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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No amendment or waiver of any provision of this Agreement or any other Loan Document, nor consent to any departure by any Borrower or any Loan Party therefrom, shall in any event be effective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by the Required Lenders, and then such waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which given; provided , however , that no amendment, waiver or consent shall (a) unless in writing and also signed by each Lender directly affected thereby, do any of the following: (i) increase the amount or extend the expiration date of any Lender’s Commitment or otherwise commit such lender to make Loans hereunder , (ii) reduce the principal of, or interest on, the Term any Loan or any fees or other amounts payable hereunder or (iii) postpone any date fixed for any payment of principal of, or interest on, the Term any Loan or any fees or other amounts payable hereunder; provided that any waiver or reduction of any payment of the Term Loan from any Excess Cash Flow may be waived or modified solely with the written consent of the Required Term Lenders then holding a majority in amount of the Term Loans ; (b) unless in writing and signed by all of the Lenders, do any of the following: (i) change the percentage of the Commitments or of the aggregate unpaid principal amount of the Term Loan, or the number of Lenders, that shall be required for the Lenders or any of them to take any action hereunder [reserved] , (ii) other than in accordance with Section 9.13, release all or substantially all of the Collateral or release all or substantially all of the guarantors from their obligations under the Article X hereof, (iii) except as expressly permitted herein or in any other Loan Document, subordinate the Liens granted hereunder or under the other Loan Documents, to any other Lien, (iv) amend this Section 9.01, (v) amend the definitions definition of “Required Lenders” or (vi) other than in accordance with Section 6.01(d), release either Borrower from all of its obligations hereunder, (c) reserved unless in writing and signed by all of the Term Lenders, do any of the following: (i) change the percentage of the Commitments or of the aggregate unpaid principal amount of the Term Loan, or the number of Term Lenders, that shall be required for the Term Lenders or any of them to take any action hereunder or (ii) amend the definition of “Required Term Lenders” ; (d) unless in writing and signed by the Agent (in addition to the Lenders required above to take such action), amend, modify or waive any provision of Article VIII or affect the rights or duties of the Agent under this Agreement or any other Loan Document; (e) reserved, (f) reserved, or (g) unless in writing signed by members of any Class holding a majority in amount of such Class, have a materially disproportionate adverse effect on such Class.

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: F.2d at 497. In Higgins, the plaintiffs sued both the United States and the manufacturer of a missile seeking damages for exposure to toxic gas which escaped into the air at a missile silo near their home. Id. at 494. During cross-examination of one of the plaintiffs, a letter written by his treating physician was read into evidence. The letter questioned that the toxic gas caused the injuries and rather might have been caused by aspiration of a piece of popcorn causing infection. Id. at 497. The plaintiff objected, contending the letter constituted inadmissible hearsay. The court overruled the objection, finding that the letter was admissible under Rule 803(6). Id. Other jurisdictions have reached similar results. Pineau v. Home Depot, Inc., 45 Conn.App. 248, 695 A.2d 14, 17 (1997) (<HOLDING>); Fanelli v. di Lorenzo, 187 A.D.2d 1004, 591 Options: A. holding that where a treating physicians opinion is contradicted by a consulting physician the alj must explain on the record the reasons for rejecting the opinion of the treating physician B. holding letter from specialist to treating physician fell within business entry exception to the hearsay rule C. holding that shipping reports prepared by private citizen and submitted to the government pursuant to law fell within government records exception to hearsay rule D. holding that even if the trial court erred in excluding a letter from evidence that fell within an exception to the hearsay rule the error was harmless where admission of the letter would not have had a substantial effect on a partys rights E. holding florida drivers handbook hearsay and not within any recognized exception to hearsay rule

