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: failure to promote, denial of transfer, or refusal to hire,” a plaintiff may only recover for acts of discrimination that occur within the statutory time period). Thus, because Plaintiff did not file her EEOC complaint until September 21, 2007, only Plaintiffs claims that U.S. Airways impermissibly denied her positions arising after November 26, 2006 are timely under the ADA. Although U.S. Airways correctly points out that Plaintiffs amended complaint does not identify those positions that she was denied between November 26, 2006 and the “end of 2006,” when Plaintiff was no longer considered employed by U.S. Airways, such facts may be adequately determined in the normal course of discovery and are not required in an initial pleading. See Twombly, 550 U.S. at 559, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (<HOLDING>) With respect to employment discrimination Options: A. holding that a complaint must contain only enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face B. holding that a plaintiffs complaint need only establish a plausible entitlement to relief C. holding that a complaint must plead enough facts to raise a right to relief above the speculative level and state a plausible claim D. holding that the defendants failed to establish an entitlement to dismissal of the plaintiffs complaint when the alleged fraud was immaterial to any issue that would ultimately be presented to the fact finder E. holding that a complaint must contain enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a plaintiffs complaint need only establish a plausible entitlement to relief
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 the obligations of the Stockholders pursuant to this Agreement shall terminate upon the earlier to occur of (a) the date the Merger Agreement shall have been validly terminated pursuant to its terms, (b) the date of any amendment, modification, change or waiver to any provision of the Merger Agreement that reduces the amount or changes the form of the Merger Consideration (subject to adjustment in accordance with the terms of the Merger Agreement), (c) the Effective Time, and (d) the date on which the Brushy Board, pursuant to Section 5.3(c) of the Merger Agreement, effects a Brushy Adverse Recommendation Change (such earlier date, the “ Expiration Date ”).

assistant: Terminations
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 the majority opinion with one exception. I dissent from the majority’s harmless error analysis of the administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) adverse credibility finding with respect to Carmickle. Maj. Op. at 1159-67. A. The Majority Applies an Incorrect Harmless Error Test. An ALJ’s error is harmless if, in light of the record-supported reasons supporting the adverse credibility finding, we can conclude that the ALJ’s error did not “affect! ] the ALJ’s conclusion.” Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1197 (9th Cir.2004); see also Stout v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050, 1054-55 (9th Cir.2006) (describing the harmless error test as whether “the ALJ’s error did not materially impact his decision”); Robbins v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 466 F.3d 880, 885 (9th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). The majority disagrees. Instead, the majority Options: A. recognizing that procedural sentencing error is harmless if the resulting sentence is not longer thanthat to which the defendant would otherwise be subject alterations and internal quotation marks omitted B. holding that apprendi error is harmless if the court finds beyond a reasonable doubt that the result would have been the same absent the error internal quotation marks and citation omitted C. holding that an error is harmless if it was inconsequential to the ultimate nondisability determination internal quotation marks omitted D. holding that compliance with rule 3 is both a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite to appeal internal quotation marks omitted E. holding that the petitioner may not turn a clerical error into a windfall of rights it would not otherwise enjoy internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an error is harmless if it was inconsequential to the ultimate nondisability determination internal quotation marks omitted
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 of the Company and each Material Subsidiary has good title to, or a valid leasehold interest in all its real and personal property material to its business except for minor defects in title that could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, and none of such property is subject to any Lien not permitted by Section 7.6.

