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: also provides that aperson commits the crime of telephonic harassment if the caller “intentionally harasses or annoys another person: “(c) By sending to, or leaving at, the other person’s telephone a text message, voice mail or any other message, knowing that the caller has been forbidden from so doing by a person exercising lawful authority over the receiving telephone.” The state did not charge defendant with telephonic harassment under paragraph (c) for leaving a “voice mail or any other message.” 3 See State v. Blair, 287 Or 519, 524-25, 601 P2d 766 (1979) (declaring ORS 166.065(1)(c) (1979), to be constitutionally inadequate because it did not require an ‘effect’ on the listener and the prohibited conduct was not narrowly defined); State v. Ray, 302 Or 595,600-01,733 P2d28 (1987) (<HOLDING>). 4 See State v. James, 266 Or App 660, 667 n Options: A. holding that state express advocacy definition without an electioneering communication limitation was not vague B. holding that threat as used in the coercion definition as that definition is incorporated into section 3605s witnesstampering prohibition was not unconstitutionally vague because nature of threat was informed by the harms enumerated in the definition in that case hatred contempt and ridicule C. holding that ors 1660651e 1985 was unconstitutional because it potentially reached areas of communication that would be constitutionally privileged and it incorporated a definition of obscenity that was unconstitutionally vague D. holding factor b is not unconstitutionally vague E. holding that attorney disciplinary rule was unconstitutionally vague as applied

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that ors 1660651e 1985 was unconstitutional because it potentially reached areas of communication that would be constitutionally privileged and it incorporated a definition of obscenity that was unconstitutionally vague
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: marks omitted) (emphasis in original). B. Arbitrability Objections to arbitrability — i.e., an arbitrator’s authority to hear a particular dispute-must be timely made. See, e.g., ComTech Dev. Co. v. Univ. of Conn. Educ. Props., Inc., 102 F.3d 677, 685 (2d Cir.1996) (“An objection to the arbitrability of a claim must be made on a timely basis, or it is waived.”). A party’s participation in the arbitration may waive rights or otherwise prevent it from contesting the jurisdiction of the arbitrator to hear a particular dispute. See, e.g., Application of Herman Miller, Inc., No. 97-CV-7878, 1998 WL 193213, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 21, 1998) aff'd sub nom. Herman Miller, Inc. v. Worth Capital, Inc. y, 173 F.3d 844 (2d Cir.1999); Gvozdenovic v. United Airlines, Inc., 933 F.2d 1100 (2d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); Teamsters Local Union No. 761 v. J.H. Merritt Options: A. holding that an arbitration agreement was invalid because inter alia the employer could modify the rules at any time without notice B. holding inter alia that common law claims were preempted C. holding that although party participated in arbitration even presenting argument on merits it had not waived its objection to arbitrators jurisdiction because it consistently objected to arbitrators jurisdiction throughout proceedings D. holding that appellants were bound by arbitrators ruling because they voluntarily and without objection participated in arbitration by inter alia arguing their case before an arbitrator E. holding that a court reviewing an arbitrators award in an act 111 grievance arbitration involves questions regarding 1 the jurisdiction of the arbitrator 2 the regularity of the proceedings 3 an excess of the arbitrators powers and 4 deprivation of constitutional rights

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that appellants were bound by arbitrators ruling because they voluntarily and without objection participated in arbitration by inter alia arguing their case before an arbitrator
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: definition of incarceration but explaining that residence in non-secure community treatment center or- halfway house is not imprisonment for guideline purposes); United States v. Phipps, 68 F.3d 159, 162 (7th Cir. 1995) (home detention not imprisonment for guideline purposes); United States v. Gordon, 346 F.3d 135, 138-39 (5th Cir. 2003) (same); United States v. Pielago, 135 F.3d 703, 711-14 (11th Cir. 1998) (community treatment center not imprisonment for guideline purposes); United States v. Jones, 107 F.3d 1147, 1161-65 (6th Cir. 1997) (home detention not imprisonment for guideline purposes); United States v. Latimer, 991 F.2d 1509, 1514 (9th Cir. 1993) (community treatment center not imprisonment for guideline purposes); but see United States v. Rasco, 963 F.2d 132 (6th Cir. 1992) (<HOLDING>). .The IDOC record for the 1996 conviction also Options: A. holding that confinement in community treatment center after parole revocation was part of original term of imprisonment B. holding that a right to confrontation exists in parole revocation proceedings C. holding that an important part of due process in the context of parole revocation is a written statement by the factfinders as to the evidence relied on and reasons for revoking parole D. holding that a defendant at federal sentencing who is on state parole where no parole revocation has occurred is not subject to an undischarged term of imprisonment thus ussg 5g13 is inapplicable E. holding that prison term following revocation of probation is a modification and part of the actual sentence imposed for the original offense

