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: Gov’t Mem. at-33-34 (quoting Ruling at 54). 3. The Court’s Resolution. a. The Constitutional Issue. As a threshold matter, the Vaccine Act is constitutional, because the Vaccine Act categorically does not deny access to Article III courts. In fact, Petitioners may appeal this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(f) (“[A]ny petitioner aggrieved by the findings or conclusions of the [United States Court of Federal Claims] may obtain review of the judgment of the court in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Cireuit[.]”). In addition, Petitioners have misread Stem’s holding that Article I bankruptcy courts do not have jurisdiction oyer common law claims between private parties. See Stern, 131 S.Ct. at 2614-15 (<HOLDING>). The claims in this case, are alleged against Options: A. recognizing that the claim at issue was one under state common law between two private parties the experts in the federal system at resolving common law counterclaims are the article iii courts B. holding that the statute in question served to modify prior common law and that the legislature was empowered to make such changes in the common law based on the public interest C. recognizing common law privileges D. holding that article 2 of the ucc preempts common law claims E. holding that federal courts may not consider other issues before resolving standing an article iii jurisdictional matter

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that the claim at issue was one under state common law between two private parties the experts in the federal system at resolving common law counterclaims are the article iii courts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute but one contract, and shall become effective as provided in Section 4 of this Amendment. Delivery of an executed counterpart to this Amendment by facsimile (or other electronic) transmission pursuant to procedures approved by the Administrative Agent shall be as effective as delivery of a manually signed original.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: impair the exercise of authority, enumerated or incidental under the NBA, the State’s regulations must give way.” Id. at 12,127 S.Ct. 1559. Cadence Bank argues that the NBA preempts Tennessee’s statutory requirement that national banks, as ‘ corporations transacting business in Tennessee, obtain a certificate of authority. The NBA provides, in relevant part: Upon duly making and filing articles of association and an organization certificate a national banking association shall become, as from the date of the execution of its organization certificate, a body corporate, and as such, and in the name designated in the organization certificate, it shall have power— Fourth. To sue and be sued, complain and defend, in any court of law and equity, as ful 3, 616 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010) (<HOLDING>); Williams v. Chase Bank USA, N.A., 390 S.W.3d Options: A. holding that the nba preempted a kentucky statute that re quired a national bank as a foreign corporation transacting business in the state to obtain a certificate of authority prior to maintaining suit in a kentucky court as it significantly impaired the banks exercise of authority under the nba B. holding that the nba preempted application of a texas statute that would infringe on a national banks federally granted right to sue in any court as fully as natural persons by requiring the bank to obtain a certificate of authority before it could maintain a suit in texas C. holding the failure of a foreign corporation to obtain a certificate of authority prior to bringing an action to recover monies owed on an account affected the corporations capacity to sue but did not affect the courts subject matter jurisdiction D. holding that a florida statute requiring a foreign corporation to obtain a certificate of authority prior to transacting business in the state was preempted as it applied to national banks E. holding that an iowa statute requiring a foreign corporation to hold a certificate of authority to transact business in the state was preempted by the nba as the statute pertained to national banks because it infringed on the powers provided to national banks by the nba

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a florida statute requiring a foreign corporation to obtain a certificate of authority prior to transacting business in the state was preempted as it applied to national banks
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 addition to being entitled to exercise all rights provided herein or granted by law, including recovery of damages, Investor and the Company will be entitled to seek specific performance under the Transaction Documents. The parties agree that monetary damages may not be adequate compensation for any loss incurred by reason of any breach of obligations described in the foregoing sentence and hereby agree to waive in any action for specific performance of any such obligation (other than in connection with any action for a temporary restraining order) the defense that a remedy at law would be adequate.

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: of G.D.’s older sibling, C.D., based on the abuse of G.D. The court may not terminate parental rights based on the abuse of a sibling without a finding of a nexus between the abuse and the prospective abuse. O.M. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs. (In re G.C.A.), 863 So.2d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (citing R.F. v. Dep’t of Children & Families (In re M.F.), 770 So.2d 1189 (Fla.2000)); see also C.M. v. Dep’t of Children & Families (In re C.M.), 844 So.2d 765, 766 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (“Children who have not been abused may be adjudicated dependent based on abuse inflicted upon their siblings; however, the evidence must demonstrate a nexus between the abuse and any prospective abuse to another sibling.”). But see T.P. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 860 So.2d 1084, 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (<HOLDING>). “Generally, this nexus is established when Options: A. holding that parental rights may be terminated based on the egregious abuse of a sibling without a showing of a nexus but providing that the parent should be afforded the opportunity to show a lack of a nexus B. holding that in order to support a termination of parental rights based on prospective abuse it is necessary to show that the behavior of the parent was beyond the parents control likely to continue and placed the child at risk and citing as an example the parents mental illness C. holding the parental rights of a child may not be terminated unless that parent has been represented by counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings D. recognizing that a court is not limited in what it may consider in determining whether parental rights should be terminated E. recognizing petitioners must be afforded the opportunity to show good cause for filing a longer petition

