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: accounting firm was not an abuse of discretion because the testimony helped establish Spivak’s state of mind. Under Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403, the district court’s ruling excluding both Bill Feinberg’s testimony and Cohn’s testimony about Joseph Reda’s comments was not an abuse of discretion. An erroneous jury charge is one that misleads the jury as to the proper legal standard or does not adequately inform the jury of the law. See Luciano v. Olsten Corp., 110 F.3d 210, 218 (2d Cir.1997). “Challenged jury instructions are reviewed de novo, but this Court will reverse only if all of the instructions, taken as a whole, caused the defendant prejudice. United States v. Bok, 156 F.3d 157, 160 (2d Cir. 1998); see also Thomley v. Penton Publ’g, Inc., 104 F.3d 26 (2d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>).” Hester v. BIC Corp., 225 F.3d 178,186 (2d Options: A. holding that to grant a new trial the error must be more than harmless B. holding cumulative error not reversible if it is more probably harmless than not C. holding exclusion was harmless error D. holding that in order to conclude that federal constitutional error is harmless court must find that error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt E. holding that admission of hearsay constituted harmless error when there was more than sufficient other evidence in the record to support the verdict

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that to grant a new trial the error must be more than harmless
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 six-year statute of limitations. Finally, the Fifth Motion seeks summary judgment on several of the state law claims upon various grounds. A. Trademark Issues 1. Standing Midwest contends that BCN/Clearing lacks standing to assert claims for trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114(l)(a) and dilution under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c) because such actions may be brought only by the registrant and owner of the mark. Midwest argues that as a licensee of the Torc-Pac mark, BCN/Clearing is not a proper party to assert those claims. Midwest apparently concedes that BCN/Clearing has standing as a licensee to assert a claim for unfair competition in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1). See Frisch’s Rests., Inc. v. Elby’s Big Boy of Steubenville, Inc., 670 F.2d 642, 649 (6th Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>). Section 32 of the Lanham Act, which governs Options: A. holding that the plaintiff an exclusive licensee of the mark had standing to bring a claim under 43a B. holding that the remedies are exclusive C. holding that plaintiff had standing to bring a rico conspiracy claim despite his inability to bring a substantive rico claim D. holding that the rico bar applies even where the plaintiff does not have standing to bring a securities fraud action E. holding that an evicted plaintiff has no legal interest in property and therefore has no standing to bring a cercla claim

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the plaintiff an exclusive licensee of the mark had standing to bring a claim under 43a
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: if spotify is notified by a copyright holder that any content infringes a copyright , spotify may in its absolute discretion take actions without prior notification to the provider of that content .

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: would have required an adversary proceeding if it had been raised as an objection to the final fee application. Id. at 48. It was the failure of the former chapter 13 debtors to avail themselves of that procedure that barred their later malpractice suit under principles of res judicata. Id. at 49. Thus, it is not clear to the Court that Costa’s objections to the Dreier and MGBD fee applications become adversary proceedings pursuant to Rule 3007 under the rationale of Iannochino. ee, has raised the malpractice and fraud claims in his objections to the fee applications of Dreier and MGBD. Unlike the parties in the three circuit court cases, Costa does not have standing to bring such claims without leave of the Court. See Scott v. Nat’l Fin. Enters., Inc., 432 F.3d 557 (4th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); DiStefano v. Stern (In re J.F.D. Enters., Options: A. holding that the purpose of the bankruptcy codes avoidance provisions is to prevent a debtor from making transfers that diminish the bankruptcy estate to the detriment of creditors B. holding that bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to control disposition of chapter 13 debtors property that is not property of the bankruptcy estate unless the property is related to the bankruptcy proceedings of the code C. holding that the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over counterclaims asserted by the bankruptcy estate against a creditor where the claim is a state law action independent of the federal bankruptcy law and not necessarily resolvable by a ruling on the creditors proof of claim in the bankruptcy emphasis added D. holding that since property of the chapter 7 estate relates back to what was property of the bankruptcy estate when the chapter 13 was commenced and since the debtor still has the vehicle in his possession the present equity in the vehicle does not belong to the chapter 7 trustee or to unsecured creditors of this estate E. holding creditors lacked standing to file an adversary action asserting the interests of the estate in seeking to prevent a former principal of the debtor from interfering with the chapter 11 reorganization given the lack of showing of the debtors consent and any determination by the bankruptcy court that the suit would be beneficial to the estate and necessary to a fair and efficient resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings

