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: for holding that [defendant Bubar’s counsel’s] conduct necessarily caused juror animus against Bubar's co-defendants." Id. The Court also found that by keeping themselves separate from Bubar’s counsel, the co-defendants' attorneys created an equally plausible inference of juror sympathy towards their clients. Id. The facts in this case are similar to those in Bubar. There is no evidence that there was any juror animosity directed towards Garrett because of the antics of Williams’s counsel. Secondly, early in the trial, Garrett and his counsel moved to a separate defense table in order to isolate themselves from Williams and his counsel. Finally, it is possible that Hughes’s actions caused the jury to sympathize with Garrett. See also United States v. Boyd, 610 F.2d 521 (8th Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>). 6 . Although Garrett correctly points out Options: A. holding that the defendant may not state one ground at trial and another on appeal B. holding that cumulative evidence of prior sexual assaults allegedly committed by defendant were prejudicial entitling defendant to new trial C. holding prejudicial effect of prosecutors comment not rendered harmless by courts general instruction that the arguments of counsel are not evidence D. holding that allegedly inflammatory and prejudicial arguments by one defendants counsel did not have an impermissible effect on the trial of another defendant E. holding instruction to jury that counsels arguments were not evidence did not negatej the prejudicial effect of the prosecutors inflammatory comments

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that allegedly inflammatory and prejudicial arguments by one defendants counsel did not have an impermissible effect on the trial of another defendant
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notices, requests, demands and other communications provided for by this Agreement shall be sufficient if in writing and (i) sent by email to the email address used by the CEO or by the Executive (as applicable) in their usual course of business; (ii) delivered by hand; (iii) sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier service or (iv) sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, in each case ((iii) and (iv)) to the Executive at the last address the Executive has filed in writing with the Company, or (as applicable) to the Company at its main office, attention of the CEO.

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: disposition of the action roughly corresponds with the framework we outlined in Meyer-land for disposing of a case which is being appealed in state court when removal is effected. According to Meyerland, "the district court [should] take the state judgment as it finds it, prepare the record as required for appeal, and forward the case to a federal appellate court for review.” Id., 960 F.2d at 520; see also Matter of 5300 Memorial Investors, Ltd., 973 F.2d 1160, 1162 (5th Cir.1992) (citing Meyerland). We further note that the district court's failure to reenter the state court judgment on a document separate from its order, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 58, does not deprive this Court of jurisdiction. See Bankers Trust Co. v. Mollis, 435 U.S. 381, 387, 98 S.Ct. 1117, 1121, 55 L.Ed.2d 357 (1978) (<HOLDING>). 10 . We reject at the outset the plaintiffs’ Options: A. holding that identification of appellant in notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement and that the failure to name a party in a notice to appeal constitutes a failure of that party to appeal B. holding that there was appellate jurisdiction under principle that a premature notice of appeal from a nonfinal order may ripen into a valid notice of appeal if a final judgment has been entered by the time the appeal is heard and the appellee suffers no prejudice C. holding that technical inadequacy in the notice of appeal did not deprive the court of jurisdiction D. holding that the 30day notice of appeal requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional E. holding that the same principles of commonsense that led the court to conclude that the technical requirements for a notice of appeal were not mandatory where the notice did not mislead or prejudice the appellee demonstrate that parties to an appeal may waive the separatejudgment requirement of rule 58

