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: 118, at 7, 388 S.W.3d 16, 21. Without such amendments, however, the appellate courts’ in? terpretation of the statute remains the law. Id., 388 S.W.3d at 21; see also Neal v. United States, 516 U.S. 284, 296, 116 S.Ct. 763, 133 L.Ed.2d 709 (1996) (“Congress, not this Court has the responsibility for revising its statutes. Were we to alter our statutory' interpretations from " cases to case. Congress would have less reason to exercise its responsibility to correct. statutes that are thought to be unwise or unfair.”); Francis v. S. Pac. Co., 333 U,S. 445, 450, 68 S.Ct. 611, 92 L.Ed. 798 (1948) (stating that the longstanding interpretation of the statute itself becomes “part of the warp and woof’ of the legislation); E. C. Barton & Co. v. Neal, 263 Ark. 40, 43, 562 S.W.2d 294, 295 (1978) (<HOLDING>). |1BUnder the separation-of-powers doctrine, Options: A. holding that it is generally sufficient that an indictment set forth the offense in the words of the statute itself B. holding that similar jurisdictional bar precluded review only of administration of statute not of challenge to statute itself C. holding that this court may independently review the administrative construction of a statute D. recognizing this as the general rule E. recognizing that this courts construction of a statute becomes as much apart of the statute as the words of the statute itself and that change is a matter that addresses itself to the general assembly not this court

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that this courts construction of a statute becomes as much apart of the statute as the words of the statute itself and that change is a matter that addresses itself to the general assembly not this 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: Any notice, request, instruction or other document to be given hereunder by any party to the other shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given ( a ) if sent by registered or certified mail in the United States, return receipt requested, upon receipt, ( b ) if sent by nationally recognized overnight air courier, one Business Day after mailing, ( c ) if sent by email or facsimile transmission, with a copy mailed on the same day in the manner provided in clauses (a) or (b) of this Section 6.2 when transmitted and receipt is confirmed, or ( d ) if otherwise actually personally delivered, when delivered. All notices hereunder shall be delivered as set forth below, or pursuant to such other instructions as may be designated in writing by the party to receive such notice.

assistant: Notices
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: we hold that it is not subject to an assertion of equitable estop-pel. As its name implies, equitable es-toppel embraces the notion that a party should not be permitted to profit by asserting rights against another when that party’s own inequitable conduct has lulled the other into action or inaction detrimental to its position. See Fla. Dep’t of Health & Rehab. Servs. v. S.A.P., 835 So.2d 1091, 1096-97 (Fla.2002) (citing State ex rel. Watson v. Gray, 48 So.2d 84, 87-88 (Fla.1950)). The doctrine has been most commonly held to preclude a defendant from raising a statute of limitations defense when the defendant’s false representations mislead the plaintiff into failing to file suit within the limitations period. See Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So.2d 1071, 1076 (Fla.2001) (<HOLDING>); Rinker Materials Corp. v. Palmer First Nat'l Options: A. holding that the timely filing of a discrimination charge with the equal employment opportunity commission is a requirement like a statute of limitations that is subject to waiver estoppel and equitable tolling B. recognizing cause of action for equitable estoppel under erisa C. holding that defendants may be estopped from raising defense of statute of limitations even though equitable estoppel is not listed in fla stat 95051 D. holding that equitable estoppel may bar a partys assertion of a statute of limitations E. holding an evidentiary hearing on the applicability of equitable estoppel