assistant: The best answer is E. holding creditors lacked standing to file an adversary action asserting the interests of the estate in seeking to prevent a former principal of the debtor from interfering with the chapter 11 reorganization given the lack of showing of the debtors consent and any determination by the bankruptcy court that the suit would be beneficial to the estate and necessary to a fair and efficient resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings
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) Unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms defined in the Collateral Trust Agreement and used herein shall have the meanings given to them in the Collateral Trust Agreement, and the following capitalized terms are used herein as defined in the New York UCC (and if defined in more than one Article of the New York UCC shall have the meanings given in Article 9 thereof): Accounts, Account Debtor, Certificated Security, Chattel Paper, Commercial Tort Claim, Commodity Account, Commodity Contract, Commodity Intermediary, Deposit Account, Documents, Electronic Chattel Paper, Equipment, Farm Products, Financial Asset, Fixtures, General Intangibles, Goods, Instruments, Inventory, Letter of Credit, Letter of Credit Rights, Money, Payment Intangibles, Securities Account, Securities Intermediary, Security, Security Entitlement, Supporting Obligations, Tangible Chattel Paper and Uncertificated Security.

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: The Lenders shall not be deemed to have waived the exercise of any right which they hold under the Credit Facility Agreement unless such waiver is made expressly and in writing (and no delay or omission by any Lender in exercising any such right shall be deemed a waiver of its future exercise). No such waiver made as to any instance involving the exercise of any such right shall be deemed a waiver as to any other such instance, or any other such right. Without limiting the operation and effect of the foregoing provisions hereof, no act done or omitted by any Lender pursuant to the powers and rights granted to it hereunder shall be deemed a waiver by any Lender of any of its rights and remedies under any of the provisions of the Credit Facility Agreement, and this Seventh Amendment is made and accepted without prejudice to any of such rights and remedies.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Either (a) on the date that is the Business Day following HSR Clearance Assembly shall deliver to Allergan representations and warranties under Section 11.2 that are identical to such representations and warranties delivered as of the Execution Date or (b) on the date that is two (2) Business Days following HSR Clearance, Assembly shall deliver to Allergan representations and warranties under Section 11.2 that are identical to such representations and warranties delivered as of the Execution Date, except for any supplement or amendment to such representations and warranties with respect to any event, condition, fact or circumstance occurring after the Execution Date that, if existing or occurring on or prior to the Execution Date, would have been required to be set forth or described in such representations and warranties as of the Execution Date, or that is necessary to correct or modify any information in such representations and warranties that has been rendered inaccurate by an event, condition, fact or circumstance occurring after the Execution Date. If Assembly does not deliver representations and warranties under the foregoing clause (a) or (b), Assembly shall be deemed to have delivered to Allergan on the date that is two (2) Business Days following HSR Clearance representations and warranties under Section 11.2 that are identical to such representations and warranties delivered as of the Execution Date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to Heisman’s room, it was nevertheless an area set aside for his own private use. [The co-tenant] had only been in the room once and then with Heisman’s permission. As a practical matter, Keterson did not have access or control of Heisman’s room for any purpose.” Id. (emphasis in original). Cases which have upheld a third party’s consent have all found that the consenter’s access to the premises was equal to or greater than that of the person asserting a privacy interest. In United States v. Guzman, 852 F.2d 1117 (9th Cir.1988), for instance, we held that a wife who leased her husband’s apartment, sometimes stayed there, possessed a key, and stored clothes and makeup there had the authority to consent to a search of the apartment. In Guzman, we specifically stated that the r.1986) (<HOLDING>). There is, however, no reported federal Options: A. holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was legally sufficient to support termination B. holding that the sound of a television on the inside of the house and the presence of a car in the driveway were sufficient to form the basis of the reasonable belief that the suspect was in the home C. holding that babysitter living in home connected via ramp to defendants home had no authority to consent to search of defendants home D. holding that the defendants mother validly consented to a search of a motor home parked in the driveway of her house when the motor home was connected by an electrical cord to her house the mother was observed entering the motor home repeatedly and the mother apparently had supervisory authority over two teenage girls who were inside the motor home because it was reasonable to conclude that the mother had common authority over the motor home sufficient to give valid consent E. holding that the sensible and popular understanding of what a motor vehicle accident entails necessarily involves the motor vehicle being operated as a motor vehicle

