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: Each Loan Party will do all things necessary to comply with its Charter Documents in all material respects, and to obtain, preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect its legal existence and the rights, licenses, permits, privileges, franchises, patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade names material to the conduct of its business, except, in each case to the extent that the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; provided , however , that the foregoing shall not prohibit any merger, consolidation, liquidation, disposition or dissolution permitted under SECTION 6.03 or SECTION 6.05.

assistant: Existence
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 indemnification and contribution provisions in this Section 4 shall be a continuing right and shall survive the registration and sale of any securities by any Person entitled to indemnification or contribution, as applicable hereunder, and the expiration or termination of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Both professionals advised Grisez that there was no basis for an insanity or diminished capacity defense. Under the applicable law, Grisez’s reliance on the experts’ opinions was justified. See Hendricks v. Calderon, 70 F.3d 1032, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1995); see also Wallace v. Stewart, 184 F.3d 1112, 1116-18 (9th Cir.1999). Although Grisez did not provide the experts with background information about Easley and his case, we have held that an attorney’s failure to volunteer information to an expert who does not ask for it does not show ineffective assistance at the guilt phase of a trial. See Wallace, 184 F.3d at 1118; Hendricks, 70 F.3d at 1037-38. Additionally, the defendant himself insisted on using an alibi defense. See Bean v. Calderon, 163 F.3d 1073, 1082 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Grisez’s performance in forgoing a mental Options: A. holding that counsel was ineffective for failing to assert an entrapment defense that was legally available and where there was no other viable defense to present B. holding that an attorney was ineffective for failing to pursue a voluntary intoxication defense because he did not understand the elements C. holding that where defense turned on defendants credibility there could be no strategic basis for allowing jury to hear defendant had prior conviction for same offense for which he was being tried and concluding counsel rendered ineffective assistance D. holding that a defendant abandons an issue for which no argument is offered on appeal E. holding that there is no ineffective assistance if an attorney makes a strategic choice to pursue one defense and abandons a conflicting defense

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that there is no ineffective assistance if an attorney makes a strategic choice to pursue one defense and abandons a conflicting defense
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: evidence of record, or it is inconsistent with the physician’s own medical records. Phillips, 357 F.3d at 1240-41; Edwards v. Sullivan, 937 F.2d 580, 583-84 (11th Cir.1991) (concluding that good cause existed not to rely on a treating physician’s findings when, inter alia, his treatment notes contained unexplained inconsistencies). The ALJ may reject the opinion of any physician when the evidence supports a contrary conclusion. Sryock v. Heckler, 764 F.2d 834, 835 (11th Cir.1985). Further, when a treating physician makes merely conclusory statements, the ALJ may afford them such weight as is supported by the clinical or laboratory findings and other consistent evidence of the claimant’s impairments. Wheeler v. Heckler, 784 F.2d 1073, 1075 (11th Cir. 1986); see Vega, 265 F.3d at 1220 (<HOLDING>). When a treating physician’s opinion does not Options: A. holding that where the alj had already obtained and considered reports from treating physicians the alj had before him a complete medical history and the evidence received from the treating physicians was adequate for him to make a determination as to disability B. holding that the alj erred in failing to give the findings and assessments of the treating physicians any weight when the medical evidence and claimants testimony supported a diagnosis of cfs C. holding that the alj failed to analyze the effect of cfs on a claimants ability to do work meaningfully when he rejected cfs as a diagnosis for want of a definite test or specific laboratory findings to support the diagnosis D. holding that the alj properly relied on the assessments of a nonexamining physician and not claimants treating physicians in determining the rfc at step four E. holding that a treating physicians diagnosis could be rejected for specific and legitimate reasons that are supported by substantial evidence in the record

