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: No amendment or waiver of any provision of this Agreement nor consent to any departure by Borrower herefrom shall in any event be effective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by the Secured Party, and then such wavier or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which it is given.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, the other Loan Documents and any separate letter agreements with respect to fees payable to the DIP Agent constitute the entire contract among the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and thereof and supersede any and all previous agreements and understandings, oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof and thereof.

assistant: Integration
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: Tenant hereby absolves Landlord from any and all loss, cost, damage, expense and liability, whether foreseeable or not, from any cause whatsoever, that Tenant may suffer to its personal property located anywhere in the Hazmat Storage Space or that it or its agents, employees, principals, invitees, or licensees may suffer as a direct or indirect consequence of Tenant's lease of or use of the Hazmat Storage Space or access areas to the Hazmat Storage Space except to the extent caused by Landlord's gross negligence or willful misconduct. In addition, Tenant hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, protect and hold Landlord harmless from and against any loss, cost, damage, liability, expense, claim, action or cause of action of any third party, whether foreseeable or not, resulting as a direct or indirect consequence of Tenant's lease or use of the Hazmat Storage Space or access areas to the Hazmat Storage Space except to the extent caused by Landlord's gross negligence or willful misconduct.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 28-29 (homemade key designed to burglarize coin-operated machines). The Legislature cannot foresee what these objects might be. The Legislature may have intended section 16.01 to cover possession of these objects, which would otherwise go unpunished. Third, we are not convinced that the Legislature intended section 16.01 to be construed more broadly, in all respects, than the statute it replaced. Under the plain language of the former statute, it applied to objects “commonly used” to commit burglary or safecracking. But under section 16.01, objects must be “specially designed, made, or adapted for use in the commission of an offense.” “Commonly used” allows for broader application than “specially designed, made, or adapted.” See Boykin v. State, 818 S.W.2d 782, 785 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (<HOLDING>). We also note that the practice commentary Options: A. holding that courts must generally give effect to the plain meaning of a statute because that is the best evidence of the legislatures intent B. holding that we must give effect to the plain and ordinary meaning of a statutes language C. holding legislatures intent is determined from plain and common meaning of words used D. recognizing that where the statutory language is not ambiguous the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute must be given effect E. holding that an appellate court must give a statute its clear and plain meaning when the statute is unambiguous

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that courts must generally give effect to the plain meaning of a statute because that is the best evidence of the legislatures intent
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 the purpose of imposing an appropriate sentence”). The record belies Cooper’s contention that the court failed to adequately consider the § 3553(a) factors and did not explain its rationale for the variance. The court specifically noted its consideration of all the § 3553(a) factors. Additionally, the court’s comments at sentencing, as well as the arguments that it heard, demonstrate the court’s consideration of many pertinent § 3553(a) factors. Although the court’s nine-month variance above the high end of Cooper’s guideline range was significant, the district court’s consideration of many of the § 3553(a) factors and its statements that the sentence was sufficient, but not greater than necessary, serve as sufficient justification. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 50, 128 S.Ct. at 597 (<HOLDING>). The record also demonstrates that the court Options: A. holding that the court must consider the adequacy of the inquiry into the conflict the extent of the conflict and the timeliness of the motion B. holding that the court must consider the extent of control exercised by the defendant over the third partys means of infringement C. holding that a reviewing court must give due deference to the district courts decision that the 3553a factors on a whole justify the extent of the variance above the guideline range D. recognizing that while our reasonableness review may take into consideration the extent of the district courts deviation from the guidelines range we must give due deference to the district courts decision that the 3553a factors on a whole justify the extent of the variance E. holding that if a court decides that an outsideguidelines sentence is warranted it must consider the extent of the deviation and ensure that the justification is sufficiently compelling to support the degree of the variance

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that if a court decides that an outsideguidelines sentence is warranted it must consider the extent of the deviation and ensure that the justification is sufficiently compelling to support the degree of the variance
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 provision of this Bill of Sale is held to be unenforceable for any reason, it will be adjusted rather than voided, if possible, to achieve the intent of the parties. All other provisions of this Bill of Sale will be deemed valid and enforceable to the extent possible.