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the defendants mother validly consented to a search of a motor home parked in the driveway of her house when the motor home was connected by an electrical cord to her house the mother was observed entering the motor home repeatedly and the mother apparently had supervisory authority over two teenage girls who were inside the motor home because it was reasonable to conclude that the mother had common authority over the motor home sufficient to give valid consent
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 Transactions (i) do not require any material consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, except such as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect and except for filings necessary to perfect Liens created pursuant to the Loan Documents and registration of a financing statement on the Jersey SIR in respect of the Jersey Collateral Agreements (which registration will be made on or prior to the date hereof), (ii) will not violate in any material respect any applicable law or regulation or the charter, by-laws or other organizational or constitutional documents of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or any order of any Governmental Authority, (iii) will not violate or result in a default under any material indenture, agreement or other instrument binding upon the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or its material assets, or give rise to a right thereunder to require any payment to be made by the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries, and (iv) will not result in the creation or imposition of any Lien on any asset of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries (other than Liens created pursuant to or otherwise permitted under the Loan Documents).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: example of peer-on-peer sexual harassment in violation of Title IX, where, as a result of peer sexual harassment, student is prevented from using an “athletic field”). 15 . See id. 16 . See supra part II.A for a discussion of Eleventh Amendment immunity. 17 . These claims are for fraud, negligent retention, and invasion of privacy. 18 . These claims are for intentional interference with contractual relations, assault, battery, fraud, and invasion of privacy. 19 . See generally Noell v. Winston, 51 N.C.App. 455, 457, 276 S.E.2d 766, 768 (1981) ("[W]e have been unable to find any authority in this State recognizing [a cause of action for interference with a business relationship or expectancy of an attorney]”). But see Dalton v. Camp, 138 N.C.App. 201, 531 S.E.2d 258, 265 (2000) (<HOLDING>); Market Am., Inc. v. Rossi, No. 1:97CV00891, Options: A. holding that an action for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage may not be directed against an individual who is an officer and the sole stockholder of a corporation which is a party to the economic relationship at issue B. holding that the first element in a prima facie case of tortious interference with prospective business advantage is the existence of business expectancy C. recognizing action for tortious interference with prospective advantage D. recognizing the tort of interference with prospective contractual relations as a subspecies of the broader tort of interference with prospective economic advantage E. holding that the plaintiff stated a claim for tortious interference

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing action for tortious interference with prospective advantage
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: project). Finally, Morgan Keegan’s allegations fail to show that the municipality would have obtained any profit or benefit from the construction of this facility, except for job creation and other economic stimulation. In fact, any payments Defendants received as a result of this project were to be used to repay bondholders. [Doc. # 25-2 at 326-27]. Consequently, this case is distinguishable from those cases cited by Morgan Keegan in which the municipality actually operated a business for profit. Cf. Junior Coll. Dist. of St. Louis, 149 S.W.3d at 448 (“[W]hen a municipality is in the business of selling water to customers for profit or revenue, it is engaged in a proprietary function.”); Pierson v. Cumberland Cnty. Civic Ctr. Comm’n, 141 N.C.App. 628, 540 S.E.2d 810, 813-14 (2000) (<HOLDING>); Susla v. State, 311 Minn. 166, 247 N.W.2d Options: A. holding that the percentage of minority faculty need not approximate the percentage of minority students B. holding that the court has discretion to double check the reasonableness of the percentage fee through a lodestar calculation C. holding that the fee applicant bears the burden of showing that an adjustment is necessary to the determination of a reasonable fee D. holding that where a contract for legal services fails to expressly provide for the amount of the fee a reasonable fee is implied E. holding that the leasing of an event center was proprietary where the public entity charged each promoter a fee for leasing the facility and received a percentage of the total ticket sales