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the same principles of commonsense that led the court to conclude that the technical requirements for a notice of appeal were not mandatory where the notice did not mislead or prejudice the appellee demonstrate that parties to an appeal may waive the separatejudgment requirement of rule 58
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall (a) by 9:30 a.m. (New York City time) on the Trading Day immediately following the date hereof, issue a press release disclosing the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereby, and (b) file a Current Report on Form 8-K, including the Transaction Documents as exhibits thereto, with the Commission within the time required by the Exchange Act. From and after the issuance of such press release, the Company represents to the Purchasers that it shall have publicly disclosed all material, non-public information delivered to any of the Purchasers by the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, or any of their respective officers, directors, employees or agents in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. The Company and the Purchasers shall consult with each other in issuing any other press releases with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby, and neither the Company nor the Purchasers shall issue any such press release nor otherwise make any such public statement without the prior consent of the Company, with respect to any press release of the Purchasers, or without the prior consent of the Purchasers, with respect to any press release of the Company, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed, except if such disclosure is required by law, in which case the disclosing party shall promptly provide the other party with prior notice of such public statement or communication. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company shall not publicly disclose the name of the Purchaser, or include the name of the Purchaser in any filing with the Commission or any regulatory agency or Trading Market, without the prior written consent of the Purchaser, except: (a) as required by federal securities law in connection with any registration statement contemplated by this Agreement and (b) to the extent such disclosure is required by law or Trading Market regulations, in which case the Company shall provide the Purchaser with prior notice of such disclosure permitted under this clause (b).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by the relationship and not by the RPCs. Id. at 260-62. ¶26 The Hizey decision, however, addressed application of the RPCs only in the legal malpractice setting. The court did not answer whether the court would also separate the ethics and potential civil liability in other suits, such as fee disgorgement, breach of contract, or disqualification motions. Indeed, the court noted that other courts had “relied on the CPR [Code of Professional Responsibility] and RPC for reasons other than to find malpractice liability and our holding today does not alter or affect such use.” Hizey, 119 Wn.2d at 264 (citing Singleton v. Frost, 108 Wn.2d 723, 742 P.2d 1224 (1987) (relying on disciplinary rule to determine reasonableness of attorney fees); Eriks v. Denver, 118 Wn.2d 451, 824 P.2d 1207 (1992) (<HOLDING>); Walsh v. Brousseau, 62 Wn. App. 739, 815 P.2d Options: A. holding that first aid does not include cpr or any other skilled treatment that requires training B. holding violation of cpr is a question of law not fact C. holding it is a question of fact D. holding that generally the question of waiver and estoppel is a question of fact E. holding that claim construction is an issue of law for the court not a question of fact for the jury

assistant: The best answer is B. holding violation of cpr is a question of law not fact
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 his two (2) life sentences[,] when this court ordered the burglary sentence to run concurrently with the two (2) life sentences[.]” ¶ 8. The circuit court summarily dismissed Ducksworth’s motion based on Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-5(2) (Supp.2012), which requires a petitioner to file his PCR motion within three years of the entry of a judgment following a guilty plea, with certain exceptions not present in Ducksworth’s case. ¶ 9. Ducksworth timely appealed. Discussion ¶ 10. Ducksworth claims he received an illegal sentence. He does so because the right to a legal sentence is a fundamental constitutional right, and an illegal-sentence claim is not subject to section 99-39-5(2)’s three-year time limit. See, e.g., Ivy v. State, 731 So.2d 601, 603 (¶¶ 13-14) (Miss.1999) (<HOLDING>); Weaver v. State, 785 So.2d 1085, 1087 (¶ 6) Options: A. holding errors based on the constitutional rights to confrontation and due process may be waived by failure to object at trial B. recognizing the right to trial by jury is a constitutional right to be given the same protections as other constitutional rights C. holding right to be fundamental D. holding that errors affecting fundamental constitutional rights such as the right to a legal sentence may be excepted from the threeyear timebar E. holding that rights under vienna convention are not the equivalent of fundamental rights such as the right to counsel

