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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Executive will continue to serve as the Senior Vice President, Neuroscience of the Company and will have such powers and duties as may from time to time be prescribed by the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”) . The Executive shall devote the Executive’s full working time and efforts to the business and affairs of the Company and not engage in any other business activities without prior written approval by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) and provided that such activities do not create a conflict of interest or otherwise interfere with the Executive’s performance of the Executive’s duties to the Company. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Executive may serve (i) as Co-Executive Director, Carribean Science Foundation, (ii) with Carribean Diaspora for Science, Technology and Innovation and/or (iii) in religious, charitable or other community activities as long as such services and activities do not do not create a conflict of interest or otherwise interfere with the Executive’s performance of the Executive’s duties to the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at 1459-60 (references to subsidiary as “division” of Kodak not equivalent to evidence that two companies operated as “single economic entity”); Akzona, 607 F.Supp. at 238 (language of annual report and employee testimony describing subsidiaries as divisions of parent not sufficient, even in conjunction with other evidence, to establish alter ego relationship). ... In a case presenting similar questions, the Ninth Circuit found no alter ego relationship was created where the parent company guaranteed loans for the subsidiary, reviewed and approved major decisions, placed several of its directors on the subsidiary’s board, and was closely involved in the subsidiary’s pricing decisions. Kramer Motors, Inc. v. British Leyland, Ltd., 628 F.2d 1175, 1177 (9th Cir.1980).... Id. at 927-928 (<HOLDING>). Here, plaintiffs proffer evidence that CNOFG Options: A. holding that the general corporate laws are incorporated into the corporate charter B. holding that to establish that subsidiary is agent of parent for jurisdictional purposes the parent must exert control that is so pervasive and continual that the subsidiary may be considered an agent or instrumentality of the parent notwithstanding the maintenance of corporate formalities C. holding that because the corporate parent and subsidiary defendants before it observed all of the corporate formalities necessary to maintain corporate separateness notwithstanding the parents active involvement in the subsidiaries operations the evidence did not establish that the entities were alter egos of one another D. holding constitutional due process requires that personal jurisdiction cannot be premised on corporate affiliation or stock ownership alone where corporate formalities are substantially observed and the parent does not exercise an usually high degree of control over the subsidiary E. holding that under north carolina law a corporate parent cannot be held liable for the acts of its subsidiary unless the corporate structure is a sham

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because the corporate parent and subsidiary defendants before it observed all of the corporate formalities necessary to maintain corporate separateness notwithstanding the parents active involvement in the subsidiaries operations the evidence did not establish that the entities were alter egos of one another
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 his or her acts were unlawful.” Wright v. Smith, 21 F.3d 496, 500 (2d Cir.1994). “[T]he absence of legal precedent addressing an identical factual scenario does not necessarily yield a conclusion that the law is not clearly established.” Johnson v. Newburgh Enlarged Sch. Dist., 239 F.3d 246, 251 (2d Cir.2001). With respect to the plaintiffs causes of action for violations of the IDEA, the court concludes that the individual defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because the law was clearly established that each child’s individualized education plan be developed and revised at least annually, by a team composed of the parents of the child with a disability. 20 U.S.C. § 1414(d). See Butler v. South Glens Falls Cent. Sch. Dist., 106 F.Supp.2d 414, 421-22 (N.D.N.Y.2000) (<HOLDING>). With respect to the plaintiffs cause of Options: A. holding that defendants claiming qualified immunity to 1983 action were entitled to summary judgment where factual disputes were not material B. holding that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity where the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that speech was public concern C. holding that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity where it was not objectively reasonable for them to believe that failing to develop ieps which contained the required information did not violate the plaintiffs statutory rights D. holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity E. holding that qualified immunity applies if either a the defendants action did not violate clearly established law or b it was objectively reasonable for the defendant to believe that his action did not violate such law internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity where it was not objectively reasonable for them to believe that failing to develop ieps which contained the required information did not violate the plaintiffs statutory rights
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 an Event of Default shall have occurred and be continuing, the Agent, without any other notice to or demand upon the Borrower, shall have in any jurisdiction in which enforcement hereof is sought, in addition to all other rights and remedies, the rights and remedies of a secured party under the Uniform Commercial Code of the State and of such jurisdiction and any additional rights and remedies as may be provided to a secured party in any jurisdiction in which Collateral is located, including, without limitation, the right to take possession of the Collateral, and for that purpose the Agent may, so far as the Borrower can give authority therefor, enter upon any premises on which the Collateral may be situated and remove the same therefrom. The Agent may in its discretion require the Borrower to assemble all or any part of the Collateral at such location or locations within the jurisdiction(s) of the Borrower’s principal office(s) or at such other locations as the Agent may reasonably designate. Unless the Collateral is perishable or threatens to decline speedily in value or is of a type customarily sold on a recognized market, the Agent shall give to the Borrower at least ten (10) Business Days prior written notice of the time and place of any public sale of Collateral or of the time after which any private sale or any other intended disposition is to be made. The Borrower hereby acknowledges that ten (10) Business Days prior written notice of such sale or sales shall be reasonable notice. In addition, the Borrower waives any and all rights that it may have to a judicial hearing in advance of the enforcement of any of the Agent’s rights and remedies hereunder, including, without limitation, its right following an Event of Default to take immediate possession of the Collateral and to exercise its rights and remedies with respect thereto.