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the leasing of an event center was proprietary where the public entity charged each promoter a fee for leasing the facility and received a percentage of the total ticket sales
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance of this Guarantee by the Guarantor and the consummation by the Guarantor of the transactions contemplated thereby do not and will not (i) conflict with or violate any provision of its certificate or articles of incorporation, by-laws or other organizational documents (ii) conflict with, constitute a default (or an event which with notice or lapse of time or both would become a default) under, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation of, any agreement, indenture or instrument to which the Guarantor is a party, or (iii) result in a violation of any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment, injunction, decree or other restriction of any court or governmental authority to which the Guarantor is subject (including federal and state securities laws and regulations), or by which any material property or asset of the Guarantor is bound or affected, except in the case of each of clauses (ii) and (iii), such conflicts, defaults, terminations, amendments, accelerations, cancellations and violations as could not, individually or in the aggregate, have or result in a Material Adverse Effect. The business of the Guarantor is not being conducted in violation of any law, ordinance or regulation of any governmental authority, except for violations which, individually or in the aggregate, do not have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 8 The county points to evidence that taxpayer has been disingenuous in its arguments regarding that point. For instance, in a letter attached to taxpayer’s application for tax exemption, Franklin Ellis, taxpayer’s President, stated that the residence was to serve as a “benevolent care facility for church officials who are “disabled.” At another time, taxpayer claimed that the residence was for a caretaker. However, the weight of the testimony shows that taxpayer was not disingenuous in making those statements, but rather attempted in good faith to describe its situation to county authorities and negotiate the necessary bureaucratic hurdles. 9 Similarly, those parts of a residence which are devoted to church use have been held exempt. See German Apost. Christ. Church, 279 Or at 644 (<HOLDING>); Washington County, 11 OTR at 252 (same). 10 Options: A. holding that a realestate appraisal was not a guarantee of the condition of the residence but a valuation of the residence and thus not a misrepresentation B. holding office exempt where the rest of the residence was not C. holding residence means legal residence for will probate D. holding that a warrant authorizing the search of a residence vehicles at the residence and all persons found in the residence was not overly broad given that search was limited to places were drugs or weapons might be found E. recognizing that a prosecutors office is an entity and that information in the possession of one attorney in the office must be attributed to the office as a whole

assistant: The best answer is B. holding office exempt where the rest of the residence was not
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: claim of CUE is a collateral attack that can only be made on a final RO or Board decision, see id. at 1380-81, and generally, rating decisions by the VA are deemed “final and binding ... as to conclusions based on the evidence on file at the time the VA issues written notification” of a decision, 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(a). In cases of grave procedural error, however, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has consistently held that RO or Board decisions are not final for purposes of direct appeal. See Tablazon v. Brown, 8 Vet.App. 359, 361 (1995) (concluding that “where VA has failed to procedurally comply with statutorily mandated requirements, a claim does not become final for purposes of appeal to the [Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims]”); Hauck v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 518, 519 (1994) (<HOLDING>); Kuo v. Derwinski, 2 VetApp. 662, 666 (1992) Options: A. holding that where va never sent the claimant a formal application form pursuant to 3155 the oneyear time period to return it could not have begun to run and therefore the effective date of the claim was the date of the informal claim B. holding that a notice of claim period did not begin to run until discovery of the injury C. holding that where an appellant never received notification of any denial the oneyear period within which to file an nod which commences with the date of mailing of notice of the result of initial review or determination did not begin to run D. holding that oneyear period commences on date of discovery of the fraudulent nature of the transfer E. holding that the time in which to file a petition for review of a commissioners order commences upon the signing of the written order