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that errors affecting fundamental constitutional rights such as the right to a legal sentence may be excepted from the threeyear timebar
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: lessee’s obligations.” Id. at 8. The district court then concluded that the City was entitled to the escrow fund under its assignment of rents to secure the performance of its mortgage covenants. Id. This appeal followed. I. ANTI-DEFICIENCY STATUTE The trustee, FILP, and FIMC argue that the City’s claim to the escrow fund is barred by the Minnesota anti-deficiency statute. Although the City recognizes that it is barred from obtaining a deficiency judgment against Brewery, the City contends that under Minnesota law, the anti-deficiency statute does not preclude it from asserting a claim to the escrow fund based on breach of mortgage covenants that do not concern the mortgage debt. See Kooda Bros. Constr. v. United Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Alexandria, 400 N.W.2d 407 (Minn.Ct.App.1987) (<HOLDING>). Based on the holding in Kooda, the district Options: A. holding that the mortgagee had no right to rents under its assignment of rents during the redemption period because it purchased the property for the full amount of the mortgage debt at its foreclosure sale B. holding that in a case in which an omitted junior mortgagee foreclosed its mortgage the junior mortgagee had the absolute right to redeem from the senior mortgagee who had purchased the property at a sale following foreclosure of the senior mortgage C. holding that the mortgagee named in the mortgage at the time of the mortgages execution acquired the legal title to the property D. holding that a mortgagee could enforce mortgage covenants requiring the mortgagors to keep the property free of encumbrances even after it foreclosed by advertisement and purchased the property for the full amount of the mortgage debt because the mortgage covenants concerned title to the mortgaged property rather than repayment of the debt E. holding that a mortgage encompasses a property right

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a mortgagee could enforce mortgage covenants requiring the mortgagors to keep the property free of encumbrances even after it foreclosed by advertisement and purchased the property for the full amount of the mortgage debt because the mortgage covenants concerned title to the mortgaged property rather than repayment of the debt
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement is prohibited by law or otherwise determined to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the provision that would otherwise be prohibited, invalid or unenforceable shall be deemed amended to apply to the broadest extent that it would be valid and enforceable, and the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Agreement so long as this Agreement as so modified continues to express, without material change, the original intentions of the parties as to the subject matter hereof and the prohibited nature, invalidity or unenforceability of the provision(s) in question does not substantially impair the respective expectations or reciprocal obligations of the parties or the practical realization of the benefits that would otherwise be conferred upon the parties. The parties will endeavor in good faith negotiations to replace the prohibited, invalid or unenforceable provision(s) with a valid provision(s), the effect of which comes as close as possible to that of the prohibited, invalid or unenforceable provision(s). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement or any other Transaction Document (and without implication that the following is required or applicable), it is the intention of the parties that in no event shall amounts and value paid by the Company and/or any of its Subsidiaries (as the case may be), or payable to or received by any of the Buyers, under the Transaction Documents (including without limitation, any amounts that would be characterized as I” under applicable law) exceed amounts permitted under any applicable law. Accordingly, if any obligation to pay, payment made to any Buyer, or collection by any Buyer pursuant the Transaction Documents is finally judicially determined to be contrary to any such applicable law, such obligation to pay, payment or collection shall be deemed to have been made by mutual mistake of such Buyer, the Company and its Subsidiaries and such amount shall be deemed to have been adjusted with retroactive effect to the maximum amount or rate of interest, as the case may be, as would not be so prohibited by the applicable law. Such adjustment shall be effected, to the extent necessary, by reducing or refunding, at the option of such Buyer, the amount of interest or any other amounts which would constitute unlawful amounts required to be paid or actually paid to such Buyer under the Transaction Documents. For greater certainty, to the extent that any interest, charges, fees, expenses or other amounts required to be paid to or received by such Buyer under any of the Transaction Documents or related thereto are held to be within the meaning of “interest” or another applicable term to otherwise be violative of applicable law, such amounts shall be pro-rated over the period of time to which they relate.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: § 4-21-311(d). On appeal, the plaintiffs -argue that, “[g]iven that [they] ... filed suit within one (1) year of the last act in a hostile environment, their claims are timely.” But they identify no specific facts probative of a hostile work environment that occurred during the year that preceded the filing of their complaints. Instead, they simply assert that, “[f]or purposes of computing the applicable period of time, it is important to note that Plaintiffs’ claims for racial discrimination are under a ‘hostile working environment theory.’ ” Because no allegations were made of specific incidents that occurred within the one-year period, we conclude that the THRA claims are time-barred. See Brown v. City of Springhill, No. 01:06-0098, 2008 WL 974729 at *4 (M.D.Tenn. April 8, 2008) (<HOLDING>). C. Discrete acts of discrimination We now Options: A. holding that allegations of failure to remedy a hostile work environment provided no basis for relief where the evidence demonstrated that the harassment had ended by the time plaintiffs complaint was filed B. holding that where the plaintiffs allegations concerning a hostile work environment consist of facts that occurred more than one year before the filing of the complaint such a claim is timebarred C. recognizing a hostile work environment claim under section 1983 D. holding that a viable hostile work environment claim requires an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive E. holding that a hostile work environment is a form of discrimination that is actionable under the statute