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 Columbia that it intended to forfeit his money. (Dkt. No. 11-1 at 1-2). 3 . In the alternative. Plaintiffs seek to certify the class either as a Rule 23(b)(2) class or as a hybrid 23(b)(2)/(b)(3) class. Because the classes will be certified under Rule 23(b)(3), the Court need not reach this request. In any event, the Court has already held that "[t]here is no reason to consider whether the action would be a hybrid because the only injunctive relief Plaintiffs point to—the "return of money”—is actually part of the claim for money damages.” (Dkt. No. 31 at 8). Moreover, it is clear that certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is inappropriate in this case after the Supreme Court's decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes. See - U.S. - , 131 S.Ct. 2541, 2557, 180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs make no compelling argument for Options: A. holding that putative class members are not parties to an action prior to class certification B. holding that a class plaintiff who seeks to assert statutory rights to protect a class of which he is a member is not asserting rights antagonistic to any members of that class C. recognizing a narrow class of cases in which the termination of the class representatives claim for relief does not moot the claims of the class members D. holding that class seeking monetary damages in addition to medical monitoring did not seek certification pursuant to 23b2 only 23b3 E. holding that rule 23b2 calls for injunction as to all class members or to none of them and does not authorize class certification when each class member would be entitled to an individualized award of monetary damages