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the alj erred in failing to give the findings and assessments of the treating physicians any weight when the medical evidence and claimants testimony supported a diagnosis of cfs
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: his monthly child support obligation. We note, however, that Mother cross-petitioned and received a judgment against Father for child support arrearages. The family court did not make a specific finding of which party prevailed and such a determination is not necessary to resolve the issue here. Even assuming Father was the “prevailing party” on his petition to reduce child support, we nonetheless reject his position that AR.S. § 25-503(E) prevents the family court from awarding fees to the non-prevailing party. ¶ 8 The use of the word “may” in A.R.S. § 25-503(E) provides the family court broad discretion to decide whether to award attorney fees to the prevailing party on a request to modify child support. See Alejandro v. Harrison, 223 Ariz. 21, 24, ¶ 10, 219 P.3d 231, 234 (App.2009) (<HOLDING>). And, contrary to Father’s argument, the Options: A. recognizing that a statutes use of may when describing the courts authority generally connotes discre tion B. recognizing the medicare statutes broad delegation of authority C. holding use of word may generally indicates permissive rather than mandatory intent D. recognizing only state courts may authoritatively construe state statutes E. recognizing that cases have generally treated statutory exceptions from remedial statutes as affirmative defenses

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that a statutes use of may when describing the courts authority generally connotes discre tion
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: so restricted. Rather, ... the doctrine is an intensely practical one, grounded in the realities of litigation in our adversary system. One of those realities is that attorneys often must rely on the assistance of investigators and other agents in the compilation of materials in preparation for trial. It is therefore necessary that the doctrine protect materials prepared by agents for the attorney as well as those prepared by the attorney himself. Id. at 238-39, 95 S.Ct. 2170. Accordingly, federal courts have consistently ruled that the work product doctrine is not inapplicable merely because the material was prepared by or for a party’s insurer or agents of the insurer. See Railroad Salvage of Conn. Inc. v. Japan Freight Consolidators (U.S.A.), Inc., 97 F.R.D. 37, 41 (E.D.N.Y.1983) (<HOLDING>), aff'd, 779 F.2d 38 (2d Cir.1985); Home Ins. Options: A. holding that correspondence between defendant and its liability carriers was protected B. holding that the prohibition of inmatetoinmate correspondence was not an unconstitutional infringement of prisoners first amendment rights C. recognizing correspondence appeared to establish a settlement relationship between the parties given the letters presented an attempt to curb further litigation D. recognizing first amendment and fourteenth amendment interests in inmate correspondence E. holding that a sixmonth gap between the protected activity and the employees termination was insufficient to infer that the protected activity was a contributing factor

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that correspondence between defendant and its liability carriers was protected
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: constitute ineffective assistance of counsel); Boag v. Raines, 769 F.2d 1341, 1344 (9th Cir.1985) (same). Valdez next argues that his appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to challenge the district court’s sentence enhancements under U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1(b)(1) (firearm possession) and 3B1.1 (leader/organizer). However, the record overwhelmingly supports a finding that Valdez was a leader and/or organizer of the conspiracy, thereby qualifying him for an enhancement under § 3B1.1. And according to the testimony of a co-conspirator, Valdez possessed a firearm during the commission of the conspiracy and it was not “clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense.” § 2D1.1 cmt. n. 3; see also United States v. Willard, 919 F.2d 606, 609 (9th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Valdez’s sentence enhancement Options: A. holding that the court cannot examine the underlying merits of the claims in determining whether to certify a class B. holding that a trial court has a duty to examine the entire record including all physical documentary evidence in order to reach an equitable result C. holding that the trial court must examine the entire course of criminal conduct in determining possession D. holding that for purposes of determining whether complete diversity exists a court must examine the plaintiffs pleading as of the time of the petition for removai E. holding that court must examine and consider the entire writing in an effort to harmonize and give effect to all the provisions of the contract so that none will be rendered meaningless