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that equitable estoppel may bar a partys assertion of a statute of limitations
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: problem of engine ECU for Tundra at the request of [DENSO Tennessee].” Appellees argue “[DENSO Japan] spent significant time addressing an [ECU] quality problem at Toyota’s ... Texas [p]lant,” “DENSO Tennessee requested DENSO Japan investigate and address the problem occurring in Texas ... where the particular ECUs were manufactured and where DENSO Japan assisted in the design and manufacture of products, which would include these ECUs.” As an initial matter, no evidence was presented that DENSO Japan “assisted in the design and manufacture” of the ECUs in the Toyota Tundras addressed above. More importantly, assuming for argument’s sake that DENSO Japan did so, there is no evidence that the quality control issues in these ECUs related to unintended accefer p.Fort Worth 2003, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). Contacts with Texas that are unrelated to the Options: A. holding that a texas court had personal jurisdiction over a kansas resident who after objecting to the texas courts jurisdiction filed a motion for attorneys fees B. holding licensing agreement between defendant and nonparty texas resident was not relevant to specific jurisdiction C. holding nonresident defendant did not submit to general jurisdiction of texas courts merely by executing contract with resident D. holding that jurisdiction existed over two georgia residents who leased a machine from a texas resident because they 1 solicited and negotiated the lease agreement by two telephone calls to texas 2 sent correspondence and payments by mail to texas 3 paid for the transfer of the machine from texas and 4 caused their insurance agent to contact the texas resident in texas to arrange coverage for the machine E. holding defendants ownership interest in texas company that was not party to lawsuit was not relevant to specific jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is B. holding licensing agreement between defendant and nonparty texas resident was not relevant to specific jurisdiction
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 Grantor will at its expense, at any time and from time to time, promptly execute and deliver all further instruments and documents and take all further action that the Collateral Agent may reasonably request in order to: (i) perfect and protect the security interest purported to be created hereby; (ii) enable the Collateral Agent to exercise and enforce its rights and remedies hereunder in respect of the Collateral; or (iii) otherwise effect the purposes of this Agreement, including, without limitation: (A) marking conspicuously all Chattel Paper and each License and, at the request of the Collateral Agent, each of its Records pertaining to the Collateral with a legend, in form and substance satisfactory to the Collateral Agent, indicating that such Chattel Paper, License or Collateral is subject to the security interest created hereby, (B) delivering and pledging to the Collateral Agent hereunder each Promissory Note, Security, Chattel Paper or other Instrument, now or hereafter owned by such Grantor, duly endorsed and accompanied by executed instruments of transfer or assignment, all in form and substance satisfactory to the Collateral Agent, (C) executing and filing (to the extent, if any, that such Grantor’s signature is required thereon) or authenticating the filing of, such financing or continuation statements, or amendments thereto, as may be necessary or desirable or that the Collateral Agent may request in order to perfect and preserve the security interest purported to be created hereby, (D) furnishing to the Collateral Agent from time to time statements and schedules further identifying and describing the Collateral and such other reports in connection with the Collateral in each case as the Collateral Agent may reasonably request, all in reasonable detail, (E) if any Collateral shall be in the possession of a third party, notifying such Person of the Collateral Agent’s security interest created hereby and obtaining a written acknowledgment from such Person that such Person holds possession of the Collateral for the benefit of the Collateral Agent, which such written acknowledgement shall be in form and substance satisfactory to the Collateral Agent, (F) if at any time after the date hereof, such Grantor acquires or holds any Commercial Tort Claim, promptly notifying the Collateral Agent in a writing signed by such Grantor setting forth a brief description of such Commercial Tort Claim and granting to the Collateral Agent a security interest therein and in the proceeds thereof, which writing shall incorporate the provisions hereof and shall be in form and substance satisfactory to the Collateral Agent, and (G) taking all actions required by any earlier versions of the Uniform Commercial Code or by other law, as applicable, in any relevant Uniform Commercial Code jurisdiction, or by other law as applicable in any foreign jurisdiction.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the state. See 457 U.S. at 842, 102 S.Ct. 2764. The defendants attempt to bolster their argument by analogizing to Rendell-Baker, arguing that the social workers employed by Lutheran, like the school teachers in Rendell-Baker, are not state actors. One court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, however, has recognized that foster care agencies are different from other state contractors and the school teachers in Rendell-Baker because they perform a function that is exclusively the prerogative of the state, namely the removal of children from their homes. See Estate of Earp v. Doud, 1997 WL 255506 *2 (E.D.Pa.1997) In Estate of Earp, the action was brought by the natural parents of Adam Earp, who was involuntarily removed from his mother’ .Ill.1989) (rev’d on other grounds) (<HOLDING>). In reaching the above conclusion, Judge Options: A. holding an unborn child is not a child for purposes of criminal prosecution of mistreatment of a child B. holding an unborn child is a child for purposes of prosecuting chemical endangerment of a child C. holding that when a state obtains an order to remove a child from his home and takes the child into protective custody it is exercising affirmative state power over the child to the extent that it has a due process obligation to assume responsibility to provide for the childs basic needs D. holding that a child has a 1983 action against the state while in foster care where the state is deliberately indifferent to the likelihood that a foster home is unsafe yet places the child there or allows the child to remain there E. holding that failing to remove a child from a foster home is not an affirmative act under the statecreated danger exception even where the officials investigation revealed obvious dangers to the childs safety

