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: not avail himself of subsection (e)’s avenue for substantive review of the Comptroller’s redetermination of eligibility — a determination that the Comptroller has no duty to make absent an application to cure. This case is readily distinguishable from those instances when a statute’s context dictated that we not construe the term “must” to create a condition precedent. See, e.g., Wilkins, 47 S.W.3d at 492 (although Texas Seed Arbitration Act made arbitration a condition precedent to filing suit, the context of the statute demonstrated that failure to file arbitration “within the time necessary to permit effective inspection of the plants under field conditions” did not bar suit) (applying Tex. Agric. Code §§ 64.002, 64.006(a)); City of DeSoto v. White, 288 S.W.3d 389, 395-96 (Tex.2009) (<HOLDING>); see also Tex. Gov’t Code § 311.016 (providing Options: A. holding hearing examiner exceeded his jurisdiction by reforming indefinite suspension to temporary suspension of 92 days in excess of 15day statutory period for temporary suspensions B. holding that police chiefs suspension letter omitting statutorily required information about process for appeal of suspension did not deprive hearing examiner of jurisdiction over suspended officers appeal and require reinstatement of officer C. holding that the good behavior requirement of a suspended sentence defined the period of suspension D. holding the state did not meet its burden of proving defendant operated a motor vehicle while suspended where the only evidence of actual notice of suspension was that dot mailed defendant the notice of suspension E. holding that technical inadequacy in the notice of appeal did not deprive the court of jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that police chiefs suspension letter omitting statutorily required information about process for appeal of suspension did not deprive hearing examiner of jurisdiction over suspended officers appeal and require reinstatement of officer
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 an adjustment is made to the Purchase Price pursuant to this Agreement, the Tax Allocation shall be adjusted accordingly in accordance with Section 1060 of the Code and as mutually agreed by Buyer and Sellers based solely on such adjustment.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by license plate holders such as the one on which plaintiff bruised his knee. “Reasonable care is determined in light of whether or not a particular danger was foreseeable.” Syverson v. Consol. Rail Corp., 19 F.3d 824, 826 (2d Cir.1994) (citing Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R., 372 U.S. 108, 117, 83 S.Ct. 659, 9 L.Ed.2d 618 (1963)). In Syverson, we allowed a negligence claim to go forward because the employer had received complaints about the alleged hazard and another employee had suffered injury in the past. 19 F.3d at 827. In this case, plaintiff adduced no evidence indicating that CSXT knew or should have known that license plate holders posed a risk to workers or even that one was affixed to the vehicle in question. See Higgins v. Metro-North R.R., 318 F.3d 422, 427 (2d Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Gallose v. Long Island R.R., 878 F.2d 80, 85 Options: A. holding that where plaintiff fails to raise issue of timeliness of departments hearing at administrative level the issue is waived on appeal B. holding that plaintiff who fails to demonstrate employers awareness of any particular threat posed by circumstance at issue cannot prove negligence C. recognizing the general principle that a party who fails to address an issue has conceded the issue D. holding that employer is entitled to summary judgment where plaintiff fails to provide evidence necessary to prove at trial that there is disproportionate impact of employers policy on black employees E. holding issue not properly before the appellate court where appellant fails to demonstrate where in the record an issue was raised in the district court

