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: a person “who knowingly or intentionally exerts unauthorized control over property of another person” commits criminal conversion, and under Ind.Code § 34-24-3-1, a person suffering a “pecuniary loss as a result of a violation of IC 35-43” may bring a civil action against the person causing the loss for treble damages, plus costs and attorneys fees. Several courts have considered whether the Copyright Act preempts state law claims of conversion, although not the Seventh Circuit, and most have found that it does indeed preempt those claims. See United States ex rel. Berge v. Board of Trustees of University of Alabama, 104 F.3d 1453 (4th Cir.1997); Daboub v. Gibbons, 42 F.3d 285 (5th Cir.1995); but see G.S. Rasmussen & Assoc. v. Kalitta Flying Service, 958 F.2d 896 (9th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). MDBS has relied on the horn-book rule that a Options: A. holding evidence which established that use of property was permissive showed use of property was not adverse B. holding that copying all or substantial portions of microcode was not fair use C. holding that unauthorized use of faa supplemental type certificate was more than simple copying of intellectual property D. holding that a defect in notice by the faa does no more than toll the statutory time limit E. recognizing that partnership property is a type of ownership

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that unauthorized use of faa supplemental type certificate was more than simple copying of intellectual property
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: paragraph 20.3 ( i ) says what happens if parts of paragraph 20.3 ( arbitration and class action waiver ) are found to be illegal , invalid or unenforceable .

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: damages. In re TMI Litig. Personal Injury Claims, No. 79-0906 (M.D.Pa. order entered Dec. 30, 1982); App. at 162. While these and companion TMI cases were being litigated in state and district court, the Supreme Court decided Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp., 464 U.S. 238, 104 S.Ct. 615, 78 L.Ed.2d 443 (1984), which held in part that states are precluded from regulating the safety aspects of nuclear energy but that states still had authority under the Act to control nonregulatory aspects of nuclear facilities. Id. at 240-41, 256, 104 S.Ct. at 617-18, 625-26. Following the decision in Silkwood, the district court denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment that had been filed following a Rule 16 confer ence. See In re Three Mile Island Litig., 605 F.Supp. 778, 784 (M.D.Pa.1985) (<HOLDING>) [referred to herein as “TMI I ”]. Shortly Options: A. holding that punitive damages are not recoverable under viwda B. holding that punitive damages are recoverable in a claim for retaliation under the flsa C. holding that punitive damages are not recoverable against municipalities under 1988 D. holding that punitive damages are not recoverable under subsection 216b E. holding that punitive damages are recoverable under the priceanderson act to the extent that damages assessed under the act would not be paid from federal monies

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that punitive damages are recoverable under the priceanderson act to the extent that damages assessed under the act would not be paid from federal monies
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 constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, whether written or oral, relating to the subject matter hereof and thereof. If there is any conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and the provisions of the plans, policies, and programs referred to in this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement will control.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: invalid if served after a notice of removal to federal court is filed. 381 F.2d at 373. While this interpretation is the rule in the Ninth Circuit, it is not necessarily the rule in Arizona state courts. See Ritchie v. Grand, Canyon Scenic Rides, 165 Ariz. 460, 464, 799 P.2d 801, 805 (1990) (Arizona courts are not bound by federal court decisions if “Arizona policy, practice, or case law requires a different result.”). ¶ 10 Moreover, the Ninth Circuit interpretation is not unanimous among the federal courts. Some courts have flatly rejected it. See, e.g., Listle v. Milwaukee County, 926 F.Supp. 826, 827 (E.D.Wis.1996), aff'd, 138 F.3d 1155 (7th Cir.1998) (citing Continental Ill. National Bank and Trust Co. of Chicago v. Protos Shipping, Inc., 472 F.Supp. 979, 982-83 (N.D.Ill.1979) (<HOLDING>)). The federal courts in Wisconsin and Illinois Options: A. holding that a defendants actual knowledge that an action is pending or that service has been attempted is not the equivalent of service of summons and will not relieve the plaintiff of its burden or vest the court with jurisdiction B. recognizing that it is well settled law that an action is commenced by the service of a summons and without valid service of process the trial court has no jurisdiction to act C. holding that service is not avoided by service on a partys attorney as service on an attorney is ineffective unless he has been authorized to accept such service D. holding that service of a statecourt summons and complaint after removal to federal court is valid service E. holding that if service done by certified mail action commenced upon receipt of summons and complaint

