT HAS NO DEFENSE, COUNTERCLAIM, OFFSET, CROSS‑COMPLAINT, CLAIM OR DEMAND OF ANY KIND OR NATURE WHATSOEVER THAT CAN BE ASSERTED TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ALL OR ANY PART OF ITS LIABILITY TO REPAY ANY LOANS OR EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT FROM AGENT AND LENDERS TO SUCH BORROWER UNDER THE CREDIT AGREEMENT OR THE OTHER DOCUMENTS OR TO SEEK AFFIRMATIVE RELIEF OR DAMAGES OF ANY KIND OR NATURE FROM LENDERS AND AGENT. EACH BORROWER HEREBY VOLUNTARILY AND KNOWINGLY RELEASES AND FOREVER DISCHARGES LENDERS, AGENT, THEIR PREDECESSORS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FROM ALL POSSIBLE CLAIMS, DEMANDS, ACTIONS, CAUSES OF ACTION, DAMAGES, COSTS, EXPENSES, AND LIABILITIES WHATSOEVER, KNOWN OR UNKNOWN, ANTICIPATED OR UNANTICIPATED, SUSPECTED OR UNSUSPECTED, FIXED, CONTINGENT, OR CONDITIONAL, AT LAW OR IN EQUITY, ORIGINATING IN WHOLE OR IN PART ON OR BEFORE THE DATE THIS AMENDMENT IS EXECUTED, WHICH SUCH BORROWER MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE AGAINST LENDERS AND AGENT, THEIR PREDECESSORS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, IF ANY, AND IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER ANY SUCH CLAIMS ARISE OUT OF CONTRACT, TORT, VIOLATION OF LAW OR REGULATIONS, OR OTHERWISE, AND ARISING FROM ANY LOANS OR EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT FROM LENDERS AND AGENT TO SUCH BORROWER UNDER THE CREDIT AGREEMENT OR THE OTHER DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY CONTRACTING FOR, CHARGING, TAKING, RESERVING, COLLECTING OR RECEIVING INTEREST IN EXCESS OF THE HIGHEST LAWFUL RATE APPLICABLE, THE EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHTS AND REMEDIES UNDER THE CREDIT AGREEMENT OR OTHER DOCUMENTS, AND NEGOTIATION FOR AND EXECUTION OF THIS AMENDMENT.

assistant: Releases
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: violate the rule of Doyle by asking ... improper question^] in the presence of the jury” constitute prosecuto-rial misconduct, and that misconduct warrants reversal where it “may [have] so infec[ted] the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.” Id. at 765, 107 S.Ct. 3102 (citation omitted). Because the district court sustained the Doyle objections, struck the one answer, admonished the jury to disregard that answer, and instructed the jury that “questions ... by lawyers are not evidence” and that “testimony that has been excluded or stricken or that you have been instructed to disregard is not evidence and must not be considered[,]” the prosecutor’s improper questions did not violate Lopez’s due process rights. See id. at 766, 107 S.Ct. 3102 (<HOLDING>). B. Jury Instruction — Burden of Proof Lopez Options: A. holding there is no meaningful distinction between due course and due process B. holding that doctrine does not violate due process C. holding that there is no due process right to appellate review D. holding that there was no due process violation occasioned by the prosecutors attempt to violate doyle on closely analogous facts E. holding that in similar factual situation no due process violation occurred

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that there was no due process violation occasioned by the prosecutors attempt to violate doyle on closely analogous facts
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: ground that the search of his computer was untimely because the motion, if pursued on this basis, would not have been granted by the district court. IV. CONCLUSION We hold that the district court did not err in denying Wolfs application for post-conviction relief because Wolfs counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress. Accordingly, the district court’s order summarily dismissing Wolfs application for post-conviction relief is affirmed. No costs or attorney fees are awarded on appeal. Chief Judge GRATTON and Judge LANSING concur. 1 . Several other jurisdictions have dealt with this issue and also held forensic examination of computers conducted after a search warrant expired to be constitutional. See United States v. Brewer, 588 F.3d 1165, 1173 (8th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Burgess, 576 F.3d 1078, 1097 Options: A. holding that the mere assertion of constitutional right to refuse consent to search does not supply probable cause to search B. holding warrantless search of defendants automobile four days after impoundment was permissible under requirements of fourth amendment and state constitution where officers had probable cause to search vehicle when it was impounded and that probable cause continued between the time of the impoundment and the search C. holding a month delay in search of a computer constitutional because probable cause continued to exist at the time of the search and no prejudice occurred D. holding that a visual body cavity search requires probable cause and a search warrant E. holding the search of a computer after the warrant had expired constitutional because despite the delay probable cause for the search continued to exist

