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: their work. Although the parties in Lansing focused their arguments on whether the airline was an ISP, the court observed that an ISP was neither mentioned nor defined by the CDA. Instead, the proper focus was on whether the airline was a provider of an interactive computer service. The court answered this question in the affirmative: We find that, under the plain language of the statute and its broad definition of an ICS [interactive computer service], an employer like defendant qualifies as a provider or user of an ICS because defendant uses an information system or service that multiple users, like defendant’s employees, use to access the Internet. Lansing, 366 Ill.Dec. 537, 980 N.E.2d at 637. Cf. Kathleen R. v. City of Livermore, 87 Cal.App.4th 684, 104 Cal.Rptr.2d 772, 777 (2001) (<HOLDING>). Here, the designated evidence clearly Options: A. holding that public library was immune from suit under section 230 because it provided an interactive computer service by enabling multiple users to access the internet through its public computers B. holding that public officials are immune from suit for discretionary functions like training under louisiana law C. holding that the total denial of all access to the law library for seven months violated the plaintiffs constitutional right of access to the courts D. holding state immune from suit brought by its own citizens E. holding that a schools internal mail system was not a public forum because users needed a principals permission for access

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that public library was immune from suit under section 230 because it provided an interactive computer service by enabling multiple users to access the internet through its public computers
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: Borrower hereby indemnifies and holds Lender, its directors, officers, agents, employees and attorneys harmless from and against any liability, loss, expenses, damage of any nature, and claims, including, without limitation, any and all present or future environmental liability or costs related to the Premises, brokers’ claims, arising in connection with the Loan, except for claims arising from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of Lender, its directors, officers, agents, employees or attorneys.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by a transfer to another position, as opposed to modification of her existing job duties. 30 . It is not obvious to us that a "modification of an existing position" theory would result in CBA interpretation, and Boeing has not cited to us any provision of the CBA that would need to be interpreted if Humble pursues that theory. See Miller v. AT & T Network Sys., 850 F.2d 543, 549 (9th Cir.1988) (explaining that under Oregon law, expert opinions and not CBA provisions on job assignments govern whether a disabled employee can satisfactorily perform a job). In the absence of briefing and discussion, we need not resolve whether Washington law on this point is the same as Oregon's. 31 . 66 F.3d at 1526-27. 32 . Id. at 1527. 33 . Id.; see also Miller, 850 F.2d at 548-49 (9th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). 34 . Cramer, 255 F.3d at 690-91 (citing Options: A. holding that erisa preemption is an affirmative defense where erisas preemptive effect would result only in a change of the applicable law and would not subject the claim to exclusive federal jurisdiction B. holding that the need to reference the cbas local assignment and transfer provisions would be minimal under oregon disability discrimination law and did not result in preemption of that claim C. holding plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the validity of an assignment from mers to bac because she was not a party to the assignment and the assignment did not affect her underlying obligation to make timely payments D. holding that west virginia disability discrimination law is not mechanically tied to federal disability discrimination jurisprudence E. holding disability discrimination claim barred

