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: the Code’s requirements for interrogating children. The purpose provision of the Code and its vague references to enforcement are not sufficiently clear to support a conclusion that the Code contemplated the remedy of dismissal. {20} Therefore, by reading the plain language of the Children’s Code, we conclude that neither the substantive provisions nor the purposes of the Code provide the chil dren’s court with the power to dismiss a delinquency petition under the circumstances of this ease. See Andrews, 1997-NMCA-017, ¶ 5, 123 N.M. 95, 934 P.2d 289 (stating that legislative intent is discerned through the plain meaning of the words of a statute). Dismissal is an extreme remedy, reserved for extraordinary circumstances. Cf. Mathis v. State, 112 N.M. 744, 747, 819 P.2d 1302, 1305 (1991) (<HOLDING>). We believe that the legislature would have Options: A. holding that dismissal with prejudice is warranted where case delayed for more than a few months B. holding that dismissal for failure to comply with discovery orders is on the merits C. holding summary judgment was not warranted because material facts were in dispute D. holding that dismissal for discovery violations was an extreme remedy but warranted under the facts of the case E. holding that a discovery exception to a statute of limitation applies only to the discovery of facts not discovery of the law

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that dismissal for discovery violations was an extreme remedy but warranted under the facts of the case
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as disclosed in the filings made by Provider with the Securities and Exchange Commission, there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or, to the best of Provider’s knowledge threatened against or affecting Provider or any of its properties, in or before any court, arbitrator or other body, that could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect on (i) the business, properties, condition (financial or otherwise) or results of operations of Provider and its Subsidiaries taken as a whole, (ii) the ability of Provider to perform its obligations under this Undertaking, or (iii) the validity or enforceability of any of this Undertaking or the rights or remedies of Recipient hereunder. Provider is not default with respect to any order of any court, arbitrator or governmental body and does not have any material contingent obligations not provided for or disclosed in the financial statements referred to in Section 6(d) .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by the Company and, assuming the due execution and delivery of this Agreement by Sellers, constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Company, enforceable against the Company in accordance with its terms, except as limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, fraudulent conveyance and other similar laws of general application affecting enforcement of creditors’ rights generally and general principles of equity. The Company has duly taken all necessary corporate action to authorize the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby, including, without limitation, compliance with (i) the provisions of Section 160 of the Delaware General Corporation Law and (ii) the Company’s related party transaction policies and procedures. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby have been approved by a fully informed vote of the disinterested members of the Company’s board of directors (the “ Board ”).

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: The Lead Arrangers shall have received the Pro Forma Financial Statements. The Lead Arrangers have received the other financial statements described in Section 5.1 (it being agreed that (i) the financial statements of the Borrower for each of the 2013, 2014 and 2015 fiscal years and the Target for each of the 2012, 2013 and 2014 fiscal years, (ii) the financial statements of the Borrower for the fiscal quarters ending December 28, 2014, March 29, 2015 and June 28, 2015 have been received and (iii) with respect to the Target, financial statements shall only be required pursuant to Section 5.1 to the extent such financial statements become available to the Borrower either publicly or by delivery of such financial statements by the Target or its Subsidiaries to the Borrower).