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that plaintiff who fails to demonstrate employers awareness of any particular threat posed by circumstance at issue cannot prove negligence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms and conditions hereof, the Company hereby agrees to issue and sell to each Purchaser and each Purchaser hereby agrees, severally and not jointly, to purchase from the Company, its respective Securities, and each Purchaser agrees, severally and not jointly, to pay the Company the Unit Price for the Securities. The Purchased Units will not be issued to purchasers or certificated. Purchasers will receive only shares of Common Stock and Warrants. The Common Stock and the Warrants may be transferred separately immediately upon issuance.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: You agree to pay or reimburse each Commitment Party, upon written demand and presentation of a written summary statement (with reasonably supporting detail if you shall so request) for all reasonable and documented out-of-pocket costs and expenses (including, without limitation, expenses of such Commitment Party’s due diligence investigation, syndication expenses, travel expenses and reasonable fees, disbursements and other charges of counsel identified in the Term Sheets, Shearman & Sterling LLP, as counsel to Credit Suisse prior to the date hereof but not in excess of $100,000, and one additional local counsel in each relevant jurisdiction) incurred by such Commitment Party or its affiliates (whether incurred before or after the date hereof) in connection with the Senior Credit Facilities and the preparation, negotiation, execution and delivery of this Commitment Letter, the Term Sheets and Fee Letter, the Loan Documents and any security arrangements in connection therewith and the administration, amendment, modification or waiver or enforcement thereof. You further agree to pay all reasonable and documented out-of-pocket costs and expenses of each Commitment Party and its affiliates (including, without limitation, reasonable fees and disbursements of counsel) incurred in connection with the enforcement of any of its rights and remedies hereunder.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: age discrimination, a plaintiff would be required to demonstrate that: (1) he was a member of the protected class [i.e, age-40-and-over]; (2) he was discharged; (3) he was qualified for the position; (4) he was replaced by a younger person. Ackerman v. Diamond Shamrock Corp., 670 F.2d 66 (6th Cir.1982) (citing Marshall v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., 554 F.2d 730, 735 (5th Cir.1977)). We have stated that the McDonnell Douglas test is not to be applied mechanically, instead opting for a case-by-case approach that focuses on whether age was in fact a determining factor in the employment decision. See Merkel v. Sco-vill, Inc., 787 F.2d 174, 177 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 990, 107 S.Ct. 585, 93 L.Ed.2d 587 (1986); Blackwell v. Sun Elec. Corp., 696 F.2d 1176, 1179 (6th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>); Ackerman, 670 F.2d at 70; Sahadi, 636 F.2d at Options: A. holding that a plaintiff who could not demonstrate every element of the mcdonnell douglas test could nonetheless demonstrate a prima facie case B. holding that the district court fundamentally misapplied the mcdonnell douglas test when it considered defendantemployers nondiscriminatory reason in assessing whether plaintiffemployee showed that she was qualified for her position under the third element of a prima facie ease C. holding that whether the case could proceed under a mixedmotive instruction was not relevant because the case could proceed under the more taxing mcdonnell douglas standard D. holding that a title vii plaintiff need not plead the elements of a mcdonnell douglas prima facie case to survive a motion to dismiss E. holding that federal government employee successfully established prima facie case of retaliation under mcdonnell douglas but failed to prove employers proffered reason was pretextual