assistant: The best answer is B. holding letter from specialist to treating physician fell within business entry exception to the hearsay rule
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: elderly father who was not active in Tejas’s business. Since 1993, Payne and his father have been the only directors. The record also raises other fact questions as to alter ego; for example, in Payne’s deposition testimony (which was offered in the motion to deny summary judgment) Payne testified that he neither knew his specific title nor who the other directors were. Tejas’s corporate meetings were held at Payne’s car dealership office. The record also shows that Payne used some of his personnel from the dealership to handle bookkeeping functions for Tejas. Moreover, the record reveals that of the $379,510.13 fisted as accounts receivable in Tejas’s balance sheet, $292,162.00 of that amount is allocated as accounts receivable payable to “EM Payne.” See Castleberry, 721 S.W.2d at 272 (<HOLDING>). Payne argues that these facts are not enough Options: A. recognizing that pursuant to the traditional application of the alter ego doctrine corporate form may be disregarded when the corporation is the mere instrumentality or business conduit of another corporation or person B. holding that the us attorneys office is the alter ego of the united states exercising its sovereign power of prosecution C. holding that alter ego is shown from the total dealings of the corporation D. holding an alter ego action could be brought by the debtor corporation under texas law E. holding jurisdiction over an individual may not usually be predicated on jurisdiction over a corporation unless the corporation is the alter ego of the individual or when the individual perpetrates a fraud

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that alter ego is shown from the total dealings of the corporation
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: oil transactions do not negate good faith. Regardless of any alleged ulterior motive to the transactions, the Downstream Purchasers were legally bound to pay for the oil purchased from the Debtors on the 20th of the following month pursuant to their respective agreements. Had the oil derivatives market stabilized, the Downstream Purchasers might not have been able to offset or net liabilities against receivables owed to the Debtors because the Debtors would not have defaulted. Instead, the Downstream Purchasers would have been legally obligated to provide payment in full for the oil purchased, and there is nothing in the record to suggest they would not have done so. Similarly, there is no evidence to indicate that these transactions were a sham. See CIT Group, 2012 WL 4603049, at *8 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the Court finds that there is no Options: A. holding that unequivocal examples of racial animus included instances when plaintiff was instructed to keep his black ass off the phone and was called a black son of a bitch and a black motherfucker B. holding that the transaction must be fair and equitable and in good faith C. holding that articulable facts sufficient to support a stop included a telephone call that two black males were selling drugs at a particular location discovery of the juvenile at that location with another black male and the juveniles nervous body reflexes D. holding that commodities was a good faith purchaser and stating that commodities arrangement was not a sham black diamond delivered coal to commodities and commodities faithfully paid nearly fiftymillion dollars for its purchases until black diamonds bankruptcy E. holding that the white defendants association with a black defendant was not sufficient to give them standing to join in the black defendants batson challenge

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that commodities was a good faith purchaser and stating that commodities arrangement was not a sham black diamond delivered coal to commodities and commodities faithfully paid nearly fiftymillion dollars for its purchases until black diamonds bankruptcy
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: City maintains that each transfer is exempt from the preference rule under § 547(c)(8). Hailes argues that the transfer in this case was the writ of garnishment; therefore, the aggregate value of the transfer should be measured by the sum of all of the payments. Under Hailes’ theory, the aggregate value of the transfer exceeded $600, and § 547(e)(8) would not exempt the garnished proceeds from the preference rule. Therefore, the sole issue on appeal is whether, under § 547(c)(8), a court may aggregate all transfers to a single creditor to determine whether the creditor received $600 in value in the pre-filing period or whether each transfer must be evaluated individually. The issue has divided the few courts that have considered it. Compare In re Djerf, 188 B.R. 586, 588 (D.Minn.1995) (<HOLDING>); In re Alarcon, 186 B.R. 135 (D.N.M.1995) Options: A. recognizing need to balance interests of debt or and creditor in determining nature of protection to be afforded creditor B. holding that debtor can aggregate multiple transfers to a single creditor in ninetyday prefiling period to meet 547c8s 600 requirement C. holding that a bankruptcy court can order rejection retroactive to an earlier date to avoid penalizing the debtor for an unnecessary delay caused by the creditor D. holding that as a general rule affirmative action by the creditor must be taken to make it known to the debtor that the creditor has exercised his option to accelerate E. holding that creditor did not have actual knowledge of the bankruptcy filing where the debtor informed creditor of the possibility that a bankruptcy case would be filed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that debtor can aggregate multiple transfers to a single creditor in ninetyday prefiling period to meet 547c8s 600 requirement
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 Release referenced in Section 2 above, the execution and non-revocation of which is a condition to the receipt of any benefits under the Plan, may include terms addressing the clawback and restrictive covenants described in this Section 3, including (i) an agreement and acknowledgment from the Participant that the Company, in addition to being entitled to the clawback of the Severance Benefit or other monetary damages that flow from the breach, will be entitled to injunctive relief in a court of appropriate jurisdiction in the event of any such act or breach, or threatened act or breach, by the Participant under Section 3(b) (and parallel provisions included in the Release), (ii) a confirmation from the Participant that all restrictions in Section 3(b) (and parallel provisions included in the Release) are separate and distinct and reasonable, and a waiver of all defenses to the strict enforcement thereof, and (iii) other provisions that the Plan Administrator deems appropriate to enforce this Section 3.