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that service of a statecourt summons and complaint after removal to federal court is valid service
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: provides the plaintiff with the only possible remedy for the alleged breach of fiduciary duty for Cultor’s alleged misrepresentations that he would have benefits under some plan. Moreover, unlike other cases finding that a plaintiff cannot pursue a claim for breach of fiduciary duty under § 1132(a)(3) where he also seeks benefits due under the terms of a plan under § 1132(a)(1)(B), plaintiff here argues both that he is presently owed benefits under the terms of some Cultor plan and that Cultor as a fiduciary made material misrepresentations about the terms of the benefits he would receive if he accepted employment with Cultor and that he acted in detrimental reliance on those misrepresentations. Cf. Wald v. Southwestern Bell Corp. Customcare Med. Plan, 83 F.3d 1002, 1006 (8th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Montesano v. Xerox Corp. Retirement Income Options: A. holding that a plaintiff seeking individual relief under erisa 502a3 under a breach of fiduciary duty theory did not have a cause of action when the alleged breach of fiduciary duty was a failure to distribute benefits in accordance with the plan B. holding that plaintiffs did not plead fraud where the complaint only alleged a breach of fiduciary duty C. holding a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty will not lie where the claim of breach is dependent upon the existence of a contractual relationship between the parties D. recognizing a cause of action for a breach of fiduciary duty in failing to provide relevant information under section 502a3 of erisa where the fiduciary had knowledge that its failure to provide the participant andor his beneficiaries with complete and accurate information would mislead them as to the coverages in effect E. holding that claim of breach of fiduciary duty can be resolved under connecticut law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a plaintiff seeking individual relief under erisa 502a3 under a breach of fiduciary duty theory did not have a cause of action when the alleged breach of fiduciary duty was a failure to distribute benefits in accordance with the plan
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: It is a corporation or company duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the jurisdiction of its organization, and has all requisite power and authority, corporate or otherwise, to execute, deliver and perform this Agreement.

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: going to do. And, everybody, oh my God, did you hear that? So the whole room basically lost control at that point. ¶ 27 Although B.B. was not tempted to retaliate with violence against Juvenile, her subjective reaction is not dispositive. An “ordinary citizen” bombarded with such personal epithets shouted from close range by an increasingly angry and agitated speaker, see Citizen Publ’g, 210 Ariz. at 519, ¶ 24, 115 P.3d at 113, could be expected to retaliate in some fashion, especially when that person is unable to “avert her ears” or leave the premises. Cf. Cohen, 403 U.S. at 21, 91 S.Ct. 1780 (deeming it significant that bystanders could simply avert their eyes to avoid viewing the profane language on defendant’s jacket). See also In re S.J.N-K, 647 N.W.2d 707, 711, ¶ 12 (S.D.2002) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted); In re Welfare of M.A.H. Options: A. holding that test for whether two offenses are not the same is whether each offense requires proof of a fact that the other does not B. holding that the availability of the icrp is but one factor to be considered in determining undue hardship but it is not determinative C. holding that foreseeability of causing injury in texas though not determinative is important consideration in establishing minimum contacts D. holding that whether the target of such provocation does not in fact retaliate is not determinative E. holding that it is the inefficacy of the remedy not the personal inability to use it that is determinative under 2255

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that whether the target of such provocation does not in fact retaliate is not determinative
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: 2, is applied first. Under the joint-liability statute, when parties are jointly liable, they are generally jointly and severally liable for the entire award. Minn.Stat. § 604.02, subd. 1 (2002). Nonetheless, if one party’s equitable obligation is uncollectible, another party may move for reallocation within one year of the judgment. Id., subd. 2. In that circumstance, the district court “shall determine whether all or part of a party’s equitable share of the obligation is uncol-lectible from that party and shall reallocate any uncollectible amount among the other parties, including a claimant at fault, according to their respective percentages of fault.” Id.; Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co., 383 N.W.2d 289, 292-93 (Minn.1986); see also Gregor v. Clark, 560 N.W.2d 744, 745 (Minn.App.1997) (<HOLDING>). The canons of statutory construction answer Options: A. holding that intent to evade collective bargaining obligations is merely one factor among many that must be considered B. holding that failure to pay obligations under a contract is a material breach as a matter of law when parties explicitly state in the contract that failure to pay warrants termination C. holding that those who poison the land must pay for its cure D. holding that a court must reallocate all uncollectible obligations among tortfeasors who can pay E. holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to require a defendant to pay all back taxes