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a plaintiff who could not demonstrate every element of the mcdonnell douglas test could nonetheless demonstrate a prima facie 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: five-year statute of limitations was retroactively applied to him in violation of the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws. Clearly established federal law holds that a State law enacted after the expiration of a previously-applicable limitations period violates the Ex Post Facto Clause when it is applied to revive a previously time-barred prosecution. Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607, 619, 123 S.Ct. 2446, 2454, 156 L.Ed.2d 544 (2003). But that rule does not apply to unexpired statutes of limitations. Stogner, 539 U.S. at 618, 123 S.Ct. 2446. Thus application of a statute of limitations extended before the original limitations period has expired, as here, does not violate the ex post facto clause. See United States v. Taliaferro, 979 F.2d 1399, 1402 (10th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). The Tenth Circuit explained that the Options: A. holding that the application of an extended statute of limitations to offenses occurring prior to the legislative extension where the prior and shorter statute of limitations has not run as of the date of such extension does not violate the ex post facto clause citing united states v powers 307 us 214 21718 59 sct 805 807 83 led 1245 rehg denied 308 us 631 60 sct 66 84 led 526 1939 B. recognizing nardone v united states 308 us 338 60 sct 266 84 led 307 1939 taint test as controlling authority C. holding that an accused may not complain if the statute of limitations is extended so long as the period of time originally provided therein had not run at the time of such extension because an accused does not acquire any vested right in a statute of limitations until it has operated to bar the prosecution of the offense with which he has been charged D. holding that a change in law does not affect the res judicata effect of judgments citing chicot county drainage dist v baxter state bank 308 us 371 375 60 sct 317 319 84 led 329 rehg denied 309 us 695 60 sct 581 84 led 1035 1940 E. holding that the ex post facto clause has no application to deportation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the application of an extended statute of limitations to offenses occurring prior to the legislative extension where the prior and shorter statute of limitations has not run as of the date of such extension does not violate the ex post facto clause citing united states v powers 307 us 214 21718 59 sct 805 807 83 led 1245 rehg denied 308 us 631 60 sct 66 84 led 526 1939
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Buyer and each Originator and their respective successors and permitted assigns. No Originator may assign any of its rights hereunder or any interest herein without the prior written consent of the Buyer, the Administrative Agent (as assignee of the Buyer) and each Purchaser (as assignee of the Buyer), except as otherwise herein specifically provided. This Agreement shall create and constitute the continuing obligations of the parties hereto in accordance with its terms, and shall remain in full force and effect until such time as the parties hereto shall agree. The rights and remedies with respect to any breach of any representation and warranty made by any Originator pursuant to Article V and the indemnification and payment provisions of Article IX and Section 10.6 shall be continuing and shall survive any termination of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: satisfies the “actually litigated” requirement for the application of collateral estoppel. Lake, 202 B.R. at 757 & n. 6; Green, 198 B.R. at 566 (citing Four Star Elec., Inc. v. F & H Constr., 7 Cal.App.4th 1375, 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 5 (1992)). 2. Extrinsic Fraud Debtors contend in their opening brief that the bankruptcy court should not have given preclusive effect to the default judgment because Debtors’ failure to appear was due to opposing counsel’s “fraud” and misrepresentations to them. A state court judgment is subject to collateral attack if the judgment was procured by extrinsic fraud. Lake, 202 B.R. at 758. Extrinsic fraud is an exception to the application of the full faith and credit doctrine such that a judgment procured by fraud may be disregarded by the bankruptcy court. Id. (<HOLDING>); In re Naemi 128 B.R. 273, 279 Options: A. holding that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to hear the petitioners collateral attack under 1331 B. recognizing collateral attack on void order C. holding that a judgment as to the title in a prior litigation was not subject to collateral attack D. recognizing bankruptcy courts jurisdiction over such a collateral attack E. holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing bankruptcy courts jurisdiction over such a collateral attack
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 provisions of this Agreement shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement to the extent necessary in order to effectuate the intent of the parties hereunder, including without limitation Sections 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 and 17 .

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: 704, 714-15 (9th Cir.1996), reasoned that the defendant had not made a prima facie case of racial discrimination where the prosecutor challenged two African-Americans in the jury pool but where three others remained on the panel. I would hold that the judge did not abuse his discretion in failing to sustain defense counsel’s Batson objection. Even following our more stringent decision in United States v. Moore, 28 MJ 366,1 am convinced that the prosecutor adequately set forth the basis for her peremptory challenge. The judge concluded that the prosecutor had been forthright in the past and that there was no evidence of a discriminatory intent. 1 . Some examples include the following: Right to counsel. Compare Nichols v. United States, 511 U.S. 738, 114 S.Ct. 1921, 128 L.Ed.2d 745 (1994)(<HOLDING>) with United States v. Kelly, 45 MJ 259 Options: A. holding an uncounseled misdemeanor conviction is valid because no prison term was imposed and the conviction may be used to enhance a sentence for a subsequent offense B. holding that uncounseled conviction could not be considered by court in sentencing defendant after subsequent conviction C. holding uncounseled misdemeanor conviction may be sentence enhancer D. recognizing that felony and misdemeanor dwi are separate offenses because a prior conviction is an essential element of felony driving while intoxicated but it is not an element of the misdemeanor offense E. holding misdemeanor conviction for petty larceny triggered disenfranchisement

assistant: The best answer is C. holding uncounseled misdemeanor conviction may be sentence enhancer
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 Award shall vest in installments over a three (3) year period, commencing on the Grant Date, at the rate of 25% effective on the first and second anniversaries of the Grant Date and 50% on the third anniversary of the Grant Date; provided that you have not incurred a Termination of Directorship (as defined below) prior to the applicable vesting date. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Award shall become fully vested prior to your Termination of Directorship upon (i) your death or (ii) a Change in Control. The date that an RSU becomes vested shall be referred to herein as the “ Vesting Date ”.