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the need to reference the cbas local assignment and transfer provisions would be minimal under oregon disability discrimination law and did not result in preemption of that 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: Executive represents and warrants that Executive is not a party to any other employment, non-competition, or other agreement or restriction which could interfere with the Executive’s employment with Heska or Executive’s or Heska’s rights and obligations hereunder and that Executive’s acceptance of employment with Heska and the performance of Executive’s duties hereunder will not breach the provisions of any contract, agreement, or understanding to which the Executive is party or any duty owed by the Executive to any other person.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Harries v. Dutton, 594 F.Supp. 949, 961 (M.D.Tenn.1984)C'In the judgment of this Court, the conditions of confinement inflicted on Mr. Harries are so adverse that they have caused him to waive his post-conviction remedies involuntarily."). Mr. Corner describes the conditions of his confinement in nothing short of Orwellian terms~ He tells us that he is in "sensory deprivation," has no access to legal materials, is permitted nothing in his cell, and must walk continuously for fear of becoming a “veggie.” Mr. Comer’s choice between execution at the State’s hands and remaining in the particular conditions of his confinement may be the type of “Hobson’s choice” that renders his supposed decision to withdraw his appeal involuntary. Cf. Gilbert v. Lockhart, 930 F.2d 1356, 1360 (8th Cir.l991)(<HOLDING>). The record is incomplete as it bears on Mr. Options: A. holding that defendant was denied counsel even though his lawyer asked another defendants lawyer to take notes or whatever in the defendants lawyers temporary absence B. holding that even where a client was more sophisticated in business matters than the lawyer himself the lawyer should have assumed the client was relying on the lawyer for the legal aspects of the loan from the client to the lawyer to the same extent that the client would rely on the lawyer for advice were the client making the loan to a third person C. holding waiver of right to counsel at sentencing not voluntary when trial court tried to dissuade discharge of counsel defendant believed incompetent for the waiver to be voluntary the trial court must inquire into the reasons for the defendants dissatisfaction with his counsel to ensure that the defendant is not exercising a choice between incompetent or unprepared counsel and appearing pro se D. holding that a request for a lawyer requires the police to cease questioning until the accused consults with his or her lawyer unless the defendant initiates further conversation E. recognizing that providing defendant with hobsons choice between incompetent lawyer or no lawyer violates right to counsel

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that providing defendant with hobsons choice between incompetent lawyer or no lawyer violates right to counsel
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: conclusion that plain (2000); Negrón, 113 F.3d at 1571 (11th Cir.) (plaintiffs failed to establish first Gingles precondition when Hispanics did not “constitute a majority of potential voters”) ; Sanchez v. Colorado, 97 F.3d 1303, 1314 (10th Cir. 1996) (noting that “satisfaction of the first precondition requires plaintiffs show a majority-Hispanic district is feasible”), cert, denied sub nom. Colorado v. Sanchez, 520 U.S. 1229, 137 L. Ed. 2d 1028 (1997); McNeil v. Springfield Park Dist., 851 F.2d 937, 945 (7th Cir. 1988) (first Gingles precondition requires a minority group to have a “voting age majority” of population), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1031, 104 L. Ed. 2d 204 (1989). The issue is unresolved in two circuits. Metts v. Murphy, 363 F.3d 8, 11 (1st Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis changed); Romero, 883 F.2d at 1424 Options: A. holding that the filing of a motion for a new trial is a critical stage of the prosecution and that an indigent defendant is constitutionally entitled to the assistance of counsel at that stage B. holding we are thus unwilling at the complaint stage to foreclose the possibility that a section 2 claim can ever be made out with a minority population of 21 percent C. holding that objection made at directed verdict stage and in motion for new trial were timely D. holding that a valid waiver of counsel at an early stage of the proceeding does not continue in effect through a subsequent stage E. holding that at the summary judgment stage there must be sufficient evidence on which the jury could find for the plaintiff

assistant: The best answer is B. holding we are thus unwilling at the complaint stage to foreclose the possibility that a section 2 claim can ever be made out with a minority population of 21 percent
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: employment, and independent living.” 20 U.S.C. § 1400(d)(1)(A) (emphasis added). A request for a service dog to be permitted to escort a disabled student at school as an “independent life tool” is hence not entirely beyond the bounds of the IDEA’S educational scheme. Finally, we reject appellants’ argument that their § 1983 discrimination claim is not subject to the exhaustion rule. The language of Section 1415(Z) of the IDEA is sufficiently broad and encompasses complaints asserted under any federal statute, as long as they seek relief available under the IDEA. In Hope, we affirmed the dismissal of all of plaintiffs’ claims, including their § 1983 cause of action, for want of subject matter jurisdiction due to non-exhaustion. Hope, 69 F.3d at 688; see also Hope, 872 F.Supp. at 19-20 (<HOLDING>). In Mrs. W. v. Tirozzi, 832 F.2d 748 (2d Options: A. holding that collateral estoppel applies to 1983 claims B. holding that excessive force claims are not subject to exhaustion requirement C. recognizing that issue exhaustion requirement and requirement exhaustion of remedies are different D. holding that exhaustion requirement applies to excessive force claims E. holding that the ideas exhaustion requirement applies to claims asserted under 1983

