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: the provision, “designed to protect bank customers in the days before Federal deposit insurance, has no place in the modern banking industry, which needs to be able to offer certain employment prospects in order to attract management personnel of high quality.” (Kemper v. First Nat. Bank in Newton (1981) 94 Ill.App.3d 169, 171 [418 N.E.2d 819, 821].) The Marques court was evidently persuaded: “Needless to say, public trust in” a national bank “is no longer based primarily on community confidence in the personal integrity of its individual officers.” (Marques v. Bank of America, supra, 59 Cal.App.4th at p. 363, fn. 5.) It nevertheless declined to act: “It is up to Congress ... to decide whether the . . . provision has therefore become entirel ties (C.D.Ill. 1992) 797 F.Supp. 656, 663 (<HOLDING>); see also Aalgaard v. Merchants Nat. Bank, Options: A. holding to the effect that section 24 fifth has been impliedly amended by title vii B. holding to the effect that section 341 fifth as impliedly amended by title vii preempts state law to the extent but only to the extent that it conflicts C. holding to the effect that section 1432a as impliedly amended by title vii preempts state law without limitation as to only conflicting state law D. holding to the effect that a court must consider section 24 fifth in conjunction with the antidiscrimination provisions of the bankruptcy reform act of 1978 as amended which are codified at title 11 of the united states code E. holding outside of the context of title vii or the adea that section 24 fifth preempts state law to the extent but only to the extent that it conflicts

assistant: The best answer is A. holding to the effect that section 24 fifth has been impliedly amended by title vii
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: agreements with the International Union of Elevator Constructors (IUEC), the first effective from July 9, 1992 to July 8, 1997, and the second effective from July 8, 1997 to July 8, 2002. See PL's Ex. 6A. These collective bargaining agreements bound American to the terms of the Standard Agreement between the National Elevator Industry and the IUEC, see id., which in turn bound it to the terms of the Restated Agreements and the amendments thereto. See Pl.’s Ex. 6B. 5 . Although courts in other jurisdictions have explicitly disagreed with the veil-piercing requirement of Solomon, see, e.g., Rockney v. Pako Corp., 734 F.Supp. 373, 378 (D.Minn.1988) and citations therein, many courts are now in agreement with Solomon. See Antol v. Esposto, 100 F.3d 1111, 1117 and n. 2 (3d Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). 6 . As of October 24, 2000, Lutyk testified Options: A. holding that a mistake by a partys counsel in interpreting a statute of limitations does not present the extraordinary circumstance beyond the partys control where equity should step in to give the party the benefit of his erroneous understanding and noting a majority of other circuits agree citing cases from the second third fifth seventh eighth ninth eleventh and federal circuits B. recognizing in a case involving analogous provisions of the labor management relations act of 1947 29 usc 185 that a majority of courts in other jurisdictions agree with solomon and citing the 1st 2nd 6th 7th 8th 9th and dc circuits C. holding that certificates of deposit are instruments and noting that the majority of jurisdictions agree D. holding that 301 of the labor management relations act of 1947 29 usc 185 does not preempt claims brought under washingtons minimum wage act chapter 4946 rcw E. holding that the same conclusion is compelled by this circuits reasoning in an analogous case

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing in a case involving analogous provisions of the labor management relations act of 1947 29 usc 185 that a majority of courts in other jurisdictions agree with solomon and citing the 1st 2nd 6th 7th 8th 9th and dc circuits
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: During the period of his employment hereunder, Executive agrees to serve the Company, and the Employer shall employ Executive, as Executive Vice President of Global PVA & Chief Marketing Officer. If appointed or elected, Executive also shall serve as an officer, director and/or manager of one or more of the Employer's subsidiaries and affiliated companies in such capacity or capacities as may be determined from time to time.

