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: became final ninety-days later, on November 28, 2005. He then had until November 28, 2006 to file his habeas petition unless that deadline was tolled. Title 28, § 2244(d)(2) provides: “The time during which a properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect to the pertinent judgment or claim is pending shall not be counted toward any period of limitation under this subsection.” The petitioner filed a motion for post-conviction relief in the state trial court on May 10, 2006, 163 days after his conviction became final. The one-year statute of limitations was tolled until the Michigan Supreme Court denied his application for leave to appeal on April 28, 2008. See Lawrence v. Florida, 549 U.S. 327, 333, 127 S.Ct. 1079, 166 L.Ed.2d 924 (2007) (<HOLDING>). At that point, the petitioner had 202 days Options: A. holding that the limitations period is likewise not tolled during the pendency of a certiorari petition to the supreme court B. holding that a state court criminal judgment is final for purposes of collateral attack in federal court at the conclusion of review in the united states supreme court or when the time for seeking certiorari review expires C. holding that tolling of the statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of a claim dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution D. holding that the oneyear statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of petition for certiorari to the united states supreme court seeking review of denial of state postconviction relief E. holding statute of limitations for filing petition for postconviction relief not tolled by general savings statute tolling limited to reasons enumerated in state postconviction relief act

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the oneyear statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of petition for certiorari to the united states supreme court seeking review of denial of state postconviction relief
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 intend all provisions of this Agreement to be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. If, however, any provision of this Agreement is held to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable under present or future law, such provision shall be fully severable, and this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if such illegal, invalid, or unenforceable provision were never a part hereof, and the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be affected by the illegal, invalid, or unenforceable provision or by its severance. In lieu of such illegal, invalid or unenforceable provision, there shall be added automatically as a part of this Agreement a legal, valid and enforceable provision as similar in terms to such illegal, invalid or unenforceable provision as may be possible, and the Company and Executive hereby request the court to whom disputes relating to this Agreement are submitted to reform the otherwise unenforceable covenant in accordance with this Section 10(e).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein, unless the invalidity of any such provision substantially deprives either party of the practical benefits intended to be conferred by this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any provision of this Agreement held invalid, illegal or unenforceable only in part or degree shall remain in full force and effect to the extent not held invalid or unenforceable, and the determination that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or unenforceable as applied to particular circumstances shall not affect the application of such provision to circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with applicable federal laws and, to the extent not inconsistent therewith or preempted thereby, with the laws of the State of Illinois, including any applicable statutes of limitation, without regard to any otherwise applicable principles of conflicts of laws or choice of law rules (whether of the State of Illinois or any other jurisdiction) that would result in the application of the substantive or procedural rules or law of any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Cf. Alscot Investing Corp. v. Incorporated Village of Rockville Centre, 64 N.Y.2d 921, 488 N.Y.S.2d 629, 477 N.E.2d 1083 (1985) (upholding a change in the zoning code after a temporary moratorium delayed the issuance of a permit). In Whitehead Oil Co. v. City of Lincoln, 234 Neb. 527, 451 N.W.2d 702 (1990), Whitehead Oil purchased property that was zoned for a planned commercial district. It was subsequently rezoned as a neighborhood business district which permitted retail stores, ear washes, and service stations. In 1986, the company applied for a land-use permit that would allow a convenience store, car wash, and gasoline station on the property. The planning director initially recommended denying the proposed use, but after White , 487 N.W.2d 263, 267 (Minn.Ct.App.1992) (<HOLDING>). C. RESOLUTION OF THE ESTOPPEL ISSUE The Options: A. holding that a city may not act arbitrarily in adopting a moratorium ordinance in order to prevent a party from obtaining a building permit to delay or prevent a single project the city must exercise the authority for the purpose of protecting the planning process B. holding that allegations that the city arbitrarily applied a zoning ordinance were insufficient to state a substantive due process claim and stating in dicta that the decision would be the same even if the city had knowingly enforced the invalid zoning ordinance in bad faith a badfaith violation of state law remains only a violation of state law C. holding landowner entitled to rely on permit from mayor and survey of city engineer both of which city ordinance required her to obtain before building D. holding that city attorneys promise in an oral settlement agreement for city to annex and rezone land was within the legal authority of the city of joliet to accomplish and were not absolutely void acts per se therefore city could be estopped from avoiding enforcement of contract E. holding city could not enforce through administrative adjudication a city ordinance limiting vehicle weight