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a court must reallocate all uncollectible obligations among tortfeasors who can pay
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 Borrower and Subsidiary owns or has the lawful right to use all material Intellectual Property necessary for the conduct of its business, without conflict with any rights of others. There is no pending or, to any Borrower's knowledge, threatened Intellectual Property Claim with respect to any Borrower, any Subsidiary or any of their Property (including any Intellectual Property). Except as disclosed on Schedule 9.1.11 , no Borrower or Subsidiary pays or owes any Royalty or other compensation to any Person with respect to any Intellectual Property. All Intellectual Property (other than off-the-shelf software) owned, used or licensed by, or otherwise subject to any interests of, any Borrower or Subsidiary, as of the Closing Date, is shown on Schedule 9.1.11 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: another’s trademark have been established (typically including the requirement that the name acquired a “secondary meaning” as a result of its association with the relevant products, see Circuit City Stores, 165 F.3d at 1054), and (2) that the scope of the injunction accounts for the reality that the mark relates to the offending party’s own last name. See, e.g., Joseph Scott, 764 F.2d at 65 n. 2, 69 (stating, in modifying the district court’s preliminary injunction, that an individual “should be permitted to use his name to describe his past accomplishments and expertise,” but that “he must make perfectly clear that his firm is no longer associated with, and is not a successor to,” a competing corporation); Taylor Wine Co. v. Bully Hill Vineyards, Inc., 569 F.2d 731, 736 (2d Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>); Berghoff Restaurant Co. v. Lewis W. Berghoff Options: A. holding that an individual may use his signature on certain labels or advertisements if he chooses but only with appropriate disclaimer that he is not connected with or a successor to a competing corporation B. holding jurisdiction over an individual may not usually be predicated on jurisdiction over a corporation unless the corporation is the alter ego of the individual or when the individual perpetrates a fraud C. holding that an employee is guilty of misconduct connected with his work when he deliberately violates a company rule reasonably designed to protect the legitimate business interests of his employer or when his acts or omissions are of such a nature or so recurrent as to manifest a willful disregard of those interests and the duties and obligations he owes his employer D. holding that a corporation could be served by delivering a copy of the subpoena to an officer or managing or general agent of the corporation and that the agent could be an individual a partnership or another corporation E. holding that the phrases in connection with and associated with are synonymous with the terms with respect to with reference to and relating to which mean connected by reason of an established or discoverable relation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an individual may use his signature on certain labels or advertisements if he chooses but only with appropriate disclaimer that he is not connected with or a successor to a competing corporation
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: Without duplication with the provisions of Sections 3 and 11 of the Equity Plan, if (i) the Company shall at any time be involved in a merger, consolidation, dissolution, liquidation, reorganization, exchange of Shares, sale of all or substantially all of the assets or Shares of the Company or a transaction similar thereto, (ii) any stock dividend, stock split, reverse stock split, stock combination, reclassification, recapitalization, or other similar change in the capital structure of the Company, or any distribution to holders of Shares other than ordinary cash dividends, shall occur or (iii) any other event shall occur which in the judgment of the Compensation Committee necessitates action by way of adjusting the terms of the Program, then and in that event, the Compensation Committee shall take such action as shall be necessary to maintain the Participants’ rights hereunder so that they are substantially the same rights existing under this Program prior to such event.

assistant: Adjustments
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: plan forming RLCWA’s organization and approved by the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas in 1974,” Grafton argues, nonetheless, that its lawful annexation of Fox Run from Eaton Township served to remove it from the RLCWA’s district. The Court disagrees. The entire territories of Grafton and Eaton Township, excluding water lines existing in 1974, are within the RLCWA’s district. See Third Stip., Exs. A, C, D. Grafton does not adequately explain why undeveloped property located within m’n, 173 F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir.1999) (city’s annexation of property within a water district was not deemed to take that property out of the district’s service area if the water district could show that it made services available to that property and was federally indebted); James Island, 249 F.3d 323 (<HOLDING>); Madison, 816 F.2d 1057 (holding that city’s Options: A. holding exempt portions of a ranch devoted to and actually used for religious purposes B. recognizing that leased property is exempt from taxation where the lessee uses it for a public purpose C. recognizing property became the property of the consolidated district such that it was not a case of requiring taxpayers of one school district to help pay the debts of another school district without receiving anything in return D. holding that citys annexation of various portions of land within water district along with citys provision of services and taxation of annexed residents did not remove that property from water district for 1926b purposes E. recognizing that the right to hold land without being subject to taxation may constitute a substantial detriment to the affected locality and a significant advantage to the landowner and that land use ought not to result in exemption from taxation absent the conferral of a substantial public benefit such as the tax exemption law was designed to foster quotation omitted

