flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: arts-related presentations, the City has evidenced an intent to conserve the Plaza’s function as an extension of the performing arts complex. Worth n L.Ed.2d 145 (1999). Thus, it is apparent that the Plaza’s primary function and purpose is to serve as a pleasing forecourt at the center of a prominent performing arts complex, to facilitate patrons’ passage into the events taking place in the arts buildings, and symbolically to promote the cultural arts for the benefit of the community. Although the Plaza’s design clearly invites passers-by to stroll through or linger, the Plaza was not created primarily to operate as a public artery, nor to provide an open forum for all forms of public expression. Cf. First Unitarian Church v. Salt Lake City Corp., 308 F.3d 1114, 1125-27 (10th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Put another way, the Plaza has not Options: A. holding that a courthouse was a nonpublic forum but an unenclosed courthouse plaza was a designated public forum B. holding that a portion of main street sold to church and converted into pedestrian plaza is a traditional public forum because by retaining easement for public passage city intended to encourage pedestrian traffic and to preserve and enhance the downtown pedestrian grid C. holding that a municipal transit vehicle is not a public forum for first amendment purposes because the city is engaged in commerce and the advertising space in question although incidental to the provision of public transportation is part of a commercial venture D. holding that chicagos navy pier is not a traditional public forum E. holding that the fremont street experience a publiclyowned commercial and entertainment pedestrian district in downtown las vegas is a traditional public forum

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a portion of main street sold to church and converted into pedestrian plaza is a traditional public forum because by retaining easement for public passage city intended to encourage pedestrian traffic and to preserve and enhance the downtown pedestrian grid
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: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Article VI, in the event that a Change in Control occurs that is also a “change in control” within the meaning of Section 409A, the Participant’s Account balance shall be distributed to the Participant as soon as administratively possible and in no event later than 14 days following the occurrence of the Change in Control. The value of the Participant’s Account shall be determined as of the date on which the Change in Control occurs.

assistant: Change In Control
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: Bank promptly shall notify Company in writing if it receives written notice of any litigation that, if adversely determined, would have a material and adverse effect on the Program, the Accounts in the aggregate or Bank’s ability to perform its obligations hereunder.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: 7.1.4 pictures , animations or videos ( collectively , `` images '' ) used in your listings must accurately reflect the quality and condition of your host services .

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: THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPLICABLE TO CONTRACTS MADE AND TO BE PERFORMED IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the matter if it finds a ground to vacate the award. This interpretation completely undermines the purpose of affording judicial review of arbitration awards in teacher-tenure cases, and is contrary to authority granting the court the discretion to remand for an arbitration hearing before a different arbitrator. See In re City of Camden, 429 N.J.Super. 309, 337-38, 58 A.3d 1186 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 215 N.J. 485, 73 A.3d 511 (2013) (permitting a remand to a different arbitrator “when deficiencies in the arbitrator’s process call into question the arbitrator’s ability to have an open mind regarding the disposition”); see also Fox v. Morris Cnty. Policemen’s Ass’n, P.B.A. 151, 266 N.J.Super. 501, 520-21, 630 A.2d 318 (App.Div.1993), certif. denied, 137 N.J. 311, 645 A.2d 140 (1994) (<HOLDING>); Manchester Twp. Bd. of Educ., supra, 199 Options: A. holding that while the determination of the scope of an arbitration agreement is for the court the enforcement of pleading requirements before the arbitrator is a procedural matter for the arbitrator B. holding that an arbitrator was not bound by an earlier award involving a different contract and different union C. holding that upon vacating an arbitration award the court has the discretion to remand to the same arbitrator or different arbitrator D. holding that the trial court not the arbitrator must decide a challenge to an arbitration provision based on public policy E. holding that because the parties agreed to arbitrate and both placed the issue before the arbitrator the issue of consolidation was for the arbitrator