assistant: Vesting
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: Comply in all material respects with the requirements of all Laws (including ERISA) and all orders, writs, injunctions and decrees applicable to it or to its business or property, except in such instances in which (a) such requirement of Law or order, writ, injunction or decree is being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings diligently conducted; or (b) the failure to comply therewith could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Compliance With 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was under Mr. Wallace’s management). Plaintiff does not deny making this request, although he stated that he did not even want to work in the same building as Mr. Wallace, because he still saw him daily, although Mr. Wallace did not speak to him. Def.’s Mot., Ex. A, Jones Dep. at 107, 110. Furthermore, it is undisputed that once Mr. Wallace was permanently transferred, plaintiff was brought back to the stock room to work, and plaintiffs temporary reassignment did not result in the lost of grade level or pay. Id. at 132; Def.’s Mot., Ex. E, Gaskins’ Decl. ¶ 4. These circumstances do not permit the Court to conclude that plaintiffs temporary assignment to the building services department amounted to an adverse employment action. See Brodetski v. Duffey, 141 F.Supp.2d 35, 45 (D.D.C.2001) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted). More significantly, Options: A. holding in the only seventh circuit case addressing prejudice in the context of failure to notice that an employee was not prejudiced because she benefitted from a reduced schedule of leave for more than a yeara schedule she wanted to keep B. holding that change in work schedule and assigning less desirable job duties did not constitute a tangible employment action C. holding that change of schedule video surveillance and disciplinary warnings were not material adverse actions sufficient to sustain retaliation claim D. holding that defendants decision to change the office schedule without allowing plaintiff leave to alter his personal schedule did not constitute an adverse action although plaintiff alleged that because of the schedule revisions he was forced to come in two hours early for his shift a mere inconvenience is not sufficiently adverse to sustain a prima facie case E. holding that a change in work schedule and request that an employee perform two additional tasks did not rise to the level of an adverse employment action

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that defendants decision to change the office schedule without allowing plaintiff leave to alter his personal schedule did not constitute an adverse action although plaintiff alleged that because of the schedule revisions he was forced to come in two hours early for his shift a mere inconvenience is not sufficiently adverse to sustain a prima facie 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: impairment that significantly restricted his ability to perform “either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes.” McKay, 110 F.3d at 372. In order to carry this burden, a plaintiff must introduce evidence, expert or otherwise, relating to his vocational skills or training, the geographical area to which he has access, or the number and type of jobs which demand similar training from which he would also be disqualified because of his disability. The failure to introduce such evidence is fatal when faced with a motion for summary judgment. See Bolton v. Scrivner, 36 F.3d 939, 943-44 (10th Cir.1994) (affirming award of summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiff had introduced no such evidence); Soileau v. Guilford of Maine, Inc. 928 F.Supp. 37, 50-52 (D.Maine 1996) (<HOLDING>), aff'd 105 F.3d 12 (1st Cir.1997); Howard v. Options: A. holding under new york law in fact the failure to prove damages is fatal to a plaintiffs breach of contract cause of action B. holding that failure to demonstrate a causal connection is fatal to a 1983 cause of action C. holding because trial court fully considered plaintiffs response to summary judgment motion failure to render summary judgment without notice or hearing harmless thus trial court was not required to vacate the summary judgment and then reinstate it to accomplish the same end D. holding that a plaintiffs failure to provide evidence of general employment demographics is fatal at summary judgment E. holding that a plaintiffs failure to submit evidence of continuing treatment by a health care provider as defined by the regulations was fatal to a plaintiffs fmla interference claim regardless of the defendants alleged failure to allow the plaintiff an opportunity to cure medical certification deficiencies

