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: through conscience-shocking behavior.” Estate of Bennett v. Wainwright, 548 F.3d 155, 162 (1st Cir. 2008) (citing Clark v. Boscher, 514 F.3d 107, 112 (1st Cir.2008)). The plaintiffs base their Fourteenth Amendment claim on the deprivation of Colon-Andino’s liberty and the seizure of his property resulting from a fabricated prosecution against him. Together, members of the Puerto Rico Police Department fabricated an entire case against Colon-Andino, conduct which plaintiffs believe shocks the conscience. These are the same factual allegations made in support of the plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claim, analyzed above. The Supreme Court has held that “because the Fourth Amendment provides an explicit textual source of constitutional protection against this sort of 249, 256 (1st Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>) (internal citation omitted). The civil actions Options: A. holding that there is no substantive due process right under the fourteenth amendment to be free from malicious prosecution B. holding that there is no due process right to appellate review C. holding the same for malicious prosecution D. holding that section 1983 claims alleging due process violations stemming from malicious prosecution are unavailable when a state malicious prosecution action exists E. holding that the fourth amendment right implicated in a malicious prosecution action is the right to be free of unreasonable seizure of the person

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that there is no substantive due process right under the fourteenth amendment to be free from malicious prosecution
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: district court learns of newly discovered evidence after a conviction, it should provide relief “if the defendant makes a showing that the evidence is in fact ‘new,’ i.e., it could not have been discovered, exercising due diligence before or during trial, and that the evidence is so material and non-cumulative that its admission ‘would probably lead to an acquittal.’” United States v. Siddiqi, 959 F.2d 1167, 1173 (2d Cir.1992) (quoting United States v. Alessi, 638 F.2d 466, 479 (2d Cir.1980)). It is clear that the evidence concerning McMahon is “new”; neither Bloomer nor the government could have discovered the evidence before or during trial. Furthermore, because the new evidence was the only evidence impeaching McMahon’s credibility, it was non-cumulative. Cf. Gordils, 982 F.2d at 72 (<HOLDING>); Gilbert, 668 F.2d at 96 (holding that new Options: A. holding that promises made by the prosecution to a witness in exchange for that witness testimony relate directly to the credibility of the witness B. holding that new evidence must be evidence that is not merely cumulative C. holding that new evidence is evidence not previously of record and not merely cumulative of other evidence D. holding that it is improper to ask a witness to comment on the credibility of another witness E. holding that new evidence impeaching credibility of governments key witness was cumulative of other evidence of witness criminal activity

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that new evidence impeaching credibility of governments key witness was cumulative of other evidence of witness criminal activity
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: Id. In the instant case, the State met its burden with respect to the knowledge element of the offense. The officers testified that appellant was in the driver’s seat of the truck and the marijuana was in a compartment in the dash in plain view. The fact that the drugs were openly within appellant’s line of sight is evidence from which appellant’s knowledge of the presence of the marijuana may be inferred. See Brown v. State, 428 So.2d 250, 252 (Fla.1983) (finding fact that drugs were in open view provided evidence ,of knowledge of the same). This, then, brings us to the matter of dominion and control. Knowledge of the presence of the drugs and the ability to exercise dominion and control over the drugs are not the same thing. See Jean v. State, 638 So.2d 995, 996 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (<HOLDING>). In the case law, the concepts of “dominion” Options: A. holding it is critical to the trial courts power of control over its own docket and its ability to serve effectively all litigants that it maintain control over progress of cases before it including requests for extensions of time B. recognizing that knowledge and dominion and control are separate elements and stating that it is conceivable that an accused might be well aware of the presence of the substance but have no ability to maintain control over it C. holding that an instruction requiring the jury to find that the defendant had the power and intention to exercise dominion and control over the cocaine was adequate to convey the principle that mere presence or proximity is not sufficient D. holding that circumstance that contraband was found in a box bearing defendants name was sufficient to support an inference of knowledge and dominion and control E. holding that where drugs are found in the presence and plain view of the owner or resident occupant of a home dominion and control maybe inferred