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that when a state obtains an order to remove a child from his home and takes the child into protective custody it is exercising affirmative state power over the child to the extent that it has a due process obligation to assume responsibility to provide for the childs basic needs
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: on Post Office and Civil Serv.). In my view, the Court of Federal Claims rightly credited this persuasive evidence of Congress’s intent that “summoned ... by a court ... to serve” should exclude those employees who freely volunteer for a grand jury pool. Hall, 99 Fed.Cl. at 232. Hall, in contrast, points to no legislative history in support of her theory that Congress intended for any employee who freely volunteers to serve, contrary to the plain directive of her supervisor, to qualify for the benefit of paid court leave. The majority holds that “summoned” in the context of jurors in § 6322(a)(1) is “unambiguous” and applies “when[ever] a court issues a summons, which requires the individual by the force of law to appear before the court,” Majority Op. at 1346 n. 7. Under th 1980) (<HOLDING>); In re Court Leave, B-214719, 1984 WL 46229 Options: A. holding that court leave under 6322 is not available to a federal employee summoned to appear in juvenile court in her capacity as the juveniles parent as a party to the proceedings B. holding that a federal court litigant who is forced into state court under pullman may reserve a right to return to federal court in that the plaintiff can preserve the right to the federal forum for federal claims by informing the state court of his or her intention to return following litigation of the state claims in the state court C. holding that court leave under 6322 is not available to a federal employee who appears in court as a plaintiff in her own action D. holding that an employee who did not present evidence that she could have returned to work prior to the expiration of her fmla leave allowance was not entitled to additional leave merely because her employer had not properly provided her with notice that the leave was designated as fmla leave E. holding that court leave under 6322 is not available to a federal employee who is summoned to appear as a defendant in the court action concerned

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that court leave under 6322 is not available to a federal employee who appears in court as a plaintiff in her own action
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 she had been shot; in August 2001, a woman reported an assault (without injury); in February 2002, a woman reported that her car was stolen from her in the parking lot; in April 2002, one customer intentionally hit another customer’s vehicle in the drive-through lane (with property damage but not injury); and, in February 2003, police arrested a person who refused to leave the premises. In contrast, no evidence exists that the Whataburger was the scene of any aggravated assault, aggravated robbery, sexual assault, or murder in the three years prior to Dean’s murder. No crime similar to this one had ever occurred: no one had ever robbed the restauran of bus was not foreseeable because plaintiff produced no evidence of similar robberies on same bus line), and Allen, 158 S.W.3d at 67 (<HOLDING>), with Trammell Crow Cent. Tex., Ltd. v. Options: A. holding that duty to protect from criminal acts does not arise in the absence of a foreseeable risk of harm B. holding that sexual assault was not foreseeable because plaintiff produced no evidence of similar criminal acts on or near defendants premises C. holding that criminal conduct on premises was not foreseeable D. holding evidence of sexual assault relevant to show defendants motive in kidnapping victim E. holding that merger did not apply because sexual assault was not a lesser included offense of seconddegree kidnapping involving sexual assault

