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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall (a) by 9:00 a.m. (New York City time) on the Trading Day immediately following the Closing Date, issue a press release disclosing the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereby, and (b) file a Current Report on Form 8-K, including the Transaction Documents as exhibits thereto, with the Commission within the time required by the Exchange Act. From and after the issuance of such press release, the Company represents to the Purchaser that it shall have publicly disclosed all material, non-public information delivered to the Purchaser by the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, or any of their respective officers, directors, employees or agents in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. In addition, effective upon the issuance of such press release, the Company acknowledges and agrees that any and all confidentiality or similar obligations under any agreement, whether written or oral, between the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any of their respective officers, directors, agents, employees or Affiliates on the one hand, and the Purchaser or any of its Affiliates on the other hand, in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement shall terminate. The Company shall not publicly disclose the name of the Purchaser, or include the name of the Purchaser in any filing with the Commission or any regulatory agency or Trading Market, without the prior written consent of such Purchaser, except (a) as required by federal securities law in connection with the filing of final Transaction Documents with the Commission and (b) to the extent such disclosure is required by law or Trading Market regulations, in which case the Company shall provide the Purchasers with prior notice of such disclosure permitted under this clause (b).

assistant: Publicity
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 HERETO HEREBY AGREES NOT TO ELECT A TRIAL BY JURY OF ANY ISSUE TRIABLE OF RIGHT BY JURY, AND FOREVER WAIVES ANY RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY FULLY TO THE EXTENT THAT ANY SUCH RIGHT SHALL NOW OR HEREAFTER EXIST WITH REGARD TO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY, OR ANY CLAIM, COUNTERCLAIM OR OTHER ACTION ARISING IN CONNECTION HEREWITH. THIS WAIVER OF RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IS GIVEN KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY BY EACH PARTY, AND IS INTENDED TO ENCOMPASS INDIVIDUALLY EACH INSTANCE AND EACH ISSUE AS TO WHICH THE RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY WOULD OTHERWISE ACCRUE. EACH PARTY IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO FILE A COPY OF THIS PARAGRAPH IN ANY PROCEEDING AS CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF THIS WAIVER.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the offense. Brown, 159 S.W.3d at 711; Torres, 137 S.W.3d at 196; Cantelon, 85 S.W.3d at 461. To determine the sufficiency of the corroborating evidence, we first eliminate the testimony of the covert witness and ask whether other inculpatory evidence tends to connect the accused to the commission of the offense, even if it does not directly link the accused to the crime. See Cantelon, 85 S.W.3d at 461 (citing McDuff v. State, 939 S.W.2d 607, 612 (Tex.Crim.App.1997)). We must view the corroborating evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict. See id. (citing Knox v. State, 934 S.W.2d 678, 686-87 (Tex.Crim.App.1996)). No precise rule can be formulated regarding the amount of evidence re 732, at *2 (Tex.App.-Dallas May 20, 2004, pet. ref'd) (not designated for publication) (<HOLDING>); Woods v. State, No. 12-02-00296-CR, 2004 WL Options: A. holding informants testimony of actual transfer of a controlled substance sufficiently corroborated by testimony of dea agents that informant was given 150 to make controlled buy and by video recording made by informant that showed him buying two 50 rocks from defendant B. holding that the defendants offer of proof which consisted only of a tape recording and a private investigators affidavit did not satisfy the defendants preliminary burden under franks without the offering of other sworn testimony or reliable evidence C. holding where tape corroborated by independent testimony of two police officers and where defendant did not challenge accuracy of recording court did not err in admitting tape despite prosecutions failure to authenticate it D. holding that testimony regarding outofcourt identification was inadmissible where the state failed to ask the witnesses about the identification during its direct examination E. holding officers identification of defendants voice on tape recording of phone call setting up controlled buy sufficient to corroborate informants testimony regarding subsequent buy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding officers identification of defendants voice on tape recording of phone call setting up controlled buy sufficient to corroborate informants testimony regarding subsequent buy
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: Employee acknowledges that Employee has carefully read and fully understands the nature of this Agreement, that Employee has been advised to consult with an attorney of his choosing before executing this Agreement, that Employee has had the opportunity to consider this Agreement, and that all of Employee’s questions concerning this Agreement have been answered to his satisfaction. Employee also agrees that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party will not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement. The provisions of this Agreement together with the exhibits hereto set forth the entire agreement between Employee and Employer Group concerning Employee’s severance pay and benefits and Employee’s termination of employment. Any other contrary promises, written or oral, are replaced by this Agreement, and are no longer effective unless they are contained in this document or are expressly deemed to survive the cessation of Employee’s employment with Employer Group in accordance with the terms of the written document in which they are contained. The validity, interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to the laws of the State of California. Any action arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be conducted before the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service (JAMS) before a single arbitrator. If the parties are unable to agree on an arbitrator, JAMS shall select the arbitrator. Arbitration shall be located in the County of Orange, State of California. This Agreement may be executed via facsimile and/or email, and in two or more counterparts, each of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) (a) The Borrower will use the proceeds of the Advances only for (i) the repayment in full of all Indebtedness outstanding under the Existing Credit Agreement and (ii) working capital and general corporate purposes and not in contravention of Section 5.06 .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Denali and Sanofi shall each cause its sales representatives performing activities under the Co-Commercialization Plan to comply with Applicable Law and industry guidelines related to the performance of its obligations hereunder.

