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: (a) Payments Free of Taxes . Any and all payments by or on account of any obligation of any Borrower under any Loan Document shall be made without deduction or withholding for any Taxes, except as required by applicable law. If any applicable law (as determined in the good faith discretion of an applicable withholding agent) requires the deduction or withholding of any Tax from any such payment by a withholding agent, then the applicable withholding agent shall be entitled to make such deduction or withholding and shall timely pay the full amount deducted or withheld to the relevant Governmental Authority in accordance with applicable law and, if such Tax is an Indemnified Tax, then the sum payable by the applicable Borrower shall be increased as necessary so that after such deduction or withholding has been made (including such deductions and withholdings applicable to additional sums payable under this Section 2.17) the applicable Recipient receives an amount equal to the sum it would have received had no such deduction or withholding been made.

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: This Guaranty and any amendments, waivers, consents or supplements hereto may be executed in counterparts (and by different parties hereto in different counterparts), each of which shall constitute an original, but all taken together shall constitute a single contract. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Agreement by facsimile or in electronic (i.e., “pdf” or “tif”) format shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Guaranty. This Guaranty constitutes the entire contract among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all previous agreements and understandings, oral or written, with respect thereto.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: again .... MARTIN: Right. WOLCOTT: You have had some bad breaks. Where do we need to go find her? MARTIN: I have no idea. I mean I don’t know. (Emphasis supplied.) Similar to the Walker interview, the interview here did not occur in an unduly oppressive environment. The interview lasted approximately three-and-a-half hours. It included a bathroom break and inquiries regarding Martin’s welfare. The detectives’ comments regarding the death penalty, and the realities of trial, were not made to incite fear in Martin, but were part of a larger conversation regarding possible penalties Martin could face in the absence of further explanation from him with regard to what happened the last time he and Jacey were together. See United States v. Mendoza-Cecelia, 963 F.2d 1467, 1475 (11th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). The detectives’ statements are best Options: A. holding that a government officer who informs the defendant of realistically expected penalties for cooperation andor noncooperation does not offer an illegal inducement B. holding that an offer to donate cannot be an offer to sell C. holding that cooperation was insufficient where the defendants cooperation was based on his confession to the charged crimes D. holding an unaccepted settlement offer or offer of judgment does not moot a plaintiffs case emphasis added E. holding that a simple offer of a ride by a friend or neighbor does not constitute a lure as that term is usually defined as the offer is not accompanied by an inducement such as a promise of pleasure an enticement or prospect of financial gain

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a government officer who informs the defendant of realistically expected penalties for cooperation andor noncooperation does not offer an illegal inducement
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: he believed she understood that explanation. Record at 44. That impression was reenforced by Mr. Mills’ subsequent testimony that CK later asked him “to help her with taking out anger on others.” Record at 47. Given that the patient was a 6 year-old child and unlikely to have much intellectual appreciation of the role of mental health professionals, we find CK’s articulation of a desire for Mr. Mills to help her with an emotional problem to be convincing evidence of her understanding that she was seeing Mr. Mills as part of some treatment that was supposed to benefit her. Consequently, she would have had the necessary motivation to speak truthfully that supports this exception to the hearsay rule. See Clark; Edens; Dean; White; cf. United States v. Avila, 27 M.J. 62, 66 (C.M.A.1988) (<HOLDING>). Even though Mr. Mills also testified that he Options: A. holding that the term medical as used in the hearsay exception regarding statements made for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment includes emotional and mental health as well as physical health B. holding that childs statements to a psychologist who was introduced to the child only as kathy and as just another mommy were not admissible under medical diagnosis and treatment exception C. holding also that only a childs first statement made is admissible under the exception D. holding that statements in medical records given for the primary purpose of medical diagnosis and treatment are nontestimonial E. holding that statements by a fouryearold child to a psychologist who introduced herself with her first name and as just another mommy were not admissible

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that childs statements to a psychologist who was introduced to the child only as kathy and as just another mommy were not admissible under medical diagnosis and treatment exception
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 has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by PIC and constitutes legal, valid and binding obligations of PIC, enforceable against PIC in accordance with its terms except (i) as limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other laws of general application affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally and (ii) as limited by laws relating to the availability of specific performance, injunctive relief or other equitable remedies.