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: government purposes since it treats citizens of different circuits differently and distinguishes between persons who filed suit before June 19,1991, and those who filed suit after that date. We address these two arguments in turn. 1. Due Process Scientific contends that section 27A is unconstitutional because it denies Scientific due process in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Scientific’s argument is premised, at least in part, upon the fact that Congress’s intent in enacting section 27A was to direct the outcome of pending litigation. The fact that it has an effect upon pending litigation does not constitute a due process violation. See International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers v. Robbins & Myers, 429 U.S. 229, 243-44, 97 S.Ct. 441, 450-51, 50 L.Ed.2d 427 (1976) (<HOLDING>). Scientific also maintains that the “statute Options: A. holding that any reliance by the parole board on inadmissible hearsay did not violate due process B. holding that doctrine does not violate due process C. holding that evidence obtained from valid search warrant did not violate constitutional due process provisions D. holding that revival by statute of an action which was already timebarred did not violate due process E. holding that 18month delay in filing forfeiture action did not violate due process

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that revival by statute of an action which was already timebarred did not violate due 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you agree to indemnify and hold uber and its officers , directors , employees and agents harmless from any and all claims , demands , losses , liabilities , and expenses ( including attorneys ' fees ) arising out of or in connection with : ( i ) your use of the services or services or goods obtained through your use of the services ; ( ii ) your breach or violation of any of these terms ; ( iii ) uber 's use of your user content ; or ( iv ) your violation of the rights of any third party , including third party providers .

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: Or The Bonneville Power Administration. The prior trial court also decided that there was no need to “address whether the Plaintiffs are third party beneficiaries as the evidence proved that they are direct beneficiaries.” Pac. Gas & Elec. Co., 105 Fed.Cl. at 433 n.2. In light of today’s privity ruling, the court is obligated to reconsider that determination, because a third-party beneficiary status is a jurisdictional exception to privity, i.e., only an intended third-party beneficiary has standing to enforce a contract to which it is not a direct party. See 13 Williston on Contracts § 37.1 (4th ed. 2013) (“[A]n exception to the need for privity was deve the express or implied intention of the contracting parties to benefit a specific third-party. See Montana, 124 F.3d at 1273 (<HOLDING>). The party asserting third-party beneficiary Options: A. holding that to maintain a class action the existence of the class must be pleaded and the limits of the class must be defined with some specificity B. holding that third party must fall within a class clearly intended to be benefitted by the contract C. holding that a plaintiff must fall within a class clearly intended to be a beneficiary thereby D. holding that it is elementary that in order to maintain a class action the class sought to be represented must be adequately defined and clearly ascertainable E. holding that advertising and selling expenses incurred by a manufacturer clearly fall within the class of charges which congress intended to be included in the tax base as they enter into the composition of the wholesale selling price