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that confinement in community treatment center after parole revocation was part of original term of imprisonment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All news releases, publicity or advertising by Borrower or its Affiliates through any media intended to reach the general public which refers to the Loan Documents or the financing evidenced by the Loan Documents, to Lender, JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, Barclays Bank PLC, Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, Morgan Stanley Bank, N.A. or any of their Affiliates shall be subject to the prior written approval of Lender, JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, Barclays Bank PLC, Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, and Morgan Stanley Bank, N.A. in their sole discretion, provided that Borrower and its Affiliates shall be permitted to make any disclosure required by the Exchange Act or any other applicable federal or State securities laws, rules or regulations without the prior written approval of Lender. All news releases, publicity or advertising by Lender or any of its Affiliates through any media intended to reach the general public which refers to the Loan Documents or the financing evidenced by the Loan Documents, or to Borrower or its Affiliates shall be subject to the prior written approval of Borrower, not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, provided , that (i) any news releases, publicity or advertising issued in connection with a sale, Securitization or other disposition of the Loan, or any portion thereof or required by applicable law and (ii) any marketing or other advertising in connection with the enforcement of Lender’s remedies after an Event of Default, shall not require the prior written approval of Borrower.

assistant: Publicity
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: defendants’ motion to dismiss the DCCPPA is denied. iii. Kansas The Kansas Consumer Protection Act (“KCPA”) provides that “[n]o supplier shall engage in any unconscionable act or practice in connection with a consumer transaction. An unconscionable act or practice violates this act whether it occurs before, during or after the transaction.” KaN. Stat. Ann. § 50-627(a). Defendants, as manufacturers and distributors of chocolate candy, qualify as “supplier^]” within the meaning of the Act. Id. § 50-624(j). Despite the KCPA’s seemingly broad language, the Supreme Court of Kansas has distinguished between consumer harms re-dressable thereunder and pricing harms governed by the Kansas antitrust statute. Equitable Life Leasing Corp. v. Abbick, 243 Kan. 513, 757 P.2d 304, 306-08 (1988) (<HOLDING>); see also Maberry v. Said, No. 94-2416, 1996 Options: A. holding that plaintiff could recover both treble damages under state racketeering statute and punitive damages under fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims because the statute provided that actions brought under it are remedial and not punitive and that civil remedies provided under it are supplemental and not mutually exclusive B. holding that a plaintiff who proves a cause of action under 1981 may recover punitive damages where the plaintiff is entitled to an award of compensatory damages even if nominal C. holding that while punitive damages were proper under antitrust law the plaintiff could not recover them under the kcpa which is designed to redress other forms of consumer harm D. holding that punitive damages are not allowed under the flsa E. holding that where plaintiffs were entitled to recover both treble damages and punitive damages under the illinois nursing home care reform act both issues could be submitted to the jury and the plaintiff could choose which award to be reflected in the judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that while punitive damages were proper under antitrust law the plaintiff could not recover them under the kcpa which is designed to redress other forms of consumer harm
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the client cannot afford new counsel satisfies the coercion statute element of "withhold[ing] testimony or information with respect to a person's legal claim -or defense.” AS 11.41.530(a)(6). 67 . ^ AS 11.41.530(a). 68 . Timothy would also have to know that Jackie was in some way dependent on him. There is no ambiguity in the record that Timothy knew Jackie was dependent on him because she could not afford a new attorney. 69 . See Mapco Express, Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 538 (Alaska 2001) (electing not to remand for an explicit finding because "it [was] obvious how the trial court resolved [the] conflict" between testimony and purportedly contradictory evidence, accepting the former as credible despite the conflict); Frontier Saloon, Inc. v. Short, 557 P.2d 779, 781 (Alaska 1976) (<HOLDING>). 70 . Price v. Eastham, 128 P.3d 725, 727 Options: A. holding that a reviewing court has the power to reject the findings and conclusions of the trial court where the findings are not supported by the evidence B. holding that remand for explicit findings was not necessary where it was readily apparent that the trial court accepted one partys testimony and rejected the other partys C. holding that the trial courts exclusion of evidence about a partys damages was at best harmless error because the partys method of calculating damages contravened indiana law and was without merit D. holding that one partys economic status may cause it to forego certain rights it would otherwise have against the other party E. holding that the tax court would be remiss not to consider the partys bad conduct in other cases