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a plaintiffs failure to provide evidence of general employment demographics is fatal at summary judgment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement amends and restates the Third Omnibus Agreement in its entirety and the Parties agree that the terms and provisions of this Agreement replace the terms and provisions of the Third Omnibus Agreement, which is no longer in force, as of the date hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party’s obligations under this Section 2.16 shall survive the resignation or replacement of the Administrative Agent or any assignment of rights by, or the replacement of, a Lender, the termination of this Agreement and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all obligations under any Loan Document.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court or authority of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be modified by such court or authority to the minimum extent necessary to make it valid, legal and enforceable. If the provision cannot be so modified, it shall be severed and all other provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. If a provision is held illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the Parties also agree to negotiate reasonably and in good faith to modify this Agreement with a new provision that approximates the intent and purpose of the original provision as closely as possible, without being illegal or unenforceable.

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: This Agreement will become effective only upon occurrence of the two following events: execution of this Agreement, the Note, and the Warrant by both the Issuer and the Investor, and delivery of the first payment of the Purchase Price by the Investor to the Issuer.

assistant: Effective Dates
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: Mr. Rosen “ethically would be compelled to inform other clients of [one witness's] testimony if detrimental to them.” Mr. Rosen, as noted earlier, has avoided that problem by keeping himself unacquainted with each witness’s version of the events at the Post. 12 . Counsel for appellant Rosen and Local 6 conceded at oral argument that there is no evidence in the record indicating what the witnesses think their relationship is with respect to Mr. Rosen, and furthermore that the witnesses were never asked whether they wanted this type of “representation.” 13 . The District Court has power to find criminal contempt on the part of a grand jury witness for refusing to obey a court order requiring him to testify. E. g., Harris v. United States, 382 U.S. 162, 86 S.Ct. 352, 15 L.Ed.2d 240 (1965) (<HOLDING>). Of course, “the trial judge [should] first Options: A. holding that right was available in grand jury proceedings B. holding fedrcrimp 42b applicable to such criminal contempt proceedings for refusals to testify before the grand jury C. holding that where witness refused to take the oath and testify his grand jury testimony should not have been admitted because he was not subject to cross examination before the grand jury D. holding no right to crossexamine in grand jury proceedings E. holding one man grand jury that held witness in contempt and sentenced him to prison was contempt proceeding to which there was a right to public access

assistant: The best answer is B. holding fedrcrimp 42b applicable to such criminal contempt proceedings for refusals to testify before the grand jury
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the recipient dies while an active employee of the Company, the number of PSUs awarded will vest and be converted to shares of Common Stock (at target) effective as of the date of death. The shares will be delivered to the estate of the recipient as soon as administratively practicable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Landlord and Tenant hereby warrant to each other that they have had no dealings with any real estate broker or agent in connection with the negotiation of this Lease, excepting only the real estate brokers or agents specified in Section 12 of the Summary (the " Brokers "), and that they know of no other real estate broker or agent who is entitled to a commission in connection with this Lease. Tenant shall pay the commissions, if any, do the Brokers pursuant to any separate commission agreement entered into by Tenant. Each party agrees to indemnify and defend the other party against and hold the other party harmless from any and all claims, demands, losses, liabilities, lawsuits, judgments, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees) with respect to any leasing commission or equivalent compensation alleged to be owing on account of any dealings with any real estate broker or agent, other than the Brokers, occurring by, through, or under the indemnifying party.

assistant: Brokers
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 Executive agrees not to make any adverse or disparaging comments (oral or written, including, without limitation, via any form of electronic media) about the Company, its affiliates, or any of their respective officers, directors, managers or employees which may tend to impugn or injure their reputation, goodwill and relationships with their past, present and future customers, employees, vendors, investors or with the business community generally. The Company agrees that its executive officers and directors shall be directed not to make any disparaging comments (oral or written, including, without limitation, via any form of electronic media) about the Executive. Nothing in this Section 10(a) is intended to prohibit, limit or prevent the Executive or the Company’s officers or directors from providing truthful testimony in a court of law, to a regulatory or law enforcement agency or pursuant to a properly issued subpoena, and such testimony will not be deemed to be a violation of this Section 10(a).