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that sexual assault was not foreseeable because plaintiff produced no evidence of similar criminal acts on or near defendants premises
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 Borrower will, and will cause each Subsidiary to, comply with all laws, rules, regulations, orders, writs, judgments, injunctions, decrees or awards to which it may be subject including, without limitation, all Environmental Laws, the violation of which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect and/or result in the creation of any Lien not permitted by Section 6.15 . The Borrower will maintain in effect and enforce policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance by the Borrower, 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the American Eagle gripping the national colors at the top of the [Ten Commandments] monument hardly detracts from the message of endorsement; rather, it specifically links religion ... and civil government.” Books, 235 F.3d at 307. See also Adland, 307 F.3d at 486-87 (agreeing with the Seventh Circuit’s holding in Books that “the inclusion of an American eagle gripping the national colors at the top of the monument, serves to heighten the appearance of government endorsement of religion”). Here, the same can be said of Defendants’ transparent attempt to “secularize” the displays by surrounding the Ten Commandments with other patriotic documents and symbols, such as the Bill of Rights and the Preamble to the Kentucky Constitution. See Indiana Civil Liberties Union, 259 F.3d at 773 (<HOLDING>) (citing Books, 235 F.3d at 307). Ultimately, Options: A. holding 15 of the kansas constitution bill of rights affords rights identical to the fourth amendment and therefore the leon goodfaith exception should be woven into state constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures B. holding that it is apparent that this act is not a revenue bill within the contemplation of said section of the constitution fpr the reason that the revenue to be derived therefrom is merely an incident to the main object of the bill and that its general purpose was not that of raising revenue id 5 C. holding that where it is alleged that state has violated rights conferred by constitution governmental immunity is not available in state court action but declining to infer a right to sue the state for damages on the basis of a violation of the michigan constitution D. holding that bill of lading issued as to two containers was binding as to third container which was stolen and as to which no bill of lading issued provided that the bill of lading in evidence was the standard form bill of lading that carrier always used E. holding that display consisting of bill of rights preamble to indiana constitution and ten commandments would signal to the reasonable observer that the state approved of such a link and was sending a message of endorsement

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that display consisting of bill of rights preamble to indiana constitution and ten commandments would signal to the reasonable observer that the state approved of such a link and was sending a message of endorsement
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: mail, return receipt requested, addressed to its mayor, city manager or clerk; or by depositing with a designated delivery service authorized pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7502(f)(2) a copy of the summons and complaint, addressed, to the mayor, city manager, or clerk, delivering to the addressee, and obtaining a delivery receipt. As used in this sub-subdivision, “delivery receipt” includes an electronic or facsimile receipt. N.C. Gen Stat. § 1A-1 Rule 4(j)(5)(a) (2011) (emphasis added). The list of parties named in the statute is exclusive; service upon anyone other than the mayor, city manager, or clerk is insufficient to confer jurisdiction over a city. See Johnson v. City of Raleigh, 98 N.C. App. 147, 149-50, 389 S.E.2d 849, 851-52, disc. review denied, 327 N.C. 140, 394 S.E.2d 176 (1990) (<HOLDING>). Here, the summons and complaint were not Options: A. holding that the court lacks jurisdiction where a complaint was filed more than 30 days after the filing of the summons B. holding pursuant to bankruptcy rule 7004b9 that because the creditor mailed the complaint and summons to the debtors attorney and to the address listed in the debtors bankruptcy petition service of process was sufficient even if the debtors were out of the country and did not actually receive notice of the complaint and summons C. holding that service of a statecourt summons and complaint after removal to federal court is valid service D. recognizing that it is well settled law that an action is commenced by the service of a summons and without valid service of process the trial court has no jurisdiction to act E. holding that service of summons was insufficient to confer personal jurisdiction over defendant city where a copy of the summons and complaint was delivered to a person other than an official named in rule 4j5