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that where the plaintiffs allegations concerning a hostile work environment consist of facts that occurred more than one year before the filing of the complaint such a claim is timebarred
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will not request any Loan or Letter of Credit, and the Borrower shall not use, and shall procure that its Subsidiaries and its or their respective directors, officers, employees and agents shall not use, the proceeds of any Loan or Letter of Credit ( A a ) in furtherance of an offer, payment, promise to pay, or authorization of the payment or giving of money, or anything else of value, to any Person in violation of any Anti-Corruption Laws, ( B b ) for the purpose of funding, financing or facilitating any activities, business or transaction of or with any Sanctioned Person, or in any Sanctioned Country, to the extent such activities, businesses or transactions would be prohibited by Sanctions if conducted by a corporation incorporated in the United States or in a European Union member state, or ( C c ) in any manner that would result in the violation of any Sanctions applicable to any party hereto.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 500 B.R. at 800; see also Wogoman v. Internal Revenue Serv. (In re Wogo-man), 475 B.R. 239, 248-49 (10th Cir. BAP 2012). Under this test, in order for a document to qualify as a return under § 523, “(1) it must purport to be a return; (2) it must be executed under penalty of perjury; (3) it must contain sufficient data to allow calculation of tax; and (4) it must represent an honest and reasonable attempt to satisfy the requirements of the tax law.” Hindenlang, 164 F.3d at 1033 (internal quotations and citation omitted). Prior to BAPCPA, a debtor’s tardiness was relevant to the question of whether a tax return qualified as an honest and genuine attempt to comply with the tax laws, thereby satisfying the fourth prong of the Beard test. See, e.g., In re Moroney, 352 F.3d at 906-907 (<HOLDING>). As we previously explained, due to the BAPCPA Options: A. holding that the defendant failed to make out a prima facie test when he could not satisfy the statistical showing required by the second duren element and declining to analyze the third element B. holding that a return filed postassessment by the irs does not satisfy fourth element of beard test C. holding that irs was bound by plan and bankruptcy codes method of determining amount of nondischargeable claim where irs had filed proof of claim for nondischargeable tax debt D. holding that a decedents tax settlement with the irs did not establish the value of his estates claim against the irs as a matter of law E. holding that in a reduction in force suit age differences of eight and 16 years are sufficient to satisfy the fourth element of a prima facie case

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a return filed postassessment by the irs does not satisfy fourth element of beard test
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: Company shall reimburse Executive for all reasonable and ordinary expenses determined in Company’s sole discretion that Executive incurs or pays during the Term in performing Executive’s services under this Agreement. Company shall, however, be required to make any such reimbursement only after Executive presents appropriate written expense statements, vouchers or such other supporting information in accordance with Company’s reimbursement policies, as Company may adopt from time to time. Company shall notify Executive of any dispute with respect to any such expenses within three months of any request for reimbursement or the expense shall be classified as non-recoverable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to Section 7(b), if the Participant incurs a Termination due to Disability or Retirement, the Restricted Shares shall, to the extent not then vested or previously forfeited or cancelled, continue to vest as provided in the Grant Notice as if the Participant had continued Employment through the Vesting Date, subject to the Participant’s compliance with the restrictive covenants set forth in Section 6 and the Participant’s execution, delivery and non-revocation of a waiver and release of claims in favor of the Company and its Affiliates and Subsidiaries in a form prescribed by the Company on or prior to the 60 th day following the Termination Date. Upon the Vesting Date, the Forfeiture Restriction shall lapse, subject to the conditions set forth in this clause (c).