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that citys annexation of various portions of land within water district along with citys provision of services and taxation of annexed residents did not remove that property from water district for 1926b purposes
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 representations, warranties, covenants, and obligations in this Agreement, the Exhibits, the certificates delivered pursuant to this Agreement, and any other document delivered pursuant to this Agreement will survive the Closing. The right to any remedy based on such representations, warranties, covenants, and obligations will not be affected by any investigation conducted with respect to, or any knowledge acquired (or capable of being acquired) by Buyer at any time, whether before or after the execution and delivery of this Agreement or the Closing, with respect to the accuracy or inaccuracy of or compliance with, any such representations, warranties, covenants, or obligations. The waiver of any condition based on the accuracy of any representation or warranty, or on the performance of or compliance with any covenant or obligation, will not affect the right to indemnification, or other remedy based on such representations, warranties, covenants, and obligations.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY LITIGATION DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF, UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AMENDMENT OR ANY OF THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS. EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PARTY HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PARTY WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER, AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AMENDMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS, AS APPLICABLE, BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION 9 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: S.Ct. 137, 102 L.Ed.2d 110 (1988); In re THC Fin. Corp., 837 F.2d 389, 392 (9th Cir.1988); In re Triangle Chemicals, Inc., 697 F.2d 1280, 1289 (5th Cir.1983); In re Berman, 167 B.R. 323 (Bankr.D.Mass.1994). The inquiry requires an applicant to demonstrate both the professional person’s suitability for appointment and the existence of excusable neglect sufficient to justify the failure to file a timely application. Singson, 41 F.3d at 319-20. The Supreme Court suggests that when a bankruptcy court is faced with the task of determining the presence of excusable neglect the analysis is twofold. First, is there neglect, whether actual negligence or a mere omission to act? See Pioneer Inv. Services v. Brunswick Associates, 507 U.S. 380, 392-94, 113 S.Ct. 1489, 1497, 123 L.Ed.2d 74 (1993) (<HOLDING>). Second, is it excusable? To answer this Options: A. holding that the observation of evidence in plain view is not a search for purposes of the fourth amendment and does not require a warrant B. holding that materiality does not require a showing that the creditors were prejudiced by the false statement C. holding that for purposes of rule 9006b the code does not require a showing of extraordinary circumstances D. holding bia should consider filing of late brief upon showing of extraordinary circumstances E. holding that an inaccurate zip code does not render an address improper for purposes of texas rule of civil procedure 5

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that for purposes of rule 9006b the code does not require a showing of extraordinary circumstances
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 may terminate Executive’s employment, on written notice to Executive after having reasonably established Executive’s Disability. For purposes of this Agreement, Executive will be deemed to have a “ Disability ” if, as a result of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment that can be expected to result in death or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than twelve (12) months, Executive is unable to perform the core functions of Executive’s position (with or without reasonable accommodation) or is receiving income replacement benefits for a period of three months or more under an accident and health plan covering employees of the Company. Executive shall be entitled to the compensation and benefits provided for under this Agreement for any period prior to Executive’s termination by reason of Disability during which Executive is unable to work due to a physical or mental infirmity in accordance with the Company’s policies for similarly-situated executives.

assistant: Disability
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 Transaction Documents, together with the exhibits and schedules thereto, and the Confidentiality Agreement, taken together, are expressly intended by the Parties to be, shall be and constitute the Parties’ single, entire, non-severable, indivisible and integrated agreement, and none of the Parties would have entered into any of the Transaction Documents but for the totality of terms and provisions of the Transaction Documents and the Confidentiality Agreement. The Transaction Documents, together with the exhibits and schedules thereto, and the Confidentiality Agreement contain the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and thereof and supersede all prior agreements and understandings, oral or written, with respect to such matters, which the Parties acknowledge have been merged into such documents, exhibits and schedules.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was to provide for restitution to the government of money taken from it by fraud, and that the device of [multiple] damages plus a specific sum was chosen to make sure that the government would be made completely whole.”). And even if the government could be said to have “sustain[ed]” the damage in some loose sense if it once possessed the funds but does no longer, to whom should the treble damages be paid? According to the statute, recovery would be paid to the government and to rela-tors, but not to Iraq. Yet, Iraq presumably would still have an independent claim against the defendants for which it coúld recover damages, resulting in a quadruple damages award. Cf. United States ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp. (Totten I), 286 F.3d 542, 553 (D.C.Cir.2002) (Randolph, J., concurring) (<HOLDING>). The more sensible interpretation, consistent Options: A. holding that the united states court of federal claims lacked jurisdiction over claims arising from the violation of a criminal statute B. holding that plaintiffs negligence claims sounded in tort and thus could not be transferred to the united states court of federal claims C. recognizing federal constitutional claim against the united states D. recognizing similar problem if fca is applied to claims presented to any federal grantee even if claims are not represented to united states E. holding it is reasonable for the plan proponent to classify claims separately only if these claims are not substantially similar