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a plaintiff must fall within a class clearly intended to be a beneficiary thereby
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: stand on the basis of such false material evidence violated his constitutional rights, and we reversed the denial of habeas relief. Id. at 985 (reversing the denial of habeas relief “[bjecause false and material evidence was admitted at [petitioner’s] trial in violation of his due process rights”). The Second Circuit has similarly explained that “[i]t is simply intolerable ... if a state allows an innocent person to remain incarcerated on the basis of lies.” Sanders v. Sullivan, 863 F.2d 218, 224 (2d Cir.1988) (reversing the denial of habeas relief and holding that the petitioner’s due process rights were violated when the petitioner in that case was convicted based on the material testimony of a witness who recanted); see also United States v. Wallach, 935 F.2d 445, 473 (2d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Here, we have resolved the threshold factual Options: A. holding that the perjury by a key government witness irrespective of whether the government knew of the perjury at the time of trial infected the trial proceedings and required reversal B. holding an individuals admission to a government agent prior to trial that he had previously committed perjury did not waive his privilege to invoke the fifth amendment as to that matter at trial C. holding that allegations of perjury require a demonstration that the witnesses actually committed perjury D. holding that plaintiff had failed to make showing required by favish where he alleged that government informant committed perjury at his trial because such assertion even if stated in sworn affidavit of plaintiff was too insubstantial to establish likelihood of government impropriety E. holding that a conviction violated due process because the prosecutor knowingly allowed a government witness to commit perjury

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the perjury by a key government witness irrespective of whether the government knew of the perjury at the time of trial infected the trial proceedings and required reversal
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: reach municipalities. Although section 3730(h) provides for the recovery of “2 times the amount of back pay,” it expressly states that its damage provisions are designed to “make the employee whole.” 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h). Congress’ characterization of this remedy as compensatory is entitled to great weight, as the question of whether a statute “is civil or punitive in nature is initially one of statutory construction.” Seling v. Young, 531 U.S. 250, -, 121 S.Ct. 727, 734 (2001). Moreover, in other statutes where Congress has provided for the doubling of lost wages, see, e.g., 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) (Fair Labor Standards Act), such damages have been considered compensatory, rather than punitive in nature. See Brooklyn Sav. Bank v. O’Neil, 324 U.S. 697, 707, 65 S.Ct. 895, 89 L.Ed. 1296 (1945) (<HOLDING>); but see Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Options: A. holding right to liquidated damages under fair labor standards act nonwaivable B. holding that claim for damages based on repair estimate is not a liquidated damage C. holding that liquidated damages under fair labor standards act constitutes compensation for the retention of a workmans pay which might result in damages too obscure and difficult of proof for estimate other than by liquidated damages D. recognizing that liquidated damages under the flsa are compensation not a penalty or punishment E. holding that because liquidated damages under the adea are punitive in nature a jurys award of state punitive damages and adea liquidated damages constitutes a double recovery and therefore reducing the total recovery by the amount of the liquidated damages award

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that liquidated damages under fair labor standards act constitutes compensation for the retention of a workmans pay which might result in damages too obscure and difficult of proof for estimate other than by liquidated damages
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: per year to audit their performance; and that a truck and driver be available for deliveries every Tuesday through Saturday. Id. The courts and the Board, however, have repeatedly regarded the presence or absence of these very factors as important in determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. One factor that the Regional Director emphasized was that the drivers “perform a function that is a regular and essential part of FedEx Home’s normal operations, the delivery of packages” to homes. Op. at 502. .Although my colleagues acknowledge that “the essential nature of a worker’s role is a legitimate consideration,” they minimize it as “not determinative.” Id. But that is true of every factor in the common-law test. See United Ins., 390 U.S. at 258, 88 S.Ct. 988 (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the cases have repeatedly cited Options: A. holding that all of the incidents of the relationship must be assessed and weighed with no one factor being decisive B. holding that no one factor is determinative and the weakness of one factor may be overborne by the strength of the others C. holding that edwards protection only extends to interrogation and that denial of counsel is only one factor to be considered in determining whether consent was voluntarily given but it is not a decisive fact D. holding that no one factor is determinative and the weakness of one factor may be overborne by the strength of the others E. holding that no single factor controls and that all factors must be weighed in light of fundamental fairness and the circumstances of the case

