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: as required by Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). The district court agreed that the lack of such warnings violated the Sixth Amendment but concluded that the error was harmless. Dallio v. Spitzer, 170 F.Supp.2d at 336-38. We affirm the district court’s judgment without reaching the question of harmless error. See Boule v. Hutton, 328 F.3d 84, 92 (2d Cir.2003) (noting our ability to affirm a judgment on any ground appearing in the record, whether or not relied on by the district court). Although explicit warnings as to the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation are certainly advisable to ensure knowing and intelligent waivers of the right to counsel, see Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 468, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938) (<HOLDING>), we conclude that it is not clearly Options: A. recognizing the right to waive a jury trial B. holding that accused must competently and intelligently waive the right to counsel C. recognizing that the sixth amendment guarantees a defendant the right to counsel and the right to waive counsel D. holding that one must voluntarily and intelligently waive the right to counsel E. holding that a death row inmates statutory right to competent counsel does not really mean counsel that performs competently

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that accused must competently and intelligently waive the right to counsel
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: considered in the context of a traditional understanding of the larceny statute.’ ” Calonico, supra at 154, quoting People v. Camiola, 225 A.D.2d 380, 380-381 (N.Y. 1996). 9 The defendant’s argument mirrors the dissent in Commonwealth v. Reske, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 522, 532-533 (1997) (Gillerman, 1, dissenting), which posited that because a victim’s mental incapacity is not an element of the offense of larceny, it may not be offered as proof of the crime except by legislative intervention. As did the majority in Reske, we reject that limitation on the nature of evidence probative of the defendant’s guilt. 10 The lack of consent is an implicit factor in other context ) (affirming larceny conviction because victim lacked mental capacity to consent to taking); Camiola, 225 A.D.2d at 380-381 (<HOLDING>). Cf. State v. Maxon, 32 Kan. App. 2d 67, 79-80 Options: A. holding admissible testimony of the victims daughter regarding a telephone call from the defendant to the victim hours before the victims death and the victims emotions following the telephone call where defendant claimed accident B. holding that mental capacity may be considered on issue of victims intent C. holding that a jury could reasonably infer defendant and his brother engaged in victims murder with deliberation where victims hands and feet were bound expert testimony was that victims injuries were inflicted when he was alive defendants gloves were discarded in victims trailer and defendant and his brother burned the trailer in an attempt to conceal the evidence D. holding that the offense of sexual battery requires the state prove the victims lack of consent regardless of the victims age and charge the jury on the same E. holding that jury may consider victims mental capacity in determining whether defendant acted with victims knowledge and consent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that jury may consider victims mental capacity in determining whether defendant acted with victims knowledge and consent
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: 1051, 108 S.Ct. 2817, 100 L.Ed.2d 917 (1988) (granting application to recall and stay Tenth Circuit’s mandate pending Court’s action on petition for certiorari). Thus, both sets of rules create a gap between the time the court’s mandate must issue and the time the party must seek redress from a higher court, and both sets of rules permit a party to obtain a stay pending appeal to a higher court. Both sets of rules are silent, however, as to what happens if the party does not seek the stay until the gap period. Cases addressing a party’s attempt to secure a stay from a circuit court after it has issued its mandate establish that the circuit court must first recall its mandate before it can enter the stay. See, e.g., United States v. Holland, 1 F.3d 454, 455 (7th Cir.1993) (Ripple, J.) (<HOLDING>); Faulkner v. Jones, 66 F.3d 661, 662 (4th Options: A. holding that the fourth amendment does not mandate the payment of money by the united states B. holding that perfection not required for regulation to be reasonable courts task is simply to determine whether regulation is reasonably related to agencys statutory mandate C. holding that the fourth amendment does not mandate payment and therefore such claims are not within the jurisdiction of the court D. holding that party who sought stay after mandate had issued first had to show that mandate ought to be recalled and then had to show that recalled mandate should be stayed E. holding that leave shall be freely given to amend a complaint is a mandate to be heeded