assistant: Financial Statements
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: To request the issuance of a Letter of Credit or the amendment, renewal or extension of an outstanding Letter of Credit (other than any automatic renewal permitted pursuant to paragraph (c) of this Section), the Borrower shall hand deliver or fax (or transmit by electronic communication, if arrangements for doing so have been approved by such Issuing Bank) to the applicable Issuing Bank and the Administrative Agent (reasonably in advance of the requested date of issuance, amendment, renewal or extension) a notice requesting the issuance of a Letter of Credit, or identifying the Letter of Credit to be amended, renewed or extended, and specifying the requested date of issuance, amendment, renewal or extension (which shall be a Business Day), the date on which such Letter of Credit is to expire (which shall comply with paragraph (c) of this Section), the amount of such Letter of Credit, the name and address of the beneficiary thereof and such other information as shall be requested by the applicable Issuing Bank as necessary to enable such Issuing Bank to prepare, amend, renew or extend such Letter of Credit. If requested by the applicable Issuing Bank, the Borrower also shall submit in connection with any request for a Letter of Credit a letter of credit application on such Issuing Bank’s standard form. A Letter of Credit shall be issued, amended, renewed or extended only (A) if (and upon issuance, amendment, renewal or extension of any Letter of Credit the Borrower shall be deemed to represent and warrant that), after giving effect to such issuance, amendment, renewal or extension, (i) the sum of the aggregate LC Exposure and the outstanding principal amount of the Issuing Bank’s Revolving Loans is greater than the Revolving Commitment of the Issuing Bank, (ii) no Lender’s Revolving Exposure shall exceed its Revolving Commitment, (iii) the Aggregate Revolving Exposure shall not exceed the Aggregate Revolving Commitment and (iv) the aggregate LC Exposure shall not exceed $25,000,000 and (B) if the issuance, amendment, renewal or extension would not violate any generally applicable policy of the Issuing Bank in place at the time of the request for such issuance, amendment, renewal or extension of a Letter of Credit; provided that if the Issuing Bank is unable to issue, amend, renew or extend any Letter of Credit as a result of this clause (B), then the Borrower may, with the Administrative Agent’s consent (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed), designate any Lender to serve as an issuing bank for purposes of this Agreement solely in respect of such Letter of Credit, provided that such Lender agrees to act in such capacity. For the avoidance of doubt, any Lender designated as an issuing bank as contemplated by the immediately preceding sentence shall deliver to the Administrative Agent the reports and other documents specified in paragraph (k) of this Section.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to Sections 2(b) and 2(c), one share of common stock of the Company (the “Common Stock”) shall be issuable for each Unit subject to the Award (the “Shares”) upon vesting. Immediately thereafter, or as soon as administratively feasible, the Company will deliver the appropriate number of Shares to the Director after satisfaction of any required tax or other withholding obligations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the relevant number of Shares shall be delivered to the Director no later than March 15th of the year following the calendar year in which the Award vests.

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: outside the jurisdiction of the United States Court of Federal Claims. See LeBlanc v. United States, 50 F.3d at 1028 (indicating that a claim under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not sufficient for jurisdiction in the United States Court of Federal Claims because it does not “mandate payment of money by the government.” (citing Carruth v. United States, 224 Ct.Cl. 422, 445, 627 F.2d 1068 (1980))); Potter v. United States, 108 Fed.Cl. 544, 548 (2013) (finding that “this Court lacks jurisdiction over violations under the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments ... because they do not mandate payment of money by the government.”) (internal citations omitted) (modifications in original); Warren v. United States, 106 Fed. Cl. 507, 511 (2012) (<HOLDING>); Pleasant-Bey v. United States, 99 Fed.Cl. Options: A. holding that the court lacks jurisdiction over sixth amendment claims because the sixth amendment is not moneymandating B. holding that neither the equal protection and due process clauses of the fourteenth amendment nor article i 2 of the constitution guarantee against errors in the administration of an election C. holding that we lack jurisdiction over unexhausted equal protection claims D. recognizing that the heck deferred accrual rule applies to fourteenth amendment equal protection claims E. holding that since the fourteenth amendment guarantee of equal protection is not money mandating accordingly the court lacks jurisdiction over these claims