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the trial court must examine the entire course of criminal conduct in determining possession
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: statutory ground for seeking an administrative hearing in the OAH. See N.C.G.S. § 126-34.1(a)(7). Accordingly, the doctrine of administrative exhaustion does not prevent plaintiff from filing a whistleblower claim in superior court. In conclusion, plaintiff’s allegations are sufficient to overcome defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Moreover, plaintiff is not barred from bringing his claim by the doctrine of administrative exhaustion. The decision of the Court of Appeals is therefore reversed, and the case is remanded to that Court for consideration of plaintiffs remaining assignment of error. REVERSED AND REMANDED. 1 . We note that the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overruled Goff in Carter v. South Central Bell, 912 F.2d 832, 840-41 (5th Cir. 1990) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1260, 115 L. Ed. 2d Options: A. holding that plaintiffs claims under 42 usc 1981 are also governed by the special venue provision of title vii B. holding that retaliation claims are not cognizable under 42 usc 1981 C. holding that civil rights claims under 42 usc 1981 and 1982 are personal injury tort claims D. holding that claims under 42 usc 1983 are not personal injury tort claims E. holding that a claim of retaliation for filing eeoc charges is cognizable under 1981

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that retaliation claims are not cognizable under 42 usc 1981
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower is a corporation duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of its state of incorporation or formation; has the power to own its properties and to carry on its business as now being conducted; and is duly qualified to do business and is in good standing in every jurisdiction in which the character of the properties owned by it or in which the transaction of its business makes its qualification necessary.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in reliance upon the representations and warranties set forth in this Agreement, the Company agrees to issue, sell and deliver to each Purchaser and AFIV shall cause each Purchaser to purchase from the Company, a Warrant to purchase the number of shares (the “ Warrant Shares ”) of Common Stock to be set forth opposite such Purchaser’s name set forth on the Allocation Schedule (as defined below) in consideration of the payment of the amount to be set forth opposite such Purchaser’s name on the Allocation Schedule. Each of the Warrants shall be issued to the Purchasers, and AFIV shall cause each of the Purchasers to fund the purchase price for such Purchaser’s Warrant, on the date that all of the conditions set forth in Section 2.1 (such conditions, the “ Closing Conditions ” and such date, the “ Closing Date ”) have been satisfied.

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

user: In the event that we or any of our representatives receive a request or are required (by deposition, interrogatory, request for documents, subpoena, civil investigative demand or similar process) to disclose all or any part of the Evaluation Materials, we or our representatives, as the case may be, agree to (i) immediately notify the Company of the existence, terms and circumstances surrounding such a request,

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may not be assigned, nor may any obligations under this Agreement be transferred or delegated, by either party without the prior written consent of the other, except that, without the prior written consent of the Manager, the Company may assign all or a portion of its rights and obligations under this Agreement to any of the Company’s Affiliates.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding the termination of this Agreement by Employee or the Company, the provisions of Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 13 shall survive such termination as if this Agreement remained in full force and effect, and no such termination shall terminate the covenants and obligations in said Sections hereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: whether a duty to defend exists, we should look at the terms of the contract and the allegations contained in the complaint. According to the City, if the allegations in the complaint fall within the terms of the contract, then the duty to defend is triggered. BPLW, on the other hand, argues that a contractual duty to defend can only be triggered if vicarious liability is alleged in the underlying complaint. While BPLW acknowledges that our case law suggests that the City’s view is correct, it argues that the cases that set out this rule all involve insurance contracts and thus that the rule is inapplicable to a duty to defend contained in other types of contracts. See, e.g., Bernalillo County Deputy Sheriffs Ass’n v. County of Bernalillo, 114 N.M. 695, 697, 845 P.2d 789, 791 (1992) (<HOLDING>). We disagree with BPLW and, as we explain Options: A. holding that an insurers duty to defend pursuant to an insurance contract arises whenever the complaint filed by the injured party may potentially come within the policys coverage B. holding insurers duty to defend is determined by allegations in the petition C. holding despite authority for the general proposition that the duty to defend is determined based on the allegations of the complaint that an insurer had no duty to defend where the underlying claim was covered by the policy based on the facts pleaded in complaint but other facts not appearing in the complaint excluded coverage D. holding that the insurer had no duty to defend the insured because the allegations of the initial complaint did not allege facts which would bring the case within the coverage of the title insurance policy E. holding that an insurers duty to defend arises from the allegations in the complaint against the insured