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

user: (b) If either party is required (by interrogatories, requests for information or documents, subpoena, civil investigative demand or similar process) to disclose any Confidential Information, it is agreed that such party will provide the other party with prompt notice of such request so that such other party may seek an appropriate protective order and/or waive the notifying party's compliance with the provisions of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Investor represents and warrants to the Company that this Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by such Investor, and is a valid and binding obligation of such Investor, enforceable against such Investor in accordance with its terms. As of the date of this Agreement, the Investor Group, together with the Affiliates and Associates that are controlled by the Investor Group or any Investor (collectively, the “Investor Group Affiliates”), beneficially owns 2,126,848 shares of the Company’s common stock (“Shares”) and has voting authority over such Shares.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Brief In Support Of Motion To Dismiss And Response In Opposition To Application For Preliminary Injunction, p. 4. This Court agrees with the Defendants on this point. There is no dispute that “[wjhile organized as a non-profit organization, the NCAA—and its member institutions—are, when presenting amateur athletics to a ticket-paying, television-buying public, engaged in a business venture of far greater magnitude than the vast majority of ‘profit-making’ enterprises.” Hennessey, 564 F.2d at 1149 n. 14. The United States Supreme Court has recognized that the NCAA's television restrictions are subject to antitrust scrutiny because those regulations are commercial in nature. See NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85, 104 S.Ct. 2948, 82 L.Ed.2d 70 (1984) (<HOLDING>). However, there is a clear difference between Options: A. holding ban violated the sherman act B. holding that plaintiffs complaint failed to state a claim under section 1 of the sherman act C. holding that same activity violated 2 of the sherman act D. holding that uniteds lease provisions violated 4 of the sherman act E. holding ncaas television restrictions violated 1 of the sherman act

assistant: The best answer is E. holding ncaas television restrictions violated 1 of the sherman act
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties hereto and supersedes all prior agreements, if any, understandings and arrangements, oral or written, between the Parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, including, without limitation, the Employment Agreement dated April 10, 2007, as amended, between the Company and Executive and the Restrictive Covenant Agreement dated as of October 10, 2012 between the Company and Executive.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement sets forth the entire and final agreement and understanding of the parties and contain all of the agreements made between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties hereto, with respect to the subject matter hereof, including the Existing Agreement; provided, however, that the Change in Control Agreement shall remain in effect as modified hereby. No change or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless in writing and signed by the Employer and the Executive.

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: indicates “[a] deliberate- and contumacious disregard of the court’s authority[,] ... bad faith, or a willful disregard or gross indifference to an order of the court, or conduct which evinces deliberate callousness.” Mercer, 443 So.2d at 946 (citations omitted). In the instant cause, the trial court dismissed Bonilla’s first lawsuit with prejudice because Bonilla failed to attend several court-ordered depositions. Contrary to the trial court’s ruling, the record in this case does not contain sufficient evidence to indicate that Bonilla exhibited the sort of wilful disregard for the court’s orders which would support the sanction of dismissal, either with or without prejudice. In addition, throughout the time that Bonilla was unavailable for deposition, Apollo had been able DCA 1979) (<HOLDING>). Consequently, because the record supports Options: A. holding that sanction of dismissal was warranted when plaintiff had failed to appear for deposition on multiple occasions and following plaintiffs failure to comply with orders of the court including an order that plaintiff make medical records available to the defendant B. holding that dismissal with leave to amend is not a final order C. holding that dismissal for failure to comply with discovery orders is on the merits D. holding that dismissal is appropriate where failure to comply with courts orders prejudiced the defendants and burdened both the courts docket and the public interest in speedy litigation and the district court considered less drastic sanctions and warned the plaintiff before dismissal E. holding that dismissal is not warranted where the plaintiff was unable to attend courtordered depositions because the military would not grant him leave time to comply with the courts orders