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing similar problem if fca is applied to claims presented to any federal grantee even if claims are not represented to united states
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: well within its discretion in denying Oliveras’ clearly untimely motion. 2. Due Process Violation Oliveras alternatively argues that her due process right to present her claim on the merits was violated by the ineffective assistance of her first attorney. While aliens in a deportation proceeding do not have a constitutional right to counsel, they are entitled to due process in such a proceeding. See Saakian, 252 F.3d at 24. “Ineffective assistance of counsel in a deportation proceeding is a denial of due process under the Fifth Amendment if the proceeding was so fundamentally unfair that the alien was prevented from reasonably presenting his case.” Rodríguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1226 (9th Cir.2002) (internal quotation mark omitted); accord Guerrero-Santana, 499 F.3d at 93 (<HOLDING>)(citing Lozada v. INS, 857 F.2d 10, 13 (1st Options: A. recognizing claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel usually must be raised in collateral proceeding B. holding that knowing reliance upon the advice of a nonattorney cannot support a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel in a removal proceeding C. holding that ineffective assistance of counsel in a removal proceeding may constitute a denial of due process if and to the extent that the proceeding is thereby rendered fundamentally unfair D. holding that defendant may raise claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal only if ineffective assistance is conclusive from the record E. holding that under oregon law a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must be raised in the initial habeas proceeding

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that ineffective assistance of counsel in a removal proceeding may constitute a denial of due process if and to the extent that the proceeding is thereby rendered fundamentally unfair
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: Without limiting or waiving in any respect any rights or remedies of the parties hereto under the Agreement, each of the parties will be entitled to seek specific performance of the obligations to be performed by the other in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement. The Company and the Investors hereby declare that it is impossible to measure in money the damages which will accrue to the parties hereto by reason of the failure of any party to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement. If any party hereto shall institute any action or proceeding to enforce the provisions hereof, each of the Company and the Investors hereby waives the claim or defense that the party instituting such action or proceeding has an adequate remedy at law.

assistant: Specific Performance
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 Guidelines, all cash compensation and Equity Awards granted hereunder, and all actions taken in connection herewith shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware without reference to principles of conflict of laws, except as superseded by applicable federal law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower irrevocably and unconditionally submits, for itself and its property, to the nonexclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State of Illinois sitting in Cook County and of the United States District Court of the Northern District of Illinois, and any appellate court from any thereof, in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this First Amendment or any other Loan Document, or for recognition or enforcement of any judgment, and each of the parties hereto irrevocably and unconditionally agrees that all claims in respect of any such action or proceeding may be heard and determined in such Illinois state court or, to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law, in such Federal court. Each of the parties hereto agrees 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. Nothing in this First Amendment or in any other Loan Document shall affect any right that Administrative Agent or any Lender may otherwise have to bring any action or proceeding relating to this First Amendment or any other Loan Document against Borrower or its properties in the courts of any jurisdiction.

