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: On: The Joint Petition Filed Dish Network LLC, et al. for Declaratory Ruling Concerning the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Rules, CG Docket No. 11-50, 26 FCC Red. 5040, 5041 (April 4, 2011). The FCC issued a notice on April 4, 2011 requesting comments. Id. Comments were supposed to be submitted by May 19, 2011. Id. at 5043. Today, over two years since the filing of the petitions with the FCC, no ruling or guidance has been provided. It would be safe to assume that the parties would face a similar timeframe here. During this entire time, Jamison will await his day in court. The Court finds that the potential delay in this case more than outweighs any theoretical benefit that might be achieved with an FCC resolution on this issue. See Nat’l Communs. Ass’n, 46 F.3d at 225 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Honda’s motion for a stay on Options: A. holding that a delay of even two years resulting from a referral to the fcc more than outweighs any benefit that might be achieved by having the fcc resolve the dispute B. holding the delays of more than six years did not amount to the denial of access to the courts C. holding that when determining whether a delay in prosecution violates a defendants right to a speedy trial courts must consider the length of the delay the reason for the delay whether the defendant asserted his rights and the resulting prejudice to the defendant D. holding that a delay of more than eight years attributable to the normal workings of the appellate process in addressing a pretrial appeal is reasonable E. holding that a delay of more than four years caused largely by the state making pretrial appeals was reasonable under the circumstances

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a delay of even two years resulting from a referral to the fcc more than outweighs any benefit that might be achieved by having the fcc resolve the dispute
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 consent, approval, authorization or order of, registration or filing with, or notice to any Governmental Authority or court is required under Applicable Law in connection with the execution, delivery and performance by Seller or Guarantor of this Agreement, any Transaction Notice and the PMH Documents.

assistant: Approvals
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 support the elements of the defense. Texaco, 729 S.W.2d at 805-06; Whitney Nat’l. Bank, 122 S.W.3d at 207. Over Jenkins’s objection, Occidental declined to request any jury findings with respect to its role in the construction of the acid addition system. Thus, unless Occidental conclusively established that it constructed the acid addition system, its failure to obtain a favorable jury finding is fatal. See Texaco, 729 S.W.2d at 805-06. Section 16.009 expressly limits its application to claims against individuals or entities who “construct[ ] or repair[ ] an improvement.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 16.009(a). A person who merely constructs a product that is later annexed to real property is not a person who “constructs or repairs an improvement.” Sonnier, 909 S.W.2d at 481 (<HOLDING>). It is the annexation that transforms the Options: A. holding that forfeiture of real property may be adjudicated before the seizure occurs because real property cannot abscond B. holding utpa does not apply to real property sales C. holding that a contract to sell real property was unenforceable because it did not contain a sufficient description of land subject to contract D. holding statute of repose did not apply to manufacturer of tomato chopper because it had not annexed device to real property E. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property

assistant: The best answer is D. holding statute of repose did not apply to manufacturer of tomato chopper because it had not annexed device to real property
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: from the point at which you make your reservation , we act solely as an intermediary between you and the supplier , transmitting the details of your reservation to the relevant supplier ( s ) and sending you a confirmation email for and on behalf of the supplier .