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that all of the incidents of the relationship must be assessed and weighed with no one factor being decisive
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) and (b) of section 13 — 214 should be construed together and tha v. Village of Willowbrook, 242 Ill. App. 3d 437, 443, 446-47 (1993) (finding that (1) in suit against municipality, limitations period for construction-related actions found in section 13 — 214(a) of the Code applies over limitations period found in section 8 — 101 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 85, par. 8 — 101) because former statute was enacted after latter provision; and (2) section 13 — 214(a), as a specific statutory provision, takes precedence over the limitations period for certain actions found in section 13 — 205 of the Code); American National Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago v. Booth/Hansen Associates, Ltd., 186 Ill. App. 3d 865, 867-69 (1989) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Walsh Construction Options: A. holding that the limitations period in section 13 214a takes precedence over the limitations period for personal injuries found in section 13 202 of the code B. holding that the then twoyear statute of limitations for constructionrelated actions found in section 13 214a of the code applies over the fiveyear statute of limitations period for certain actions found in section 13 205 of the code C. holding that limitations period in section 13 214a of the code applies over limitations period for contribution actions found in section 13 204 of the code because former provision is more specific D. holding that a twoyear statute of limitations period applies to all 1983 actions brought in pennsylvania E. holding that statute of limitations for contribution actions found in section 13 204 of the code applies over limitations period for malpractice actions found in section 13 212 of the code where the plaintiffs complaint was based solely on contribution act ill rev stat 1985 ch 70 par 301 et seq section 13 204 is more specific than section 13 212

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the then twoyear statute of limitations for constructionrelated actions found in section 13 214a of the code applies over the fiveyear statute of limitations period for certain actions found in section 13 205 of the code
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 476, 101 A. at 105. Furthermore, the Court held that “the mother is entitled to damages for her distress and disappointment at the time of the birth because through the defendant’s negligence she has been deprived of the right and the satisfaction of bearing a sound child, if it be found that the child’s deformity is due to the injury she received through the defendant’s negligence.” Id. The plaintiffs propose that Gagnon stands for a general rule that a pregnant woman can collect damages for her apprehension that she would give birth to a deformed child. They also cite various cases from other jurisdictions to support their argument that Mrs. Perrotti should be able to recover damages for her alleged mental suffering. See, e.g., Prescott v. Robinson, 74 N.H. 460, 69 A. 522 (1908) (<HOLDING>); Fehely v. Senders, 170 Or. 457, 135 P.2d 283 Options: A. holding that fundamental error occurred in the prosecution of a mother for aggravated manslaughter of her child when the prosecutor commented on the fact that the mother had contemplated having an abortion during the course of her pregnancy with the child B. holding that the mother was permitted to recover damages for mental anguish because of the reasonable probability that the defendants negligent act of severely injuring her would cause her to produce an abnormal child C. holding that evidence was sufficient to support trial courts best interest finding where mother allowed child to be in contact with individual who had physically abused her mother was not capable of caring for child on her own mother admitted at trial she had not found stable employment and child was doing well in her current placement D. holding that mother did not waive the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by failing to raise it in her first responsive pleading ie her answer to dhrs petition to terminate her parental rights because the mother sought leave to amend her answer to include the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction dhr did not object to that motion and the juvenile court allowed the mother to amend her answer E. holding that nonsignatory wife asserting in her individual capacity claims for damages such as her own mental anguish and loss of consortium earnings companionship society and inheritance lacked the type of privity contemplated for the contracting parties to bind her to a contract that she did not sign in her individual capacity