assistant: Liens
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: 535 S.E.2d 126, 127 (2000) (finding the fingerprint evidence was insufficient to prove the defendant’s guilt because testimony was presented the defendant had been in and around the victim’s house at least three times before the burglary)). The court noted “the State’s fingerprint expert testified she could not determine when the print was placed on the vehicle and that such a print could remain on a vehicle for an indefinite period if left undisturbed.” Id. The court found, “Because the State offered no timing evidence to contradict reasonable explanations for the presence of the fingerprint, the jury could only have guessed the fingerprint was made at the time of the crimes.” Id. at 401-02, 764 S.E.2d at 711 (citing State v. Buckmon, 347 S.C. 316, 322-23, 555 S.E.2d 402, 405 (2001) (<HOLDING>)). In Bostick, 392 S.C. at 137-38, 708 S.E.2d Options: A. holding the trial court properly denied defendants motion for judgment of acquittal although defendant offered evidence as to how his fingerprints were placed on a candy box found at the scene of the crime B. holding that the defendant was guilty of leaving the scene because the injured party and a police officer were present at the scene within a reasonable time after the accident C. holding denial of jury trial was harmless because evidence was insufficient to create issue of fact for submission to jury and insurer would have been entitled to directed verdict D. holding a defendant was entitled to a directed verdict when none of the evidence presented by the state placed the defendant at the crime scene and the jury was left to speculate as to the defendants guilt E. holding that some evidence was presented to support the jurys verdict that defendant breached contract and therefore trial court did not err in denying defendants motion for directed verdict or jnov

assistant: The best answer is D. holding a defendant was entitled to a directed verdict when none of the evidence presented by the state placed the defendant at the crime scene and the jury was left to speculate as to the defendants guilt
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 order to comply with all applicable federal or state income tax laws or regulations, the Company may take such action as it deems appropriate to ensure that all applicable federal or state payroll, withholding, income or other taxes, which are the sole and absolute responsibility of a Participant are withheld or collected from such Participant. In order to assist a Participant in paying all or a portion of the federal and state taxes to be withheld or collected upon exercise or receipt of (or the lapse of restrictions relating to) an Award, the Committee, in its discretion and subject to such additional terms and conditions as it may adopt, may permit the Participant to satisfy such tax obligation by (i) electing to have the Company withhold a portion of the Shares otherwise to be delivered upon exercise or receipt of (or the lapse of restrictions relating to) such Award with a Fair Market Value equal to the amount of such taxes or (ii) electing to deliver to the Company Shares other than Shares issuable upon exercise or receipt of (or the lapse of restrictions relating to) such Award with a Fair Market Value equal to the amount of such taxes. The election, if any, must be made on or before the date that the amount of tax to be withheld is determined.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Parties hereby agrees to take such further actions and to execute, acknowledge and deliver all such further documents as are reasonably requested by the other Party, or which are reasonably necessary to successfully consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: pockets. After Vasquez gave appellant twenty dollars, appellant searched his pockets and took his wallet. When appellant found only “fake Mexican” money, Levy struck Vasquez again and shot him in the head. Appellant then left the scene with Levy and gave Vasquez’s wallet to Levy. Based on this evidence that appellant and his companions coordinated their movements throughout the offense, as well as appellant’s remark about what one of his companions “was supposed to do,” a rational jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt a prior or contemporaneous plan to commit this robbery in which appellant pai'ticipated. There was no evidence that appellant ever argued with or refused to follow Levy’s directions. See Thompson v. State, 54 S.W.3d 88, 95 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2001, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>). Although appellant said he was afraid of Options: A. holding criminal conspiracy is sustained where the commonwealth establishes the defendant entered into an agreement to commit or aid in an unlawful act with another person with a shared criminal intent and an overt act was done in furtherance of the conspiracy a coconspirator may commit the overt act and conspirators are liable for acts of the coconspirators committed in furtherance of the conspiracy B. holding that evidence tending to show knowing participation in the conspiracy is sufficient to sustain conspiracy conviction C. holding that a joint conspiracy trial was proper based on the lack of complexity of the conspiracy the number of defendants and an appropriate jury instruction D. holding evidence of conspiracy sufficient and noting lack of evidence that any member of the group did anything but cooperate with the terms of the plan to commit robbery E. holding the fedrevid 801d2e requires proof of the conspiracy by a preponderance of the evidence and allows consideration of the offered declaration as part of the proof of the conspiracy