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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: 694, 699-702 (5th Cir.1999) (“[A] federal court may consider ‘summary judgment-type evidence such as affidavits and deposition testimony’ when reviewing a fraudulent joinder claim.”); Pampillonia v. RJR Nabisco. Inc., 138 F.3d 459, 461-62 (2d Cir.1998) (examining facts in plaintiffs affidavit to conclude that no cause of action existed against defendant). Affidavits and other types of evidence used at summary judgment may help determine whether a “factual fit [exists] between the plaintiffs’ allegations and the pleaded theory of recovery.” Griggs, 181 F.3d at 701; see AIDS, 903 F.2d at 1003. While such evidence should not be used to resolve uncertain questions of law and fact, some evidence must exist in the record to substantiate the cause of action. Compare Hartley, 187 F.3d at 425 (<HOLDING>) with AIDS, 903 F.2d at 1003 (affirming that Options: A. holding that district court should not have made determination concerning novel application of public duty rule to plaintiffs claims B. recognizing district court application of the same rule C. holding a district courts application of supplemental jurisdiction is a doctrine of discretion not of plaintiffs right D. holding that a court of appeals should review de novo a district courts determination of state law E. holding that courts of appeals should review all aspects of the district courts rule 11 determination for abuse of discretion and noting that the district court has broad discretion to impose rule 11 sanctions

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that district court should not have made determination concerning novel application of public duty rule to plaintiffs claims
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 determining the Lenders’ obligations to fund or acquire participations in Loans, the Administrative Agent shall exclude the Commitments and Loans of any Defaulting Lender(s) from the calculation of Pro Rata Shares. A Defaulting Lender shall have no right to vote on any amendment, waiver or other modification of a Credit Document, except to the limited extent provided in Section 13.12 . In no event shall any Lender’s obligations pursuant to this Section 2.11(a) cause such Lender to exceed its aggregate Commitment.

assistant: Amendments
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: We find that the court applied the proper standard of materiality and properly took account of the nature of the transaction in deciding whether the proxy statement disclosed all material information. The materiality issue is “a mixed question of law and fact” whose determination “requires delicate assessments ... [that] are peculiarly ones for the trier of fact”. TSC Industries, 426 U.S. at 450, 96 S.Ct. at 2133. In this circuit, a mixed question of law and fact is reviewable only for clear error in the absence of some showing that the court applied the wrong legal standard. See Sweeney v. Board of Trustees of Keene State College, 604 F.2d 106, 109 n. 2 (1st Cir.1979) (collecting cases); see also Nash v. Farmers New World Life Insurance Co., 570 F.2d 558, 561 n. 7 (6th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>). In their complaint, the Patriots stockholders Options: A. holding the manifest error standard of review is the proper standard to be applied to the mixed question of law and fact presented by a determination of whether a defect presents an unreasonable risk of harm B. holding that pretext is subject to the clearly erroneous standard C. holding that when an administrative agencys decision was a mixed question of fact and law a reviewing court should apply a clearly erroneous standard of review D. recognizing that mixed questions of fact and law that are essentially factual in nature should be reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard as opposed to the generally administered de novo standard E. holding that even though the court does not usually apply the clearly erroneous standard to mixed questions of fact and law this standard is properly applied to the materiality issue

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that even though the court does not usually apply the clearly erroneous standard to mixed questions of fact and law this standard is properly applied to the materiality issue
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 distinguish fees and expenses incurred with respect to claims upon which the Court’s mootness determination does not constitute success.... [B]oth intervenors and plaintiffs seek total awards which, in the Court’s view, are grossly excessive for this seven-month litigation. Id. at 3 (note omitted). Local 73 and FIRE now appeal. II. We review the district court’s dismissal for mootness de novo. See Stop H-3 Ass’n v. Dole, 870 F.2d 1419, 1423 (9th Cir.1989). A case is properly dismissed as moot if it “has lost its character as a present, live controversy of the kind that must exist if we are to avoid advisory opinions on abstract questions of law.” Princeton Univ. v. Schmid, 455 U.S. 100, 103, 102 S.Ct. 867, 869, 70 L.Ed.2d 855 (1982) (per curiam) (quotations and citation omitted) (<HOLDING>). Generally, the “voluntary cessation of Options: A. holding moot the plaintiffs challenge to a universitys requirement that foreign students carry health insurance where named plaintiffs were no longer students at the university B. holding that the challenge to a university regulation was moot because the regulation had been substantially amended C. holding that a challenge to the disbursement of attorneys fees was not equitably moot D. holding that universitys amendment of regulation made moot a challenge to regulations E. holding that an overbreadth challenge to a child pornography law was rendered moot by amendment to the statute

