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: is inapplicable because Zurich failed to establish the policy language granting it discretion when investigating and paying claims extended to those within the deductible. As Methodist asserts, the policy provision granting Zurich the “right to investigate and settle these claims, proceedings or suits” referred to “any claim, proceeding or suit against [Methodist] for' benefits payable by this insurance.” (emphasis added). ' Methodist argues (1) the emphasized language demonstrated Zurich had the right to settle only claims for which it was ultimately responsible or (2) based on existence of the deductible, there was a latent ambiguity on whether Zurich had the right to settle all claims or only those for which it was ultimately responsible. See CBI Indus., Inc., 907 S.W.2d at 520 (<HOLDING>). We disagree with both contentions. Because Options: A. recognizing that legislative history is not used to create ambiguity where statutory language is clear B. holding that where latent ambiguity exists regarding identity of real property described in a will question as to what testatrix intended to devise is a mixed question of law and fact C. recognizing latent ambiguity arises when contract unambiguous on its face is applied to subject matter with which it deals and ambiguity appears by reason of some collateral matter D. recognizing that a federal court is obliged to dismiss a case whenever it appears the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction E. holding that where an ambiguity exists in fact or by construction it is proper to consider the history of the legislation

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing latent ambiguity arises when contract unambiguous on its face is applied to subject matter with which it deals and ambiguity appears by reason of some collateral matter
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including PDF or any electronic signature complying with the U.S. federal ESIGN Act of 2000, e.g., www.docusign.com) or other transmission method and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

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: 5.2. The obligations in Clause 5.1 shall not apply for Confidential Information that: 5.2.4. is required to be disclosed by law, regulation or any competent governmental, judicial or regulatory authority, or by a recognized stock exchange, or in response to a request from a regulatory body with a supervisory role over Recipient or any of its Affiliates, in which case Recipient will (or, if Recipient's Representative is subject to the disclosure obligation, Recipient will procure that such Representative will), in each case to the extent permitted by law, regulation or the relevant authority: a) inform Discloser of the circumstances of the disclosure and the information that will be disclosed as soon as reasonably practicable;

assistant: No
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Participant’s Service terminates because of the Disability of the Participant, the Option, to the extent unexercised and exercisable for vested shares on the date on which the Participant’s Service terminated, may be exercised by the Participant (or the Participant’s guardian or legal representative) at any time prior to the expiration of twelve (12) months (or such longer or shorter period provided by the Award Agreement) after the date on which the Participant’s Service terminated, but in any event no later than the date of expiration of the Option’s term as set forth in the Award Agreement evidencing such Option (the “ Option Expiration Date ” ).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as provided in any signed written agreement contemporaneously or hereafter executed by the Company and Executive, this Agreement (i) constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with regard to the subject matter hereof, (ii) supersedes all prior agreements, arrangements, and understandings, written or oral, relating to the subject matter hereof, and (iii) contains all the covenants, promises, representations, warranties, and agreements between the parties with respect to employment of Executive by the Company. Without limiting the scope of the preceding sentence, all understandings and agreements 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. As of the Effective Date, the Previous Employment Agreement shall be void and have no legal effect and neither the Company nor Executive shall have any further liability or obligation thereunder (other than with respect to any breach thereof prior to the Effective Date).

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY OR THEREBY (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER THEORY). EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PERSON HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PERSON WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION 14.6 .