assistant: Positions
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: Proper and accurate (in all material respects), federal and all material state, local and foreign tax returns, reports and statements required to be filed (after giving effect to any extension granted in the time for filing) by the Borrower and each Restricted Subsidiary or any member of the Affiliated Group as determined under Section 1504 of the Code (hereafter collectively called the “ Tax Group ”) have been filed with the appropriate Governmental Authorities, and all taxes (which are material in amount) and other impositions due and payable have been timely paid prior to the date on which any fine, penalty, interest, late charge or loss may be added thereto for non-payment thereof except where contested in good faith and by appropriate proceeding. Neither the Borrower nor any member of the Tax Group has given, or been requested to give, a waiver of the statute of limitations relating to the payment of any federal, state, local or foreign taxes or other impositions. Proper and accurate amounts have been withheld by the Borrower and all other members of the Tax Group from their employees for all periods to comply in all material respects with the tax, social security and unemployment withholding provisions of applicable federal, state, local and foreign law.

assistant: Taxes
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: brings a claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, arguing that the "continuing assessment and collection” of the local share assessment "constitutes an intentional, knowing, and deliberate violation” of Mount Airy's Equal Protection rights. See Mount Airy's Amended Complaint, 6/17/2015, at -14. Although this- Court has exclusive jurisdiction "to hear any challenge to or to render a declaratory judgment concerning the constitutionality of” the Gaming Act, we lack original jurisdiction over Mount Airy's Section 1983 claim. 4 Pa.C.S. § 1904; see generally Penna. State Troopers Ass'n v. Penna. Gaming Control Bd., 591 Pa. 561, 92 al Revenue Code’s personal exemptions, deductions, and other tax preferences violated the Uniformity Clause); Kelley v. Kalodner, 320 Pa. 180, 181 A. 598, 602 (1935) (<HOLDING>). 5 . At oral argument, counsel for the Options: A. holding that a graduatedrate income tax violates the uniformity clause B. holding that rluipa violates establishment clause C. holding that the statute as applied violates the commerce clause D. holding a state cannot impose an income tax on indians whose income is solely from reservation sources E. holding that the uniformity clause proscribes the unequal treatment of certain individuals based upon their income

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a graduatedrate income tax violates the uniformity 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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 429 U.S. 65 97 S.Ct. 342 50 L.Ed.2d 223 PARKER SEAL COMPANY, petitioner,v.Paul CUMMINS No. 75-478 Supreme Court of the United States November 2, 1976 On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Nov. 2, 1976. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. 2 Mr. Justice STEVENS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 3
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: None of the officers or directors of the Company or any Subsidiary and, to the knowledge of the Company, none of the employees of the Company or any Subsidiary is presently a party to any transaction with the Company or any Subsidiary (other than for services as employees, officers and directors), including any contract, agreement or other arrangement providing for the furnishing of services to or by, providing for rental of real or personal property to or from, providing for the borrowing of money from or lending of money to or otherwise requiring payments to or from any officer, director or such employee or, to the knowledge of the Company, any entity in which any officer, director, or any such employee has a substantial interest or is an officer, director, trustee, stockholder, control person, member or partner, in each case in excess of $50,000 other than for: (i) payment of salary for services rendered, (ii) reimbursement for expenses incurred on behalf of the Company or any Subsidiary, and (iii) other employee benefits, including stock option agreements under any stock option plan of the Company.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: Malhotra, the Defendants argue that the Malhotra’s claims should be dismissed because more than three years have passed since the alleged material omission. The Court agrees. Section 9(e) of the Exchange Act sets forth the relevant statute of limitations for claims brought pursuant to Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. This section states, “[n]o action shall be maintained to enforce any liability created under this section unless brought within one year after the discovery of the facts constituting the vi 04 WL 2166293, at *19 (E.D.Pa. Sept.24, 2004) (“[t]he relevant date for accrual of a section 10(b) claim is the date of a misrepresentation or omission, not the date of sale.”); Antell v. Arthur Andersen LLP, No. 97 C 3456, 1998 WL 245878, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7183 (N.D.Ill. May 4, 1998) (<HOLDING>). Here, Malhotra made his initial investment in Options: A. holding that the statute of limitations period begins to run when the allegedly discriminatory pension plan is applied to the plaintiffs and leaving determination of the actual date the statute begins to run on each claim to the district court B. holding as to a fraudulent misrepresentation claim under michigan law that the sixyear statute of limitations begins to run when the misrepresentation was perpetrated and not when the plaintiff discovered or should have discovered the misrepresentation C. holding that the threeyear limitations period for section 10b and rule 10b5 claims begins to run upon the date a defendant makes an affirmative misrepresentation or in the case of an omission upon the date a duty to disclose the withheld information arises D. holding that a rule 10b5 claim begins to run when a defendant makes an affirmative misrepresentation E. holding that limitation period begins to run at the time of the breach