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: This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original of this Amendment, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Amendment may be executed and delivered by facsimile, or by email in portable document format (.pdf) and delivery of the executed signature page by such method will be deemed to have the same effect as if the original signature had been delivered to other the parties.

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: governmental conduct, that Amendment, not the more generalized notion of ‘substantive due process,’ must be the guide for analyzing these claims.” Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395, 109 S.Ct. 1865, 104 L.Ed.2d 443 (1989). Following the Supreme Court’s holding in Graham, the First Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected alleged deprivations of substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment based either on excessive force or on malicious prosecution. Estate of Bennett v. Wainwright, 548 F.3d 155 (1st Cir.2008) (dismissing a substantive due process claim for deprivation of a life interest because the claim was based on excessive force more appropriately brought under the Fourth Amendment); Torres-Rivera v. O’Neill-Cancel, 406 F.3d 43, 51-53 (1st Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); Roche v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins., 81 Options: A. holding that new york law reasonable cause standard is equivalent to fourth amendments probable cause standard B. holding that an excessive force claim is governed by the fourth amendments objectively reasonable standard rather than the fourteenth amendments shock the conscience standard C. holding that whether an officers force was reasonable must be analyzed under the reasonableness standard of the fourth amendment D. holding that claims that law enforcement officials used excessive force in making an arrest are properly analyzed under the fourth amendments objective reasonableness standard E. holding that the protect act amendments to the standard of review apply retroactively

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an excessive force claim is governed by the fourth amendments objectively reasonable standard rather than the fourteenth amendments shock the conscience standard
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 Participant has reviewed with the Participant's own tax advisors the Federal, state, local and foreign tax consequences of the transactions contemplated by this Restricted Share Agreement. The Participant is relying solely on such advisors and not on any statements or representations of the Company or any of its agents. The Participant understands that he or she (and not the Company) shall be responsible for any tax liability that may arise as a result of the transactions contem-plated by this Restricted Share Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision herein is or should become inconsistent with any present or future law, rule or regulation of any sovereign government or regulatory body having jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Agreement, such provision shall be deemed to be rescinded or modified in accordance with such law, rule or regulation. In all other respects, this Agreement shall continue to remain in full force and effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Any Plan shall fail to satisfy the minimum funding standard required for any plan year or part thereof or a waiver of such standard or extension of any amortization period is sought or granted under Section 412 of the Code; any Plan is or shall have been terminated or is the subject of termination proceedings under Section 4041(c) or Section 4042 of ERISA including the giving of written notice thereof; the PBGC has given written notice to the U.S. Parent Borrower of its intent to terminate any Plan or to appoint a trustee to administer any Plan or the occurrence of any event or condition which the U.S. Parent Borrower reasonably expects to constitute grounds under ERISA for the termination of or the appointment of a trustee to administer any Plan; any Borrower, any Subsidiary or any Commonly Controlled Entity has incurred or is likely to incur a liability to or on account of a Plan under Section 409, 502(i), 502(l), 4062, 4063, 4064 or 4069 of ERISA or Section 4971 or 4975 of the Code or to or on account of a Multiemployer Plan under Section 515, 4201 or 4204 of ERISA (including the giving of written notice thereof); (b) a Foreign Plan Termination Event shall occur; or there is an appointment by the appropriate Governmental Authority of a replacement administrator to administer any Canadian Defined Benefit Plan; or if any Canadian Defined Benefit Plan shall be terminated or a replacement administrator is appointed, or if the Canadian Borrower or any other Canadian Subsidiary is in default with respect to payments to a Canadian Defined Benefit Plan; or Canadian Borrower or any other Canadian Subsidiary completely or partially withdraws from a Foreign Plan which is a “multi-employer pension plan”, as defined under the applicable pension standards legislation and any such event may reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; or any Lien arises (save for contribution amounts not yet due) in connection with any Foreign Plan; and (c) it is reasonably likely from any event or events set forth in clause (a) or (b) of this Section 10.6 that the imposition of a lien, the granting of a security interest, or a liability would result, and such lien, security interest or liability would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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 counsel.” United States v. Gordon, 4 F.3d 1567, 1570 (10th Cir.1993), see also United States v. Jordan, 516 Fed.Appx. 681, 682 (10th Cir.2013) (applying Gordon where counsel explained the wrong maximum sentence); United States v. Triplett, 402 Fed.Appx. 344, 348 (10th Cir.2010) (same); United States v. Kutilek, 260 Fed.Appx. 139, 147-48 (10th Cir.2008) (applying Gordon where counsel explained the wrong mandatory minimum). Moreover," even if counsel’s performance was deficient, Garcia cannot show prejudice. His assertion that counsel’s error rendered the plea unknowing and involuntary is undercut by his statement in advance of plea, in which he acknowledged that he faced a sentence of ten years to life in prison. See United States v. Silva, 430 F.3d 1096, 1100 (10th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). Consequently, Garcia does not sufficiently Options: A. holding that a defendant must have knowledge of the likely consequences of entering the guilty plea in order for a plea to be voluntary and knowing B. holding that counsels failure to advise the defendant of the collateral consequences of a guilty plea cannot rise to the level of constitutionally ineffective assistance C. holding that where a defendant acknowledged awareness of the consequences of his plea agreement counsels erroneous explanation of the consequences was not prejudicial D. holding that the defendants guilty plea was valid where the district court carefully questioned the defendant about whether he understood the consequences of his guilty plea E. holding that an attorney is required to advise a defendant of the direct consequences of a plea and will not be found ineffective for failing to advise of collateral consequences of the plea