assistant: Compliance With 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: Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, this Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding of the parties hereto with respect to the matters covered herein and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous negotiations, commitments, agreements and writings with respect to the subject matter hereof, all such other negotiations, commitments, agreements and writings which includes, but is not limited to, Will’s Separation Agreement dated March 2, 2000 shall have no further force or effect, and the parties to any such other negotiation, commitment, agreement or writing shall have no further rights or obligations thereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will, and will cause each Subsidiary to, maintain with financially sound and reputable insurance companies insurance on all their Property, liability insurance and environmental insurance in such amounts, subject to such deductibles and self-insurance retentions and covering such Properties and risks as is consistent with sound business practice, and the Borrower will furnish to any Lender upon request full information as to the insurance carried, including a certificate setting forth in summary form the nature and extent of all such insurance.

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: The parties agree that certain matters in which the Employee will be involved during the Employment Period may necessitate the Employee's cooperation in the future. Accordingly, following the termination of the Employee's employment for any reason, to the extent reasonably requested by the Board of Directors of the Bank or the Company, the Employee shall cooperate with the applicable Employer in connection with matters arising out of the Employee's service to the applicable Employer; provided that, the Employers shall make reasonable efforts to minimize disruption of the Employee's other activities. The Bank shall reimburse the Employee for reasonable expenses incurred in connection with such cooperation and, to the extent that the Employee is required to spend substantial time on such matters, the Bank shall compensate the Employee at an hourly rate based on the Employee's Base Cash Compensation on the effective date of termination of employment.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance by each Seller, Guarantor and each Seller Party Subsidiary of each Program Agreement do not conflict with any term or provision of the formation documents or by‑laws of such Seller, Guarantor or such Seller Party Subsidiary or any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment, writ, injunction or decree applicable to such Seller, Guarantor or such Seller Party Subsidiary of any court, regulatory body, administrative agency or governmental body having jurisdiction over such Seller, Guarantor or such Seller Party Subsidiary, which conflict would have a Material Adverse Effect and will not result in any violation of any such mortgage, instrument, agreement or obligation to which such Seller, Guarantor or such Seller Party Subsidiary is a party.