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a city may not act arbitrarily in adopting a moratorium ordinance in order to prevent a party from obtaining a building permit to delay or prevent a single project the city must exercise the authority for the purpose of protecting the planning process
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of Holdings, the Company and each Borrower will, and will cause each Restricted Subsidiary to, maintain, with insurance companies that Holdings, the Company and each Borrower believe (in the good faith judgment of the management of Holdings, the Company and such Borrower) are financially sound and responsible at the time the relevant coverage is placed or renewed, insurance in at least such amounts (after giving effect to any self-insurance which Holdings, the Company and such Borrower believes (in the good faith judgment of management of Holdings, the Company and such Borrower) is reasonable and prudent in light of the size and nature of its business) and against at least such risks (and with such risk retentions) as Holdings, the Company and such Borrower believe (in the good faith judgment of the management of Holdings, the Company and such Borrower) are reasonable and prudent in light of the size and nature of its business; and will furnish to the Lenders, upon written request from an Administrative Agent, information presented in reasonable detail as to the insurance so carried.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision hereof should be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, then, to the fullest extent permitted by law, (a) all other provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall be liberally construed in order to carry out the intentions of the Parties as nearly as may be possible and (b) the Parties shall use their best efforts to replace the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision(s) with valid, legal and enforceable provision(s) which, insofar as practical, implement the purposes of such provision(s) in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: failed to notify Spencer that no manager would be on duty during the shift in which Dean was killed. Readi ly available cash, and a key to the safe, Barton argues, “gave Greg Love exactly what he was looking for” in planning the robbery. But, as Texas cases and the Restatement observe, foreseeability requires more than “afford[ing] an opportunity” to commit a crime. The aggravated robbery and murder at the Whataburger was an extraordinary event, with the record containing no evidence that anyone had ever attempted to rob the restaurant, much less at gunpoint, before. Nothing in the record indicates that Love had any history of violence. An aggravated robbery and murder is not the ordinary result of the situation created by Spencer and Mur 502-03 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2007, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); Garcia, 203 S.W.3d at 437-38 (holding that Options: A. holding provision in oil and gas lease authorizing lessor to use gas for agricultural purposes contained no geographical limitations B. holding that gas line is not improvement C. holding plaintiffs were properly enjoined from using excessive amounts of gas not contemplated by the free gas clause in the lease D. holding a gas storage and oil lease providing for free gas for domestic use at the principal dwelling house on said lands and for low cost gas for domestic use on said lands in the event of storage limited the lessor to low cost gas at one principal dwelling E. holding that injury caused by criminal fleeing after stealing gas from gas station was not foreseeable result of stations policy of not requiring customers to prepay for gas

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that injury caused by criminal fleeing after stealing gas from gas station was not foreseeable result of stations policy of not requiring customers to prepay for gas
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: party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). With a motion for summary judgment, the moving party bears the burden of proving that no genuine issue of material fact is in dispute, see Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 n. 10, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986), and all evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See id. at 587, 106 S.Ct. 1348. Once the movant has carried its initial burden, then the nonmoving party “must come forward with ‘specific facts showing there is a genuine issue for trial.’ ” Matsushita, 475 U.S. at 587, 106 S.Ct. 1348 (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)) (emphasis omitted); see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986) (<HOLDING>). Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment A Options: A. holding that an issue is genuine if the evidence is sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to return a verdict for the nonmoving party B. holding that the nonmoving party must show how additional discovery will defeat the summary judgment motion ie create a genuine dispute as to a material fact and that the nonmoving party must show that he has diligently pursued discovery of the evidence in question C. holding that an adverse party must state specific facts showing there is a genuine issue of fact for trial D. holding that the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings to show that there is a genuine issue for trial E. holding that the nonmoving party may not rest upon mere denials or allegations in the pleadings but must set forth specific facts sufficient to raise a genuine issue for trial