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that upon vacating an arbitration award the court has the discretion to remand to the same arbitrator or different arbitrator
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 vesting of any Stock Units or any distribution of shares of Common Stock in respect of the Stock Units, the Participant or other person entitled to receive such distribution may irrevocably elect, in such manner and at such time or times prior to any applicable tax date as may be permitted or required under Section 8.5 of the Plan and rules established by the Administrator, to have the Corporation reduce the number of shares to be delivered by (or otherwise reacquire) the appropriate number of whole shares, valued at their then fair market value to satisfy any withholding obligations of the Corporation or its Subsidiaries with respect to such distribution of shares at the minimum applicable withholding rates; provided, however, that in the event that the Corporation cannot legally satisfy such withholding obligations by such reduction of shares , or in the event of a cash payment or any other withholding event in respect of the Stock Units, the Corporation (or a Subsidiary) shall be entitled to require a cash payment by or on behalf of the Participant and/or to deduct from other compensation payable to the Participant any sums required by federal, state or local tax law to be withheld with respect to such distribution or payment.

assistant: Tax 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: Holland conversational questions, to which Holland did not respond, such as whether they could speak with him, how he was doing, where he had been, when he got back to town, and whether he lived in the area. The only question that indicated the officers suspected Holland of criminal activity was whether he was carrying any firearms. However, there was nothing in the record demonstrating that the officers’ questions or tone of voice indicated that Holland had to stop and respond to the officers. While Detective Bridges testified that he talked “somewhat loud[ly],” he also testified that he did so “[i]n order to be heard” and that, at the time, he was thirty feet away from Holland, who continued walking away from the officers. Cf. United States v. Wilson, 953 F.2d 116, 123 (4th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Turning to the remaining Mendenhall factors, Options: A. holding that no seizure occurred where officer approached the suspect at the bus stop mentioned that he was investigating a bank robbery asked the suspect what he was doing in the area and for his identification and otherwise gave no indication that the suspect was not free to leave or to refuse to respond to questioning B. holding that an officer engaged in the functional equivalent of interrogation when he asked a suspect to identify clothing found at a crime scene after the suspect was in custody and had invoked his right to silence regardless of the officers intentions C. holding that there was no clearly established law when suspect refused to allow officers to handcuff him and when suspect died after prolonged taser usage because precedent had not staked out a bright line D. holding that seizure occurred when officers prolonged and persistent questioning after the suspect had conveyed an unequivocal unwillingness to engage in further conversation with the officer E. holding no seizure occurred when after defendant began to walk away officer directed him to stop

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that seizure occurred when officers prolonged and persistent questioning after the suspect had conveyed an unequivocal unwillingness to engage in further conversation with the officer
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive agrees that Executive shall not disparage, criticize or defame the Company, its affiliates and their respective affiliates, directors, officers, agents, partners, stockholders or employees. The Company agrees that it shall not, and it shall instruct its officers and members of its Board to not, disparage, criticize or defame Executive. Nothing in this Section 11(b) shall have application to any evidence or testimony required by any court, arbitrator or government agency.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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 SIDE LETTER SHALL BE CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, AND THE OBLIGATIONS, RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OF THE PARTIES HEREUNDER SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH LAWS.