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where an appellant never received notification of any denial the oneyear period within which to file an nod which commences with the date of mailing of notice of the result of initial review or determination did not begin to run
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: an “inventive concept” that “ensure[s] that the patent in practice amounts to significantly more than a patent on the [ineligible concept] itself.” 134 S.Ct. at 2355 (citing Mayo, 132 S.Ct. at 1303). In applying Section 101 analysis at the pleading stage, the mov ., 50 F.Supp.3d 1306, 1314 (C.D.Cal.2014) (citation omitted) (applying clear and convincing evidence standard to Section 101 challenge). However, the appropriateness of attaching a presumption of validity to a patent subject to a Section 101 analysis has been questioned. See Ultramercial, Inc, v. Hulu, LLC (“Ultramercial II”), 772 F.3d 709, 720-21 (Fed. Cir.2014); see also TNS Media Research, LLC v. Tivo Research & Analytics, Inc., No. 11-cv-4039 SAS, 166 F.Supp.3d 432, 446-47, 2016 WL 817447, at *10 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 2016) (<HOLDING>). b. The ’038 Patent’s claims are directed to Options: A. holding that the clear and convincing evidence standard of proof applicable in fraud actions does not apply to the proof of misrepresentations under ors 743612 B. holding that a bad faith claim must be met through the clear and convincing evidence standard C. holding that the clear and convincing evidentiary standard applies to section 101 challenges D. holding that the presumption of validity and its concomitant clear and convincing evidence standard does not apply to section 101 claims the court reasoned because no evidence outside the pleadings is considered in deciding a motion to dismiss it makes little sense to apply a clear and convincing standard a burden of proof to such motions citation omitted E. holding that despite the lack of a statutory requirement that severe child abuse be shown by clear and convincing evidence due to the consequences of such a finding the clear and convincing standard must be applied

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the presumption of validity and its concomitant clear and convincing evidence standard does not apply to section 101 claims the court reasoned because no evidence outside the pleadings is considered in deciding a motion to dismiss it makes little sense to apply a clear and convincing standard a burden of proof to such motions citation omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: about the cireum-stances surrounding the hiring of Petti-grew to rewrite the airport rules and standards. Thus, their testimony would have been relevant to Turner's claim that the rewritten rules and standards were void because Pettigrew was hired without Ferries' permission. However, as we discussed above, that claim is without merit because the Board possessed independent statutory authority to hire outside attorneys. See supra Part ILA. Consequent ly, Turner could not have prevailed on that claim at trial even if Ferries and Pet-tigrew had testified. Because his claim was without merit, the trial court's exclusion of witnesses to testify about that claim is, at best, harmless error. See Harlan Sprague Dawley, Inc. v. S.E. Lab Group, Inc., 644 N.E.2d 615, 622 (Ind.Ct.App.1994) (<HOLDING>), reh'g denied, trans. denied. Turner also Options: A. holding that remand for explicit findings was not necessary where it was readily apparent that the trial court accepted one partys testimony and rejected the other partys B. holding that the trial courts exclusion of evidence about a partys damages was at best harmless error because the partys method of calculating damages contravened indiana law and was without merit C. holding method of accounting in administering a contract was inadmissible evidence of a partys interpretation D. holding exclusion was harmless error E. holding in all cases that where the evidence of guilt was sufficient any error in the exclusion of lastminute evidence and testimony was harmless error