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings to show that there is a genuine issue for 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: The Company will, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, (i) comply with all laws, rules, regulations and orders of any Governmental Authority, including the Luxembourg Domiciliation Law, applicable to it or its property, except where the failure to do so, individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect and (ii) perform in all material respects its obligations under material agreements to which it is a party, in each case except where the failure to do so, individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. The Company will maintain in effect and enforce policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance in all material respects by the Company, its Subsidiaries and their respective directors, officers, employees and agents with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: At any time and from time to time after the date hereof, any Seller shall, upon the request of Purchaser, and Purchaser shall, upon the request of any Seller, promptly execute, acknowledge and deliver such further instruments and other documents, and perform or cause to be performed such further acts, as may be reasonably required to evidence or effectuate the sale, conveyance, transfer and delivery hereunder of the Purchased Stock and the Purchaser Common Stock and the performance by the parties of any of their other respective obligations under this Agreement and to carry out the purposes and intent of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Accession Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of this Accession Agreement by telecopy or portable document format (“pdf”) shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Accession Agreement.

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: or anything manifestly designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting death or serious bodily injury; or (B) anything that in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury. Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 1.07(a)(17) (Vernon 1994). Magee argues that gasoline is not a deadly weapon per se and that gasoline is not the type of deadly weapon the Legislature contemplated. The Court of Criminal Appeals, interpreting what is now section 1.07(a)(17) of the Penal Code, stated that “[Ajnything ... which is actually used to cause the death of a human being is a deadly weapon.... This is necessarily so because a thing which actually causes death is, by definition, ‘capable of causing death.’ ” Tyra v. State, 897 S.W.2d 796, 798 (Tex.Crim.App.1995) (<HOLDING>). Gasoline may be a deadly weapon in the manner Options: A. holding hand can be deadly weapon B. holding a motor vehicle can be a deadly weapon by the manner of its use C. holding that use of deadly weapon extends as well to any employment of a deadly weapon even its simple possession if such possession facilitates the associated felony D. recognizing that motor vehicle can be a deadly weapon in involuntary manslaughter case for purposes of providing notice in indictment E. holding floor can be used as deadly weapon

assistant: The best answer is B. holding a motor vehicle can be a deadly weapon by the manner of its use
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: Article Two analogue to 9-307.”). In other jurisdictions, then, the present case would likely be resolved in favor of the Hattens and Pralles as buyers in the ordinary course of business, either under section 9-307 or section 2-403. Cases from other states are instructive because the UCC and Minnesota’s car titling act (based on the Uniform Motor Vehicle Certificate of Title and Anti-Theft Act) are uniform laws. See Minn. Stat. § 645.22 (1992) (“Laws uniform with those of other states shall be interpreted and construed to effect their general purpose to make uniform the laws of those states which enact them.”). In addition, this view does not conflict with our courts’ prior treatment of the state’s motor vehicle titling statute. See Welle v. Prozinski, 258 N.W.2d 912, 916 (Minn.1977) (<HOLDING>); see also Minn. Stat. § 168A.05, subd. 6 Options: A. recognizing that in 1982 kentucky converted to a new title system for motor vehicles under which the secured creditor must perfect its security interest by noting the lien on the certificate of title to the motor vehicle B. holding that normal presumption of ownership in favor of holder of motor vehicle certificate of title may be rebutted despite language of minnstat 168a10 subd 5 providing that the transfer of a motor vehicle is not effective until titling requirements are complied with C. holding that assault conviction for driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol and causing serious bodily injury to the person of another with the motor vehicle qualified as a crime of violence under ussg 4b12a D. holding that the sensible and popular understanding of what a motor vehicle accident entails necessarily involves the motor vehicle being operated as a motor vehicle E. holding that the statutory definition of motor vehicle is not controlling