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that party who sought stay after mandate had issued first had to show that mandate ought to be recalled and then had to show that recalled mandate should be stayed
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: Appellant's interpretation of the CDCA unlicensed lenders, like Appellant, would be permitted to charge exorbitant fees, while at the same time lenders licensed under the CDCA are limited to charges of $50 annually. See 7 P.S. § 6217.l.D. The Department and the amici reason that lenders would have no incentive to obtain a license in order to charge higher interest rates, because they could capture that increase by charging high fees, thus rendering the statute useless at protecting the public against usury. 9 . Moreover, this Court has recognized that choice-of-law agreements can be avoided when the terms offend Commonwealth public policy even in disputes between contracting parties. See McIlvaine Trucking, Inc. v. W.C.A.B. (States), 570 Pa. 662, 672-73, 810 A.2d 1280, 1286 (2002) (<HOLDING>). Pennsylvania courts have consistently held Options: A. holding that the trial courts authority to initiate workers compensation benefits before the final adjudication was not divested by the legislature and was consistent with the stated purpose of the workers compensation act B. holding that legislature clearly intended that workers compensation act and unemployment security act be construed together thus prohibiting worker from receiving both unemployment compensation and workers compensation payments for same period C. holding that the parties choiceoflaw agreement as relating to workers compensation was appropriately avoided where it offended state public policy as reflected in express provisions of the pennsylvania workers compensation act D. holding that the provisions of the workers compensation act must be satisfied or the action is not maintainable in the courts E. holding that provisions of section 40115102 are applicable to the determination of the status of truck drivers as employees or independent contractors under the workers compensation act and discussing legislative history indicating intent to apply these provisions both to workers compensation and unemployment compensation matters

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the parties choiceoflaw agreement as relating to workers compensation was appropriately avoided where it offended state public policy as reflected in express provisions of the pennsylvania workers compensation act
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: laundering that took place outside of the Western District. For venue purposes, the overt act need not be the whole crime, but merely an act (including, in a proper case, an act of a non-conspirator caused by a previous act or contact by a conspirator) in furtherance of the conspiracy. See note 4 supra and accompanying text. Appellants’ reliance on United States v. Cabrales, 524 U.S. 1, 118 S.Ct. 1772, 141 L.Ed.2d 1 (1998), is misplaced, for there the Court was careful to point out that “[njotably, the counts at issue do not charge Cabrales with conspiracy; they do not link her to, or assert her responsibility for, acts done by others.” Id. at 1776 (emphasis added). Cabrales also specifically distinguished Hyde v. United States, 225 U.S. 347, 32 S.Ct. 793, 56 L.Ed. 1114 (1912) (<HOLDING>), on the ground that it was a conspiracy Options: A. holding that venue for a conspiracy prosecution was proper in a district where an overt act took place although defendant had never been there and the conspiracy was not formed there B. holding that proof of an overt act is not required in a 846 conspiracy C. holding that venue is proper in any district where any act in furtherance of the conspiracy took place D. holding that in a conspiracy case venue lies where the conspiracy agreement was formed or in any jurisdiction where an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy was committed by any of the conspirators E. holding criminal conspiracy is sustained where the commonwealth establishes the defendant entered into an agreement to commit or aid in an unlawful act with another person with a shared criminal intent and an overt act was done in furtherance of the conspiracy a coconspirator may commit the overt act and conspirators are liable for acts of the coconspirators committed in furtherance of the conspiracy

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that venue for a conspiracy prosecution was proper in a district where an overt act took place although defendant had never been there and the conspiracy was not formed there
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 term, covenant or condition of this Agreement or any breach thereof shall be deemed waived, except with the written consent of the party against whom the waiver is claimed, and any waiver of any such term, covenant, condition or breach shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach of the same or any other term, covenant, condition or breach.

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: Any provision of any Credit Document held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability without affecting the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions thereof; and the invalidity of a particular provision in a particular jurisdiction shall not invalidate such provision in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: You agree not to take any action or make any statement, written or oral, or make any posting on any website, blog or by other electronic means, that would reasonably be interpreted to disparage Iron Mountain or its affiliates, or any of their respective officers, directors, employees or agents, or that has the intended or foreseeable effect of harming the business reputation of any such entity or person. The CEO and his direct reports agree that they shall not take any action or make any statement, written or oral, or make any posting on any website, blog or by other electronic means, that would reasonably be interpreted to disparage you.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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 to the other that, except for Cushman & Wakefield (“ Tenant’s Broker ”) and Jones Lang LaSalle (“ Landlord’s Broker ”), no broker, agent or finder negotiated or was instrumental in negotiating or consummating this Second Amendment. Each party further agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other party from and against any claim for commission or finder’s fee by any person or entity (other than Tenant’s Broker and Landlord’s Broker) who claims or alleges that they were retained or engaged by the first party or at the request of such party in connection with this Second Amendment.