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the trial courts exclusion of evidence about a partys damages was at best harmless error because the partys method of calculating damages contravened indiana law and was without merit
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: Effective as of the Effective Date, the Executive shall continue to serve as the Company’s President. On or before June 1, 2017, the Executive shall be appointed as the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, reporting to the Company’s board of directors (the “ Board ”), and thereafter Executive shall serve in such capacity. Executive shall devote his full business time, efforts, and skill to the performance of his duties to the Company. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Executive shall be permitted to serve on boards of directors (or similar bodies) of non-profit and charitable organizations, and, with the consent of the Board, boards of directors of other for profit entities, so long as such duties do not materially interfere with his ability to perform his duties to the Company. So long as Executive is serving as the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, (i) the Company shall use its best efforts, subject to the Board’s exercise of its fiduciary duties under applicable law, to cause Executive to be recommended and nominated for service on the Board at every appropriate opportunity, and (ii) upon the resignation of any existing member of the Board, Executive shall be appointed to fill the open Board seat if Executive is not already a member of the Board; provided that the Company shall not be so obligated if Cause exists for the removal of Executive from the Board or for the failure to nominate or elect Executive to the Board. Executive shall be subject to and comply with the policies and procedures generally applicable to senior executives of the Company to the extent the same are not inconsistent with any term of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is accepted by the court, there will not be a further trial on the issue of the defendant’s guilt; and “(viii) The fact that there is no right to appeal unless the defendant has, before entering the plea of guilty, expressly reserved the right to appeal with respect to a particular issue or issues, in which event appellate review shall be limited to a determination of the issue or issues so reserved.” Here, the circuit court failed to employ the safeguards required by Rule 14.4, Ala. R.Crim. P., and Boykin before accepting Clark’s stipulation of guilt. (R. 3-4.) Indeed, there is no indication in the record that Clark understood and voluntarily waived any of his constitutionally protected rights when he entered the “good behavior” stipulation. See Fleming v. State, 972 So.2d at 836 (<HOLDING>). Because this court cannot presume a valid Options: A. holding that when the defendant voluntarily and knowingly pleaded guilty he waived any claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress the defendants inculpatory statements B. holding that a defendants guilty plea was unconditional where the guilty plea was not in writing and the government did not consent to it being conditional C. holding that the record must establish that a defendants guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily made and that the circuit court complied with rule 144 ala rcrim p D. holding that the defendants guilty plea was entered into knowingly voluntarily and intelligently E. holding trial court failed to make a finding of fact but rather made a finding of the ultimate question of law that the defendants plea was not knowingly and intelligently made

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the record must establish that a defendants guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily made and that the circuit court complied with rule 144 ala rcrim p
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 shall have delivered to Bank evidence of insurance coverage, in form, substance, amounts, covering risks and issued by companies satisfactory to Bank, and where reasonably required by Bank, with lender loss payable endorsements in favor of Bank. Bank acknowledges that such evidence delivered by Borrower prior to the date of this Agreement is satisfactory to Bank.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: agreement. That is not the law. The validity of the settlement agreement in this case is governed by federal law. See Pierce v. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Co., 65 F.3d 562, 570-71 (7th Cir.1995). Because of the unique nature of the attorney-client relationship, and consistent with the public policy favoring settlements, federal law presumes that an attorney-of-record who enters into a settlement agreement, purportedly on behalf of a client, has authority to do so. See, e.g., Anderson v. Flexel, 47 F.3d 243, 249 (7th Cir.1995) (“we [] recognize the existence of the longstanding legal presumption that an attorney has the authority to act on behalf of the person he represents.”); Greater Kansas City Laborers Pension Fund v. Paramount Indus., 829 F.2d 644, 646 (8th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); Edwards v. Born, Inc., 792 F.2d 387, 390 (3d Options: A. holding that a rebuttable presumption in favor of the action of an administrative agency and the burden of proof is upon one challenging its action B. holding that the burden is on the plaintiff C. holding that burden of proof is on party challenging attorneyofrecords authority to settle case D. holding that the burden of proof is on the claimant E. holding that traditional allocation of burden of proof to the party challenging the decisions applies to decisions under the tca

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that burden of proof is on party challenging attorneyofrecords authority to settle case
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 hospital an independent cause of action against the third party tortfeasor.” Id. at *6, *13. One court considering situations similar to those before this court has come to the opposite conclusion. Rogalla v. Christie Clinic, P.C. relied on language in the agreement between the provider and the insurer to conclude that the clinic “reserve[d] [its] statutory right to seek relief from third-party tortfeasors” by “subro-gatfing] the claims of plaintiff.” 341 Ill. App.3d 410, 276 Ill.Dec. 489, 794 N.E.2d 384, 392 (4 Dist.2003). The court then held that a hospital’s statutory lien was not based on the patient’s debt to the healthcare provider, but rather on the debt of the third-party tortfeasor to the patient and the provider. Id. We decline to adopt this approach. Ms. Morga Tex.1998) (<HOLDING>); Wright v. First Nat'l Bank in Albuquerque, Options: A. holding that because the contract between the hospital and the health insurance company had a hold harmless provision which stated the hospital would not bill or hold insurance subscribers liable for any hospital expenses covered by the subscribers insurance contract and all expenses from the patients treatment for the automobile accident were covered in such contract there was no debt upon which the hospital could assert a lien pursuant to the states hospital lien statute B. holding that where hospital used balance billing that since the hospital had already received payments from the patient and his health insurer and had agreed to accept that amount as payment in full for its services there was no longer any amount owing to the hospital and thus it could not assert a statutory hospital lien for the difference between its charges and the amount received in light of the negotiated network agreements C. holding that under nebraskas physicians lien statute a physicians lien could not exceed the amount the health care provider agreed to accept for the services rendered to a patient even if the usual and customary charge for such services is greater than that sum because the statute extends such lien only to the amount due or debt of the patient to the hospital D. holding that where hospital used balance billing its lien was unenforceable because the hospital had been paid in full for the services it provided to patient and there was consequently no debt to secure by the existence of the lien E. holding that the lien bond releases the property from the lien but the lien is then secured by the bond