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that knowledge and dominion and control are separate elements and stating that it is conceivable that an accused might be well aware of the presence of the substance but have no ability to maintain control over it
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: which of such property is separate property, which is marital property, and which is part separate and part marital property in accordance with subdivision A3.... The court shall determine the value of any such property as of the date of the evidentiary hearing on the evaluation issue. Code § 20-107.3(A) (emphasis added). Considering the separate subsections of Code § 20-107.3 together, we hold that when ordering reimbursement of contributed separate property under subsection (A)(3)(g), a court shall determine the value of the contributed property as of the date of the evidentiary hearing. See, e.g., Oraee v. Breeding, 270 Va. 488, 498, 621 S.E.2d 48, 53 (2005) (construing together subsections A and B of Code § 8.01-581.18); Hart v. Hart, 27 Va.App. 46, 66, 497 S.E.2d 496, 505 (1998) (<HOLDING>). This interpretation makes good sense because Options: A. holding that a defendant in an action to redeem property from a tax sale was barred from asserting on remand a counterclaim for the value of improvements made to the property B. holding the aggregate value of the land and its improvements is the controlling value C. holding that an increase in the value of nonmarital property attributable to the efforts of one or both spouses during marriage is marital property D. holding that in determining the value of a partys nonmarital contribution to hybrid property under code 201073a3 the important factor is the value that improvements add to the property not their cost E. holding determination of property value in case to decide if assessed value was excessive is not a liquidated demand where only evidence of property value was the conclusory allegation of value in plaintiffs unsworn petition

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that in determining the value of a partys nonmarital contribution to hybrid property under code 201073a3 the important factor is the value that improvements add to the property not their cost
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 to the extent otherwise expressly provided herein, the Company shall reimburse TPG and its Affiliates, upon presentation of appropriate documentation, for all reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by TPG and its Affiliates after the date hereof in connection with enforcement of this Agreement.

assistant: Expenses
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: claims that, as of August 28, 1998, Marathon owed it $28,605.46 in Recurring Fees pursuant to Section 7 of the License Agreement. Defendants Marathon and Gage respond that plaintiffs submission of an affidavit claiming that plaintiff is owed “approximately” that amount, with no further evidence, is insufficient to support summary judgment in plaintiffs favor. The court agrees, and denies summary judgment with respect to plaintiffs claim for $28,605.46 in Recurring Fees damages. For the same reason, the court denies summary judgment with respect to plaintiffs claim for pre-judgment interest. Pursuant to Section 7.3 of the License Agreement, defendants are liable for 1.5% pre-judgment interest. See Mid-Jersey Nat’l Bank v. Fidelity-Mortgage Investors, 518 F.2d 640, 645 (3rd Cir.1975) (<HOLDING>). Because the principal amount has not yet been Options: A. holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract B. holding that award and rate of prejudgment interest are within trial courts discretion C. holding that a utility can claim no rate as a legal right that is other than the filed rate whether fixed or merely accepted by the commission D. holding that the petitioner can claim no rate as a legal right other than the filed rate whether fixed or merely accepted by the agency commission E. holding that it is proper to award prejudgment interest at the legal rate from the date the monies were due under the contract

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a 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: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, (a) Descartes shall transfer to Fermat the Acquired Ag Assets and Fermat shall assume the Assumed Ag Liabilities and (b) Fermat shall transfer to Descartes the Acquired H&N Assets and Descartes shall assume the Assumed H&N Liabilities, as described in more detail in this Article II .