assistant: The best answer is E. holding the search of a computer after the warrant had expired constitutional because despite the delay probable cause for the search continued to exist
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 award represents a substantial economic benefit to the Participant. The Participant, by virtue of such Participant's role with the Company, has access to, and is involved in the formulation of, certain confidential and secret information of the Company regarding its operations and each Participant could materially harm the business of the Company by competing with the Company or soliciting employees or customers of the Company.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Title 26 U.S.C. § 1(f)(3) provides that "the cost-of-living adjustment for any calendar year is the percentage (if any) by which — (A) the CPI for the preceding calendar year, exceeds (B) the CPI for the calendar year 1992.” 26 U.S.C. § 1(f)(3). Finally, 26 U.S.C. § 1(f)(5) provides that "the term ‘Consumer Price Index’ means the last Consumer Price Index for all-urban consumers published by the Department of Labor.” 26 U.S.C. § 1(f)(5). 3 . Clayton also argues that to the extent that the exemption amount is listed in the Form 1040 instruction booklet, under the APA, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-558, this instruction booklet cannot impose a legal duty on individuals because those exemption amounts are not published in the Federal Register. See United States v. Harvey, 659 F.2d 62, 64 (5th Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>). Clayton asserts that at best, the Form 1040 Options: A. holding that courts apply the procedural law of the forum and the substantive law of the jurisdiction originating the claim B. holding that the veterans administrations loan servicing manual had no force and effect of law because it was not promulgated in accordance with the procedural requirements of the apa C. holding that under alabama law the law of the forum applies to procedural matters and that in most instances the statute of limitations is considered to be a procedural rule D. holding valid administrative rules promulgated by agency acting within its statutory authority have force and effect of legislation E. holding that an unpublished bia decision that does not rely on precedent for its definition of a contested term does not receive chevron deference because it is not promulgated under the agencys authority to make rules carrying the force of law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the veterans administrations loan servicing manual had no force and effect of law because it was not promulgated in accordance with the procedural requirements of the apa
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of the death of Employee during the Term, this Agreement and Employee’s Employment hereunder shall be terminated as of the date of death and Employee’s designated beneficiary or, in the absence of such designation, the estate or other legal representative of Employee (collectively, the “Estate”) shall be entitled to receive (i) Employee’s Base Salary through the end of the month in which the death occurs and accrued but unused PTO through the date of death, paid in a single lump sum within 30 days following the date of death, and (ii) a pro-rata Annual Bonus (based upon target bonus and the days of employment in the calendar year of Termination), to be paid in a single lump sum within 30 days following the termination date. The Estate shall be entitled to all other applicable death benefits in accordance with the terms of the Company’s benefit programs and plans. In addition, any unvested shares of the Company’s common stock awarded pursuant to Section 4(c) shall vest immediately (at target) upon Employee’s death.

assistant: Death
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: it 's important that you review the terms whenever we modify them , because if you continue to use the services after we have posted modified terms on the site or app , or otherwise communicate them to you , you are indicating to us that you agree to be bound by the modified terms .

assistant: Contract by using
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 parties to each assignment shall execute and deliver to the Administrative Agent an Assignment and Assumption, together with a processing and recordation fee in the amount of $3,500; provided , however , that the Administrative Agent may, in its sole discretion, elect to waive such processing and recordation fee in the case of any assignment; provided , further , that such processing and recordation fee shall not apply to any assignment permitted pursuant to Section 10.09 . The assignee, if it is not a Lender, shall deliver to the Administrative Agent an Administrative Questionnaire.