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where a defendant acknowledged awareness of the consequences of his plea agreement counsels erroneous explanation of the consequences was not prejudicial
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 purposes of this Agreement and the Performance RSUs granted hereunder, the following defined terms shall have the meanings set forth below, provided that, if the Employee is a party to an employment agreement with the Company which contains any of the defined terms below, the meanings set forth in the Employee’s employment agreement shall govern the terms of this Agreement and the Performance RSUs granted hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding any particular state’s conflict of laws rules or provisions and to the extent permitted by federal law, this Release shall be interpreted, construed, and enforced pursuant to and in accordance with the laws of the state of Ohio. The Parties agree to submit all disputes arising out of or in connection with this Release to the exclusive jurisdiction of an appropriate court having jurisdiction over Franklin County, Ohio. Executive expressly consents to the personal jurisdiction of such a court for any lawsuit filed there against him by Huntington arising from or relating to this Release. Notwithstanding the general requirements stated earlier in this Paragraph, Executive agrees that Huntington, and only Huntington, at its sole discretion, may seek injunctive or other equitable relief to enforce the terms of this Release in any court of competent jurisdiction.

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: Indemnitee shall promptly notify the Company in writing upon being served with any summons, citation, subpoena, complaint, indictment, information or other document relating to any Proceeding or matter for which indemnification will or could be sought under this Agreement. Such notice to the Company shall include a description of the nature of, and facts underlying, the Proceeding, shall be directed to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company and shall be given in accordance with the provisions of Section 13(d). In addition, Indemnitee shall give the Company such additional information and cooperation as the Company or its counsel may reasonably request, provided that such documentation and information may exclude any privileged or similarly protected information. Indemnitee’s failure to so notify, provide information and otherwise cooperate with the Company shall not relieve the Company of any obligation which it may have to Indemnitee under this Agreement, except to the extent that the Company is adversely affected by such failure.

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: 656, 658, 562 S.E.2d 60, 62-63 (2002) (internal quotation omitted)). “Whenever, during the course of litigation it develops that the relief sought has been granted or that the questions originally in controversy between the parties are no longer at issue, the case should be dismissed, for courts will not entertain or proceed with a cause merely to determine abstract propositions of law.” In re Peoples, 296 N.C. 109, 147-48, 250 S.E.2d 890, 912 (1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 929, 61 L. Ed. 2d 297 (1979). As a general proposition, the “[r]epeal of a challenged law generally renders moot the issue of the law’s interpretation or constitutionality.” See Property Rights Advocacy, 173 N.C. App. at 183, 617 S.E.2d at 718 (citing State v. McCluney, 280 N.C. 404, 407, 185 S.E.2d 870, 872 (1972) (<HOLDING>). However, the repeal of a challenged statute Options: A. holding that an issue not presented to the trial court will not be considered on appeal B. holding that the lack of any ongoing appeal of weeks conviction renders moot the question of bail pending direct appeal C. recognizing that the constitutionality of a statute is a question of law subject to de novo review D. holding appeal moot on this basis E. holding that the repeal of a statute renders moot the question of its constitutionality and that the constitutionality of the new act does not arise on this appeal and will be decided if and when it is presented