assistant: Closings
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 term or provision of this Agreement that is invalid or unenforceable in any situation in any jurisdiction will not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or the validity or enforceability of the offending term or provision in any other situation or in any other jurisdiction. In the event that any provision hereof would, under applicable Legal Requirements, be invalid or unenforceable in any respect, each party hereto intends that such provision will be construed by modifying or limiting it so as to be valid and enforceable to the maximum extent compatible with, and possible under, applicable Legal Requirements.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and admitted evidence in deciding whether the district court abused its discretion in precluding an -alternative perpetrator defense). a. S.H. Trial testimony reveals S.H. visited the home Meisel shared with Thomas, Thomas regularly slept during the day, and Meisel left his computer on with a slots program running. Given this extremely limited evidence, we have no doubt the district court acted within its discretion in refusing to admit the evidence for the purpose of arguing S.H. is the person who committed the child pornography crimes set out in the indictment. If mere proximity and potential access were sufficient to argue an alternative perpetrator committed the crime, this court can hardly envision a criminal trial that would not involve such a defense. But see id. at 1220-22 (<HOLDING>). b. W.R. Evidence implicating W.R. as the Options: A. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting testimony to only one witness where additional witnesses would have provided the same testimony B. holding that the trial court must apply the provisions of the statute and specifically determine whether the perpetrator of domestic abuse had rebutted the presumption against an award of joint custody C. holding unconstitutional a state evidentiary rule automatically excluding alternative perpetrator evidence when the prosecution case was strong D. holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting alternative perpetrator evidence where the record demonstrated the supposed alternative perpetrator was near the victim no more than ten minutes before the crime E. holding that if the trial court would have had no discretion to deny summary judgment on an alternative ground the appellate court can on that alternative ground sustain the order granting summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting alternative perpetrator evidence where the record demonstrated the supposed alternative perpetrator was near the victim no more than ten minutes before the crime
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 Partnership Unit Designation may only be amended with the written consent of the General Partner together with the holders of a majority in interest of holders of Series SO Class B OP Units or in the case of substantially similar amendments or amendments with substantially similar effects being adopted by the General Partner in respect of all other series of Class B OP Units established by the Partnership from time to time by a majority in interest of all holders of Class B OP Units, except that, the General Partner may amend the Schedules hereto in a manner permitted under the Partnership Agreement or this Partnership Unit Designation, or to make any amendments that are clerical or ministerial in nature and do not impact the substantive rights of the holders of Series SO Class B OP Units. Majority in interest shall be calculated on an as converted into Class A OP Units basis, with the number of votes to be cast by each holder of Class B OP Units being equal to the number of Class A OP Units such holder would receive had they converted their Class B OP Units into Class A OP Units, assuming that any conversion lock-up would not apply.

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: On the Restatement Effective Date, (a) the fair value of the assets of each Loan Party exceeds its debts and liabilities, subordinated, contingent or otherwise; (b) the present fair saleable value of the property of each Loan Party is greater than the amount that will be required to pay the probable liability of its debts and other liabilities, subordinated, contingent or otherwise, as such debts and other liabilities become absolute and matured; (c) each Loan Party is able to pay its debts and liabilities, subordinated, contingent or otherwise, as such debts and liabilities become absolute and matured; and (d) no Loan Party has unreasonably small capital with which to conduct the business in which it is engaged as such business is now conducted and is proposed to be conducted following the Restatement Effective Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: CAWV shall pay all expenses related to providing Class Members with notice of the Settlement Agreement, including without limitation the compilation of address lists for Class Members, printing and mailing the Class Notice, publishing the Summary Notice, address searches for Class Member for whom notices are returned as undeliverable, and responding to Class Member inquiries.