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that universitys amendment of regulation made moot a challenge to regulations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: free from seizure in the absence of probable cause or reasonable suspicion is beyond question. See, e.g., Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. at 30-31, 88 S.Ct. 1868 (allowing a lesser seizure on the basis of reasonable suspicion); United States v. White, 584 F.3d at 949 (describing the reasonable suspicion standard); United States v. DeJear, 552 F.3d at 1200 (same); United States v. Maddox, 388 F.3d at 1361 (allowing a reasonable-suspicion seizure); United States v. Morris, 247 F.3d at 1088 (discussing the requirement of probable cause for an arrest and defining probable cause). Likewise, the right to be free from excessive physical force during the course of an arrest is also clearly established. See, e.g., Vondrak v. City of Las Cruces, 535 F.3d at 1208; Cortez v. McCauley, 478 F.3d at 1130-32 (<HOLDING>)(citing United States v. Hensley, 469 U.S. 221, Options: A. holding that the level of force the defendants used against one plaintiff was unreasonable in relation to the threat that she presented and the surrounding circumstances and finding that the law was clearly established B. holding that where the plaintiffs evidence supported a finding that the defendants had applied force to restrain him the jury must determine not only whether the officers were justified in using force at all but if so whether the degree of force actually used was reasonable C. holding that under 521 the coercive force applied against a plaintiff must result in an interference with a separate constitutional or statutory right and it is not sufficient that the right interfered with is the right to be free of the force or threat of force that was applied D. holding that to determine whether a statement was voluntary the court must consider the totality of all the surrounding circumstances both the characteristics of the accused and the details of the interrogation and decide whether a defendants will was overborne by the circumstances surrounding the giving of a confession E. holding that the court may consider collateral evidence of the circumstances surrounding the execution of the agreement in determining whether the language of the agreement is unclear and if the evidence presented is so plain that no reasonable person could hold any way but one then the court may interpret the meaning as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the level of force the defendants used against one plaintiff was unreasonable in relation to the threat that she presented and the surrounding circumstances and finding that the law was clearly established
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: quoting Industrial Sugars, Inc. v. Standard Accident Ins. Co., 338 F.2d 673, 676 (7th Cir.1964); Affiliated FM Ins. Co. v. Beatrice Foods Co., 645 F.Supp. 298, 302 (N.D.Ill.1985). Plaintiff does not argue that he unintentionally violated Judge McGarr’s consent order and with good reason. The Seventh Circuit all but concluded that Plaintiff intentionally violated the consent order when it stated that “[t]he elaborate efforts that Ros-soff took to conceal the sale of the powder for therapeutic use show his consciousness that the form of the drug was immaterial.” Schering, 62 F.3d at 907. Rather, Plaintiff asserts that he did not violate the consent order at all. However, Plaintiff presented that claim to and it was rejected by the Seventh Circuit. See Schering, 62 F.3d at 907-08 (<HOLDING>). Thus, Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of Options: A. holding that plaintiffs sale of gentamicin in powder form violated the consent order B. holding consent not voluntary where police threatened to arrest defendants girlfriend if he refused to sign consent form C. holding that sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine is constitutional D. holding that a bankruptcy courts sale order is a final order for res judicata purposes E. holding that an order authorizing a sale is a final judgment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that plaintiffs sale of gentamicin in powder form violated the consent order
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 and all notices or other communications or deliveries required or permitted to be provided hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given and effective on the earliest of: (i) the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile at the facsimile number set forth on the signature pages attached hereto at or prior to 12:00 noon (New York City time) on a Trading Day; (ii) the next Trading Day after the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile at the facsimile number set forth on the signature pages attached hereto on a day that is not a Trading Day or later than 12:00 noon (New York City time) on any Trading Day; or (iii) the second (2 nd ) Trading Day following the date of physical transmittal, if sent by a United States nationally recognized overnight courier service or upon actual receipt of the physically transmitted notice by the party to whom such notice is required to be given. The address for such notices and communications shall be as set forth on the signature pages attached hereto.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except for Jon Vance of MedDx Strategy Partners, LLC, Venaxis has not retained any broker, finder or agent or agreed to pay any brokerage fees, finder's fee or commissions with respect to transactions contemplated hereby.