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the repeal of a statute renders moot the question of its constitutionality and that the constitutionality of the new act does not arise on this appeal and will be decided if and when it is presented
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 Affinion Parties shall provide to the Investors and their respective advisors and representatives reasonable access during normal business hours to all books, records, documents, properties, personnel, advisors and representatives of the Affinion Parties; provided , that the foregoing shall not require the Affinion Parties (a) to permit any inspection, or to disclose any information, that in the reasonable judgment of the Affinion Parties would cause any of the Affinion Parties to violate any of its obligations with respect to confidentiality to a third party if the Affinion Parties shall have used its commercially reasonable efforts to obtain, but failed to obtain, the consent of such third party to such inspection or disclosure, (b) to disclose any legally privileged information of any of the Affinion Parties as determined based on the advice of its legal counsel, or (c) to violate any Laws. In addition, the Affinion Parties shall promptly provide written notification to the Investors of any material claim or litigation, arbitration or administrative proceeding that is threatened in writing or filed against the Company or Issuer from the date hereof until the earlier of the (i) Termination Date and (ii) termination of this Agreement. Any requests for information and access provided by the Affinion Parties to the Investors pursuant to this Section 5.03 shall be directed to an executive officer of the Company, the Company’s advisors or such person as may be designated by the Company’s executive officers.

assistant: Records
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 Award Certificate shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal substantive laws (not the law of choice of laws) of the State of California. If the Optionee is a party to an agreement with the Corporation to arbitrate claims, such agreement to arbitrate claims shall apply as to any dispute or disagreement regarding the Optionee’s rights under this Award Certificate.

assistant: Arbitration
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 travel to another pharmacy. . .may reduce the efficacy of those drugs”). Second, the court noted the rules’ delivery requirement, as related to pharmacies, applied to all objections to deliveries that did not fall into an exemption, regardless of the motivation behind those objections. Id. Finally, the court noted the delivery requirement also applied to all prescription products, not just contraceptives, making the requirement broadly ap plicable to a range of drugs, including those not subject to religious objections. See id. Akin to the law in Stormans, the Act provides no exemption for religious objections. But this lack of an exemption does not render the Act unconstitutional, because such exemptions are not constitutionally required. See Smith, 494 U.S. at 890, 110 S.Ct. 1595 (<HOLDING>). Additionally, the notice provision to which Options: A. holding that congress specifically allowed states to use their own exemptions instead of the federal exemptions listed in 522d and new yorks bankruptcy only exemption scheme is not so inconsistent with the exemptions listed in 522d as to render it invalid under the supremacy clause B. holding that free exercise clause did not require government to grant religious exemption from generally applicable religionneutral statutory requirement that welfare recipients furnish their social security numbers where no individualized exemptions were allowed C. holding states may make nondiscriminatory religious practice exemptions but that such exemptions are not constitutionally required D. holding out admission to practice law when not admitted to practice E. holding that rumors are nondiscriminatory due to the very nature of such gossip