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that remand for explicit findings was not necessary where it was readily apparent that the trial court accepted one partys testimony and rejected the other partys
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: hold an interest. Ryan Operations G.P. v. Santiam-Midwest Lumber Co., 81 F.3d 355, 362 (3d Cir.1996); Oneida Motor Freight, Inc. v. United Jersey Bank, 848 F.2d 414, 417 (3d Cir.1988); In re Tully, 818 F.2d 106, 110 (1st Cir.1987). To allow the Debtor to secrete estate assets based upon a determination made unilaterally by the Debtor and outside the purview of this Court would upend the system of disclosure required to maintain the integrity of the bankruptcy system. Further, a rule that allows a debtor the discretion to pay one creditor outside the supervision of the bankruptcy court would risk the subversion of the integrity of estate administration by eliminating any mechanism to protect the Code’s distribution priorities. See, e.g., In re Foster, 19 B.R. 28, 29 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1982) (<HOLDING>). While this Court’s equitable powers are Options: A. holding that an anticipated tax refund was property of the bankruptcy estate as of the date the bankruptcy case was filed B. holding that the decedents estate had standing because the traditional requirement that the plaintiff show an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the conduct of the defendant is met by the allegation in the complaint that the defendants actions resulted in the diminishment of the assets of the estate C. holding that the bankruptcy code endows the bankruptcy trustee with the exclusive right to sue on behalf of the estate D. holding that the unauthorized transfer of estate assets was in blatant disregard of the integrity of the court as well as the constraints mandated by congress in the bankruptcy code E. holding that bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to control disposition of chapter 13 debtors property that is not property of the bankruptcy estate unless the property is related to the bankruptcy proceedings of the code

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the unauthorized transfer of estate assets was in blatant disregard of the integrity of the court as well as the constraints mandated by congress in the bankruptcy 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you will not remove , alter or obscure any copyright , trademark , service mark or other proprietary rights notices incorporated in or accompanying the airbnb platform , airbnb content or member content .