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: the application of the guardian ... decree a conveyance of the property, by mortgage or deed of trust....” We note tangentially that the Maryland Court of Appeals observed that "[i]t is not altogether clear how a court in a foreign jurisdiction ‘decrees’ the sale of property in Maryland!,] ” and that Maryland law generally does not require court approval for such a conveyance. Id. at 244 & n. 6; see also id. at 258 n. 16 ("[T]he Maryland statute permitted guardians to do just what the guardian did in executing and delivering the bill obligatory."). 3 . 11A John Alan Appleman & Jean Appleman, Insurance Law and Practice § 6712, at 407-08 (1981). 4 . Appleman, supra, § 6713, at 415 (describing the rule "generally” but not unanimously fol 9 A.D. 639, 639, 291 N.Y.S. 82 (N.Y.App.Div.1936) (<HOLDING>). 7 .See D.C.Code § 21-115, which provides Options: A. holding that a surety has standing to sue for a progress payment released by the government after notification by the surety of unpaid subcontractors B. holding that there is no privity of contract between the government and a surety since the government is not a party to the agreement between the surety and the contractor the government never undertakes an obligation to the surety C. recognizing that the gjovernment as obligee owes no equitable duty to a surety unless the surety notifies the government that the principal has defaulted under the bond notice by the surety is essential before any governmental duty exists D. holding that taxable costs included only the premium on a surety bond posted on appeal not the fees paid for letters of credit to secure the bond where the state statute and court rule only specifically allowed for premium on any surety bond E. holding that surety was not liable for losses arising out of 1931 acts by the principal a committee of an incompetent person because the bond agreement limited the scope of the suretys undertaking by providing that the surety would assume liability on fiduciary court bonds for all losses occurring on and after the 1st day of may 1933 and all losses as to which no notice was received by the old company prior to midnight of april 30th 1933

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that surety was not liable for losses arising out of 1931 acts by the principal a committee of an incompetent person because the bond agreement limited the scope of the suretys undertaking by providing that the surety would assume liability on fiduciary court bonds for all losses occurring on and after the 1st day of may 1933 and all losses as to which no notice was received by the old company prior to midnight of april 30th 1933
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: Tyson hereby agrees to continue to employ you and you hereby accept continued employment with Tyson. The duties and services required to be performed by you shall be consistent with your position, as assigned by Tyson in its sole discretion from time to time, and shall be consistent with the level and responsibility of the duties and services performed by other similarly situated employees. At Tyson’s sole discretion, your position is subject to change during your term of employment. You agree to devote substantially all of your working time, attention and energies to the business of Tyson. You may make and manage personal investments (provided such investments in other activities do not violate, in any material respect, the provisions of Section 6 of this Agreement), be involved in charitable and professional activities, and, with the prior written consent of Tyson’s General Counsel or Chief Human Resources Officer, serve on boards of other for profit entities, provided such activities do not materially interfere with the performance of your duties hereunder. You agree that during your employment with Tyson, you will not engage in any (i) competitive outside business activities, (ii) outside business that provides goods or services to Tyson, or (iii) outside business that buys products from Tyson, other than with Tyson’s prior written approval. You will devote your best efforts to the performance of your duties and the advancement of Tyson and shall not engage in any other employment, profitable activities, or other pursuits which would cause you to disclose or utilize Confidential Information (as defined in Section 6(a)), or reflect adversely on Tyson. This obligation shall include, but is not limited to, obtaining Tyson’s consent prior to performing tasks for business associates of Tyson outside of your customary duties for Tyson, giving speeches or writing articles, blogs, or posts, about Tyson’s business, improperly using Tyson’s name or identifying your association or position with Tyson in a manner that reflects unfavorably upon Tyson. You further agree that you will not use, incorporate, or otherwise create any business entity or organization or domain name using any name confusingly similar to the name of Tyson or the name of any affiliate of Tyson or any other name under which any such entities do business.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan does not constitute a contract of employment, and selection as a Participant will not give any employee the right to be retained in the employ of the Company or any Subsidiary. The Plan does not constitute or serve as evidence of an agreement or understanding, express or implied, that the Company will retain a director for any period of time. Subject to the provisions of paragraph IV.3(a), no award under the Plan shall confer upon the holder thereof any right as a stockholder of the Company prior to the date on which he fulfills all service requirements and other conditions for receipt of shares of Stock. If the redistribution of shares is restricted pursuant to paragraph I.8, certificates representing such shares may bear a legend referring to such restrictions.