assistant: Expenses
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: Fatal Claim Petition, denying each of Snizaski’s allegations. The WCJ conducted a hearing on September 16, 1996, at which Rox Coal asserted as an affirmative defense that Snizaski was ineligible for fatal claim benefits because Decedent’s death resulted from his violation of the law. Rox Coal relied upon the police report from the accident, submitted by Snizaski, which indicated that Decedent had been guilty of the following violations of the Vehicle Code: (1) careless driving; (2) driving at an unsafe speed; (3) driving on the wrong side of the road; and (4) failure to use a restraint system. Rox Coal relied on section 301(a) of the Act, which provides in relevant part as follows: Every employer shall be liable for compensation for personal injury to, o 7 Pa. 172, 146 A. 543 (1929) (<HOLDING>). Rox Coal’s company car policy provided that Options: A. holding that the employee was not entitled to compensation because he committed an act in direct hostility to and in defiance of the positive orders of the employer B. holding that the debtors knowing act of failing to obtain workers compensation insurance so that the employer owed an employee a debt after the employee suffered a workplace injury was not the sort of willful and malicious injury required for nondischargeability under 523a6 because it cannot not be said that the employer intended for the employee to suffer a fall or that there was an unbroken chain of events leading from the employers intentional act to the employees physical injury C. holding that glc 152 15 provides that the only party immune from suit under the statute is the direct employer a special employer is not immune because the special employer is not liable for the payment of workers compensation and there was no agreement between the direct employer and the special employer that the special employer would be liable for the payment of such compensation D. holding that an employer is accountable to a discharged employee for unpaid compensation if the employee was terminated in bad faith and the compensation is clearly connected to work already performed E. holding that whether the tortious act was committed during the time the employee was on duty and whether the tortious act was committed while the employee was on the employers premises were both factors weighing in favor of finding the activity within the scope of employment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the employee was not entitled to compensation because he committed an act in direct hostility to and in defiance of the positive orders of the employer
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: 264 Ga. 285, 285-286 (1) (443 SE2d 837) (1994). BANA and Fannie Mae continue to assert on appeal that James alleged only that she failed to receive notice of the foreclosure. But this argument is belied by the record. In the complaint, James specifically pled that BANA foreclosed on the Property “without having sent proper notice to [her] as required by OCGA § 44-14-162.2 or indeed any notice at all.” Further, James repeats in numerous places throughout the complaint that BANA failed to “send” or to “provide” her with the requisite notice of the foreclosure proceedings. These allegations are sufficient to set forth a claim for wrongful foreclosure, and the trial court erred in dismissing that claim. See Babalola v. HSBC Bank, USA, 324 Ga. App. 750, 753 (2) (a) (751 SE2d 545) (2013) (<HOLDING>); see also Roylston v. Bank of America, 290 Ga. Options: A. holding that debtors allegation that mortgage holder failed to provide him with the statutorily required notice of foreclosure was sufficient to state a claim for wrongful foreclosure B. holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage C. holding that despite foreclosure judgment providing that the holder of a junior mortgage had no interest in or lien on or claim to said premises the lack of foreclosure sale meant that the junior mortgage was not extinguished D. holding that a failure to comply with the foreclosure statutes invalidates a foreclosure sale E. holding that rookerfeldman barred a debtors action to rescind a mortgage because it was inextricably intertwined with a state courts foreclosure judgment which was premised on the existence of a valid mortgage

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that debtors allegation that mortgage holder failed to provide him with the statutorily required notice of foreclosure was sufficient to state a claim for wrongful foreclosure
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will, and will cause each Restricted Subsidiary to, maintain, with insurance companies that the Borrower believes (in the good faith judgment of the management of the Borrower) are financially sound and responsible at the time the relevant coverage is placed or renewed, insurance in at least such amounts (after giving effect to any self-insurance which the Borrower believes (in the good faith judgment of management of the Borrower) is reasonable and prudent in light of the size and nature of its business) and against at least such risks (and with such risk retentions) as the Borrower believes (in the good faith judgment or the management of the Borrower) are reasonable and prudent in light of the size and nature of its business, and will furnish to the Administrative Agent, upon written request from the Administrative Agent, information presented in reasonable detail as to the insurance so carried. Each such policy of insurance shall (i) name the Administrative Agent, on behalf of the Lenders, as an additional insured thereunder as its interests may appear and (ii) in the case of each casualty insurance policy, name the Administrative Agent, on behalf of the Lenders as the loss payee thereunder.