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: This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts by the parties hereto (including by facsimile and electronic (e.g. “.pdf”, or “.tif”) transmission), each of which counterparts when so executed shall be an original, but all the counterparts shall together constitute one and the same instrument.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Executive’s employment hereunder is terminated by either party by reason of the Executive’s Disability, the Company’s shall pay the Executive the unpaid Accrued Compensation through the Termination Date within thirty (30) days following the Executive’s Termination Date, except that any portion thereof required to be paid sooner under applicable law shall be paid by the applicable deadline.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: our prior qualified-immunity cases have not imposed the requirement. However, we find that the lack of such a specification impairs our ability to carry out our responsibilities e some basis for distinguishing between well-reasoned conclusions arrived at after a comprehensive consideration of all relevant factors, and mere boiler-plate approval phrased in appropriate language but unsupported by evaluation of the facts or analysis of the law.” Protective Committee for Indep. Stockholders of TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v. Anderson, 390 U.S. 414, 434, 88 S.Ct. 1157, 20 L.Ed.2d 1 (1968). At least one other Circuit has encountered the same difficulty in the qualified-immunity context that motivates us to act in a supervisory capacity here. See Beck v. Schwartz, 992 F.2d 870, 871 (8th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). Our approach differs from Beck’s. We cannot Options: A. holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that a motion for summary judgment was not opposed B. holding that it was error for the district court to overrule appellants motion for summary judgment without reference to the qualified immunity defense C. holding that arguments not presented to the district court in response to a motion for summary judgment are waived D. holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that motion for summary judgment was not opposed E. holding district court did not err by considering a contract central to the dispute without converting the motion to a motion for summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that it was error for the district court to overrule appellants motion for summary judgment without reference to the qualified immunity defense
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and prohibit that spouse from realizing any investment income generated by his separate property interest. Steven R. Brown, An Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Division of Pension Benefits in Divorce and Post-Judgment Partition Actions: Cu 534, 535 (1996) (noting that QDRO unambiguously gave the non-employee wife a right to receive her portion of the marital share of any early retirement subsidy available to the husband when the husband actually retires); Layne v. Layne, 83 Ohio App.3d 559, 615 N.E.2d 332, 336 (1992) (stating that a non-employed former spouse is entitled to the benefit of any increase in the value of his or her unma-tured proportionate share after divorce attributable to the continued participation of the other spouse in the retirement plan, including earl .App.1994) (<HOLDING>); Greenwood v. Greenwood, 746 A.2d 358, 361-62 Options: A. holding husbands early retirement subsidy was not marital property as a vested right but an option contingent upon his continued employment and eventual qualification for the subsidy in nine years based upon value of the pension frozen at the time of dissolution B. holding that a nonemployee spouse holds a community marital property interest in pension plan early retirement enhancements because practically by definition the right to retirement benefits that accrues at least in part during marriage before separation underlies any right to an enhancement C. holding that qdros providing the former wife with future enhancements that were not part of the marital portion of husbands pension plan including future improvements cost of living adjustments and early retirement subsidies conflicted with the final judgment that valued the pension at the time of dissolution D. holding that nonemployee spouse waived distribution of her husbands early retirement benefits because although both parties were aware of the enhancements the additional benefits were not included in calculation of the pension funds at the time of dissolution E. recognizing the continued interest of a criminal defendant in frozen property prior to forfeiture

assistant: The best answer is A. holding husbands early retirement subsidy was not marital property as a vested right but an option contingent upon his continued employment and eventual qualification for the subsidy in nine years based upon value of the pension frozen at the time of dissolution
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: WL 760811, at 4-6 (M.D.Tenn. Aug. 29, 1994), report and recommendation approved by, No. 1:93-0211, 1994 WL 761231 (M.D.Tenn. Oct. 31, 1994); Rodriguez v. U.S. Dep’t of Treasury, 131 F.R.D. 1, 7-9 (D.D.C.1990). In a perceived disability case, the issue of whether an employer regarded a job applicant as disabled within the meaning of the Act is a matter that the jury decides. See Cook v. State of R.I., Dep’t ofMHRH, 10 F.3d 17, 25 (1st Cir.1993). With regard to this question, a jury may conclude that an employer viewed a prospective employee as unable to perform a major life activity, namely working, if the former, in rejecting an applicant, betrays the belief that the individual’s impairment prevents her from performing a wide range of jobs. Id. at 26. See also Forrisi, 794 F.2d at 935 (<HOLDING>). In the present case, the plaintiffs are Options: A. holding that an employer regards an employee as handicapped in his or her ability to work by find ing the employees impairment to foreclose generally the type of employment involved B. holding that when an employer takes steps to accommodate an employees restrictions it is not thereby conceding that the employee is disabled under the ada or that it regards the employee as disabled C. holding that a plaintiffs ability to work is substantially limited when his impairment foreclosed him generally from obtaining jobs doing the type of work plaintiff has chosen as his field D. holding an employee is an agent of his employer where the employer assumes the right to control time manner and method of work E. holding that an employers awareness of an employees impairment without more is insufficient to demonstrate that the employer regarded the employee as disabled

