flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) If (i) any Plan shall be deemed to be in “at risk status” (as defined in Section 430(i)(4) of the Code without regard to Section 430(i)(4)(B) relating to the transition rule), (ii) any Plan shall have had or is likely to have a trustee appointed to administer such Plan, (iii) any Plan is, shall have been or is likely to be terminated or to be the subject of a distress termination proceeding under ERISA, (iv) a minimum required contribution (as defined in Section 430(a) of the Code) for a Plan has not been timely made, (v) a Loan Party or any ERISA Affiliate has incurred or is likely to incur a liability to or on account of a Plan under Section 409, 502(i), 502(l), 515, 4062, 4063, 4064, 4069, 4201, 4204 or 4212 of ERISA or Section 401(a)(29), 4971, 4975 or 4980 of the Code, or (vi) a Loan Party has incurred or is likely to incur liabilities pursuant to one or more employee welfare benefit plans (as defined in Section 3(l) of ERISA) that primarily provide health and welfare benefits to retired employees or other former employees (other than as required by Section 601 of ERISA) and any of the foregoing could have a Material Adverse Effect; (b) if there shall result from any event or events described in clauses (a)(i), (a)(ii), (a)(iii), (a)(iv) or (a)(v) of this Section 10.1.11, the imposition of a lien, the granting of a security interest, or a liability or a material risk of incurring a liability which could have, or reasonably be expected to have, a Material Adverse Effect; or (c) if any such lien, security interest or liability is imposed or granted and, individually, and/or in the aggregate, in the reasonable opinion of the Administrative Agent could have, or reasonably be expected to have, a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Attached hereto as Schedule 8.2(g) is a list of all Authorizations. Except as described on Schedule 8.2(g) , neither Hersha Owner nor Hersha Lessee has received any written notice of a material default with respect to any Authorization, and to Hersha Owner’s and Hersha Lessee’s knowledge, (i) all Authorizations (except for the New Permit) are in full force and effect, (ii) all material requirements and conditions of the Authorizations have been complied with, and (iii) no event has occurred which, merely by notice or the passage of time or both, would render Hersha Owner, Hersha Lessee or the Property in material breach of such requirements and conditions.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party represents that it has had the opportunity to consult with an attorney, and has carefully read and understands the scope and effect of the provisions of this Agreement. Neither Party has relied upon any representations or statements made by the other Party hereto which are not specifically set forth in 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: Any Lender may at any time, without the consent of, or notice to, the Borrower or the Administrative Agent, sell participations to any Person (other than a natural person, the Borrower or any of the Borrower’s Affiliates or Subsidiaries or a Person that is not a financial institution) (each, a “ Participant ”) in all or a portion of such Lender’s rights and/or obligations under this Agreement (including all or a portion of its Commitment and/or the Loans owing to it); provided that (i) such Lender’s obligations under this Agreement shall remain unchanged, (ii) such Lender shall remain solely responsible to the other parties hereto for the performance of such obligations and (iii) the Borrower, the Administrative Agent, the Lenders, and the Issuing Lender shall continue to deal solely and directly with such Lender in connection with such Lender’s rights and obligations under this Agreement.

assistant: Participations
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 a decision in connection with the appellant’s EED claim regarding her DIC award, supported by an adequate statement of reasons or bases, see 38 U.S.C. §§ 1310, 5100 5103, 5103A, 5106, 5107, 7104(a), (d)(1); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b), (c) (2002); Charles v. Principi 16 Vet.App. 370, 374 (2002); Quartuccio v. Principi, 16 Vet.App. 183, 187 (2002); Fletcher v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 394, 397 (1991), all consistent with this opinion and in accordance with section 302 of the Veterans’ Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub.L. No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (found at 38 U.S.C. § 5101 note) (requiring Secretary to provide for “expeditious treatment” for claims remanded by BVA or the' Court) [hereinafter VBIA § 302]; see Vargas-Gonzalez v. Principi, 15 Vet.App. 222, 225-30 (2001) (<HOLDING>), and with all applicable law and regulation. Options: A. holding that guilty plea admits all elements of offense B. holding that vbia 302 applies to all elements of claim remanded by court or board C. holding that freestanding predecessor of section 7112 applies to all elements of claim remanded by the court or board D. holding that a found in indictment need not allege all of the elements of entry E. holding that section 302 of veterans benefits improvements act of 1994 publ no 103446 302 108 stat 4645 4658 predecessor of section 7112 applies to all elements of claim remanded by the court or board