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the ideas exhaustion requirement applies to claims asserted under 1983
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All RSUs (including accumulated Dividend Equivalents) that have not become Released Units shall terminate and be forfeited for no consideration upon a termination of the Participant’s service with the Company and its Affiliates prior to the applicable Vesting Date.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: prior convictions could not be used to support a § 922(g)(1) charge because his civil rights had been automatically restored under Colorado law by the time of his arrest, and because state law permitted him to possess handguns. The district court disagreed with Hall on his claim that his civil rights had been restored. R. Vol. VII at 29-30. Noting a split in the circuits, the district court sided with the First Circuit in holding that a convicted felon’s civil rights can be “restored” under § 921(a)(20) only through an affirmative act by the state, specific to the felon, and not by mere operation of law. See United States v. Ramos, 961 F.2d 1003, 1008 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 364, 121 L.Ed.2d 277 (1992). But see United States v. Thomas, 991 F.2d 206, 212 (6th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 607, 126 Options: A. holding that a person has standing to bring suit under the civil rights act if she or he can show that she or he was punished for trying to vindicate the rights of minorities B. holding that jones act claims can be brought either in admiralty or at law C. holding that state can restore civil rights either affirmatively or automatically individually or generally D. holding that the private right of action available to individual indigents can be used either affirmatively or defensively E. holding that the state must affirmatively act to curtail the individuals freedom such that he or she can no longer care for him or herself

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that state can restore civil rights either affirmatively or automatically individually or generally
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 consideration for the performance of the Services, the Company shall pay Ariel $17,250 within 30 days of the date hereof and an additional $17,250 on or before May 1, 2019.

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: The number of Restricted Stock Units (including electively deferred 409A RSUs) credited to the Grantee shall be subject to adjustment by the Company, in accordance with Section 13 of the Plan, in order to preserve without enlarging the Grantee’s rights with respect to such Restricted Stock Units. Any such adjustment shall be made taking into account any crediting of cash dividend equivalents to the Grantee under Section 7(a) in connection with such transaction or event. In the case of an extraordinary cash dividend, the Committee may determine to adjust Grantee’s Restricted Stock Units under this Section 7(b) in lieu of crediting cash dividend equivalents under Section 7(a). Restricted Stock Units credited to the Grantee as a result of an adjustment shall be subject to the same forfeiture and settlement terms as applied to the related Restricted Stock Units prior to the adjustment.

assistant: Adjustments
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: 6”). Thus, to successfully challenge an agency’s procurement decision, a plaintiff must show that the agency’s decision was “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 6 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A); see also Bannum, Inc., 404 F.3d at 1351. This “highly deferential” standard of review “requires a reviewing court to sustain an agency action evincing rational reasoning and consideration of relevant factors.” Advanced Data Concepts, Inc. v. United States, 216 F.3d 1054, 1058 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (citing Bowman Transp., Inc. v. Ark.-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 419 U.S. 281, 285, 95 S.Ct. 438, 42 L.Ed.2d 447 (1974)). Thus, the Court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the agency. See Honeywell, Inc. v. United States, 870 F.2d 644, 648 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (<HOLDING>), Instead, the Couit’s function is limited to Options: A. holding that a court must defer to an agencys reasonable interpretation of a statute even if the court might have preferred another B. holding that board of contract appeals should defer to agencys best value decision as long as it is grounded in reason even if the board itself might have chosen a different bidder C. holding that appellate court may affirm ruling where trial court reached right result for wrong reason as long as alternate basis for affirmance was presented to trial court and no further factual findings are necessary D. holding that the district court must make findings on the record as to the basis for its conclusion about the amount of actual loss E. holding that as long as there is a reasonable basis for the agencys action the court should stay its hand even though it might as an original proposition have reached a different conclusion quoting m steinthal co v seamans 455 f2d 1289 1301 dc cir 1971