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that dismissal is not warranted where the plaintiff was unable to attend courtordered depositions because the military would not grant him leave time to comply with the courts orders
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: Boeing’s argument that parties will shield improper conditions of sale from appellate review by claiming that they are integral to the transaction ignores the fact that § 363(m) provides review of authorized sales for those parties that obtain a stay. Consequently, the creation of the Trust is entitled to § 363(m) protection. B. Having concluded that the Debtors’ formation of the Trust is deserving of § 363(m) protection, and recognizing that its execution was not stayed, we must now determine whether granting Boeing its requested relief, vacating the Trust, would “affect the validity of the sale.” Krebs, 141 F.3d at 499. Courts undertaking this analysis focus on whether relief would impact the transaction as executed by the parties pursuant to the court’s authorization. See id. (<HOLDING>); United Bank, Inc. v. Howard (In re Howard), Options: A. holding that allowing the debtor to reject buysell agreement affects the validity of the sale because it would necessitate reversing the subsequent assumption and assignment of the underlying franchises B. holding plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the validity of an assignment from mers to bac because she was not a party to the assignment and the assignment did not affect her underlying obligation to make timely payments C. holding the assignment of the mortgage once the original grant by the mortgagor to the mortgagee has been perfected does not involve a transfer of the property of the debtor D. holding that the validity of a contract for a commission for the sale of real estate is determined by the law of the state where the contract is made E. holding that subsequent to a judicial sale the report of the sale must be made to and ratified by the court before a deed for the property is given by the trustee to the purchaser

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that allowing the debtor to reject buysell agreement affects the validity of the sale because it would necessitate reversing the subsequent assumption and assignment of the underlying franchises
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 a condition to the delivery of the Shares received in settlement of RSUs pursuant to Section 6, the Company, at its option, may require the Grantee to execute a general release on behalf of the Grantee and the Grantee’s heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, releasing all claims, actions and causes of action against the Company and each parent, subsidiary and former affiliate of the Company, and their respective current and former directors, officers, administrators, trustees, employees, agents, and other representatives. Such release must be in form and substance satisfactory to the Board.

assistant: Releases
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: judicial districts, in accordance with the legislative authority to do so granted under Article V, Section 11 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Pa. Const, art. V, § ,11, 2 . Bray v. McKeesport Hous. Auth., 114 A.3d 442, 446 n.5 (Pa. Commw. 2015) (defining a housing authority as a “local agency” for purposes of the Local Agency Law, 2 Pa.C.S. § 752, by reference to the definition Of “Commonwealth government” in the Judicial Code); Frazier v. Phila. Cnty. Office of Prothonotary, 58 A.3d 858, 859-60 (Pa. Commw. 2012) (defining “unified judicial system” in the definition of "judicial agency” under the (continued...) RTKL by reference to the definition in the Judicial Code); Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna Cnty. v. Pa. Office of Open Records, 2 A.3d 810, 813 & n.6 (Pa. Commw. 2010) (<HOLDING>). It is notable that the Commonwealth Court Options: A. holding that the director of the office of domestic relations of a court of common pleas was administrative staff of the court and thus a judicial agency under the rtkl B. recognizing the transition of the administrative hearing process from the division of motor vehicles to the office of administrative hearings C. holding that the director of the office of domestic relations was a judicial agency pursuant to the rtkl because the director was administrative staff of the unified judicial system as defined in the judicial code 42 pacs 102 D. holding that despite the merits of the argument the appellant raised on appeal the issue was not preserved for judicial review because it was not raised before the administrative agency E. holding that a draft of a proposed letter from an area director of a government agency to a municipal administrative agency was properly excluded because it did not represent an agency finding

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the director of the office of domestic relations of a court of common pleas was administrative staff of the court and thus a judicial agency under the rtkl
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth in or modified by the Company Schedule of Exceptions, the representations and warranties made by the Company in Section 3 shall be true and correct in all material respects as of the date of the Closing.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement may not be modified, amended, or supplemented except in a writing executed and delivered by Ascent, Monitronics and the Requisite Consenting Noteholders.

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: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, at the Closing (as defined below), each Seller hereby agrees to sell the number of Shares set forth next to such Seller’s name on Exhibit A, and each Purchaser hereby agrees to purchase such Shares from the Sellers, in the amounts set forth next to each Purchaser’s name on Exhibit B , for an aggregate purchase price of One Hundred and Fifty Thousand U.S. Dollars ($150,000, the “ Gross Purchase Price ”), paid in accordance with Section 1.03 below. This is a private transaction between the Sellers and Purchasers.

