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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and (2) Jackson’s second claim — that neither counsel nor the trial court advised him that he would subject himself to conditional release probation— was facially insufficient because the record showed no hearing or entry or acceptance of a plea on the alleged date. Mr. Jackson filed an amended rule 3.850 motion alleging that his counsel misadvised him and failed to advise the court of the correct amount of jail credit due and that, had counsel done so, the outcome of the sentencing hearing would have been different. The postconviction court denied the amended motion with prejudice because it remained facially insufficient in view of the court’s prior 3.800(a) ruling that Mr. Jackson was not entitled to additional jail credit. See Oquendo v. State, 2 So.3d 1001 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (<HOLDING>). Mr. Jackson argues that the postconviction Options: A. holding applicants general state court claim was insufficient to exhaust his later more specific federal habeas claim B. holding that the plaintiffs breach of contract claim was properly a statutory claim under the personnel management act C. holding that a claim is not moot where there is a viable damages claim D. holding court may properly deny claim with prejudice where claim is refiled but remains insufficient E. holding preponderance of the evidence must be against a claim before the claim can be denied where factual record is insufficient remand required

assistant: The best answer is D. holding court may properly deny claim with prejudice where claim is refiled but remains insufficient
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In addition to being entitled to exercise all rights provided herein or granted by law, including recovery of damages, the Purchasers and the Company will be entitled to specific performance under the Transaction Documents. The parties agree that monetary damages would not be adequate compensation for any loss incurred by reason of any breach of obligations contained in the Transaction Documents and hereby agree to waive and not to assert in any action for specific performance of any such obligation the defense that a remedy at law would be adequate.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The rights and interests of the Participant under this Grant Letter may not be sold, assigned, encumbered or otherwise transferred except, in the event of the death of the Participant, by will or by the laws of descent and distribution. The rights and protections of the Company hereunder shall extend to any successors or assigns of the Company and to the Company’s parents, subsidiaries, and 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: Except as otherwise explicitly provided herein and in the other Transaction Documents, create or suffer to exist any Lien, other than Permitted Device Liens upon or with respect to, any Device or Related Customer Lease or any interest therein (other than Devices and Related Customer Leases, if any, subsequently (i) repurchased by the Originators pursuant to the terms of the Transaction Documents or (ii) distributed to the Originators pursuant to Sections 2.6, 2.7 or 2.8), or any Servicer Collection Account to which any Collections of any of the foregoing are sent, or any right to receive income or proceeds (other than distributions made to such Originator in accordance with the Transaction Documents or any proceeds of Collections remitted to such Originator hereunder to the extent such Originator owes no other amounts hereunder) from or in respect of any of the foregoing or, prior to the Final Settlement Date, its equity interest in it Related Lessee, if any.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the law restricting third party beneficiary status remained unchanged by our decision in Montana. Accord Roedler v. Dept. of Energy, 255 F.3d 1347 (Fed.Cir.2001). Accordingly, because the shareholders did not stand to directly benefit under the contract, they are at most incidental beneficiaries of the contract with no rights to enforce the contract against the United States. We reverse the Court of Federal Claims summary judgment of liability in favor of the shareholders and remand the case so that the court may consider any remaining claims asserted by the shareholders. II. FDIC’s Breach of Contract Claims We review the Court of Federal Claims’ legal conclusion that the FDIC has asserted a justiciable claim de novo. See Alger v. United States, 741 F.2d 391, 393 (Fed.Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). Article III, section 2 of the United States Options: A. holding that we review a district courts interpretation of a statute de novo B. holding that we review legal conclusions of the court of federal claims de novo C. holding that we review constitutional challenges de novo D. holding appellate court reviews legal conclusions de novo E. holding that we review issues of statutory interpretation de novo