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a rule 10b5 claim begins to run when a defendant makes an affirmative misrepresentation
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: All Bonds (Special Documents of Title UCC § 7201, UCC § 7202, UCC § 8102 et seq) and-Accounts regards Me and My PERSON; wind-up the Ens Legis: WILLIAM FREDERICK KEMP JR. (UCC § 9307(h)).” As plaintiffs statement regarding this relief does not assert a claim for money damages, perhaps this is a request for declaratory or injunctive relief. The Federal Circuit has explained that the Court of Federal Claims “does not have general equity jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief.” Shemonsky v. United States, 215 F.3d 1340 (Fed.Cir.1999) (upholding decision of the Court of Federal Claims that the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to injunctive or declaratory relief); see also Martinez v. United States, 333 F.3d 1295, 1303 (Fed.Cir.2003); Choate v. United States, 60 F.3d 840 (Fed.Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). As stated by the Federal Circuit: The Court Options: A. holding that the tucker act does not provide a means by which the court of federal claims may grant injunctive or declaratory relief where the suit does not involve a preaward protest or the application of section 7428 of the internal revenue code B. holding that the tucker act does not provide independent jurisdiction over claims for injunctive relief in contractual dispute cases C. holding that the tucker act grants the united states court of federal claims jurisdiction to grant nonmonetary relief in connection with contractor claims including claims requesting an interpretation of contract terms D. holding that this court does not have jurisdiction over tax claims for declaratory or equitable relief E. holding that the eleventh amendment does not prevent private individuals from bringing suit against state officials for prospective injunctive or declaratory relief for ongoing violations of federal law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the tucker act does not provide a means by which the court of federal claims may grant injunctive or declaratory relief where the suit does not involve a preaward protest or the application of section 7428 of the internal revenue code
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: Club, 145 F.3d 114, 117 (2d Cir.1998). The judgment of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED. 1 . The district court dismissed defendant City of New York (the "City”) from the action, reasoning that the Department of Education, rather than the City, was Desir’s direct employer. The district court also dismissed the Title VII claims against Cooperman, Lombardi, and Burnett on the ground that individuals are not subject to liability under Title VII. Desir does not challenge either of these rulings on appeal. 2 . To the extent that Desir identifies statements he made concerning the treatment of other instructors in the program, those remarks were made in his official capacity and thus do not receive protection under the First Amendment. See Garcetti, 547 U.S. at 424, 126 S.Ct. 1951 (<HOLDING>). 3 . Desir does not challenge the district Options: A. holding that when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties the employees are not speaking as citizens for first amendment purposes and the constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline B. holding that the regulations prohibit only monetary discipline of exempt employees C. holding that the first amendment does not prohibit managerial discipline based on an employees expressions made pursuant to official responsibilities D. holding that the eleventh amendment does not prohibit the united states from prosecuting a claim of contribution E. holding that under the first amendment speech can be pursuant to a public employees official job duties even though it is not required by or included in the employees job description or in response to a request by the employer