assistant: Insurances
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 party represents and warrants to the other that it has not dealt with any real estate broker, salesman or finder in connection with this transaction, other than Coldwell Banker Commercial Upchurch Realty, which has acted as the sole agent in this transaction (“Broker”). Seller shall be obligated to pay a fee to Broker upon the Closing, pursuant to a separate written agreement between Seller and Broker, provided, however, that Seller shall have no obligation to pay any portion of such fee if the Closing shall fail to occur for any reason. Buyer agrees to indemnify and hold Seller harmless from and against any and all claims, losses, costs, damages, liabilities or expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees, to the extent arising out of the claim to a commission by any party claiming by or through Buyer, other than Broker. Seller agrees to indemnify and hold Buyer harmless from and against any and all claims, losses, costs, damages, liabilities or expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees, to the extent arising out of the claim to a commission by any party claiming by or through Seller.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of a weapon and pled guilty to harassment); see also Stein v. Cnty. of Westchester, N.Y., 410 F.Supp.2d 175, 179 (S.D.N.Y.2006) (dismissing § 1983 action brought by former inmate who successfully challenged conviction for, inter alia, rape and sodomy, later pled guilty to endangering the welfare of a child, and filed suit upon release). •These cases, non-binding as they are, nevertheless reflect the continued vitality of the Cameron line of precedent. McNeill is especially persuasive as a close analog; and both of my colleagues in the majority on the present panel sat on the panel in McNeill. The majority relies on other courts’ opinions in cases that bear no resemblance whatsoever to the present. See Maj. Op. at 61-62 n. 2 (citing Smith v. Gonzales, 222 F.3d 1220 (10th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); Davis v. Zain, 79 F.3d 18, 19 (5th Cir. 1996) Options: A. holding that for sentencing purposes the government does not need to allege a defendants prior conviction or prove the fact of a prior conviction where that fact is not an element of the present crime B. holding that a conviction vacated by operation of a state rehabilitative statute still constitutes a conviction for immigration purposes C. holding that defendants statement in defendants brief that a case upon which it was relying was pending on appeal was a judicial admission of that fact D. holding that where the government filed an information identifying the conviction relied upon to enhance defendants sentence and counsel told the court that the defendant did not dispute the conviction the trial judges sentencing ritual here complied with the requirements of 851b E. holding that heck was inapplicable where court vacated defendants conviction and government filed nolle prosequi indicating that it would not prosecute defendants case further

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that heck was inapplicable where court vacated defendants conviction and government filed nolle prosequi indicating that it would not prosecute defendants case further
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: opinions are entitled to controlling weight. If the ALJ finds that any of these opinions is not entitled to controlling weight, the ALJ needs to explain the basis for that finding. IV. The ALJ’s Credibility Determination Is Not “Patently Wrong.” Ulloa contends that the ALJ erred in rejecting his credibility. Ulloa argues that several factors in the record support his credibility, including: the opinions of his treating physicians, an MRI showing a herniated disc, his complaints of ongoing pain and dizziness, prescribed medication to alleviate the pain, as well as his pursuit of significant treatment over time. To succeed on this ground, Ulloa must overcome a highly deferential standard that we accord credibility determinations. See Powers v. Apfel, 207 F.3d 431, 435 (7th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). We will reverse an ALJ’s credibility Options: A. holding that the jurys resolution of questions of credibility and demean or is entitled to special deference B. holding that the credibility determinations by the board are virtually unreviewable C. holding that the credibility determinations of hearing officers are afforded special deference D. holding that credibility determinations are reviewed only for substantial evidence E. holding that credibility determinations are for the jury