assistant: The best answer is C. holding states may make nondiscriminatory religious practice exemptions but that such exemptions are not constitutionally required
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 agency apply); 4 White & Summers, Uniform, Commercial Code § 31-8 (6th ed. 2012) (“We are left, therefore, with several hundred years of cases and with the policy of Article 9 to help us define the word possession.”). The main focus of possession is whether the evi rts have stated that for per er. 447, 453-54, 370 A.2d 41, 45 (N.J.App.Div.1977) (finding that the secured party had possession of the hotel’s personalty when the debtor handed the hotel’s keys to the secured party). The Fourth Circuit has held that a “pledgee must either have actual exclusive possession of the property, or if it remains on the pledgor’s premises he must so separate and mark it as to give notice of his possession to the public.” In re Spanish-American Cork Prods. Co., 2 F.2d 203, 204 (4th Cir.1924) (<HOLDING>). The Fourth Circuit has further held that it Options: A. holding under kansas law that a plumber who was injured while inspecting the leased premises in order to prepare an estimate for plumbing work had not entered the premises for the purpose for which they were leased and thus could not rely on the public use exception B. recognizing a landlords duty for injuries sustained on leased premises where the landlord is aware that the premises are leased with intent to admit the public C. holding that the public use exception was not applicable because the injury to the tenants employee occurred in an area of the leased premises that was not open to the public but was used only by employees D. holding that signs placed on the inside of a leased space were not alone sufficient to provide notice of control of any part of the premises by anyone other than the debtor E. holding that abandonment requires that tenant vacate the leased premises

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that signs placed on the inside of a leased space were not alone sufficient to provide notice of control of any part of the premises by anyone other than the debtor
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 disclosed in the SEC Reports and the Memorandum, there is no action, suit, inquiry, notice of violation, proceeding or investigation pending or, to the knowledge of the Company, threatened against or affecting the Company, any Subsidiary or any of their respective properties before or by any court, arbitrator, governmental or administrative agency or regulatory authority (federal, state, county, local or foreign) (collectively, an “ Action ”) which (i) adversely affects or challenges the legality, validity or enforceability of any of this Agreement and the transactions contemplated pursuant to the Memorandum or the Securities or (ii) could, if there were an unfavorable decision, have or reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. Neither the Company nor any Subsidiary, nor any director or officer thereof, is or has been the subject of any Action involving a claim of violation of or liability under federal or state securities laws or a claim of breach of fiduciary duty. There has not been, and to the knowledge of the Company, there is not pending or contemplated, any investigation by the Commission involving the Company or any current or former director or officer of the Company. The Commission has not issued any stop order or other order suspending the effectiveness of any registration statement filed by the Company or any Subsidiary under the Exchange Act or the Securities Act.

assistant: Litigations
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: (no disability where employee required hourly breaks while standing or walking); Colwell v. Suffolk County Police Dep’t, 158 F.3d 635, 644 (2d Cir.1998) (inability to stand for “any period of time” not a disability). The same analysis applies with equal force here, as Gretillat’s limitations are similar to those at issue in- Wood. Although Gretillat’s inability to walk long distances and stand for more than one hour at a time certainly inconvenience her life, they are moderate, not severe restrictions. Factually, Gretillat’s limitations are less severe than those of the plaintiff in Wood: there is no evidence Gretillat uses a cane or experiences numbness. This holds true regardless of whether Gretillat’s limitations are judged individually or together. See Nuzum, 432 F.3d at 845 (<HOLDING>). It is important to note that, like the Options: A. holding that as to the scope of court review substantial evidence is a stringent limitation B. recognizing the basic statutory mandate that disability benefits are to be awarded only in cases of disability by reason of any some medically determinable physical or mental impairment but then concluding that the ad must determine the truthfulness of allegations of subjective pain C. recognizing that a substantial limitation of a constellation of basic motor functions could suffice to prove a disability D. recognizing that employer has notice of limitation when disability manifests itself to the extent that it would be reasonable to infer that her employer actually knew of the disability E. holding that a oneyear limitation provision was unreasonable and thus unenforceable because it conflicted with the motor vehicle reparations acts twoyear limitation period

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that a substantial limitation of a constellation of basic motor functions could suffice to prove a 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 failure of a party hereto at any time or times to require performance of any provision hereof shall in no manner affect its right at a later time to enforce the same. No waiver by a party of any breach of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in an instrument in writing signed by the party or parties to be bound thereby and specifically referencing the breach of the provision to be waived, and no waiver in any one or more instances shall be deemed to be a further or continuing waiver of any such breach in other instances or a waiver of any other breach of any other provision.

assistant: Waivers