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that normal presumption of ownership in favor of holder of motor vehicle certificate of title may be rebutted despite language of minnstat 168a10 subd 5 providing that the transfer of a motor vehicle is not effective until titling requirements are complied with
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: SSA in this regard are similarly unavailing. Virginia Lee’s suggestion that the SSA in some sense intended to undo the settlement agreements in this or other cases by voiding assignments is patently wrong. Even had it attempted to do so, the SSA was not a party to the settlement in this case and was powerless to affect any order of this court. As for the defendant’s contention that section 9706(f)(3) provides convincing support of a legislative intent to override judicially-created doctrines favoring the finality of judgments, I note that even were that a correct interpretation of the statutory language, the Supreme Court has clearly ruled that such attempts by Congress will not be upheld. See Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211, 225-26, 115 S.Ct. 1447, 131 L.Ed.2d 328 (1995) (<HOLDING>). IV. Conclusion. Virginia Lee cannot avail Options: A. holding rfra is inconsistent with smith and violates the separation of powers doctrine B. holding a congressional act which required courts to reopen certain final judgments as an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers doctrine C. recognizing separation of powers doctrine D. holding ifrp is neither a usurpation of sentencing courts article iii power nor violation of separation of powers doctrine E. recognizing that the judicial rewriting of a statute would violate the separation of powers doctrine

assistant: The best answer is B. holding a congressional act which required courts to reopen certain final judgments as an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers doctrine
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 embodies the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior representations, understandings and agreements between the parties regarding the subject matter hereof. There are no representations, understandings or agreements, oral or written, between the parties regarding the subject matter hereof that are not fully expressed herein.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The term of this Agreement (the “ Term ”) shall commence upon the date of this Agreement and shall remain in effect in perpetuity, other than those provisions herein that are contemplated to extend for a specific period, which shall terminate upon the expiration of such period.

assistant: Terms
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 establishing the Plan, granting awards under the Plan, and entering into this Agreement, the Company does not give the Grantee any right to continue to be employed by the Company or to be entitled to any remuneration or benefits not set forth in this Agreement or the Plan .

assistant: Employment
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: award. C. Past Practices The district court also ruled that Arbitrator Murphy failed to “arguably construe” the CBA because he “failed to look to past practices of the parties to interpret any ambiguity” of the CBA. The district court found that under “long-recognized practice, Smucker and the Union allowed employees who were bumped from their position by a more senior employee’s exercise of bumping rights to bump a less senior employee.” But the Sixth Circuit has held that past practices should not be used to interpret or give meaning to a provision or clause of an agreement that is clear and unambiguous. Beacon Journal Pub. Co. v. Akron Newspaper Guild, Local No. 7, 114 F.3d 596, 601 (6th Cir.1997); Int’l Union of Elec. Workers v. Hurd Corp., 7 Fed.Appx. 329, 335 (6th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). The plain language of Article 6, Section 2 of Options: A. holding that collective bargaining agreements cannot compel the arbitration of statutory rights B. holding that mandatory statutory pension funding requirements to be enforced notwithstanding any contrary provision of law trumped inconsistent terms of an act 111 collective bargaining agreement C. holding that where a collective bargaining agreements terms are clear but the management has engaged in contrary practice for a number of years the words of the agreement must be enforced D. holding that arbitration clauses as contractual agreements must be enforced to their terms E. holding that agreements other than fullfledged collective bargaining agreements may be contracts within the meaning of 301