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 355 U.S. 18 78 S.Ct. 2 2 L.Ed.2d 1 See 355 U.S. 900, 78 S.Ct. 258. Jay Lee GIBSON, Petitioner, v.Guy A. THOMPSON, Trustee, New Orleans, Texas & Mexico Railway Company. No. 142. Rehearing Denied Dec. 9, 1957. Messrs. Doerner, Rhinehart & Stuart, Tulsa, Okl., Fred Parks, Houston, Tex., for petitioner. Messrs. Woodul, Arterbury & Wren, Walter F. Woodul, Houston, Tex., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for certiorari is granted, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Texas is reversed and the case is remanded. We hold that the proofs justified with reason the jury's conclusion that employer negligence played a part in producing the petitioner's injury. Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 77 S.Ct. 443, 1 L.Ed.2d 493; Webb v. Illinois Central R. Co., 352 U.S. 512, 77 S.Ct. 451, 1 L.Ed.2d 503; Ferguson v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc., 352 U.S. 521, 77 S.Ct. 457, 1 L.Ed.2d 511; Shaw v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 353 U.S. 920, 77 S.Ct. 680, 1 L.Ed.2d 718; Futrelle v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 353 U.S. 920, 77 S.Ct. 682, 1 L.Ed.2d 718; Deen v. Gulf, C. & S.F. Ry. Co., 353 U.S. 925, 77 S.Ct. 715, 1 L.Ed.2d 721; Thomson v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co., 353 U.S. 926, 77 S.Ct. 698, 1 L.Ed.2d 722; Arnold v. Panhandle & S.F. Ry. Co., 353 U.S. 360, 77 S.Ct. 840, 1 L.Ed. 889; Ringhiser v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co., 354 U.S. 901, 77 S.Ct. 1093, 1 L.Ed.2d 1268; McBride v. Toledo Terminal R. Co., 354 U.S. 517, 77 S.Ct. 1398, 1 L.Ed.2d 1534. For the reasons set forth in his opinion in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 524, 77 S.Ct. 443, 459, 1 L.Ed.2d 493, Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER is of the view that the writ of certiorari is improvidently granted. 2 Memorandum of Mr. Justice HARLAN, with whom Mr. Justice BURTON and Mr. Justice WHITTAKER join. For reasons elaborated by Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER at the last Term, 352 U.S. 521, 524, 77 S.Ct. 457, 459, 1 L.Ed.2d 511, I think that certiorari should have been denied. However, I continue in the view, expressed at the last Term, 352 U.S. 559, 77 S.Ct. 478, that once certiorari has been granted in such cases, we disbelievers, consistent with the Court's certiorari procedure, should consider them on the merits. Further, much as I disagree, 352 U.S. 559, 562—564, 77 S.Ct. 478 481, with the reasoning and philosophy of the Rogers case, which strips the historical role of the judge in a jury trial of all meaningful significance, I feel presently bound to bow to it. Applying Rogers to the present cases, I am forced to concur in judgments of reversal in Nos. 142 and 350.

assistant: 8
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: affect [ ] . . . Tung Fong’s ability to enter into [subcontracting] transactions.” Pl.’s Reply Brief at 8. Quite apart from the issue of the legality of the calculation of the “all others” rate in this case, a party granted its own dumping margin generally lacks standing to challenge the “all others” rate. See Torrington Co. v. United States, 21 CIT 251, 263, 960 F. Supp. 339, 349 (1997); Fag Italia S.p.a. v. United States, 20 CIT 1377, 1384-85, 948 F. Supp. 67, 73 (1996). Tung Fong advances no compelling reason why that principle should not apply with equal force here. Tung Fong’s argument that it may, in the future, enter into subcontracts with companies subject to the “all others” rate is simply too speculative. See, e.g., Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1991) (<HOLDING>). Thus, because there is no showing that Tung Options: A. holding that environmental groups that might someday return to a contested habitat did not meet the actual or imminent standard required for injury in fact B. holding that inmates must demonstrate an actual injury C. holding that allegation of procedural injury does not affect the issues of injury in fact or causation D. holding that plaintiffs vague desire to return is insufficient to satisfy the requirement of imminent injury E. recognizing that the government not the relator must have suffered the injury in fact required for article iii standing

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that environmental groups that might someday return to a contested habitat did not meet the actual or imminent standard required for injury in fact
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: (a) None of the execution and delivery of the Basic Documents, the consummation of the transactions therein contemplated or compliance with the terms and provisions thereof will conflict with or result in a breach of, or require any consent under, (i) the certificate of incorporation, LLC operating agreement or partnership agreements, or by-laws of the Parent or any of its Subsidiaries, or any applicable law or regulation, or any order, writ, injunction or decree of any court or Governmental Authority, or any Basic Document or (ii) any other material agreement or instrument to which the Parent or any of its Subsidiaries is a party or by which it is bound or to which it is subject, or constitute a default under any such lease, agreement or instrument, or result in the creation or imposition of any Lien upon any of the revenues or assets of the Parent or any of its Subsidiaries pursuant to the terms of any such agreement or instrument.