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the first amendment does not prohibit managerial discipline based on an employees expressions made pursuant to official responsibilities
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: may permit a doctor to exercise judgment in choosing among several courses of treatment. “The error-of-judgment rule . . . stems in part from the recognition that if there is more than one acceptable treatment option, then the selection of any one of them is not negligence. Thus, a doctor is not liable for untoward results if he or she used reasonable care in selecting one of those options.” Rogers v. Meridan Park Hospital, 772 P.2d 929, 930-31 (Or. 1989). In this case, the defendants assert that in the course of treating Mrs. Francoeur, Dr. Piper had multiple options from which to choose, each of which met the standard of care, and the fact that the option he chose resulted in Mrs. Francoeur’s amputation does not, standing alone, constitute negligence. The defendant argues that 995) (<HOLDING>); Deyo v. Kinley, 565 A.2d 1286, 1292-93 (Vt. Options: A. holding that a plaintiff must show that a defendant did not have an honest good faith belief in marking its products B. holding that an insurers violation of covenant of good faith and fair dealing was actionable under the consumer protection act C. holding term good faith in iowa code section 23272 rests on a defendants subjective honest belief D. holding good faith and honest error in judgment instructions erroneously imply only badfaith and dishonest deviations actionable E. holding that the transaction must be fair and equitable and in good faith

assistant: The best answer is D. holding good faith and honest error in judgment instructions erroneously imply only badfaith and dishonest deviations actionable
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: policy. The NFL asserts that the Supreme Court’s holding in Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp., 467 U.S. 752, 104 S.Ct. 2731, 81 L.Ed.2d 628 (1984), controls the facts of this case and overturns prior caselaw holding that NFL clubs do not constitute a single enterprise but rather, are separate entities which were capable of conspiring with each other under § 1. See L.A. Coliseum, 726 F.2d at 1387-90; NASL, 670 F.2d at 1256-58. We do not agree that Copperweld, which found a corporation and its wholly owned subsidiary to be a single enterprise for purposes of § 1, Copperweld, 467 U.S. at 771, 104 S.Ct. at 2741, applies to the facts of this case or affects the prior precedent concerning the NFL. See McNeil v. National Football League, 790 F.Supp. 871, 879-80 (D.Minn.1992) (<HOLDING>). Copperweld’s holding turned on the fact that Options: A. holding that the department of the treasury and the internal revenue service are not entities subject to suit and they should be dismissed B. holding that the gtla does not apply to contract claims against governmental entities C. holding that a member of a golf club was charged with knowledge of an indemnity clause in the clubs membership handbook D. holding that copperweld did not apply to the nfl and its member clubs and finding the clubs to be separate entities capable of conspiring together under 1 E. holding that notice statute applies to both municipal entities and employees of municipal entities acting within the scope of their employment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that copperweld did not apply to the nfl and its member clubs and finding the clubs to be separate entities capable of conspiring together under 1
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) The Issuer will pay principal of and interest on the Note by wire transfer of immediately available funds to the bank account designated by the Holder in writing and delivered to the Issuer at least 2 Business Days prior to the applicable payment date. Such payment will be in such coin or currency of the United States of America as at the time of payment is legal tender for payment of public and private debts. The registered Holder of a Note may be treated as its owner for all purposes.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: It is intended that the rights of Participants under this Plan will be exempt from Section 409A of the Code as a “short-term deferral” under the applicable regulations. The Plan shall be construed in a manner that effects such intent. Nevertheless, the tax treatment of the benefits provided under the Plan is not warranted or guaranteed. Neither the Company, its affiliates nor their respective directors, officers or employees shall be held liable for any taxes, interest, penalties or other monetary amounts owed by any Participant or other taxpayer as a result of the Plan.

assistant: General
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: policies. Id. While we have never directly held that there is a right of rescission under ERISA for insurance contracts entered into under a false representation of health, it is clear that the remedy should exist. Seventy years ago, the Supreme Court stated that “[insurance policies are traditionally contracts uberrimae fidei and a failure by the insured to disclose conditions affecting the risk, of which he is aware, makes the contract voidable at the insurer’s option.” Stipcich v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 277 U.S. 311, 316, 48 S.Ct. 512, 72 L.Ed. 895 (1928). We need not moot whether uberrimae fidei itself still applies to ordinary insurance contracts because many federal courts facing insurance issues have identified a right of rescission. See, e.g., Davies, 128 F.3d at 943-44 (<HOLDING>); Hauser v. Life General Sec. Ins. Co., 56 F.3d Options: A. holding that an award of fees under 411839 was mandatory where an insured is compelled to file a lawsuit by reason of an insurers refusal to pay to recover for a loss under her insurance contract B. recognizing an insurers right to rescind an insurance contract where the insured has made fraudulent or material misrepresentation in insurance application C. holding an insurer has a right to rely on statements made in an insurance application D. recognizing that a material misrepresentation or omission of fact in an insurance application relied on by the insurer in issuing a policy renders the coverage voidable at the insurance companys option E. holding that insureds failure to list his brother as a member of the household was a material misrepresentation that provided the insurance company with grounds to rescind the policy