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an insurers duty to defend arises from the allegations in the complaint against the insured
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 seriousness of her offense. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A). This court has recognized that a sick, young child who requires special care presents an extraordinary family circumstance that the court must consider in selecting its sentence — and a statement that the circumstance is the defendant’s fault is not adequate consideration. United States v. Schroeder, 536 F.3d 746, 756 (7th Cir.2008). Nonetheless, Pilon’s family hardship argument was not a major part of her sentencing strategy, and the district court gave consideration commensurate with the argument that was made. The district court demonstrated that it had read her letter and considered her family hardship, but thought that the circumstances did not outweigh the seriousness of her offense. Cf. Schroeder, 536 F.3d at 751 (<HOLDING>). Further, by Pilon’s own admission, her older Options: A. holding the resolution of questions regarding credibility and the weight given to testimony is a function of the family court judge who heard the testimony B. holding that cooperation agreement defendant entered into with the government did not include defendants testifying at trial where there was no meeting of the minds as to that point C. holding that risk is measured at the point when the attorneys time was committed to the case D. holding that summarily blaming the family hardship on the defendant was insufficient consideration where the defendant made family hardship a focal point by providing medical documentation offering testimony about the familys hardship and making the circumstances a key point of argument at sentencing E. recognizing the same point

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that summarily blaming the family hardship on the defendant was insufficient consideration where the defendant made family hardship a focal point by providing medical documentation offering testimony about the familys hardship and making the circumstances a key point of argument at sentencing
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 undersigned represents and warrants to Landlord that (i) Tenant is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing in accordance with the laws of the state under which it was organized; (ii) all action necessary to authorize the execution of this Amendment has been taken by Tenant; and (iii) the individual executing and delivering this Amendment on behalf of Tenant has been authorized to do so, and such execution and delivery shall bind Tenant. Tenant, at Landlord's request, shall provide Landlord with evidence of such authority.

assistant: Warranties
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 pay or reimburse the Executive for all ordinary and reasonable out-of-pocket expenses actually incurred (and, in the case of reimbursement, paid) by the Executive during the Term in the performance of the Executive’s services under this Agreement, in accordance with the Company’s policies regarding such reimbursements. The Company shall also pay or reimburse the Executive for all attorneys’ fees and other charges of counsel reasonably incurred by the Executive in connection with the negotiation and execution of this Agreement, promptly upon presentation of appropriate supporting documentation and in accordance with the expense reimbursement policy of the Company, up to the amount of $5,000.

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: whether the structure Jennings placed on his property constitutes a mobile home or a generic successor as prohibited by the deed restriction. As a result, summary judgment is improper because a fact question exists regarding whether Jennings’s home qualifies as the type of structure that the deed restriction prohibits. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s judgment declaring that Jennings’s home violates the deed restriction against mobile homes and remand the cause for a determination of whether Jennings’s home constitutes a mobile home or a generic successor of a mobile home as prohibited by the deed restriction, giving effect to the liberal construction required for unambiguous deed restrictions. See T Assoc., Inc., 953 S.W.2d 525, 528 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1997, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). However, because we have determined that a Options: A. holding that property owner could not argue it had no notice of deed restrictions simply because guidelines were unclear when owner acknowledged having copy of such restrictions B. holding that because the property owner argued only a theory of taking that was no longer a valid theory property owner did not demonstrate his entitlement to relief C. holding that the current property owner may not assert a public nuisance claim against the former owner D. holding that property owners who are aware of deed restrictions and accompanying guidelines are considered to be on notice of such restrictions despite believing that guidelines are unclear and inapplicable E. holding that magistrate judge had jurisdiction to enter default judgment in an in rem forfeiture action even though property owner had not consented to it because 28 usc 636c1 only requires the consent of the parties and the property owner having failed to comply with the applicable filing requirements was not a party

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that property owner could not argue it had no notice of deed restrictions simply because guidelines were unclear when owner acknowledged having copy of such restrictions
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 a Notice of Borrowing or Letter of Credit Application, as applicable, from the Borrower in accordance with Section 2.3(a) or Section 4.2 , as applicable.