assistant: No Defaults
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 2004) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, we affirm the trial court’s Options: A. holding that standard for revocation of probation is preponderance of the evidence B. holding defendant cannot establish prejudice merely by alleging court held probation revocation hearing after defendants period of probation expired C. holding probation revocation is not a stage of a criminal prosecution D. holding a sentencing court is not required to grant probation E. holding that revocation of probation is merely an extension of a sentencing proceeding

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that revocation of probation is merely an extension of a sentencing proceeding
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 Consent may be executed in counterparts (and by different parties hereto in different counterparts), each of which when so executed and delivered will constitute an original, but all of which when taken together will constitute a single contract. Delivery of an executed counterpart to this Consent by telecopy or other electronic means shall be effective as an original and shall constitute a representation that an original will be delivered.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company may withhold from any benefit under the Plan an amount sufficient to satisfy its tax withholding obligations. Except with respect to any Member whose employment is terminated for Cause or voluntarily resigns without Good Reason (other than Retirement, as defined in the Company’s 2010 Equity Incentive Plan) before February 26, 2015, a Member may elect to have his or her tax withholding obligations in respect of his or her Stock Account satisfied by having shares of Common Stock held back by the Company with a Fair Market Value equal to the minimum amount of such tax withholding obligations.

assistant: Withholdings
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: 373 U.S. 238 83 S.Ct. 1265 10 L.Ed.2d 321 William SMITH, Jr., Petitioner,v.STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. No. 667. Argued April 30, 1963. Decided May 13, 1963. Morris B. Abram. Atlanta, Ga., for petitioner. G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Jackson, Miss., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner was convicted of rape by a jury in the Circuit Court of Madison County, Mississippi, and sentenced to death. The conviction was affirmed by the Supreme Court of Mississippi. Miss., 139 So.2d 857. We granted petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and his petition for certiorari which presented several claims of alleged denial of rights secured to him by the Fourteenth Amendment. 371 U.S. 939, 83 S.Ct. 323, 9 L.Ed.2d 274. After oral argument and study of the record, we have reached the conclusion that the record is not sufficient to permit decision of his constitutional claims. The writ is therefore dismissed as improvidently granted, without prejudice to an application for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 after exhaustion of any state remedies still open to him. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254; Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 435, 83 S.Ct. 822, 847, 9 L.Ed.2d 837. 2 Upon the effective date of our action today, the stay of execution granted October 5, 1962, by MR. JUSTICE BLACK expires of its own terms. We see no reason, however, to continue the stay in effect. Although the Mississippi Supreme Court, see Miss., 145 So.2d 688, reserved to the State the right, upon this Court's disposition of the writ of certiorari, to apply for an order fixing a new execution date, we assume that that court will not act on application of the State without affording petitioner an opportunity to pursue with due diligence any available state remedies and, if necessary, the remedy in federal habeas corpus. 3 Writ dismissed.

assistant: 9
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: arrest in March 2000. Lin simply responded with greater detail when she was specifically asked about being “locked up.” Also, contrary to the IJ’s conclusions, the record establishes that the Chinese government did in fact interfere with Lin’s business and that she was able to fly to Guan Toa in one day without violating her duty to report to the police. Similarly, the discrepancy between Lin’s consistent testimony that she started practicing Zhong Gong in October 1994 and the asylum officer’s notation that she began practicing in 1995 was a “discrepancy ... capable of being attributed to a typographical or clerical error, [and] it [therefore] cannot form the bases of an adverse credibility finding.” Shah v. INS, 220 F.3d 1062, 1068 (9th Cir.2000); see also Bandari, 227 F.3d at 1166 (<HOLDING>). Finally, the IJ cited Lin’s nervous demeanor Options: A. holding that speculation and conjecture cannot support an adverse credibility finding B. holding that inconsistencies adequately support the administrative law judges alj adverse credibility finding C. holding that any alleged inconsistencies in dates that reveal nothing about a petitioners credibility cannot form the basis of an adverse credibility finding D. holding that inconsistencies between an application and testimony can serve as the basis for adverse credibility findings where the testimonial change goes to the heart of a petitioners claim E. holding an ij must to address a petitioners explanation for inconsistencies to rely upon them as the basis for an adverse credibility finding