assistant: No Conflicts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement are severable and, in the event that any court of competent jurisdiction shall determine that any one or more of the provisions or part of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall, for any reason, be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision or part of a provision of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall be reformed and construed as if such invalid or illegal or unenforceable provision, or part of such provision, had never been contained herein, so that such provisions would be valid, legal and enforceable to the maximum extent possible.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH GRANTOR, THE COLLATERAL AGENT AND EACH OTHER SECURED PARTY, BY ACCEPTANCE OF THE BENEFITS HEREOF, HEREBY IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY WAIVES TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL ACTION OR PROCEEDING RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT AND FOR ANY COUNTERCLAIM THEREIN.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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 time, no obligation existed under judgment. On October 30, 2002, before spousal support was scheduled to end, wife moved to modify the judgment to provide for indefinite support. Husband moved for summary judgment, ORCP 47 C, on the ground that the court was without authority to extend the duration of spousal support because he had satisfied the support obligation before wife’s motion was filed. The trial court denied husband’s motion, reasoning that husband’s payment accrued on November 1, 2002, and that “[t]he fact that [husband] made this payment early does not change the payment’s due date. [Wife] filed her Motion and Order to Show Cause RE: Modification of Support before November 1, 2002 and therefore that support payment had not yet acc P2d 504, rev den, 308 Or 608 (1989) (<HOLDING>); Park and Park, 43 Or App 367, 602 P2d 1123 Options: A. holding that the trial court lacked authority to renew spousal support payments pursuant to a motion that was filed after the expiration of time during which spousal support was required to be paid under the original judgment B. holding that the trial court was without authority to modify a spousal support obligation when the modification proceeding was initiated ten years after the obligation to pay spousal support under the dissolution judgment had been terminated by order C. holding that a court is without authority to modify its spousal support decree retroactively and relieve a party of the obligation to pay past due installments D. holding that as with a promissory note when the final payment was made on a support judgment the obligation was discharged and after that date husband had no obligation that could support a modification E. holding that a trial court has broad discretion to modify a spousal maintenance award

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the trial court was without authority to modify a spousal support obligation when the modification proceeding was initiated ten years after the obligation to pay spousal support under the dissolution judgment had been terminated by order
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Administrative Agent shall have received this Amendment executed and delivered by the Administrative Agent, the Canadian Administrative Agent, the Parent, the Company and the Lenders party to the Credit Agreement constituting the “Majority Lenders” thereunder and the Term Lenders having more than 50% of the aggregate principal amount of the Term Loans.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: ( ii ) you have the written consent , release and / or permission of each and every identifiable individual person in the user submission to use the name and/or likeness of each and every such individual in the user submission , to enable inclusion and use thereof in the manner contemplated by these terms .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and, except as otherwise provided by Section 12(a)(iii) , shall be deemed given when actually received by the Executive or actually received by the Company’s Secretary or any officer of the Company other than the Executive. If mailed, such notices shall be mailed by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressee only, postage prepaid, if to the Company, to Oshkosh Corporation, Attention: Secretary (or, if the Executive is then Secretary, to the Chief Executive Officer), 2307 Oregon Street, P.O. Box 2566, Oshkosh, WI 54903-2566, or if to the Executive, at the address set forth below the Executive’s signature to this Agreement, or to such other address as the party to be notified shall have theretofore given to the other party in writing.