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: IV & XIV; Fla. Const, art. 1, § 12. The demand for a speedy trial sounds in the constitutional right to a “speedy and public trial.” U.S. Const, amend. VI & XIV; Fla. Const, art. 1, § 16(a). A person does not ordinarily abandon the right to seek suppression of evidence unlawfully seized merely by demanding a speedy trial. Indeed, the Florida Supreme Court has made clear that a speedy trial demand can be compatible with a pending motion to suppress. State v. Embry, 322 So.2d 515, 518 (Fla.1975) (“[T]he mere filing of a motion to suppress is not tantamount to a finding of law that the speedy trial deman-der does not have a bona fide desire to obtain trial, that he is not prepared and will not be prepared for trial.”); see also Williams v. State, 548 So.2d 898, 899 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (<HOLDING>). Nor are we persuaded by the trial court’s Options: A. holding that aggressiveness with which defendant asserted his speedy trial right was lacking because he merely filed one demand for speedy trial and opposed his original counsels withdrawal B. holding that the trial court erred by granting the defendants motion to dismiss C. holding that trial court erred in considering pro se motion for new trial filed when defendant was represented by counsel D. holding a trial court erred in determining that a motion to suppress was waived by a speedy trial demand E. holding that like most rights speedy trial can be waived

assistant: The best answer is D. holding a trial court erred in determining that a motion to suppress was waived by a speedy trial demand
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall pay to Executive the sum of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($180,000) as an annual salary (the “Base Salary”), payable in accordance with the normal payroll practices of the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: legal hunting. Id. Since the unambiguous text of 50 C.F.R. § 20.23 states that "tak[ing] migratory game birds” is an element of the offense (as opposed to taking species of migratory game birds not open to legal hunting), this Court rejects appellant’s legislative intent argument. To the extent appellant's third ground may relate to a lack of intent to commit the offense charged, such an argument would also be unavailing. The Fifth Circuit has noted that most misdemeanor offenses under the MBTA do not require a mens rea element as they are strict liability offenses. United States v. Morgan, 311 F.3d 611, 614-15 (5th Cir.2002) (distinguishing "baiting” crimes which do require a minimal level of scienter); United States v. Stephans, 142 Fed.Appx. 821 (5th Cir.2005) (unpublished opinion) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, even if appellant's offense were Options: A. recognizing that a violation of the mbta is a strict liability offense B. holding that notice not required because cercla is a strict liability statute C. recognizing the significance of control in strict products liability D. recognizing strict product liability actions E. holding that duress is unavailable to defendants charged with the strict liability offense of child abuse

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that a violation of the mbta is a strict liability offense
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 transactions contemplated hereby (a) do not require any consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, except such as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect or which shall be completed at the appropriate time for such filings under applicable securities laws, (b) will not violate, to Borrower’s knowledge, any applicable law, regulation or order of any Governmental Authority to the extent that such violation could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, (c) will not violate the charter, by-laws, trust certificate or other organizational documents of any Credit Party, any Entity or any of their Affiliates, (d) will not violate or result in a default under any indenture, agreement or other instrument binding upon any Credit Party or its assets, or give rise to a right thereunder to require any payment to be made by any Credit Party or any Entity to the extent that such violation, default or right to require payment could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect and (e) will not result in the creation or imposition of any Lien on any assets of the Credit Parties or Entities, except pursuant to the Security Documents.

assistant: No Conflicts
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 and any disputes or claims arising out of or in connection with its subject matter shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida without regard to the rules of conflict of laws of such state that would cause the laws of another jurisdiction to apply. The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that venue and jurisdiction for any claim, suit or controversy related to or arising out of this Agreement shall lie in the state or federal courts located in Miami-Dade County, Florida. THE PARTIES HEREBY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL OF ANY MATTERS ARISING OUT OF THIS AGREEMENT OR THE CONDUCT OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEM.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Issuer will apply the proceeds of the sale of the Notes and the Royalty Rights to fund the Cash Reserve Account on the Closing Date in the amount of the CE Marking Cash Reserve Amount, to pay fees, costs and expenses arising in connection with the issuance of the Notes and for general corporate purposes.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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 provisions of this Section 5.1 shall survive the Closing (and not be merged into the Ground Lease Assignment Agreement) until both parties agree, in writing, that all obligations of the parties hereunder have been satisfied and fully complied with and shall not be deemed merged into any instrument of conveyance delivered at the Closing.