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing an insurers right to rescind an insurance contract where the insured has made fraudulent or material misrepresentation in insurance application
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 Sections 1.3, 1.4, 4.1, 4.2 and Section 5.1 through 5.13 hereof, as well as Exhibit A and Exhibit B and the applicable consideration required thereby under Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.3, shall survive the termination for any reason or expiration of this Agreement for the period described or referenced in each such Section or, if no period is described or referenced in such Section, indefinitely.

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: For services to be rendered hereunder, Executive will receive a base salary at the rate of $388,000 per year (the “ Base Salary ”) less standard payroll deductions and withholdings and payable in accordance with the Company’s regular payroll schedule. The Base Salary will be reviewed from time to time (at least annually) and may be increased (but not decreased) by the Compensation Committee of the Board (the “ Committee ”) in its sole discretion; provided that, subject to the terms of this Agreement, the Base Salary may be decreased in accordance with a uniform reduction in base salaries applicable to all senior executives of the Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement (including all Schedules and all Exhibits), the Transaction Documents, and the Confidentiality Agreement constitute the entire agreement among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, written and oral, among the parties with respect thereto. For the avoidance of doubt, the Confidentiality Agreement shall survive the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and continue to be in full force and effect.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Provided, that any prior nondisclosure/nonuse agreements are not superseded; and the Parties confirm that any confidential information which was disclosed under such prior nondisclosure/nonuse agreements shall remain confidential and shall be subject to the nondisclosure and nonuse provisions set forth in Section 8 of this Agreement. Neither Party has made any promises, representations, warranties, covenants, or undertakings, other than those expressly set forth or referred to herein, to induce the other Party to execute or authorize the execution of this Agreement, and each Party acknowledges that it has not executed or authorized the execution of this Agreement in reliance upon any such promise, representation, or warranty, covenant or undertaking not contained herein.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the Company and the Executive with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes in its entirety the Original Agreement. Any payments actually made under this Agreement in the event of the Executive’s termination of employment shall be in lieu of any severance benefits payable under any severance plan, program, or policy of the Company to which the Executive might otherwise be entitled.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: all copyright , trade marks and all other intellectual property rights in the website and its content ( including without limitation the website design , text , graphics and all software and source codes connected with the website ) are owned by or licensed to betterpoints.uk or otherwise used by betterpoints.uk as permitted by law .