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that since the fourteenth amendment guarantee of equal protection is not money mandating accordingly the court lacks jurisdiction over these claims
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: Gardner v. Brown, 5 F.3d 1456 (Fed.Cir.1993), aff'd sub nom Brown v. Gardner, 513 U.S. 115, 115 S.Ct. 552, 130 L.Ed.2d 462 (1994), the Court emphasized that the plain meaning of a statute “must be given effect unless a ‘literal application of [it] will produce a result demonstrably at odds with the intention of the drafters.’ ” Gardner v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 584, 586-87 (quoting Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc., 458 U.S. 564, 102 S.Ct. 3245, 73 L.Ed.2d 973 (1982)). Only where a statute’s plain meaning leads to such an absurd result that Congress clearly never could have intended it is this “plain meaning rule” abandoned for a review of the applicable legislative history and statutory construction. Id. at 587-88. See also Thayer v. Principi, 15 Vet.App. 204, 210 (2001) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). In Mintz v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 277 (1994), the Options: A. holding that when interpreting statute court must avoid a conclusion that is not supported when construing every part or section of the statute and would yield an absurd result B. recognizing the legal concept that when interpreting a statute it is presumed that the legislature did not intend an absurd or unreasonable result C. recognizing that the cardinal rule in statutory construction is to give effect to the intent of the legislature and to avoid construing a statute in a manner that produces an absurd unjust or unreasonable result D. holding that courts must give effect to every word when interpreting a statute E. recognizing a court must look beyond the plain language of a statute when the literal interpretation would lead to an absurd result

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that when interpreting statute court must avoid a conclusion that is not supported when construing every part or section of the statute and would yield an absurd result
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 may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall, together, constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement, the other Loan Agreements, and each other agreement or instrument entered into in connection herewith or therewith or contemplated hereby or thereby, and any amendments hereto or thereto, to the extent signed and delivered by means of a photographic, photostatic, facsimile or similar reproduction of such signed writing using a facsimile machine or e-mail shall be treated in all manner and respects as an original agreement or instrument and shall be considered to have the same binding legal effect as if it were the original signed version thereof delivered in person. At the request of any party hereto or to any such agreement or instrument, each other party hereto or thereto shall reexecute original forms thereof and deliver them to all other Parties. No party hereto or to any such agreement or instrument shall raise the use of a facsimile machine or e-mail to deliver a signature or the fact that any signature or agreement or instrument was transmitted or communicated through the use of a facsimile machine or e-mail as a defense to the formation or enforceability of a contract and each such party forever waives any such defense.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: limit her claimed damages below the jurisdictional amount of this Court. She made no claim for a specific sum of damages in her complaint or in her Motion for Remand, and neither has she provided an affidavit indicating that her claimed damages do not meet the amount in controversy requisite nor has she responded to the defendant’s request to clarify the amount of damages she actually is seeking. See Asociacion Nacional de Pescadores a Pequena Escala o Artesanales de Colombia v. Dow Quimica de Colombia, S.A., 988 F.2d 559, 566 (5th Cir.1993), abrogated on other grounds by Marathon Oil Co. v. Ruhrgas, 145 F.3d 211 (5th Cir.1998) (“[A]t least where the following circumstances are present, [the removing party’s burden of establishing diversi itigation, 918 F.Supp. 178, 179 (E.D.Tex.1996) (<HOLDING>). Thus, if so inclined, the plaintiff may Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs second complaint did not relate back to her first complaint because her second complaint was not an amendment to her first complaint but rather a separate filing B. holding that a plaintiff can defeat removal by filing a binding affidavit with her complaint stating that she will not seek or accept more than the jurisdictional amount C. holding that filing of an administrative complaint did not meet the requirement that the employee seek counseling prior to filing D. holding that the standard for withholding of removal is a showing that it is more likely than not that a petitioner will face persecution upon her return E. holding that the statements in the plaintiffs original petition along with the sworn declaration attached to her original petition stating that she would not accept a judgment or recovery greater than 74000 were sufficient to bind the plaintiff to a recovery of no more than 74000