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: As of the date hereof and throughout the Term (i) neither Borrower, Operating Lessee nor any Guarantor nor any ERISA Affiliate sponsors, or is obligated to contribute to, an “employee benefit plan,” as defined in Section 3(3) of ERISA, that is subject to Title IV of ERISA, Section 303 of ERISA or Section 412 of the Code, (ii) none of the assets of Borrower, Operating Lessee or any Guarantor constitutes or will constitute “plan assets” within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. Section 2510.3-101 as modified in operation by Section 3(42) of ERISA, (iii) neither Borrower, Operating Lessee nor any Guarantor is or will be a “governmental plan” within the meaning of Section 3(32) of ERISA, and (iv) neither Borrower, Operating Lessee nor any Guarantor are subject to state statutes regulating investment of, and fiduciary obligations with respect to, governmental plans. As of the date hereof, neither Borrower, Operating Lessee, nor any ERISA Affiliate maintains, sponsors or contributes to or has any obligations with respect to a “defined benefit plan” (within the meaning of Section 3(35) of ERISA) or a “multiemployer pension plan” (within the meaning of Section 3(37)(A) of ERISA). Neither Borrower nor Operating Lessee has engaged in any transaction in connection with which it could be subject to either a material civil penalty assessed pursuant to the provisions of Section 502 of ERISA or a material tax imposed under the provisions of Section 4975 of the Code.

assistant: Erisa
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 justified at its inception and then (2) whether the action was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances for the stop in the first place. Id. at 24, ¶ 27, 170 P.3d at 273 (citing Terry, 392 U.S. at 19-20, 88 S.Ct. 1868). ¶ 46 The second detention started when Officer Craft grabbed Appellant’s arm and informed him he was being detained. Men-denhall, 446 U.S. at 553, 100 S.Ct. 1870 (A person is “seized” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only when by means of physical force or show of authority his freedom of movement is restrained.). Because Officer Craft and Appellant were engaged in a consensual encounter immediately prior to this point, Appellant was not seized and the Fourth Amendment was not implicated. United States v. Munoz, 590 F.3d 916, 920 (8th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Flores, 474 F.3d 1100, 1103 Options: A. holding officers request for passengers identification during stop constituted lawful consensual encounter B. holding that a traffic stop is valid under the fourth amendment if the stop is based on an observed traffic violation or if the police officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that a traffic or equipment violation has occurred or is occurring C. recognizing that once a completed traffic stop evolves into a consensual encounter there is no seizure and the fourth amendment is not implicated D. holding that the officers mere use of her spotlight and flashlight did not transform the consensual encounter into an investigatory stop E. holding that the return of a defendants drivers license after a traffic stop can convert what was a brief seizure into a consensual encounter even where the officer questions the defendant about criminal activity immediately thereafter

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that once a completed traffic stop evolves into a consensual encounter there is no seizure and the fourth amendment is not implicated
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: rather than the law as it was read to the jury,” even if the party did not object to the jury instructions. Pincay v. Andrews, 238 F.3d 1106, 1109 n. 4 (9th Cir.2001) (citing Air-Sea Forwarders, Inc. v. Air Asia Co., 880 F.2d 176, 181-83 (9th Cir.1989)). III A In order to frame the precise issue before us, we begin by noting several important legal issues about which the parties are in agreement. First, the police concede that even though Fisher was technically taken into custody outside his apartment, he was, for legal purposes, seized inside his home, and, as such, the burden is on the police to show either that they obtained a warrant or that some exception to the warrant requirement excused officers from getting one. See United States v. Al-Azzawy, 784 F.2d 890, 893 (9th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Johnson, 626 F.2d 753, 757 Options: A. holding that a seizure as a violation of the fourth amendment when police surrounded an individuals house for three hours planning an arrest and ordering the individual out of his home under drawn firearms believing he was a suspect in a bank robbery B. holding that defendant was arrested when the police officer took physical custody of him by grabbing his arm and returned him to the hotel for detention there C. holding that the suspect was effectively arrested when police surrounded his trailer with their weapons drawn and ordered him through a bullhorn to leave the trailer and drop to his knees D. holding that long authorizes protective search of vehicle for weapons during terry stop even when suspect is outside vehicle and effectively under police control E. holding that an unconstitutional seizure occurred when police officers discovered that a suspect illegally sold alcohol from his home and ordered him to open the door involuntarily to be arrested inside his home