assistant: The best answer is D. holding evidence of conspiracy sufficient and noting lack of evidence that any member of the group did anything but cooperate with the terms of the plan to commit robbery
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: F.2d 1359, 1365 n. 10 (7th Cir.1985) (noting that “[i]t could be argued that the Court’s decision in Great American Fed. Savings & Loan Assn. v. Novotny, 442 U.S. 366 ... [99 S.Ct. 2345, 60 L.Ed.2d 957] (1979), implicitly recognized that § 1985(3) could reach a conspiracy founded on a gender-based animus. See id. at 389 n. 6 ... [99 S.Ct. at 2357] (White, J., dissenting)”); Dv. Wisconsin Gas Co., 760 F.2d 1474, 1485-87 (7th Cir.1985) (in rejecting handicapped as a protected class, distinguishes “race, ethnic origin, sex, religion, or politics”); Schultz v. Sundberg, 759 F.2d 714, 718 (9th Cir.1985) (in rejecting Alaska state representatives as a protected class, distinguishes classes that already receive heightened equal protection clause scrutiny). But see Grimes, 776 F.2d at 1366-67 (<HOLDING>). One of the cases denying relief under § Options: A. recognizing that in areas historically legislated by the states the courts must narrowly construe any express preemption clauses so that if an ambiguity exists as to preemption nonpreemption should be found B. recognizing courts obligation to construe meaning of relatives C. holding that courts should liberally construe the requirements of rule 3 D. recognizing that texas courts narrowly construe the intentional infliction of emotional distress doctrine E. recognizing scotts admonition to construe the classbased animus requirement narrowly

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing scotts admonition to construe the classbased animus requirement narrowly
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 execution, delivery and performance of the Loan Documents and the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby (i) are within the corporate (or the equivalent company or partnership) authority of each of the Borrowers, (ii) have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate (or other) proceedings, (iii) do not conflict with or result in any material breach or contravention of any Applicable Law to which any of the Borrowers is subject or any judgment, order, writ, injunction, license or permit applicable to any of the Borrowers so as to materially adversely affect the assets, business or any activity of the Borrowers, and (iv) do not conflict with any provision of the corporate charter, articles or bylaws (or equivalent other entity or partnership documents) of the Borrowers or any material agreement or other material instrument binding upon the Borrowers.

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: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All of the restrictive covenants contained in this Section 13 shall be binding on the assigns, executors, administrators and other legal representatives of the Executive, and shall survive the termination of this Agreement and Executive’s employment.

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: Subject to the terms of this Agreement, the Company is authorized to issue interests in the Company designated as “ Units ,” which shall constitute limited liability company interests under the Act and shall include only the following two (2) classes of membership Units: (i) Class A Units (“ Class A Units ”) and Class B Units (the “ Class B Units ”). The Company shall initially issue an aggregate of 100,000 Class A Units on the date hereof and shall make future issuances of Class B Units as may be required to fulfill the Company’s obligations under the Management Incentive Plan. Units may be issued in fractional amounts, and any use of the terms “Units”, “Class A Units” and “Class B Units” in this Agreement shall also refer to any fractional units therein. The Company shall not issue any other additional Units without the prior written consent of the Lead Member Holders. All grants of Class B Units to Management Members shall be made and allocated in accordance with the Management Incentive Plan. Each Officer is hereby expressly authorized to take any action, including without limitation amending this Agreement and Schedule A , to reflect any issuance of additional Units or Transfer of Units, in each case as permitted by the terms of this Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: individual rights before federal funding provisions will be read to provide a basis for private enforcement. Id. at 280, 122 S.Ct. at 2273 (citing Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 451 U.S. 1, 17, 28 & n. 21, 101 S.Ct. 1531, 1540, 1545 & n. 21, 67 L.Ed.2d 694 (1981)). “In legislation enacted pursuant to the spending power, the typical remedy for state noncompliance with federally imposed conditions is not a private cause of action for noncompliance but rather action by the Federal Government to terminate funds to the State.” Pennhurst, 451 U.S. at 28, 101 S.Ct. at 1545. Only twice since Pennhurst has the Supreme Court held that spending legislation gave rise to rights enforceable via § 1983. See Wilder v. Va. Hosp. Ass’n, 496 U.S. 498, 110 S.Ct. 2510, 110 L.Ed.2d 455 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Wright v. Roanoke Redevelopment & Hous. Options: A. holding that boren amendment created substantive federal right enforceable by health care providers to reasonable and adequate rates B. holding that 42 usc 1396aa13a which requires states to make reasonable reimbursement to providers was enforceable by the providers pursuant to section 1983 C. holding that health care providers could pursuant to 1983 enforce the boren amendment to the medicaid act D. holding that the medicaid statute did not create an enforceable cause of action against a private health care facility E. holding no exhaustion requirement in 1983 suit alleging violations of the medicaid act