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that service of summons was insufficient to confer personal jurisdiction over defendant city where a copy of the summons and complaint was delivered to a person other than an official named in rule 4j5
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 set forth on Schedule 4.9 , the Company shall use the net proceeds from the sale of the Securities hereunder for general corporate purposes and shall not use such proceeds: (a) for the satisfaction of any portion of the Company’s debt (other than payment of trade payables in the ordinary course of the Company’s business and prior practices and as contemplated by the Pay-Off Letter), (b) for the redemption of any Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents or (c) in violation of FCPA or OFAC regulations.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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, together with the Loan and Security Agreement and the other Loan Documents, constitute the entire agreement between Borrower and Lender concerning the subject matter hereof and may not be altered or amended except by written agreement signed by Lender. Borrower acknowledges and agrees that this Amendment is a final expression of the agreement between Lender and Borrower and this Amendment may not be contradicted by evidence of any alleged oral agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: academic exercise of resolving complicated factual questions in order to delineate an exact Guidelines range if the court has already settled on a reasonable sentence in light of the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Although the Second Circuit has determined that, in such cases, a precise -92 (1st Cir.1999) (applying de novo review to "the trial court’s interpretation of the guidelines or its final determination to see whether the facts here supported a finding that[the defendant] made a threat of death” but applying clear error review as to any "factual disputes”). Both the Fifth and Sixth Circuits, in contrast, have held that the applicability of the threat-of-death enhancement is a legal determination. See United States v. Soto-Martinez, 317 F.3d 477, 478-79 (5th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Winbush, 296 F.3d 442, 443 Options: A. holding question of law applied to undisputed facts reviewed de novo B. holding that antitrust standing is question of law reviewed de novo C. holding that waiver should be reviewed de novo when decided without trial on undisputed facts D. holding that when the facts of a robbery are undisputed the imposition of the enhancement is a question of the application of the guidelines to be reviewed de novo E. recognizing that this court reviews de novo the trial courts interpretation and application of a statute to undisputed facts

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that when the facts of a robbery are undisputed the imposition of the enhancement is a question of the application of the guidelines to be reviewed de novo
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 miscellaneous provisions set forth in Article VIII of the Pledge Agreement apply to this Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute but one contract. Delivery of an executed counterpart to this Agreement by facsimile transmission or electronic transmission in “.pdf” or comparable format shall be as effective as delivery of a manually signed original.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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: duty are ripe. Proof of actual damages is not an element of Tribune Publishing’s breach of contract claim. See, e.g., Nappe v. Anschelewitz, Barr, Ansell & Bonello, 97 N.J. 37, 477 A.2d 1224, 1228 (1984). “[W]henever there is a breach of contract, ... the law ordinarily infers that damage ensued, and, in the absence of actual damages, the law vindicates the right by awarding nominal damages.” Id. A “breach of a contract is per se a legal injury from which some damage will be inferred, and, in the absence of proof of actual damage arising from such breach, the plaintiff is entitled to nominal damages.” Car & Gen. Ins. Corp. v. Davimos, 12 N.J. Misc. 569, 173 A. 150, 151 (1934), aff'd, 114 N.J.L. 192, 176 A. 320 (1935); see also Culver v. Dziki, 123 N.J.L. 66, 8 A.2d 51, 52 (1939) (<HOLDING>). Thus, Tribune Publishing need not allege Options: A. holding that plaintiff was not entitled to a presumption of nominal damages when she had failed to request them B. holding that the right to nominal damages was waived in a breach of duty action when plaintiff failed to raise the issue of nominal damages until after the verdict C. holding that the plaintiff was entitled to nominal damages in a breach of contract regarding a fire appraisal D. holding that plaintiff waived the right to nominal damages in an excessive force case because nominal damages were not requested until after the verdict E. holding that when plaintiff has proven injury but has failed to prove the amount of damages the plaintiff is only entitled to nominal damages

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the plaintiff was entitled to nominal damages in a breach of contract regarding a fire appraisal
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 the Parties in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original instrument, but all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Signatures electronically transmitted by fax or in .pdf format shall be considered binding.