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the mother was permitted to recover damages for mental anguish because of the reasonable probability that the defendants negligent act of severely injuring her would cause her to produce an abnormal child
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, including both counterparts that are executed on paper and counterparts that are in the form of electronic records and are executed electronically. An electronic signature means any electronic sound, symbol or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed and adopted by a party with the intent to sign such record, including facsimile or e-mail electronic signatures. All executed counterparts shall constitute one agreement, and each counterpart shall be deemed an original. The parties hereby acknowledge and agree that electronic records and electronic signatures, as well as facsimile signatures, may be used in connection with the execution of this Agreement and electronic signatures, facsimile signatures or signatures transmitted by electronic mail in so-called pdf format shall be legal and binding and shall have the same full force and effect as if a paper original of this Amendment had been delivered had been signed using a handwritten signature. Landlord and Tenant (i) agree that an electronic signature, whether digital or encrypted, of a party to this Amendment is intended to authenticate this writing and to have the same force and effect as a manual signature, (ii) intended to be bound by the signatures (whether original, faxed or electronic) on any document sent or delivered by facsimile or , electronic mail, or other electronic means, (iii) are aware that the other party will reply on such signatures, and (iv) hereby waive any defenses to the enforcement of the terms of this Amendment based on the foregoing forms of signature. If this Amendment has been executed by electronic signature, all parties executing this document are expressly consenting under the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (“ E-SIGN ”) and Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (“ UETA ”), that a signature by fax, email or other electronic means shall constitute an Electronic Signature to an Electronic Record under both E-SIGN and UETA with respect to this specific transaction.

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: 507-08. The statement in this case about which defendant complains is distinguishable from that made by the Harbison attorney and does not amount to ineffective assistance. Trial counsel here was pointing out to the jury that specific intent was lacking in this case and that the lack of specific intent was the only difference between second-degree and first-degree murder. Defense counsel was arguing to the jury that, without specific intent, the most serious crime for which defendant could be convicted would be second-degree murder. This situation differs substantially from Harbison, where the attorney argued, “ T think you should find him guilty of manslaughter and not first degree.’ ” Id. at 178, 337 S.E.2d at 506. See State v. Harvell, 334 N.C. 356, 361, 432 S.E.2d 125, 128 (1993) (<HOLDING>). The statement in the present case does not Options: A. holding the crime of conspiracy is committed or not before the substantive crime begins B. holding that counsel did not admit the defendant was guilty of a crime when counsel noted that if the evidence established the commission of any crime that crime was voluntary manslaughter not murder C. holding that firstdegree murder is one crime although the defendant can commit the crime in several ways D. holding that unlike the specificintent crime of firstdegree murder seconddegree murder is a generalintent crime for which the defense of voluntary intoxication is not available E. holding counsel must only provide relevant facts of the crime