assistant: 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: added.) It is undisputed that Hoy gave notice of his claim for compensation to the attorney for Alpha Corporation, and that the Alpha Corporation attorney understood this claim to extend not only to judgments, but also to all “money due,” including settlement proceeds. Consequently, Hoy satisfied the statutory notice requirements for establishing an attorney’s lien. Second, although at least one jurisdiction requires counsel to bring a separate action against his client to enforce an attorney’s lien, Neilson v. Neilson, 780 P.2d 1264 (Utah Ct.App.1989), we align ourselves with the majority of jurisdictions which hold that an attorney’s lien may be enforced either through a separate action or incident to the underlying litigation. See Gee v. Crabtree, 192 Colo. 550, 560 P.2d 835 (1977) (<HOLDING>); Plaza Shoe Store, Inc. v. Hermel, Inc., 636 Options: A. holding that no lien may be imposed without direct and specific notice to the fund of an opposing party or its carriers that a lien is asserted before the proceeds are disbursed B. holding that a lawyers claim for impression of his statutory charging lien upon the recovery secured in an action may be prosecuted as an ancillary proceeding to the main litigation C. holding state courts authority under iowa code section 59821 not the lien created there under prevented debtor from claiming the iowa homestead exemption and therefore the debtor could not avoid the lien because the lien did not impair an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled but for the lien D. holding that the attorneys charging lien may be asserted and enforced in the civil action which gave rise to the lien claim or in an independent action E. holding that the lien bond releases the property from the lien but the lien is then secured by the bond

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the attorneys charging lien may be asserted and enforced in the civil action which gave rise to the lien claim or in an independent action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to codify case law as expressed in Neal v. Clark [, 95 U.S. 704, 24 L.Ed. 586 (1877),] which interp that state-court order of rescission based on finding of misrepresentation held to preclude relitigation of fraud issue in dischargeability proceeding). These decisions- in the bankruptcy context are consistent with general collateral estoppel principles, according to which an issue litigated in a legal action can be precluded in a subsequent equitable action, and vice versa. See Lytle v. Household Mfg., Inc., 494 U.S. 545, 556 n. 4, 110 S.Ct. 1331, 1338 n. 4, 108 L.Ed.2d 504 (1990) (noting that if certain claims had not been dismissed, jury’s determination would have had pre-clusive effect when court considered equitable claims); Parklane Hosiery, 439 U.S. at 334-37, 99 S.Ct. at 653-55 (<HOLDING>); Davenport v. DeRobertis, 844 F.2d 1310, Options: A. holding collateral estoppel elements met considering changed circumstances in the context of an exception to the general rule of collateral estoppel B. recognizing cause of action for equitable estoppel under erisa C. holding that collateral estoppel applies to 1983 claims D. holding equitable determination can have collateralestoppel effect in a subsequent legal action without violating seventh amendment E. holding that equitable determinationcan have collateral estoppel effect in subsequent legal action