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an employer regards an employee as handicapped in his or her ability to work by find ing the employees impairment to foreclose generally the type of employment involved
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 waiver by Landlord or Tenant of any provision of this Lease or of any breach by Landlord or Tenant hereunder shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision hereof, or of any subsequent breach by the other party. Consent to or approval of any act requiring consent or approval under this Lease shall not be deemed to render unnecessary the obtaining of such consent to or approval of any subsequent act. No act or thing done by Landlord or Landlord’s agents during the Lease Term shall be deemed an acceptance of a surrender of the Premises, unless in writing signed by Landlord. The delivery of the keys to any employee or agent of Landlord shall not operate as a termination of the Lease or a surrender of the Premises. The acceptance of any Rent or other payments following a breach of this Lease shall not constitute a waiver of such breach or any other breach unless such waiver is expressly stated in a writing signed by the waiving party.

assistant: Waivers
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: Administrative Agent and the Arrangers shall have received from Sponsor (i) the Historical Financial Statements, (ii) pro forma consolidated balance sheets of the Sponsor and its Subsidiaries as at the Funding Date, and reflecting the consummation of the Transactions, the related financings and the other transactions contemplated by the Credit Documents to occur on or prior to the Funding Date, which pro forma financial statements shall be in form and substance satisfactory to Administrative Agent and Arrangers, and (iii) the Projections.

assistant: Financial Statements
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: challenged by Plaintiff. Plaintiff relies instead on a statistical analysis of a company-wide data pool and makes no attempt to narrow the data pool to the locations in which she worked or the positions which she challenges. As this Court noted in the order denying class certification, the probative value of Plaintiffs statistical evidence is therefore highly questionable, in significant part due to the treatment of factors such as experience, education, and specific promotion processes. Cooper v. Southern Company, 205 F.R.D. 596, 613-14 (N.D.Ga.2001). The analytical deficiencies of Plaintiffs statistics diminish the probative value of this evidence such that it cannot by itself support a claim of disparate treatment. See Brown v. American Honda Co., 939 F.2d 946, 952 (11th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); Hawkins v. Ceco Corp., 883 F.2d 977, 985 Options: A. holding that summary judgment was appropriate where plaintiffs statistical evidence which lacked specific analytical foundation and thus failed to show that employer maintained discriminatory intent was insufficient to establish prima facie case or pretext B. holding reliance on statistical evidence of inexorable zero was sufficient to establish prima facie case notwithstanding plaintiffs failure to reference appropriate workpool C. holding to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination a plaintiff must show he 1 D. holding that plaintiffs statistical evidence failed to establish prima facie case or pretext where evidence failed to make specific analytical comparisons E. holding the plaintiff failed to make a prima facie case that the defendants failure to promote him was discriminatory where the plaintiff failed to that show he was qualified for the relevant position

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that summary judgment was appropriate where plaintiffs statistical evidence which lacked specific analytical foundation and thus failed to show that employer maintained discriminatory intent was insufficient to establish prima facie case or pretext
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: v. Rivas-Marmol, 679 So.2d 808, 809 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), where the Third District determined that an arrest of an individual accused of DUI occurred after he failed a field sobriety test and was handcuffed, placed in the back of a police cruiser, and advised he was going to the police station. In the case before us, Ms. Mathis was detained and, after failing to complete the field sobriety tests, handcuffed and invol untarily transported to CBT. Ms. Mathis was notified that her car would be impounded if alternate arrangements were not made to secure it. Although Deputy McKenzie told Ms. Mathis why she was stopped and testified that he transferred her to CBT to continue the DUI investigation, these statements are insufficient to establish mere detention. See Rivas-Marmol, 679 So.2d at 809 (<HOLDING>). The trial court correctly concluded that Ms. Options: A. holding that the odor of alcohol on the defendants breath her admission that she had a few drinks earlier in the evening and a positive result on a breath test do not provide probable cause to arrest her for dui B. holding that arresting officers testimony at suppression hearing supported finding of probable cause to arrest defendant for dwi despite contradictory testimony of defendant and his passenger and despite minor inconsistencies in officers testimony C. holding that an unlawful stop may invalidate an ensuing arrest and that without a valid arrest there can be no request to take a breath test which may lead to a lawful suspension D. holding that suppression of stateadministered breath test is necessary where the accused is denied access to a telephone despite his requests to arrange an independent chemical test E. holding that an arrest occurred despite an officers testimony that the accused was only detained prior to a breath test