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: the 2008 policy was any different from the 2006 policy, see id. at 853 (“Although the [2008] policy went into effect after the date of the loan, no prior policy was introduced by either Adamov or the bank.”). We now know, thanks to Adamov’s filing of the 2006 policy, that the operative ethics policy at the time of Adamov’s termination did not proscribe his behavior. See R. 108-4 (2006 Policy at 18) (Page ID # 1105) (prohibiting employees “from borrowing from customers” but not from lending to them). Therefore, there is a genuine issue of material fact on whether U.S. Bank’s proffered reason for terminating Adamov—the $10,000 loan to his college friend—was the real reason for its action. See Ford Motor Co., 782 F.3d at 767; Upshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 576 F.3d 576, 590 (6th Cir. 2009) (<HOLDING>). Second, a reasonable jury could conclude that Options: A. holding that although reasons given by a prosecutor would normally be adequately neutral explanations taken at face value the fact that two of the four proffered reasons do not hold up under judicial scrutiny militates against their sufficiency B. holding no pretext for not following progressive discipline where policy contemplated immediate termination for certain offenses C. holding that the conflicting explanations given by defendants agents for the plaintiffs termination were also sufficient to raise a reasonable inference that defendants proffered reasons for the termination were pretextual the inconsistent testimony regarding the motivating reasons for plaintiffs termination cast doubts on the asserted nondiscriminatory legitimate reasons and may alone be sufficient to preclude summary judgment on plaintiffs claim D. holding that there was pretext when two of fords four proffered reasons for terminating upshaw do not typically warrant any formal discipline at fords sharonville plant let alone termination E. holding that inconsistency in employers reasons for the termination is an indication of pretext

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that there was pretext when two of fords four proffered reasons for terminating upshaw do not typically warrant any formal discipline at fords sharonville plant let alone 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: Directly or, to its knowledge, indirectly use the proceeds of any extension of credit hereunder for any purpose which would violate the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, the UK Bribery Act 2010, or other similar anti-corruption legislation in other jurisdictions applicable to it or the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970, as amended, the money laundering statutes of all jurisdictions applicable to it or the rules and regulations thereunder.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be fairly interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damage sustained” (emphasis added)). Therefore, the court does not have jurisdiction over the Plaintiffs Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 or Fourteenth Amendment claims. 4. The United States Court of Federal Claims Does Not Have Jurisdiction Over A Just Compensation Clause Claim Based On Illegal Taxation. a. The Government’s Argument. Although the Government acknowledges that a claim asserted under the Just Compensation Clause to the United States Constitution is money-mandating, the Government argues that the court does not have jurisdiction over this claim, because the appropriate cause of action is a direct challenge to the tax levy. See Gov Corp., 419 U.S. 102, 127, 95 S.Ct. 335, 42 L.Ed.2d 320 (1974) (<HOLDING>); Rith Energy, Inc. v. United States, 247 F.3d Options: A. holding that a disability must be evaluated at the time of the challenged employment action B. holding that the federal action at issue must be authorized C. holding state of the law must be determined at time of challenged action D. recognizing that every theory of relief must raise federal issue for claim to arise under federal law E. holding that a federal employee cannot bring a civil action placing only the allegedly insufficient administrative remedy at issuethe employee must also place the finding of discrimination at issue

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the federal action at issue must be authorized
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 your continued employment, 33-1/3% of the Stock Units will vest on [DATE] of [YEAR], [YEAR] and [YEAR]. Each date on which a Stock Unit is scheduled to vest pursuant to this Section II.B.2. is a “ Stock Unit Scheduled Vesting Date .” In the event of your termination of employment, the occurrence of your Permanent Disability (as defined in Section V.H.) or the occurrence of a “ Change in Control ” (as defined in the Plan) prior to a Stock Unit Scheduled Vesting Date, your right to any Stock Units that are unvested immediately prior to your termination of employment or occurrence of your Permanent Disability, as applicable, will be determined in accordance with Section III. or Section IV., as applicable. For the avoidance of doubt, the date of your termination of employment for purposes of determining vesting under this Section II.B.2. will be determined in accordance with Section III.H.