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that equitable determinationcan have collateral estoppel effect in subsequent legal action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and parliament of England in lands under tide waters, and that the owner of land bounded by a navigable river within the ebb and flow of the tide had no private title or right in the shore below high-water mark ...” Shively v. Bowlby, 152 U.S. 1, 20-21, 14 S.Ct. 548, 38 L.Ed. 331 (1894). As stated above, Plaintiff admitted at trial that the State did not grant any rights or property to any previous owner of the 175 Ellis Street property. Furthermore, Plaintiffs own expert witness testified that errors in deeds are common, and that some of Plaintiffs own deeds contained errors. In light of the fact that no external proof exists that the foreshore was granted to the Plaintiff, I find that title to the 175 Ellis Street foreshore remains in the State. C. Proof of Ownership of the Fo 1895) (<HOLDING>); see also Evans v. City of Johnstown, 96 Options: A. recognizing private right of action B. holding that the involvement of the police in executing the courtordered search without more does not convert the private defendants abuse of state law into conduct attributable to the state for purposes of 1983 liability and because yanaki and moss allege nothing more than private misuse of state laws their compliant fails to satisfy the first part of the color of law test C. holding that grants from parliament and the crown for purely private purposes are ineffective D. holding that the conclusion is inevitable that the parliament and the crown together were not competent to grant to a private corporation for private purposes the seacoast around the island below the shore line without violating established principles of law E. holding that the government is liable under the ftca in the same respect as a private person under the law of the place where the act occurred

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the conclusion is inevitable that the parliament and the crown together were not competent to grant to a private corporation for private purposes the seacoast around the island below the shore line without violating established principles of law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless otherwise required by applicable law, on the Settlement Date, (a) the Shares and the Dividend Payment will be considered ordinary income for tax purposes and subject to all applicable payroll taxes; (b) the Company shall report such income to the appropriate taxing authorities as it determines to be necessary and appropriate; (c) the Participant shall be responsible for payment of any taxes due in respect of the Shares and the Dividend Payment; and (d) the Company shall withhold taxes in respect of the Shares and the Dividend Payment (a “ Tax Payment ”); provided, however, that the Participant may elect, subject to the Company's approval in its sole discretion, to satisfy his or her obligation to pay the Tax Payment by authorizing the Company to withhold from any Shares otherwise to be delivered to the Participant, a number of whole shares of Common Stock having a Fair Market Value equal to the Tax Payment (i.e., a “cashless exercise”). If the Participant fails to pay any required Tax Payment, the Company may, in its discretion, deduct any Tax Payments from any amount then or thereafter payable by the Company to the Participant and take such other action as deemed necessary to satisfy all obligations for the Tax Payment (including reducing the number of Shares delivered on the Settlement Date). The Participant agrees to pay the Company in the form of a check or cashier’s check any overage of the Tax Payment paid by the Company as a result of making whole any partial Share issued through a cashless exercise. Furthermore, the Participant acknowledges and agrees that the Participant will be solely responsible for making any Tax Payment directly to the appropriate taxing authorities should the Participant opt not to satisfy his or her Tax Payment through a cashless exercise.

assistant: Taxes
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 will ensure compliance by it with Anti-Corruption Laws, applicable AML Laws and applicable Sanctions and the Borrower will maintain in effect and enforce policies and procedures designated to ensure compliance by its Subsidiaries and its officers, directors, employees and agents with Anti-Corruption Laws, applicable AML Laws and applicable Sanctions.

assistant: Sanctions
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: Assignor hereby consents and agrees that the Agent may at any time and from time to time, without notice to or further consent from Assignor, either with or without consideration, surrender any property or other security of any kind or nature whatsoever held by it or by any person, firm or corporation on its behalf or for its account, securing the Secured Obligations; substitute for any Collateral so held by it, other collateral of like kind; agree to modification of the terms of the Loan Documents; extend or renew the Loan Documents for any period; grant releases, compromises and indulgences with respect to the Loan Documents for any period; grant releases, compromises and indulgences with respect to the Loan Documents to any persons or entities now or hereafter liable thereunder or hereunder; release any guarantor, endorser or any other person or entity liable with respect to the Secured Obligations; or take or fail to take any action of any type whatsoever; and no such action which the Agent shall take or fail to take in connection with the Loan Documents, or any of them, or any security for the payment of the Secured Obligations or for the performance of any obligations or undertakings of Assignor, nor any course of dealing with Assignor or any other person, shall release Assignor’s obligations hereunder, affect this Assignment in any way or afford Assignor any recourse against Lender.