assistant: Brokers
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: Seller Parties acknowledge that any breach of this Section 7.6 would result in serious and irreparable injury to Buyer, Buyer could not be adequately compensated by monetary damages alone, and Buyer’s remedy at law would not be adequate. Therefore, Seller Parties acknowledge and agree that, in the event of a breach or threatened breach by any Seller Party, Buyer shall be entitled, in addition to any other remedy at law or in equity to which Buyer may be entitled, to equitable relief against such Seller Party, including temporary restraining orders and preliminary and permanent injunctions to restrain such Seller Party from such breach or threatened breach and to compel compliance with the obligations of such Seller Party, and such Seller Party waives the posting of a bond or undertaking as a condition to such relief. The terms of this Section shall not prevent Buyer from pursuing any other available remedies for any breach or threatened breach hereof, including but not limited to the recovery of damages from such Seller Party.

assistant: Remedies
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 part. As the Majority explains, the “implied bias [doctrine] remains available, in appropriate circumstances, to disqualify jurors whose connection with the litigation makes it highly unlikely that they can remain impartial adjudicators.” (Slip Op. at 13 (citing United States v. Calabrese, 942 F.2d 218 (3d Cir. 1991)).) In dicta in Calabrese, we cited with approval Justice O’Connor’s observation in Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209, 102 S. Ct. 940, 71 L. Ed. 2d 78 (1982), that a “juror [who] is an actual employee of the prosecuting agency” is one example of an “extreme situation^ that would justify a finding of implied bias.” Calabrese, 942 F.2d at 226 (quoting Smith, 455 U.S. at 222 (O’Connor, J., concurring)); accord United States v. Polichemi, 201 F.3d 858, 861-64 (7th Cir. 2000) (<HOLDING>). It is true, as the Majority says, that Juror Options: A. holding that the failure to strike potentially biased juror was not iac where decision was based on trial strategy B. holding that where a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is grounded in the claim that counsel failed to strike a biased juror a defendant must show that the juror was actually biased against him C. holding that the attorney generals decision not to provide representation to an employee is reviewable by the appellate division not by the law division where the actions against the employee are pending D. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion when the trial judge questioned the juror extensively enough to satisfy itself that the juror was not biased emphasis added E. holding without citing to justice oconnors concurrence in smith that a juror who was a 15year secretarial employee in the civil division of the prosecuting agency was impliedly biased

assistant: The best answer is E. holding without citing to justice oconnors concurrence in smith that a juror who was a 15year secretarial employee in the civil division of the prosecuting agency was impliedly biased
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: conservation or more efficient use of water, energy, or stormwater or sewer services in such structures or equipment. Except as provided in section 7 of this Article, an appropriate charge back shall be made for such extension of public moneys or credit and the same shall be a lien against the structure benefited or a security interest in the equipment benefited. Any financing for energy conservation authorized by this article shall only be used for conservation purposes in existing structures and shall not be used for any purpose which results in a conversion from one energy source to another. (Emphasis added.) ¶15 In City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of the City of Tacoma, our Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of conservation loan programs. 108 Wn.2d 679, 705, 743 P.2d 793 (1987) (<HOLDING>). 116 Further, article VIII, section 10 Options: A. holding loan programs constitutional because the city received sufficient bargained for consideration in the form of public benefit from electric conservation B. recognizing the importance of public welfare and conservation of water in administering its public waters C. holding that a plantshutdown benefit is not an optional form of benefit D. holding that consideration for guaranty of loan previously made was that guarantors friend the bank manager who issued the loan would not lose his job for making a bad loan E. holding that city electors who rendered property to city assessor after time fixed by statute were qualified to vote at city election on issuance of bonds for construction of an electric light and power system

assistant: The best answer is A. holding loan programs constitutional because the city received sufficient bargained for consideration in the form of public benefit from electric conservation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless otherwise defined herein, terms defined in the Credit Agreement shall have such defined meanings when used herein, and, for purposes of this Pledge Agreement, the rules of construction set forth in Section 1.2 of the Credit Agreement shall apply as if fully set forth herein, mutatis mutandis.