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that vbia 302 applies to all elements of claim remanded by court or board
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 Parent owns, or is validly licensed or otherwise has the right to use, all Intellectual Property Rights which are material to the conduct of the business of the Parent taken as a whole. The Parent Disclosure Schedule sets forth a description of all Intellectual Property Rights which are material to the conduct of the business of the Parent taken as a whole. No claims are pending or, to the knowledge of the Parent, threatened that the Parent is infringing or otherwise adversely affecting the rights of any person with regard to any Intellectual Property Right. To the knowledge of the Parent, no person is infringing the rights of the Parent with respect to any Intellectual Property Right.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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 agree that irreparable damage, for which monetary damages would not be an adequate remedy, would occur in the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement were not performed in accordance with their specific terms or were otherwise breached by the Parties. Prior to the termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section 8.1 , it is accordingly agreed that the Parties shall be entitled to an injunction or injunctions, or any other appropriate form of specific performance or equitable relief, to prevent breaches of this Agreement and to enforce specifically the terms and provisions hereof in any court of competent jurisdiction, in each case in accordance with this Section 9.11 , this being in addition to any other remedy to which they are entitled under the terms of this Agreement at law or in equity. Each Party accordingly agrees not to raise any objections to the availability of the equitable remedy of specific performance to prevent or restrain breaches or threatened breaches of, or to enforce compliance with, the covenants and obligations of such Party under this Agreement all in accordance with the terms of this Section 9.11 . Each Party further agrees that no other Party or any other Person shall be required to obtain, furnish or post any bond or similar instrument in connection with or as a condition to obtaining any remedy referred to in this Section 9.11 , and each Party irrevocably waives any right it may have to require the obtaining, furnishing or posting of any such bond or similar instrument. If prior to the End Date, any Party hereto brings an action to enforce specifically the performance of the terms and provisions hereof by any other Party, the End Date shall automatically be extended by such other time period established by the court presiding over such action.

assistant: Specific Performance
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: By the issuance of a Letter of Credit (or an amendment to a Letter of Credit increasing the amount thereof) and without any further action on the part of the applicable Issuing Bank or the Lenders, subject to Section 2.19(e), such Issuing Bank hereby grants to each Lender, and each Lender hereby acquires from such Issuing Bank, a participation in such Letter of Credit equal to such Lender’s Pro Rata Share of the aggregate amount available to be drawn under such Letter of Credit. The Borrower hereby agrees to each such participation. In consideration and in furtherance of the foregoing, each Lender hereby absolutely and unconditionally agrees to pay to the Agent, for the account of such Issuing Bank, such Lender’s Pro Rata Share of each drawing made under a Letter of Credit funded by such Issuing Bank and not reimbursed by the Borrower on the date made, or of any reimbursement payment required to be refunded to the Borrower for any reason. To the extent of its Revolving Credit Commitment, each Lender acknowledges and agrees that its obligation to acquire participations pursuant to this paragraph in respect of Letters of Credit is absolute and unconditional and shall not be affected by any circumstance whatsoever, including any amendment, renewal or extension of any Letter of Credit or the occurrence and continuance of a Default or reduction or termination of the aggregate Revolving Credit Commitments, and that each such payment shall be made without any offset, abatement, withholding or reduction whatsoever.

assistant: Participations
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 U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 386 U.S. 212 87 S.Ct. 977 17 L.Ed.2d 870 Janet PHILLIPS and William Ross Phillipsv.CALIFORNIA. No. 684, Misc. Supreme Court of the United States February 27, 1967 Rehearing Denied April 10, 1967. See 386 U.S. 1000, 87 S.Ct. 1311. Janet Phillips and William Ross Phillips, pro se. Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen. of California, William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and S. Clark Moore, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Chapman v. State of California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824. 2 Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice CLARK are of the opinion that the judgment should be vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in light of Chapman v. State of California, supra. 3 Mr. Justice HARLAN would affirm the judgment below for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in Chapman v. State of California, 386 U.S., at 45, 87 S.Ct., at 839.