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that any alleged inconsistencies in dates that reveal nothing about a petitioners credibility cannot form the basis of an adverse credibility finding
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: entitlement claims. The VA’s new rule had the effect of reinterpreting § 1318 to prohibit hypothetical entitlement claims. See Tarver, 1373-74. In Rodriguez and Tarver, we applied the three-part test outlined in Princess Cruises to determine that § 3.22 could be applied retroactively to bar § 1318 claims based on a hypothetical entitlement theory. See Rodriguez, 511 F.3d at 1156 (finding that all three Princess Cruises factors weighed in favor of retroactive application of § 3.22, as amended in 2000, to claims for DIC benefits filed by survivors before the amendment took effect); Tarver, 557 F.3d at 1374-77 (finding that retroactive application of § 3.22 was permissible in a case “distinguishable from Rodriguez only . v. Sec’y of Veterans Affairs, 260 F.3d 1365, 1370 (Fed.Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Ms. Kernea argues that because § 3.10(f)(3), Options: A. recognizing hixs holding that hypothetical entitlement claims were permitted under 1311a2 B. holding that plaintiffs state claims were not preempted because defendant failed to show that these claims rested on standards other than those permitted by the fda C. recognizing hardship where plaintiff alleged it was being deprived of statutory entitlement D. holding the state law claims were not preempted E. holding that the husbands failure to argue his entitlement to attorneys fees under a prenuptial agreement at a hearing held on the issue of entitlement to attorneys fees constituted an abandonment of that claim

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing hixs holding that hypothetical entitlement claims were permitted under 1311a2
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: States, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought. Any such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such. 28 U.S.C. § 2201. A district court’s decision to exercise its discretion and issue a declaratory judgment “will not be overturned absent a showing of clear abuse of ... discretion.” Kunkel v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 866 F.2d 1269, 1273 (10th Cir.1989). Bayouth and Hastings urge us to “assume that the District Court decided that [they] were not necessary parties,” Aplt. Br. at 11, and to then follow Federal Kemper Insurance Co. v. Rauscher, 807 F.2d 345, 353-54 (3d Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>), Harris v. Quinones, 507 F.2d 533, 536-37 Options: A. holding that the insurers declaratory relief action presented a justiciable controversy for the injured parties even though the insured tortfeasor had suffered a default judgment B. holding that where all necessary parties including the insurer the insured and the third party claimant had stipulated to the material facts in the dispute a declaratory judgment action on the insurers duty to indemnify could proceed C. holding that the district court erred in dismissing the injured party from the insureds declaratory relief action based on a default judgment entered against the insured and the insureds tortfeasor son D. holding that the injured party had standing to appeal the declaratory judgment in favor of the insurance company and noting that it was decisive to the holding that dairyland named the injured appellants in its declaratory judgment action E. holding that an injured party in an underlying tort action was not a necessary party in an action by an insurer for declaratory judgment of nonliability where the injured person had not obtained judgment against the insured

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the insurers declaratory relief action presented a justiciable controversy for the injured parties even though the insured tortfeasor had suffered a default judgment
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 company reserves the right , in its sole discretion , to restrict , suspend , or terminate this eula and your access to all or any part of the service at any time without prior notice or liability if you breach any provision of this eula or violate the rights of any third party copyright owner of musical works or sound recordings .

assistant: Limitation of liability, Unilateral termination
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 representations and warranties respectively made by Sellers and Purchaser in this Agreement and in any certificate delivered hereunder will expire as of the Closing or any termination of this Agreement, as applicable. Following the Closing or any termination of this Agreement, as applicable, no claim with respect to any breach of any representation or warranty contained in this Agreement may be pursued or maintained (either hereunder or otherwise) against any other Party.