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: previous opportunities to litigate his claim suggest that this Court must deny the motion in the interests of judicial economy and res judicata. The doctrines of issue and claim preclusion prevent the Court from re-adjudicating the matter, as McCarron previously asserted the same claim in district court and with this Court, and received final judgments on the matter. McCarron v. FDIC, 111 F.3d 1089, 1092 (3rd Cir.1997) (“McCarron timely filed a claim for severance pay and pension payments with the FDIC.”). In 2006, McCarron filed a supplemental memorandum in support of his motion to intervene, which the Court denied and McCarron did not appeal. Consequently, McCarron did not preserve the issue and cannot raise it again now. See Suess v. United States, 97 Fed.Cl. 564, 566 (Fed.Cl.2011) (<HOLDING>); Tronzo v. Biomet, Inc., 236 F.3d 1342, 1349 Options: A. holding that a defendants failure to object or join in a codefendants objection to an issue bars the defendant from raising the issue on appeal B. holding that an issue not raised on appeal is waived C. holding that the plaintiff was precluded from raising the issue for the first time on appeal D. holding an issue not raised in the bankruptcy court was waived on appeal E. holding that the court bars a party from raising an issue on remand that was not raised on appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the court bars a party from raising an issue on remand that was not raised on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and all controversies arising out of this Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of Texas, without giving effect to the principles of conflicts of laws that would apply the laws of any state other than the laws of the State of Texas.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (orig. proceeding). A trial court abuses its discretion if it incorrectly interprets or improperly applies the law. In re Dep’t of Family & Protective Services., 273 S.W.3d 637, 642-43 (Tex.2009) (orig. proceeding); Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 840. Absent extraordinary circumstances, mandamus will not issue unless relator lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. In re Van Waters & Rogers, Inc., 145 S.W.3d 203, 210-11 (Tex.2004) (orig. proceeding) (citing Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 839). Whether a clear abuse of discretion can be adequately remedied by appeal depends on a careful analysis of costs and benefits of interlocutory review. In re McAllen Med. Ctr., Inc., 275 S.W.3d 458, 464 (Tex.2008) (orig. proceeding). As this balance depends heavily on circumstances, it Worth 2009, orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>); In re Garza, 153 S.W.3d 97, 100 (Tex.App.-San Options: A. holding that mandamus is appropriate to challenge temporary orders because they are not subject to interlocutory appeal B. holding same as to the filing of a notice of an interlocutory appeal C. holding that mandamus was appropriate remedy because temporary order granting visitation is not appealable D. recognizing plenary power of district court to alter interlocutory orders E. holding that mandamus is appropriate remedy because temporary order granting visitation is not appealable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that mandamus is appropriate to challenge temporary orders because they are not subject to interlocutory 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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 375 U.S. 1 84 S.Ct. 89 11 L.Ed.2d 44 George Wm. DAEGELEv.KANSAS. No. 72, Misc. Supreme Court of the United States October 14, 1963 George Wm. Daegele, pro se. William M. Ferguson, Atty. Gen. of Kan., and J. Richard Foth, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Kansas. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Kansas for further consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811. 2 For reasons expressed in his dissenting opinion in No. 16, Misc., Pickelsimer v. Wainwright, and related cases, 375 U.S. 2, 84 S.Ct. p. 80, Mr. Justice HARLAN would set this case for argument of the question whether Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811, should be applied retroactively.

assistant: 2
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’s obligations under this Section 3.10 shall survive the resignation or replacement of the Administrative Agent or any assignment of rights by, or the replacement of, a Lender, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all other obligations under any Credit Document.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: category of II, the probation officer set Peterson’s sentencing range at 15 to 21 months’ imprisonment. At the sentencing on January 23, 2009, Peterson challenged the USSG § 2S1.3(b)(2) enhancement, contending that the enhancement did not apply because her structuring offense did not involve “a pattern of unlawful activity,” which is defined as “at least two separate occasions of unlawful activity ..., without regard to whether any such occasion occurred during the course of the offense or resulted in a conviction for the conduct that occurred on that occasion.” USSG § 2S1.3, comment, (n.3). According to Peterson, if the structured money came from one source, here her safe deposit box, there could be only one offense, see United States v. Davenport, 929 F.2d 1169, 1172 (7th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>), and thus no pattern of unlawful activity, Options: A. holding due process clause requires the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt all of the elements included in the definition of the charged offense and new york law that requires the defendant in a second degree murder prosecution to prove by a preponderance of the evidence the affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance in order to reduce the crime to manslaughter when no element of the charged offense is presumed does not violate the due process clause B. holding the proper unit of prosecution for indecent liberties is the number of discrete acts C. holding that the statute was ambiguous because it provides no definition of the term violation and provides no specific direction as to the proper unit of prosecution D. holding that the structuring itself and not each individual deposit is the unit of prosecution in a structuring offense E. holding that test for whether two offenses are not the same is whether each offense requires proof of a fact that the other does not