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that we review legal conclusions of the court of federal claims de novo
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 provided herein, this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their heirs, successors and assigns, and the agreements, representations, warranties and acknowledgments contained herein shall be deemed to be made by and be binding upon such heirs, executors, administrators, successors, legal representatives and assigns. This Agreement does not confer any rights or remedies upon any person or entity other than the parties hereto and their heirs, successors and permitted assigns, provided , however , that Xynomic is an intended third-party beneficiary of this Agreement, and the Company and Subscriber hereby acknowledge and agree that Xynomic has the right to cause the Company to enforce its rights and perform its obligations under this Agreement including the right to cause the Company to make or not make any election or otherwise exercise or not exercise a right hereunder.

assistant: Binding Effects
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 to this Agreement agree that all actions or proceedings arising directly or indirectly from this Agreement shall be litigated in courts having a situs within Orange County, California; hereby consent to the jurisdiction of any local, state or federal court in which such an action or proceeding is commenced that is located in Orange County, California; agree not to disturb such choice of forum (including waiving any argument that venue in any such forum is not convenient); agree that any litigation initiated by any party hereto in connection with this Agreement may be venued in either the state or federal courts located in Orange County, California; agree that a final judgment in any such action or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law; and waive the personal service of any and all process upon them and consent that all such service of process may be made by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the respective parties at the address set forth above.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of Ind. Code § 9-30-5-5 and provides: “A person who operates a vehicle with a controlled substance listed in schedule I or II of IC 35-48-2 or its metabolite in the person’s body commits a Class C misdemeanor.” The State presented evidence that Radick operated the vehicle with THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, in his system. Marijuana is a controlled substance listed in schedule I of Ind.Code § 35-48-2-4. We conclude that the evidence is sufficient to sustain Radick’s conviction for operating a vehicle with a controlled substance listed in Schedule I or II as a class C misdemeanor. Despite any inconsistency in the verdicts, the convictions are permissible because they are supported by sufficient evidence. See, e.g., Slate v. State, 798 N.E.2d 510, 519-520 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (<HOLDING>). For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Radick’s Options: A. holding that a jury verdict of guilty constitutes a conviction for purposes of the federal firearms statute and therefore the defendant was convicted of a felony during the interval between the jurys return of its guilty verdict and his scheduled sentencing B. holding that court of appealss remedy on remand from reversal for harmful charge error based on failure to meet second step of rousseau lesserincludedoffense test was to remand for a retrial for the lesser offense because the jurys verdict that the appellant was guilty of the lesserincluded offense operates as an acquittal of the greater offense to which jeopardy had attached this prevents a retrial for the greater offense but not for the lesser offense C. holding that jurys failure to address first degree murder charge amounted to a verdict of not guilty on that charge D. holding that a defendant cannot challenge his conviction merely because it is inconsistent with jurys verdict of acquittal on another count E. holding that the jurys guilty verdict for the offense of operating a vehicle while intoxicated as a class a misdemeanor was not wholly inconsistent with its acquittal of the defendant on the charge of public intoxication

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the jurys guilty verdict for the offense of operating a vehicle while intoxicated as a class a misdemeanor was not wholly inconsistent with its acquittal of the defendant on the charge of public intoxication
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: As compensation for all services to be rendered by Executive under this Agreement, the Company shall pay to Executive an annualized salary of four hundred thousand Dollars ($400,000), less applicable tax and other authorized applicable withholdings (the “ Base Salary ”), which shall be paid in accordance with the Company’s normal payroll procedures and policies. Executive’s salary will be reviewed, and if appropriate, adjusted, on an annual basis at or after the end of each calendar year.