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an arrest occurred despite an officers testimony that the accused was only detained prior to a breath test
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All covenants, agreements, representations and warranties made in this Subordination Agreement shall, except to the extent otherwise provided herein, survive the execution and delivery of this Subordination Agreement, and shall continue in full force and effect until the Discharge of Senior Indebtedness has occurred.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you agree to submit to the exclusive personal jurisdiction of the courts located within san mateo county , california ( and , for the avoidance of doubt , to exclude the jurisdiction of any other court ) for the purpose of litigating all such claims or disputes .

assistant: 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 party represents and warrants that (a) such party is not subject to any contract, arrangement, agreement, policy or understanding, or to any statute, governmental rule or regulation, that in any way limits such party’s ability to enter into and fully perform such party’s obligations under this Agreement; (b) such party is not otherwise unable to enter into and fully perform such party’s obligations under this Agreement; and (c) upon the execution and delivery of this Agreement by both parties, this Agreement shall be such party’s valid and binding obligation, enforceable against such party in accordance with its terms, except to the extent that enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency or similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The rights and obligations of the parties under the provisions of this Agreement shall survive, and remain binding and enforceable, notwithstanding the expiration of the Term, the termination of this Agreement, the termination of Executive’s employment hereunder or any settlement of the financial rights and obligations arising from Executive’s employment hereunder, to the extent necessary to preserve the intended benefits of such provisions.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: forge any tcp/ip packet header or any part of the header information in any email or newsgroup posting , or in any way use the services or content to send altered , deceptive , or false source-identifying information ;

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: No failure on the part of Lender to exercise, and no forbearance, delay or omission by Lender in exercising, any right or remedy hereunder shall impair such right or remedy or operate or be construed as a waiver thereof or any acquiescence therein, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right or remedy hereunder preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right or remedy hereunder.

assistant: No Waivers
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: follow this link for further information on complying with the ftc 's guidance : https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/one-stops/advertisement-endorsements/091005revisedendorsementguides.pdf .

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: known they were violating a clearly established right. Defendants could have reasonably believed that the duties of an administrative assistant were not merely technical, as in Barnes. Billingsley was the sole intermediary between O’Mara and his constituents. She received calls from citizens, transmitted the information to O’Mara, and communicated his response to them. She also performed a broad range of duties that dealt with sensitive issues ranging from proposed legislation to county development projects. It was thus reasonable for O’Mara, holding as he did a legislative position, to demand personal political loyalty from the one staffer — Billings-ley — -who acted as a conduit of information to and from O’Mara’s constituents. See Hudson v. Burke, 913 F.2d 427, 432-33 (7th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Granted, the relationship between Options: A. holding that persecution was on account of political opinion because petitioners prosecutorial investigation into acts of political corruption was by its very nature political B. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract because of political affiliation not protected by first amendment C. holding that legislative aides could be terminated on account of political affiliation when they investigated and reported facts that provided input on sensitive governmental issues D. holding that independent contractor claiming loss of and denial of contracts because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment E. holding that independent contractor claiming denial of public contract because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that legislative aides could be terminated on account of political affiliation when they investigated and reported facts that provided input on sensitive governmental issues
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: to rule on the remand issue.” (Defs. Mem. at 7.) Customarily, a federal court first resolves any doubts about its jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case before reaching the merits or otherwise disposing of the case. On some occasions, however, considerations of judicial economy and restraint may persuade the court to -avoid a difficult question of subject-matter jurisdiction when the case may be disposed of on a simpler ground. Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P. v. Peaslee, 88 F.3d 152, 155 (2d Cir. 1996). The court is skeptical that transferring the case to a different federal venue constitutes a "disposal” under Cantor, since it would not moot the question of jurisdiction. Cf. Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Int'l Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422, 431, 127 S.Ct. 1184, 167 L.Ed.2d 15 (2007) Options: A. holding that a district court may dismiss based on forum non conveniens without first addressing personal jurisdiction B. holding that 1404a governed a forum non conveniens motion to transfer based upon a forum selection clause despite the current forums public policy that may refuse to enforce such provisions C. holding that issue concerning forum non conveniens decision was not suitable for interlocutory appeal in part because a forum non conveniens decision is inherently factsensitive D. holding that a district court has discretion to grant a defendants forum non conveniens motion to transfer before disposing of any other threshold challenges E. holding that a permissive forum selection clause containing a waiver of any claims of forum non conveniens amounts to a mandatory forum selection clause at least where the plaintiff chose the designated forum