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a plaintiff can defeat removal by filing a binding affidavit with her complaint stating that she will not seek or accept more than the jurisdictional amount
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 Agreement may be modified or amended at any time, in accordance with Section 14 of the Plan and provided that you must consent in writing to any modification that adversely and materially affects your rights or obligations under this Award Agreement (with such an effect being presumed to arise from a modification that would trigger assessment of the additional tax under Section 409A of the Code). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Committee may, however, take any action permitted by Section 12 of the Plan without your written consent.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you hereby agree that all disputes between you and the company ( whether or not such dispute involves a third party ) arising out of or in connection with your relationship with the company , including without limitation disputes related to the terms of this agreement or the privacy policy , your use of the service , and/or rights of privacy and/or publicity , will be finally settled by binding , individual arbitration under the rules of arbitration of the international chamber of commerce by one arbitrator appointed in accordance with the said rules .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive shall be eligible for 4 weeks of paid vacation that includes 1 week Christmas holidays as provided to similarly situated employees under the Company ' s policy, if there is one, or other policies in place, which vacation time shall be taken at such time or times in each year so as not to materially and adversely interfere with the business of the Company. Unused vacation may not be carried over from any one-year period to any other period except as may be required by law.

assistant: Vacations
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 controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or any breach thereof, excepting only the enforcement of any Loyalty Obligations arising under Paragraph 18 of this Agreement, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect in the Commonwealth of Virginia and judgment upon such award rendered by the arbitrators may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. The board of arbitrators shall consist of one arbitrator to be appointed by the Company, one by the Executive, and one by the two arbitrators so chosen. The arbitration shall be held at such place as may be agreed upon at the time by the parties to the arbitration. The cost of arbitration shall be borne as determined by the arbitrators.

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: that prohibited the recognition of contracts entered into by unlawful aliens. United States v. Alabama, 691 F.3d 1269, 1292-95 (11th Cir.2012), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 133 S.Ct. 2022, 185 L.Ed.2d 905 (2013). Because the law essentially prevented aliens “from enforcing contracts for basic necessities” in derogation of the ability to live and conduct daily affairs, the court concluded that the measure’s effect of forcing undocumented aliens out of the state interfered with the exclusive federal power to expel aliens, as well as with the INA’s comprehensive scheme governing the removal of aliens. Id. at 1293-94. The Farmers Branch ordinance is just as invidious because its adverse effect on housing also precludes aliens from obtaining an essential human requirement. Cf. id. at 1299 n. 25 (<HOLDING>). Farmers Branch, like Alabama, “has Options: A. recognizing such an exception B. holding that the failure to notify aliens counsel of an order to appear for deportation violated the aliens statutory right to counsel C. holding a municipality liable for negligently maintaining a sewer where despite extraordinary rainfall the unclogged sewer may have prevented damage to the plaintiffs property D. holding that an aliens express waiver of his right to appeal to the bia deprives this court of jurisdiction to consider the aliens subsequent petition for review E. recognizing that depriving aliens of basic needs such as water garbage and sewer services amounted to an impermissible policy of expulsion

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that depriving aliens of basic needs such as water garbage and sewer services amounted to an impermissible policy of expulsion
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 agreements in this Section shall survive the resignation of the Administrative Agent and any LC Issuer, the assignment of any Commitment or Loan by any Lender, the replacement of any Lender, the termination of the Aggregate Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all the other Obligations.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: for a period of sixty ( 60 ) days from the date of receipt of notice from the other party , viber and you will engage in a dialogue in order to attempt to resolve the section 8 ( b ) dispute , though nothing will require either you or viber to resolve the section 8 ( b ) dispute on terms which either you or viber , in each of our sole discretion , are uncomfortable with .