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: correctness of the plaintiffs alleged facts. See Johnson, 515 U.S. at 313-15, 115 S.Ct. at 2156-57; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) (stating that summary judgment is appropriate when “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and ... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law”). “The subjective intent of government actor defendants plays no part in qualified immunity analysis”; “[o]bjective legal reasonableness” is the determinative standard. Lassiter, 28 F.3d at 1150; see Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 641, 107 S.Ct. 3034, 3040, 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987) (noting that a government actor’s subjective beliefs about the legality of his conduct are irrelevant to qualified immunity analysis); Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 191, 104 S.Ct. 3012, 3017, 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984) (<HOLDING>). While evidence of improper motive is Options: A. holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity B. holding that reasonableness for qualified immunity purposes requires an objective inquiry into the totality of the circumstances C. recognizing that qualified immunity is evaluated under a purely objective standard without consideration for the government actors subjective belief D. holding that private defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity but remanding for a determination of whether they were liable as government actors E. holding that government entities may not assert qualified immunity

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that qualified immunity is evaluated under a purely objective standard without consideration for the government actors subjective belief
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: Applying the Blockburger test, we do not believe the acts for which Martin was convicted are the same in fact. The images of child pornography found on Martin’s computers were downloaded and saved at separate times. Moreover, these pictures involved the exploitation of different children. As the Wisconsin Supreme Court noted in a similar case: Even had [Defendant] downloaded all the image files in a very short period of time, the fact that there were more than 28 separate files supports a conclusion that he made a new decision to obtain each one. Every time he downloaded a new file, he recommitted himself to additional criminal conduct. Each decision to download more child pornography represented a new volitional departure. State v. Multaler, 252 Wis.2d 54, ¶ 58, 643 N.W.2d 437, 449 (<HOLDING>). [¶ 41.] Martin was charged and convicted for Options: A. holding that private possession of child pornography is not protected by the first amendment B. holding admission of videos containing child pornography was probative of intent to sexually assault a child C. holding a defendant found in possession of three or more copies of the same article of child pornography during a single episode may only be prosecuted for a single count of possession with intent to promote D. holding twentyeight charges against defendant for possession of child pornography were not multiplicious E. recognizing continuing harm from defendants knowing possession of child pornography

assistant: The best answer is D. holding twentyeight charges against defendant for possession of child pornography were not multiplicious
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: Pledgors. shall be responsible for the payment of any and all reasonable fees, costs and expenses which Agent may incur by reason of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the following: (i) any taxes of any kind related to any property or interests assigned or pledged hereunder; (ii) expenses incurred in filing public notices relating to any property or interests assigned or pledged hereunder; and (iii) any and all costs, expenses and fees (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses and court costs and fees), whether or not litigation is commenced, incurred by Agent in protecting, insuring, maintaining, preserving, attaching, perfecting, enforcing, collecting or foreclosing upon any Lien, security interest, right or privilege granted to Agent or any obligation of Pledgors under this Agreement, whether through judicial proceedings or otherwise, or in defending or prosecuting any actions or proceedings arising out of or related to this Agreement or any property or interests assigned or pledged hereunder.

assistant: Costs
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: report (“monitoring functions required of the EPA by section 6 [of the Senate Bill] are not likely to increase costs because they would most likely be carried out (as they would have been under current law) by registrants of organotin-containing substances ....”) (quoting letter from James Blum to Hon. Quentin N. Burdick, Chairman, Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (December 3, 1987)) S.Rep. No. 237, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. at 9 (1987). 15 . Chevron, U.S.A. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837, 843 n. 9, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 2782 n. 9, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984). 16 . Chem. Mfrs. Ass'n v. EPA, 919 F.2d 158, 162-63 (D.C.Cir.1990). 17 . See Plaintiffs’ SJ at 16-17. 18 . 5 U.S.C. 551(4) (1988). 19 . See e.g., NLRB v. Bell Aerospace Co., 416 U.S. 267, 294, 94 S.Ct. 1757, 1771, 40 L.Ed.2d 134 (1974) (<HOLDING>); SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194, 202-03, Options: A. holding that a state habeas proceeding decided on the merits precluded a section 1983 action in federal court B. holding that younger principles apply to an action for damages that relates to a pending state proceeding C. holding that a workers compensation proceeding is a legal proceeding D. holding that the plaintiff was precluded from raising the issue for the first time on appeal E. holding that the board was not precluded from announcing new principles in an adjudicative proceeding