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: work environment,” although she did not include a separate hostile work environment count. Compl. ¶¶ 1, 9. Even when a “claim is not set forth ... in a separate count,” courts have addressed the validity of that claim as if the plaintiff listed the count. Ficken v. Golden, 2005 WL 692019, at *6 (D.D.C. Mar.24, 2005) (adjudging the validity of a defamation claim even though the plaintiff did not list it as a separate count). Furthermore, the plaintiff provides factual support for this claim throughout her complaint, pointing to Ridgely’s hostile and hurtful treatment of her from .2004 until her departure. Compl. ¶¶ 10-13. Such factual statements are sufficient to allege a claim so long as they provide notice of that claim. Freeman v. Fallin, 254 F.Supp.2d 52, 59 n. 4 (D.D.C.2003) (<HOLDING>). Because the plaintiff expressly identified a Options: A. holding despite collective allegations in complaint the complaint was not deficient under rule 8a because it stated with sufficient particularity facts establishing a causal connection between the defendants actions and the constitutional deprivation B. holding that the plaintiffs complaint was valid because despite general allegations it provided notice C. holding that a plaintiff may present unsubstantiated factual allegations on appeal provided they are consistent with the complaint to show that the complaint should not have been dismissed D. holding that the complaint did not satisfy the notice pleading requirements of federal rule of civil procedure 8a because the complaint gave the defendants no notice of the specific factual allegations presented for the first time in the plaintiffs opposition to summary judgment E. holding that the district court did not err in finding that the plaintiff failed to provide adequate notice of new allegations where the plaintiffs complaint gave the defendants no notice of the specific factual allegations presented for the first time in the plaintiffs opposition to summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the plaintiffs complaint was valid because despite general allegations it provided notice
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 U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 430 U.S. 703 97 S.Ct. 1671 51 L.Ed.2d 750 Susan Lynn VORCHHEIMER, by her parents Bert and Carol Vorchheimer, etc., petitioner,v.SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA et al No. 76-37 Supreme Court of the United States April 19, 1977 On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. April 19, 1977. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. 2 Mr. Justice REHNQUIST took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 2
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: Based on the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the Closing Date, after giving effect to the receipt by the Company of the proceeds from the sale of the Purchased Securities hereunder: (i) the fair saleable value of the Company’s assets exceeds the amount that will be required to be paid on or in respect of the Company’s existing Indebtedness and other liabilities (including known contingent liabilities) as they mature, (ii) the Company’s assets do not constitute unreasonably small capital to carry on its business as now conducted and (iii) the current cash flow of the Company, together with the proceeds the Company would receive, were it to liquidate all of its assets, after taking into account all anticipated uses of the cash, would be sufficient to pay all amounts on or in respect of its liabilities when such amounts are required to be paid. The Company does not intend to incur debts beyond its ability to pay such debts as they mature (taking into account the timing and amounts of cash to be payable on or in respect of its debt). The Company has no knowledge of any facts or circumstances which lead it to believe that it will file for reorganization or liquidation under the bankruptcy or reorganization laws of any jurisdiction within one year from the Closing Date.

assistant: Solvency
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: issues relating to denial of due process because of prosecutorial misconduct and a Sixth Amendment violation of being denied counsel during pre-trial proceedings were not properly raised below); White v. State, 324 Md. 626, 640, 598 A.2d 187, 194 (1991) (citing Md. Rule 8-131(a) in holding that a claim that the defendants were deprived of their constitutional right to present witnesses in their defense was not properly before the Court because the argument was not made to the trial court); In re John H., 293 Md. 295, 303, 443 A.2d 594, 598 (1982) (citing Rule 885, a predecessor of Md. Rule 8-131(a), not reaching the issue of whether a statute was constitutional because the issue of constitutionality of the statute was not argued to the trial judge n. 2, 772 A.2d 1260, 1266 n. 2 (2001) (<HOLDING>). Rule 8-131(a) states: “RULE 8-131. SCOPE OF Options: A. holding that claims based on an alleged violation of double jeopardy constitute fundamental error which absent a knowing and voluntary waiver may be raised for the first time on appeal B. holding that claims which were not presented to the motion court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal C. recognizing in dicta the court of special appeals howell holding that double jeopardy claims may not be raised for the first time on appeal D. holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal E. recognizing the general rule that a court of appeals will not consider an issue raised for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing in dicta the court of special appeals howell holding that double jeopardy claims may not be raised for the first time on appeal
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: (Breyer, J., concurring in part). See also Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAG, 528 U.S. 377, 402 (2000) (Breyer, J., concurring). I would ask whether the statutes strike a reasonable balance between their speech-restricting and speech-enhancing consequences. Or do they instead impose restrictions on speech that are disproportionate when measured against their corresponding privacy and speech-related benefits, taking into account the kind, the importance, and the extent of these benefits, as well as the need for the restrictions in order to secure those benefits? What this Court has called “strict scrutiny” — with its strong presumption against constitutionality — is normally out of place where, as here, important competing constitutional interests are implicated. See ante, at 518 (<HOLDING>); ante, at 533 (“important interests to be Options: A. recognizing possible conflict between the cases B. recognizing conflict between circuits C. recognizing conflict D. recognizing the conflict E. recognizing conflict between interests of the highest order