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: on appeal. See, e.g., United States v. Alvarez-Sanchez, 511 U.S. 350, 360 n. 5, 114 S.Ct. 1599, 128 L.Ed.2d 319 (1994) (“Finding no exceptional circumstances that would warrant reviewing a claim that was waived below, we adhere to our general practice and decline to address respondent’s Fourth Amendment argument.”); Giordenello v. United States, 357 U.S. 480, 487, 78 S.Ct. 1245, 2 L.Ed.2d 1503 (1958) (finding, where the government defended the legality of the petitioner’s arrest “by relying entirely on the validity of the warrant,” to allow the government to argue for the first time before the Supreme Court that even a warrantless arrest would have been valid “would unfairly deprive petitioner of an adequate opportunity to respond”); United States v. Nee, 261 F.3d 79, 86 (1st Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); United States v. 22249 Dolorosa St., 167 F.3d Options: A. holding by failing to raise it to the district court the government waived its argument the subjective intent of the officers was irrelevant for establishing probable cause B. holding that the defendant waived an argument by failing to raise it in his appellants brief C. holding that a defendant waived an argument under section 2 610b by failing to raise it in the trial court D. holding that as long as officers possess a valid warrant the subjective intent of officers is irrelevant E. holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding by failing to raise it to the district court the government waived its argument the subjective intent of the officers was irrelevant for establishing probable cause
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: So long as participation of the same percentage of Group Commitment and/or Group Loans is entered into concurrently therewith, any Lender may at any time, without the consent of, or notice to, the Borrower or the Administrative Agent, sell participations to any Person (other than a natural Person (or a holding company, investment vehicle or trust for, or owned and operated for the primary benefit of a natural person), a Defaulting Lender or a Disqualified Lender); provided that, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, participations may be sold to Disqualified Lenders unless the DQ List has been posted to the Platform (each, a “ Participant ”) in all or a portion of such Lender’s rights and/or obligations under this Agreement (including all or a portion of its Commitment and/or the Loans (including such Lender’s participations in L/C Obligations and/or Swing Line Loans) owing to it); provided that (i) such Lender’s obligations under this Agreement shall remain unchanged, (ii) such Lender shall remain solely responsible to the other parties hereto for the performance of such obligations, (iii) the Borrower, the Administrative Agent, the Lenders and the L/C Issuers shall continue to deal solely and directly with such Lender in connection with such Lender’s rights and obligations under this Agreement, and (iv) no Lender shall sell a participation if such sale would cause any Loan Party or the Participant to be in violation of any material Communications Law. For the avoidance of doubt, each Lender shall be responsible for the indemnity under Section 10.04(c) without regard to the existence of any participation. This Section 10.06(d) shall be construed so that the Loans are at all times maintained in “registered form” within the meaning of Sections 163(f), 871(h)(2) and 881(c)(2) of the Code. All parties hereto acknowledge and agree that the Administrative Agent shall have no obligation or duty to monitor or track whether any Disqualified Lender shall have become a Participant hereunder.

assistant: Participations
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 Participant’s continued service as a member of the Board of Directors of the Company and the terms of the Plan and this Agreement, the Restricted Shares will vest and cease to be Restricted Shares, and accordingly, the restrictions contained in Sections 2 and 5 will no longer apply (but the Shares will remain subject to Section 9) on the first anniversary of the date specified on the Signature Page hereto.

assistant: Vesting
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: or development.” Id at 489-90. Applying this interpretation of what constitutes “internal tribal matters,” we held that the Penob-scot Nation’s operation of beano games was “fundamentally unlike” the listed internal tribal matters, was “not embraced within the general term” of “internal tribal matters”, and was, therefore, subject to enforcement under state law. Id. [¶ 16] In Great Northern Paper, we did not discuss the ejusdem generis approach taken in Stilphen. Instead, we adopted the non-exclusive, non-dispositive factors described in Akins v. Penobscot Nation, 130 F.3d 482, 486-87 (1st Cir.1997), and we reviewed legislative history, to aid in determining whether the disputed issue related to an internal tribal matter. Great N. Paper, 2001 ME 68, ¶ 48-50, 60, 770 A.2d at 588-89, 591 (<HOLDING>). The factors applied in Great Northern Paper Options: A. holding the fourteenth amendment does not apply to the actions of the federal government B. holding that the maine freedom of access act does not apply pursuant to section 62061 to the tribes internal conduct of their government but does apply when the tribe communicates and interacts with other governments C. holding that the ada does not contain a waiver of sovereign immunity and thus does not apply to the federal government D. holding that the ada amendments act does not apply to preamendment conduct E. holding that section 102 of the civil rights act of 1991 does not apply to preenactment conduct

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the maine freedom of access act does not apply pursuant to section 62061 to the tribes internal conduct of their government but does apply when the tribe communicates and interacts with other governments
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: regardless of the manner in which the arbitration is conducted , the arbitrator shall issue a reasoned written decision sufficient to explain the essential findings and conclusions on which the decision and award , if any , are based .