assistant: Defined 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: To the extent permitted by applicable law, the Company shall indemnify and hold harmless each individual serving as a member of the Plan Administrator against any and all expenses, liabilities and claims arising out of their discharge in good faith of responsibilities under or incident to the Plan including any such expenses, liabilities and claims as may arise based upon such individual’s negligence. Expenses and liabilities arising out of such individual’s own gross negligence or willful misconduct shall not be covered under this indemnity. Expenses against which such individual shall be indemnified hereunder shall include, without limitation, the amounts of any settlement or judgment, costs, counsel fees, and related charges reasonably incurred in connection with a claim asserted or a proceeding brought or settlement thereof. This indemnity shall not preclude such further indemnities as may be available under insurance purchased by the Company or provided by the Company under any articles of incorporation, bylaw, agreement, vote of stockholders or disinterested directors or otherwise, as such indemnities are permitted under applicable law.

assistant: Indemnity
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: section 1-14-3 of title 68 of the Indiana Administrative' Code reads as follows: (a) The [ISP] shall, through interdepartmental bill, assess the costs listed in section 2 of this rule to the [IGC]. The [IGC] will reimburse the [ISP] for the amount assessed. (b) The [IGC] will prepare an invoice that will be sent to the riverboat licensee or riverboat license applicant. The riverboat licensee or riverboat license applicant will pay the [IGC] in the manner directed in the invoice. Thus, the ISP officers assigned to Aztar are separated from Aztar by two governmental agencies, the ISP and IGC. The fact that the troopers are two levels removed from Aztar weighs against a finding that Trooper McCarthy was an employee or agent of Aztar. See GKN Co. v. Magness, 744 N.E.2d 397, 405 (Ind.2001) (<HOLDING>). C.Belief of the Parties Fioretti has supplied Options: A. holding that plaintiff could recover medical fees not actually paid by the insurance company pursuant to an insurance contract B. holding that fact that trucking company paid plaintiff withheld his taxes and paid his workers compensation insurance premiums pointed to the conclusion that plaintiff was employee of trucking company and not of general contractor even though general contractor paid trucking company for work that was solely performed by plaintiff C. holding that the employer created an erisa plan when it 1 paid for the employees insurance 2 contracted with the insurance company for coverage and eligibility requirements and 3 collected and remitted the employees dependents premiums D. holding in part that the liability insurance company of the subcontractor which had named the general contractor as an additional insured on the subcontractors policy was liable to reimburse the general contractor for a settlement payment the general contractor had made to the subcontractors employee E. holding in part that a paymentbond surety is entitled to the benefit of the equitable rights of both the contractor had the contractor completed performance and paid his laborers and materialmen and the subcontractors

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that fact that trucking company paid plaintiff withheld his taxes and paid his workers compensation insurance premiums pointed to the conclusion that plaintiff was employee of trucking company and not of general contractor even though general contractor paid trucking company for work that was solely performed by plaintiff
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: ... is one that is inferred from the statements or conduct of the parties. It is not a promise defined by the law, but one made by the parties, though not expressly.” (citation omitted)). Implied employment contracts do not require a factual showing of additional consideration or mutual assent to the implied term. Ordinarily, to be legally enforceable, a contract must be factually supported by an offer, an acceptance, consideration, and mutual assent. See SCRA 1986, 13-801 (Repl.Pamp.1991) (definition of contract); Romero v. Earl, 111 N.M. 789, 791, 810 P.2d 808, 811 (1991) (stating consideration adequate to support a promise is essential to enforcement of the contract and must be bargained for by the parties); Trujillo v. Glen Falls Ins. Co., 88 N.M. 279, 280, 540 P.2d 209, 210 (1975) (<HOLDING>). —Consideration. Paxton challenges the Options: A. recognizing that an implied contract must result from a meeting of the minds of the parties in mutual assent to the terms and must be based upon a sufficient consideration free from fraud or undue influence not against public policy and sufficiently definite to be enforced B. holding that mutual mistake is ground for reformation when as here the minds of the parties have met contractually but because of a mutual mistake the written contract between the parties is wanting in expression or execution to evince the actual and binding contractual intent of the parties C. holding that both the lack of mutual assent and the indefiniteness of contract terms negate the existence of a contract D. holding that the one thing without which a contract cannot be made is the assent of the parties to the agreement the meeting of the minds upon a definite proposition E. holding mutual assent in contract law is elementary and it must be expressed by the parties

assistant: The best answer is E. holding mutual assent in contract law is elementary and it must be expressed by the parties
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 otherwise expressly provided herein, all costs and expenses, including fees and disbursements of counsel, financial advisors and accountants, incurred in connection with the preparation, negotiation execution and performance of this Agreement and the Notes and the documents and transactions contemplated hereby and thereby shall be paid by the party incurring such costs and expenses, whether or not the Closing shall have occurred; provided , however , the Company shall be responsible for the payment of Agent’s due diligence costs and legal fees relating to the preparation, execution and performance of this Agreement and the Note and the other transaction documents contemplated hereby and thereby and the consummation of the transactions contemplated herein and therein, in the amount of $38,500, which payment may be made directly from the payment proceeds described herein.