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the structuring itself and not each individual deposit is the unit of prosecution in a structuring offense
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: intentionally providing false information on an application form. Ill We conclude that it was arbitrary and capricious to deny Singleton a hearing at which he could offer evidence that he did not understand the phrase “administrative action” to include a court-ordered revocation of his driver’s license. Accordingly, we grant the petition for review, vacate the NTSB’s summary judgment order, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. So ordered. 1 . Although Hart itself interpreted a regulation related to fraudulent or intentionally false entries in logbooks, the FAA and the Board adopted its requirements for purposes of § 67.403(a)(1) as well. See Dillmon, op. at 1093. 2 . See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Board Opinion at 6 (noting that the NTSB has Options: A. holding that dispute regarding material fact is genuine if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party B. holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if there is a genuine dispute about a material fact C. holding that under the federal rules of civil procedure summary judgment will not lie if the dispute about a material fact is genuine that is if the evidence is such that a reasonable factfinder could return a verdict for the nonmoving party D. holding that an issue is genuine if the evidence is sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to return a verdict for the nonmoving party E. holding that summary judgment is unwarranted if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that under the federal rules of civil procedure summary judgment will not lie if the dispute about a material fact is genuine that is if the evidence is such that a reasonable factfinder could return a verdict for the nonmoving party
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH OF THE COMPANY AND THE HOLDER IRREVOCABLY WAIVES ANY RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY PROCEEDING (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE) BETWEEN OR AMONG SUCH PERSONS ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS OPTION OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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: undermine confidence in the outcome.” United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682, 105 S.Ct. 3375, 3383, 87 L.Ed.2d 481 (1985). “The question is not whether the defendant would more likely than not have received a different verdict with the [concealed] evidence, but whether in its absence he received a fair trial, understood as a trial resulting in a verdict worthy of confidence.” Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 434, 115 S.Ct. 1555, 1566, 131 L.Ed.2d 490 (1995). The defendant does not have to demonstrate by a preponderance that disclosure of the suppressed evidence would have resulted in an acquittal. Id. at 434, 115 S.Ct. at 1566. The “Brady rule is not an evidentiary rule that grants broad discovery powers to a defendant.” United States v. Quinn, 123 F.3d 1415, 1421-22 (11th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); see also Weatherford v. Bursey, 429 U.S. 545, Options: A. holding in camera review by trial court to determine whether crime stoppers information contained brady information would meet the balance of defendants constitutional rights against the states interest in fostering law enforcement B. holding that the information contained in the police files with regard to other possible suspects was not brady material C. holding that where government does not intend to disclose grand jury materials in camera proceedings are appropriate to protect govern ments interest in secrecy D. holding that the government was not required to disclose the contents of personnel files of testifying officers or submit them for in camera review simply based on the defendants unsupported contention that they might contain information of significance to his ease E. holding party seeking disqualification waives attorneyclient privilege as to the court so the court may assess the contents of allegedly confidential information and the party may present the information either in a hearing out of the presence of the party against whom confidentiality is to be protected or in camera inspection