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: This Agreement shall be binding upon the Joint ABL Agent, the other ABL Claimholders, the Term Loan Collateral Agent, the other Term Loan Claimholders, the ABL Grantor, and their respective successors and assigns from time to time. If either of the Joint ABL Agent or the Term Loan Collateral Agent resigns or is replaced pursuant to the ABL Loan Documents or the Term Loan Documents, as applicable, its successor and/or assign shall be deemed to be a party to this Agreement and shall have all the rights of, and be subject to all the obligations of, this Agreement. No provision of this Agreement will inure to the benefit of a bankruptcy trustee, debtor-in-possession, creditor trust or other representative of an estate or creditor of the ABL Grantor, including where any such bankruptcy trustee, debtor-in-possession, creditor trust or other representative of an estate is the beneficiary of a Lien securing ABL Priority Collateral by virtue of the avoidance of such Lien in an Insolvency or Liquidation Proceeding.

assistant: Assigns
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: a jailhouse witness to the stand who testified that while in a holding cell, he heard Mr. Shearod say that he had “killed the cracker,” referring to the white victim. The State later distanced itself from this testimony in closing argument as it became highly likely that it was false. However, in arguing against the motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence, the State correctly maintained that it was within the jury’s province to pass upon this witness’s credibility. Nonetheless, we are compelled to note that without this testimony — and without other testimony that we discuss below— the State would likely fail to establish a prima facie case sufficient to withstand a motion for judgment of acquittal. Cf. Walker v. State, 273 So.2d 137, 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973) (<HOLDING>); Hines v. State, 227 So.2d 334, 336 (Fla. 1st Options: A. holding that where testimony is inherently improbable the court may choose to disregard it B. recognizing that although the question of the credibility of witnesses is one for the jury alone such rule does not mean that the jury is at liberty under the guise of passing upon the credibility of a witness to disregard his testimony when from no reasonable point of view is it open to doubt C. holding that the testimony of the complaining witness although argumentative inconclusive conflicting and appearing in certain instances to be unbelievable does not by itself warrant reversal because the jury is at liberty to believe what they choose and disbelieve what they choose but reversing for a new trial because of additional errors D. holding that a superior court justice may not choose between conflicting inferences at summary judgment stage E. holding that trier of fact may believe one witness disbelieve others and resolve inconsistencies in the testimony of any witness