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the suspect was effectively arrested when police surrounded his trailer with their weapons drawn and ordered him through a bullhorn to leave the trailer and drop to his knees
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: when the jury reached a verdict on one charge. When viewing the totality of the circumstances, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion when instructing the jurors to continue deliberations. Defendant has failed to point to any statement, act, or omission by the trial court which could be interpreted as coercive. Defendant also notes that the jury deliberated nine hours without a mistrial being declared. However, our prior cases indicate that the amount of time that the jury deliberated in the case at bar was not so long as to be coercive in nature. See State v. Jones, 47 N.C. App. 554, 562, 268 S.E.2d 6, 11 (1980) (stating a two-day period is not an “unreasonable” period under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1235); see also State v. Beaver, 322 N.C. 462, 465, 368 S.E.2d 607, 609 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Without any other evidence of coercion or Options: A. holding that there was no coercion by the trial court where the jury deliberated all day friday and all day saturday B. holding that in computing time to determine whether an act was performed within a specified period of time under the statute of limitations the first day is excluded and the last day of the period is included C. holding that a telephone request to the court for a continuance the day before the trial was to start was a nullity D. holding that the trial court properly failed to instruct the jury on voluntary intoxication and manslaughter where there was no evidence that the appellant was intoxicated at the time of the offense although there was evidence that the appellant had been drinking beer on the day of the offense where there was no evidence concerning the quantity of beer he had consumed E. holding that trial court may modify sentence on the same day as the assessment of the initial sentence and before the court adjourns for the day

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that there was no coercion by the trial court where the jury deliberated all day friday and all day saturday
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: United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508, 1518-19 (11th Cir.1984). We hold that the delay attributed to appellant under § 3161(h)(7) was reasonable. The reason for this continuance, i.e., the need for a codefendant to obtain counsel, is precisely the type of delay that is reasonable in a case involving twenty codefendants. See Darby, 744 F.2d at 1519. In addition, we cannot conclude that the length of the continuance, five months, was not necessary to serve the purpose of the continuance. Id. Reasonableness is also measured by the extent to which the defendant's defense is prejudiced. Id. at 1519. We find very little prejudice in the instant case. T of additional pretrial incarceration to be reasonable under § 3161(h)(7)); United States v. Varella, 692 F.2d 1352, 1358 (11th Cir. 1984) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Davis, 679 F.2d 845, 850 Options: A. holding that a five month delay is unreasonable B. holding that a five month delay was unreasonable C. holding a four month delay to be reasonable under 3161h7 D. holding that a 13 month delay was unreasonable E. holding that eight months and ten days of delay was not an unreasonable period of delay to attribute to a codefendant under 3161h7

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a four month delay to be reasonable under 3161h7
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: we do not make any representations , warranties or terms of any kind in respect of this website or its contents ( including , without limitation , any views or comment made ) other than those required by law .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to Council members in violation of Department and City policy, diminishing the level of protection his speech might otherwise enjoy. Belcher’s interest in speaking privately to the Council members must be weighed against the contrary interests of the City and the Department in maintaining harmony among Department employees. “When close working relationships are essential to fulfilling public responsibilities, a wide degree of deference to the employer’s judgment is appropriate.” Koch v. City of Hutchinson, 847 F.2d 1436, 1452 (10th Cir. 1988) (quoting Connick, 461 U.S. at 151—52, 103 S.Ct. 1684). Because such close relationships are necessary in a fire department, there is a “heightened governmental interest in maintaining harmony” among fire department employees. Id. at 1452 n. 22 (<HOLDING>). Firefighters place their lives in each Options: A. holding routine exclusion of members of fire and police departments did not violate the faircrosssection requirement because it is good for the community that these workers not be interrupted in their work B. holding that fire departments are analogous to police departments in this respect C. holding that a police departments refusal to permit police affin ity group to march in parades was not a form of government speech D. holding that an expert established a national standard of care for police officer training by testifying that police departments throughout the country commonly trained officers to deal with mentally distuibed persons and by naming several departments that offered such training E. holding the evidence supported the police officers failure to follow the directives in the montgomery county police departments field operations manual

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that fire departments are analogous to police departments in this respect
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 any exercise of the Option, an amount necessary to pay the exercise price and to satisfy applicable tax withholding requirements, including those arising under federal, state and local income tax laws, will be due and payable at the time of exercise prior to the issuance of any shares of Common Stock pursuant to such exercise. The Grantee may pay the exercise price and satisfy the minimum withholding requirements by one or more of the following methods: (a) in cash, (b) in cash received from a broker-dealer to whom the Grantee has submitted an exercise notice and irrevocable instructions to deliver the purchase price and amount of tax withholding to the Company from the proceeds of the sale of shares of Common Stock subject to the Option, (c) by delivery to the Company of other Common Stock owned by the Grantee that is acceptable to the Company, valued at its fair market value on the date of exercise, (d) by certifying to ownership by attestation of such previously owned Common Stock, or (e) by having shares withheld from the Common Stock otherwise distributable to the Grantee upon exercise of the Option. A Grantee’s election pursuant to the preceding sentence must be made at the time of exercise of such Option and must be irrevocable. Payment shall be made pursuant to the online procedures set forth on the AAR 2013 Stock Benefit Plan online website through Morgan Stanley (www.stockplanconnect.com).