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that where hospital used balance billing its lien was unenforceable because the hospital had been paid in full for the services it provided to patient and there was consequently no debt to secure by the existence of the lien
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: Upon any taxable event arising in connection with the Bonus Units, the General Partner shall have the authority and the right to deduct or withhold (or cause to be deducted or withheld), or to require Director to remit to the General Partner or one of its Affiliates an amount sufficient to satisfy all applicable federal, state and local taxes required by law to be withheld with respect to such event. In satisfaction of the foregoing requirement, unless otherwise determined by the Committee, the General Partner or one of its Affiliates shall withhold, or cause to be surrendered, from any cash or equity remuneration (including any of the Common Units issued under this Agreement) then or thereafter payable to Director an amount equal to the aggregate amount of taxes required to be withheld with respect to such event. The amount of such withholding shall be limited to the aggregate amount of taxes required to be withheld based on the minimum statutory withholding rates for federal, state, local and foreign income tax and payroll tax purposes that are applicable to such taxable income; provided , however , that such withholding may be based on rates in excess of the minimum statutory withholding rates if (x) the Committee (i) determines that such withholding would not result in adverse accounting, tax or other consequences to the General Partner or any of its Affiliates (other than immaterial administrative, reporting or similar consequences) and (ii) authorizes such withholding at such greater rates and (y) Director consents to such withholding at such greater rates. Director acknowledges and agrees that none of the Board, the Committee, the General Partner, the Partnership or any of their respective Affiliates has made any representation or warranty as to the tax consequences to Director as a result of the receipt of the Bonus Units. Director represents that he is in no manner relying on the Board, the Committee, the General Partner, the Partnership or any of their respective Affiliates or any of their respective managers, directors, officers, employees or authorized representatives (including, without limitation, attorneys, accountants, consultants, bankers, lenders, prospective lenders and financial representatives) for tax advice or an assessment of such tax consequences. Director represents that he has consulted with any tax consultants that Director deems advisable in connection with the Bonus Units .

assistant: Tax Withholdings
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: offense level by four points because the defendant was convicted under the money laundering statute and because of the defendant’s role in the offense. The court also de ducted three points for the petitioner’s acceptance of responsibility. The Judgment and Commitment Order was entered on June 14, 2004. The petitioner did not appeal his sentence. III. ANALYSIS A. Legal Standard for a Motion Under § 2255 A person may challenge the validity of his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 by moving the court that imposed the sentence to “vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255; see also Daniels v. United States, 532 U.S. 374, 377, 121 S.Ct. 1578, 149 L.Ed.2d 590 (2001); Wilson v. Office of Chairperson, Dist. of Columbia Bd. of Parole, 892 F.Supp. 277, 279 n. 1 (D.D.C.1995) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Hartwell v. United States, 353 Options: A. holding that it is well settled in this jurisdiction and elsewhere that 2255 will lie only to attack the imposition of a sentence and that an attack on the execution thereof may be accomplished only by way of habeas corpus in the district of confinement B. holding that an attack on the computation and execution of a sentence must come in the form of a 2241 petition C. holding that 2255 is unavailable to attack execution of sentence D. holding that recent cases have established that habeas corpus relief is not limited to immediate release from illegal custody but that the writ is available as well to attack future confinement and obtain future releases E. holding that managing conservator while in texas to seek return of child by writ of habeas corpus may not be served with civil process and is subject to jurisdiction of court in which habeas corpus is pending and only for purpose of prosecuting writ of habeas corpus