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the board was not precluded from announcing new principles in an adjudicative proceeding
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: knowing that doing so would implicate a wounded Issa still waiting in the back yard. Issa now contends, as he did in his motion for new trial, that his trial counsel’s argument during closing was so absurd that it amounted to ineffective assistance. But during the hearing on Issa’s motion for new trial, his trial counsel testified that in light of the strong—albeit circumstantial—evidence against his client, he believed that his theory of a third perpetrator, who faked being shot after the struggle with C. D ennings v. State, 282 Ga. 679, 681-82 (4) (653 SE2d 17) (2007) (punctuation omitted); accord Dingier v. State, 293 Ga. App. 27, 31 (3) (666 SE2d 441) (2008). 55 Dingier, 293 Ga. App. at 31 (3) punctuation omitted); see Ponder v. State, 268 Ga. 544, 545 (2) (491 SE2d 363) (1997) (<HOLDING>). 56 See Ponder, 268 Ga. at 545 (2) (finding Options: A. holding that comment by prosecutor in closing argument that defense counsel did not produce evidence of the defendants innocence was not a comment on the defendants failure to testify B. holding a prosecutor may not comment on a defendants silence C. recognizing the right of a defendant to comment upon the failure of the state to produce evidence D. holding the prosecutors statements were not an inappropriate comment on the defendants failure to testify but rather a comment on the defendants failure to present convincing evidence to support his defense E. holding that it was permissible for prosecutor to comment on the general failure of the defense to produce any evidence

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that it was permissible for prosecutor to comment on the general failure of the defense to produce any evidence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a sufficient supporting brief for purposes of the Local Rules. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the court will grant Whiting’s motion to sever Cable-La’s third-party complaint against Whiting and GAI from the Cable-La-Williams matter. This results in two separate act nge Corp., 840 F.2d 249 (4th Cir.1988), continues to govern the distinction between mandatory and permissive forum-selection clauses in this circuit, because the Supreme Court’s subsequent overruling of the case was limited to a holding on an unrelated issue. See Lauro Lines S.R.L. v. Chasser, 490 U.S. 495, 109 S.Ct. 1976, 104 L.Ed.2d 548 (1989). The language contained in the forum-selection clause in the contract between Cable-La and Williams is unquestionably mandatory under Sterling Forest. 840 F.2d at 251-52 (<HOLDING>). 4 . The court notés that, while the Options: A. holding that a forumselection clause which stated that any dispute arising between the parties hereunder shall come within the jurisdiction of the competent greek courts was permissive rather than mandatory B. holding that venue in the district identified in 9 was mandatory C. holding clause reading the parties agree that in any dispute jurisdiction and venue shall be in california to be mandatory D. holding that a forumselection clause was mandatory because it provided for exclusive jurisdiction and venue in a particular court E. holding that the clause any dispute that shall arise between the parties with reference to the interpretation of this agreement or their rights with respect to any transaction involved was broad

assistant: The best answer is C. holding clause reading the parties agree that in any dispute jurisdiction and venue shall be in california to be mandatory
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: if , despite our policy , you choose to send us content , information , ideas , suggestions , or other materials , you further agree that instagram is free to use any such content , information , ideas , suggestions or other materials , for any purposes whatsoever , including , without limitation , developing and marketing products and services , without any liability or payment of any kind to you .