assistant: Warranties
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: defense strategy to make the Government witness appear biased. Vallejo’s trial counsel elicited the statement when he asked Trotman, “And it would be fair to say, and honest to say, you, together with the agents of the Government want to see Mr. Vallejo convicted; isn’t that honest and fair?” The same tactic was also used on other Government witnesses for the same purpose. “A defendant cannot complain on appeal of alleged errors invited or induced by himself, particularly where, as here, it is not clear that the defendant was prejudiced thereby.” United States v. Console, 13 F.3d 641, 660 (3d Cir.1993) (citation omitted). Even if Trotman’s comment was improper, the curative jury instruction ensured that the statement did not deprive Vallejo of a fair trial. See Riley, 621 F.3d at 339 (<HOLDING>). Thus, the District Court did not commit plain Options: A. holding that a jury is presumed to follow the trial courts instructions B. holding that the district courts jury instruction cured the risk of prejudice resulting from the prosecutors improper comment because juries are presumed to follow their instructions richardson v marsh 481 us 200 211 107 sct 1702 95 led2d 176 1987 C. holding that a jury is presumed to follow a judges instructions D. recognizing that this court presumes that juries follow district courts instructions E. holding that instruction to disregard cured error from prosecutors improper comment during voir dire

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the district courts jury instruction cured the risk of prejudice resulting from the prosecutors improper comment because juries are presumed to follow their instructions richardson v marsh 481 us 200 211 107 sct 1702 95 led2d 176 1987
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 will maintain with financially sound and reputable insurers insurance with respect to its properties and business against such casualties and contingencies as shall be in accordance with general practices of businesses engaged in similar activities in similar geographic areas. Such insurance shall be in such minimum amounts that the Company will not be deemed a co-insurer under applicable insurance laws, regulations and policies and otherwise shall be in such amounts, contain such terms, be in such forms and be for such periods as may be reasonably satisfactory to the Collateral Agent.

assistant: Insurances
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 legal suit, action or proceeding arising out of or based upon this Warrant or the transactions contemplated hereby may be instituted in the federal courts of the United States of America or the courts of the State of New York in each case located in the city of New York and County of Manhattan, and each party irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of such courts in any such suit, action or proceeding. Service of process, summons, notice or other document by certified or registered mail to such party's address set forth herein shall be effective service of process for any suit, action or other proceeding brought in any such court. The parties irrevocably and unconditionally waive any objection to the laying of venue of any suit, action or any proceeding in such courts and irrevocably waive and agree not to plead or claim in any such court that any such suit, action or proceeding brought in any such court has been brought in an inconvenient forum.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any of the provisions of this Agreement (or parts thereof), or the application thereof in any circumstances, is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect for any reason, the validity and enforceability of any such provision in every other respect, and of the remaining provisions of this Agreement, shall not be in any way impaired or affected, it being intended that all of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.

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: of the applicable statute in this context, it also held that the statute was not unconstitutional. Upon rehearing en banc, however, the Third District, in a unanimous opinion, affirmed the trial court’s ruling in its entirety. In so doing, it approved the panel’s determination regarding the tax appraiser’s standing. These timely appeals and petition for review followed. PROPERTY APPRAISER’S STANDING The initial question presented is whether, in an action filed by a property appraiser seeking review of an adverse decision of the VAB which has overturned the appraiser’s ad valorem tax assessment on a subject p praiser can make such a challenge, however, if the taxing statute at issue involves the disbursement of public funds. See Kaulakis v. Boyd, 138 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1962) (<HOLDING>); Barr v. Watts, 70 So.2d 347, 351 (Fla.1953) Options: A. holding an unappealed ruling is the law of the case and cannot be later challenged B. holding that a ruling from a prior decision of this court becomes the law of the case that cannot be challenged in a later proceeding quotation marks omitted C. holding that the burden is on the defendant when the validity of the warrant is challenged D. recognizing that the general rule that a ministerial officer cannot in a judicial proceeding attack the validity of a law imposing duties on him is subject to the exception that such a law may be challenged where it involves the disbursement of public funds E. recognizing the public interest exception