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that counsel did not admit the defendant was guilty of a crime when counsel noted that if the evidence established the commission of any crime that crime was voluntary manslaughter not murder
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 expressly permitted in this Agreement, directly or indirectly enter into any transaction or arrangement whatsoever or make any payment to or otherwise deal with any Affiliate, except, as to all of the foregoing in the ordinary course of and pursuant to the reasonable requirements of the Borrower’s business and upon fair and reasonable terms not materially less favorable to the Borrower than would be obtained in a comparable arm’s length transaction with a Person not an Affiliate of the Borrower.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: action against Respondent’s license issued pursuant to Chapter 560.” See §§ 560.114, 560.1285, 560.810, Fla. Stat. (2010); Fla. Admin. Code R. 69V-560.704. The administrative complaint gave clear notice of a point of entry, stating that failure to respond within twenty-one days of receipt would be deemed a waiver of all rights to a hearing “and Final Order will be entered without further notice.” Trisha’s One Stop failed to file a petition for hearing in response to the administrative complaint, which it received by certified mail on December 5, 2012. Accordingly, on January 25, 2013, the final order under review was entered without a hearing. As the basis for administrative action, the final order incorporated the facts alleged in the com n, 21 So.3d 919, 920 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (<HOLDING>); Aleong v. Fla. Dep’t of Bus. & Prof’l Options: A. holding that any person who receives written notice of an agency decision that does or may determine substantial interests and who fails to file a written request for a hearing within 21 days waives the right to request a hearing quoting florida administrative code rule 281061114 B. holding that when wojnowski failed to timely seek an administrative hearing to challenge the facts supporting ofrs intended action he waived any further opportunity to do so citing florida administrative code rule 281061114 C. holding no restitution hearing is mandated when defendant did not object to order of restitution or request a hearing D. holding reasonable an agency determination that a request for an investigative file did not include the employment file E. holding that florida administrative code rule 285211 which purported to allow an agency or hearing officer to dismiss a proceeding or enter a default as a sanction for failure to comply with a procedural order was invalid

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that any person who receives written notice of an agency decision that does or may determine substantial interests and who fails to file a written request for a hearing within 21 days waives the right to request a hearing quoting florida administrative code rule 281061114
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance by each Loan Party of the Loan Documents to which such Loan Party is a party, the borrowings thereunder and the use of the proceeds of the Revolving Loans (a) will not violate any applicable Requirement of Law of any Loan Party (except those as to which waivers or consents have been obtained), (b) will not conflict with, result in a breach of or constitute a default under the articles of incorporation, bylaws, articles of organization, operating agreement or other organization documents of the Loan Parties or any Material Contract to which such Person is a party or by which any of its properties may be bound or any material approval or material consent from any Governmental Authority relating to such Person, and (c) will not result in, or require, the creation or imposition of any Lien on any Loan Party’s properties or revenues pursuant to any Requirement of Law or Contractual Obligation other than the Liens arising under or contemplated in connection with the Loan Documents or Permitted Liens. No Loan Party is in default under or with respect to any of its Contractual Obligations except where such default could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: No Defaults
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: `` software '' is the software provided to you by linden lab and/or its suppliers under license in connection with the service , including but not limited to the software for accessing the service and any other communication software , whether facilitating text-based , chat-based , voice , audio or other communication , within or outside of the service , and any application program interfaces ( the `` apis '' ) for use with the service .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company may assign any of its rights under this Award. This Award will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the Company. Subject to the restrictions on transfer set forth in this Award, this Award will be binding upon the Holder and the Holder’s beneficiaries, executors, administrators and the person(s) to whom the Award Restricted Shares may be transferred by will or the laws of descent or distribution.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any change in the time, manner or place of payment of all or any part of the Indebtedness or the Guaranteed Obligations, or in any other term thereof, or any renewal, extension, increase, alteration, rearrangement, amendment, or other modification to any provision of any of the Loan Documents (other than this Guaranty and the Environmental Indemnity) or any other document, instrument, contract or understanding between Borrower and Lender or any other Person pertaining to the Indebtedness or the Guaranteed Obligations.