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: Each of Bright Mountain and the Buyer is a entity duly incorporated, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Florida, with full corporate power and authority to own, lease and operate its business and properties and to carry on its business in the places and in the manner as presently conducted or proposed to be conducted. Each of Bright Mountain and the Buyer is in good standing as a foreign entity in each jurisdiction in which the properties owned, leased or operated, or where the business is conducted by it requires such qualification, except where the failure to so qualify would not have a Material Adverse Effect on the business of Bright Mountain or the Buyer, taken as a whole, or consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if the arbitrator finds that either the substance of your claim or the relief sought in the arbitration is frivolous or brought for an improper purpose ( as measured by the standards set forth in federal rule of civil procedure 11 ( b ) ) , then the payment of all fees will be governed by the aaa rules .

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: Promptly upon request by the Administrative Agent, or any Lender, the Borrower will (i) correct any material defect or error that may be discovered in any Basic Document or in the execution, acknowledgment, filing or recordation thereof, and (ii) do, execute, acknowledge, deliver, record, re-record, file, re-file, register and register any and all such further acts, deeds, certificates, assurances and other instruments as the Administrative Agent or any Lender may reasonably require from time to time in order to (A) carry out more effectively the purposes of the Basic Documents, (B) to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law, subject the Borrower’s properties, assets, rights or interests to the Liens now or hereafter intended to be covered by any of the Basic Documents, (C) perfect and maintain the validity, effectiveness and priority of any of the Basic Documents and any of the Liens intended to be created hereunder and thereunder and (D) assure, convey, grant, assign, transfer, preserve, protect and confirm more effectively unto the Secured Parties the rights granted or now or hereafter intended to be granted to the Secured Parties under any Basic Document or under any other instrument executed in connection with any Borrower Basic Document.

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: is no genuine dispute of material fact, the inferences arising from the facts in this case are susceptible to more than one reasonable conclusion precluding summary judgment.” However, Bagley does not identify any facts that purportedly give rise to inferences susceptible to more than one reasonable conclusion, and, ultimately, his generalized argument to that effect is not materially different from his argument in support of his first assignment of error. Accordingly, we reject that alternative argument without further discussion. 5 Although existing Oregon case law on point is limited, several other states have similarly reasoned that a former minor’s acceptance of the benefits of a contract may constitute a ratification. See, e.g., Jones v. Dressel, 623 P2d 370, 372-74 (Colo 1981) (<HOLDING>); Parsons ex rel Cabaniss v. American Family Options: A. recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract B. holding the contract was not authorized by law C. holding that even though certain corporate formalities had not been complied with in the execution of the subject contract the corporation had knowledge of the existence of the contract and treated it as a valid and binding contract and thus ratified the contract by accepting the benefits thereunder D. holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur E. holding that a former minor who had signed a release at age 17 in order to skydive ratified the contract as a matter of law by accepting the benefits of the contract when he used the defendants facilities and further stating that the question whether that former minors subsequent actions constituted disaffirmance of the contract was not relevant because the former minor had already ratified the contract

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a former minor who had signed a release at age 17 in order to skydive ratified the contract as a matter of law by accepting the benefits of the contract when he used the defendants facilities and further stating that the question whether that former minors subsequent actions constituted disaffirmance of the contract was not relevant because the former minor had already ratified the contract
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 become effective as of the date the Purchaser executes the sale purchase agreements with the Seller and other shareholders in the Company representing the sale and purchase of 11,309,718 shares of the Company, including the sale and purchase of 4,887,596 shares of the Company from Ji Jun Hong.