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the credibility determinations of hearing officers are afforded special deference
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: alleged negligence. See Pena, 990 S.W.2d at 755-56; Whitten, 427 S.W.2d at 315 (noting that intervening force can rise to level of superseding cause when its operation or consequences are extraordinary). The evidence is undisputed that the robbery was a wrongful act and that at least three of the men involved have been convicted of Dean’s murder — Marshall is sentenced to death and Love to life in prison. See Pena, 990 S.W.2d at 754; Whitten, 427 S.W.2d at 315; see also Marshall v. State, 210 S.W.3d 618, 620, 637 (Tex.Crim.App.2006); Love, 199 S.W.3d at 449, 457. We hold that these wrongful acts are a superseding cause of Dean’s death, and the trial court properly granted Whatabur-ger’s no-evidence summary judgment on Barton’s ordinary negligence claims. See Pena, 990 S.W.2d at 756 (<HOLDING>); Pichardo v. Big Diamond, Inc., 215 S.W.3d Options: A. holding that active participation in a criminal street gang means that there is a relationship between the defendant and the gang that is more than nominal passive inactive or purely technical and that defendant must devote all or a substantial part of his time and efforts to the gang B. holding that experts testimony as to aspects of gang culture relevant to the case including requirements of members obedience silence and staunch defense of other gang members and the punishment meted out to a gang member who violates these requirements went to factual matters outside the experience of the average juror C. holding that murder committed by minor gang members was not foreseeable result of sale of alcohol to gang members D. holding that an expert in the field of gangs and gang codes of behavior including the requirements of members obedience silence and staunch defense of other gang members and the punishment meted out to a gang member who violates these requirements could testify because these were factual matters outside the experience of the average juror E. holding that murder committed by customer was not foreseeable result of excessive sale of alcohol to customer

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that murder committed by minor gang members was not foreseeable result of sale of alcohol to gang members
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice provided for in this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be either personally delivered, or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed (a) if to Executive, to his last known address shown on the payroll records of the Company, and if to the Company, to The New Home Company Inc., 85 Enterprise, Suite 450, Aliso Viejo, California 92656, attention: Chairman of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, with a copy to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company at the same address, or (b) to such other address as either party shall have furnished to the other in accordance with this Section 10.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, statements or other documents which are required or contemplated by this Agreement shall be: (i) in writing and delivered personally or sent by first class registered or certified mail, overnight courier service or facsimile or electronic transmission to the address designated in writing, (ii) by facsimile to the number most recently provided to such party or such other address or fax number as may be designated in writing by such party and (iii) by electronic mail, to the electronic mail address most recently provided to such party or such other electronic mail address as may be designated in writing by such party. Any notice or other communication so transmitted shall be deemed to have been given on the day of delivery, if delivered personally, on the business day following receipt of written confirmation, if sent by facsimile or electronic transmission, one (1) business day after delivery to an overnight courier service or five (5) days after mailing if sent by mail.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: we may suspend , or terminate your access to or use of our services anytime for any reason , such as if you violate the letter or spirit of our terms and polices , or create harm , risk , or possible legal exposure for us , our users , or others .

assistant: Unilateral termination
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 enforceable in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware as applicable to contracts executed and performed within such state, without regard to the application of any choice-of-law rules that would result in the application of another state’s laws.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: At no time during the Post-Termination Period shall you, directly or indirectly, disparage the Company Group or any of the Company Group’s past or present employees, directors, products or services. At no time during the Post-Termination Period shall any executive officers of the Company Group, directly or indirectly, disparage you. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Section 3 shall prevent you from making any truthful statement to the extent (i) necessary to rebut any untrue public statements made about him; (ii) necessary with respect to any litigation, arbitration or mediation involving this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the enforcement of this Agreement; or (iii) required by law or by any court, arbitrator, mediator or administrative or legislative body (including any committee thereof) with jurisdiction over such person.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Seller, the Company and Purchaser shall, on request, on and after the Closing Date, cooperate with one another by furnishing any additional information, executing and delivering any additional documents and/or instruments and doing any and all such other things as may be reasonably required by the parties to consummate or otherwise implement the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