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: Consultant acknowledges that the restrictions contained in this Section IV , in view of the nature of the Company’s business, are reasonable and necessary to protect the Company’s legitimate business interests, goodwill and reputation, and that any violation of these restrictions would result in irreparable injury and continuing damage to the Company, and that money damages would not be a sufficient remedy to the Company for any such breach or threatened breach. Therefore, Consultant agrees that the Company shall be entitled to a temporary restraining order and injunctive relief restraining Consultant from the commission of any breach or threatened breach of Section IV , without the necessity of establishing irreparable harm or the posting of a bond, and to recover from Consultant damages incurred by the Company as a result of the breach, as well as the Company’s attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses related to any breach or threatened breach of this Consulting Agreement and enforcement of this Consulting Agreement. Nothing contained in this Consulting Agreement shall be construed as prohibiting the Company from pursuing any other remedies available to it for any breach or threatened breach, including, without limitation, the recovery of money damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs. The existence of any claim or cause of action by Consultant against the Company, whether predicated on this Consulting Agreement or otherwise, shall not constitute a defense to the enforcement by the Company of the restrictions contained in Section IV or preclude injunctive relief.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: dispute, even though the CPT codes were referenced in the responses, to him. Helton, 709 F.3d at 352. He submitted no additional information to support this claim and made no claim or case that Michelin should cast aside the CPT codebook and classify the musculo-skeletal steroid knee injections as an “office visit” or routine non-surgical injection, rather than as an “office surgery” procedure. There is likewise nothing in the administrative record that would have placed Michelin on notice that it needed to solicit more medical records or medical opinions after it confirmed that the codes submitted were correct, or that would have otherwise placed a burden upon it -to question the provider’s coding decision. Cf. Harrison v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 773 F.3d 15, 20 (4th Cir. 2014) (<HOLDING>). In sum, Michelin relied upon the industry Options: A. holding that the plan administrator failed to meet its plan obligations when it chose to remain willfully blind to readily available medical information where the plan beneficiary had placed them on notice of the existence of such information B. holding that a payment is under the plan when the debt is provided for in the plan C. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant D. holding that plan language giving plan administrator power to determine which employees are eligible to participate in the plan and providing all parties dealing with the plan an interpretation of plan provisions on request indicates deferential standard of review of trustee eligibility decisions E. holding that because no plan document granted discretion to the plan administrator and because the fiduciaries had not expressly delegated their discretionary authority to the plan administrator the district court properly employed the de novo standard of review

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the plan administrator failed to meet its plan obligations when it chose to remain willfully blind to readily available medical information where the plan beneficiary had placed them on notice of the existence of such information
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at 43. Because Layne elected, in the counterclaim, to sue the Underwriters — not the Names — and because Tennessee law dictated that “[a] party who deals with such an agent may sue either the principal or the agent, but not both,” the Underwriters, and not the Names, were found to be the real parties in interest to the suit. Id. (quoting Holt v. American Progressive Life Ins. Co., 731 S.W.2d 923, 925 (Tenn.Ct.App.1987)). Since the parties here have stipulated that it is not the Und at Lloyd’s London, 1991 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 12937 (N.D.Ill.1991) (examining the proper manner of determining Lloyd’s syndicates and holding that citizenship of a Lloyd’s syndicate is that of all of the participating Names); Queen Victoria Corp. v. Insurance Specialists of Hawaii, 711 F.Supp. 553 (D.Haw. 1989) (<HOLDING>). While, as the parties stipulate, Lloyd’s of Options: A. holding that the constitutional level of punitive damages is not a finding of fact that must be determined by the jury it may be determined de novo by the court B. holding that citizenship of active underwriters and names with lloyds london had to be considered for purposes of diversity jurisdiction C. holding that for diversity purposes the citizenship of a llc is determined by the citizenship of all of its members D. holding that the citizenship of lloyds is determined by that of all names E. holding that a limited liability companys citizenship is that of its members

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the citizenship of lloyds is determined by that of all names
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: ed.1997). Creditors are protected by the requirement that the plan provide them at least as much value (discounted to present value) as they would receive under a chapter 7 liquidation of the debtor’s estate. See § 1325(a)(4); Solomon v. Cosby (In re Solomon), 67 F.3d 1128, 1132 (4th Cir.1995). The sale of a capital asset does not create “disposable income” pursuant to § 1325. Disposable income under § 1325 is postpetition income received by the debtor that is not reasonably necessary for the maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependant of the debtor. See § 1325(b)(2). A debtor’s prepetition homestead is a capital asset, not postpetition income. So it remains under a chapter 13 plan. Therefore, the debtors in this case cannot be compelled to modify then-plan to treat the o.1997) (<HOLDING>); Gaertner v. Claude (In re Claude), 206 B.R. Options: A. holding that a chapter 13 debtor should be able to obtain a copy of his transcript in light of the broader discharge provision of chapter 13 B. holding that the statement of current monthly income was the presumptive amount of projected disposable income but presumption could be rebutted by the debt or upon a showing of substantial change of circumstances C. holding that thrift savings plan monthly payroll deductions could be included as part of a hypothetical chapter 13 disposable income calculation in determining whether a chapter 7 case could be dismissed as a substantial abuse D. holding tort action accruing after original chapter 7 petition not part of estate when case converted to chapter 13 and then back to chapter 7 E. holding that child support arrearages may not be included in a chapter 13 plan