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that rule 23b2 calls for injunction as to all class members or to none of them and does not authorize class certification when each class member would be entitled to an individualized award of monetary 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: for sum mary judgment that the plaintiff does not have a vested right or property interest in the position of municipal judge. Although in his Original Petition the plaintiff alleges in a conclusory fashion that he was a public employee working pursuant to a contract of employment, the plaintiff fails to allege any facts to indicate that a contract of employment existed and further fails to provide any competent summary judgment evidence to support this allegation. The City of Was-kom’s ordinance provides that the term of office of the municipal judge shall be by appointment of the City Council by a majority vote of the governing body. The City’s ordinance does not appear to create a contract of employment. See Youngblood v. City of Galveston, 920 F.Supp. 10B (S.D.Tex. 1996) (<HOLDING>). The plaintiff does not even allege that the Options: A. holding that plaintiff did not have dueprocessprotected property interest because he failed to sufficiently plead a rule or other mutually explicit understanding from the manual or otherwise bridling the reason for which he could be terminated and thereby creating a sufficient expectation of continued employment the critical component herewithout alleging such a bridle plaintiff was an atwill employee consequently he lacked a property interest in his continued employment B. holding that former municipal judge did not have property interest in continued employment C. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property D. holding that property interest in continued expectation of public employment does not include right to actually occupy position E. holding an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing was insufficient to create a property interest in continued employment under montanas statutory scheme for at will employment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that former municipal judge did not have property interest in continued employment
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 SUPPLEMENT AND THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES HEREUNDER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY CLAIMS SOUNDING IN CONTRACT LAW OR TORT LAW ARISING OUT OF THE SUBJECT MATTER HEREOF AND ANY DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO POST-JUDGMENT INTEREST) SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND SHALL BE CONSTRUED AND ENFORCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REGARD TO CONFLICT OF LAWS PRINCIPLES THEREOF THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICATION OF ANY LAW OTHER THAN THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. The provisions of Sections 9.15 (Consent to Jurisdiction) and 9.16 (Waiver of Jury Trial) of the Credit Agreement are hereby incorporated herein by reference, mutatis mutandis .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the acquisition of a new claim of homestead defeats and discharges a previously-filed claim of homestead. The court agreed with Citizens, holding that the plain language of § 2 meant that Garran’s § 1A declaration and corresponding homestead exemption was defeated and discharged by his wife’s subsequent § 1 declaration. We agree that this is the proper reading of the statutory language. Garran’s wife filed a declaration of homestead under § 1 on February 21, 2001. The declaration of homestead under § 1 is an acquisition of a homestead “for the benefit of [the] family.” Id. § 1. Therefore, by his wife’s filing of a § 1 declaration, Garran, as her spouse and member of her family, “acquired” a homestead on February 21, 2001. See In re Roberts, 280 B.R. 540, 547 (Bankr.D.Mass.2001) (<HOLDING>). Section 2 states that “the acquisition of a Options: A. recognizing that no private right of action exists for subsection a violations B. holding that the fourth amendment protects people not places C. holding debtor could include property because the bank accepted payments directly from the debtor and had previously allowed the debtor to cure default D. recognizing that the eighth amendment protects individuals from a lingering death E. recognizing that a declaration filed under subsection 1 protects even the nonfiling debtor

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that a declaration filed under subsection 1 protects even the nonfiling debtor
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: Evidence of Contents The original is not required, and other evidence of the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible if— (1) Originals Lost or Destroyed. All originals are lost or have been destroyed, unless the proponent lost or destroyed them in bad faith; or (2) Original Not Obtainable. No original can be obtained by any available judicial process or procedure; 7 . Dalton v. F.D.I.C., 987 F.2d 1216, 1223 (5th Cir.1993) (finding the defendant could use either an affidavit of a financial officer or use the bank's documentation to prove the account deficiency because the plaintiff could not "use the best evidence rule to force the [defendant] to produce the particular type of evidence of the loan that he would prefer”); United States v. Jackson, 451 F.2d 259, 261 (<HOLDING>) (citations omitted). See also Jack V. Options: A. holding that the trial court committed prejudicial error by failing to give a requested instruction on the probative value of fingerprint evidence where the state relied primarily on that evidence B. holding that the this rule is limited to cases where the contents of a writing are to be proved and allowing testimony without fingerprint evidence being produced C. holding that as a general rule pleadings filed in this court are public records and are not subject to being sealed D. holding that trial court could take judicial notice of the contents of the court files to the extent it considered previous court orders evidence admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule and testimony and evidence admitted at any previous adjudicatory proceedings such as when the children were determined to be dependent E. recognizing this rule