assistant: Expenses
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: Notwithstanding any provision in this Plan or any Award Document to the contrary, Awards will be subject, to the extent applicable, to: (a) the terms and conditions of the Company’s executive compensation recoupment policy (as previously adopted, and as may be amended and restated from time to time); and (b) the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, as amended (the “ Dodd Frank Act ”), the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, and rules, regulations and binding, published guidance thereunder, and any similar legislation that may be enacted subsequent to the date hereof (including any rules, regulations and binding, published guidance thereunder). Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Company may, in its sole discretion, implement any recoupment policies or make any changes to the Company’s existing recoupment policies as the Company deems necessary or advisable in order to comply with applicable law or regulatory guidance (including, without limitation, the Dodd-Frank Act).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the date of this Agreement, the authorized capital stock of TDA is 100 consisting of One Hundred (100) shares of TDA Ordinary Stock at $1.00 (in Singapore Dollars) per share. TDA has issued and outstanding One Hundred (100) shares of TDA Ordinary Stock. The issued and outstanding shares of TDA Ordinary Stock constitute one hundred percent (100%) of the issued and outstanding capital stock of TDA. All of the outstanding shares of TDA Ordinary Stock have been duly authorized, are validly issued and outstanding, and are fully paid and non-assessable. There are no dividends which have accrued or been declared but are unpaid on the capital stock of TDA.

assistant: Capitalization
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 provided in any signed written agreement contemporaneously or hereafter executed by Company and Executive, this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with regard to the subject matter hereof, and contains all the covenants, promises, representations, warranties and agreements between the parties with respect to employment of Executive by Company. Without limiting the scope of the preceding sentence, all individual employment, severance, and change in control agreements between the parties preceding the date of execution of this Agreement and relating to the subject matter hereof are hereby null and void and of no further force and effect. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only if it is in writing and signed by the party to be charged.

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

user: Read the 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 claims brought on behalf of third parties contained in section 20.3.3 is found to be unenforceable , then all of section 16.3 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: This Agreement shall become effective upon the Restatement Effective Date and shall continue in full force and effect for a term ending on January 17, 2022 (the “ Maturity Date ”). The foregoing notwithstanding, the Lender Group, upon the election of the Required Lenders, shall have the right to terminate its obligations under this Agreement immediately and without notice upon the occurrence and during the continuation of an Event of Default.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 384 U.S. 889 86 S.Ct. 1914 16 L.Ed.2d 995 NEW JERSEY et al.v.Anthony RUSSO et al. No. 834. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Brendan T. Byrne, for petitioners. 1 Raymond A. Brown and Irving I. Vogelman, for respondent Russo. 2 Respondent Bisignano, pro se. 3 Arthur J. Sills, Atty. Gen. of New Jersey, Alan B. Handler, First Asst. Atty. Gen., and Richard Newman and Max Spinrad, Deputy Attys. Gen., for the Attorney General of New Jersey, as amicus curiae. 4 Arlen Specter and Joseph M. Smith, for the District Attorney of Philadelphia County, Pa., as amicus curiae. 5 June 20, 1966. 6 PER CURIAM. 7 The motion of respondent Frank Bisignano, for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is also granted and the judgment is vacated. The case is remanded to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey for further proceedings in light of Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719, 86 S.Ct. 1772, 16 L.Ed.2d 882. 8 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS dissents for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 384 U.S., at 736, 86 S.Ct., at 1782, 16 L.Ed.2d, at 894.