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: Va. 2012). The only remaining provisions in section 77p aré the definitions in subsection (f). Unlike any other provision in section 77p, the definition of “covered class actions” can reasonably be incorporated by reference into the Jurisdiction Provision. Thus, the only logical reading of the amended Jurisdiction Provision is'that state courts retain concurrent jurisdiction over “all suits in equity and -actions at law brought to enforce any liability or duty created by” the Securities Act, except “with respect' to covered class actions,” as defined in 31 (PAC), 2009 WL 4067266, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 24, 2009) (same); Knox v. Agria Corp., 613 F.Supp.2d 419, 426 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (same); Rubin v. Pixelplus Co., No. 06-CV-2964 (ERK), 2007 WL 778485, at *4-5 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2007) (<HOLDING>); with Irra v. Lazard Ltd., No. 05-CV-3388 Options: A. holding that appellate court could not consider objection to testimony when defendant objected at trial on different grounds B. holding this court may affirm on any grounds supported by the record even if different from the district courts grounds C. holding in favor of removability on different grounds D. holding that where the issue is one of arbitrability the federal presumption in favor of arbitration shifts to favor a court determination E. recognizing that a court must balance the policy in favor of hearing a litigants claims on the merits with the policy in favor of finality

assistant: The best answer is C. holding in favor of removability on different grounds
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, demand or request required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed sufficient when delivered personally or by overnight courier or sent by email, or 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 on the signature page, as subsequently modified by written notice, or if no address is specified on the signature page, at the address set forth in the Purchase and Sale Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Form or otherwise acquire any subsidiary or affiliated business, or acquire the assets of or acquire any equity or ownership interest in any Person, unless such subsidiary, affiliate or Person executes and delivers to the Agent: (i) a guaranty of all of the Loan Obligations, in form and substance acceptable to the Agent, in its sole discretion; (ii) security agreements in form substantially similar to the Security Agreement; and (iii) such other documents and amendments to this Agreement and the other Loan Documents as the Agent shall reasonably require.

assistant: Subsidiaries
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: repeated false labor sheets constituted only “a simple repetition of a simple plan” (emphasis omitted)); United States v. Rust, 976 F.2d 55, 57 (1st Cir.1992) (requiring enhanced sentence for repeated acts, even assuming defendant “engaged in no more planning than would be typical for the crime of mail fraud, which, by its very nature, involves planning”); see generally Kim, 23 F.3d at 515 (noting two “guideline paradigms of more than minimal planning — repeated acts and more planning than is typical for the simple form of the crime”). Reviewing the sentencing court’s factual findings for clear error, and giving due deference to its application of the Guidelines to the facts, we find the third prong of the more than minimal planning enhancement satisfied here. See Kim, 23 F.3d at 517 (<HOLDING>). Although the presentence report did not Options: A. holding that district court is entitled to substantial deference in its determination that particular facts of case implicate a departure factor B. holding that where the issue before the court is legal as opposed to factual an appellate court need not give deference to a trial courts decision C. holding that an appellate court must give deference to the trial judges determination of juror competency D. holding that appellate court should afford due deference to district court determination that defendant engaged in more than minimal planning E. holding that more than notice to a defendant is required

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that appellate court should afford due deference to district court determination that defendant engaged in more than minimal planning
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of Executive’s death during the Term, Executive’s estate or designated beneficiaries will receive or commence receiving, as soon as practicable, accrued but unpaid Base Salary through the date of death and any payments under applicable employee benefit plans or programs including those that may have accrued to Executive as a result of subsections 5.a. above and including any vested equity awards.

assistant: 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: except as prohibited by law , you hereby waive , and you agree to waive , any moral rights ( including attribution and integrity ) that you may have in any user content , even if it is altered or changed in a manner not agreeable to you .

assistant: None