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that thrift savings plan monthly payroll deductions could be included as part of a hypothetical chapter 13 disposable income calculation in determining whether a chapter 7 case could be dismissed as a substantial abuse
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: 33 . Dissent at 1052. 34 . See Julsen, 741 P.2d at 649 n. 10. 35 . Id. 36 . See Dissent at 1052. 37 . Dissent at 1053. 38 . Borchgrevink, 941 P.2d at 138; see also Julsen, 741 P.2d at 649 n. 10. 39 . Borchgrevink, 941 P.2d at 137; see also Duffus, 932 P.2d at 779. 40 . Park, 986 P.2d at 210. 41 . Gratrix v. Gratrix, 652 P.2d 76, 82-83 (Alaska 1982). 42 . The fact that Joseph later reimbursed Kathey for the November house payment does not contradict the court's finding. 43 . See Davila v. Davila, 876 P.2d 1089, 1092 (Alaska 1994) (quoting Parker v. Northern Mixing Co., 756 P.2d 881, 892 (Alaska 1988)) ("[I]t is the function of the trial court, not of this court, to judge witnesses’ credibility and to weigh conflicting evidence.”). 44 .See Long v. Long, 816 P.2d 145, 157 (Alaska 1991) (<HOLDING>). 45 . See Burcell v. Burcell, 713 P.2d 802, Options: A. holding that psychological parent was not entitled to custody or visitation B. recognizing right of fit parent to prevent visitation by grandparents which right can only be overridden by court based on evidence that the prevention of the visitation would harm the child C. holding visitation statute unconstitutional because it disregards presumption favoring parental decisionmaking forcing parents to prove visitation not in childs best interest D. holding that uncertainty regarding amount of visitation ordered is fatal to the validity of a trial courts visitation award E. holding conclusory statements in visitation dispute were not adequate to support awarding visitation rights

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that uncertainty regarding amount of visitation ordered is fatal to the validity of a trial courts visitation award
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: with respect to Direct and October. Ms. Goren alleges that Direct and October knew that there was “no basis” for certain statements on Dr. Wallach’s tape (“Dead Doctors Don’t Lie”), R.21 ¶ 32, that unspecified misrepresentations regarding New Vision products appear in “free literature published and/or distributed” by Direct, R.21 ¶ 63, and that Direct and October “conducted or participated in the conduct of the affairs of the enterprise [New Vision]” through a pattern of racketeering activity. R.21 ¶¶ 110 & 118. These conclusory allegations fail to specify the time, place and content of any of the misrepresentations attributed to these defendants and therefore fall short of the particularity demanded by Rule 9(b). See Robin v. Arthur Young & Co., 915 F.2d 1120, 1127 (7th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 923, 111 S.Ct. 1317 Options: A. holding that rule 9bs heightened pleading requirement applies to allegations of mail and wire fraud used as predicate acts for a rico claim B. holding that the plaintiffs failed to meet rule 9bs particularity requirement where they did not present any evidence at an individualized transactional level C. holding that allegations against nondiverse defendants must be factual not conclusory because conclusory allegations do not state a claim D. holding that the concerns that require fraud to be pleaded with particularity are even more urgent in a civil rico action E. holding that plaintiffs must provide more than conclusory allegations to satisfy rule 9bs requirement that circumstances of fraud be pleaded with particularity

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that plaintiffs must provide more than conclusory allegations to satisfy rule 9bs requirement that circumstances of fraud be pleaded with particularity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: notwithstanding the foregoing , you acknowledge and agree that no user video will be considered to be a separate copyrightable work and all rights in each user video will remain with the owners of the content used to create such user video .