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: Id. at 42, 34 S.Ct. 736. The resale contract cost the government more money and it sued Ax-man for the difference. Id. The Supreme Court held that the original contract “specifically made the place of dumping the spoil an essential and particular term of the contract.” Id. at 43, 34 S.Ct. 736. “Dredging the channel would not be enough to show performance of his contract, unless [Axman] complied with the other material requirement as to the deposit of the spoil.” Id. “[W]e think the change in overnment could not charge contractor excess cost of re-let contract where the re-let contract was for a more expensive communication system based on different technology than that provided under the original contract); Rosenberg v. United States, 76 Ct.Cl. 662, 677-79, 1933 WL 1837 (1933) (<HOLDING>); George Leary Constr. Co. v. United States, 63 Options: A. holding original contractor not liable for additional cost of relet contract where significant changes were made to the construction specifications B. recognizing a defense immunizing federal contractors from liability where the contractor has conformed its behavior to precise government specifications and if necessary has warned the government of risks posed by those specifications C. holding that the government could not charge contractor excess cost of relet contract where the governments specifications were impossible to meet government changed the specifications but did not change the price to be paid original contractor refused to perform and new contractor was paid more to meet new specifications D. holding that a contractor who had substantially complied with the building specifications substantially performed E. holding that the government could not charge contractor excess cost of relet contract where government caused a delay in contract performance in which contractor was to use his own equipment original contractors costs increased and government refused to allow original contractor to perform at cost but allowed new contractor to use government equipment and paid new contractor a different rate

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the government could not charge contractor excess cost of relet contract where the governments specifications were impossible to meet government changed the specifications but did not change the price to be paid original contractor refused to perform and new contractor was paid more to meet new specifications
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 represents to the Company and its affiliates that, in fulfilling his duties or responsibilities to the Company and its affiliates or for any other reason, he will not disclose or disseminate any information from any of his former employers that would be considered by such former employers to be confidential information. In addition, he represents that, except as previously disclosed to AGS in writing, he is not subject to any covenant not to compete that would limit his ability to fulfill his duties and responsibilities hereunder.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and have chosen to abandon the misdemeanor-manslaughter rule. See, e.g., State v. Pray, 378 A.2d 1322, 1323 (Me.1977) (acknowledging that criminal negligence had been required for misdemeanor-manslaughter rule, but choosing to abolish the entire doctrine in Maine); Commonwealth v. Catalina, 407 Mass. 779, 556 N.E.2d 973, 978 (1990) (noting the strong trend away from the misdemeanor-manslaughter rule and holding “that unlawful-act manslaughter should be abandoned in Massachusetts except for appropriate cases which are based on the principle that a battery that causes death is manslaughter”). Other jurisdictions require that the predicate misdemeanor for misdemeanor manslaughter be either inherently dangerous or malum in se. See, e.g., Comber v. United States, 584 A.2d 26, 50 (D.C.1990) (<HOLDING>); Schlossman v. State, 105 Md.App. 277, 659 Options: A. holding that begay rejected that circuits earlier approach under which an offense presented a serious potential risk of physical injury to another if the offense conduct had the potential for serious physical injury to another B. holding method of merchandising and nature of article causing injury more important than length of time dangerous article has been in area in which injury occurs C. holding that under the misdemeanormanslaughter rule the category of misdemeanors dangerous in and of themselves encompasses misdemeanors which bear an inherent danger of physical injury D. recognizing inherent power of courts of appeals E. holding that the malum in se commonlaw misdemeanor of intentional battery was a sufficient predicate offense even though not inherently dangerous to support a misdemeanormanslaughter conviction