assistant: Assignments
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: to show action in conformity therewith.” Tex.R. Evid. 404(b). Courts have consistently concluded that such evidence is inherently prejudicial, tends to confuse the issues, and forces the accused to defend himself against charges not present in the case against him. Sims v. State, 273 S.W.3d 291, 295 (Tex.Crim.App.2008). However, Rule 404(b) allows such evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts if the evidence has relevance apart from character conformity. See Tex.R. Evid. 404(b); Moses v. State, 105 S.W.3d 622, 626 (Tex.Crim.App.2003). Rebuttal of a defensive theory is one of the permissi ble purposes for which evidence may be admitted under Rule 404(b). Moses, 105 S.W.3d at 626; Albrecht, 486 S.W.2d at 101; Garrett v. State, 998 S.W.2d 307, 316 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1999, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>). In determining whether extraneous-offense Options: A. holding that evidence was insufficient to prove constructive possession where the defendant was in jail at the time the drugs were seized from his residence B. holding extraneous evidence that defendant was using drugs admissible under rule 404b because evidence not offered to show that defendant was drug user and was using drugs at the time of the offense but to rebut the defense of consensual sex C. holding that the evidence was insufficient to prove the offense of supplying contraband to a jail because the defendant was not in possession of the drugs when he was taken to jail where the arresting officer entered the jail with the drugs D. holding that evidence of prior drug transactions was admissible under rule 404b to show inter alia intent to enter into the drug conspiracy and knowledge of the conspiracy E. holding that evidence was insufficient to prove a conspiracy where the evidence did not show that individuals who sold drugs to the defendant knew that the drugs were meant to be resold

assistant: The best answer is B. holding extraneous evidence that defendant was using drugs admissible under rule 404b because evidence not offered to show that defendant was drug user and was using drugs at the time of the offense but to rebut the defense of consensual sex
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 and delivery of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents to which the Borrower is or is to become a party will result in valid and legally binding obligations of such Person enforceable against it in accordance with the respective terms and provisions hereof and thereof, except as enforceability is limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other laws relating to or affecting generally the enforcement of creditors' rights and except to the extent that availability of the remedy of specific performance or injunctive relief is subject to the discretion of the court before which any proceeding therefore may be brought.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: total offense level was calculated to be 45, but because U.S.S.G. § 5A n. 2 stated that an offense level of more than 43 was to be treated as an offense level of 43, Oliver’s total offense level was set at 43. Based on a total offense level of 43, and a criminal history category of III, the guideline range was life imprisonment. Even with a reduction of Oliver’s base offense level to 38, with the enhancements applied at sentencing in 1993, Oliver’s offense level would be 43. With an offense level of 43, and a criminal history category of III, Oliver’s sentencing range remains life imprisonment. Se -, 129 S.Ct. 965, 173 L.Ed.2d 156 (2009), and cert. denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1601, 173 L.Ed.2d 689 (2009); United States v. Walker, 301 Fed.Appx. 844 (11th Cir.2008) (unpublished opinion) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we affirm. Options: A. holding that the recent amendment to the crack cocaine guidelines does not qualify defendant for a sentencing reduction under 3582c2 because defendant was originally sentenced pursuant to the guideline range for career offenders B. holding that district court did not err in determining that cocaine base was crack cocaine based on chemical analysis identifying cocaine base together with competent lay testimony bridging the evidentiary gap between cocaine base and crack cocaine and refusing to require showing of smokeability ie water solubility or melting point for purposes of establishing crack cocaine under the guidelines since smokeability distinguishes cocaine base from powder cocaine not from crack C. holding that the district court lacked authority under 3582c2 to grant a sentencing reduction to defendants who were career offenders sentenced under ussg 4b11 because amendment 706 would not ultimately affect their guideline ranges D. holding that the district court lacked authority under 3582c2 to grant a sentencing reduction to a defendant who was held accountable for more than 45 kilograms of crack cocaine E. holding that a district court resentencing a defendant based on the retroactive change in the crack cocaine guidelines pursuant to 3582c2 lacks authority to sentence a defendant below the newly calculated guidelines range and need not hold an evidentiary hearing on the issue