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: Notices and all other communications contemplated by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when personally delivered or when mailed by U.S. registered or certified mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid. In the case of the Employee, mailed notices shall be addressed to him or her at the home address that the Employee most recently communicated to the Company in writing. In the case of the Company, mailed notices shall be addressed to 12930 IH 10 West, San Antonio, Texas 78249, and all notices shall be directed to the attention the General Counsel.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you and academia.edu agree that any dispute , claim or controversy arising out of or relating to these terms or the breach , termination , enforcement , interpretation or validity thereof or the use of the site or services ( collectively , `` disputes '' ) will be settled by binding arbitration , except that each party retains the right : ( i ) to bring an individual action in small claims court and ( ii ) to seek injunctive or other equitable relief in a court of competent jurisdiction to prevent the actual or threatened infringement , misappropriation or violation of a party 's copyrights , trademarks , trade secrets , patents or other intellectual property rights ( the action described in the foregoing clause ( ii ) , an `` ip protection action '' ) .

assistant: Arbitration
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 Court noted that neither § 841(b)(1) nor the Sentencing Guide lines defined the words “mixture” or “substance.” Id. at 461-62, 111 S.Ct. at 1925-26. The Court therefore applied the ordinary dictionary meaning of the terms and concluded that the combination of the pure LSD and blotter paper is a “mixture” within the meaning of the statute. Id. at 462, 111 S.Ct. at 1925. Amendment 488 does not contradict Chapman because the Sentencing Commission has the authority to review the work of the courts and revise the Guidelines by adopting an interpretation of a particular guideline in conflict with prior judicial constructions of that guideline. See Stinson, — U.S. at —, 113 S.Ct. at 1919; see also Braxton v. United States, 500 U.S. 344, 348, 111 S.Ct. 1854, 1857, 114 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991) (<HOLDING>). At the time of the Chapman holding, the Options: A. holding that the mere mandatory application of the guidelines the district courts belief that it was required to impose a guidelines sentence constitutes error B. holding the state must prove that at the time of the homicide the defendant was engaged in the commission of the felony C. recognizing that congress has the power to completely divest the courts of their sentencing discretion and that congress granted broad authority to the sentencing commission guided by specific goals and principles D. holding that congress necessarily contemplated that the commission would review the work of the courts and revise the guidelines E. holding that under the fsia congress contemplated waivers of a specific and explicit nature

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that congress necessarily contemplated that the commission would review the work of the courts and revise the guidelines
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Employee shall become physically or mentally disabled so that the Employee is unable substantially to perform her services hereunder for (1) a period of 120 consecutive days, or (2) for shorter periods aggregating to 180 days during any twelve-month period, the Company may terminate the Employee’s employment hereunder upon written notice given by the Company to the Employee.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower shall indemnify Lender and its Affiliates, directors, officers, employees, agents and advisors (each such Person being called an “ Indemnitee ”) against, and hold each Indemnitee harmless from, any and all losses, claims, damages, liabilities and related expenses (including the fees, charges and disbursements of any counsel for any Indemnitee, incurred by any Indemnitee or asserted against any Indemnitee by any third party or by Borrower or any Subsidiary arising out of, in connection with, or as a result of (i) the execution or delivery of this Agreement, any other Loan Document or any agreement or instrument contemplated hereby or thereby, the performance by the parties hereto of their respective obligations hereunder or thereunder, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby or thereby, or the administration of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents, (ii) the Loan or the use or proposed use of the proceeds therefrom, (iii) any actual or alleged presence or release of Hazardous Materials on or from any property owned or operated by Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries, or any Environmental Liability related in any way to Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries, or (iv) any actual or prospective claim, litigation, investigation or proceeding relating to any of the foregoing, whether based on contract, tort or any other theory, whether brought by a third party or by Borrower or any Subsidiary, and regardless of whether any Indemnitee is a party thereto; provided that such indemnity shall not, as to any Indemnitee, be available to the extent that such losses, claims, damages, liabilities or related expenses (A) are determined by a court of competent jurisdiction by final and non-appealable judgment to have resulted from the gross negligence, bad faith or willful misconduct of such Indemnitee or (B) result from a claim brought by Borrower or any Subsidiary against an Indemnitee for breach in bad faith of such Indemnitee’s obligations hereunder or under any other Loan Document, if Borrower or any Subsidiary has obtained a final and non-appealable judgment in its favor on such claim as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.