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the testimony of the complaining witness although argumentative inconclusive conflicting and appearing in certain instances to be unbelievable does not by itself warrant reversal because the jury is at liberty to believe what they choose and disbelieve what they choose but reversing for a new trial because of additional errors
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 Employee agrees to cooperate with the Company, during the Covered Employment Term and thereafter (including following the Employee’s termination of employment for any reason), by making himself reasonably available to testify on behalf of the Company or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates in any action, suit, or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative, or investigative, and to assist the Company or any affiliate or subsidiary thereof, in any such action, suit, or proceeding, by providing information and meeting and consulting with the Company’s Board of Directors or its representatives or counsel, or representatives or counsel to the Company or any subsidiary or affiliate thereof as reasonably requested; provided , however that the same does not materially interfere with his then-current professional activities and is not contrary to the best interests of the Employee. The Company agrees to reimburse the Employee, on an after-tax basis, for all expenses actually incurred in connection with his provision of testimony or assistance.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties agree that compliance with Sections 5.1 -5.7 of the Agreement and Appendix A is necessary to protect the business and goodwill of Company, that the restrictions contained herein are reasonable and that any breach of this Section will result in irreparable and continuing harm to Company, for which monetary damages will not provide adequate relief. Accordingly, in the event of any actual or threatened breach of any covenant or promise made by Executive in Section 5, Company and Executive agree that Company shall be entitled to all appropriate remedies, including temporary restraining orders and injunctions enjoining or restraining such actual or threatened breach. Executive hereby consents to the issuance thereof forthwith by any court of competent jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 2010 WL 877569, at *3; Hart, 1999 WL 225956, at *2). The court reasoned that because Samshi Homes acknowledged that the documents filed by De Leon were in the form of mechanics liens, the documents were instruments “provided by the ... laws of this state” and were “therefore not presumed to be fraudulent under section 51.901(c)(2)(A).” Id. The court concluded, “Samshi Homes[’s] complaints based on section 53.054 are therefore beyond the scope of the current proceedings.” Id. at 668. The court further concluded that “Sam-shi Homes’ substantive evidentiary claims — that it, rather than Kama, owned the subject properties and that Kama never entered into an agreement with De Leon — are also beyond the scope of the section 51.903 proceedings.” Id. (citing Becker, 2010 WL 877569, at *3 (<HOLDING>)). Although it is factually distinct from the Options: A. holding that the declaratory judgment act is remedial only and the party seeking declaratory relief must have an underlying cause of action B. holding that an injured party in an underlying tort action was not a necessary party in an action by an insurer for declaratory judgment of nonliability where the injured person had not obtained judgment against the insured C. holding that movant converted his motion for judicial review into an action seeking declaratory judgment by requesting rulings on underlying rights of the parties D. holding that a motion for a summary judgment is an appropriate means of seeking an adjudication on the merits E. holding that where the question to be resolved in the declaratory judgment action will be decided in a pending action it is inappropriate to grant a declaratory judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that movant converted his motion for judicial review into an action seeking declaratory judgment by requesting rulings on underlying rights of the parties
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: disrupt , interfere with or otherwise adversely affect the normal flow of the service or otherwise act in a manner that may negatively affect other users ' experience when using the service or playing supercell 's games .

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 375 U.S. 248 84 S.Ct. 360 11 L.Ed.2d 311 Edward R. FIELDS et al., appellants,v.CITY OF FAIRFIELD. No. 30. Supreme Court of the United States October Term, 1963. December 16, 1963 Melvin L. Wulf for appellants. Burke Marshall for the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of Court. Frank B. Parsons for appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 The udgment of the Supreme Court of Alabama is reversed. Thompson v. City of Louisville, 362 U.S. 199, 80 S.Ct. 624, 4 L.Ed.2d 654; Garner v. Louisiana, 368 U.S. 157, 82 S.Ct. 248, 7 L.Ed.2d 207.

assistant: 3
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: parties to make honest but perhaps mistaken judgments about the risks they face. See generally Associated Wholesale Grocers, Inc. v. Americold Corp., 261 Kan. 806, 934 P.2d 65, 87 (1997) (factors in evaluating reasonableness of settlement by abandoned insured include the releasing person’s damages; the merits of the releasing person’s liability theory; the merits of the released person’s defense theory; the released person’s relative faults; the risks and expenses of continued litigation; the released person’s ability to pay; any evidence of bad faith, collusion, or fraud; the extent of the releasing person’s investigation and preparation of the case; and the interests of the parties not being released); S.G. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 460 N.W.2d 639, 644-45 (Minn. App.1990) (<HOLDING>). Indiana courts would not treat a challenge to Options: A. holding that an over twoyear delay without any excuse was unreasonable as a matter of law B. holding that an eightmonth delay without excuse was unreasonable as a matter of law C. holding that it may be decided as a matter of law D. holding settlement agreement was reasonable as a matter of law where insureds potential liability far exceeded settlement amount and no other evidence indicated it was unreasonable E. holding as a general rule of contract law if no other meaning is reasonable the court shall rule as a matter of law that the meaning is established