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the government was not required to disclose the contents of personnel files of testifying officers or submit them for in camera review simply based on the defendants unsupported contention that they might contain information of significance to his ease
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: regulation of which plaintiff himself is the object, “there is ordinarily little question that the [defendant’s] action or inaction has caused the injury.” Lujan, 504 U.S. at 555, 112 S.Ct. at 2130. A second factor in deciding whether there is an imminent threat of harm to the plaintiff is the plaintiffs level of certainty that he will engage in conduct that will subject him to injury. See id at 563-64, 112 S.Ct. at 2138. When the plaintiff has been able to state with some certainty an intent to engage in allegedly expected conduct at a relatively specific time in the future, courts have found a sufficiently imminent threat of harm to meet the first element in the Lujan test. See, e.g., Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200, 212, 115 S.Ct. 2097, 2105, 132 L.Ed.2d 158 (1995) (<HOLDING>); Mausolf v. Babbitt, 85 F.3d 1295, 1301-02 Options: A. holding that at will contracts of employment are subject to tortious interference with contracts claims B. holding that a contracts clause violation may support a 1983 claim C. holding that the court was not bound by the parties agreement that contracts were unambiguous and holding that contracts were ambiguous D. holding that plaintiffs statement that it bid on every guardrail project in colorado combined with affidavits showing that there had been fourteen guardrail contracts up for bid between 1983 and 1990 created a sufficient certainty that plaintiff would bid on contracts in the future to support standing E. holding that a business owners testimony was insufficient to establish lost profits where he was not able to specify which contracts they lost how many they lost how much profit they would have had from the contracts or who would have awarded them contracts and explaining that the plaintiffs could have supported their lost profits with testimony that they had lost out on specific contracts but failed to do so

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that plaintiffs statement that it bid on every guardrail project in colorado combined with affidavits showing that there had been fourteen guardrail contracts up for bid between 1983 and 1990 created a sufficient certainty that plaintiff would bid on contracts in the future to support standing
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: punishment would be assessed if guilt was adjudicated. Therefore, Applicant’s waiver was not knowing and intelligent and does not bar him from appealing from the punishment phase of trial. Relief is granted, and the trial court is instructed to certify Applicant’s right to appeal issues related to his sentence. KELLER, P.J., and WOMACK, J„ concurred. 1 . While it seems odd that the trial court’s certification of defendant’s right to appeal was signed and dated before Applicant signed and dated the waiver of hi .-Corpus Christi 2004, no pet.) (reasoning that the waiver was not knowing and intelligent because the appellant could not know the consequences of the waiver at the time it was executed); Arnone v. State, No. 05-03-01165-CR, 2004 WL 147612, at *1 (Tex.App.-Dallas Jan. 28, 2004) (<HOLDING>); Andrews v. State, Nos. 2-02-353-CR, Options: A. holding an allocution error would not be reversed on appeal because the appellant did not furnish any information about what he would have allocuted to that might have mitigated his sentence B. holding that appellant forfeited his complaint regarding his postadjudication sentence because he did not object at trial or present his motion for new trial C. holding that because the appellant could not have known what his sentence would be at the time he entered his plea monreal and blanco are not controlling D. holding that appellant forfeited his complaint regarding his sentence because he did not object at trial E. holding that a defendant must show reasonable probability that but for the error he would not have entered the plea

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because the appellant could not have known what his sentence would be at the time he entered his plea monreal and blanco are not controlling
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: issue of material fact showing that defendant knew that it was attempting to collect a time-barred debt); Martinez v. Albuquerque Collection Serv., Inc., 867 F.Supp. 1495, 1506 (D.N.M.1994) (denying summary judgment motion regarding plaintiff's claim that defendant attempted to collect on a time-barred account because genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether defendant contacted plaintiff about time-barred debt); Beattie v. D.M. Collections, Inc., 754 F.Supp. 383, 393 (D.Del.1991) (explaining that "threatening ... a lawsuit which the debt collector knows or should know is unavailable ... by reason of a legal bar such as the statute of limitations is the kind of abusive practice the FDCPA was intending to eliminate”); Kimber v. Fed. Fin. Corp., 668 F.Supp. 1480 (M.D.Ala.1987) (<HOLDING>). 5 . In Plaintiffs Response to Defendant’s Options: A. holding that the name under which a debt collector is licensed to do business is the debt collectors true name for purposes of the fdcpa B. holding that a debt collectors filing of a lawsuit on a debt that appears to be timebarred is an unfair and unconscionable means of collecting the debt C. holding that debt collectors have no obligation to warn a consumer that her debt may increase over time D. holding that effect of discharge of debt under bankruptcy code is the same as it was under the 1898 bankruptcy act it is not an extinguishment of the debt but only a bar to enforcement of the debt as a personal obligation of the debt or E. holding that plaintiffs allegation that debt collectors attempted to collect on a debt to a condominium association notwithstanding their knowledge that plaintiff did not really owe that debt to the condominium was sufficient to state a claim under the fdutpa