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the this rule is limited to cases where the contents of a writing are to be proved and allowing testimony without fingerprint evidence being produced
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: imprisonment, below the 24-month sentence recommended by Probation. II Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 prohibits “[t]he court” from participating in plea discussions. Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(1). The Federal Rules broadly define “[c]ourt” to “mean[ ] a federal judge performing functions authorized by law,” Fed.R.Crim.P. 1(b)(2), a definition which expressly includes “a magistrate judge” executing' his or her legal duty, Fed. R.Crim.P. 1(b)(3)(B). While Rule 11(c)(1) appears to prohibit any form of judicial participation in the plea bargaining process, our “court previously approved the participation by a settlement judge in plea negotiations.” United States v. Scolari, 72 F.3d 751, 753 (9th Cir.1995); see United States v. Torres, 999 F.2d 376, 377-78 (9th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Torres and Scolari did not address, much less Options: A. holding that no rule 11 violation occurred when the parties hammered out their agreement with the assistance of a settlement judge in accordance with the thenexisting criminal case settlement procedures for the southern district of california B. holding that a settlement agreement is not a court order and therefore a violation of the settlement agreement would not subject a party to contempt C. holding that the plaintiffs lawsuit which was filed despite a general release in the parties settlement agreement constituted a material breach of the settlement agreement D. holding that the appellants appeal of the jurys verdict was a material breach of the no appeals provision in the parties settlement agreement E. holding that because the alleged settlement was never approved by the court under rule 9019 the settlement agreement was unenforceable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that no rule 11 violation occurred when the parties hammered out their agreement with the assistance of a settlement judge in accordance with the thenexisting criminal case settlement procedures for the southern district of california
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: Vendor’s obligations under this Schedule shall survive expiration or any full or partial termination of this Agreement and this Schedule shall be included as part of the complete agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between any term or condition in this Schedule and the body of this Agreement, this Schedule shall prevail.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Amendments, variations, modifications or changes herein may be made effective and binding upon the parties by, and only by, the setting forth of same in a document duly executed by BCX Sponsor and DPF Advisor, and any alleged amendment, variation, modification or change herein which is not so documented shall not be effective as to any party.

assistant: Amendments
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: was required to object to the reports within 21 days. See id. The Hospital filed its motion to dismiss more than three months after the statutory deadline for objections. Consequently, the Hospital waived all of its objections to the sufficiency of Nguyen’s expert reports, including its argument that Nguyen’s vicarious liability claim is frivolous. As a result, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the Hospital’s motion to dismiss. See McCoy, 283 S.W.3d at 100, 103. We overrule the Hospital’s sole issue. We affirm the trial court’s denial of the Hospital’s motion to dismiss. 1 . We have jurisdiction over this interlocutory-appeal. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(a)(9); see Neason v. Buckner, 352 S.W.3d 254, 257 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). 2 . Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ Options: A. holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal after an untimely filing of a notice of appeal B. holding that an untimely postjudgment motion does not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal and that this court has no jurisdiction over an untimely filed appeal C. holding court had jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal in which trial court had denied an untimely motion to dismiss expert report D. holding that the appellate court had jurisdiction to hear the interlocutory appeal on a restraining order and the district court retained jurisdiction to proceed with the trial E. holding court lacked jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeal of denial of motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity by defendants who were not public officials

assistant: The best answer is C. holding court had jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal in which trial court had denied an untimely motion to dismiss expert report
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: 502 U.S. 104 112 S.Ct. 633 116 L.Ed.2d 432 Robert E. GIBSON, petitioner,v.FLORIDA BAR, et al. No. 90-1102 Supreme Court of the United States December 4, 1991 PER CURIAM. 1 The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.

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: Dubé, who held a hearing on the summary judgment motions on December 11, 2003. On January 14, 2004, Judge Dubé issued his R & R, which recommended that Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment be granted and that Defendant’s Motion be denied, thereby reversing the decision of the Appeals Council. Having received objections from both parties, the R & R is now ripe for consideration by this Court. Analysis The issues appealed from the Appeals Council are purely questions of law. Although a more restrictive standard of review applies if an appeal of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is based on that decision’s factual findings, no presumption of validity attaches to the Commissioner’s conclusions of law. See Cornelius v. Sullivan, 936 F.2d 1143, 1145-46 (11th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Therefore; the Court must conduct its own Options: A. holding that although the district court was not required to discuss each of the factors on the record a decision to dismiss stands a better chance on appeal if the appellate court has the benefit of the district courts reasoning B. holding that the best interest of the child was the proper standard to apply in determining whether blood tests should be conducted C. holding the courts scope of review is limited to determining whether the commissioner applied the correct legal standards and whether the record as a whole contains substantial evidence to support the commissioners findings of fact D. recognizing that when reviewing for clear error we usually must reverse if the district court applied incorrect legal standards to reach its findings E. holding the district court can reverse the commissioners decision based on her failure to apply the correct law or to provide the reviewing court with sufficient reasoning for determining that the proper legal analysis has been conducted