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: decisions cited in Morsani. See 790 So.2d at 1080 n. 22. For example, we cited Aldrich v. McCulloch Properties, Inc., 627 F.2d 1036 (10th Cir.1980). In that case, the court described equitable estoppel as arising “where the parties recognize the basis for suit, but the wrongdoer prevails upon the other to forego enforcing his right until the statutory time has lapsed.” Id. at 1043 n. 7. Therefore, although given its unique facts, the result in S.A.P. deviated from the uniform law of equitable estoppel, the foundations of that opinion were deeply rooted in, and in fact appeared to respect, that uniform law. In S.AP. we simply created an exception to the doctrine for childhood sexual abuse, as we have done in other areas. Compare Hearndon v. Graham, 767 So.2d 1179, 1186 (Fla.2000) (<HOLDING>), with Davis v. Monahan, 832 So.2d 708, 712 Options: A. recognizing that heamdon only created an exception to the statutory limitations on the delayed discovery doctrine and citing the unique and sinister nature of childhood sexual abuse to hold that heamdon is limited to the specific facts in that case B. holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse C. recognizing doctrine D. holding that the delayed discovery doctrine applies in situations involving childhood sexual abuse accompanied by traumatic amnesia E. recognizing the two distinct generic definitions of sexual abuse of a minor and holding that a statute contains the element of abuse under the medinavilla definition if it applies to sexual conduct with children younger than fourteen years

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the delayed discovery doctrine applies in situations involving childhood sexual abuse accompanied by traumatic amnesia
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: solely in respect of users located in the eea and/or australia , the following governing law provisions shall apply : these terms of use and any disputes or claims arising out of or in connection with it shall be governed by , and construed in accordance with , the laws of england .

assistant: Choice of law
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: Unless otherwise determined by the Administrator, as a condition to the non-forfeiture of Restricted Stock Units upon Retirement under Section 6(a) or upon a termination due to Disability under Section 6(c), the Grantee shall be required to execute a separation agreement and release, in a form prescribed by the Administrator, setting forth covenants relating to noncompetition, nonsolicitation, nondisparagement, confidentiality and similar covenants for the protection of the Company’s business, and releasing the Company from liability in connection with the Grantee’s termination. Such agreement shall provide for the forfeiture and/or clawback of the Restricted Stock Units subject to Section 6(a) or 6(c), and the Shares of Common Stock issued or issuable in settlement of the Restricted Stock Units, and related dividend equivalents and any other related rights, in the event of the Grantee’s failure to comply with the terms of such agreement. The Administrator will provide the form of such agreement to the Grantee at the date of termination, and the Grantee must execute and return such form within the period specified by law or, if no such period is specified, within 21 days after receipt of the form of agreement, and not revoke such agreement within any permitted revocation period (the end of these periods being the “Agreement Effectiveness Deadline”). If any Restricted Stock Units subject to Section 6(a) or 6(c) or related rights would be required to be settled before the Agreement Effectiveness Deadline, the settlement shall not be delayed pending the receipt and effectiveness of the agreement, but any such Restricted Stock Units or related rights settled before such receipt and effectiveness shall be subject to a “clawback” (repaying to the Company the Shares and cash paid upon settlement) in the event that the agreement is not received and effective and not revoked by the Agreement Effectiveness Deadline.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that shortcoming to defeat the plaintiffs claim. Morsani, 790 So.2d at 1077. As previously discussed, statutes of repose involve something more significant than a legal defect in a party’s case. While a statute of limitations precludes a remedy for the cause of action the plaintiff asserts, see Hess, 175 So.3d at 695, a statute of repose extinguishes that cause' of action altogether, see Bogorff, 583 So.2d at 1003. Such statutes thus erect an absolute bar to the assertion of the extinguished cause of action that is analogous to a jurisdictional statute of nonclaim. . See May, 771 So.2d at 1155 (quoting Comerica Bank & Trust, F.S.B. v. SDI Operating Partners, L.P., 673 So.2d 163, 168 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)); Musculoskeletal Inst. Chartered v. Parham, 745 So.2d 946, 953 (Fla. 1999) (<HOLDING>). ' It would be incongruous with the conception Options: A. holding wrongful death action barred by 10year construction statute of repose B. holding that statute of repose was not subject to toiling provision applicable to statute of limitations because among other reasons it would ignore fundamental distinctions between ordinary statutes of limitations and statutes of repose C. holding that a statute of repose sets absolute parameters of any action D. holding that provision has the characteristics of a statute of repose E. holding that statute was one of repose because it embodies the most distinctive characteristic of a statute of repose the barring of the right to bring an action rather than the remedy prescribed

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a statute of repose sets absolute parameters of any action