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a debt collectors filing of a lawsuit on a debt that appears to be timebarred is an unfair and unconscionable means of collecting the debt
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: not the specially noticed meeting of a majority of the corporation’s members required by the articles of incorporation— purported to approve an amendment to the articles of incorporation. Joe Hughes, who remained a member and director of the lders purported to effect another amendment to the articles of incorporation to provide that the Church would have no members. Then, after Mary Miller, Mr. Miller’s sister, had replaced Joan Belaviteh as a putative elder or director, the three Millers met on March 8, 1996, and voted to dissolve the corporation and distribute its assets. Articles of dissolution were filed accordingly. These acts were also ultra vires and without legal effect, however. See Radison Properties, Inc. v. Flamingo Groves, Inc., 767 So.2d 587, 589 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (<HOLDING>); Prigerson v. White Cap Sea Foods, Inc., 100 Options: A. holding deed executed by former corporate president was void B. holding that sellers agreement to furnish title policy was a separate agreement not superseded by the deed and properly not included in the deed C. holding that a beneficiary under a deed of trust was entitled to reformation of the grantors deed D. holding that void deed is neither title nor color of title E. holding that a confessed judgment was not enforceable against a corporate president who individually guaranteed payment of corporate note signed by him in his capacity as president and which authorized confession of judgment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding deed executed by former corporate president was void
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: would entitle them to relief, the district court dismissed the four counts of the amended complaint. The district court dealt with the conspiracy issue in a footnote: "Because of the legal inadequacies of the allegations, we need not reach the conspiracy question.” R. 248 at 26 n. 11. 6 . See also Brubaker v. City of Richmond, 943 F.2d 1363, 1376 (4th Cir.1991) (noting that appellate court must consider whether signer’s position was objectively reasonable at time complaint was filed, not whether district court’s judgment on the merits was correct). 7 . See Danvers v. Danvers, 959 F.2d 601, 604 (6th Cir.1992) (recognizing "action that could be properly dismissed for failure to state a claim, which nonetheless would not warrant the imposition of sanctions”); Brubaker, 943 F.2d at 1373 (<HOLDING>). 8 . Furthermore, the County did not argue Options: A. holding rule 1 ls factual inquiry requirement violated only when no factual basis for allegations B. holding that when a respondent fails to challenge factual allegations contained in a petition for the writ of mandamus the appellate court accepts as true the factual statements in the petition C. holding that based on the facts presented by the state and the defendants stipulation to the existence of a factual basis for his plea the court properly determined a factual basis for the plea existed D. holding that factual basis inquiry is one way of satisfying the constitutional requirement that a guilty plea be voluntary and intelligent but it is not mandated by due process E. holding that court may satisfy factual basis requirement by examining presentence report

assistant: The best answer is A. holding rule 1 ls factual inquiry requirement violated only when no factual basis for allegations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of ONI, OrLeaf, the Company, and the Subject Companies has the necessary power and authority to enter into the Transaction Documents that are being executed in connection with the Closing and to which it is party, to perform its obligations thereunder and to consummate the transactions contemplated therein. All corporate or limited liability company actions or proceedings to be taken by or on the part of ONI, OrLeaf, the Company, and the Subject Companies to authorize and permit the due execution and valid delivery by ONI, OrLeaf, the Company, and the Subject Companies of the Transaction Documents that are being executed in connection with the Closing and to which it is a party and required to be duly executed and validly delivered by it pursuant thereto, the performance by ONI, OrLeaf, the Company, and the Subject Companies of its obligations thereunder, and the consummation by ONI, OrLeaf, the Company, and the Subject Companies of the transactions contemplated therein, have been duly and properly taken. The Transaction Documents have been duly executed and delivered by ONI, OrLeaf, the Company, and the Subject Companies, as applicable, and constitute the legal, valid, and binding obligation of ONI, OrLeaf, the Company, and the Subject Companies, as applicable, enforceable in accordance with their terms, except as such enforceability (i) may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, fraudulent conveyance, moratorium or other similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights and remedies generally and (ii) is subject to general principles of equity (regardless of whether enforceability is considered in a proceeding in equity or at law).