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that parental rights may be terminated based on the egregious abuse of a sibling without a showing of a nexus but providing that the parent should be afforded the opportunity to show a lack of a nexus
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: “discontinue service to any customer on reasonable notice of nonpayment of bills,” the utility terminated the plaintiffs service. Jackson, 419 U.S. at 346, 95 S.Ct. 449. The plaintiff sued the utility, claiming that the utility had terminated her power without affording her notice and a hearing and had thus violated the Due Process Clause. The plaintiff contended that the defendant’s monopoly in the market for electrical power rendered the defendant a state actor. The Court rejected this argument, stating that the defendant’s state-created monopoly was “not determinative in considering whether [the defendant’s] termination of service to [the plaintiff] was ‘state action.’ ” Id. at 351-52, 95 S.Ct. 449; see also Crissman v. Dover Downs Entm’t., 289 F.3d 231, 247 (3d Cir.2002) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). The state’s grant of a monopoly to the Options: A. holding that an action naming a state entity as a defendant did not constitute an action against the state because the state entity was sued in its capacity as receiver B. holding that even though a state racing regulation commission had granted a racetrack a sixmonth monopoly in the market for harness racing the acts of the entity operating the racetrack were not attributable to the state C. holding that a school was not a state actor even though it had to comply with many state regulations to be eligible for state funding and almost all of its students had been referred to it by the state D. holding that a public corporation in that case a commission created to provide information about the tva is an entity separate from the state and its acts are not acts of the state within the meaning of the state constitutions prohibition against the state creating new debts E. holding that there was no state action where the decisions to discharge the petitioners were not compelled or even influenced by any state regulation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that even though a state racing regulation commission had granted a racetrack a sixmonth monopoly in the market for harness racing the acts of the entity operating the racetrack were not attributable to the state
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the estates would be better off litigating the claims than negotiating their resolution through a plan of reorganization. In fact, the Committee itself recognizes the possibility that “nego tiations might consensually resolve” its challenges. (Bankr. Dkt. No. 2740 at 25). If the motion is granted, the Committee says, the court should not require the proposed amended complaint to be filed right away or by a certain date. The Committee instead asks leave to file the complaint at its discretion—“to potentially avoid unnecessary litigation if it appears its discussions with the parties may yield progress.” (Id.). That the litigation could prove unnecessary given the parties’ settlement discussions is justification enough for the debtors’ not to pursue it. Cf. Caesars, 808 F.3d at 1188-89 (<HOLDING>). The debtors’ justification, though, might not Options: A. holding that this court could enjoin litigation in another court if doing so would promote settlement of disputes in these bankruptcy cases B. holding bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to issue injunction of state court litigation against debtors principal stating this power under 11 usc 105a includes the authority to enjoin litigants from pursuing actions in other courts that threaten the integrity of the debtors estate C. holding that bankruptcy court may enjoin federal administrative proceedings when they threaten the debtors estate D. holding that bankruptcy court may enjoin state environmental reclamation order E. holding that bankruptcy court could not enjoin third party tort claims that would not affect estate