assistant: Base Salary
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: (same); Ellis v. United States, 780 F.Supp. 783, 787 (D.Utah 1991) (“It is also well established that the decision to assign safety responsibility to a contractor cannot form the basis for tort liability against the government.”). This is so even when there is an applicable non-delegable duty under state law. See Andrews, 121 F.3d at 1438-40, 1442 (finding, in spite of the government’s non-delegable duty to monitor the activities of independent contractors hired to dispose of hazardous waste under Florida law, that the Navy was free to delegate its safety responsibilities in the absence of federal legislation dictating otherwise); but see Dickerson, Inc. v. United States, 875 F.2d 1577, 1582-84 (11th Cir.1989). See also Berrien v. United States, 711 F.3d 654, 659 (6th Cir.2013) (<HOLDING>); accord Alinsky v. United States, 415 F.3d Options: A. holding that article 2 of the ucc preempts common law claims B. holding that the flsa preempts certain state law claims C. holding the ftca exemption of liability for independent contractors preempts state law where it imposes nondelegable duties D. holding that fifra preempts state law failure to warn claims E. holding that general maritime law preempts state law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding the ftca exemption of liability for independent contractors preempts state law where it imposes nondelegable duties
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of section 13-305 of the Consumer Protection Act. The court was notified that the same legal issue was one of several issues that would be subject to the Division’s authority to provide injunctive relief after the determination of the administrative action. Thus, even after obtaining declaratory judgment in its favor as to the validity of the proposed advertisement, Luskin’s could still be subject to an adverse administrative order enjoining the implementation of the proposed advertisement. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the circuit court should not have granted declaratory judgment because it would not “serve to terminate the uncertainty or controversy giving rise to the proceeding.” Id.; see, e.g., Brohawn v. Transamerica Ins. Co., 276 Md. 396, 406, 347 A.2d 842 (1975) (<HOLDING>). Primary Jurisdiction Additionally, we Options: A. holding that an insurer will not be estopped from denying coverage merely because the underlying case proceeds to judgment before the declaratory judgment action is resolved B. holding that the declaratory judgment act is remedial only and the party seeking declaratory relief must have an underlying cause of action C. holding that in a declaratory judgment action it is the character of the impending action not the plaintiffs defense that determines whether there is federal question jurisdiction D. 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 E. holding that filing of infringement action twelve days after complaint for declaratory judgment obviated the need for a declaratory judgment in this case

assistant: The best answer is D. 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
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: Co. v. United Transp. Union, 396 U.S. 142, 154-55, 90 S.Ct. 294, 24 L.Ed.2d 325 (1969)). 16 . United Steelworkers of Am. v. Warrior & Gulf Nav. Co., 363 U.S. 574, 578, 80 S.Ct. 1347, 4 L.Ed.2d 1409 (1960). 17 . Id. at 579, 80 S.Ct. 1347. 18 . Norris, 512 U.S. at 264-65, 114 S.Ct. 2239. 19 . Jones v. Roadway Express, Inc., 931 F.2d 1086, 1090 (5th Cir.1991). 20 . Consol. Rail Corp. v. Ry. Labor Executives' Assn, 491 U.S. 299, 305, 109 S.Ct. 2477, 105 L.Ed.2d 250 (1989) (emphasis added). 21 . See Brown v. Ill. Cent. R.R. Co., 254 F.3d 654, 668 (7th Cir.2001) (“A claim brought under an independent federal statute is precluded by the RLA only if it can be disposi-tively resolved through an interpretation of a CBA. This occurs only when a provision of th F.3d 1416, 1419-20 (9th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). 25 .Ralph v. Lucent Techs., Inc., 135 F.3d Options: A. holding that a claim for discrimination in private employment is not preempted by title vii B. holding that physician was an independent contractor and thus could not sue hospital under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 C. holding that title vii claim is independent of cba and thus minor dispute D. holding that title vii claim was subject to compulsory arbitration E. holding that there is no individual liability under title vii