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where a collective bargaining agreements terms are clear but the management has engaged in contrary practice for a number of years the words of the agreement must be enforced
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: explained it has not rendered a final decision on those questions of unsettled state law. This Court is the final arbitrator of unsettled questions of state law, and . the first two questions about liability under our state statutes are posited such that they may be determinative of the proceeding. Moreover, there is no controlling precedent on those ques tions. Accordingly, we exercise our discretion to answer the first two certified questions. However, we consider the remaining certified questions about damages under N.D.C.C. § 38-11.1-04 in the context of whether an adequate factual record has been developed for this Court to exercise its discretion to answer those questions. See Bornsen, 2011 ND 183, ¶¶ 23-27, 804 N.W.2d 55 (Kapsner, J., dissenting). See also Cray, 925 P.2d at 62 (<HOLDING>). IV [¶ 13] Before addressing the certified Options: A. recognizing other state courts have declined to answer certified questions that would not be determinative of the action that were based on conflicting facts or that had already been decided by the state appellate court B. holding that constitutional questions will not be decided if case can be decided on other grounds C. holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts D. holding that courts are precluded from reconsidering issues that have already been decided in the same case E. recognizing the general rule that an appellate court will not address matters that were not raised or decided in the trial court

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing other state courts have declined to answer certified questions that would not be determinative of the action that were based on conflicting facts or that had already been decided by the state appellate court
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: A payment of interest only shall be paid annually on each anniversary of the date of this Note. All outstanding principal and interest shall be due and payable on the Maturity Date. Any payment hereunder shall be applied first to the payment of costs and charges of collection, if any, then to accrued interest, and the balance, if any, shall be then applied to reduction of principal. Principal and interest are payable in lawful money of the United States of America.

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: by “heighten[ing] the duties of those in control of particular industries, trades, properties or activities that affect public health, safety or welfare,” regardless of the actor's intent. Id. at 250-56, 72 S.Ct. at 243-46. 7 . Gilmour rejected a First Amendment challenge to an Iowa state child pornography statute that is nearly identical to § 2251(a). 117 F.3d at 372. 8 . The only item that had traveled in interstate or foreign commerce in this case was the China-manufactured cell phone he used to take the images, but Ruggiero does not appear to contend that § 2251(a) is unconstitutional as applied to him for lack of a sufficient nexus to foreign commerce. If he does, we reject that contention. See Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 9, 17, 125 S.Ct. 2195, 2201, 2205, 162 L.Ed.2d 1 (2005) (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Forrest, 429 F.3d Options: A. holding that individual coverage is established if a substantial part of an employees activities related to goods whose movement in the channels of interstate commerce was established by the test we have described he is covered by the flsa B. holding that congress may regulate purely local intrastate activities if they are part of an economic class of activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce C. holding that housing discrimination has a substantial effect on interstate commerce D. recognizing that congress had the power to regulate boxcars that traveled exclusively intrastate because of their inherent mobility and connection to interstate commerce it is no objection to such an exertion of commerce clause power that the dangers intended to be avoided arise in whole or in part out of matters connected with intrastate commerce E. holding that commerce clause authorizes congress to punish any particular criminal action even without proof of a relation to interstate commerce when the activity is part of a class of activities determined by congress to affect interstate commerce