assistant: Modifications
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 recording and other taxes (excluding franchise, income or similar taxes) or other similar assessments or charges payable or ruled payable by any governmental authority incurred in connection with the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement shall be paid by the Borrower, together with interest and penalties, if any.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the district court properly applied the McConnell factors. The district court aptly determined that the proposed testimony lacked the requisite “substance” to generate prejudice. R., Vol. II, Doc. 322, at 2 (Order Den. Pursley’s and Wardell’s Renewed Mot. to Sever, dated Dec. 5, 2005). The testimony consisted, in its entirety, of two statements. We address the exculpatory “substance” vel non of each statement. The first statement simply memorialized a legal conclusion disavowing culpability — -that neither coconspirator “conspire[d]” with Mr. Wardell or Mr. Pursley. R., Vol. II, Doc. 316, at 5, 6. Under our precedent, this conclusory assertion of innocence lacks the requisite exculpatory value to require severance. See United States v. Rogers, 925 F.2d 1285, 1287-88 (10th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); McConnell, 749 F.2d at 1445-46 (noting that Options: A. holding that when the testimony relating each of the statements by codefendants was admissible against at least one of the codefendants the statements were not rendered inadmissible because each statement would be hearsay as to the other two defendants B. holding that a reasonable jury could have concluded based on repeated references to the substance as cocaine and testimony from witnesses who had used the substances which they believed to be cocaine that substance was cocaine C. holding that a codefendants prior statements made at his guilty plea hearing were not admissible to corroborate his trial testimony because the witnesss guilty plea hearing did not predate any improper motive he may have had to testify against the defendant D. holding that codefendants purported testimony that defendant did not sell cocaine or handle weapons at codefendants apartment lacked substance because it amounted to little more than his assertion that defendant had no involvement in the charged crimes E. holding that testimony regarding a little pistol defendant carried was inadmissible where nothing in the record linked the little pistol to the gun used in the crimes charged

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that codefendants purported testimony that defendant did not sell cocaine or handle weapons at codefendants apartment lacked substance because it amounted to little more than his assertion that defendant had no involvement in the charged crimes
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: as lacking in plausibility, and could reasonably have found 1950) (same); Kilduff v. Kalinowski, 136 Conn. 405, 71 A.2d 593, 594-95 (1950) (same). B. The Union’s Liability 1. Standard of Proof The Union argues that the Johnsons’ suit stems from a labor dispute and that therefore its liability should be governed by the “clear proof" requirement of the Norris-La-Guardia Act, 29 U.S.C. § 106, infra. Johnson sued his labor union for the harassment he suffered after testifying against other Union members at an arbitra tion hearing. Whether the events underlying the suit can be characterized as a labor dispute for the purposes of § 106 of the Norris-LaGuardia Act is a close question. See Columbia River Packers Ass’n v. Hinton, 315 U.S. 143, 145-47, 62 S.Ct. 520, 521-23, 86 L.Ed. 750 (1942) (<HOLDING>); Jacksonville Bulk Terminals, Inc. v. Options: A. holding that the most critical factor in determining the reasonableness of a fee award is the degree of success obtained B. holding that the district court erred in not determining whether the amount in controversy necessary to create diversity jurisdiction was met at the time of removal C. holding that the critical element in determining whether the provisions of the norrislaguardia act apply is whether the employeremployee relationship is the matrix of the controversy D. recognizing the motives of the officer as a critical factor in determining whether a particular instance of excessive force rises to the level of a constitutional violation E. recognizing that the critical question is whether any present violation exists