assistant: 1
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 the officers or directors of the Company or any Subsidiary and, to the Knowledge of the Company, none of the employees of the Company or any Subsidiary is presently a party to any transaction with the Company or any Subsidiary (other than for services as employees, officers and directors), including any contract, agreement or other arrangement providing for the furnishing of services to or by, providing for rental of real or personal property to or from, providing for the borrowing of money from or lending of money to or otherwise requiring payments to or from any officer, director or such employee or, to the Knowledge of the Company, any entity in which any officer, director, or any such employee has a substantial interest or is an officer, director, trustee, stockholder, member or partner, in each case in excess of $120,000 other than for (i) payment of salary or consulting fees for services rendered, (ii) reimbursement for expenses incurred on behalf of the Company and (iii) other employee benefits, including stock option agreements under any stock option plan of the Company.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: acted jointly with the intent to defraud either the banking examiners or the FDIC which, as discussed below, is not the case here. Yarbrow v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. (In re Yarbrow), 150 B.R. 233, 239 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1993). Additionally, the better-line of reasoning on this issue does not relieve the Board from proving reliance. See Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Smith (In re Smith), 133 B.R. 800, 810 (N.D. Tex. 1991) (declining to apply the doctrine to excuse the FDIC as receiver from proving reliance under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A)); Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Rotman (In re Rotman), 133 B.R. 843 (S.D. Tex. 1991) (concluding that issues of dischargeability under § 523(a)(2)(B) are beyond the scope of the doctrine); see also Resolution Trust Corp. v. Hilton, 182 B.R. 483 (S.D. Miss. 1995) (<HOLDING>). The Board must, therefore, prove that St. Options: A. holding debtor could cure after the debtor had previously made payments to the bank B. holding that since motor vehicle contract between the debtor and fifth third bank was a lease and not a security agreement the debtor was required to treat fifth third banks claim in his chapter 13 plan as a lease and not as a secured debt which meant that the debtor could not obligate fifth third bank to finance the purchase of his vehicle C. holding that a copy of an agreement executed by an insolvent bank found in the draft documents of the banks attorney did not satisfy section 1823es requirements because it was not an official record of the failed bank D. holding debtor could include property because the bank accepted payments directly from the debtor and had previously allowed the debtor to cure default E. holding that doench duhme cannot be used to satisfy the 523a2b reliance requirement absent evidence of collusion or an agreement between the debtor and the bank

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that doench duhme cannot be used to satisfy the 523a2b reliance requirement absent evidence of collusion or an agreement between the debtor and the bank
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, up to an aggregate of $1,431,000 of Shares and Warrants. Each Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser shall be made available for “Delivery Versus Payment” settlement with the Company or its designee. The Company shall deliver to each Purchaser its respective Shares and a Warrant as determined pursuant to Section 2.2(a), and the Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of EGS or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree. Unless otherwise directed by the Placement Agent, settlement of the Shares shall occur via “Delivery Versus Payment” (“ DVP ”) (i.e., on the Closing Date, the Company shall issue the Shares registered in the Purchasers’ names and addresses and released by the Transfer Agent directly to the account(s) at the Placement Agent identified by each Purchaser; upon receipt of such Shares, the Placement Agent shall promptly electronically deliver such Shares to the applicable Purchaser, and payment therefor shall be made by the Placement Agent (or its clearing firm) by wire transfer to the Company).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, the Note and the other Loan Documents contain the entire agreement between Pledgor and Pledgee with respect to the specific subject matter hereof and thereof and supersede any prior understandings and agreements between Pledgor and Pledgee with respect to such specific subject matter.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: blizzard entertainment will provide you with 24 hours advance notice of any temporary suspension of world of warcraft on world of warcraft 's log-in screen , except in case of urgency .

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: If a Participant who holds Restricted Shares or Restricted Share Units fails to satisfy the restrictions, terms or conditions applicable to the Award, except as otherwise determined by the Committee, the Participant shall forfeit the Restricted Shares or Restricted Share Units. The Committee may at any time waive such restrictions or accelerate the date or dates on which the restrictions will lapse; however, to the extent the Restricted Shares or Restricted Share Units are intended to qualify for the Performance-Based Exception, the provisions of Section 6(d)(iv) will apply.

assistant: Forfeitures
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 3, a Participant will be 100% vested if he remains employed with the Company or any Affiliate or Subsidiary on February 29, 2020 (the “Vesting Date”). For purposes of the Agreement, the “Vesting Period” is the period from the first day of the calendar month that includes the Date of Grant through the Vesting Date. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Participant who meets the criteria to terminate employment due to Retirement (as provided in Section 3(a)) shall be 100% vested as of the date the Participant meets such criteria (irrespective of whether the Participant terminates employment due to Retirement).