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it is well settled in this jurisdiction and elsewhere that 2255 will lie only to attack the imposition of a sentence and that an attack on the execution thereof may be accomplished only by way of habeas corpus in the district of confinement
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, INCLUDING THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE PARTIES HERETO, SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-1401 AND 5-1402 OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BUT WITHOUT REGARD TO ANY OTHER CONFLICTS OF LAW PROVISIONS THEREOF, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE PERFECTION, THE EFFECT OF PERFECTION OR PRIORITY OF THE INTERESTS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT OR ANY PURCHASER IN THE COLLATERAL IS GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF A JURISDICTION OTHER THAN THE STATE OF NEW YORK).

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: All of the Borrowers’ obligations under this Article III shall survive termination of the Term Loan Commitments, the Total Revolving Credit Commitments and repayment of all other Obligations hereunder.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: deny all right to appeal, close the courts to petitioners, or infringe on this court's jurisdiction to promulgate rules. Thus, because only the Suspension Clause could invalidate the PCRA's time bar in this case, I confine my discussion to that constitutional provision alone. 11 . My analysis of this ques (Pa.Super.Ct.2001) (upholding one-year statute of limitations on PCRA petitions); In re Runyan, 121 Wash.2d 432, 444-45, 853 P.2d 424 (1993) (en banc) (same); see also People v. Wiedemer, 852 P.2d 424, 435 (Colo.1993) (en banc) (upholding three-year statute of limitations); Davis v. State, 443 N.W.2d 707, 709-10 (Iowa 1989) (same); Battrick v. State, 267 Kan. 389, 985 P.2d 707, 714-15 (1999) (upholding thirty-day limitation); Bartz v. State, 314 Or. 353, 839 P.2d 217, 224-25 (1992) (<HOLDING>); Potts v. State, 833 S.W.2d 60, 61-62 Options: A. holding also that iiriras foreclosure of habeas review does not violate the suspension clause B. holding that revocation of medical license does not violate the ex post facto clause C. holding that 120day time limit for post conviction collateral attacks did not violate state suspension clause D. holding that use of the guidelines in effect at time of sentencing does not violate ex post facto clause after booker E. holding that district court did not violate ex post facto clause in applying remedial holding of booker at sentencing

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that 120day time limit for post conviction collateral attacks did not violate state suspension clause
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: LLC In its motion to dismiss, Culver challenges the sufficiency of the allegations in the corporate plaintiffs’ complaint to support a § 1981 claim. Relying on out-of-district precedent, Culver argues that their allegations lack sufficient factual specificity demonstrating that race was the reason for its actions. At the outset, the Court notes that the corporate plaintiffs who were the parties to the franchise agreements with Culver have standing to bring a § 1981 claim here. See Amber Pyramid, Inc. v. Buffington Harbor Riverboats, L.L.C., 129 Fed.Appx. 292, 294 (7th Cir.2005) (allowing corporation owned by two African-American shareholders to maintain § 1981 suit) (citing cases); see also Thinket Ink Info. Res., Inc. v. Sun Microsystems, Inc., 368 F.3d 1053, 1060 (9th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Here, the corporate entities are each Options: A. holding unequivocally that 1981 protects against racial discrimination in private employment B. holding with little discussion that section 1981 applies to private racial discrimination C. holding that title vii precludes a claim under section 1981 for racial discrimination against a federal employee D. holding where corporation had acquired imputed racial identity and was direct target of discrimination it had standing to pursue 1981 claim E. holding that conduct occurring after the formation of an employment contract could not be racial discrimination under 1981

assistant: The best answer is D. holding where corporation had acquired imputed racial identity and was direct target of discrimination it had standing to pursue 1981 claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the Effective Date, your base salary will be $430,000 per annum, earned and payable bi-weekly at a rate of $16,538.46. The Company will, in good faith, review your performance and salary on an annual basis beginning in 2020, and will consider appropriate increases in your salary based on your performance and the successful achievement of agreed upon objectives. The Company’s performance year is consistent with its fiscal year.

assistant: Base Salary