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that as long as there is a reasonable basis for the agencys action the court should stay its hand even though it might as an original proposition have reached a different conclusion quoting m steinthal co v seamans 455 f2d 1289 1301 dc cir 1971
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: duration of licenses : the above licenses will continue unless and until you remove your videos from the vimeo service , in which case the licenses will terminate within a commercially reasonable period of time .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that [section 301] creates federal jurisdiction only over parties to the contract being sued upon.” Id. at 583. Plaintiff also cites Service, Hospital, Nursing Home, and Public Employees Union v. Commercial Property Services, Inc., 755 F.2d 499, 506 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 850, 106 S.Ct. 147, 88 L.Ed.2d 122 (1985), in which the Sixth Circuit held that “a district court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over a non-signatory to a collective bargaining agreement, where no rights or duties are stated in the terms and conditions of the agreement.” 755 F.2d at 506. However, in each of those cases, the plaintiff filed suit directly under § 301, seeking to recover against a non-signatory to the collective bargaining agreement, and the courts w . 1054, 1056-57 (E.D.Mich.1995) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff has cited to no authority to the Options: A. holding that plaintiffs state law claim against a nonsignatory to the cba was preempted by 301 B. holding that plaintiffs negligence claim was preempted by section 301 because employers duty to provide a safe workplace was expressly created by the cba C. holding that plaintiffs had standing to bring section 301 lawsuit to enforce seniority rights under cba D. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law E. holding state law claim preempted by 301 of labor management relations act only if application of state law requires interpretation of collective bargaining agreement

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that plaintiffs state law claim against a nonsignatory to the cba was preempted by 301
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: continuous and systematic WEDGE Group, Inc., 882 F.2d 1087, 1089-90 (6th Cir.1989) (noting that the defendant’s contacts were not sufficient to maintain general jurisdiction since the defendant never directly conducted- business, held title to property, or retained employees in the forum state). In short, the district court erred in concluding that the exercise of general personal jurisdiction was proper. B. Specific Personal Jurisdiction The exercise of specific jurisdiction is proper where the claims in the case arise f , 619 F.2d 676, 678 n. 10 (7th Cir.1980) (noting that courts have declined to find specific jurisdiction when the defendant’s contact with the forum state is limited to an attempt to resolve the parties’ dispute); cf. Neal v. Janssen, 270 F.3d 328, 332 (6th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); American Greetings Corp. v. Cohn, 839 F.2d Options: A. holding that purposeful availment may exist when a defendant makes phone calls and sends facsimiles into the forum state and such communications form the bases for the action of an intentional tort B. holding that making phone calls and sending facsimiles into the forum may be sufficient to confer specific jurisdiction C. recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties D. recognizing a tort for the intentional spoliation of evidence E. holding that phone and facsimile communications to the forum purchase orders and payments sent to the forum a choice of law clause within the contract regarding the forum state and delivery of the product within the forum state were not enough to satisfy minimum contacts

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that purposeful availment may exist when a defendant makes phone calls and sends facsimiles into the forum state and such communications form the bases for the action of an intentional tort
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the matters addressed herein and, upon the Effective Date, it supersedes all other prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, express or implied, with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, including but not limited to the Eastern Virginia Bankshares, Inc. Executive Severance Plan (the “Executive Severance Plan”). Executive expressly waives all rights and entitlements, if any, under the Executive Severance Plan.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (Pa.Super.2007) (citation omitted). See also 1 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 1922(1). ¶29 “The purpose of post[-]judgment interest is to compensate a successful plaintiff for being deprived of compensation for his or her loss during the time between ascertainment of the damage and payment by the defendant.” 47 C.J.S. InteRest & Usury § 110. Giving the judgment debtor the benefit of an erroneous court ruling, during which time the judgment debtor is relieved from paying post-judgment interest, hampers the very purpose behind such a policy. Such a construction needlessly and, we find, unjustly benefits the recipient of an erroneous ruling, while depriving an innocent plaintiff of his or her rightful award. See, e.g., Hewitt v. General Tire & Rubber Co., 5 Utah 2d 379, 302 P.2d 712, 714 (1956) (<HOLDING>); Espinoza v. Rossini, 257 Cal.App.2d 567, 573, Options: A. holding that the trial court erred in denying as untimely a postjudgment motion to intervene filed promptly after judgment and noting that this holding was consistent with several decisions of the federal courts permitting postjudgment intervention for the purpose of appeal B. holding that the insured was entitled to prejudgment and postjudgment interest and attorney fees as found by the jury C. holding that plaintiff was entitled to postjudgment interest from date of original verdict and not just from the date on which the supreme court reversed the trial courts entry of a directed verdict noting we cannot see any good reason why plaintiff should lose his postjudgment interest because defendant was able to convince the trial court to make an erroneous ruling D. holding that interest does not begin to accrue until the date of judgment not the date of verdict E. holding that the trial court erred in granting the school boards posttrial motion for directed verdict because although the school board timely moved for a directed verdict during trial it did not serve its motion for directed verdict until the eleventh day after the verdict