assistant: 1
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: Neither party has had any contact or dealings regarding the Master Project, or any communication in connection with the subject matter of this Agreement, through any real estate broker or other person who can claim a right to a commission or finder's fee in connection with the transactions contemplated herein. In the event that any broker or finder claims a commission or finder's fee based upon any contact, dealings or communication, the party through whom the broker or finder makes its claim shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the other party hereto, its successors and assigns, agents, employees, officers, trustees, members and managers from and against any and all obligations, liabilities, claims, demands, liens, encumbrances and losses (including reasonable attorneys' fees), whether direct, contingent or consequential, arising out of, based on, or incurred as a result of such claim. The provisions of this paragraph shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

assistant: Brokers
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 make payment of all amounts to be paid by Buyer to Seller Parties under this Agreement or the Holdback Escrow Agreement, as the case may be, to Seller Parties per written instructions provided by such Seller Parties.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the notice must ( 1 ) describe the nature and basis of the claim or dispute ; and ( 2 ) set forth the specific relief sought ( `` demand '' ) .

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: In the event that any one or more of the provisions of this Letter Agreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remainder of this Letter Agreement shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: insurer is found to have breached its duty to defend and the indemnity contract provided coverage for potential legal liability, it will be liable for a judgment or settlement stemming from the underlying action that necessitated the indemnity claim when two requirements are met. First, the insured must show that the claim settled was in fact covered by the policy. See Vance, 730 S.W.2d at 522; see also Medical Protective, 581 S.W.2d at 26-27; O’Bannon, 678 S.W.2d at 398. Second, the settlement must have been reasonable and reached'in the absence of fraud or collusion. Wallins Creek Coal, 176 S.W. at 219; see also Grimes v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 705 S.W.2d 926, 932 (Ky.Ct.App.1985); Estate of Clem v. Western Heritage Ins. Co., 195 Fed.Appx. 328, 332-33 (6th Cir.2006) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Limiting this rule to only those cases where Options: A. holding that an insurer had a duty to defend the insured until it could establish that those claims were not supported by the facts B. holding that insurer had a continuing duty to defend C. holding that insured may recover from its insurer any attorney fees incurred in successfully attempting to force the insurer to defend an action against the insured D. holding that an insured who breaches it duty to defend is liable for the costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the insured in defending against the claims asserted as well as consequential damages E. holding that an insurer that mistakenly fails to defend an insured is liable for reasonable settlements under kentucky law

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an insurer that mistakenly fails to defend an insured is liable for reasonable settlements under kentucky law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as specifically disclosed in Schedule 5.06 , and matters covered by insurance or indemnification agreements, as of the Closing Date, there are no actions, suits, proceedings, claims or disputes pending or, to the knowledge of the Borrower after investigation, overtly threatened, at law, in equity, in arbitration or before any Governmental Authority, by or against the Borrower or any of the Borrower’s Subsidiaries or Unrestricted Subsidiaries or against any of their properties or revenues of which there is a reasonable possibility of a determination adverse to such Person and which if determined adversely, could have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Litigations
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)). Here, we cannot conclude as a matter of law that Gray’s actions in asking a group of fellow customers to quiet down was not a normal and foreseeable consequence of Denny’s failure to act on her request that an employee do so. Indeed, if Gray’s version of events is credited, then her conduct evokes the precise risk contemplated by the scope of Denny’s duty of care. See Derdiarian v. Felix Contracting Corp., 51 N.Y.2d 308, 315, 434 N.Y.S.2d 166, 169, 414 N.E.2d 666 (1980) (“An intervening act may not serve as a superseding cause, and relieve an actor of responsibility, where the risk of the intervening act occurring is the very same risk which renders the actor negligent.”); see also McKinnon v. Bell Sec., 268 A.D.2d 220, 221, 700 N.Y.S.2d 469, 471 (1st Dep’t 2000) (<HOLDING>). Thus, a fact question arises as to whether Options: A. holding that the defendant did not establish good faith as a matter of law B. holding as a matter of law that natural condition present was open and obvious to all who would encounter it C. holding it not unforeseeable as matter of law that plaintiff would approach suspect after security guard inexplicably released him D. holding that it may be decided as a matter of law E. holding that arkansas would not adopt the approach of reliance to resolve this case