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that this court could enjoin litigation in another court if doing so would promote settlement of disputes in these bankruptcy cases
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: Roberts but before Crawford, the Supreme Court expressly relied on Roberts. The Court reasoned that “the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule [Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E) ] is firmly enough rooted in our jurisprudence that, under this Court’s holding in Roberts, a court need not inde1 pendently inquire into the reliability of such statements.” Bourjaily, 483 U.S. at 183, 107 S.Ct. 2775. Brist is therefore correct that the Court has rejected Bour-jaily’s underlying reasoning by now requiring courts to conduct a separate Confrontation Clause analysis for out-of-court “testimonial” statements, even when the statements at issue otherwise satisfy a firmly-rooted hearsay exception. See, e.g., Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305, —, 129 S.Ct. 2527, 2540, 174 L.Ed.2d 314 (2009) (<HOLDING>); Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813, 821, 126 Options: A. holding that confrontation clause issues are subject to harmless error analysis B. holding confrontation clause violations subject to harmless error analysis C. holding that certificates of analysis produced by forensic scientists who conducted a chemical analysis of drugs seized from the defendant are subject to confrontation clause challenge wjhether or not they qualify as business or official records D. recognizing that statements admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule may be inadmissible when tested against the confrontation clause because confrontation clause analysis differs from hearsay rule analysis E. holding that admission of business records does not violate the confrontation clause under roberts

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that certificates of analysis produced by forensic scientists who conducted a chemical analysis of drugs seized from the defendant are subject to confrontation clause challenge wjhether or not they qualify as business or official records
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 for Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., there is no investment banker, broker, finder, financial advisor, placement agent or other Person that has been retained by or is authorized to act on behalf of the Company or any Subsidiary who might be entitled to any fee or commission in connection with the transactions contemplated by 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: Each Seller and Purchaser agrees to reasonably cooperate with each other, from the date hereof up through and following the Closing Date, in good faith, in an effort to satisfy all further conditions, undertakings and agreements contained in this Agreement.

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: not entertain a reserve officer’s non-promotion claim until she has first presented it to the Secretary in accordance with the clear congressional command of § 14502(g). The remaining question is whether Harkness’s constitutional claim falls within the scope of this exclusive scheme. We conclude that it does. Harkness’s claim is plainly “based in any way on [his] failure ... to be selected for promotion by a selection board.” As evidence, we need look no further than his standing to bring it. Harkness’s claim arose because he suffered injury when the 2007 board allegedly failed to promote him for religious reasons and because he is likely to suffer the same injury when he is considered for promotion by subsequent boards. Cf. In re Navy Chaplaincy, 697 F.3d 1171, 1175-77 (D.C.Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). Put another way, the sole reason Harkness has Options: A. holding that article iii standing is necessary for intervention B. holding that a plaintiff seeking injunctive relief must show a real or immediate threat that he will be wronged again to establish article iii standing C. recognizing that the government not the relator must have suffered the injury in fact required for article iii standing D. holding that article iii standing is not a prerequisite to intervention E. holding that chaplains who were likely to be considered for promotion faced an imminent threat of future injury sufficient to establish article iii standing

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that chaplains who were likely to be considered for promotion faced an imminent threat of future injury sufficient to establish article iii 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Parent MLP, the Borrower and the other Restricted Subsidiaries either own or have valid licenses or other rights to use all databases, geological data, geophysical data, engineering data, maps, interpretations and other technical information used in their businesses as presently conducted, subject to the limitations contained in the agreements governing the use of the same, which limitations are customary for companies engaged in the business of the exploration and production of Hydrocarbons, with such exceptions as could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Intellectual 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan, as amended and restated, shall become effective immediately upon approval of the Plan by the Board, subject to approval of the Plan, as amended and restated, by by the requisite percentage of the holders of the Common Stock of the Company within twelve months after the date of approval of the Plan by the Board.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall indemnify the Holder(s) of the Registrable Securities to be sold pursuant to any registration statement hereunder and each person, if any, who controls such Holders within the meaning of Section 15 of the Securities Act or Section 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“ Exchange Act ”), against all loss, claim, damage, expense or liability (including all reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses reasonably incurred in investigating, preparing or defending against any claim whatsoever) to which any of them may become subject under the Securities Act, the Exchange Act or otherwise, arising from such registration statement but only to the same extent and with the same effect as the provisions pursuant to which the Company has agreed to indemnify the Placement Agent contained in Section 7 of the Placement Agency Agreement between the Placement Agent and the Company, dated as of April 18, 2017.