assistant: Cooperation
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: urge us to adopt the view that companion animals are more properly considered as family members than personal property, so that recovery for noneconomic damage occasioned by their loss should be similarly available as for the wrongful death of next of kin. See 14 V.S.A. §§ 1491, 1492(b) (enabling recovery by parent for the “loss of love and companionship” of a deceased child and “for destruction of the parent-child relationship”); Dubaniewicz v. Houman, 2006 VT 99, ¶¶ 6-16, 180 Vt. 367, 910 A.2d 897 (allowing siblings to recover damages for loss of companionship under the wrongful-death statutes when sibling is the next of kin and provides evidence of physical, psychological, and emotional relationship); Hartnett v. Union Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 153 Vt. 152, 156, 569 A.2d 486, 488 (1989) (<HOLDING>). Citing a modern regard for pets as family Options: A. holding that de facto parentchild relationship does not support a finding of qualifyingrelative status B. holding that attorneys fees and costs may not be awarded as child support when they are incurred in a suit to modify the parentchild relationship that does not involve the enforcement of a child support obligation C. holding that consortium is not a part of the parentchild relationship D. holding that the clear and convincing standard must apply in terminating the parentchild relationship after the children have been adjudicated dependent or neglected E. holding that destruction of the parentchild relationship includes grief and mental anguish

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that destruction of the parentchild relationship includes grief and mental anguish
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice to be given under this Agreement must be in writing and delivered either in person, or by (i) air mail (postage prepaid) requiring return receipt, (ii) overnight courier, or (iii) facsimile confirmed thereafter by any of the foregoing, to the Party to be notified at its address(es) given below, or at any address such Party may designate by prior written notice to the other Party in accordance with this Section 16.8. Notice shall be deemed sufficiently given for all purposes upon the earliest of: (a) the date of actual receipt; (b) if air mailed, five (5) days after the date of postmark; (c) if delivered by overnight courier, the next day the overnight courier regularly makes deliveries or (d) if sent by facsimile, the date of confirmation of receipt if during the recipient’s normal business hours, otherwise the next business day.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: recovered despite failure to comply with the NCP. Any costs incurred after a cleanup has begun are recoverable only if incurred consistent with the NCP.” Pierson, 1996 WL 338624, at *6 (citing County Link, 933 F.2d at 1515). Borg-Warner agrees no cleanup has yet begun. 126 . Mar. 20, 2006 Testimony of Steven Roosth. 127 . United States v. Colo. & E. R.R. Co., 50 F.3d 1530, 1536 (10th Cir.1995); Envtl. Transp. Sys., Inc. v. ENSCO, Inc., 969 F.2d 503, 509 (7th Cir.1992). 128 . See Kerr-McGee Chem. Corp. v. Lefton Iron & Metal Co., 14 F.3d 321, 326 (7th Cir. 1994); Seneca Meadows, 427 F.Supp.2d at 292; United States v. Davis, 31 F.Supp.2d 45, 65 (D.R.I.1998) ("Davis I”); Sea Lion, 974 F.Supp. at 600. 129 . See, e.g., Morrison Enters. v. McShares, Inc., 302 F.3d 1127, 1135 (10th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>); Pinal Creek Group v. Newmont Mining Corp., Options: A. holding that the court may equitably apportion among the prps the orphan shares of responsibility for the contamination attributable to defunct insolvent or judgment proof parties or parties that cannot be located or identified B. holding that a federal court may refuse to exercise continuing jurisdiction even though the parties have agreed to it parties cannot confer jurisdiction by stipulation or consent C. holding parties to an exculpatory clause where the parties intent is clear D. holding that the parties choice to require arbitration for disputes which arise under a contract when the standard language was arising out of or relating to demonstrated that the parties intended the agreement to be narrow E. holding that the current party was sufficiently identified with the parties to the prior litigation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the court may equitably apportion among the prps the orphan shares of responsibility for the contamination attributable to defunct insolvent or judgment proof parties or parties that cannot be located or identified
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 properties of the Loan Parties and their respective Subsidiaries, including all Mortgaged Properties, are insured with financially sound and reputable insurance companies not Affiliates of the Borrower, in such amounts, with such deductibles and covering such risks as are customary and appropriate for similarly situated, prudent companies that are engaged in the business conducted by and that own properties similar to those owned by the Loan Parties.