assistant: The best answer is D. holding settlement agreement was reasonable as a matter of law where insureds potential liability far exceeded settlement amount and no other evidence indicated it was unreasonable
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: to companies that act as conduits to debarred contractors.” Def.-Intervenor’s Opp’n 9. In this case, the Corps initially determined that BBSSI’s proposal constituid ed the best value to the government. It also determined that BBSSI was “fully qualified” to perform the work encompassed by the JOC. Pl.’s App. 290. Based upon its interpretation of Dr. Cosmelli’s opinion, the Corps concluded that, while BBSSI was qualified to perform the work, BBSSI was nevertheless “also required” to utilize BBH’s resources. Id. The “public interest in honest, open, and fair competition in the procurement process is compromised whenever an agency abuses its discretion in evaluating a contractor’s bid.” Overstreet Elec. Co. v. United States, 47 Fed.Cl. 728, 744 (2000); Info. Scis. Corp., 80 Fed.Cl. at 799 (<HOLDING>); Beta Analytics Int’l, Inc. v. United States, Options: A. holding that the definition of procurement under the tucker act is broader than the definition of procurement contract in the fgcaa such that an agency can engage in a procurement process for the purposes of the tucker act even though it is using a cooperative agreement instead of a procurement contract to memorialize the parties agreement B. holding that without a valid reason for cancelling the procurement the government violated its duty to conduct a fair procurement C. recognizing the publics interest in receiving the best value in public services D. recognizing the publics interest in ensuring that the ultimate awardee offers the best value to the government pursuant to the terms of the solicitation and applicable procurement regulations E. holding that a contracting officer has great discretion in best value procurement decisions

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing the publics interest in ensuring that the ultimate awardee offers the best value to the government pursuant to the terms of the solicitation and applicable procurement regulations
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: Property Mgmt. Co., Inc., 690 S.W.2d 546, 548-49 (Tex.1985). When a plaintiff moves for summary judgment against a defendant’s counterclaim, the plaintiff must negate one or more of the essential elements of the defendant’s counterclaim. Martin v. McDonnold, 247 S.W.3d 224, 229 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2006, no pet.). Because the trial court’s order did not specify the ground(s) on which the summary judgment was granted, and because there were multiple grounds on which summary judgment may have been granted in the instant case, the State is required to negate all grounds on appeal. See Star-Telegram, Inc., v. Doe, 915 S.W.2d 471, 474 (Tex.1995); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. S.S., 858 S.W.2d 374, 381 (Tex.1993); Lewis v. Adams, 979 S.W.2d 831, 833 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); Evans v. First Nat’l Bank of Bellville, 946 Options: A. holding that to establish grounds for reversal an appellant must challenge all grounds on which the trial court ruled against it B. holding that summary judgment must be affirmed where multiple grounds are asserted and the appellant does not attack all grounds on appeal C. holding that party may not appeal summary judgment in favor of opponent when grounds opposing summary judgment asserted on appeal were not raised before trial court D. holding where movant asserts several grounds in support of its summary judgment motion and the trial court does not specify the grounds on which judgment was granted the reviewing court can affirm the judgment if any of the grounds are meritorious E. holding that where specific grounds for an objection are stated at trial all other grounds are waived and will not be considered for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that summary judgment must be affirmed where multiple grounds are asserted and the appellant does not attack all grounds on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Participant’s employment is terminated by reason of the Participant’s death during the two-year period beginning on the date of a Change of Control, the Company shall provide the Participant’s estate or beneficiaries with the Accrued Obligations, the Pro Rata Bonus and the timely payment or delivery of the Other Benefits in accordance with the terms of the underlying plans or agreements, and shall have no other severance obligations under this Plan. The Accrued Obligations and the Pro Rata Bonus shall be paid to the Participant’s estate or beneficiary, as applicable, in a lump sum in cash within 30 days after the Date of Termination , subject to any applicable deferral election as contemplated by Section s 4.1(a)(i) and (ii) . With respect to the provision of the Other Benefits, the term “Other Benefits” as utilized in this Section 4.2 shall include, without limitation, and the Participant’s estate and/or beneficiaries shall be entitled to receive, benefits at least equal to the most favorable benefits provided by the Company and the Affiliated Entities to the estates and beneficiaries of peer executives of the Company and the Affiliated Entities under such plans, programs, practices and policies relating to death benefits, if any, as in effect with respect to other peer executives and their beneficiaries at any time during the 120-day period immediately preceding the Change of Control or, if more favorable to the Participant’s estate and/or the Participant’s beneficiaries, as in effect on the date of the Participant’s death with respect to other peer executives of the Company and the Affiliated Entities and their beneficiaries.