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: Civil No. 975972, 8 Mass. L. Rptr. 21 (Mass. Super. Ct. Dec. 15, 1997), this court (Kottmyer, J.) held that two companies engaged in the computer data storage industry were in direct competition because both entities were attempting to “fulfill the same need in the same marketplace.” Following the holding in the above cases, this court concludes that Cereva and Pirus are engaged in the storage networking industry and both market to the same customer base. Accordingly, Cereva and Pirus do compete with each other directly. With respect to the issue of the difference in price between the two products, entities can be in direct competition with each other despite the difference in price between the products that they offer. See Lumex, Inc. v. Highsmith, 919 F.Sup. 624, 631 (E.D.N.Y. 1996) (<HOLDING>). B. Covenants Not to Compete Employee Options: A. holding that products dissimilar in price can have similar features so as to compete with each other B. holding that when a plaintiff can establish that she was in the vicinity in which asbestos dust from defendants products was inhaled a jury can reasonably infer that plaintiff was injured by defendants products C. holding that assertions of privilege must normally be raised as to each record sought and each question asked so that the court can rule with specificity D. recognizing products liability and products actions based on negligence as part of the general maritime law E. holding that parties to an arbitration agreement need not equally bind each other with respect to an arbitration agreement if they have provided each other with consideration beyond the promise to arbitrate

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that products dissimilar in price can have similar features so as to compete with each other
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 board intends that this policy will be applied to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. The Company has the authority to seek recovery through any available means including litigation or the filing of liens, if necessary. The Company also has the authority, to the extent permitted by law, to deduct the amount to be repaid from any amounts otherwise owed to the recipient, including wages or other compensation, fringe benefits, or vacation paid. Whether or not the Company elects to make any deduction, if the Company does not recover the full amount that it has determined should be recovered, the recipient must immediately repay the unpaid balance. By agreeing to accept an award, each award recipient consents to the Company’s right to make these deductions.

assistant: Enforcements
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: Executive shall be paid a base salary (“Base Salary”) at the annual rate of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00), payable in bi-weekly installments consistent with Company’s payroll practices. Any accrued salary must be paid out at year-end, each year.

assistant: Base Salary
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 its knowledge, the Company owns or possesses sufficient legal rights to all patents, trademarks, service marks, tradenames, copyrights, trade secrets, licenses, information and proprietary rights and processes necessary for its business without any conflict with, or infringement of, the rights of others. The Company is not a party to any licenses or agreements of any kind with respect to the patents, trademarks, service marks, trade names, copyrights, trade secrets, licenses, information, proprietary rights and processes or intellectual property rights of any other person or entity, in each case, other than licenses or other agreements entered into in the ordinary course of business. The Company has not received any communications alleging that the Company has violated or, by conducting its business, would violate any of the patents, trademarks, service marks, tradenames, copyrights, trade secrets or other proprietary rights or processes of any other person or entity. Each employee, consultant and officer of the Company has executed an agreement with the Company regarding confidentiality and proprietary information and assignment of intellectual property. The Company is not aware that any of its employees or consultants is in violation thereof, and the Company will use its best efforts to prevent any such violation.

assistant: Intellectual 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to Section 8.17, the Parent Borrower, the Co-Borrower and the Guarantors will promptly (and in no event later than thirty (30) days after written notice from the Administrative Agent is received) cure or cause to be cured any defects in the creation, execution and delivery of any of the Loan Documents. The Parent Borrower, the Co-Borrower and the Guarantors will, at their expense, promptly (and in no event later than thirty (30) days after written notice from the Administrative Agent is received) execute and deliver, or cause to be executed and delivered, to the Administrative Agent and/or the Collateral Agent upon request all such other and further documents, agreements and instruments (including without limitation further security agreements, financing statements, continuation statements, and assignments of accounts and contract rights, except for Excluded Contracts (as defined in the Guaranty and Collateral Agreement)) in compliance with or accomplishment of the covenants and agreements of the Parent Borrower, the Co-Borrower and the Guarantors in the Loan Documents or to further evidence and more fully describe the Vessel Collateral, including any renewals, additions, substitutions, replacements or accessions to the Vessel Collateral, or to correct any omissions in the Security Instruments, or more fully state the security obligations set out herein or in any of the Security Instruments, or to perfect, protect or preserve any Liens created pursuant to any of the Security Instruments, or to make any recordings, to file any notices, or obtain any consents as may be necessary or appropriate in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. It is understood that any requests made by the Administrative Agent and/or the Collateral Agent pursuant to this Section 8.05 shall be upon written direction from the Required Lenders.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that of Pacour-ek in that she alleges that Hewlett-Packard discriminated against her because it knew that she was planning to become pregnant and probably would become so in the near future. This court agrees with Pacourek that the purpose of the PDA is best served by extending its coverage to women who are trying to become pregnant. As noted above, the Supreme Court has equated discrimination on the basis of pregnancy with discrimination based on sex. Newport News, supra, 462 U.S. at 684, 103 S.Ct. at 2631. Further, it has recognized that a woman’s ability to become pregnant may subject her to disparate treatment. International Union, United Auto., Aerospace and Agric. Implement Workers of Am., UAW v. Johnson Controls, 499 U.S. 187, 197, 111 S.Ct. 1196, 1202, 113 L.Ed.2d 158 (1991) (<HOLDING>). The legislative history of the PDA supports Options: A. holding that title vii does not prescribe an employers determination of preferred or required job requirements B. holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii C. holding that because plaintiff did not apply for a job he could not be rejected in a title vii case D. recognizing title vii claim by subclass of african american women E. holding that employers fetal protection policy violates title vii because fjertile men but not fertile women are given a choice as to whether they wish to risk their reproductive health for a particular job