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the district court lacked authority under 3582c2 to grant a sentencing reduction to a defendant who was held accountable for more than 45 kilograms of crack cocaine
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: covered by the subpoena duces tecum issued on November 12, 2008, and there was no evidence showing Respondent was required to have filed his 2008 tax returns by November 25, 2008-the date the subpoena was returnable. Additionally, Respondent told the court at the hearing on August 19, 2009, that his 2008 tax returns had not been filed. 111 . The ABA adopted this comment in 2002. See Ellen J. Bennet et al., Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct 326 (ABA Tth ed.2011). Although the Colorado Supreme Court adopted comment 1 on April 12, 2007, effective January 1, 2008, not all jurisdictions have adopted this comment. See id. 112 . Colo. RPC Scope T21. 113 . Colo. RPC 3.3 cmts. 1-2; see also Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Rhinehart, 827 N.W.2d 169, 176-77 (Iowa 2013) (<HOLDING>); State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Dobbs, 94 Options: A. holding that an attorney who committed extrinsic fraud did not violate iowas analogue to colo rpc 33 because he engaged in fraud in his own dissolution proceeding rather than while representing a client B. holding that where an agent is guilty of independent fraud for his benefit knowledge of the fraud is not imputed to the principal C. holding that although a lawyer who violated the predecessor to colo rpc 18a did not have the conscious objective to deceive his client or to take advantage of her he was aware of the circumstances and the consequences of his conduct his mental state was therefore greater than one of negligence D. holding that in the context of federal immigration law the amount of loss to the victim of fraud or deceit does not refer to an element of the fraud or deceit but rather refers to the particular circumstances in which an offender committed fraud or deceit E. holding that a plaintiff cannot avoid the securities fraud exception by pleading mail fraud or wire fraud if the conduct giving rise to those offenses also amounts to securities fraud

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an attorney who committed extrinsic fraud did not violate iowas analogue to colo rpc 33 because he engaged in fraud in his own dissolution proceeding rather than while representing a client
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: for sentencing purposes must be established through a collateral, post-verdict adjudication at which the applicable procedural protections are significantly lower than those applicable at the trial itself. For example, a criminal defendant enjoys the right to a trial by jury, see U.S. Const, amend. VI, but that right does not exist at sentencing, see, e.g., Spaziano v. Florida, 468 U.S. 447, 459, 104 S.Ct. 3154, 3161, 82 L.Ed.2d 340 (1984). At trial, an element of a charged offense must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, see In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1072, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970), but most pertinent sentencing facts need only be established by a preponderance of evidence, see McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 U.S. 79, 91, 106 S.Ct. 2411, 2418, 91 L.Ed.2d 67 (1986) (<HOLDING>); United States v. McDowell, 888 F.2d 285, Options: A. holding that standard for revocation of probation is preponderance of the evidence B. holding that the proper standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence C. holding that the preponderance standard is generally appropriate in guidelines sentencing D. holding that the preponderance standard is generally constitutional E. holding that the standard of proof for dischargeability actions is the preponderance of the evidence standard

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the preponderance standard is generally constitutional
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: is not a party to these appeals. 2 Home Builders Assn. of Savannah v. Chatham County, 276 Ga. 243, 245 (1) (577 SE2d 564) (2003) (citation and punctuation omitted). 3 OCGA § 51-12-51 (a). 4 Holcomb v. Long, 329 Ga. App. 515, 517-518 (1) (765 SE2d 687) (2014) (citations and punctuation omitted). 5 See generally Holcomb, 329 Ga. App. at 518 (1). 6 OCGA § 51-12-51 (a) (emphasis supplied). 7 See generally Holcomb, 329 Ga. App. at 520 (1). 8 We note that this Court has previously held that individuals who cut or removed trees without the requisite consent could be held liable under the GTCCS, although the rulings did not expressly address the issues raised by Redcedar in this appeal. See, e.g., AgSouth Farm Credit v. Gowen Timber Co., 336 Ga. App. 581, 588-592 (2) (b) (784 SE2d 913) (2016) (<HOLDING>); Thakkar v. St. Ives Country Club, 250 Ga.App. Options: A. holding that a person who cut and removed timber from a golf course was liable to the owners of the course as a matter of law under the gtccs regardless how the person subsequently disposed of the timber ie by using selling or discarding it B. holding that a person who cut and removed timber pursuant to the direction of the person in possession of the property but without the written consent of the company holding legal title to the land could be held liable under the gtccs C. holding that a company that cut removed and sold timber from land that secured a debt held by the plaintiff was liable as a matter of law under the gtccs because it had not first obtained the written consent of the plaintiff D. holding by texas supreme court that takings claim failed as a matter of law because the state took possession of the property in question under a contract with the plaintiff and therefore with the plaintiffs permission and consent E. holding that if an insurance company is as a matter of state law liable to a plaintiff in the personal injury action subsequent discharge of the assured in bankruptcy does not alter the obligation of the insurance company and further finding that it is the policy of the law to discharge the bankrupt but not to release from liabilities those who are liable with him