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing conflict between interests of the highest 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the context of the EAJA, see, e.g. Perales v. Casillas, 950 F.2d 1066, 1072 (5th Cir.1992) (noting failure of bad faith claim did not mandate conclusion that government’s position was substantially justified); Barry v. Bowen, 825 F.2d 1324, 1334 (9th Cir.1987) abrogated on other grounds, 884 F.2d 442 (9th Cir.1989) (bad faith standard "higher than the substantial justification standard"); Gregory C. Sisk, "The Essentials of the Equal Access to Justice Act: Court Awards of Attorney's Fees for Unreasonable Government Conduct (Part Two)” 56 La. L.Rev. 1, 54 (1995) (noting that where the government acts in bad faith, this "under mines the 'substantial justification’ for the government's position”), as well as in other areas. Cf. United States v. Truesdale, 211 F.3d 898, 908 (5th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). Here we simply conclude that the basis for Options: A. holding that a bad faith claim is a tort B. holding that for the administrative position of the government to be substantially justified it must have a reasonable basis both in law and fact C. holding that congress did not want the substantially justified standard to be read to raise a presumption that the government position was not substantially justified simply because it lost the case citations omitted D. holding that in order to establish bad faith claim under hyde amendment criminal defendant must show more than that governments position was not substantially justified E. holding that the governments position must be justified to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person and have a reasonable basis in both law and fact citations omitted

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that in order to establish bad faith claim under hyde amendment criminal defendant must show more than that governments position was not substantially justified
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 restriction or covenant in this Agreement is deemed by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unreasonable or unenforceable as written, the court may modify any unreasonable or unenforceable element of the restriction or covenant to make it reasonable and enforceable or enforce it only to the extent it is reasonable and enforceable. If the court determines that any restriction or covenant in this Agreement is wholly or partially invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the restrictions or covenants will be given full effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is entitled to a plenary hearing to resolve the disputed facts. Hand, supra, 391 N.J.Super. at 111, 917 A.2d 269. A plenary hearing must be conducted where “the custody of children is a genuine and substantial issue____” R. 5:8-6. “[WJhen the submissions show there is a genuine and substantial factual dispute regarding the welfare of the children,” the “plenary hearing is necessary to resolve the factual dispute.” Hand, supra, 391 N.J.Super. at 105, 917 A.2d 269 (citing Shaw v. Shaw, 138 N.J.Super. 436, 440, 351 A.2d 374 (App.Div.1976)). Frequently, the factual disputes are evident based upon the conflicting certifications of the parties, or based upon evaluative reports regarding the child’s condition. See, e.g. Mackowski v. Mackowski, 317 N.J.Super. 8, 10, 721 A.2d 12 (App.Div.1998) (<HOLDING>); Dorfman v. Dorfman, 315 N.J.Super. 511, 518, Options: A. holding that certifications of parent and child regarding her desire to live with her father were sufficient to warrant a plenary hearing B. holding mothers drug use during pregnancy and after child was removed from her care in face of random drug testing that placed her relationship with child at risk was legally and factually sufficient evidence that she engaged in course of conduct which endangered her child C. recognizing that the pregnant womans ability to assert her own rights is beset with obstacles including her desire to protect her privacy D. holding trial court could have considered mothers desire to hurt herself and her history of noncompliance with her medication schedule as factors endangering child E. holding that trial court properly terminated fathers obligation to support his seventeenyearold daughter who refused to live with father but instead chose to reside in her own apartment after her mother moved out of state where daughter offered no justifiable reason for not living with her father daughter only contended that her stepmother was too neat for her and that she wanted to live closer to her friends