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plaintiff was entitled to postjudgment interest from date of original verdict and not just from the date on which the supreme court reversed the trial courts entry of a directed verdict noting we cannot see any good reason why plaintiff should lose his postjudgment interest because defendant was able to convince the trial court to make an erroneous ruling
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: assert a Brady violation, nor does he assert a failure to comply with disclosure obligations under Fed.R.Crim.P. 16(a)(1)(C). Aplt’s Br. at 20; Aplt's Rep.Br. at 9. 4 . Campbell testified only that he had a B.S. degree in business administration with a specialization in accounting. 5 . Although the court noted that Thomas would be important specifically to respond to testimony from former WMC employees about Kennedy’s deviation from industry norms, rather than to respond to Campbell, Thomas was retained and qualified for his general expertise in the metals industry. 6 . We also note that one of Kennedy’s witnesses, Lloyd Evan Qualls, had a master's degree in accounting and was employed as an auditor, although Kennedy did not call him to testify based on his accounting e 0th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); see also Dunn v. Roberts, 963 F.2d 308, 314 Options: A. holding that the constitutional right to present a defense is not violated by the exclusion of a defendants proffered evidence where he is otherwise given the opportunity to present his defense and crossexamine the key prosecution witnesses B. holding that diminished capacity is a defense only to specific intent crimes C. holding that due process entitled indigent defendant to psychiatrist to present insanity defense and crossexamine state psychiatrists because of the tremendous reliance jurors place on psychiatric testimony where there is often no single accurate psychiatric conclusion on legal insanity D. holding that due process right to present a defense is subject to forfeiture if not properly asserted in the trial court E. holding that due process entitled indigent defendant to psychiatrist to present defense of lack of capacity to form specific intent and to crossexamine governments psychiatrist on this point

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that due process entitled indigent defendant to psychiatrist to present defense of lack of capacity to form specific intent and to crossexamine governments psychiatrist on this point
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 terms, covenants, conditions and agreements contained in this Lease shall, subject to the provisions as to assignment, subletting, and bankruptcy contained herein and any other provisions restricting successors or assigns, apply to and bind the heirs, successors, legal representatives and assigns of the parties hereto.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Lender shall have received a certificate of a Responsible Officer of each Loan Party either (i) attaching copies of all consents, licenses and approvals required in connection with the consummation by such Loan Party of the transactions contemplated by the Loan Documents and the execution, delivery and performance by such Loan Party and the validity against such Loan Party of the Loan Documents to which it is a party, and such consents, licenses and approvals shall be in full force and effect, or (ii) stating that no such consents, licenses or approvals are so required.