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a company that cut removed and sold timber from land that secured a debt held by the plaintiff was liable as a matter of law under the gtccs because it had not first obtained the written consent of the plaintiff
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: face. We therefore hold that relator’s attempted collateral attack on the Agreed Order fails. Even addressing relator’s specific complaints regarding the grandparents’ standing, we further conclude his challenges fail for several reasons. First, he states that upon the death of the managing conservator (M.W.L.’s mother), the managing conservatorship ended immediately and, therefore, under Greene v. Schuble, 654 S.W.2d 436, 437-38 (Tex.1983), there was no longer a valid, subsisting court order. He contends that the grandparents failed to show they had sufficient standing under the family code to pursue their suit to modify the parent-child relationship because, under Greene, the conservatorship orders between the mother and father ended immediately upon the mother’s death. Id. at 437-38 (<HOLDING>). Therefore, he contends the grandparents’ suit Options: A. holding that trial court may arrest judgment on conviction for possession with intent to deliver and enter judgment of guilt on simple possession B. holding that possession of a pistol in public requires knowing possession C. recognizing possession of cocaine as a lesserincluded offense of possession of cocaine with intent to sell D. holding portion of decree dealing with conservatorship no longer valid court order governing possession upon death of conservator for purposes of then section 1410e habeas proceeding for possession of child E. recognizing innocent possession defense to a charge of criminal weapons possession

assistant: The best answer is D. holding portion of decree dealing with conservatorship no longer valid court order governing possession upon death of conservator for purposes of then section 1410e habeas proceeding for possession of child
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: linden lab hereby grants you a non-exclusive , non-transferable , non-sublicenseable , limited , personal , revocable license to access and use the service on an internet device as set forth in these terms and expressly conditioned upon you and each of your accounts remaining active , in good standing , and in compliance with these terms .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company reserves the right to amend, suspend or terminate this Plan at any time. However, to the extent any such amendment, suspension or termination would adversely impact the Director’s (or Beneficiary’s) Benefit, the amendment, suspension, or termination shall require the written consent of the Director (or Beneficiary), even if the Director is no longer serving on the board of directors of the Company or the Bank.

assistant: Amendments
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, together with the Notice of Grant and the Incentive Plan supersede any and all other prior understandings and agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and constitute the sole and only agreements between the parties with respect to the said subject matter. All prior negotiations and agreements between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof are merged into this Agreement and the Notice of Grant. Each party to this Agreement and the Notice of Grant acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party or by anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied in this Agreement, the Notice of Grant or the Incentive Plan and that any agreement, statement, or promise that is not contained in this Agreement, the Notice of Grant or the Incentive Plan shall not be valid or binding or of any force or effect. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Notice of Grant, this Agreement or in the Incentive Plan, in the event of any conflict between the terms and conditions of the Award as set forth in the Notice of Grant, this Agreement and in the Incentive Plan, as the case may be, and the terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement, the terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement shall govern unless the conflicting provision in the Notice of Grant, this Agreement or in the Incentive Plan, as the case may be, is more favorable to the Participant; in which case, the provision more favorable to the Participant shall govern.

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: In the event of the death of a Participant during the period of Continuous Service since the Grant Date of an Option, or within 12 months following termination of the Participant’s Continuous Service, the Option may be exercised, at any time within 12 months following the date of the Participant’s death (or such earlier date on which the Option expires), by the Participant’s estate or by a person who acquired the right to exercise the Option by bequest or inheritance, but only to the extent the right to exercise the Option had vested at the date of death or, if earlier, the date the Participant’s Continuous Service terminated.