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that certifications of parent and child regarding her desire to live with her father were sufficient to warrant a plenary hearing
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: that the Air Force’s Handbook is not binding as it was not promulgated according to the APA’s procedural requirements). Where agency publications have not been so promulgated, the agency’s decision to analyze impacts by other methods is not an automatic violation of the law. As such, it is subject to review under the normal “arbitrary and capricious standard” used to review agency action under the APA. Davis Mountains, 116 Fed.Appx. at 9-10 (“Thus the Air Force retained discretion to analyze impacts on livestock by methods other than those contained in the Handbook, and we must address the adequacy of the Air Force’s chosen method according to the arbitrary and capricious standard”); see also Communities Against Runway Expansion, Inc. (CARE) v. F.A.A., 355 F.3d 678, 688 (D.C.Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Here, plaintiffs neither argue nor offer Options: A. holding that ftc issuance of a complaint meets the apa definition of order and therefore is agency action even if not final agency action B. holding the director of the united states environmental protection agency in contempt for failure to comply with court order C. holding that an administrative agency is not subject to a contempt proceeding for failure to comply with an order D. holding that even though an executive order mandating agency consideration of environmental justice concerns created no private right of action for an agencys failure to comply with that mandate the court would review the agencys action as an exercise of discretion under the apa and nepa E. recognizing private right of action

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that even though an executive order mandating agency consideration of environmental justice concerns created no private right of action for an agencys failure to comply with that mandate the court would review the agencys action as an exercise of discretion under the apa and nepa
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: Employee agrees that during the term of Employee’s services to the Company, and at any time thereafter, not to make or communicate any comments or other remarks which are negative or derogatory to the Company or which would tend to disparage, slander, ridicule, degrade, harm or injure the Company (or any business relationship of the Company) or any officer, partnership member, or other employee of the Company or its affiliates.

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: United States v. Edwards, 526 F.3d 747, 755-56 (11th Cir.2008) (quotation omitted). To make this determination, we will consider all the evidence presented at trial and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the jury’s verdict. United States v. Perez, 661 F.3d 568, 574 (11th Cir.2011). We have defined “commercial advantage” as “a profit or gain in money obtained through business activity” and “private financial gain” as “an additional profit specifically for a particular person or group.” United States v. Zheng, 306 F.3d 1080, 1086 (11th Cir.2002). No evidence of actual payment or of an agreement for defendant to be paid is needed; evidence that the defendant acted for the purpose of financial gain is sufficient. See United States v. Dominguez, 661 F.3d 1051, 1066 (11th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). We have upheld a conviction under § Options: A. holding that civil settlements have no bearing on decisions of criminal punishment and imposition of a restitution order is a form of punishment and part of a criminal sentence B. holding that punishment in this court for an offense under ncgs 1381 north carolinas driving while intoxicated statute cannot exceed a fine of 1000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year the maximum punishment for a misdemeanor under 18 usc section 1 because to allow the greater punishment that could be imposed under state law would conflict with the federal policy of limiting us magistrates nonconsensual jurisdiction to that allowed under the federal definition of a misdemeanor C. holding that judgeimposed cumulation does not offend the sixth amendment and further noting that where within the statutory range punishment should be assessed and whether to cumulate the sentences imposed is a normative discretionary function that does not turn on discrete findings of fact D. holding that the trial judges failure to admonish the appellant regarding the range of punishment was harmless because the record was replete with statements by the parties concerning the punishment range and because there was nothing in the record to indicate that the appellant was unaware of the range of punishment E. holding that punishment under 1324a2bii does not turn on the financial success of the smuggling venture

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that punishment under 1324a2bii does not turn on the financial success of the smuggling venture
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 Separation Date, Executive’s employment and all other positions Executive held with the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates terminated, including, without limitation, Executive’s position as Executive Vice President, Staffing-North America.

assistant: General
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 represent and warrant to the Company that the performance of your duties will not violate any agreements with or trade secrets of any other person or entity, and that you are not in breach of any legal or contractual duty or agreement, including any agreement concerning trade secrets or confidential information, owned by any other person or entity. You represent that you have not relied on any agreements or representations, express or implied, with respect to your employment that are not expressly set forth in this letter. You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Company and its employees from any claim relating to any false representation made by you in hereunder.

assistant: Representations