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that under the misdemeanormanslaughter rule the category of misdemeanors dangerous in and of themselves encompasses misdemeanors which bear an inherent danger of physical injury
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: Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that notwithstanding the use of the term “Purchased Intellectual Property” in the Original Agreement, no Purchased Intellectual Property, Intellectual Property Licenses or Technology are included in the Assets and Purchaser has no rights thereto, including, without limitation, the right to use the word “Apollo,” the name “Figueroa Medical Clinic” or any variation or derivation of such word or such name, in connection with its business or the use of the Assets. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Purchaser may use the name “Fletcher Family Medical Clinic” or any similar name in connection with its business or the use of the Assets.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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: common law. See Green v. United States, 356 U.S. 165, 169, 78 S.Ct. 632, 2 L.Ed.2d 672 (1958) (explaining that at English common law, disobedience of a writ under the King’s seal was treated as a contempt), overruled in part on other grounds by Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194, 88 S.Ct. 1477, 20 L.Ed.2d 522 (1968). While this Circuit has yet to address this issue, we have cited with approval the Sixth Circuit’s decision that “[t]he crime of bail jumping diminishes the power of a court to control those properly within its jurisdiction and afflicts that court with its detrimental effects.” United States v. Chappell, 854 F.2d 190, 192 (7th Cir.1988) (quoting United States v. Roche, 611 F.2d 1180, 1183 (6th Cir.1980)); see also United States v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1213, 1216 (6th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). Garrett directs our attention to decisions in Options: A. holding that the summary rejection of a witness as noncredible is prejudicial and the proper administration of justice requires more B. holding that it is a well established rule that the power to judge a contempt rests exclusively with the court contemned and that no court is authorized to punish a contempt against another court C. holding that a civil contempt defendant has a right to a jury trial when the act of contempt was not committed in the presence of the court and when the incarceration is in part punitive D. holding that the extension of judicial immunity to witnesses attorneys and parties was regarded by us as necessary to the proper administration of justice E. holding that the primary effect of bail jumping is upon the proper administration of justice in the court which admits one to bail and is akin to a constructive contempt of court quoting roche 611 f2d at 1183

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the primary effect of bail jumping is upon the proper administration of justice in the court which admits one to bail and is akin to a constructive contempt of court quoting roche 611 f2d at 1183
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: peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Article 40 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights provides: "That the liberty of the press ought to be inviolably preserved; that every citizen of the State ought to be allowed to speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that privilege.” The Maryland Court of Appeals has held that courts ordinarily “need not consider Article 40 and the First Amendment separately as Article 40 is read generally in pari materia with the First Amendment.” Nefedro v. Montgomery County, 414 Md. 585, 593 n. 5, 996 A.2d 850, 855 n. 5 (2010). Plaintiff does not assert that the protection under Article 40 exceeds that of the First Ame Auth., 150 F.3d 695, 702 (7th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). However, the tourist areas in those cases had Options: A. holding that the venice beach boardwalk is a traditional public forum B. holding that bostons fish pier is not a traditional public forum C. recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties D. holding that san franciscos fishermans wharf is a traditional public forum E. holding that chicagos navy pier is not a traditional public forum

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that chicagos navy pier is not a traditional public forum
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: terms, which does not include former employees. This interpretation is supported by neither Amara, see 131 S.Ct. at 1879-82 (identifying three alternative — not interdependent — equitable avenues for obtaining monetary compensation for misleading disclosures), nor equity, see Baltzer v. Raleigh & Augusta Air-Line R. Co., 115 U.S. 634, 645, 6 S.Ct. 216, 29 L.Ed. 505 (1885) (“[I]t is well settled that equity would reform the contract, and enforce it, as reformed, if the mistake or fraud were shown”); Hogg v. Maxwell, 218 F. 356, 358 (2d Cir.1914) (observing that if court of equity granted relief of contract reformation, it could “go on and do complete justice by awarding damages for the breach”); see also Johnson v. Meriter Health Servs. Emp. Ret. Plan, 702 F.3d 364, 369 (7th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). As to the contention that Osberg cannot Options: A. holding that retirement benefits are accrued benefits under erisa B. holding that employer was acting as erisa fiduciary when it misled employees regarding security of their benefits C. holding that an employees claim for wrongful discharge based on the employers desire to avoid contributing to or paying benefits under the employees pension fund is preempted by erisa even though the claims are asserted under tort theories not erisa and seek damages only in the form of lost wages mental anguish and punitive damages not benefits under the plan D. holding that it is not necessary to ascertain whether a plan is tax qualified but only that it is covered by erisa E. holding that erisa authorizes former employees to sue for unpaid benefits whether under the plan as it is or as it should be once reformed