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a district court may dismiss based on forum non conveniens without first addressing personal 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: Buyer shall deliver the balance of the Purchase Price (less the amount of the Final Earnest money, plus or minus prorations and escrow fees, if any) to Seller and Seller shall execute and deliver the Deed (as defined below) to Buyer at “Closing”. Closing shall take place on December 11, 2015 ( “ Closing Date ” ). Seller must provide Buyer with evidence of good and merchantable title prior to Closing.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Inc. v. Interwest Sav. Ass’n, 717 S.W.2d 452, 454 (Tex.App. — Fort Worth 1986, no writ). An injunction that fails to identify the harm that will be suffered if it does not issue must be declared void and be dissolved. Moreno v. Baker Tools, 808 S.W.2d at 210; Hermann Hosp. v. Thu Nga Thi Tran, 730 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Tex.App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, no writ). This rule operates to invalidate an injunction even when the complaining party fails to bring the error to the trial court’s attention. Hopper v. Safeguard Business Systems, 787 S.W.2d 624, 626 (Tex.App. — San Antonio 1990, no writ); Courtlandt Place Historical Foundation v. Doerner, 768 S.W.2d 924, 926 (Tex.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1989, no writ) (citing Interfirst Bank San Felipe v. Paz Const., 715 S.W.2d 640, 641 (Tex.1986) (<HOLDING>)). The injunction in the instant case does not Options: A. holding that courts must strictly adhere to title viis procedural requirements and stating that these requirements are not to be disregarded by courts out of a vague sympathy for particular litigants B. holding 2513 to be jurisdictional and therefore must be strictly construed C. holding pcra time limits are jurisdictional in nature and must be strictly construed D. holding that a governments consent to be sued must be construed strictly in favor of the sovereign E. holding that requirements of rule 683 are mandatory and must be strictly followed

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that requirements of rule 683 are mandatory and must be strictly followed
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: exercised supplemental jurisdiction over their claims. Plaintiffs' only substantive statement regarding the district court's exercise of jurisdiction is that the district court erroneously denied plaintiffs’ motion to sever these claims and remand them back to state court, saying that they were part of the "same case or controversy” as the forfeiture itself, and that subject matter jurisdiction was present under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) even though the bank employees' alleged actions had occurred months previously and had minimal factual nexus with the consent judgment of forfeiture. See Plaintiffs' Br. at 59. It is only in their reply brief that Plaintiffs set forth a developed argument and citations to support their claim. United States v. Crozier, 259 F.3d 503, 517 (6th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Nevertheless, as discussed in the main text, Options: A. holding that this court will not address the merits of an issue presented for the first time in a reply brief B. holding that issue raised for the first time in reply brief was waived C. holding that an argument raised for the first time in a reply brief is waived D. holding that defendant could not address merits of claim of error for first time in reply brief even though defendant cited to statute governing issue in initial brief claim of error deemed waived on appeal E. holding an appellant who raised an issue for the first time in his reply brief waived the claim