assistant: The best answer is E. holding the district court can reverse the commissioners decision based on her failure to apply the correct law or to provide the reviewing court with sufficient reasoning for determining that the proper legal analysis has been conducted
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: During and after the Executive’s employment with the Company, the Executive shall cooperate fully with the Company and its affiliates in the defense or prosecution of any claims or actions now in existence or which may be brought in the future against or on behalf of the Company and its affiliates which relate to events or occurrences that transpired while the Executive was employed by the Company. The Executive's full cooperation in connection with such claims or actions shall include, but not be limited to, being available to meet with counsel to prepare for discovery or trial and to act as a witness on behalf of the Company and its affiliates at mutually convenient times. During and after the Executive's employment, the Executive also shall cooperate fully with the Company and its affiliates in connection with any such investigation or review of any federal, state or local regulatory authority as any such investigation or review relates to events or occurrences that transpired while the Executive was employed by the Company. The Company shall reimburse the Executive for any reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with the Executive's performance of obligations pursuant to this Section. If assistance is required after Executive is no longer employed by the Company, the Company agrees to compensate Executive by paying him a mutually agreed upon hourly rate for all time spent beyond five (5) hours. The performance by the Executive under this Section after the termination of the Executive's employment with the Company shall be subject to his other employment obligations.

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: v ) any content downloaded or otherwise obtained through the use of our resources is done at your own discretion and risk , and that you are solely responsible for any damage to your computer or other devices for any loss of data that may result from the download of such content .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Loans (other than as set forth in the next two succeeding provisos) shall bear interest at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR plus the Applicable Margin until repaid; provided that (x) Loans made pursuant to an Expedited Borrowing Request that have not been refinanced with a LIBOR-based Loan and (y) any Loan with respect to which LIBOR cannot be determined, shall bear interest at a rate per annum equal to the Reference Rate plus the Applicable Margin; provided , further that upon the occurrence and during the continuance of an Event of Default, the Loans shall bear interest at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR or the Reference Rate, as applicable, plus the Applicable Margin plus 2.00%. Interest shall be calculated daily on the basis of a year of 360 days and actual days elapsed. Interest shall accrue on each Loan through but excluding the date of payment.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of tax preference shall be properly adjusted where the tax treatment giving rise to such items will not result in the reduction of the taxpayer’s tax under this subtitle for any taxable years. Petitioners suggest that section 58(h) exhibits a clear congressional effort “to apply the tax benefit rule in a broad and comprehensive manner where the application of the minimum tax deprives taxpayers of benefits to which they are otherwise entitled.” Section 301(g) of the 1976 Act provided, however, that section 58(h) was effective only after December 31, 1975. The years for which petitioners were liable for the minimum tax (1972 through 1975) all predate the effective date of section 58(h). See Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. United States, 231 Ct. Cl. 334, 685 F.2d 1346, 1351-1352 (1982) (<HOLDING>) (hereinafter Occidental I). Accord First Options: A. holding that asbestos was not a listed substance in larevstat 2310311 prior to 1975 such that when it caused disease it was covered by workers compensation B. holding that section 58h was inapplicable to years beginning prior to december 31 1975 C. holding that if claim is not an allowed secured claim pursuant to section 506a by its terms section 1325a5b is inapplicable D. holding frady inapplicable E. holding procedural requirements of section 14004 inapplicable to appellate filings