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that employers fetal protection policy violates title vii because fjertile men but not fertile women are given a choice as to whether they wish to risk their reproductive health for a particular job
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of Allen, 28 Wn. App. 637, 626 P.2d 16 (1981). In that case a stepmother had raised her deaf stepson as her own since he was three years old and had fully integrated the child into her family. She ensured that he learned sign language, that all her other children learned sign language as well, and that the whole family communicated with the child in sign language. Allen, 28 Wn. App. at 640-41. The Allen court recognized that a de facto parental relationship had formed between the stepmother and the child. Thus, the court affirmed the trial court’s award of custody of the child to the stepmother following the dissolution of her marriage to the biological father, despite the absence of a finding that the biological father was unfit — because it would have been detr , 783 P.2d 615 (1989) (<HOLDING>); In re Welfare of Hansen, 24 Wn. App. 27, 36, Options: A. recognizing that a foster parent may attain the status of psychological parent when the relationship is not temporary in duration and exists with the consent and encouragement of a childs legal parent or guardian B. holding that psychological parent was not entitled to custody or visitation C. holding that evidence that parent is victim of spousal abuse and that parent is unemployed living in crowded conditions and had multiple visits to mental hospital was no evidence that awarding custody to parent would significantly impair child D. recognizing that aunt had become psychological parent of nephew and reversed and remanded for trial and a custody decision under chapter 2610 rcw where the evidence indicated that the biological parent was unable to care for the child E. holding that the requisites for in loco parentis status are the actual care and custody of a child by a nonparent who assumes parental duties because the parent generally due to his or her absence is unable or unwilling to care for the child

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that aunt had become psychological parent of nephew and reversed and remanded for trial and a custody decision under chapter 2610 rcw where the evidence indicated that the biological parent was unable to care for the child
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: test for determining whether a hearing examiner exceeded his jurisdiction as “[a]n abuse of authority occurs when a decision is so arbitrary and unreasonable that it amounts to a clear and prejudicial error of law”). In his brief, Salvaggio provides a survey of cases in which courts have held that a hearing examiner exceeded his jurisdiction under the City of Pasadena test. In City of Pasadena, the Supreme Court held the hearing examiner exceeded his jurisdiction by summarily reversing the police officer’s suspension without accepting and hearing any evidence. Id. at 20-21 (noting the Act requires the hearing examiner to base his decision on evidence submitted during a hearing). In Kelley, the Supreme Court held the hearing examiner e 86 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). In City of Athens v. MacAvoy, the court held Options: A. holding that the good behavior requirement of a suspended sentence defined the period of suspension B. holding that temporary order amounted to order modifying custody of children because language changed custody for an indefinite period C. holding that a temporary order granting emergency relief and temporary child custody under the domestic violence act is not immediately appealable D. holding hearing examiner exceeded his jurisdiction by reforming indefinite suspension to temporary suspension of 92 days in excess of 15day statutory period for temporary suspensions E. holding that police chiefs suspension letter omitting statutorily required information about process for appeal of suspension did not deprive hearing examiner of jurisdiction over suspended officers appeal and require reinstatement of officer