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: pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. 2 . The Attorney General of the State of New Jersey intervened because Amana raised a Commerce Clause challenge to the extraterritorial application of the NJFPA. We have since held that the NJFPA does not violate the Commerce Clause. See Instructional Systems, Inc. v. Computer Curriculum Corp. 35 F.3d 813 (3d Cir.1994), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1176, 130 L.Ed.2d 1128 (1995). 3 . Amana does not argue that the termination of its business relationship with Cooper was for "good cause,” a concept that is “limited to failure by the franchisee to substantially comply with those requirements imposed upon him by the franchise.” N.J.S.A. § 56:10-5; see also Westfield Centre Service, Inc. v. Cities Service Oil Co., 86 N.J. 453, 432 A.2d 48, 55 (1981) (<HOLDING>). . 4 . Because Amana’s briefs do not raise or Options: A. holding that franchisors have a duty to act in good faith and with commercial reasonableness when terminating franchise agreements B. holding that franchisor has an interest in the goodwill its franchise has created C. holding that a restrictive covenant will be upheld where a franchisor has a protectable interest in the sale of his franchise D. holding that restrictive covenants in franchise agreements are enforceable to protect the basic product which the franchisor has to sell namely the franchise itself E. holding that a franchisor who in good faith and for bona fide reasons terminates a franchise for any reason other than substantial nonperformance has violated the act

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a franchisor who in good faith and for bona fide reasons terminates a franchise for any reason other than substantial nonperformance has violated the act
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: he believed Reuland lied to him. Hynes’s counsel attempted to broaden this to simply “he had lied period,” but the court responded: “That is not what the evidence is____The whole issue whether he lied to him. This really isn’t ... a Pickering question, it’s a causation question. It is a way of focusing more precisely on your version of what caused the demotion.” Rather than persist in her Pickering argument, Hynes’s counsel replied, “I think that is right. I think what Your Honor has proposed will work.” Generally, we need not consider a claim on appeal where the party advancing it consented not to submit it to the jury below. See Coffey v. Dobbs Int’l Servs., Inc., 170 F.3d 323, 325 n. 2 (2d Cir.1999); Getty Petroleum Corp. v. Bartco Petroleum Corp., 858 F.2d 103, 106-07 (2d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). By failing to make clear to the district Options: A. holding that defensive theory must be submitted to jury when theory is raised by evidence from any source B. holding that theories of liability or defense pleaded and proved but not submitted are abandoned C. holding that a theory of recovery pleaded but not submitted to the jury by explicit agreement need not be considered on appeal D. holding that the jury need not agree on the theory supporting the conviction if there is sufficient evidence to support either theory E. holding that proof of an explicit agreement is not required

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a theory of recovery pleaded but not submitted to the jury by explicit agreement need not be considered on 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All of the Borrower’s obligations under this Article III shall survive termination of the Commitments of all of the Lenders, repayment of all other Obligations hereunder, and resignation of the Administrative Agent.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: intervenor.” Turn Key Gaming, Inc., 164 F.3d at 1081. Because no one disputes the timeliness of NSP’s motion to intervene, we start with the second element, whether NSP has “a recognized interest in the subject matter of the litigation.” See Mausolf v. Babbitt, 85 F.3d 1295, 1300 (8th Cir.1996). NSP’s property interests in Sher-co and its financial stake in the litigation are sufficient to satisfy the recognized interest requirement of Rule 24(a)(2). If the Environmental Groups obtain relief, NSP may be directed to purchase and install emission-control technology at Sherco. A potential judgment therefore implicates two recognized interests of NSP. First, NSP’s property interests in Sherco, see Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 989 F.2d 994, 997-98 (8th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>), and second, NSP’s direct financial interests, Options: A. holding that private landowners had a recognized interest at stake in a landdispute litigation between a band of chippewa indians and the state of minnesota because the litigation would determine the band members rights to hunt fish and gather on the private landowners property B. holding that the right to appeal a trial courts taking decision provided in section 56 adequately protected the landowners rights C. holding that the landownerlicensee relationship ceased when the licensee left the landowners property D. holding in an inverse condemnation case that the abutting landowners right of direct access was subservient to the city of portlands proper exercise of its governmental powers for purposes of public safety and convenience and that the elimination of access from the landowners property to the affected street did not constitute a taking E. holding batson criteria applicable to private litigation in a civil case