assistant: Submission 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts and by different parties hereto on separate counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original and all of which taken together will constitute one and the same agreement, and this Agreement will be binding on all of the parties hereto, even though such parties do not sign the same signature page. Signatures transmitted electronically or by telecopy will be deemed 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is for parties to accomplish by agreement things they conclude are more to their advantage than what they could accomplish by litigation. ¶ 17. The Administrative Code prevents DPI from imposing a twenty-five percent bond requirement on an MPCP school in the absence of proof that the school is not financially viable. Travis Tech contends that the Administrative Code bond requirement— which it voluntarily accepted in the Agreement— violates state law. Essentially, Travis Tech argues that parties can never stipulate to provisions that abrogate any part of statutory law. We disagree. ¶ 18. Case law has repeatedly held that although a statute permits certain actions, parties may nonetheless stipulate to the contrary. See Rice v. Gruetzmacher, 30 Wis. 2d 222, 227-28, 140 N.W.2d 238 (1966) (<HOLDING>); Spencer v. Spencer, 140 Wis. 2d 447, 451, 410 Options: A. holding that a claim did not arise under a workers compensation law when it stated a right to relief in tort and sought common law damages distinct from statutory compensation scheme B. holding that an agencys determination on a workers compensation claim was entitled to deference C. holding that employers insurer who provided workers compensation benefits to employee but did not consent to employees settlement with thirdparty tortfeasor may maintain an action for payments that become payable in the future D. holding that thirdparty tortfeasor has right to contribution from employer up to amount of employers workers compensation liability E. holding that a workers compensation insurer is entitled to share in a thirdparty settlement under the statutory formula unless it stipulates otherwise

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a workers compensation insurer is entitled to share in a thirdparty settlement under the statutory formula unless it stipulates otherwise
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 obligations of the parties under the provisions of this Agreement (including without limitation Section 7 shall survive, and remaining binding and enforceable, notwithstanding the expiration of the Term, the termination of this Agreement the termination of Executive’s Employment hereunder or otherwise, to the extent necessary to preserve the intended benefits of such provision.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY AND ALL RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, THE OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY AND THEREBY.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Bums is here to step in if need be.” Id., at 29. The Commonwealth agrees with the PCRA court that Appellant’s actions and assertions demonstrated that he elected to proceed pro se and that his election was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. It maintains that the PCRA court’s finding of waiver is correct, even absent a formal colloquy, because Appellant’s violent behavior prevented the Court from conducting an official inquiry on the record. The Commonwealth contends, alternatively, that Appellant’s brutal actions of attacking Attorney Burns in the courtroom should be deemed a forfeiture of his right to counsel, which requires no formal colloquy to determine if the relinquishment of the right is knowing and voluntary. See Commonwealth v. Coleman, 905 A.2d 1003, 1008 (Pa.Super.2006) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Thomas, 879 A.2d 246, 257 Options: A. holding that the defendant played games with the court system to such an extent that she forfeited her right to counsel thereby rendering unnecessary the colloquy required for a waiver of counsel B. recognizing that the sixth amendment guarantees a defendant the right to counsel and the right to waive counsel C. holding that in determining whether there exists a valid waiver of the right to counsel in the criminal setting the court may consider a defendants lack of good faith in working with appointed counsel including an unreasonable refusal to cooperate with counsel or an unreasonable request for substitution of appointed counsel and the timeliness of defendants request for new counsel particularly when a defendant makes an untimely request for new counsel under circumstances which are likely to result in a continuance D. holding that even though the state court did engage in a colloquy with the petitioner that colloquy was insufficient to establish that the waiver was knowing and voluntary because the state court had refused to permit petitioners counsel to ask him questions that would probe the waivers validity E. recognizing that a criminal defendants right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the defendant played games with the court system to such an extent that she forfeited her right to counsel thereby rendering unnecessary the colloquy required for a waiver of counsel
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 underlying crimes. But a court also cannot be expected to accept wholesale unsubstantiated accusations of egregious police misconduct. This conclusion is not based on an unreasonable understanding of Strickland or an unreasonable view of the facts. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). Even if Bynum had testified, the only support for his claims of coercion would have been his own uncorroborated and self-serving testimony. He did not present any physical evidence of coercion or first-hand witness accounts of the interrogations. Without more support to Bynum’s story, it was permissible for the state appellate court to conclude that there was not a reasonable probability that the trial court would have accepted By-num’s version of events. See Mahaffey v. Page, 151 F.3d 671, 683-84 (7th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>), overruled on other grounds by Mahaffey v. Options: A. holding that testimony given by a defendant in support of a motion to suppress cannot be admitted as evidence of his guilt at trial B. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by finding that defendant had waived the opportunity for a suppression hearing on his confession by first moving to suppress the confession orally at the start of trial when no motion to suppress was filed no hearing requested and no objection to the admission of the statements was made C. holding that when defendant failed to appear at scheduled suppression hearing the court could have decided the motion in defendants absence but it did not have the authority to refuse to consider it D. holding that consistent testimony given by three officers made it unlikely that defendants motion to suppress his confession as coerced would have been granted even though two witnesses to the interrogation had not testified at suppression hearing E. holding that petitioner was not prejudiced by counsels decision not to call sole witness to petitioners alleged beating at suppression hearing because testimony of arresting officers and assistant attorneys as well as absence of physical evidence of coercion made it unlikely that motion to suppress the confessions would have been granted