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that the general rule that a ministerial officer cannot in a judicial proceeding attack the validity of a law imposing duties on him is subject to the exception that such a law may be challenged where it involves the disbursement of public funds
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 Borrower shall have paid, on or prior to the Closing Date, subject to Section 10.3 , without duplication, all costs and expenses (including, to the extent invoiced, payment or reimbursement of all Legal Costs) incurred by the Agent and the Lender in connection with the preparation, execution and delivery of this Agreement, the other Loan Documents and the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby which are required to be paid by the Borrower, provided that such costs and expenses incurred by the Agent and the Lender and reimbursable by the Borrower pursuant to this paragraph (l) shall not exceed $150,000.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you do , you agree that the owner of the domain associated with your email address may control and administer your account , and access and process your data , including the contents of your communications and files .

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: 15.3 without limiting our rights specified below , airbnb may terminate this agreement for convenience at any time by giving you thirty ( 30 ) days ' notice via email to your registered email address .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice, request or other communication required or permitted to be given under this Control Agreement shall be in writing and deemed to have been properly given when delivered in person, or when sent by facsimile transmission or other electronic means and electronic confirmation of error free receipt is received or two days after being sent by certified or registered United States mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to the party at the address set forth below.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: MOORE, C.J., and MURDOCK and BRYAN, JJ., dissent. 1 . Because R,J. was granted youthful-offender status, we are using initials instead of his name. MOORE, Chief Justice (dissenting). I agree with the Court of Criminal Appeals that the trial court’s “strict application of the hearsay rule deprived [Devonte Cortes] Acosta of the ability to present a complete defense to the jury.” Acosta v. State, 208 So.3d 645, 651 (Ala.Crim.App.2015). “ ‘[T]he Constitution guarantees criminal defendants a “meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.’”” Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319, 324, 126 S.Ct. 1727, 164 L.Ed.2d 503 (2006) (quoting Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683, 690, 106 S.Ct. 2142, 90 L.Ed.2d 636 (1986)); see also McWhorter v. State, 142 So.3d 1195, 1255-56 (Ala.Crim.App.2011) (<HOLDING>). In this case, I believe that, under Chambers Options: A. recognizing a criminal defendants right to present a complete defense B. holding that the constitution guarantees criminal defendants a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense C. recognizing defendants right to due process includes the right to present a defense by crossexamining witnesses D. holding that insanity is a complete defense to the criminal charge E. recognizing fundamental fairness requires criminal defendants be granted a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing a criminal defendants right to present a complete defense
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: public chats are conversations held between groups of participants who have a common interest or affiliation , and are chatting amongst themselves , on viber , while any viber user choosing to follow such public chat ( `` viber public chat '' ) publically views the chat .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: an alien is generally entitled to have deportation proceedings continued or reopened, following an order of deportation, where there is currently pending an immigrant visa petition, filed on the alien’s behalf, along with an adjustment of status application, where the visa petition and status adjustment application are “prima facie approvable.” See id. at 657; see also Hassan, 110 F.3d at 492. The BIA emphasized in Garcia, however, that it did not intend to establish an inflexible rule, stating: It clearly would not be an abuse of discretion for the [IJ] to summarily deny a request for a continuance or a motion to reopen upon his determination that the visa petition is frivolous or that the adjustment application would be denied on statutory grounds or in the exercise of dis .1990) (<HOLDING>). Unlike this case, Garcia involved an alien Options: A. holding denial of continuance to be an abuse of discretion B. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion C. holding no abuse of discretion where ij denied aliens request for continuance because alien had no immigrant visa available and it was unlikely attorney general would exercise discretion to permit excludable alien to stay D. holding that the ij did not abuse his discretion in denying request for further continuance where the ij granted previous request E. holding that there was no abuse of discretion in allowing a defendants surprise fact witness to testify because the plaintiff did not request a continuance

assistant: The best answer is C. holding no abuse of discretion where ij denied aliens request for continuance because alien had no immigrant visa available and it was unlikely attorney general would exercise discretion to permit excludable alien to stay
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: notwithstanding any rights or obligations governed by the additional terms ( as defined below ) if , at any time you choose to upload or post user submissions to the skype websites or through the software ( excluding reports and excluding the content of your communications ) you automatically grant skype a non-exclusive , worldwide , irrevocable , royalty-free , perpetual , sub-licensable and transferable license of all rights to use , edit , modify , include , incorporate , adapt , record , publicly perform , display , transmit and reproduce the user submissions including , without limitation , all trade marks associated therewith , in connection with the skype websites and skype 's software and products including for the purpose of promoting or redistributing part or all of the skype websites and/or the software or products , in any and all media now known or hereafter devised .