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that private landowners had a recognized interest at stake in a landdispute litigation between a band of chippewa indians and the state of minnesota because the litigation would determine the band members rights to hunt fish and gather on the private landowners 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the Court has intimated that tolling based on mental incapacity is allowed. More recently, it decided Young v. United States, 535 U.S. 43, 122 S.Ct. 1036, 152 L.Ed.2d 79 (2002), a bankruptcy case that involved whether 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(8)(A)(i)’s lookback period could be tolled during the pendency of a prior bankruptcy petition. The Court noted that equitable tolling has been widely permitted in the two situations acknowledged in Irwin, supra, and its progeny. Young, 535 U.S. at 50, 122 S.Ct. 1036. Significantly, and of critical importance to the outcome of Young, the Supreme Court said, “We have acknowledged, however, that tolling might be appropriate in other cases, and this, we believe is one.” Id. (citations omitted). Equitable tolling of federal statutes of limi (1st Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). The Second, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth and D.C. Options: A. holding that 26 usc 6511 may not be equitably tolled but that mental incapacity is a grounds for tolling when available B. holding that 42 usc 405g may be equitably tolled based on a plaintiffs mental impairment C. holding that 5 usc 7703b2 can be tolled due to mental incapacity D. holding that mental incapacity is an extraordinary circumstance that may warrant equitable tolling E. holding that 2401b of the ftca can be equitably tolled

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 26 usc 6511 may not be equitably tolled but that mental incapacity is a grounds for tolling when available
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you agree to provide accurate , current and complete information about yourself as prompted by the registration form ( `` registration data '' ) and to use the account management tools provided to keep your registration data accurate , current and complete .

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: 523(a)(7) explicitly requires that the exception to discharge only applies to payments that are not in compensation for actual pecuniary loss, and thus no enforceable contract "penalty” would fall under this provision. 17 . Again, we provide the definition pertinent to the context. 18 . We further note that the "exceptions to discharge are to be strictly construed in favor of the debtor,” In re Fegeley, 118 F.3d 979, 983 (3d Cir.1997). 19 . As discussed above, we find this interpretation to be the only one that comports with the language used in the statute. We note that the Debtor’s own arguments in support of this interpretation rely on pre-Code bankruptcy practice and on the provision’s legislative history, but we do not find either of these sources useful or convinc 912) (Hand, J.) (<HOLDING>) and Matter of Lake, XXII Am. Bankr.R. (N.S.) Options: A. holding that a bail bond surety debt was not an allowable debt in bankruptcy because it is a penalty B. holding that an entity engaged in collection activity on a defaulted debt acquired from another is a debt collector under the fdcpa even though it may actually be owed the debt C. holding that effect of discharge of debt under bankruptcy code is the same as it was under the 1898 bankruptcy act it is not an extinguishment of the debt but only a bar to enforcement of the debt as a personal obligation of the debt or D. holding that reporting of historically accurate debt may violate the fcra when the reporting did not include that the debt was discharged in bankruptcy or that the debt was in dispute E. holding that a debt collectors filing of a lawsuit on a debt that appears to be timebarred is an unfair and unconscionable means of collecting the debt

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a bail bond surety debt was not an allowable debt in bankruptcy because it is a penalty
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: AEDPA does not violate the Suspension Clause because petitioners still have an opportunity to be heard on the merits. Lucidore v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 113 (2d Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 873, 121 S.Ct. 175, 148 L.Ed.2d 120 (2000). The Second Circuit has also held that treating a petitioner’s habeas petition as “second or successive” under the AEDPA because her first petition was denied as time-barred does not violate the Suspension Clause because the petitioner had an opportunity to be heard on the merits. Villanueva v. United States, 346 F.3d 55, 62 (2d Cir.2003), cert. denied, 542 U.S. 928, 124 S.Ct. 2895, 159 L.Ed.2d 791 (2004); see also Warren v. Garvin, 219 F.3d 111, 113 n. 2 (2d Cir. 2000) cert. denied, 531 U.S. 968, 121 S.Ct. 404, 148 L.Ed.2d 312 (2000) (<HOLDING>). In contrast, however, the Second Circuit has Options: A. holding that even where postconviction petitioner reserved the option to file an amended petition in his opening petition simply filing an amended petition is insufficient to request leave to file an amended petition a motion for leave to file an amended petition was required before it was necessary for the district judge to consider the amended petition B. recognizing that aedpa would not apply to a habeas petition that was pending at the time of its enactment C. holding that where tjhere was no dispute from the trial record and between the parties that the defendant requested his counsel to file a notice of appeal and that counsel did not timely file such a disposition was appropriate despite any potential jurisdictional problems in part to avoid the potential that a habeas petition seeking the same relief would use up the defendants opportunity for a first petition and to obviate the risk that a habeas petition would be untimely D. holding that the habeas petition did not qualify for equitable tolling because the petitioner discovered that his attorney had lied about filing a petition in early 2008 and yet the petitioner did not file one himself until nearly two years later E. holding that dismissing a habeas petition as timebarred under the aedpa does not violate the suspension clause because petitioner had years to file the petition and gave no explanation why he failed to file on time