assistant: Vesting
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: 524 (5th Cir.1974). We take judicial notice of the federal rule. Tex.R.Crim.Evid. 202. In Davis, a Texas state prisoner, serving a life sentence for the primary offense because of (1) a prior federal conviction and (2) a prior state conviction, sought federal habeas corpus relief. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of relief at least as to the use by the State of the prior federal conviction for enhancement purposes, noting the difference between the Texas and federal rules. Davis, 502 F.2d at 524. The applicant, as does the appellant here, had contended that the prior federal conviction was not available for enhancement purposes because it was a federal probated sentence. This claim was rejected. Id.; Cf. United States v. Locke, 542 F.2d 800, 801 (9th Cir.1976) (<HOLDING>). In Ex parte Blume, 618 S.W.2d 373, 376 Options: A. holding the defendant was a convicted felon within the purview of the federal statute prohibiting the receiving and possession of firearms by a convicted felon where the defendants prior conviction was based on an idaho state probated sentence B. holding that dual convictions of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of ammunition by a convicted felon violated double jeopardy C. holding that the trial court was not entitled to impose a threeyear mandatory minimum sentence on a defendant convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon where the jury verdict did not specifically find actual possession D. holding that defendant was not entitled to partially suspended sentence as a previously convicted felon E. holding that a convicted felon is not entitled to return of firearms or to have firearms held in trust by third party

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the defendant was a convicted felon within the purview of the federal statute prohibiting the receiving and possession of firearms by a convicted felon where the defendants prior conviction was based on an idaho state probated sentence
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: For the avoidance of doubt, any Lien created by any Loan Document in respect of any Purchased Asset (as defined in the Project Spartan Purchase Agreement) shall be automatically released upon the consummation of the Project Spartan Disposition and the Administrative Agent shall promptly (and the Lenders hereby authorize the Administrative Agent to) take such action and execute any such documents as may be reasonably requested by the Company (all at the Company's expense) to release any Lien created by any Loan Document in respect of any such Purchased Asset.

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: charge by one vendor or billed separately by one or more vendors. Id. (emphasis added). There is no comparable Policy Statement regarding natural gas billing. Spectrum fails to articulate why it should not be required to pay tax on electricity delivery when the Commonwealth’s Department of Revenue has specifically called for electricity delivery charges to be subject to sales tax in the clear language of the Policy Statement. Although the disparate treatment of electricity and natural gas may seem illogical to Spectrum, it apparently is the scheme intended by the legislature. It is not within this Court’s power to alter this scheme and the impact of any inconsistency is more properly addressed directly to the legislature. See Martin v. Soblotney, 502 Pa. 418, 466 A.2d 1022, 1025 (1983) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Rieck Inv. Corp., 419 Pa. 52, Options: A. holding interpretation may not be inconsistent with regulation B. holding that the colorado constitution reserves no authority in the state legislature to change add to or diminish the qualifications for constitutionally created offices C. holding that a court may not legislate or by interpretation add to legislation matters which the legislature saw fit not to include D. holding that the court assumes the legislature acquiesced in our interpretation of the language because the legislature had not amended the language E. recognizing that a court may rely on matters of which a court may take judicial notice

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a court may not legislate or by interpretation add to legislation matters which the legislature saw fit not to include
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: we will reimburse all other aaa filing , administration and arbitrator fees paid by you , unless the arbitrator determines that the arbitration was frivolous or brought for an improper purpose , in which case the payment of all such fees shall be governed by the aaa rules .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a startling event.” [¶ 40.] The remaining statements were admitted under SDCL 19-16-7, which provides: A statement of the declarant’s then existing state of. mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition, such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, and bodily health, is not excluded by § 19-16-4, even though the declarant is available as a witness, but a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed is excluded unless it relates to the execution, revocation, identification, or terms of declar-ant’s will. The court explained that the evidence, “which describes the emotional, physical, and verbal abusive acts by the Defendant towards the victim and his controlling nature is relevant to show ... the state of mind of both the vict 728, 730 (2001) (<HOLDING>); State v. Murillo, 349 N.C. 573, 509 S.E.2d Options: A. holding victims statements to coworkers admissible to rebut defendants claim that they had a good marriage B. recognizing exception under state constitution C. holding that victims statements were hearsay admissible under the state of mind exception to the hearsay rule and constitutionally permissible under ohio v roberts citations omitted D. holding victims statements admissible under state of mind exception to rebut defendants claim of accident andor suicide E. holding victims statements were admissible under state of niind exception to show gun was not accidentally fired