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that erisa authorizes former employees to sue for unpaid benefits whether under the plan as it is or as it should be once reformed
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 equity. “Despite the merger doctrine, prior agreements are not merged into a realty deed [that] is signed due to fraud, accident, or mistake.” Geodyne Energy Income Prod. P’ship I-E v. Newton Corp., 161 S.W.3d 482, 487 (Tex.2005). In equity, Texas law would allow the Cades to sue to reform the deed based, on mutual mistake, but they must bring that claim within the four-year statute of limitations. For the reasons the Court explains, I agree that the law charges the Cades with knowledge of the deed’s contents as of the date they signed it, so they cannot rely on the discovery rule to toll the statute of limitations, which expired before they filed suit to reform the deed in February 2011. See Nat’l Prop. Holdings, L.P. v. Westergren, 453 S.W.3d 419, 425 (Tex.2015) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>) (quoting El Paso Field Servs., L.P. v. MasTec Options: A. holding that the law presumes that a party knows and accepts the terms of a contract the party signs andit is not the courts role to protect parties from their own agreements B. holding that when a contract is signed by one party but not the other the manifestation of consent by the nonsigning party is sufficient to bind that party C. holding that prevailing party was entitled to attorneys fees under an option contract which had expired prior to litigation because the parties were litigating their performance under the terms of the contract D. holding that when a court accepts a fixed plea agreement it is bound by the agreements terms E. holding that an arbitration agreement enforceable against party who signed the agreement even where the other party did not sign it because generally it is enough that the party against whom the contract is sought to be enforced signs it

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the law presumes that a party knows and accepts the terms of a contract the party signs andit is not the courts role to protect parties from their own agreements
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: facility; (iii) the overall financial resources of the covered entity; the overall size of the business of a covered entity with respect to the number of its employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities; and (iv) the type of operation or operations of the covered entity, including the composition, structure and functions of the workforce of such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12111(10)(B). JC Penney challenges Bukta’s proposed accommodation, arguing that a part time schedule imposes an undue hardship on its business by eliminating the essential job requirement of attendance. Essential function means the fundamental duties of the position. 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(n)(l). Attendance can be an essential job function. See Brenneman v. MedCentral Health System, 366 F.3d 412 (6th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); Gantt v. Wilson Sporting Goods Co., 143 F.3d Options: A. holding that attendance can be an essential function of a position and that excessive absenteeism rendered an employee unqualified for such a position B. holding governments position unreasonable where government advanced no legal authority for its position and applicable principle of law was long settled C. recognizing that an employers decision to eliminate a position is a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for terminating a position or employee D. holding that attendance is a minimum function of any job E. holding attendance problem was a legitimate basis for an employers termination of an employee

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that attendance can be an essential function of a position and that excessive absenteeism rendered an employee unqualified for such a position
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 waiver by Sublandlord or Subtenant of any breach or default of any term, provision, covenant, or condition contained in this Sublease, or the failure of such party to insist on the strict performance by the other party, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such term, provision, covenant, or condition as to any subsequent breach or default thereof or of any other term, covenant, or condition contained in this Sublease. The acceptance of Rent hereunder by Sublandlord or the payment of Rent hereunder by Subtenant shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any breach or default by Subtenant or Sublandlord, respectively, of any term, provision, covenant, or condition herein, other than the failure of Subtenant to pay the particular rent so accepted, regardless of Sublandlord’s or Subtenant’s respective knowledge of such breach or default at the time of acceptance or payment of rent.