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the critical element in determining whether the provisions of the norrislaguardia act apply is whether the employeremployee relationship is the matrix of the controversy
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: similarly concluded that Pinholster’s childhood head injuries resulted in organic, pre-frontal brain damage that changed his personality and explained his aggressive, violent, and antisocial behavior, while Dr. Stalberg characterized the injuries as possibly “devastating” and likewise connected them to Pinholster’s epilepsy. This additional medical evidence would have helped counter the State’s aggravation case in three respects. First, evidence that Pinholster’s brain damage may have influenced, or even caused, his behavior at the time of the crime may have led jurors to conclude that he was less morally culpable at the time of the offense, and at least one juror may have been inclined to refrain from voting in favor of a capital sentence. See Wiggins, 539 U.S. at 537, 123 S.Ct. 2527 (<HOLDING>). Evidence of organic brain injury in other Options: A. holding that prejudice is established if there is a reasonable probability that at least one juror would have struck a different balance between life and death B. holding that ineffective assistance of counsel occurs when there is deficient performance and prejudice which is a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different C. holding that in order to show prejudice defendant must demonstrate that there is a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different D. holding that to establish prejudice there must be a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different E. holding that to establish prejudice sufficient to warrant finding of ineffective assistance the defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that prejudice is established if there is a reasonable probability that at least one juror would have struck a different balance between life and death
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: implicated by the facts of this case. 2. We decline to adopt Wyckotf’s extension of premises liability The existence of a legal duty is a threshold requirement for negligence liability — whether sounding in general negligence or premises defect liability. Kroger Co. v. Elwood, 197 S.W.3d 793, 794 (Tex.2006). “Texas law generally imposes no duty to take action -to prevent harm to others absent certain special relationships or circumstances.” Torrington Co. v. Stutzman, 46 S.W.3d 829, 837 (Tex.2000). One “special relationship” that gives rise to a duty to take action to prevent harm to others is the r r did not owe duty to keep premises safe and did not owe any duty with respect to hole on premises engineer neither created nor agreed to make safe); see also Martinez, 941 S.W.2d at 911 (<HOLDING>). In the absence of Supreme Court authority for Options: A. holding that the policy insured property but failure to occupy premises negated coverage B. holding that the decoration contractor freeman was not subject to premises liability because it did not occupy own control or make special use of the premises at the javits center C. holding that the defendant who owned the premises could discharge its duty by either warning the plaintiff or making the premises reasonably safe D. holding that it is not E. holding that defendant properly established that it did not owe premises liability duty because it did not own occupy or control premises where injury occurred but that defendant was not entitled to traditional summary judgment because it failed to address duty arising out of alleged creation of dangerous condition

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that defendant properly established that it did not owe premises liability duty because it did not own occupy or control premises where injury occurred but that defendant was not entitled to traditional summary judgment because it failed to address duty arising out of alleged creation of dangerous condition
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, together with Exhibit A , constitutes and expresses the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to Employer’s employment of Employee, and there are no representations, inducements, promises, agreements, arrangements, or undertakings oral or written, between the Parties other than those set forth herein and therein. Any and all prior agreements or understandings with respect to such matters are hereby superseded. No modification or amendment of this Agreement, nor waiver of any of its provisions, shall be valid or enforceable unless in writing and signed by both Parties.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: factor for consideration. Whether the number 50 in this hypothetical District is a minimum, a maximum or just a guideline for the permissible number of osteopathic beds was a subject of confusion among the witnesses who testified at the hearing. Also subject to confusion was whether the proposed rule has the effect of limiting non-osteopathic facilities to 95% of the toal bed need as computed under Rule 10-5.11(23), Florida Administrative Code. (11) In determining the need for osteopathic and allopathic beds in a given area, it is the generally accepted practice of health planning experts to consider such factors as historical, current and projected utilization or occupancy rates of existing acute care beds, the average of length of patient stays, and the admission rates of physicians (<HOLDING>). Another useful predictor of need for Options: A. recognizing significant differences in text of state and federal equal protection clauses B. recognizing distinction between two types of waiver C. recognizing split among district courts D. recognizing the differences in admission practices among specialties and types of physicians E. holding defense applicable to both types of claims