assistant: The best answer is E. holding victims statements were admissible under state of niind exception to show gun was not accidentally fired
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: Such party is not required to obtain any consent, authorization or order of, or make any filing or registration with, any court, governmental agency or any regulatory or self-regulatory agency or any other Person in order for it to execute, deliver or perform any of its obligations under or contemplated by this Agreement (other than (i) any consent, authorization or order that has been duly obtained as of the date hereof and (ii) any filing or registration that has been made as of the date hereof).

assistant: Consents
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: were under color of state law. The defendants take the position that they were acting as private citizens, rather than Illinois police officers, when they arrested Rambo in Indiana. Since a constitutional violation requires state action, the defendants maintain that they could not have violated a clearly established constitutional right. As Johnson clarified, Mitchell permits interlocutory appeals only where the defendant is a public official asserting a defense of qualified immunity. Johnson, — U.S. at -, 115 S.Ct. at 2155; Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 527-28, 105 S.Ct. at 2816. Defendants cannot assert a defense of qualified immunity, thereby invoking our jurisdiction under Mitchell, by claiming that they acted as private citizens. See Nelson v. Streeter, 16 F.3d 145, 149 (7th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). The defendants’ contention that they acted as Options: A. holding that appellate court need not analyze and address in writing each and every argument issue or claim raised and properly before us on appeal B. holding same as to the filing of a notice of an interlocutory appeal C. holding that a letter utilized by the appellant in his argument would not be considered on appeal because it was not properly before the trial court D. holding argument not asserted before district court is waived on appeal E. holding that the defendants argument that they acted as private citizens was not properly before us on interlocutory appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the defendants argument that they acted as private citizens was not properly before us on interlocutory appeal
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: were responsive to comments made at the review and comment hearing. In the absence of the designated representatives, the Board was left to rely on the statements of an objector whose counsel had listened to the review and comment hearing, and the directly contradictory comments of one Title Board member who apparently had spoken with the staff person conducting that review and comment hearing. 1 27 We recognize that we have previously held that the failure of proponents to comply with the requirement to designate two representatives does not affect the Board's authority to act, because it is simply "a procedural requirement promoting efficient notification." In re Proposed Initiated Constitutional Amendment Concerning Ltd. Gaming in City of Antonito, 873 P.2d 733, 739 (Colo.1994) (<HOLDING>); In re Initiative Concerning "Taxation III", Options: A. holding that listing of five proponents where the statute required that the proponents designate two persons to whom all notices or information concerning the petition would be mailed did not affect the boards authority to act B. holding that title insurer not in business of supplying information in issuing either title commitment or policy of title insurance for purposes of exception to moorman prohi bition against recovery of economic losses in tort further holding that contract defines title insurers liability C. holding that a title holder has the superior right to possession over one who holds no title D. holding that proponents designation of only one person to whom all notices or information would be mailed instead of two did not deprive title board of authority to fix the title E. recognizing that most other courts apply title vii principles to title ix cases but refusing to apply title viis knew or should have known standard to a title ix claim