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that health care providers could pursuant to 1983 enforce the boren amendment to the medicaid 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: You agree that you will at all times promptly disclose to the Company (which, for the purposes of this Section 7, will include the Company and any subsidiaries and affiliates of the Company), in such form and manner as the Company may reasonably require, any inventions, improvements or procedural or methodological innovations, programs methods, forms, systems, services, designs, marketing ideas, products or processes (whether or not capable of being trade-marked, copyrighted or patented) conceived or developed or created by you during or in connection with your employment hereunder and which relate to the business of the Company and any subsidiaries or affiliates (“ Intellectual Property ”). You agree that all such Intellectual Property will be the sole property of the Company. You further agree that you will execute such instruments and perform such acts as may reasonably be requested by the Company to transfer to and perfect in the Company all legally protectable rights in such Intellectual Property.

assistant: Disclosures
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 ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT AND THE GUARANTORS HEREBY IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK (OR THE STATE COURTS SITTING IN THE BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN IN THE EVENT THE FEDERAL COURTS LACK SUBJECT JURISDICTION) IN ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO ANY LOAN DOCUMENTS AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT AND THE GUARANTORS HEREBY IRREVOCABLY AGREE THAT ALL CLAIMS IN RESPECT OF SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING MAY BE HEARD AND DETERMINED IN ANY SUCH COURT AND IRREVOCABLY WAIVE ANY OBJECTION IT MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE AS TO THE VENUE OF ANY SUCH SUIT, ACTION OR PROCEEDING BROUGHT IN SUCH A COURT OR THAT SUCH COURT IS AN INCONVENIENT FORUM.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: plaintiff submitted a sworn declaration from her attorney in support of her requested rates. See Deck of Qualifications and Experience of Individual Special Educ. Legal Providers Employed by the Chris Anwah Law Firm (“Adewusi Deck”). The declaration attests to the attorneys’ respective educational background, bar admission status, and special education experience and training. See generally id. The plaintiff also notes that the Chris Anwah Law Firm has been “practicing special education law exclusively since 1997.” Ph’s Mot. at 4. Although the plaintiff does not submit evidence regarding her attorneys’ standard billing practices, the court concludes that the plaintiff has satisfied her burden of proving that her requested rates are reasonable. See, e.g., Alfonso, 464 F.Supp.2d at 6-7 (<HOLDING>); Kaseman, 329 F.Supp.2d at 26 (holding that Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs had not offered sufficient evidence that their claims met the requirements of rule 23a B. holding that plaintiffs law firm was subject to disqualifica tion when after unsuccessful mediation the plaintiffs firm hired the mediator appointed to settle the case C. holding that the plaintiffs met their burden by highlighting the experience and qualifications of plaintiffs counsels firm and the firms long history of practice in this area of law D. holding that law firm who was plaintiffs adversary in foreclosure proceeding owed no duty to plaintiffs as law firm could not have expected that plaintiffs would rely on law firms representations about payoff amounts E. holding that the plaintiffs assessment of the candidates qualifications cannot demonstrate a pretext for discrimination

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the plaintiffs met their burden by highlighting the experience and qualifications of plaintiffs counsels firm and the firms long history of practice in this area of law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Award Certificate shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Delaware (disregarding any choice-of-law provisions). Any dispute or disagreement regarding the Participant’s rights under this Award Certificate shall be settled solely by binding arbitration in accordance with applicable rules of the American Arbitration Association.