assistant: Brokers
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: in criminal cases involving misdemeanors when the defendant consents in writing to a trial before a magistrate. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(a); 18 U.S.C. § 3401. 3 . That subsection contains an identical limitation for "prisoner petitions challenging conditions of confinement.” We express no opinion on whether Reynaga’s action contained such a claim. Compare McCarthy v. Bronson, — U.S. -,-, 111 S.Ct. 1737, 1740, 114 L.Ed.2d 194 (1991) (noting evidence that "Congress intended [subsection (1)(B) ] to include in their entirety the two primary categories of suits brought by prisoners — applications for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255 and actions for monetary or injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983”) with Houghton v. Osborne, 834 F.2d 745, 749-50 (9th Cir. 1987) (<HOLDING>). 4 . Reynaga has already taken his case before Options: A. holding that a state university is not a person within the meaning of 1983 and therefore is not subject to suits brought under 1983 B. holding that a 1983 action based on the duration of a petitioners confinement must be dismissed unless that petitioner has first established the invalidity of the fact or length of that confinement C. holding that preclusion rules apply in section 1983 actions D. holding that 1983 action challenging jail clothing rules is not subject to subsection 1b and noting that the prison conditions covered by section 636b1b relate to the type of confinement and matters concerning health safety or punishment E. holding that denial of counsel in section 1983 action is not immediately appealable

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that 1983 action challenging jail clothing rules is not subject to subsection 1b and noting that the prison conditions covered by section 636b1b relate to the type of confinement and matters concerning health safety or punishment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise noted herein, this Agreement, and any agreements referenced herein, represent the entire agreement and understanding between the Executive and the Company regarding the subject matter hereof and supersede and replace any and all prior agreements and understandings between the Parties with respect thereto. This Agreement may not be modified except expressly in a writing signed by both parties.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: vehicle seized and destroyed in retaliation for Livingston’s exercising his First Amendment rights. The only specific allegation relating to Shirey is that, after Livingston’s vehicle had been destroyed, he wrote Shirey requesting compensation, and Shirey’s office refused the request. ANALYSIS I. Jurisdiction Denial of judgment on qualified immunity grounds at any stage of the proceedings is immediately appealable. See Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 598 n. 19, 118 S.Ct. 1584, 140 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998) (“If the district court enters an order denying the defendant’s motion for dismissal or summary judgment, the official is entitled to bring an immediate interlocutory appeal of that legal ruling on the immunity question.”); Wallin v. Norman, 317 F.3d 558, 563 (6th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). We therefore have the authority to adjudicate Options: A. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction over statelaw tort claims on an interlocutory appeal from a denial of qualified immunity B. holding that a district courts refusal to address the merits of defendants motion asserting qualified immunity prior to the close of discovery was a conclusive determination for the purpose of allowing an interlocutory appeal C. holding same as to the filing of a notice of an interlocutory appeal D. holding court lacked jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeal of denial of motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity by defendants who were not public officials E. holding that an interlocutory appeal lies from a denial of summary judgment on a qualified immunity claim

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a district courts refusal to address the merits of defendants motion asserting qualified immunity prior to the close of discovery was a conclusive determination for the purpose of allowing an interlocutory appeal