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that petitioner was not prejudiced by counsels decision not to call sole witness to petitioners alleged beating at suppression hearing because testimony of arresting officers and assistant attorneys as well as absence of physical evidence of coercion made it unlikely that motion to suppress the confessions would have been granted
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 Plan which is not a Multiemployer Plan, and, to the knowledge of each Seller Party or Servicer, each Multiemployer Plan, is in compliance in all material respects with, and has been administered in all material respects in compliance with, the applicable provisions of ERISA, the Code and any other Federal or State law. No event or condition has occurred and is continuing as to which any Seller Party or Servicer would be under an obligation to furnish a report to Buyer under Section 13(a)(xi) hereof. The present value of all accumulated benefit obligations under each Plan subject to Title IV of ERISA (based on the assumptions used for purposes of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 87) did not, as of the date of the most recent financial statements reflecting such amounts, exceed the fair market value of the assets of such Plan, and the present value of all accumulated benefit obligations of all Plans (based on the assumptions used for purposes of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 87) did not, as of the date of the most recent financial statements reflecting such amounts, exceed the fair market value of the assets of all such Plans. Each Seller Party and Servicer and its Subsidiaries do not provide any material medical or health benefits to former employees other than as required by the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, as amended, or similar state or local law at no cost to the employer (collectively, “COBRA”).

assistant: Erisa
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 those cases and sentenced to prison. 2 . The judge construed Brogan’s Rule 60(b) motion as a second or successive 2255 motion, declined to transfer it to this court, and dismissed it. That decision may have been improper, but "because the controlling constitutional claim that trial counsel was ineffective is now properly before this court,” Brogan has chosen not to press the issue. Aplt. Opening Br. & Request for COA at 10 n. 3. 3 . Brogan does not challenge the district judge’s decision finding him not credible and determining his counsel would have investigated the inclusion of check 30878 if the problem has been brought to counsel’s attention. Any disputes with these aspects of the judge’s decision are waived. See United States v. Wayne, 591 F.3d 1326, 1334 n. 6 (10th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). His argument here is that even without Options: A. holding an argument not raised in opening brief is waived B. holding argument waived for failure to raise it in opening brief C. holding that appellant waived issue by failing to raise it in opening brief D. holding an argument made in plaintiffs reply brief but not in their opening brief waived E. holding that argument not raised in opening brief is waived

assistant: The best answer is B. holding argument waived for failure to raise it in opening brief
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 Jones v. Greninger, 188 F.3d at 326 (finding that an inmate’s request for monetary damages on a failure to protect claim was barred by § 1997e(e) because he did not allege any physical injury). “The prohibitive feature of § 1997e(e), requiring physical injury before recovery, does not apply[, however,] in the context of requests for declaratory or injunctive relief sought to end an allegedly unconstitutional condition of confinement.” Herman v. Holiday, 238 F.3d at 665. (c) Failure to State a Claim To the extent that Plaintiff complains about retaliation, conspiracy, religious freedom, and equal protection, he has failed to state claims upon which relief can be granted despite having been given the opportunity to amend his pleadings. See Rodriguez v. United States, 66 F.3d at 98 (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff argues that many of the Defendants Options: A. holding that dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim should generally be without prejudice but if the plaintiff has been given an opportunity amend his complaint and fails to do so the dismissal may be with prejudice B. holding that proper remedy for failure to exhaust is dismissal of the claim without prejudice C. holding that dismissal of a complaint for insufficient jurisdictional allegations should be without prejudice to amend D. holding that a review committee of the kansas board for discipline of attorneys had the authority to dismiss a complaint against an attorney with or without prejudice and when dismissal was ordered without specifying the nature of the dismissal the dismissal was without prejudice to the filing of later proceedings on the same matter E. holding that when the allegations do not affirmatively negate a claim dismissal for failure to state a claim is appropriate only when the plaintiff has been given an opportunity to amend after special exceptions have been sustained

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim should generally be without prejudice but if the plaintiff has been given an opportunity amend his complaint and fails to do so the dismissal may be with prejudice