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing the differences in admission practices among specialties and types of physicians
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 promptly as practicable following the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the Parties shall issue a joint press release announcing the execution of this Agreement and the termination of the Master Combination Agreement, in a form proposed by the Giants Parties and approved by the Jaguar Representative, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Prior to releasing any further press release or other public announcement (including any document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission) with respect to this Agreement or the Master Combination Agreement, any of the transactions contemplated thereby or any of the discussions between the Parties related to those agreements or any other transaction, the releasing Party shall, to the extent reasonably practicable, provide the other Party an opportunity to review and comment on such release or announcement.

assistant: Publicity
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 required or permitted by this Note shall be in writing and shall be deemed sufficient upon delivery, when delivered personally or by a nationally-recognized delivery service (such as Federal Express or UPS), or forty-eight (48) hours after being deposited in the U.S. mail, as certified or registered mail, with postage prepaid, addressed to the party to be notified at such party’s address as set forth below or as subsequently modified by written notice.

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: administrative remedies once the union representative instructed Plaintiff Hill to pay the claim personally, the entire ERISA exhaustion requirement would be rendered meaningless. Under such a ruling, Plaintiff Hill could avoid the internal procedures of the program and jump to federal court without Defendant ever having an opportunity to administratively defend its denial of benefits. Defendant, and others like Defendant, would be subject to federal litigation merely because a single local union representative declined, for whatever reason, to administratively pursue a claim. In addition, the local union representative is Plaintiff Hill’s agent, and what the agent did or failed to do is attributable to Plaintiff Hill for ERISA exhaustion purposes. See Brooks, 208 F.Supp.2d at 824-25 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, administrative remedies have not Options: A. recognizing that the involvement of supervisory union members in union affairs conflicts with the need to assure the complete devotion of union negotiating teams to employee interests B. holding that an employee may sue for breach of a collective bargaining agreement without the union C. holding an employee accountable for administrative procedures assigned to his union representative D. holding that an employer is accountable to a discharged employee for unpaid compensation if the employee was terminated in bad faith and the compensation is clearly connected to work already performed E. holding union members state law claims for defamation against union preempted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding an employee accountable for administrative procedures assigned to his union representative
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 the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in this Agreement, at the Closing (defined below), the Purchaser hereby agrees to purchase, acquire and accept from Seller, and Seller hereby agrees to sell, transfer, assign, convey and deliver to the Purchaser , all of the right, title and interest in and to the SUDS Field Assets, being not less than an undivided fifty percent (50%) leasehold working interest in the SUDS Field Assets.

assistant: Sales
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: (1982) (remanding for entry of judgment on misdemeanor breaking or entering where evidence was sufficient to support that offense, but not felonious intent). IV. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Defendant next argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to move in limine to exclude evidence that he had been arrested on an unrelated breaking or entering charge and initially failed to object to introduction of that evidence at trial. When his trial counsel did object to the State’s attempt to call a witness in rebuttal to testify regarding the other charge, the trial court sustained the objection under Rule 403. To prevail in a claim for [ineffective assistance o 359 (1987), State v. Lamson, 75 N.C. App. 132, 133, 135, 330 S.E.2d 68, 68, 70 (<HOLDING>), disc. rev. denied, 314 N.C. 545, 335 S.E.2d Options: A. holding that squatter in home did not have standing to challenge search of house where he was staying B. holding that the evidence was sufficient to preclude inference where defendant believed house to be that of his girlfriend and nothing in the dwelling had been disturbed C. holding that the evidence was sufficient to preclude inference where he tried to enter the house drunk and was staying at the neighboring house D. holding that squatter had no standing to challenge search of abandoned house where he was staying E. holding that defendant staying in abandoned house had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the house despite having a key to the house and the ability to let people in and out of it

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the evidence was sufficient to preclude inference where he tried to enter the house drunk and was staying at the neighboring house
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 reside in brazil , then the other party to this contract is evernote do brasil serviços de aplicações ltda. , a company headquartered in the city of são paulo , state of sao paolo , brazil ( `` evernote brasil '' ) .