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that title vii claim is independent of cba and thus minor dispute
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 Purchaser is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the Laws of its jurisdiction of organization, with full power and authority to own, lease, use and operate its properties and to conduct its business as currently conducted.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you agree that your use of the app and play of the game is at your own risk , and it is your responsibility to maintain such health , liability , hazard , personal injury , medical , life , and other insurance policies as you deem reasonably necessary for any injuries that you may incur while using the services .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by the parties hereto in separate counterparts, and signature pages may be delivered by facsimile, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Target is a Malaysian corporation duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of Malaysia and has all requisite corporate power and authority to own, lease and operate its respective properties and to conduct its respective business as presently conducted and as proposed to be conducted and is duly qualified or licensed as a foreign corporation in good standing in each jurisdiction in which the character of its properties or the nature of its business activities require such qualification.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: GRANTING MOTION TO VACATE CONVICTION PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2255 GADOLA, District Judge. A. Petitioner’s § 2255 Motion Petitioner was convicted of conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, use of a fir (E.D.N.C. 1996) (<HOLDING>), and Mixon v. United States, 926 F.Supp. 178 Options: A. holding that courts limited jurisdiction precludes twolevel increase on resentencing B. holding that defendant may be subject to death penalty on resentencing C. holding that resentencing is required D. holding that pepper did not allow petitioner to seek a resentencing under 2255 E. holding that constitution and courts jurisdiction allow for twolevel increase on resentencing

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that constitution and courts jurisdiction allow for twolevel increase on resentencing
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: For all purposes of this Agreement, all communications, including without limitation notices, consents, requests or approvals, required or permitted to be given hereunder must be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when hand delivered or dispatched by electronic facsimile or other electronic transmission (with receipt thereof orally confirmed), or one business day after having been sent for next day delivery by a nationally recognized overnight courier service, addressed to the Company (to the attention of the Secretary of the Company) and to Indemnitee at the applicable address shown on the signature page hereto, or to such other address as any party may have furnished to the other in writing and in accordance herewith, except that notices of changes of address will be effective only upon receipt.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: those services have been marked beta , preview , early access , or evaluation ( or with words or phrases with similar meanings ) and may not be as reliable as dropbox 's other services , so please keep that in mind .

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: All notices, demands requests, consents, approvals, and other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and, unless otherwise specified herein, shall be (i) personally served, (ii) deposited in the mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, (iii) delivered by reputable air courier service with charges prepaid, or (iv) transmitted by hand delivery, telegram, facsimile or electronic mail, addressed as set forth below or to such other address as such party shall have specified most recently by written notice. Any notice or other communication required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be deemed effective (a) upon hand delivery or delivery by facsimile or electronic mail, with delivery receipt or the affidavit of messenger, at the address, number or electronic mail address designated below (if delivered on a Business Day during normal business hours where such notice is to be received), or the first Business Day following such delivery (if delivered other than on a Business Day during normal business hours where such notice is to be received) or (b) on the second business day following the date of mailing by express courier service, fully prepaid, addressed to such address, or upon actual receipt of such mailing, whichever shall occur first. The addresses for such communications shall be: (i) if to the Company, to: Surna Inc., Attn: Chief Executive Officer - Amendment, Surna 1780 55 th Street, Suite C, Boulder, Colorado 80301, facsimile: +1 (303) 955-2544, e-mail: amendment@surna.com, with a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to Duane Morris LLP, Attn: David N. Feldman, 1540 Broadway, New York, New York 10024, facsimile: +1 (212) 202 6094, e-mail: dnfeldman@duanemorris.com, and (iii) if to the Note Holder, to the address, fax number and e-mail as indicated on the signature page attached hereto.