assistant: The best answer is D. holding hearing examiner exceeded his jurisdiction by reforming indefinite suspension to temporary suspension of 92 days in excess of 15day statutory period for temporary suspensions
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: For a period of 12 months following the termination of the Executive’s employment with the Company for any reason, the Executive shall provide reasonable cooperation in connection with any action or proceeding (or any appeal from any action or proceeding) which relates to events during the Executive’s employment hereunder of which the Executive has knowledge. The Company shall reimburse the Executive for the Executive’s reasonable travel expenses incurred in connection with the foregoing, in accordance with the Company’s policies (and consistent with the Executive’s travel practices during the Executive’s employment with the Company) and subject to the delivery of reasonable support for such expenses. Any such requests for cooperation shall be subject to the Executive’s business and personal schedule and the Executive shall not be required to cooperate against his own legal interests or the legal interests of his employer or partners or business ventures. In the event the Executive reasonably determines that he needs separate legal counsel in connection with his cooperation, the Company shall reimburse the Executive for the reasonable costs of such counsel as soon as practicable (and in any event within thirty (30) days) following its receipt of an invoice for such costs. In the event the Executive is required to cooperate for more than eight (8) hours in any 12-month period, the Executive shall be paid an hourly consulting fee in an amount mutually agreed between the Company and Executive at the time.

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: 318-19 (Bankr. M.D.Fla.1991) (awarding $250,000.00 in punitive damages where petitioners acted willfully and maliciously); In re Camelot, Inc., 25 B.R. at 869 (assessing $1,000.00 in punitive damages where petitioners “vindictively” filed their petition). Also, the court should attempt to further overriding bankruptcy policies while ensuring that the penalty is not “unduly harsh.” In re Atlas Mach, and Iron Works, Inc., 190 B.R. at 805 (quoting In re Fox Island Square, 106 B.R. 962, 968 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.1989)). The court should take into account the petitioner’s financial situation in determining what amount of sanctions will further the purposes served by punitive damage awards. See TXO Prod. Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp., 509 U.S. 443, 462, 113 S.Ct. 2711, 125 L.Ed.2d 366 (1993) (<HOLDING>). In these cases, Petitioners chose not to Options: A. holding a court may not award punitive damages B. recognizing the financial position of the defendant as a factor in assessing a punitive damages award C. holding that defendants wealth is a traditional and acceptable factor where calculating punitive damages D. holding tcpa is remedial statute and that statutory damages are not punitive damages E. holding without discussion of the punitive damages issue that judgment for embezzlement which included actual and punitive damages was nondischargeable

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that defendants wealth is a traditional and acceptable factor where calculating punitive damages
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: substances and testing results, and it “failed to provide an opportunity for public review and comment of the alternative remedial measure it was considering”); American Color & Chemical Corp., supra, 918 F.Supp. at 957 (“The court agrees ... that the public was provided with an opportunity for meaningful public comment concerning selection of a response action.... Additionally, the requirements of the ... Consent Orders were substantially equivalent to those found in the 1990 NCP”); Greene v. Product Mfg. Corp., 842 F.Supp. 1321, 1326 (D.Kan.1993) (“The court is persuaded that the provisions of the consent decree providing for a community relations program through the KDHE are sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the NCP”); General Electric Co., supra, 715 F.Supp. at 952, 961 (<HOLDING>). Still other courts have simply examined the Options: A. holding that the ncp public participation requirement was fulfilled because the indiana department of environmental management gave public notice and received public comments before issuing an npdes permit for the cleanup even if it did not hold a public hearing B. holding that where the action was filed as a class action and a consent decree was entered into entry of the consent decree was sufficient certification of the action as a class action under rule 23 C. holding that if notice to the public was a requirement the input of the missouri department of natural resources mdnr served as a substitute for public comment because the consent decree between plaintiff and mdnr required all remedial action for the site to be consistent with the national contingency plan and required mdnr approval of all remedial action D. holding that any member of the general public can initiate an action to raise issues involving the public trust in air water or other natural resources of the state E. holding that public meetings held after implementation of final remedial action were not meaningful and that the only public meetings held before remedial action were not meaningful because they did not discuss selection of remedy