assistant: Indemnity
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: above a lawfully established level. As such, the ability of the plaintiffs to issue refunds substantially diminishes the harm that may befall their subscribers if an injunction is granted, and is outweighed by the harm that may befall the plaintiffs. Finally, we must determine whether the issuance of an injunction will serve the public interest. The plaintiffs have made a showing that there is a substantial likelihood that MTA §§ 701 and 310(7), respectively, are unconstitutional insofar as each statute fails to provide adequate safeguards against confiscatory rates. As such, the public interest would be served by the enjoinment of each of the challenged sections of the MTA. See Planned Parenthood Association of Cincinnati, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati, 822 F.2d 1390, 1400 (6th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). In summary, the plaintiffs have presented a Options: A. recognizing that public utilities affect the public interest in that they render essential public services to a large number of the general public B. holding unconstitutional the enforcement provisions of the brady handgun violence prevention act requiring local chief law enforcement officers to perform background checks on gun purchasers C. recognizing an administrative necessity exception to the general rule that state courts are the proper forum for determining whether there is a public highway under rs 2477 and the respective rights of interested parties D. holding that the state attorney generals duty to support the constitutionality of challenged state statutes and his duty to defend actions in which the state is interested do not constitute enforcement of the statute in question E. recognizing that the public is certainly interested in the prevention of enforcement of ordinances which may be unconstitutional

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that the public is certainly interested in the prevention of enforcement of ordinances which may be unconstitutional
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 and all amounts payable and benefits or additional rights provided pursuant to this Agreement beyond the Accrued Amounts shall only be payable if y ou deliver to Silvercrest an original, signed release of claims relating to your employment by Silvercrest or the termination of such employment occurring up to the release date, in a form substantially the same as Silvercrest uses for senior executive officers (the “ Release ”). Silvercrest shall deliver the Release to y ou within ten (10) calendar days of y ou r Termination Date and y ou must deliver to Silvercrest an executed and enforceable Release , and the period for you to revoke the Release must have expired without your having revoked it, no later than sixty (60) calendar days after your Termination Date (the “ Release Deadline ”). Payment of the amounts described in Section 5 shall commence no earlier than the date on which yo u deliver to Silvercrest and do not revoke an executed and enforceable release as described herein. Payment of any severance or benefits that are not exempt from Code Section 409A shall be delayed until the Release Deadline, irrespective of when you execute the Release; provided, however, that where your Termination Date and the Release Deadline occur within the same calendar year, the payment may be made up to thirty (30) calendar days prior to the Release Deadline, and provided further that where your Termination Date and the Release Deadline occur in two separate calendar years, payment may not be made before the later of January 1 of the second year or the date that is thirty (30) calendar days prior to the Release Deadline. As part of the Release, you shall affirm that you (i) have advised Silvercrest , in writing, of any facts of which you are aware that constitute or might constitute a violation of any ethical, legal, or contractual standards or obligations of Silvercrest or any a ffiliate, and (ii) are not aware of any existing or threatened claims, charges, or lawsuits that y ou ha ve not disclosed to Silvercrest. The Release shall not require you to release your claim to payments pursuant to Section 5, your right to indemnification and continued liability insurance coverage as described in Section 10, or your rights as a shareholder of Silvercrest Asset Management Group Inc. or as a limited partner of Silvercrest L.P. , and shall not impose any restrictive covenants upon your activities after termination in excess of those set forth in this Agreement.