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that section 58h was inapplicable to years beginning prior to december 31 1975
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: 2002)(<HOLDING>) Contrary to the wife’s argument, the exception Options: A. holding that it was error to impute income to wife where there was no evidence of regular periodic payments and where assistance from wifes mother was of a temporary nature during the pendency of the divorce proceedings holding that lower court properly imputed income to husband where husbands parents maderegular periodic payments that allowed parties to maintain a high standard of living B. holding that trial court did not err in imputing income to wife for purposes of child support based on the continued monthly payment of wifes living expenses by wifes mother C. holding that wife could receive permanent total disability payments after the death of her husband where the husbands claim was pending before the effective date of the 2008 statutory amendments and was still pending at the time of his death even though husbands death occurred after the effective date of the 2008 statutory amendments as wifes status as a dependent was subject to determination as of the time of husbands injury D. holding that husbands obligation to pay premiums on a life insurance policy for five years with wife as the beneficiary was periodic alimony E. holding that the trial court exceeded its discretion because its judgment created financial obligations for the husband that after deducting the wifes periodicalimony award from the husbands net income exceeded his remaining income

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it was error to impute income to wife where there was no evidence of regular periodic payments and where assistance from wifes mother was of a temporary nature during the pendency of the divorce proceedings holding that lower court properly imputed income to husband where husbands parents maderegular periodic payments that allowed parties to maintain a high standard of living
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 this state that when ... a business homestead is conveyed to a corporation ... the property is no longer the homestead of the grantors, even though they may continue to occupy it.”); Sparks v. Robertson, 203 S.W.2d 622, 626 (Tex.Civ.App. — Austin 1947, writ refd) ("One can not have a homestead interest in property the title to which is in neither spouse nor in the community.”); Williams v. Corpus Christi Bank & Trust Co., 104 S.W.2d 56, 57 (Tex.Civ.App.— San Antonio 1937, writ ref'd) ("After the Williams had conveyed this tract to the Townsite Company, it ceased to be their homestead, and ... the fact that they continued to use the land at the sufferance of the grantees[ ] did not change the situation.”); Hampton v. Gilliland, 23 Tex.Civ.App. 87, 56 S.W. 572, 573-74 (1900, no writ) (<HOLDING>). 7 . See, e.g., Franklin v. Woods, 598 S.W.2d Options: A. holding that son who lived on land entirely by virtue of his mothers consent owned no estate to which the homestead right could attach and that the homestead right cannot be based on so precarious a tenure as the sons occupancy at the will of his mother B. holding that homestead exemption was unavailable even though claimants were living on the land and claiming it as homestead with the permission or acquiescence of the owner for they could have no homestead right or interest in land to which they had no title C. holding that the general homestead exemption may not be invoked to defeat claims against the holder for taxes and assessments against the homestead property D. holding that the general rule is that temporary absence from the premises will not itself cause an abandonment of the homestead but to retain the homestead exemption one leaving the homestead must in good faith intend to return albeit the intent to return need not be at any particular time in the future E. holding that son had no homestead interest in property even though he resided upon it with his fathers consent because son had neither title nor a present right to possess land nor right to demand partition from father who was his cotenant

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that son who lived on land entirely by virtue of his mothers consent owned no estate to which the homestead right could attach and that the homestead right cannot be based on so precarious a tenure as the sons occupancy at the will of his mother
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 “Effective Date” of the Plan, the date as of which the Plan was established, is January 1, 1979. This restatement of the Plan is generally effective October 27, 2014 (unless otherwise noted) and incorporates all amendments adopted effective through October 27, 2014.