assistant: Modifications
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: As a regular full-time employee, you shall be entitled to participate in the employee benefits made available to similarly-situated employees, in accordance with the terms of such benefits plans and programs. Information regarding these employee benefits is available in the official plan documents, summary plan descriptions, and applicable summaries. Details on each plan will be provided at the time of hire. The Company, in its sole discretion, has the right to amend or terminate any benefit plan or program at any time and without prior notice. Your health benefits would be effective on the first day of the month of employment following the effective date of your hire if you timely enroll when you commence employment with Kite. The benefits package currently includes medical, dental and disability benefits.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any Lender may at any time, with notice to and the consent of the Agent, sell participations to any Person (other than a natural person or the Loan Parties or any of the Loan Parties’ Affiliates or Subsidiaries) (each, a “ Participant ”) in all or a portion of such Lender’s rights and/or obligations under this Agreement (including all or a portion of its Commitment and/or the Loans owing to it); provided , that , (i) such Lender’s obligations under this Agreement shall remain unchanged, (ii) such Lender shall remain solely responsible to the other parties hereto for the performance of such obligations and (iii) the Loan Parties, the Agent and the Lenders shall continue to deal solely and directly with such Lender in connection with such Lender’s rights and obligations under this Agreement. Any Participant shall agree in writing to comply with all confidentiality obligations set forth in Section 10.07 as if such Participant was a Lender hereunder.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: use any robot , bot , spider , crawler , scraper , site search/retrieval application , proxy or other manual or automatic device , method or process to access , retrieve , index , `` data mine , '' or in any way reproduce or circumvent the navigational structure or presentation of the service or its contents .

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: is too severe. The referee recommended that Kar-ten be disbarred from the practice of law. Karten argues that this Court should not accept the recommended discipline because the referee relied on three invalid aggravating factors. The first aggravating factor challenged by Karten is the referee’s reliance on Karten’s prior disciplinary offense. We find that this is a valid aggravating factor. Although the admonishment that Karten received was given after the conduct in the instant case occurred, this Court has said that “cumulative misconduct can be found when the misconduct occurs near in time to the other offenses, regardless of when discipline is imposed.” Florida Bar v. Golden, 566 So.2d 1286, 1287 (Fla.1990); see also Florida Bar v. Roberts, 770 So.2d 1207, 1209 (Fla.2000) (<HOLDING>). Karten also challenges the “refusal to Options: A. holding referee may consider prior disciplinary proceeding even though conduct subject to that proceeding occurred after the instant conduct B. holding that a sentencing court may consider acquitted conduct or uncharged criminal conduct C. holding that a proceeding under section 547 is a core proceeding D. holding that a workers compensation proceeding is a legal proceeding E. holding that in a noncore proceeding a bankruptcy court may enter final orders with the consent of all the parties to the proceeding

assistant: The best answer is A. holding referee may consider prior disciplinary proceeding even though conduct subject to that proceeding occurred after the instant conduct
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of a Change in Control, the vesting of the Options may be accelerated pursuant to the Company’s Executive Change in Control Plan or pursuant to Section 12 of the Plan. In any such event, the treatment of the Options shall be governed by the applicable provisions of the Executive Change in Control Plan and Section 12 of the Plan.

assistant: Change In Control
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: claim as “all or nothing.” Id. at 399-400. This ruling by this district court will be reviewed for an abuse of discretion—“[w]here a new trial motion asserts that the jury award is not supported by the evidence, the verdict must stand unless it is clearly, decidedly, or overwhelmingly against the weight of evidence.” Anaeme v. Diagnostek, Inc., 164 F.3d 1275, 1284 (10th Cir.1999) (citations omitted). The question of whether the jury award in this case was clearly against the weight of the evidence must be considered under Kansas law. As the Supreme Court has explained, the law applied in evaluating the legality of the amount of a jury verdict is substantive rather than procedural. Gasperini v. Center for the Humanities, 518 U.S. 415, 425, 428-31, 116 S.Ct. 2211, 135 L.Ed.2d 659 (1996) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, under the principles laid out in Options: A. holding that superior court erred in reversing trial courts order granting new trial and remanding for a new trial limited to apportionment of damages B. holding that an order granting a new trial in a civil action is appealable C. holding that the standard for granting a new trial on the basis that a jurys award of damages is improper influences outcomes by tightening the range of tolerable awards D. holding that an award of restitution is only for the loss caused by the specific conduct that is the basis of the offense of conviction E. holding that to offset a jurys damage award a separate thirdparty insurance award must cover the same loss which served as the basis for the jury award

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the standard for granting a new trial on the basis that a jurys award of damages is improper influences outcomes by tightening the range of tolerable awards