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: Complaints in this ease meet either standard. According to Plaintiffs, Brad Fain, who was one of FSG’s four members, received the 2001 and 2005 Reports and reviewed the content therein. He also allegedly participated in the decision to cancel the final feasibility study and knew of the S & Y’s withdrawal from the project. Likewise, given the Fain Group’s prominent role in obtaining the Event Center’s financing and the Fain Group’s decision to commission the 2005 Report before cancel-ling a final analysis, it seems “hard to believe” that senior officials, who allegedly managed the day-to-day operations of this relatively small, family-owned company, were unaware of the alleged misrepresentations. See id. (citing Berson v. Applied Signal Tech., Inc., 527 F.3d 982, 989 (9th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>)). Given these allegations, which are plausible Options: A. holding that a sherman act 1 claim requires a complaint with enough factual matter taken as time to suggest that an agreement was made B. holding that a literal interpretation should not be adhered to when it would lead to absurd results C. holding that a statute cannot be construed in a manner that would lead to an absurd or unreasonable result D. holding that contracts should be interpreted to avoid absurd results E. holding that the subjectmatter of the alleged omissions was prominent enough that it would be absurd to suggest that top management was unaware of them

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the subjectmatter of the alleged omissions was prominent enough that it would be absurd to suggest that top management was unaware of them
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: in its footnote 6, only unpublished cases of no prece-dential value (and one published case) from other jurisdictions. These cases present neither binding nor persuasive authority and are also inapplicable in that they reference different factual scenarios. Likewise, the mostly unpublished cases from other jurisdictions cited in the majority's footnote 16 as failing to find that online defamatory statements were directed at the forum state are neither binding nor persuasive authority, present different fact patterns, and are inapplicable. 3 . Wilkerson did not argue that exercise of personal jurisdiction would not be fair and just; therefore, it is not necessary to address this issue. See Glattly v. CMS Viron Corp., 177 S.W.3d 438, 450 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); see also Guardian Royal Exch. Assurance Ltd. Options: A. holding that appellant bears burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence B. holding that defendant bears burden of presenting compelling case that exercising jurisdiction over it would not be fair and just C. holding that the defendant bears the burden under plainerror review D. holding that a party seeking to seal a judicial record bears the burden of overcoming the compelling reasons standard E. holding that the defendant bears the burden of demonstrating that the action should be transferred

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendant bears burden of presenting compelling case that exercising jurisdiction over it would not be fair and just
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: Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-04, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973); Texas Dep’t of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 252-53, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981). Once this prima facie case has been established, there is a presumption of discrimination, and the burden shifts to the defendant to articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the challenged employment action. McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802-04, 93 S.Ct. 1817. If such a showing is made, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to demonstrate that the articulated reason was merely a pretext for intentional discrimination. Id. The third step of the McDonnell Douglas test has been altered by the Supreme Court’s decision in Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90, 123 S.Ct. 2148, 156 L.Ed.2d 84 (2003) (<HOLDING>). In light of Desert Palace, the Fifth Circuit Options: A. holding that in title vii cases the mixedmotives theory of discrimination is available in cases with circumstantial evidence of discrimination B. holding that such circumstantial evidence may be used to prove discrimination C. holding that mcdonnell douglas framework which is used in title vii cases applies to ada cases when only circumstantial evidence of discrimination is offered D. holding that direct evidence of discrimination is not required to prove discrimination in mixed motive cases under title vii E. holding that a claim for discrimination in private employment is not preempted by title vii

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that in title vii cases the mixedmotives theory of discrimination is available in cases with circumstantial evidence of discrimination
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: addressed only Dr. Keszler’s conduct and did not mention SADI or implicate its behavior. Id. at 671. The supreme court rejected this argument, holding that “[w]hen a party’s alleged health care liability is purely vicarious, a report that adequately implicates the actions of that party’s agents or employees is sufficient.” Id. at 671-72. Although Gardner involved a corporation rather than a professional association, we conclude that its reasoning is equally applicable here. Therefore, we reject OGA’s assertion, at least concerning “purely vicarious” liability claims, that Dr. Brewer’s expert reports concerning Drs. Jacobs and Gunn did not sufficiently implicate OGA. See id.; Ctr. for Neurological Disorders, P.A. v. George, 261 S.W.3d 285, 295 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2008, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>). Here, OGA did not object to Dr. Brewer’s Options: A. holding that no expert reports specifically addressing conduct of professional corporation and professional association were required when plaintiffs alleged only vicarious liability based on medical negligence of entities physicians explaining that the entities conduct is not measured by a medical standard of care but rather their liability was solely vicarious B. holding that a professional owes no duty to third persons unless the professional had actual knowledge that those persons would rely on his rendering of professional services C. holding that expert report that sufficiently addressed certain claims against doctor employed by professional association was sufficient as to claims against professional association based on doctors negligence because the doctors negligence is imputed to the association under the professional association act D. holding a condominium association had no duty to a woman who had committed suicide after the association removed the womans dog because while the association knew the dog was essential to the womans will to live the association had no authority to prevent the womans suicide E. recognizing contributory negligence as a defense to professional malpractice claims