assistant: Authority
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 shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the law of the State of New York, without regard to the conflicts of law principles of such state. Any dispute arising under this Amendment shall be governed in accordance with Section 9.11 of the Exchange Agreement.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if the prohibition against class actions and other disputes brought on behalf of third parties is found to be unenforceable for a dispute , then all of the provisions above under the caption `` special arbitration provision for united states or canada users '' will be null and void as to that dispute .

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: Except as set forth in Schedule 3.9(c) , to the Knowledge of Seller, during the past two (2) years, there has been no Release of Hazardous Materials at, on or under the Real Property Interests that could reasonably be expected to result in material liability for investigation, cleanup or other response action by Buyer.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice hereunder shall be given by first class mail, express mail, or facsimile (followed by confirmation), addressed to the Parties at the addresses given in the preamble of this Agreement, or to such other address as a Party may later designate in writing to the other Party. Notice of any legal action, claim or other legal matter given by Consultant to Emergent shall be directed to Emergent's General Counsel at 400 Professional Drive, Suite 400, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20879, USA.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. Electronic delivery of an executed signature page of this Agreement shall be effective as delivery of an executed counterpart hereof.

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: This Agreement may be executed in identical counterparts, and all said counterparts when taken together shall constitute one and the same Agreement and the parties hereto are hereby authorized to collate such counterparts into one original. For purposes of negotiating and finalizing this Agreement (including any subsequent amendments thereto), any signed document transmitted in portable document format (“ PDF ”) shall be treated in all manner and respects as an original document. The signature of any party by PDF shall be considered for these purposes as an original signature. Any PDF document shall be considered to have the same binding legal effect as an original document. Upon request, an original of such PDF document shall be mailed by first class U.S. mail or personally delivered to the recipient. At the request of either party, any PDF document subject to this Agreement shall be re-executed by both parties in an original form. The undersigned parties hereby agree that neither shall raise the use of the PDF or the fact that any signature or document was transmitted or communicated through the use of a PDF as a defense to the formation of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Adriatic shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless CSA against any and all losses, damages, liabilities, deficiencies, claims, actions, judgments, settlements, interest, awards, penalties, fines, costs, or expenses of whatever kind, including reasonable attorneys’ fees arising from (a) a third party seeking to collect under the Note, or (b) breach of this Conversion Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in ways that create a substantial risk of producing or exacerbating personal injury to her child, to exercising too much or too little, indeed to engaging in virtually any injury-prone activity that, should an injury occur, might reasonably be expected to endanger the life or safety of the child. Such ordinary things as skiing or horseback riding could produce criminal liability. If the State’s position were to prevail, there would seem to be no clear basis for categorically excluding any of those activities from the ambit of the statute; criminal liability would depend almost entirely on how aggressive, inventive, and persuasive any particular prosecutor might be. Kilmon v. State, 394 Md. 168, 177-78, 905 A.2d 306, 311-12 (Ct.App.2006). Additionally, the State’s suggested con 0 (1992) (<HOLDING>); People v. Morabito, 151 Misc.2d 259, 580 Options: A. holding an unborn viable fetus is not a human being under the new mexico child abuse statute and the mothers use of cocaine during pregnancy was not child abuse B. holding a criminal charge of endangerment of a child does not apply to a pregnant woman who ingests an illegal substance that results in the transmission of drugs to her child through the umbilical cord C. holding ohios child endangerment statute does not apply to mothers who abuse drugs during pregnancy D. recognizing the unique relationship between mother and child during pregnancy and birth and permitting mothers claim for emotional distress where the mothers emotional wellbeing and the birth of the child are inextricably intertwined E. holding child abuse statute clearly did not apply to fetuses and therefore did not apply to a mother who ingested cocaine during pregnancy