assistant: Effectiveness
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: Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Supplement are defined in Appendix 1 to the 2016-A Exchange Note Supplement, dated as of March 1, 2016 (the “ Exchange Note Supplement ”), to the Second Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement, dated as of July 22, 2005, as amended and restated as of December 1, 2015 (the “ Credit and Security Agreement ”), among CAB East LLC and CAB West LLC, as Borrowers, U.S. Bank National Association, as Administrative Agent, the Collateral Agent and Ford Credit, as Lender and Servicer, or in Appendix A to the Credit and Security Agreement. Appendix 1 and Appendix A also contain usage rules that apply to this Supplement. Appendix 1 and Appendix A are incorporated by reference into this Supplement.

assistant: Definitions
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: days’ imprisonment. At most, the government’s additional comments were ambiguous. Accordingly, any error was not plain. See United States v. Dorsey, 677 F.3d 944, 953 (9th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). 2. The district court did not commit Options: A. holding that defendant could not show district courts alleged error in considering 3553a2a when imposing a revocation sentence was clear or obvious under plain error review B. holding that an error is plain only if it is clear under current law when there is no binding precedent on point an instruction typically will not be plain error C. holding that plain error will be identified only if 1 there is error 2 that is clear or obvious rather than subject to reasonable dispute 3 that affects defendants substantial rights and 4 that seriously impugns fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings D. holding that failure to object at trial should cause this court to review solely for plain error ie error that is clear or obvious and materially prejudicial to an appellants substantial rights E. holding that an error is plain if it is clear or obvious

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an error is plain if it is clear or obvious
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: Section headings in this First Amendment are included herein for convenience of reference only, are not part of this First Amendment and are not to affect the construction of, or to be taken into consideration in interpreting, this First Amendment.

assistant: Headings
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: be considered a system of records unless there is actual retrieval of records keyed to individuals” (emphasis added)); Baker v. Department of Navy, 814 F.2d 1381, 1384 (9th Cir.) (stating that “the definition of ‘system of records’ makes coverage under the Act dependent upon the method of retrieval of a record rather than its substantive content”), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 963, 108 S.Ct. 450, 98 L.Ed.2d 390 (1987); Boyd v. Secretary of the Navy, 709 F.2d 684, 686 (11th Cir.1983) (finding that “a record must be maintained by the agency in a group of records cued to the requestor” (citations omitted)), cert. denied sub nom. Boyd v. Lehman, 464 U.S. 1043, 104 S.Ct. 709, 79 L.Ed.2d 173 (1984); Savarese v. United States Dep’t of Health, Educ. and Welfare, 479 F.Supp. 304, 307 (N.D.Ga.1979) (<HOLDING>), aff'd sub nom. Savarese v. Harris, 620 F.2d Options: A. holding that neither a reading file nor a program file since not keyed to retrieval by names or identifiers were systems of records under the act B. holding that neither the ada nor the rehabilitation act applies to prison employment C. recognizing the debtorinpossessions duty to file records and operating reports D. holding that neither rule 18 nor section 30002 allowed the successor to an electoral loser to file findings when the transition did not happen during the period in which the trial court was obligated to file findings E. holding reasonable an agency determination that a request for an investigative file did not include the employment file