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: could not accurately enforce this portion of the property settlement agreement, despite testimony from both Mr. and Mrs. Prine that they knew exactly which tools Mr. Prine was to receive under the term “small hand tools” as such term was used in the property settlement agreement. Additionally, the chancellor made no finding as to Mr. Prine’s rights with respect to a “Yamaha 250 four wheel ATV” that Mr. Prine was to receive under the terms of the property settlement agreement, an article of personal property which Mrs. Prine gave away for no consideration after Mr. Prine fled the marital home. ¶ 16. Under these facts I must conclude that the chancellor committed manifest error in attempting to modify the terms of an enforceable property settlement agreement. See Mount, 624 So.2d at 1005 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, I would reverse the chancellor’s Options: A. holding that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find that an oral agreement existed and that it was not modified B. holding that a settlement agreement is not a court order and therefore a violation of the settlement agreement would not subject a party to contempt C. holding that chancellor committed manifest error when he modified property settlement agreement D. holding that it was error for the court to enter a modified agreement which materially altered the agreement reached by the parties E. holding that the plaintiffs lawsuit which was filed despite a general release in the parties settlement agreement constituted a material breach of the settlement agreement

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that chancellor committed manifest error when he modified property settlement agreement
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: 3. In the event that Independent Contractor is required by law or by interrogatories, requests for information or documents, subpoena, Civil Investigative Demand, or similar process to disclose any information supplied to Independent Contractor pursuant to the Agreement, including without limitation the Confidential Information or any other information the disclosure of which is restricted by the terms of this Exhibit B, Independent Contractor will provide the Company with prompt prior written notice of such request or requirement so that the Company may seek an appropriate protective order.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: linden lab owns intellectual property rights in and to the service , including but not limited to the linden content , software , the servers , and the websites related thereto , and in and to our trademarks , service marks , trade names , logos , domain names , taglines and trade dress ( collectively , the `` linden marks '' ) .

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: Id. Indeed, the district court concluded that “[the bankruptcy court] properly held that its jurisdiction to interpret and enforce its sale order ... is historic and unimpeded by Stern v. Marshall or other recent developments in the law.” Id. (internal citations and quotations omitted). The district court affirmed the' bankruptcy court’s decision and concluded that the bankruptcy court had properly exercised its jurisdiction in issuing the injunction. Id. at *5-6. Other courts — including the Supreme Court — have also held that a bankruptcy court maintains jurisdiction to interpret and enforce its own prior orders, and that a court’s enforcement of its prior order is a “core” matter. See, e.g., Travelers Indent. Co. v. Bailey, 557 U.S. 137, 151, 129 S.Ct. 2195, 174 L.Ed.2d 99 (2009) (<HOLDING>); Luan Inv. S.E. v. Franklin 145 Corp. (In re Options: A. holding that the trial court had continuing jurisdiction over all subsequent custody orders once the trial court acquired jurisdiction B. holding that trial court is without authority to modify a settlement agreement but may enforce and interpret it C. holding that the bankruptcy court plainly had jurisdiction to interpret and enforce its own prior orders D. holding that a motion to enforce bankruptcy sale order is a core proceeding and citing 11 usc 105a as the section which gives the bankruptcy court the power and the jurisdiction to enforce its valid orders E. holding a bankruptcy court is empowered to reopen a bankruptcy case on its own motion under 11 usc 105a