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: Any suit or other legal action to enforce the terms of this Agreement or any document or agreement referenced herein must be brought in the St. Louis County, Missouri Circuit Court or (if federal jurisdiction exists) the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. You agree that venue and personal jurisdiction are proper in either such court, and waive all objections to jurisdiction and venue and any defense or claim that either such forum is not the most convenient forum.

assistant: Jurisdictions
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: There is no litigation or proceeding pending or, to the knowledge of Purchaser, threatened, against Purchaser, which, if adversely determined, would prohibit or materially interfere with the consummation by Purchaser of the transactions contemplated herein.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you acknowledge sole responsibility for and assume all risk arising from your use of any such websites or resources or the content , products , or services on or available from such websites or resources .

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: to the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable law , viber , its parent rakuten and any subsidiaries or affiliated companies of viber ( `` the viber group '' ) disclaim all warranties , express or implied , including , but not limited to , implied warranties of merchantability , fitness for a particular purpose , and non-infringement .

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: It has filed all federal income tax returns and all other material tax returns that are required to be filed by it and has paid all taxes due pursuant to such returns or pursuant to any assessment received by it, except (i) for any such taxes or assessments that are being appropriately contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which adequate reserves in conformity with GAAP have been provided or (ii) to the extent that the failure to do so could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. No tax lien has been filed, and, to its actual knowledge, no claim is being asserted, with respect to any such tax or assessment that could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: On and as of the date of the making of such Advance: (i) the representations of each of the Borrower, the Parent, the Custodian, the Securities Intermediary and the Servicer set forth in the Transaction Documents shall be true and correct with the same effect as if made on such date, and (ii) each of the Borrower, the Parent, the Custodian, the Securities Intermediary and the Servicer shall be in compliance with the covenants set forth in the Transaction Documents to which it is a party.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) The Loans comprising each ABR Borrowing (including each Swingline Loan denominated in Dollars) shall bear interest at the Alternate Base Rate plus the Applicable Rate. Each Swingline Loan denominated in a currency other than Dollars shall bear interest at a rate at which the Swingline Lender offers to place deposits in such currency for the applicable period to first-class banks in the London interbank market at approximately 11:00 a.m. London time on the first day of such period.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All captions herein are for convenience only and shall not be interpreted as having any substantive meaning. The Exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated herein by reference and shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Unless otherwise expressly provided herein or the context of this Agreement otherwise requires: (a) words of any gender include each other gender; (b) words such as “herein”, “hereof”, and “hereunder” refer to this Agreement as a whole and not merely to the particular provision in which such words appear; (c) words using the singular shall include the plural, and vice versa; (d) the words “include,” “includes” and “including” shall be deemed to be followed by the phrase “but not limited to”, “without limitation”, “inter alia” or words of similar import; and (e) references to “Article,” “Section,” “subsection”, “clause”, or other subdivision, or Exhibit, without reference to a document are to the specified provision or Exhibit of this Agreement. If the terms of this Agreement conflict with the terms of any Exhibit, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. References to either Party include the successors and permitted assigns of that Party. The Preamble, Recitals and Exhibits are incorporated by reference into this Agreement. The Parties have each consulted counsel of their choice regarding this Agreement, and, accordingly, no provisions of this Agreement will be construed against either Party on the basis that the Party drafted this Agreement or any provision thereof. The official text of this Agreement and any Exhibit, any notice given or accounts or statements required by this Agreement, and any dispute proceeding related to or arising hereunder, will be in English. If any dispute concerning the construction or meaning of this Agreement arises, then reference will be made only to this Agreement as written in English and not to any translation into any other language.

assistant: Construction