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that neither a reading file nor a program file since not keyed to retrieval by names or identifiers were systems of records under the 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: by default, unless, the insurance company undertakes the burden of obtaining a separate, comprehensible, and written disclaimer of stacking. Under this rationale those who want stacked coverage pay for it, and those who don’t want it don’t pay for it. ¶ 31. It is clear that such a rule would not cut down on the statutory minimum under this Court’s holding in Garriga, because, if stacked coverage is treated as extra U.M. coverage, the insured has the right to contract for stacked coverage above the $10,000 minimum. Additionally, the concern voiced by the majority that all insurance contracts will be written to exclude stacking becomes irrelevant because, under Garriga, the carrier must provide the insured with the extra stacked coverage if she so desires it. Garri-ga, 636 So.2d at 663 (<HOLDING>). ¶32. This rule would have the effect of Options: A. holding that loss of quiet enjoyment is not a sufficient plus B. holding that even if the minimum mandatory exceeds the statutory maximum the court must impose the minimum mandatory C. holding that the minimum under the statute is 10000 plus whatever additional coverage the insured desires to purchase D. holding that a district court commits reversible error when it sentences a defendant to less than the statutory minimum where no exception to the mandatory minimum applies E. holding that sentencing court had discretion under sentencing statute noting that the legislature has demonstrated its ability to use restrictive language when it desires to do so

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the minimum under the statute is 10000 plus whatever additional coverage the insured desires to purchase
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of a Change in Control and provided that as of such Change in Control Grantee has been in continuous service with the Company since the Date of Grant, vesting of the RSUs shall accelerate and the RSUs shall become fully vested.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: individual and institutional abuse.” Bordenkircher, 434 U.S. at 365, 98 S.Ct. at 669. In order to protect prosecutorial impartiality, a trial court has the power to disqualify a Commonwealth’s attorney from proceeding with a particular criminal prosecution if the trial court determines that the Commonwealth’s attorney has an interest pertinent to a defendant’s case that may conflict with the Commonwealth’s attorney’s official duties. See People v. Hamilton, 46 Cal.3d 123, 141, 249 Cal.Rptr. 320, 328, 756 P.2d 1348, 1357 (Cal.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1040, 109 S.Ct. 1176, 103 L.Ed.2d 238 (1989); 63A Am.Jur.2d Prosecuting Attorneys § 30-32 (1984); 27 C.J.S. District and Prosecuting Attorneys § 12(6) (1959); see generally T.J. Griffin, Disqualification of Prosecuting Attorney on 67) (<HOLDING>). The specific due process right implicated Options: A. holding the double jeopardy clause applicable to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment B. holding that an attempt by a prosecuting attorney to serve two masters violates the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment C. holding that an exercise by the state of its police power is presumed to be valid when it is challenged under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment D. holding failure of prosecution to disclose evidence that may be favorable to the accused is a violation of the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment E. recognizing that the integrity of the family unit has found protection in the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an attempt by a prosecuting attorney to serve two masters violates the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment
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: concluded that 11 U.S.C. § 106(c) does not permit an award of money damages against the IRS for violating the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. § 362(a), the court examines 11 U.S.C. § 106(a) and (b) for authority to support the judgment of the bankruptcy court. Section 106(a) and (b) addresses to what extent the government is deemed to have waived its sovereign immunity in bankruptcy proceedings when it pursues a claim against a debtor. Subsection (a) “provides for ‘affirmative recovery/ including money judgments,” but only in limited circumstances. Hoffman v. Connecticut Dep’t of Income Maintenance (In re Willington Convalescent Home, Inc.), 850 F.2d 50, 54 (2d Cir.1988), aff'd, 492 U.S. 96, 109 S.Ct. 2818, 106 L.Ed.2d 76 (1989) (citations omitted); see also Inslaw, 113 B.R. at 812-13 (<HOLDING>). The waiver of sovereign immunity under this Options: A. holding that the fourth amendment does not mandate the payment of money by the united states B. holding that the doctrine of sovereign immunity barred a claim for money damages against the librarian of congress in his official capacity because immunity had not been waived and the exceptions to immunity did not apply C. holding that the united states department of justice waived its immunity from money damages under subsection a D. holding that exhaustion is required under the plra even if the plaintiff seeks only money damages and money damages are not available as relief E. holding a claim for injunction but not money damages against a state officer for a violation of the age discrimination in employment act enacted under article i section 8 of the united states constitution was not barred by sovereign immunity under the ex parte young exception

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the united states department of justice waived its immunity from money damages under subsection a