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: consistent with this opinion. Coleman and Schindler, JJ., concur. 1 In applying a totality of the circumstances test to admit a past tape-recorded statement, a Vermont court reasoned: A number of courts have ruled statements inadmissible as past recollection recorded because the statements were not sworn, signed by the witness, or otherwise affirmed by the witness as accurate. Closer examination of those cases reveals, however, that the statements involved were not prepared by the witness, but by another person, usually a law enforcement agent. See, e.g., United States v. Schoenborn, 4 F.3d 1424, 1427 (7th Cir. 1993) (noting that witness “did not adopt... as his own” report prepared by FBI agent of interview with witness); People v. Hoffman, 205 Mich. App. 1, 518 N.W.2d 817, 825 (1994) (<HOLDING>); People v. Kubasiak, [98 Mich. App. 529,] 296 Options: A. holding that a police officers notes were relevant as prior and possibly inconsistent statements made and recorded by the witness B. holding that police report of witnesss statement was inadmissible because witness had not adopted report as accurate when matter was fresh in his memory C. holding that witness statements in police report inadmissible D. holding that denying admission of police officers typewritten notes of witnesss statement was proper where witness never adopted statements as true and accurate E. holding that an fbi agents notes were not a witness statement within the act because there was no evidence that the witness adopted or approved what was recorded

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that denying admission of police officers typewritten notes of witnesss statement was proper where witness never adopted statements as true and accurate
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: Every provision of this Agreement is intended to be severable. If any term or provision of this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable for any reason, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected or impaired thereby. Any invalidity, illegality or unenforceability in any jurisdiction shall not affect the validity, legality or enforceability of any such term or provision in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: furthermore , your interactions with advertisers found on or through the service , including , without limitation , all reliance upon advertising , all commercial transactions and legal obligations associated therewith , are solely between you and such advertisers .

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 WITHOUT REGARD TO ANY PRINCIPLES OF CONFLICTS OF LAW WHICH COULD CAUSE THE APPLICATION OF THE LAWS OF ANY JURISDICTION OTHER THAN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: pitney bowes inc. , a third-party global shipping provider , will oversee the processing , customs clearance , and international shipment of the item on behalf of your international buyer .

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 Note has been freely and fairly negotiated among the parties. If an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises, this Note will be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and no presumption or burden of proof will arise favoring or disfavoring any party because of the authorship of any provision of this Note. Unless the context requires otherwise, any agreements, documents, instruments or Laws defined or referred to in this Note will be deemed to mean or refer to such agreements, documents, instruments or Laws as from time to time amended, modified or supplemented, including (a) in the case of agreements, documents or instruments, by waiver or consent and (b) in the case of Laws, by succession of comparable successor statutes. All references in this Note to any particular Law will be deemed to refer also to any rules and regulations promulgated under that Law. The words “include, “includes” and “including will be deemed to be followed by “without limitation.” The word “or” is used in the inclusive sense of “and/or” unless the context requires otherwise. References to a Person are also to its permitted successors and assigns. Pronouns in masculine, feminine and neuter genders will be construed to include any other gender, and words in the singular form will be construed to include the plural and vice versa, unless the context requires otherwise. When a reference in this Note is made to an Article, Section, Exhibit, Annex or Schedule, such reference is to an Article or Section of, or Exhibit, Annex or Schedule to, this Note unless otherwise indicated. The words “this Note,” “herein,” “hereof,” “hereby,” “hereunder” and words of similar import refer to this Note as a whole and not to any particular subdivision unless expressly so limited. Any statement in this Note to the effect that the Company will not permit Jamex Parent to take an action shall be interpreted to mean that the Company will cause Jamex Parent to take such action.