assistant: Death
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: at 304. Thus, supervisory prison officials such as Defendants Banks and Jackson may be held liable for a Section 1983 violation only if they either were personally involved in the constitutional deprivation or if there is a “sufficient causal connection between the supervisor’s wrongful conduct and the constitutional violation.” Thompkins, 828 F.2d at 304. The court concludes that Defendants Banks and Jackson were not personally involved in denying Plaintiff medical care. These Defendants are neither nurses, doctors, or other health aides; rather, they hold supervisory positions and were not personally involved in Plaintiffs medical treatment. Accordingly, they cannot be liable for the alleged denial of medical treatment. See, e.g., Camberos v. Branstad, 73 F.3d 174, 176 (8th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 111 (2d Options: A. holding that state medical director of prison medical services corporation was not final policymaker B. holding that because the warden and medical treatment director lacked medical expertise they cannot be liable for the medical staffs diagnostic decision not to refer plaintiff to a doctor to treat his shoulder injury C. holding that conduct by the plaintiff contributing to his illness or medical condition and furnishing the occasion for medical treatment is not a defense to medical malpractice where a doctor negligently treated a man who had attempted to commit suicide D. holding that statements in medical records given for the primary purpose of medical diagnosis and treatment are nontestimonial E. holding that whether to order an xray or additional diagnostic treatment is a matter for medical judgment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that because the warden and medical treatment director lacked medical expertise they cannot be liable for the medical staffs diagnostic decision not to refer plaintiff to a doctor to treat his shoulder injury
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 by the Buyer and the consummation by the Buyer of the transactions contemplated hereby will not (i) conflict with or result in a violation of any provision of its certificate of formation or other organizational documents, or (ii) violate or conflict with or result in a breach of any provision of, or constitute a default (or an event which with notice or lapse of time or both could become a default) under, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation of, any agreement, note, bond, indenture or other instrument to which Buyer is a party, or (iii) result in a violation of any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment or decree (including federal and state securities laws and regulations and regulations of any self-regulatory organizations to which Buyer is subject) applicable to Seller or the Note is bound or affected. The Buyer is not required to obtain any consent, authorization or order of, or make any filing or registration with, any court, governmental agency, regulatory agency, self-regulatory organization or stock market or any third party in order for it to execute, deliver or perform any of its obligations under this Agreement in accordance with the terms hereof.

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 Company is a business company duly incorporated, validly existing and in good standing under the Laws of the Cayman Islands and has all requisite corporate power and authority to own, lease and operate its properties and to carry on its business as now being conducted. Each Subsidiary of the Company is a corporation or other entity duly formed, validly existing and, except as set forth in Schedule 4.1 , in good standing under the Laws of its jurisdiction of organization and has all requisite corporate power and authority to own, lease and operate its properties and to carry on its business as now being conducted. Except as set forth in Schedule 4.1 , each Target Company is duly qualified or licensed and in good standing in the jurisdiction in which it is incorporated or registered and in each other jurisdiction where it does business or operates to the extent that the character of the property owned, or leased or operated by it or the nature of the business conducted by it makes such qualification or licensing necessary. Schedule 4.1 lists all jurisdictions in which any Target Company is qualified to conduct business and all names other than its legal name under which any Target Company does business. The Company has provided to the Purchaser accurate and complete copies of its Organizational Documents and the Organizational Documents of each of its Subsidiaries, each as amended to date and as currently in effect. No Target Company is in violation of any provision of its Organizational Documents.

assistant: Organizations
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: Notwithstanding any other provision of the Notice or these Terms and Conditions to the contrary, if you die before the Fourth Vesting Date and before you have otherwise terminated employment with the Company Group, all remaining Forfeiture Restrictions shall immediately lapse on the date of the termination of your employment due to death.

assistant: Death
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: None of (a) the Borrowers, any Subsidiary or, to the knowledge of any Borrower or such Subsidiary, any of their respective directors, officers or employees, or (b) to the knowledge of any Borrower, any agent of any Borrower or any Subsidiary that will act in any capacity in connection with or benefit from the credit facility established hereby, is a Sanctioned Person.

assistant: Sanctions
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 Mejias’ car would not create probable cause to believe they were aware of the package’s contents. b. Probable cause at the time criminal proceedings were commenced against the Mejias. The determination of whether a particular defendant had probable cause must be made on the basis of the information possessed by, or reasonably available to, that defendant. See 59 N.Y. Jur.2d False Imprisonment & Malicious Prosecution § 71 (1987). In this case, there is no evidence that at the time criminal proceedings were commenced, any Airborne employee was aware of the seizure of the additional portfolios from the Mejias’ office. Moreover, even if the police defendants’ knowledge of the additional portfolios can be imputed to Airborne, cf. Davis v. Little, 851 F.2d 605, 607 (2d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>), that additional evidence would still not be Options: A. recognizing that an arrest based on probable cause cannot be the basis of a claim for false arrestimprisonment B. holding that hearsay may be relied on to show probable cause when substantial basis exists for crediting it C. holding that probable cause may be determined on basis of collective knowledge of police D. holding that the police officers had probable cause to make a warrantless entry E. holding that a determination of probable cause does not bar a state law malicious prosecution claim where the claim is based on the police officers supplying false information to establish probable cause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that probable cause may be determined on basis of collective knowledge of police