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that defendant could not address merits of claim of error for first time in reply brief even though defendant cited to statute governing issue in initial brief claim of error deemed waived on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be completed beforehand. Dallas County v. Coskey, 247 S.W.3d 753, 755 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008, pet. denied). We agree that Section 311.034 does not apply to the post-suit notice requirements of Section 89.0041. See Tex.Loc.Gov’t Code Ann. § 89.004; Coskey, 247 S.W.3d at 755-56. Moreover, legislative intent to make Section 89.004 jurisdictional could have been provided for by statute in light of the apparent inconsistency between Section 89.0041 and Section 311.034. It is not this Court’s job to insert words in a statute when the word is absent. Laidlaw Waste Sys. (Dallas), Inc. v. City of Wilmer, 904 S.W.2d 656, 659 (Tex.1995). Other courts have followed the same line of reasoning set out in Coskey. See County of Bexar v. Bruton, 256 S.W.3d 345, 349 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2008, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); Roccaforte v. Jefferson County, 281 S.W.3d Options: A. recognizing that issue exhaustion is a mandatory although not jurisdictional requirement B. holding that section 890041 is not a jurisdictional requirement rather a requirement to maintain suit C. holding that the ftcas exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional D. holding that issue exhaustion is mandatory even if not a statutory jurisdictional requirement E. holding that this time requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that section 890041 is not a jurisdictional requirement rather a requirement to maintain suit
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: two propositions, and the verdict does not specify upon which the jury acted, there can be no certainty that they found upon one rather than the other” and preclusion is inappropriate. 158 U.S. 216, 222, 15 S.Ct. 816, 818, 39 L.Ed. 956 (1895); see also Fayerweather, 195 U.S. at 302, 25 S.Ct. at 65 (When the basis upon which a judgment is rendered is unclear, it is "tantamount to a finding in favor of the successful party of all facts necessary to sustain the judgment.” (emphasis added)). In Brown II, we observed that Florida courts uphold this common-law protection: [Pjreclusive effect is not given to issues which could have, but may not have, been decided in an earlier lawsuit between the parties. See, e.g., Acadia Parsers, L.P. v. Tompkins, 673 So.2d 487, 488-89 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (<HOLDING>); Allstate Ins. Co. v. A.D.H., Inc., 397 So.2d Options: A. holding that a cause of action for breach of contract accrues at the time of the breach B. recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract C. holding party in breach could not maintain suit for breach of contract D. holding that jurys verdict for the defendant in a breach of contract action did not establish the absence of breach because the jury was instructed that it could find for the defendant if it concluded that the defendant had not breached the contract or if the defendant proved an affirmative defense E. holding that a breach of contract claim against one defendant related back to interference with contract claim against that defendant and breach of contract claim against second defendant because it was based on same set of operative facts

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that jurys verdict for the defendant in a breach of contract action did not establish the absence of breach because the jury was instructed that it could find for the defendant if it concluded that the defendant had not breached the contract or if the defendant proved an affirmative defense
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: he maintains that public policy supports this position. A negligence cause of action has three elements: (1) a legal duty owed by one person to another, (2) a breach of that duty, and (3) damages proximately caused by the breach. D. Houston, Inc. v. Love, 92 S.W.3d 450, 454 (Tex.2002). The threshold inquiry in a negligence case is duty. Centeq Realty, Inc. v. Siegler, 899 S.W.2d 195, 197 (Tex.1995); Mathis v. RKL Design/Build, 189 S.W.3d 839, 844 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). The existence of duty is a question of law fo judgment s ry duty to persons who claim an interest in a decedent’s non-testamentary property; to them, she owes no legal duty of care. See In re Ernst, No. 04-10-00319-CV, 2011 WL 192654 (Tex.App.-San Antonio Jan. 12, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (<HOLDING>). Historically, some courts of appeals have Options: A. holding that executor and administratrix of estates were bound by arbitration provisions adopted by decedents because those representatives stand in the shoes of the decedent in wrongful death actions B. holding decedents death did not arise out of her employment due to lack of causal connection between work and death since nature of work did not increase risk she would be slain by criminal act C. holding that decedents daughter was necessary party to maryland wrongful death action D. holding that plaintiffs failure to prove decedents death was caused by the wrongful acts of the defendant precludes any recovery of wrongful death damages under mississippis wrongful death statute E. holding that executor owed no legal duty under negligence theory to decedents sons who claimed bank accounts upon her death under a right of survivorship but were not beneficiaries of any of decedents property under her will

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that executor owed no legal duty under negligence theory to decedents sons who claimed bank accounts upon her death under a right of survivorship but were not beneficiaries of any of decedents property under her will