assistant: The best answer is C. holding ohios child endangerment statute does not apply to mothers who abuse drugs during pregnancy
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 shall cooperate with the other Party in connection with all activities relating to the Prosecution and Maintenance of the Angionetics Patents undertaken by such other Party pursuant to this Section 9.2, including: (i) making available in a timely manner any documents or information such other Party reasonably requests to facilitate such other Party’s Prosecution and Maintenance of the Angionetics Patents pursuant to this Section 9.2; and (ii) if and as appropriate, signing (or causing to have signed) all documents relating to the prosecution and maintenance of any Angionetics Patents by such other Party. Each Party shall also promptly provide to the other Party all information reasonably requested by such other Party with regard to such Party’s activities pursuant to this Section 9.2. Licensee shall hold all information disclosed to it under this Section as Confidential Information.

assistant: Cooperation
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: 143 F.3d 698, 702 (2d Cir.1998); Hathaway v. Coughlin, 37 F.3d 63, 66 (2d Cir.1994); see also Varricchio v. Cnty. of Nassau, 702 F.Supp.2d 40, 56 (E.D.N.Y.2010). Unsanitary conditions at a prison facility such as, lack of toiletries, exposure to cold, rodents and human waste can present a risk sufficient for Section 1983 liability. See Gaston v. Coughlin, 249 F.3d 156, 166 (2d Cir.2001) (collecting cases). However, conditions that are temporary or occasional, such as the mere “presence of rodents” without more have been found not to constitute “a sufficiently serious deprivation” to sustain a Section 1983 deliberate indifference claim. Higgins v. Coombe, No. 94-CV-7942, 1996 WL 502409, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 4, 1996); see, e.g., Trammell v. Keane, 338 F.3d 155, 164 (2d Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Davidson v. Murray, 371 F.Supp.2d 361 Options: A. holding that plaintiffs allegation that defendant had exclusive knowledge as the manufacturer did not support claim that defendant was aware of a defect B. holding that conclusory allegation of conspiracy without supporting factual averments insufficient to state claim C. holding five complaints of excessive force over twentytwomonth period sufficient to sustain jury verdict D. holding that plaintiffs conelusory allegation in his complaint that his suit was timely was insufficient to defeat motion to dismiss E. holding that an allegation that the plaintiffs toiletries were not replenished over a period of nine days was insufficient to sustain a claim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an allegation that the plaintiffs toiletries were not replenished over a period of nine days was insufficient to sustain a claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: one of the purposes in establishing the offense of assault with intent to murder was to compound the punishment for attempted murder.” Id. at 322-23, 593 A.2d 671. In this case, like in Williams, the appellant’s attempted first degree murder conviction and first degree assault conviction arose out of the same acts: his firing a handgun at Clark as Clark retreated from the scene. While we disagree, as we have explained, -with the appellant’s assertion that the offenses merge under the “required evidence test,” we conclude that the sentences should have been merged under the rule of lenity. First degree assault of the (a)(2) modality is an attempt to cause, or actually causing, physical harm to another by use of a firearm. See Lamb v. State, 93 Md.App. 422, 428-29, 613 A.2d 402 (1992) (<HOLDING>). Like first degree assault of the (a)(1) Options: A. holding that virginia domestic assault and battery statute did not qualify B. holding that battery is clearly a factual determination readily resolved by the application of a legal standard defining battery to the facts in question C. holding that battery is an inherently included offense of aggravated battery D. holding sentence enhancement statute did not create offense of attempted battery on school employee and thus minors adjudication of delinquency should have been based on finding that minor committed attempted battery E. holding that under maryland common law an assault is an attempted battery an actual battery or a combination of the two