assistant: The best answer is C. holding it not unforeseeable as matter of law that plaintiff would approach suspect after security guard inexplicably released him
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: PUC from litigating the Eleventh Amendment issue now. Collateral estoppel prevents the relitigation of issues that have been decided in a previous action. See Hawksbill Sea Turtle v. Federal Emergency Management Agency, 126 F.3d 461, 474 (3rd Cir.1997). It “protect[s] litigants from the burden of relit-igating an identical issue with the same party or his privy and ... promotes] judicial economy by preventing needless litigation.” See id. (citing Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322, 326, 99 S.Ct. 645, 58 L.Ed.2d 552 (1979)). The issue of the PUC’s Eleventh Amendment immunity has already been thoroughly litigated between Amtrak and the PUC in this Court. See National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Com. of Pennsylvania Public Utility Com’n, 1997 WL 597963, at *6-10 (Sep. 15, 1997) (<HOLDING>); National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Com. of Options: A. holding that a county is not an arm of the state for purposes of the eleventh amendment B. holding that the fsba was an arm of the state for diversity purposes C. holding that the university of colorado is an arm of the state for purposes of sovereign immunity D. holding that the anne arundel board of education is an arm of the state for purposes of eleventh amendment immunity E. holding that the puc is not an arm of the state and rejecting claim of immunity

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the puc is not an arm of the state and rejecting claim of immunity
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 person executing this Lease on behalf of Landlord and Tenant hereby covenants and warrants that: (a) the entity on whose behalf such person is signing is duly organized and validly existing under the laws of its state or country of organization; (b) such entity has full right and authority to enter into this Lease and to perform all of Landlord's and Tenant's obligations hereunder; and (c) each person (and both of the persons if more than one signs) signing this Lease on behalf of Landlord or Tenant is duly and validly authorized to do so.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at trial to prove that the alleged statements were made. As an initial matter, plaintiffs argue that the notes and reports are not hearsay because the evidence is offered to show merely that statements were made, as opposed to the truth of the statements. In the present situation, the distinction defies logic. Plaintiffs hope to introduce the notes and reports to establish the actual content of statements by Cirrus executives. Accordingly, the notes and reports are offered to show the truth of the assertion that Cirrus made specific fraudulent statements to analysts. Such evidence clearly falls within the definition of hearsay under Rule 801(e) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Cypress, 891 F.Supp. at 1374. See also Larez v. City of Los Angeles, 946 F.2d 630, 640-44 (9th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); Seagate, ¶ 98,530 at 91,583-84 (finding Options: A. holding that the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment is not violated by the admission of hearsay statements under the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule where the defendant was able to confront and crossexamine the witness who claimed that the statements at issue were made B. holding rule 16a1a does not include statements made by coconspirators even if those statements can be attributed to the defendant for purposes of the rule against hearsay C. holding that hearsay within a police report was inadmissible D. holding that newspaper articles were inadmissible hearsay when used to prove that the defendant made the statements attributed to him in the article E. holding that statements in affidavits based solely on hearsay are inadmissible as summary judgment evidence

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that newspaper articles were inadmissible hearsay when used to prove that the defendant made the statements attributed to him in the article
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 Service Providers and the Company shall, and the Company shall cause any of its subsidiaries that are Receiving Parties hereunder to, cooperate with each other in all reasonable respects in matters relating to the provision and receipt of the Services.

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: 2786. Lack of definitive guidance in Daubert left Judges with the task of deciphering Daubert’s impact on non-scientific testimony. Kimberly M. Hrabosky, Note, Kumho Tire v. Carmi chael: Stretching Daubert Beyond Recognition, 8 Geo. Mason L.Rev. 203, 207 (1999). Logical arguments regarding Daubert’s applicability to non-scientific expert testimony remained an open issue until the Kumho Tire decision. In the interim, there was a split between Federal Circuit Courts as to whether the Daubert decision applied to non-scientific experts (whatever that concept may include). Some Federal Circuits, including the Fifth and the Eighth Circuits, held that Daubert was applicable to the non-scientific expert testimony. See Moore v. Ashland Chemical, Inc., 5th Cir., 151 F.3d 269, 275 n. 6 (1998) (<HOLDING>); Dancy v. Hyster Co., 8th Cir., 127 F.3d 649, Options: A. holding that federal rule of evidence 702 superceded the frye standard of admissibility of scientific evidence and that under rule 702 the district court had to determine that proffered expert testimony was both reliable and relevant B. holding that the general principles of rule 702 recognized by the daubert decision are applicable to other species of expert testimony C. holding that under fedrevid 702 expert testimony must be reliable to be admissible D. holding that daubert sought only to clarify the standard for evaluating scientific knowledge under rule 702 E. holding that the basic gatekeeping obligation of daubert applies to all expert testimony

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the general principles of rule 702 recognized by the daubert decision are applicable to other species of expert testimony