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that congress may regulate purely local intrastate activities if they are part of an economic class of activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce
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 interpretation, construction and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Wisconsin without regard to the principle of conflicts of laws. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement, which other provisions shall remain in full force and effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and therefore that ruling is reversed. C. Negligent-Misrepresentation Claims Similar to the breach-of-eon-tract claim discussed above, we conclude that PONI’s negligent-misrepresentation claim against NCB is preempted under ERISA § 514(a), but its claim against MVP is not. In reviewing whether ERISA preempts a state-law negligent-misrepresentation claim, we have held that ERISA preemption does not turn on the timing of the alleged misrepresentation, but rather the true nature of the issues underlying the claim. Lion’s Volunteer Blind Indus., Inc. v. Automated Group Admin., Inc., 195 F.3d 803, 808 (6th Cir.1999). Where resolution of the misrepresentation claim necessarily requires evaluation of the plan and the parties’ performance pursuant to it, the claim is preempted. See id. at 809 (<HOLDING>). In this case, PONI alleges that NCB and MVP Options: A. holding that claims for misrepresentation under texas insurance code were preempted because the plaintiffs sought to recover benefits under an erisa plan B. holding that the claim is preempted because a court entertaining the merits of this misrepresentation claim would be forced to calculate plan benefits that would have been owed to the plaintiff under the erisa plans C. holding that erisa preemption does not apply where the plan itself would not be liable even though a successful plaintiffs damages would be measured in part by the lost pension benefits the plaintiff would have received had he been a participant in the plan D. holding misrepresentation claim to be preempted E. holding negligent misrepresentation claim was not preempted because it neither sought benefits under plan nor alleged improper processing of benefits

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the claim is preempted because a court entertaining the merits of this misrepresentation claim would be forced to calculate plan benefits that would have been owed to the plaintiff under the erisa plans
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: does not alone create exigent circumstances ... additional facts that would significantly increase the likelihood of violence” are required). 18 . Cf. Najar, 451 F.3d at 719-20 (concluding that officers' “response to a 911 call where the occupant repeatedly refused to answer the telephone or the door” supported reasonable belief that warrantless entry was immediately necessary to provide aid). 19 . Cf. Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398, 403, 406-07, 126 S.Ct. 1943, 164 L.Ed.2d 650 (2006) (finding exigent circumstances to enter home where officers observed ongoing fight that reasonably supported belief -that entry was necessary “to render. emergency assistance to an injured occupant or to protect an occupant from imminent injury”). 20 . Cf. Gordon, 741 F.3d at 70 (10th Cir.2014) (<HOLDING>). 21 . Cf. United States v. Rhiger, 315 F.3d Options: A. holding that debtor who was separated from her husband and who testified that she would only return to the marital home if her husband vacated the house or died or if she was required to care for him or her adult son there or if the couple reconciled was an abandonment of the marital home as her homestead B. recognizing exigency to permit warrantless home entry where officer entered home to protect victim of domestic battery who contacted police saying that she was afraid that her boyfriend would seriously harm her C. holding that an officer may not continue her search once she has determined that no exigency exists D. holding wife did not have a duty to warn a police officer who was shot while escorting her home that her husband had threatened to kill any police officer E. holding that hot pursuit of a fleeing suspect justified a warrantless entry into the suspects home to protect inhabitants as long as the police did not know the home belonged to the suspect

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing exigency to permit warrantless home entry where officer entered home to protect victim of domestic battery who contacted police saying that she was afraid that her boyfriend would seriously harm her
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: During each year of the Term, the Executive shall be entitled to 30 days of paid vacation (pro-rated for any partial years) and holiday and sick leave at levels commensurate with those provided to other senior executives of the Company, in accordance with the Company’s vacation, holiday and other pay for time not worked policies. The Executive shall have the right to carry over to a subsequent period or periods any vacation days unused by him up to a maximum of 30 days at any time; provided that, for the avoidance of doubt, at no time shall the Executive be entitled to accrued vacation in excess of 60 days in any calendar year.