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that dismissing a habeas petition as timebarred under the aedpa does not violate the suspension clause because petitioner had years to file the petition and gave no explanation why he failed to file on time
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 Employer shall pay Executive an aggregate minimum annual salary at the rate of (i) $800,000 per annum from the Effective Date through December 31, 2017 and (ii) $900,000 per annum from January 1, 2018 through the end of the Employment Period (“Base Salary”). Base Salary shall be payable bi-weekly in accordance with the Employer’s normal business practices and shall be reviewed by the Board or Compensation Committee of the Board at least annually. In no event shall Executive’s Base Salary in effect at a particular time be reduced without his prior written consent.

assistant: Base Salary
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 by one or more of the parties hereto on any number of separate counterparts, and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Agreement by telecopy, e-mailed .pdf or any other electronic means that reproduces an image of the actual executed signature page shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement. The words “execution,” “signed,” “signature,” “delivery,” and words of like import in or relating to any document to be signed in connection with this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby shall be deemed to include Electronic Signatures, deliveries or the keeping of records in electronic form, each of which shall be of the same legal effect, validity or enforceability as a manually executed signature, physical delivery thereof or the use of a paper-based recordkeeping system, as the case may be, to the extent and as provided for in any applicable law, including the Federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, the New York State Electronic Signatures and Records Act, or any other similar state laws based on the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act.

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: and performance begun). The Performance Contract was effective on May 31, 1996, and was signed by the parties in early June of that year. Anderson admitted during his deposition that he was aware of the Performance Contract long before the contract was entered into. Despite this knowledge, Anderson did not object at any of the public meetings held on the subject, and did not file his lawsuit until several months after Trane had begun its performance of the contract. Anderson never requested a preliminary injunction, and did not even request a permanent injunction until he amended his complaint in October 1996. The trial court denied Anderson’s request for a permanent injunction, and the trial court’s order was not superseded by Anderson’s appeal. See Masonry Arts, 628 So.2d at 335 (<HOLDING>). Trane has now completed the installation of Options: A. holding that a similar denial was not superseded because the appellant did not seek a stay of the trial courts order B. holding that because trial courts order did not dispose of the defendants counterclaim that order was not a final judgment that would support an appeal C. holding that appeal from denial of rule 60b motion raised for review only the district courts order of denial and not the underlying judgment itself D. holding that although appellant filed a proposed jury charge appellant did not preserve error because trial court did not endorse proposed charge and appellant did not call trial courts attention to the portions of the proposed charge that were complained about on appeal E. holding that res judicata did not apply where a trial courts order was not a final judgment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a similar denial was not superseded because the appellant did not seek a stay of the trial courts order
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All covenants, agreements, representations and warranties made in this Agreement shall, except to the extent otherwise provided herein, survive the execution and delivery of this Agreement, and shall continue in full force and effect until the Discharge of Senior Debt has occurred. The foregoing to the contrary notwithstanding, the obligations of each Obligor under Section 9 and Section 16 shall survive the Discharge of Senior Debt.

assistant: Survival