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: enett international usa , llc ( for credit or debit cards issued in the united states excluding american express ) or enett international ( uk ) limited ( for all other cards and all american express cards ) is appointed by , and has contractual relationship with , the supplier to process your reservation payment as the supplier 's agent .

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: After giving effect to the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the Additional Note Purchase Agreements, Company has capital sufficient to carry on its business and transactions and is solvent and able to pay its debts as they mature. No transfer of property is being made and no indebtedness is being incurred in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or the Additional Note Purchase Agreements with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud either present or future creditors of Company or any Subsidiary of Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the willful and intentional assault of either a fellow employee or a third person does not prevent the injury from being accidental within the meaning of the Act. Continental Life Ins. Co. v. Gough, 161 Va. 755, 759, 172 S.E. 264, 266 (1934). The Defendants cite Haddon v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 239 Va. 397, 389 S.E.2d 712 (1990), for the general proposition that the intentional tort of an employer or fellow employee falls within the scope of the Act. The Defendants fail to note, however, that the assault must be “personal to the employee and not directed against him as an employee or because of his employment.” Richmond Newspapers v. Hazelwood, 249 Va. 369, 373, 457 S.E.2d 56, 58 (1995) (citations omitted); see also City of Richmond v. Braxton, 230 Va. 161, 335 S.E.2d 259 (1985) (<HOLDING>). In the cases at hand, Williams and Miller Options: A. holding that language in employee handbook stating that it was not to be considered as creating terms and conditions of an employment contract and that the employment relationship was employment atwill was sufficiently explicit to preclude the creation of implied contractual obligations as a matter of law B. holding that assault by employee against customer arising out of dispute concerning services that employee was performing not outside scope of employment as a matter of law C. holding that allegations of sexual assault by an employee of the church fell within coverage for sexual misconduct D. holding that an assault that occurred immediately after the employee was discharged was in the course of the employment E. holding that a sexual assault on a female employee was of a personal nature and not directed against the employee as part of the employment relationship

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a sexual assault on a female employee was of a personal nature and not directed against the employee as part of the employment relationship
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 Dispute arising out of or in connection with this Localization Agreement, including any question regarding its existence, validity or termination, that is not resolved by the Parties under Section 22.1 above shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration in Hong Kong administered by the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (hereinafter " HKIAC ") in accordance with the HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules (hereinafter, the " HKIAC Rules ") then in force, which rules are deemed to be incorporated by reference in this Section, except as otherwise provided herein. The arbitration tribunal shall consist of three (3) arbitrators, with a presiding arbitrator. The presiding arbitrator shall not be a national of China nor of the United States of America and such arbitrator shall be fluent in English. Party A and Party B shall each appoint one (1) arbitrator and the third arbitrator, who shall serve as the presiding arbitrator, shall be appointed by agreement between the Parties. In the event that the Parties cannot agree on the nomination of the third arbitrator within fourteen (14) days of the arbitration tribunal accepting the case, the third arbitrator shall be appointed by the administrator of the arbitration tribunal. The language to be used in the arbitration proceedings shall be English and Chinese. All costs of arbitration (including arbitration fees, costs of arbitrators, costs of translation and interpretation and legal fees and disbursements) shall be determined by the arbitral tribunal in accordance with the HKIAC Rules. The arbitral award shall be final and binding upon the Parties.

assistant: Arbitration