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the bankruptcy court plainly had jurisdiction to interpret and enforce its own prior orders
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: it could have provided a similar definition of unborn children, as in the previously existing N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-17.1.” Geiser, at ¶ 17. [¶ 18] Chapter 12.1-17.1, N.D.C.C., also expressly excludes criminalizing acts committed on the unborn child by the pregnant woman: Charging a pregnant woman for a crime allegedly committed against her unborn child violates the express legislative policy of N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-17.1. Our holding that a pregnant woman cannot be charged for a crime allegedly committed against her unborn child under N.D.C.C. § 19-03.l-22.2(l)(b) coincides with ... N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-17.1. Geiser, at ¶ 19 (emphasis added). [¶ 19] The State argues Geiser is not applicable because Geiser’s unborn child died in útero. Our conclusion and analysis in Geiser did not hin 991) (<HOLDING>); State v. Aiwohi, 109 Hawai'i 115, 123 P.3d Options: A. holding ohios child endangerment statute does not apply to mothers who abuse drugs during pregnancy B. holding an unborn viable fetus is not a human being under the new mexico child abuse statute and the mothers use of cocaine during pregnancy was not child abuse C. holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was factually sufficient to support termination D. holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was legally sufficient to support termination E. holding child abuse statute clearly did not apply to fetuses and therefore did not apply to a mother who ingested cocaine during pregnancy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding child abuse statute clearly did not apply to fetuses and therefore did not apply to a mother who ingested cocaine during pregnancy
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given if mailed or transmitted and confirmed by any standard form of telecommunication. Notices to the Companies shall be given to them at Extended Stay America, Inc., 11525 N. Community House Road, Suite 100, Charlotte, North Carolina 28277, fax: (980) 335-3089; Attention: General Counsel and Corporate Secretary with a copy to Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, One New York Plaza, New York, New York 10004, Attention: Stuart Gelfond, Esq. Notices to the Sellers shall be given to Centerbridge Partners, L.P. at 375 Park Ave., New York, NY 10152, Attention: Office of the General Counsel, with copies to: legalnotices@centerbridge.com; to Paulson & Co. Inc. at 1251 Avenue of the Americas, 50th Floor, New York, New York 10020, Attention: General Counsel, (fax: (212) 977-9505); and to The Blackstone Group, L.P. at 345 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10154, Attention: General Counsel, (fax: (646) 253-8983).

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 may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, including facsimile and electronically transmitted counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together constitute one and the same instrument. Signatures provided by facsimile transmission or in Adobe™ Portable Document Format (PDF) sent by electronic mail will be deemed to be original signatures.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the other Loan Documents, and any separate letter agreements with respect to fees payable to the Administrative Agent, constitute the entire contract among the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersede any and all previous agreements and understandings, oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof.

assistant: Integration
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 in determining whether the Maoists’ actions rose to the level of persecution. The IJ erred in relying on the absence of permanent physical harm to find that Petitioner was not persecuted by the Maoists. Nothing in the pertinent statutes or relevant precedents suggests that an applicant must be permanently maimed in order to demonstrate past persecution. The record shows that the beating Petitioner suffered resulted in injuries serious enough to require medical care, with the hospital documents indicating that Petitioner was rendered semi-unconscious in the attack. Regardless of whether Petitioner was permanently injured in this attack, it does not seem to be a minor incident that can be brushed off as insig nificant. Cf. Witjaksono v. Holder, 573 F.3d 968, 977 (10th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). Additionally, Petitioner presented both Options: A. holding that harassment or discrimination does not rise to the level of persecution under the ina unless it is accompanied by physical punishment infliction of harm or significant deprivation of liberty B. holding that physical assaults did not rise to the level of persecution where they did not requirfe medical attention C. holding that alien was teased bothered and harassed based on her religious beliefs but that it did not rise to the level of persecution and that fear of future persecution was too speculative D. holding any improper delegation did not rise to level of plain error E. holding that charging fees for medical services did not violate the eighth amendment where prisoner did not allege denial of medical care