assistant: Construction
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: under Florida law, the Florida court had lacked personal jurisdiction over the wife because she had not generally appeared in the action. Id. at 603. Therefore, while the husband’s residence in Florida had enabled the Florida court to grant a divorce, the court’s lack of personal jurisdiction over the wife prevented its adjudication of personal rights, such as property division and alimony. Id. at 601-04. Because the Florida court had lacked personal jurisdiction over the wife, its judgment was not res judicata as to her alimony claim. Id. at 604. ¶ 19. Turning to the instant case, the parties do not dispute that the Washington court had subject-matter jurisdiction to grant Martin a divorce. See Williams v. North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 298-99, 63 S.Ct. 207, 213, 87 L.Ed. 279 (1942) (<HOLDING>). But the Washington court held that it lacked Options: A. holding that the information must establish that the court has jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the parties B. holding that the grant of subject matter jurisdiction in 502e1 is exclusive C. holding that personal jurisdiction is not required to make an outofstate parent a party to custody action where the state court has subject matter jurisdiction under the uniform child custody jurisdiction act D. holding that a state has subject matter jurisdiction to grant a divorce if one of the spouses is domiciled in the state E. holding that the state police is a state agency

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a state has subject matter jurisdiction to grant a divorce if one of the spouses is domiciled in the state
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 therefore expressly acknowledge and agree that use of the services is at your sole risk and that the entire risk as to satisfactory quality , performance , accuracy and effort is with you .

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: the plaintiff. [Cit.]” Kitfield v. Henderson, Black & Greene, 231 Ga. App. 130, 135 (6) (498 SE2d 537) (1998). A claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress will not succeed where the defendant uttered “mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities. [Cit.]” Jenkins v. General Hospitals of Humana, 196 Ga. App. 150, 152 (395 SE2d 396) (1990). Additionally, we have held that neither the filing of a lawsuit or threat to file a lawsuit is sufficient to establish humiliating, embarrassing, or frightening conduct which will give rise to a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress. Rolleston v. Huie, 198 Ga. App. 49, 51 (2) (400 SE2d 349) (1990). See also Moses v. Prudential Ins. Co., 187 Ga. App. 222 (369 SE2d 541) (1988) (<HOLDING>). In the instant case, the evidence Options: A. holding that theft from the person of another under wisconsin law is not a crime of violence as a matter of law and can only qualify as such if there are sufficient facts in the indictment to indicate that a serious threat of violence occurred B. holding that a threat to harm another person is a crime of violence C. holding that threat occurring 36 days before possession of firearm not present threat D. holding that a telephone threat to resort to physical violence and to litigation does not state a claim E. holding that confession was coerced because it was prompted by a credible threat of physical violence where official told defendant that defendant was in danger of physical harm at hands of other inmates and offered to protect defendant in exchange for a confession

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a telephone threat to resort to physical violence and to litigation does not state a claim
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 jury that Queen’s attorney had, during his closing argument, relied on ambiguous language in the original instruction was a permissible exercise of discretion. Although the supplemental instruction may have undermined defense counsel’s argument, the instruction stated the law properly. We do not reverse judgments for jury instruction errors where “the charge was not misleading and contained an adequate statement of the law.” United States v. United Med. and Surgical Supply Corp., 989 F.2d 1390, 1407 (4th Cir.1993), quoting United States v. Park, 421 U.S. 658, 675, 95 S.Ct. 1903, 1913, 44 L.Ed.2d 489 (1975). Furthermore, the instruction did not refer either to counsel or to counsel’s argument. Instead, the instruction fairly responded to the jury question in a non-pre (4th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Tanner, 61 F.3d 231, 237 Options: A. holding that extending immunity to contractors under the act would not further the purpose behind the act B. holding prior act testimony admissible to establish the identity behind an alias C. holding testimony admissible as showing context of relationship with coconspirator prior to conspiracy D. holding that in a prosecution for lurking evidence of a prior act of lewdness by defendant was admissible to establish motive E. holding that the victims prior videotaped testimony from a preliminary hearing was admissible as testimony at trial where the victim was unavailable to testify