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that proponents designation of only one person to whom all notices or information would be mailed instead of two did not deprive title board of authority to fix the title
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: and concluding that “where a mining patent has issued, the patent-holder is granted both the surface and mineral rights ...”). Accordingly, the Hansards own both the surface and the subsurface rights of their mining claims (at least where those claims overlap with the land granted to Arvilla McLean ), and the conflicting portions of the McLeans’ patent are void. Mantle v. Noyes, 5 Mont. 274, 291, 5 P. 856, 862 (1885) (“If the government issues a patent for lands that have been previously sold or reserved from sale, the patent is so far void.”); Noyes v. Mantle, 127 U.S. 348, 354, 8 S. Ct. 1132, 1135 (1888) (“A patent of the government cannot, any more than a deed of an individual, transfer what the grantor does not possess.”); Brown v. Buddy, 9 P.2d 326, 332 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1932) (<HOLDING>); cf. Silver Bow Mining & Milling, 5 Mont. at Options: A. holding a nonparty to a patent infringement suit who funded an unsuccessful challenge to a patent could not file a subsequent lawsuit again challenging the patent B. recognizing general proposition that if land is artificially submerged for the statutory period necessary to change ownership of the land title to the submerged land is passed to the state in trust for the public C. holding that recitals in land patent were affirmative evidence that patentee paid requisite price for land D. holding that a cause of action for damages to property resulting from a permanent nuisance accrues to the owner of the land at the time the injury begins to affect the land and mere transfer of the land by deed does not transfer the claim for damages E. holding that the srha homesteaders patent could not convey title to the portion of the land that overlapped an earlier located mining claim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the srha homesteaders patent could not convey title to the portion of the land that overlapped an earlier located mining claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Tenant represents and warrants that it has not directly or indirectly dealt, with respect to the leasing of office space in the Building, with any broker or had its attention called to the Premises or other space to let in the Building, etc. by anyone other than the broker, person or firm, if any, designated in Exhibit 1. Tenant agrees to defend, exonerate and save harmless and indemnify Landlord and anyone claiming by, through or under Landlord against any claims for a commission arising out of the execution and delivery of this Lease or out of negotiations between Landlord and Tenant with respect to the leasing of other space in the Building, provided that Landlord shall be solely responsible for the payment of brokerage commissions to the broker, person or firm, if any, designated as Landlord’s Broker in Exhibit 1. Landlord shall pay a brokerage commission to Tenant’s Broker and Landlord’s Broker, pursuant to separate agreements between Landlord and Landlord’s Broker and Landlord and Tenant’s Broker.

assistant: Brokers
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: Borrowers’ acknowledge that Agent shall have earned as of the Sixth Amendment Date a non-refundable closing fee in the amount of $100,000 (the “ Sixth Amendment Fee ”), which fee shall be payable on May 1, 2017; provided however, Agent hereby acknowledges and agrees that in the event that the Credit Agreement is terminated, and the Obligations are repaid in full, on or before May 1, 2017, Agent hereby agrees that the Sixth Amendment Fee shall be waived.

assistant: Fees
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: FLIC may terminate Executive’s employment upon his becoming “Totally Disabled,” in which event Executive shall be entitled to receive the compensation and vested benefits due Executive as of the date of Executive’s termination, and Executive shall have no right to receive any other compensation or benefits under this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Executive shall be “ Totally Disabled ” if Executive is physically or mentally incapacitated so as to render Executive incapable of performing the essential functions of his position under this Agreement even with reasonable accommodation. Executive’s receipt of disability benefits under the Bank ’s long-term disability plan, if any, or receipt of Social Security disability benefits shall be deemed conclusive evidence of Total Disability for purpose of this Agreement; provided, however, that in the absence of Executive’s receipt of such long-term disability benefits or Social Security benefits, the Board may, in its reasonable discretion but based upon appropriate medical evidence, determine that Executive is Totally Disabled.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: demonstrated historical facts capable of ready verification or impeachment.” United States v. Ford, 184 F.3d 566, 577 (6th Cir.1999) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Supreme Court and our circuit have applied the doctrine in several cases where, like this one, a potentially illegal search was followed by a search conducted in accordance with a valid search warrant premised on evidence of probable cause developed independently of the initial search. See, e.g., Murray, 487 U.S. at 541-43, 108 S.Ct. 2529 (remanding case for consideration of the inevitable-discovery doctrine where police conducted an initial, illegal search and later conducted a second, legal search in which they seized marijuana); Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 813-16, 104 S.Ct. 3380, 82 L.Ed.2d 599 (1984) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Keszthelyi, 308 F.3d 557, Options: A. holding that drugs seized from defendants person and automobile trunk based on statements taken without miranda warnings would inevitably have been discovered in a search incident to arrest and a postimpoundment inventory search B. holding that officers executing a search warrant for contraband have the authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted C. holding that search of backpack constituted a search of defendants person and was not authorized by search warrant for premises D. holding that a warrant to search for contraband founded on probable cause implicitly carries with it the limited authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted E. holding that contraband would have been inevitably discovered where agents conducted a warrantless search while obtaining a search warrant and later conducted a second legal search in which agents discovered contraband

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that contraband would have been inevitably discovered where agents conducted a warrantless search while obtaining a search warrant and later conducted a second legal search in which agents discovered contraband
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: although enett international usa , llc ( for credit or debit cards issued in the united states excluding american express ) or enett international ( uk ) limited ( for all other cards and all american express cards ) take ultimate responsibility for the credit card or debit card payment , booking.com will take care of customer support in case of questions related to a reservation paid by credit card or debit card .