assistant: Insurances
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: AB; no physical evidence was present, and the appellee’s statements in the pretext phone call provided no significant inculpatory information. Even if the two senior noncommissioned officers expressed some uncertainty about exactly what SMSgt AB told them, any indication that SMSgt AB may have made inconsistent statements directly about a charged rape could be reasonably likely to affect the judgment of the factfinder. Cf. Romano, 46 M.J. at 273 (finding the appellant was prejudiced by the Government’s failure to provide discovery of exculpatory statements by an enlisted member with whom the appellant, an officer, was accused to have fraternized because “[t]he central issue in this case was the credibility of the witnesses”); United States v. Brickey, 16 M.J. 268, 268-69 (C.M.A.1983) (<HOLDING>). We do not know whether the statements by the Options: A. holding as brady violation prosecutions failure to disclose to defense that prosecution had agreed not to prosecute key witness in exchange for his testimony at trial B. holding that promises made by the prosecution to a witness in exchange for that witness testimony relate directly to the credibility of the witness C. holding that prejudice existed when an attorney was both the trial counsel and a necessary witness D. holding trial counsel violated its duty to disclose information that impacted both the credibility and competence of a key prosecution witness to a drug trial E. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in upholding witness refusal to disclose place of employment noting that defendant had obtained information regarding witness background that enabled defense counsel to crossexamine witness fully and effectively without the employment information

assistant: The best answer is D. holding trial counsel violated its duty to disclose information that impacted both the credibility and competence of a key prosecution witness to a drug trial
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, other than with regard to employees in the good faith performance of your duties with the Company while employed by the Company, both during and for two (2) years after your employment with the Company terminates for any reason, not to knowingly disparage the Company or its officers, directors, employees or agents in any manner likely to be harmful to it or them or its or their business, business reputation or personal reputation. This paragraph will not be deemed to be violated by statements that are truthful, materially complete and made in good faith in required response to legal process or governmental inquiry.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: if he does an affirmative act, participate’s in another’s affirmative acts, or omits to perform an act which he is legally required to do that causes the deprivation of which complaint is made.” Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d at 743 (citation omitted). “Moreover ... anyone who “causes” any citizen to be subjected to a constitutional deprivation is also liable.” Id. Thus, “[t]he requisite causal connection can be established not only by some kind of direct personal participation in the deprivation, but also by setting in motion a series of acts by others which the actor knows or reasonably should know would cause others to inflict the constitutional injury.” Id. (citation omitted). See also Larez v. City of Los Angeles, 946 F.2d 630, 645 (9th Cir.1991) (citations and quotations omitted) (<HOLDING>); Redman v. County of San Diego, 942 F.2d 1435, Options: A. holding that punitive damages may be awarded under 1983 when the defendants conduct is shown to be motivated by evil motive or intent or when it involves reckless or callous indifference to the federally protected rights of others B. holding that a supervisor with no personal involvement may be liable for the constitutional violation of a subordinate for culpable action or inaction in the training supervision or control of his subordinates acquiescence in the constitutional deprivation or reckless or callous indifference to the rights of others C. holding officer liable for deprivation of constitutional rights despite argument that officer although present was not in control of the situation D. holding that individual liability under 1983 must be based on personal involvement in the alleged constitutional violation E. holding that since the complaint set out a deliberate indifference claim it follows logically that reckless or callous indifference has been noticed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a supervisor with no personal involvement may be liable for the constitutional violation of a subordinate for culpable action or inaction in the training supervision or control of his subordinates acquiescence in the constitutional deprivation or reckless or callous indifference to the rights of others