assistant: The best answer is B. holding prior act testimony admissible to establish the identity behind an alias
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: ie., the presence of an elaborate mechanism for the resolution of claims] are applicable here with respect to the NCBA’s allegations of violations of the fifth amendment due process clause and of various provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Although there may be no established mechanism for the recovery of damages against federal authorities for unconstitutional conduct, the unavailability of complete relief does not mandate the creation of a Bivens remedy when other “meaningful safeguards or remedies for the rights of persons situated as were the plaintiffs” are available. In this case, the NCBA has recourse to challenge the legality of the penalty assessment under several provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Accord Dahn v. United States, 127 F.3d 1249, 1254 (10th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). The conduct which gives rise to this action Options: A. holding that comprehensive administrative scheme signals that congress did not intend to permit service members to assert a private cause of action in federal court under the mwpa B. holding that in light of the comprehensive administrative scheme created by congress to resolve taxrelated disputes individual agents of the irs are also not subject to bivens actions C. holding that a remedial scheme created by congress even if incapable of addressing all of plaintiffs injuries precluded a bivens action D. holding that in its review of the irs exercise of discretion the court is limited to a review of the administrative record E. holding that irs agents did not violate the fourth amendment by conducting surveillance in violation of regulations requiring prior authorization because neither the constitution nor any act of congress requires that official approval be secured before conversations are overheard or recorded by government agents with the consent of one of the eonversants

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that in light of the comprehensive administrative scheme created by congress to resolve taxrelated disputes individual agents of the irs are also not subject to bivens actions
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless this Agreement is terminated under Section 8, the representations and warranties of the Company and the Buyers contained in Sections 2 and 3 and the agreements and covenants set forth in Sections 4, 5 and 9 shall survive the Closing for a period of one (1) year from the date hereof. Each Buyer shall be responsible only for its own representations, warranties, agreements and covenants hereunder.

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: The internal laws of the State of Wisconsin (without reference to its principles of conflicts of law) govern the construction, interpretation and other matters arising out of or in connection with this IP Agreement and each of the exhibits and schedules hereto (whether arising in contract, tort, equity or otherwise).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: accord those opinions little weight. For the reasons set forth below, the evidence the ALJ cites as contradicting the opinions of Santiago’s treating physicians is not substantial. For example, the ALJ completely disregarded Nunez’s opinion that Santiago’s depression met the B Criteria on the ground that Nunez expressed his view by signing a report that the ALJ believes was written by Malinowska. (Tr. 23.) However, even if the ALJ’s handwriting analysis is accurate and the report was written by Malinowska, there is no reason to believe that the report Nunez signed does not reflect his own view. Nor is there any legal principle which states that a doctor must personally write out a report that he signs for it to be afforded weight. See Ruiz v. Apfel, 98 F.Supp.2d 200, 209 (D.Conn.1999) (<HOLDING>). Since Nunez signed his name to the report and Options: A. holding that a question of fact existed regarding whether the hospital held the doctor out as its agent if the hospital provided the doctor without explicitly informing the patient that the doctor was not its employee B. holding that alj must give weight to a report signed by doctor even though it was prepared by someone else C. holding that a summary report prepared by police officers for the solicitors use in prosecuting the case was not subject to discovery D. holding that where a treating doctor is called to give an expert opinion on the standard of care that doctor is properly labeled an expert witness and must be disclosed to the other party along with other experts E. holding expert report requirement fulfilled in claim against nurse by providing expert report of nurse as to standard of care and expert report of medical doctor as to causation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that alj must give weight to a report signed by doctor even though it was prepared by someone else
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: Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 101 S.Ct. 1908, 68 L.Ed.2d 420 (1981) (overruled on other grounds by Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 330-31, 106 S.Ct. 662, 88 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986)). This decision was proper. A plaintiff is not required to exhaust state remedies before pursuing a § 1983 claim. Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 183, 81 S.Ct. 473, 5 L.Ed.2d 492 (1961). However, in a procedural due process case where a government official deprives a plaintiff of property by way of an unauthorized official act rather than pursuant to established procedures, the plaintiff has no due process claim if the state provides an adequate post-deprivation remedy. Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. at 544, 101 S.Ct. 1908; see also Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 435-36, 102 S.Ct. 1148, 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982) (<HOLDING>); Vicory v. Walton, 721 F.2d 1062 (6th Options: A. holding that subsection 6 did not apply where state patrol officer was not acting pursuant to any policy in causing collision B. holding that anders procedures apply to juvenile appeals C. holding parratt does not apply where an officer acts pursuant to established procedures D. holding that although jury found officer not to have had probable cause for arrest officer was entitled to immunity because law was not clearly established as to circumstances in which officer found himself E. holding that parratt does apply to intentional conduct if the conduct is unauthorized