assistant: Death
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: bidding, bumping, transfer or promotion rights" was facially discriminatory because it “excludes women with childbearing capacity from lead-exposed jobs and so creates a facial classification based on gender”); Los Angeles Dep’t of Water & Power v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702, 98 S.Ct. 1370, 55 L.Ed.2d 657 (1978) (employer's policy requiring female employees to make larger contribution to pension fund than male employees is discriminatory on its face); Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Sec’y of United States Dep’t of Labor, 85 F.3d 89, 95-96 (2d Cir.1996) (proposed settlement agreement violated the ERA because it contained explicit gag provisions aimed at having the employee relinquish his statutory rights); EEOC v. Board of Governors of State Colls. & Univs., 957 F.2d 424, 431 (7th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). BRIGHT, Circuit Judge, dissenting. I Options: A. holding age discrimination claim barred B. holding that claims arising under the age discrimination in employment act may be subject to arbitration C. holding that the age discrimination in employment act was not preempted by the nlra D. holding that an agreement to submit age discrimination claims to arbitration does not constitute a waiver E. holding that a collective bargaining agreement violated the antiretaliation provision of the age discrimination in employment act because on its face it unambiguously denied an employee his contractual right to file an inhouse grievance once he elected to file an age discrimination charge

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a collective bargaining agreement violated the antiretaliation provision of the age discrimination in employment act because on its face it unambiguously denied an employee his contractual right to file an inhouse grievance once he elected to file an age discrimination charge
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: was not teaching the use of the very same colors. “[T]he discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer.” Atlas Powder Co., 190 F.3d at 1347; see also, e.g., In re Cruciferous Sprout Litig., 301 F.3d 1343, 1350 (Fed.Cir.2002) (finding the claims of a patent inherently anticipated where the inventor “ha[d] done nothing more than recognizing properties inherent in certain prior art * * * ”); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 (Fed.Cir.1990) (“[M]erely discovering and claiming a new benefit of an old process cannot render the process again patentable.”); Titanium Metals Corp. of Am. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 782 (Fed.Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). Because the colors disclosed in the three Options: A. holding that the patent in suit was not obvious because a combination may be patentable whether it be composed of elements all new partly new or all old citing connell and prior art did not suggest the solution to a recognized problem hit upon in the patent B. holding that the plaintiffs were entitled to the differential between their new and old wages C. recognizing risk of allowing patent holder to selfservingly make a reissue declaration that broadens the scope of the claims beyond what was intended by the inventor when the initial patent was first filed D. holding a technical term used in a patent document is interpreted as having the meaning that it would be given by persons experienced in the field of the invention unless it is apparent from the patent and the prosecution history that the inventor used the term with a different meaning E. holding that the claims of a patent were inherently anticipated where the inventor merely discovered new properties of an old alloy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the claims of a patent were inherently anticipated where the inventor merely discovered new properties of an old alloy
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 AMENDMENT NO. 1 SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. Sections 10.09 and 10.10 of the Credit Agreement are incorporated by reference herein mutatis mutandis . The provisions of this Amendment No. 1 shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Loan Parties, Administrative Agent, the Collateral Agent, and the Lenders and their respective successors and permitted assigns.

assistant: Miscellaneous