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that under maryland common law an assault is an attempted battery an actual battery or a combination of the two
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: district court considered this testimony in sentencing McFarlane on September 6, 2001. The district court was aware of the testimony only because the same judge presided over the trial and later sentenced McFarlane. The Fifth Amendment grants to all persons the privilege against compelled self-incrimination by providing that “[n]o person ... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” U.S. Const, amend. V. The Supreme Court has limited the Fifth Amendment privilege to prohibiting the use of physical or moral compulsion; the fact that a criminal defendant faces difficult choices does not necessarily compel the individual's choice so as to implicate the Fifth Amendment. See South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553, 562-63, 103 S.Ct. 916, 74 L.Ed.2d 748 (1983) (<HOLDING>). “The ‘Amendment speaks of compulsion,’ United Options: A. holding that a defendants right to an independent blood alcohol test means the right to a test that is not subject to government manipulation B. holding that the fourth amendment is implicated by the withdrawal of blood to test its alcohol content C. holding that south dakotas law requiring a person arrested for drunk driving to submit to a blood alcohol test or face having his refusal used against him did not violate the fifth amendment D. holding that a motion to strike was improper where defendant assisted a drunk minor in his negligence by driving the drunk minor to his car E. holding that forfeiture of funds to be used for legal fees does not violate the fifth or sixth amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that south dakotas law requiring a person arrested for drunk driving to submit to a blood alcohol test or face having his refusal used against him did not violate the fifth amendment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Parties agree that all conditions, covenants and requirements established by this Agreement related to the "Common Area" terminate if Tenant is no longer the sole Tenant of Building 100, as to those areas which are no long subject to its exclusive use and control. For purposes of this Agreement, Common Area refers to the areas shaded in grey on the Exhibits A and B , attached.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower shall permit Lender and Lender’s duly authorized representatives (including, without limitation, the Consulting Engineer or Progress Inspector) no more than twice per month to enter upon the Land and to inspect the Improvements and any and all materials to be used in connection with the construction of the Improvements and to examine all detailed plans and shop drawings and similar materials relating to the construction of the Improvements, during ordinary business hours. Borrower will at all times cooperate and use its reasonable good faith efforts to cause each and every of its subcontractors and materialmen to cooperate with Lender and Lender’s duly authorized representatives (including, without limitation, the Consulting Engineer or Progress Inspector) in connection with or in aid of the performance of Lender’s functions under this Loan Agreement. The fees of any Consulting Engineer or Progress Inspector engaged or employed by Lender in connection with or in aid of the performance of Lender’s functions under this Loan Agreement shall be paid by Borrower.

assistant: Cooperation
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 has not argued that this defendant is a Thimerosal Defendant. Accordingly, the Holders have not shown that the district court e 78 F.3d 472, 477 (5th Cir.2002) (stating that an order granting a motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo). 7 . 343 F.3d 765 (5th Cir.2003), cert. denied, 544 U.S. 991, 125 S.Ct. 1823, 161 L.Ed.2d 755 (2005). 8 . 408 F.3d 177 (5th Cir.2005). 9 . 381 F.3d 501 (5th Cir.2004). 10 . 385 F.3d at 571. 11 . Id. at 573 (quoting Travis v. Irby, 326 F.3d 644, 646-47 (5th Cir.2003)). 12 . Id. 13 . Id. at 574. 14 . Id. 15 . Id. at 575; see also Rainwater v. Lamar Life Ins. Co., 391 F.3d 636, 638-39 (5th Cir.2004) (noting that the Smallwood "common defense” rule only applies if the defense is "dispositive of all claims against all defendants”). 16 . 408 F.3d at 184 (<HOLDING>). 17 . 381 F.3d 501, 503-04 (5th Cir.2004) Options: A. holding that claims against a city police chief in his official capacity were really claims against the city B. holding claims based on the fair labor standards act subject to arbitration C. holding that claims against vaccine manufacturers were subject to the vaccine act but claims against thimerosal manufacturers were not therefore the cause was properly removed based on a fraudulent joinder theory D. holding the state law claims were not preempted E. holding that claims based on asserted violations of the lad and 1983 are not subject to the new jersey tort claims act

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that claims against vaccine manufacturers were subject to the vaccine act but claims against thimerosal manufacturers were not therefore the cause was properly removed based on a fraudulent joinder theory