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that expert report that sufficiently addressed certain claims against doctor employed by professional association was sufficient as to claims against professional association based on doctors negligence because the doctors negligence is imputed to the association under the professional association 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the six counts in its complaint at the latest, before the fee arbitration award was confirmed. 3 . As we noted in the earlier appeal of this case, "[a] cause of action for attorney malpractice does not mature until 'the client discovers or reasonably should have discovered the existence of all of the elements of his cause of action.’ ” Andrews v. Wade & De Young, Inc., P.C., 875 P.2d 89, 91 (Alaska 1994) (citing Wettanen v. Cowper, 749 P.2d 362, 364 (Alaska 1988)). Hub City maintains that it learned of the facts which form the basis of its malpractice claims during the course of the attorney's fee recovery litigation— after it served its answer in that case. 4 . State court precedent is to the same effect. See, e.g., Skillman v. First State Bank of Altoona, 341 So.2d 691 (Ala.1977) (<HOLDING>); O’Brien v. Scottsdale Discount Corp., 14 Options: A. recognizing cause of action for wrongful death B. recognizing cause of action for wrongful discharge C. holding that wrongful garnishment claim was not barred as a compulsory counterclaim to an earlier action by bank to collect on a note because the wrongful garnishment arose after the time for skillman to answer in the earlier action D. holding that a failure to include a beneficiary in a wrongful death action is a defect because the wrongful death act restricts plaintiffs to a single action E. holding that res judicata is not applicable to a claim for relief that was unavailable in the earlier action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that wrongful garnishment claim was not barred as a compulsory counterclaim to an earlier action by bank to collect on a note because the wrongful garnishment arose after the time for skillman to answer in the earlier 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: that the error was plain, and (3) that the plain error affected his substantial rights.” United States v. Dazey, 403 F.3d 1147, 1174 (10th Cir.2005). “If all these conditions are met, a court reviewing the error may exercise discretion to correct it if the error seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id. ‘We conduct this analysis ‘less rigidly when reviewing a potential constitutional error.’ ” Id. (citing United States v. James, 257 F.3d 1173, 1182 (10th Cir.2001)). “It is well-established that a prosecutor may use a defendant’s pre-arrest silence to impeach the defendant’s credibility.” United States v. Chimal, 976 F.2d 608, 611 (10th Cir.1992) (citing Jenkins v. Anderson, 447 U.S. 231, 238, 240, 100 S.Ct. 2124, 65 L.Ed.2d 86 (1980) (<HOLDING>)). In the present case, the prosecutor Options: A. holding that substantive use of prearrest silence is contrary to fifth amendment B. holding references to a defendants lack of remorse violate the fifth eighth and fourteenth amendments C. holding that impeachment by use of prearrest silence does not violate fifth or fourteenth amendments D. holding that the government can use prearrest silence for impeachment purposes against a defendant because no government action induced the silence E. holding that state constitution prohibits substantive use of prearrest silence

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that impeachment by use of prearrest silence does not violate fifth or fourteenth 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: In consideration of Executive’s performance of the responsibilities and duties set forth in this Agreement, the Bank will provide Executive the compensation specified in this Agreement. The Bank will pay Executive a salary of $123,000 per year (“ Base Salary ”). Base Salary will be payable in accordance with the customary payroll practices of the Bank. During the term of this Agreement, Executive’s Base Salary shall increase by a minimum of three percent (3%) per year. Any change in Base Salary will become the new “Base Salary” for purposes of this Agreement.

assistant: Base Salary