assistant: Vacations
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: who treated Sievers’ daughter. The note states: I treated Debbie Diercks May 15, 16, 17, 18, 19. She has extreme tension in her cervical & upper dorsal area. She responded quite well to our manipulative therapy. I feel this condition produces fibro-myalgic -symptoms but it is really more muscular tension & spasms. We think this note fails to generate a genuine issue of material fact on the requirements to qualify chiropractic treatment for FMLA coverage purposes. For example, there was no showing that the chiropractor who treated Sievers’ daughter was authorized to practice in South Dakota. Nor was there any showing that South Dakota law allowed the chiropractor to treat neurological disorders like seizures. See Iowa, Kemper Ins. Co. v. Cunningham, 305 N.W.2d 467, 469 (Iowa 1981) (<HOLDING>). The record contained no X-rays to show that Options: A. recognizing that the court may take judicial notice of its own docket B. recognizing that a court may rely on matters of which a court may take judicial notice C. holding that trial court erroneously entered judgment pursuant to a theory which was neither pleaded nor tried by acquiescence or otherwise D. recognizing that a court may take judicial notice of court filings and other matters of public record E. holding that court will not take judicial notice of foreign law that is neither pleaded nor proven

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that court will not take judicial notice of foreign law that is neither pleaded nor proven
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 likelihood of substantial and immediate irreparable injury and the inadequacy of remedies at law. “[P]rinciples of equity, comity, and federalism ... should inform the judgment of fe isconduct supported by a fully defined record can support broad in-junctive relief.” Thomas, 978 F.2d at 509. While we are dealing with a relatively small number of citations of only fourteen individual plaintiffs in this case, the citations have been the result of a clear CHP- citation policy in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which has continued despite the Bianco court’s limiting interpretation of the helmet law. CHP argues that none of the motorcyclists is threatened with irreparable injury because the Fourth Amendment lack-of-probable-cause defense would be available at their 74 (3d Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, this circuit has upheld injunctions Options: A. holding that injunctive relief may be warranted where there is a particularly strong likelihood of success on the merits even if there is a relatively slight showing of irreparable injury B. holding that potential loss of a contract constitutes irreparable injury C. holding that evidence of specific competitive injury establishes irreparable injury warranting injunctive relief D. holding that even when likelihood of success has been established the absence of irreparable injury standing alone makes preliminary injunctive relief improper E. holding that an osha inspection violating the fourth amendment would constitute irreparable injury for which injunctive relief would be appropriate

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an osha inspection violating the fourth amendment would constitute irreparable injury for which injunctive relief would be appropriate
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 AMENDMENT AND ANY CLAIMS, CONTROVERSY, DISPUTE OR CAUSE OF ACTION (WHETHER IN CONTRACT OR IN TORT OR OTHERWISE) BASED UPON, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AMENDMENT AND THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at common law by or against his personal representative. 34 . Tennant v. Marion Health Care Found., Inc., 194 W.Va. 97, 104, 459 S.E.2d 374, 381 (1995). 35 . Syllabus Point 3, in part, In re State Public Building Asbestos Litigation, 193 W.Va. 119, 454 S.E.2d 413 (1994) (emphasis added). 36 . Tennant, 194 W.Va, at 111, 459 S.E.2d at 388. 37 . Syllabus Point 8, Tennant, 194 W.Va. at 102, 459 S.E.2d at 379. 38 . Syllabus Point 3, State v. Farmer, 200 W.Va. 507, 490 S.E.2d 326 (1997). 39 . McDonald v. Beneficial Standard Life Ins. Co., 160 W.Va. 396, 398, 235 S.E.2d 367, 368 (1977). 40 . United States v. Hickman, 592 F.2d 931, 933 (6th Cir. 1979) (quoting Frantz v. United States, 62 F.2d 737, 739 (6th Cir. 1933)). See also State v. Thompson, 220 W.Va. 398, 400, 647 S.E.2d 834, 836 (2007) (<HOLDING>), 41 . Garner v. Missouri Dep't of Mental Options: A. holding judges in criminal cases must exercise restraint and impartiality in questioning witnesses B. holding that the test for ineffective assistance of counsel in termination cases is generally the same as in criminal proceedings C. holding that defendant must have opportunity to respond to governments substantial assistance motion because that response is essential predicate to exercise of courts discretion and distinguishing cases holding denials of 5k11 motions unreviewable because those cases concerned underlying merits of courts discretionary judgments not their very exercise D. holding that habeas proceedings do not embrace review of the exercise of discretion in criminal alien cases E. holding that the workproduct doctrine applies in criminal cases because its role in assuring the proper functioning of the criminal justice system is even more vital than its role in civil cases