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 amounts required to be paid by the Bank to Executive pursuant to this Agreement shall not be subject to offset other than with respect to any amounts that are owed to the Bank by Executive due to his receipt of funds as a result of his fraudulent activity. The foregoing and other provisions of this Agreement notwithstanding, all payments to be made to Executive under this Agreement, including under Sections 6 and 7, or otherwise by the Bank, will be subject to withholding to satisfy required withholding taxes and other required deductions.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Amendment claim because the record demonstrates that there are several disputed issues of material fact. We agree. We review de novo a district court’s order granting summary judgment. Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 626 (9th Cir. 2002). “We must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the releva h Cir.1998) (en banc) (explaining that “we tolerate informalities from civil pro se litigants”). A careful look at Christman’s “Opposition to Summary Judgment” reveals that it served as a statement of controverted facts. In addition, Plaintiffs’ verified complaint constituted an opposing affidavit. Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 923 (9th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added). Christman presented Options: A. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in considering successive motions for summary judgment when each of fdics motions reflected material changes in the posture of this litigation and was grounded on meritorious contentions B. holding in part that the presumption of public access attaches to pretrialnondiscovery motions whether preliminary or dispositive and the materials briefs and documents filed with the court in support of or in opposition to such motions but not to pretrial discovery motions C. holding that a declaration signed under penalty of perjury and verifying the allegations set forth in the complaint were true and correct was competent summary judgment evidence D. holding that where the plaintiff is pro se the court must consider as evidence in his opposition to summary judgment all of plaintiffs contentions offered in motions and pleadings where such contentions are based on personal knowledge and set forth facts that would be admissible in evidence and where plaintiff attested under penalty of perjury that the contents of the motions or pleadings are true and correct E. holding that pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that where the plaintiff is pro se the court must consider as evidence in his opposition to summary judgment all of plaintiffs contentions offered in motions and pleadings where such contentions are based on personal knowledge and set forth facts that would be admissible in evidence and where plaintiff attested under penalty of perjury that the contents of the motions or pleadings are true and correct
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 are no actions, suits, proceedings, arbitrations or governmental investigations by or before any Governmental Authority or other court or agency now filed or otherwise pending or, to Borrower’s knowledge, threatened against or affecting Borrower, Guarantor or the Collateral, in each case, except as listed in the Exception Report (and none of the matters listed in the Exception Report, even if determined against Borrower or the Collateral, would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 5 . We have also examined United States v. United States Coin & Currency, 401 U.S. 715, 91 S.Ct. 1041, 28 L.Ed.2d 434, which afforded retroactivity to Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39, 88 S.Ct. 697, 19 L.Ed.2d 889, and Grosso v. United State, 390 U.S. 62, 88 S.Ct. 709, 19 L.Ed. 2d 906. We feel that the Coin & Currency case is different in that it involved a constitutional immunity barring any punishment. O’ Callahan, on the other hand, involved no such constitutional immunity from punishment, but a question of jurisdiction of State or military courts to hear the case. See Gosa v. Mayden, supra 450 F.2d at 758-759. 6 . Among the decisions denying retroactivity to cases recognizing new constitutional rules are: Williams v. United States, 401 U.S. 646, 91 S.Ct. 1148, 28 L.Ed.2d 388 (<HOLDING>) ; DeStefano v. Woods, supra (holding the rule Options: A. holding the guarantee against double jeopardy applicable to the states as announced in benton v maryland 395 us 784 89 sct 2056 23 led2d 707 to be retroactive B. holding the rule that an accused has a right to counsel at any critical confrontation announced in united states v wade 388 us 218 87 sct 1926 18 led2d 1149 and gilbert v california 388 us 263 87 sct 1951 18 led2d 1178 not to be retroactive C. holding the rule against adverse comments on a defendants failure to testify as violative of the privilege against selfincrimination announced in griffin v california 380 us 609 85 sct 1229 14 led2d 106 not to he retroactive D. holding the rule on the scope of per missible searches incident to arrest announced in chimel v california 395 us 752 89 sct 2034 23 led2d 685 not to be retroactive E. holding that counsel must be appointed to indigents for purposes of appeal as announced in douglas v california 372 us 353 83 sct 814 9 led2d 811 to be retroactive