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that physical assaults did not rise to the level of persecution where they did not requirfe medical attention
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 counsel,” and district courts must exercise discretion "[d]epending on the circumstances of the individual case”); United States v. Lopez-Osuna, 242 F.3d 1191, 1199 (9th Cir.2001) (rejecting "use [of] a particular script” to assess knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel: "the focus should be on what the defendant understood, rather than on what the court said”); United States v. Kind, 194 F.3d 900, 904 (8th Cir.1999) (noting that district court’s failure "specifically [to] warn[] the defendant of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation” before allowing him to proceed pro se was not fatal if appellate court could discern from "entire record” that "defendant had the required knowledge from other sources”); United States v. Hughes, 191 F.3d 1317, 1323-24 (10th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Singleton, 107. F.3d 1091, Options: A. holding that in order for a waiver of counsel to be valid the trial court must ensure that the defendants waiver of his right to counsel is done knowingly and intelligently so that the record establishes that the defendants choice is made with eyes open B. holding that waiver of counsel may be valid absent an inquiry by the court where the surrounding facts and circumstances including the defendants background and conduct demonstrate that he actually understood his right to counsel and the difficulties of pro se representation and knowingly and intelligently waived his right internal quotation marks omitted C. holding that waiver of counsel during pcr review requires a judicial inquiry into whether defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel D. holding that lower courts misunderstood the requirement for finding a valid waiver of the right to counsel where neither the trial court nor the arizona supreme court undertook to focus on whether edwards understood his right to counsel and intelligently and knowingly relinquished it E. holding that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel even though the exchange between the magistrate and the defendant was inadequate standing alone to inform the defendant of the dangers and disadvantages of selfrepresentation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that waiver of counsel may be valid absent an inquiry by the court where the surrounding facts and circumstances including the defendants background and conduct demonstrate that he actually understood his right to counsel and the difficulties of pro se representation and knowingly and intelligently waived his right internal quotation marks omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was the subject of the enforcement proceedings.” Ingrahm, 711 So.2d at 1346. The trial court also found that “[i]n th , argues that based upon the “tipsy coachman” doctrine, this court should nonetheless affirm as the trial court was right for the wrong reason. The former husband argues that dismissal was proper because the former wife’s motion for rehearing was pending in the Duval Circuit Court when she filed her Complaint in Miami-Dade County. The former husband’s reliance on the “tipsy coachman” doctrine is, however, misplaced, as the issue of the former wife’s Duval County motion for rehearing was not included in the record before the trial court. See Robertson v. State, 829 So.2d 901, 906 (Fla.2002)(quoting Dade County Sch. Bd. v. Radio Station WQBA, 731 So.2d 638, 645 (Fla.1999))(<HOLDING>); State, Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Rochell v. Options: A. holding that a trial court order reaching the right result with erroneous or incomplete reasoning can be affirmed under the tipsy coachman doctrine so long as the alternative ruling is supported by the record before the trial court B. holding that where the trial court reaches a correct disposition this court can affirm on any basis C. holding that the tipsy coachman doctrine allows an appellate court to affirm a trial court that reaches the right result but for the wrong reasons so long as there is any basis which would support the judgment in the record D. holding that if a trial court reaches the right result but for the wrong reasons it will be upheld if there is any basis which would support the judgment in the record E. holding that the tipsy coachman rule permits an appellate court to affirm a trial court order on the basis of an alternative theory which was not asserted in the court below

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the tipsy coachman doctrine allows an appellate court to affirm a trial court that reaches the right result but for the wrong reasons so long as there is any basis which would support the judgment in the record
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 U.S. Borrower will, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done, all things necessary to preserve and keep in full force and effect its existence and its material rights, franchises, licenses, permits, copyrights, trademarks and patents; provided, however, that nothing in this Section 7.4 shall prevent (i) sales of assets and other transactions by the U.S. Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries in accordance with Section 8.2 or (ii) the withdrawal by the U.S. Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries of its qualification as a foreign Company in any jurisdiction if such withdrawal could not, either individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you understand that all information , data , text , software , music , sound , photographs , graphics , video , messages , tags , or other materials ( `` content '' ) , whether publicly posted or privately transmitted , are the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated .

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: is therefore unpersuasive. But the Agency’s statement to this Court that the records withheld pursuant to exemption 1 are less than twenty-five years old is, as to some documents, plainly incorrect. For example, portions of several documents dating from 1962 are withheld on the basis of exemption 1. DiMaio Decl. Ex. 2, Part 3, at 26-30 (“2008 Vaughn Index”). Executive Order 12,-958 calls for the automatic declassification of records “more than 25 years old” with “permanent historical value.” E.O. 12,958 §§ 3.4(a). The Order exempts from this requirement nine categories of information. Id. § 3.4(b). The records at issue here may well fall into one or more of these categories, but the CIA has not made such an assertion. Cf. Schoenman v. FBI, 2009 WL 763065, at *21 (D.D.C.2009) (<HOLDING>). The CIA should address this issue in its Options: A. holding that the cia complied with the requirements of eo 12958 where a declaration regarding a foia request stated that the declarant had rereviewed each of the documents described in the cias vaughn index during the current litigation process and determined that the relevant documents each contain information warranting their continued classification despite their age B. holding that the district court properly considered documents attached to a motion to dismiss that described the terms of plaintiffs group health insurance plan where plaintiff alleged membership in the plan his claims depended on the conditions described in the documents and plaintiff never disputed their authenticity C. holding that the agency did not have an obligation to search for and produce the documents the plaintiff claimed entitlement to because the plaintiffs foia request gave no indication that she sought those particular documents D. holding that the fdas voluntary release of documents that may have been caused by the courts order to submit a revised vaughn index cannot constitute court ordered relief E. holding that the government must provide the party seeking disclosure with a detailed index describing the documents the government claims are exempt from disclosure under foia

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the cia complied with the requirements of eo 12958 where a declaration regarding a foia request stated that the declarant had rereviewed each of the documents described in the cias vaughn index during the current litigation process and determined that the relevant documents each contain information warranting their continued classification despite their age
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: For the first time he asserted a claim against Wexford Corporation, alleging that it did not provide him with adequate care following his injury in the kitchen. He also alleged more generally that it failed to conduct inmate-intake and infections-disease examinations and ran a below-standard hepatitis C Clinic. II. DISTRICT COURT DISPOSITION The district court disposed of the relevant claims in two very thorough orders. We summarize them here. The first order, Lymon v. Aramark Corp., 728 F.Supp.2d 1222 (D.N.M.2010), painstakingly parsed through the various y for certain torts committed by “law enforcement officers,” does not apply to corrections officers. Lymon, 728 F.Supp.2d at 1268-70 (relying primarily on Callaway v. N.M. Dep’t of Corr., 117 N.M. 637, 875 P.2d 393 (N.M.App.1994) (<HOLDING>)). Counts III and IV assert tort claims against Options: A. holding that police officers were not entitled to immunity under the itca law enforcement immunity provision where the officers violated their statutory duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all individuals while acting within the scope of their employment B. holding that directors and officers are fiduciaries C. holding that the secretary of corrections is not a law enforcement officer under the tca D. holding that law enforcement officers first amendment interest is entitled to even greater weight where officers reports exposed possible government corruption E. holding corrections officers are not law enforcement officers under 41412

assistant: The best answer is E. holding corrections officers are not law enforcement officers under 41412
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: with this rule.” Tex.R. Civ. P. 506.1(h). “[I]t is well-settled that perfection of an appeal to county court from a justice court for trial de novo vacates and annuls the judgment of the justice court.” Villalon v. Bank One, 176 S.W.3d 66, 69-70 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, pet. denied). It is undisputed that Palavan perfected his appeal to the county court. See Tex.R.'Civ. P. 506.1(h). Accordingly, the judgment of the justice of the peace court was vacated and annulled. See Villalon, 176 S.W.3d at 69-70. Palavan argues that, as a result, the agreed judgment did not bar his claims before the county court. We disagree. Agreed judgments are based on agreements between the parties and are construed as contracts. See Gulf Ins. Co. v. Burns Motors, Inc., 22 S.W.3d 417, 422 (Tex.2000) (<HOLDING>); Hicks v. Hicks, 348 S.W.3d 281, 283 Options: A. holding rules of procedure interpreted in same manner as statutes B. holding an ambiguous contract will be construed against the party drafting the same C. holding same D. holding agreed judgments are treated as contract beiween parties E. holding agreed judgments are construed in same manner as contract

assistant: The best answer is E. holding agreed judgments are construed in same manner as contract