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: Management of FHLBank risks as determined by the weighted average rating by the board of directors in an annual evaluation of the Risk Appetite metrics in this area using a 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest) point scale. General risk categories are market, credit and liquidity risks.

assistant: Definitions
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: a defendant is under no obligation to put forward evidence on his or her own behalf. As Hall correctly points out, when the prosecution raises the spectre of a flawed alibi and the defendant chooses not to offer any alibi evidence, it may well leave the jury with an unfavorable impression of the defendant. In any event, whether it was improper for the prosecutor to comment on potential alibi witnesses under the facts of this case is an issue we need not reach in order to dispense with Hall’s appeal because improper prosecutorial remarks standing alone cannot justify a new trial unless they “undermined the fairness of the trial and contributed to a miscarriage of justice.” United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1, 16 n. 14, 105 S.Ct. 1038, 84 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985); see also Mealy, 851 F.2d at 903 (<HOLDING>) (citations and internal quotations omitted). Options: A. holding that alleged prosecutorial misconduct must be evaluated in light of the prosecutors argument and the entire record and if a review of the record convinces the court that the jury would have convicted defendant even if it were not exposed to the alleged improper prosecutorial comments then no actual prejudice occurred B. recognizing that even if the prosecutor engaged in improper conduct we must reexamine the improper remark in light of the entire record to determine whether the remark deprived the defendant of a fair trial C. holding that we may reverse a conviction under plain error only if the prosecutors improper conduct so affected the jurys ability to consider the totality of the evidence fairly that it tainted the verdict and deprived the defendant of a fair trial D. holding that a defendant was estopped from asserting improper service where the defendants conduct caused the allegedly improper service E. recognizing that we are obligated to reverse where the improper exclusion of evidence places the underlying fairness of the entire trial in doubt or where the exclusion affects the substantial rights of the defendant

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that even if the prosecutor engaged in improper conduct we must reexamine the improper remark in light of the entire record to determine whether the remark deprived the defendant of a fair trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Guarantor hereby guarantees that payments under this Article II will be paid to the Administrative Agent, for the ratable benefit of the Guaranteed Creditors, without set-off, deduction or counterclaim in dollars, in immediately available funds, at the offices of the Administrative Agent specified in Section 12.01 of the Credit Agreement. If acceleration of the time for payment of any Guarantor Obligation is stayed by reason of the insolvency or receivership of any Guarantor or otherwise, all Guarantor Obligations otherwise subject to acceleration under the terms of any Loan Document shall nonetheless be payable by the Guarantors hereunder.

assistant: Payments
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 innocence disappears."). 133 Thus, as a jury evaluates the evidence against a defendant, it must continue to presume him or her innocent until it concludes that the evidence proves the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See Delo v. Lashley, 507 U.S. 272, 278, 113 S.Ct. 1222, 122 L.Ed.2d 620 (1993) ("The presumption [of innocence] operates at the guilt phase of a trial to remind the jury that the State has the burden of establishing every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt."). 34 The prosecutor's comment here, that the evidence against defendant itself was sufficient to weaken or eliminate the presumption of innocence, wrongly suggested that the jury need not presume defendant innocent as it deliberated upon that evidence. See McBride, 228 P.3d at 223-24 (<HOLDING>); Mahorney v. Wallman, 917 F.2d 469, 471 (10th Options: A. holding that the prosecutors comment that the defendant sits here in front of the jury a guilty man was erroneous and should not be repeated in future cases B. holding that prosecutors statement that the guilty man flees but the righteous man stands bold as a lion was not an improper comment on defendants failure to come forward because statements about a defendants flight are proper as circumstantial evidence of guilt C. recognizing the stated rule but finding that the prosecutors comment did not imply to the jury that he had personal knowledge of facts not presented to them indicating the defendants guilt D. holding that the prosecutors reference to the nonexistence of mitigating evidence was not a comment on the defendants failure to testify E. holding that there was no abuse of discretion in denying mistrial based on a comment that the defendant was in prison where the comment provided the jury with little detail

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the prosecutors comment that the defendant sits here in front of the jury a guilty man was erroneous and should not be repeated in future cases