assistant: The best answer is C. holding parratt does not apply where an officer acts pursuant to established procedures
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Term of this Agreement, the President shall serve as President of the Company. The President shall report to the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”). The President shall perform those duties consistent with his position, as well as such other duties, not inconsistent with this Agreement, as the Board may from time to time direct. Exhibit A hereto sets forth the specific duties the President is required to perform hereunder. The President shall devote all of his business time and efforts to the performance of his duties under this Agreement and, other than as set forth in Exhibit B , shall not, during the President’s employment by the Company, without the prior written approval of the Chairman of the Board, be employed by or otherwise engaged in any other business activity requiring any of the President’s time, provided that the President may, to the extent not otherwise prohibited by this Agreement, devote such amount of time as does not interfere or compete with the performance of the President’s duties under this Agreement to any one or more of the following activities: (i) investing the President’s personal assets in such manner as will not require services to be rendered by the President in the operation of the affairs of the companies in which investments are made; or (ii) engaging in charitable activities, including serving on the boards of directors of charitable organizations. Other than those activities and investments listed on Exhibit B , there are no other activities or investments that would interfere with the President’s fulfillment of his duties as set forth in this Agreement. The President shall not enter into new activities or investments that would interfere with the fulfillment of his duties to the Company or expand his involvement with the activities and investments listed on Exhibit B without the prior written approval of the Chairman of the Board. The President further agrees that he may, without any additional compensation, serve as a director or in such other executive officer capacity (“ Additional Positions ”) with respect to the Company, its subsidiaries, affiliated companies and divisions, or in associations in which the Company is a member, as may from time to time be mutually agreed to in writing by the President and the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: it effectively reduced the rate of future benefit accruals. Foot Locker submits that the version of ERISA in effect at the time of the challenged notice did not require such disclosure, that any deficiency was cured by subsequent summary plan descriptions, and, in any event, that Osberg’s § 204(h) claim is time-barred. Here, we need not determine whether Osberg’s § 204(h) notice claim is either timely or valid because § 204(h) does not, in any event, afford him the remedy he seeks, i.e., a pension benefit calculated under the cash balance plan but “with an opening balance equal to the value of the retirement annuity he had already earned under the old formula.” Appellant’s Reply Br. 5. See 10 Ellicott Square Court Corp. v. Mountain Valley Indem. Co., 634 F.3d 112, 125 (2d Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). This is because insufficient notice in Options: A. recognizing this court may affirm for any reason supported by the record B. holding that we may affirm a district court if its holding was right for any reason C. recognizing that the court of appeals can affirm a grant on summary judgment on any basis made apparent by the record D. recognizing that this court may affirm on any grounds apparent from the record quotation omitted E. recognizing ability to affirm for any reason that finds support in record

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing ability to affirm for any reason that finds support in record