assistant: No Waivers
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 hereby represent, acknowledge, and agree that you have, prior to signing this Agreement, fully disclosed to the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company all information that you possess with respect to any violations, or potential violations, of the securities laws or any other laws and regulations with which the Company has an obligation to comply.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 350 U.S. 521 76 S.Ct. 539 100 L.Ed. 666 Application of Eugene BURWELL. Application of James Alonzo ROGERS. Nos. 736, 737. Decided April 2, 1956. PER CURIAM. 1 The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has certified to this Court the following three questions: 2 '(1) Has Congress created in the Court of Appeals, as a court, the jurisdiction to issue a certificate of probable cause, sought from the court, as a court, by the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2253, replacing the repealed 28 U.S.C. § 466? 3 '(2) If the Supreme Court holds that Congress has not given the Courts of Appeal such jurisdiction, did the Supreme Court create that jurisdiction, by its per curiam opinion, rendered without argument, which failed to consider 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and was based on the repealed 28 U.S.C. § 466 and House v. Mayo, 1945, 324 U.S. 42, 48 (65 S.Ct. 517, 521, 89 L.Ed. 739), and its remand to this court 'so that the petitioner's application for a certificate of probable cause may be entertained on its merits'? 4 '(3) If the Supreme Court holds that Congress or the Court creates such jurisdiction by 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and that House v. Mayo applies, does its mandate mean that all the judges, as judges, or some individual judge, or the court as a court shall consider the petition for a certificate of probable cause?' 5 Earlier this Term we were constrained to find that the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was in error in deeming itself without jurisdiction to entertain applications for certificates of probable cause, under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253, addressed to that court instead of to a judge or judges thereof. Accordingly, we reversed the judgments in these cases. Burwell v. Teets, 350 U.S. 808, 76 S.Ct. 98; Rogers v. Teets, 350 U.S. 809, 76 S.Ct. 98. Each of these cases was reversed 'so that the petitioner's application for a certificate of probable cause may be entertained on its merits.' 6 We did not attempt to lay down a procedure for the Court of Appeals to follow for the entertainment of such applications on their merits. We shall not do so now. It is for the Court of Appeals to determine whether such an application to the court is to be considered by a panel of the Court of Appeals, by one of its judges, or in some other way deemed appropriate by the Court of Appeals within the scope of its powers. Cf. Western Pacific R. Corp. v. Western Pacific R. Co., 345 U.S. 247, 73 S.Ct. 656, 97 L.Ed. 986. It is not for this Court to prescribe how the discretion vested in a Court of Appeals, acting under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253, should be exercised. See United States v. Rosenburgh, 7 Wall. 580, 19 L.Ed. 263. As long as that court keeps within the bounds of judicial discretion, its action is not reviewable. 7 The entire certificate in each of these cases must be dismissed. 8 Dismissed.

assistant: 9
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: as between you and linkedin , you own the content and information that you submit or post to the services and you are only granting linkedin and our affiliates the following non-exclusive license : a worldwide , transferable and sublicensable right to use , copy , modify , distribute , publish , and process , information and content that you provide through our services , without any further consent , notice and/or compensation to you or others .

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: Bryant concluded that “[t]he State ha[d] the burden of proof to show that the amount of 0.012 grams of a substance con-taming an unknown amount of cocaine[] would have a discernable effect on the human body.” However, insofar as the defendant advances a motion to dismiss on de minimis grounds, it is the defendant, and not the prosecution, who bears the burden of proof on the issue. In other words, as this court’s de minimis cases attest, the defendant must establish that his or her conduct neither caused nor threatened to cause the harm or evil that the statute, under which he or she is charged, seeks to prevent. See, e.g., State v. Hironaka, 99 Hawai'i 198, 53 P.3d 806 (2002); State v. Carmichael, 99 Hawai'i 75, 53 P.3d 214, 219 (2002); Balanza, 93 Hawai'i at 283-85, 1 P.3d at 285-87 (<HOLDING>); State v. Akina, 73 Haw. 75, 77-80, 828 P.2d Options: A. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by determining expert witness was qualified to testify B. holding that trial courts limited findings were insufficient to allow determination of whether trial court abused its discretion in denying defendants motion to dismiss his indictment on constitutional speedy trial grounds C. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants motion to dismiss on de minimis grounds where his expert witness testimony was inadmissible D. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling motion for new trial on perjury grounds E. holding juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants motion to dismiss on de minimis grounds where his expert witness testimony was inadmissible