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that if notice to the public was a requirement the input of the missouri department of natural resources mdnr served as a substitute for public comment because the consent decree between plaintiff and mdnr required all remedial action for the site to be consistent with the national contingency plan and required mdnr approval of all remedial action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: affirmed only if the record establishes that the mov-ant has conclusively proved all essential elements of the movant’s cause of action or defense as a matter of law. Clear Creek Basin, 589 S.W.2d at 678. IV. Existence of a Contract In her first and fourth issues, appellant complains that the trial court abused its discretion by granting summary judgment based solely on her deemed admissions because no contract between appellant and appellee ever existed in the first place. Appellee served appellant with two sets of requests for admissions. Appellant answered the first set but did not timely answer the second set; the second set of admissions negated any attempt by appellant to deny the existence of a contract. See TexR. Civ. P. 198.3; Marshall v. Vise, 767 S.W.2d 699, 700 (Tex.1989) (<HOLDING>). Appellant’s deemed admissions show that no Options: A. holding out admission to practice law when not admitted to practice B. holding that statement within expert report is not a judicial admission but is instead an admission by party C. holding that unanswered requests for admissions are automatically deemed admitted unless court on motion permits withdrawal or amendment once admitted admission is judicial admission whether deemed or otherwise D. holding that even if evidence admitted in error admission must result in material prejudice to warrant reversal E. holding exhibits deemed admitted into evidence where they were treated below without objection as if they were admitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that unanswered requests for admissions are automatically deemed admitted unless court on motion permits withdrawal or amendment once admitted admission is judicial admission whether deemed or otherwise
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 hereto intend and believe that each provision in this Guaranty comports with all applicable local, state, provincial and federal laws and judicial decisions. However, if any provision or provisions, or if any portion of any provision or provisions, in this Guaranty is found by a court of law to be in violation of any applicable local, state, provincial or federal ordinance, statute, law, administrative or judicial decision, or public policy, and if such court should declare such portion, provision or provisions of this Guaranty to be illegal, invalid, unlawful, void or unenforceable as written, then it is the intent of all parties hereto that such portion, provision or provisions shall be given force to the fullest possible extent that they are legal, valid and enforceable, that the remainder of this Guaranty shall be construed as if such illegal, invalid, unlawful, void or unenforceable portion, provision or provisions were not contained therein, and that the rights, obligations and interest of the Credit Parties or the holder of the Notes under the remainder of this Guaranty shall continue in full force and effect.

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: that concern, it has been clearly established that burdens on prisoners’ free exercise rights must be justified by a legitimate penological interest. See id. at 594-95; Salahuddin v. Goord, 467 F.3d 263, 275-76 (2d Cir.2006) (denying qualified immunity for prison officials not separating Sunni and Shi’ite Ramadan services because “it was clearly established at the time of the alleged violations that prison officials may not substantially burden inmates’ rights to religious exercise without some justification”). It was also clearly established before 2007 that prison officials could not rely solely on the opinions of the New York Board of Rabbis in assessing the sincerity of Barnes’s religious belief. See Ford, 352 F.3d at 590, 597-98; Jackson v. Mann, 196 F.3d 316, 320-21 (2d Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); Jolly v. Coughlin, 76 F.3d 468, 476 (2d Options: A. holding orthodox jewish inmate was entitled to kosher meals B. holding that prison official could not deny inmate kosher meals based on rabbis determination that inmate was not jewish under judaic law C. holding that an inmate has a first amendment right to file grievances against prison officials D. holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate E. holding orthodox jewish inmates are entitled to a kosher diet

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that prison official could not deny inmate kosher meals based on rabbis determination that inmate was not jewish under judaic 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 360.010 is expressly preempted by HOLA pursuant to 12 C.F.R. § 560.2. HOLA authorized the Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”) to promulgate regulations providing “for the organization, incorporation, examination, operation, and regulation” of federal savings associations and federal savings banks. 12 U.S.C. § 1464(a). The OTS received broad rulemaking authority to preempt state laws that would otherwise govern the banking activities of federal savings associations and banks. Id. at § 1465. The OTS promulgated a regulation, 12 C.F.R. § 560.2, occupying the field in connection with the lending operations of federal savings associations and banks and this regulation expressly preempts state laws such as state usury laws. See Molosky v. Washington Mutual, Inc., 664 F.3d 109 (6th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). But the Plaintiff contends that the Options: A. holding that the law of michigan rather than the forum applied to manufacturers claim of attorneyclient privilege in a products liability suit because the communication took place in michigan and therefore michigan had most significant relationship to communication B. holding that the michigan usury act mcla 43831 a statute setting forth the legal interest rate in michigan is preempted according to the explicit terms of hola C. holding that litigating franchise dispute in michigan does not require that michigan law govern dispute as michigan franchise investment law does not expressly void choice of law provisions in franchise agreement D. holding michigan friend of the court employees absolutely immune from suit under 1983 E. holding breach of contract claim not preempted under hola

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the michigan usury act mcla 43831 a statute setting forth the legal interest rate in michigan is preempted according to the explicit terms of hola