assistant: The best answer is A. holding judges in criminal cases must exercise restraint and impartiality in questioning witnesses
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: Lexus. 28 . 618 A.2d 176 (D.C.1992). 29 . Id. at 177. ("Appellant replied that he did not own a car, but he was driving one." Id.) 30 . That Scott might not have been driving the Lexus on the day he was arrested does not mean he lacked standing to object to the search of the vehicle. As a permitted co-user of the vehicle, Scott had a reasonable expectation of privacy in it even if White was using it that particular day. 31 . United States v. Brown, 708 A.2d 637, 639 (D.C.1998); see also 2 Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure § 3.7(c), at 412 (4th ed.2004) (explaining that to justify a warrant-less search, the government must establish "a sufficient nexus between (1) criminal activity, and (2) the things to be seized, and (3) the place to be searched”). 32 . Cf. Brown, 708 A.2d at 638-39 (<HOLDING>). 33 . Cf. Spinner, 618 A.2d at 179 (holding Options: A. holding that search was proper where a drug dog jumped into the open trunk of a car and keyed on a duffel bag after the suspect opened the trunk B. holding that defendants suspect activity in the trunk and passenger compartment of his car immediately after he engaged in an apparent drug sale established probable cause to search the vehicle for drugs and drug money C. holding that although search of passenger compartment was legal search of trunk was not D. holding that an officer clearly had probable cause to search the passenger compartment of the vehicle without a warrant based on the burning marijuana he smelled as he approached the car E. holding that after making an arrest of the driver of a vehicle the police may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendants suspect activity in the trunk and passenger compartment of his car immediately after he engaged in an apparent drug sale established probable cause to search the vehicle for drugs and drug money
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: 334 U.S. 806 68 S.Ct. 1185 92 L.Ed. 1739 HEDGEBETHv.STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 674. Argued April 27, 1948. Decided June 14, 1948. Mr. Wilford L. Whitley, Jr., of Plymouth, N.C., for petitioner pro hac vice by Special leave of Court. Mr. Ralph Moody, of Raleigh, N.C., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 After a conviction for robbery, petitioner sued out a writ of habeas corpus in a Superior Court of North Carolina claiming that the sentence he is serving involved a denial of his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The writ was dismissed and the dismissal affirmed by the Supreme Court of North Carolina, 228 N.C. 259, 45 S.E.2d 563. If petitioner's allegations, with supporting affidavits, in the habeas corpus proceedings controlled the issue before us, they would establish circumstances that make the right to assistance of counsel an ingredient of the Due Process Clause. While the Supreme Court of North Carolina recognized the right of an accused to the benefit of counsel under appropriate circumstances, it held that in the proceedings on the habeas corpus the trial court had before it not merely the petitioner's allegations but 'the oral testimony of the sheriff, which was not sent up.' In short, there was before the North Carolina Supreme Court only a partial record of the proceedings in the Superior Court. In reviewing a judgment of a State court, we are bound by the record on which that judgment was based. Since the North Carolina Supreme Court went on the ground that it did not have the full record before it, we are constrained to dismiss this writ because the judgment below can rest on a non-federal ground. Petitioner's rights under the Federal Constitution must be pursued according to the procedural requirements of North Carolina or, in default of relief by available North Carolina proceedings, by a new claim of denial of due process for want of such relief. Foster v. Illinois, 332 U.S. 134, 139, 67 S.Ct. 1716, 1719, 91 L.Ed. 1955. 2 Writ dismissed. 3 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS and Mr. Justice RUTLEDGE are of the opinion that the judgment should be reversed.

assistant: 9