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the rule on the scope of per missible searches incident to arrest announced in chimel v california 395 us 752 89 sct 2034 23 led2d 685 not to be retroactive
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As consideration for MSSF’s and MUFG’s commitment hereunder and the Arrangers’ agreement to perform the services described herein, you agree to pay the non-refundable fees set forth in the Fee Letter delivered herewith from the Arrangers to you relating to the Facility and dated the date hereof (the “ Fee Letter ”).

assistant: Fees
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: Upon the terms and subject to the conditions hereof, each of the Parties shall use its commercially reasonable efforts to take, or cause to be taken, all appropriate action, and to do or cause to be done, all things necessary, proper or advisable under applicable Laws to consummate and make effective the transactions and actions contemplated by this Agreement. Without limiting the foregoing, but subject to the other terms of this Agreement, the Parties agree that, from time to time, whether before, at or after the Closing Date, each of them will execute and deliver, or cause to be executed and delivered, such instruments of assignment, assumption, transfer, conveyance, endorsement, direction or authorization as may be necessary to consummate and make effective the transactions and actions contemplated by this Agreement.

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: (N.D.N.Y.2000); Phipps v. New York State Dep’t of Labor, 53 F.Supp.2d 551, 558 (N.D.N.Y.1999). Because the State of New York has not consented to suit in federal court and the Department of Transportation is an arm of the State, plaintiffs claims for money damages against the State of New York, the NYSDOT, and the individual defendants in their official capacities must be dismissed. See Garcia v. S.U.N.Y. Health Sciences Center of Brooklyn, 280 F.3d 98, 107 (2d Cir.2001); Richman v. Pediatric Serv. Group, LLP, 222 F.Supp.2d 207, 209 (N.D.N.Y.2002); Hayut, 127 F.Supp.2d at 340; Phipps, 53 F.Supp.2d at 558. B. Individual Liability Under Title VII and the ADA It also is settled that there is no individual liability under Title VII. See Wrighten v. Glowski, 232 F.3d 119, 120 (2d Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); Tomka v. Seiler Corp., 66 F.3d 1295, 1313-17 Options: A. holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii B. holding that there is no individual liability under title vii C. holding that individual employees are not liable under title vii D. holding individual employees may be liable under title vii E. holding that relief granted under title vii is against the employer not individual employees whose actions constituted a violation of title vii emphasis in original

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that there is no individual liability under title vii
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: are distinguishable on their facts, I am not convinced we should distinguish them. In the first instance, I am uncomfortable with a State court determining what “undermine[s] the authority of the tribal courts over Reservation affairs and hence would infringe on the right of the Indians to govern themselves,” the test prescribed, as the majority notes, by the United States Supreme Court in Williams v. Lee, 358 U.S. 217, 223, 79 S.Ct, 269, 3 L.Ed.2d 251 (1959). Because of the relationship of the federal government to the Indian tribes, see Article 1, § 8 of the United States Constitution (“Congress shall have power ... [t]o regulate commerce ... with the Indian tribes”) and decisions such as Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 471 U.S. 759, 764, 105 S.Ct., 2399, 85 L.Ed.2d 753 (1985) (<HOLDING>) it seems to me to be presumptuous for the Options: A. holding that indian tribes lack tribal jurisdiction over crimes committed by nonmember indians within the tribes reservation B. holding the constitution vests the federal government with exclusive authority over relations with indian tribes C. holding that congress which regulated the introduction of alcoholic beverages in indian country could validly delegate to indian tribes its authority to regulate that subject matter because indian tribes themselves possessed independent authority over the subject matter D. holding that an indian tribes exercise of criminal jurisdiction over nonindians is inconsistent with the domesticdependent status of the tribes and that tribes may not assume such jurisdiction without congressional authorization E. holding that federal legislation with respect to indian tribes is not based upon impermissible racial classifications and noting that article i 8 of the constitution gives congress the power to regulate commerce with the indian tribes

assistant: The best answer is B. holding the constitution vests the federal government with exclusive authority over relations with indian tribes