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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except for termination of a Guarantor’s obligations hereunder as provided in Section 5.14 , each Guarantor shall remain obligated hereunder notwithstanding that, without any reservation of rights against any Guarantor and without notice to or further assent by any Guarantor: (a) any demand for payment of any of the Obligations made by the Collateral Agent or any other Secured Party may be rescinded by such party and any of the Obligations continued; (b) the Obligations, or the liability of any other party upon or for any part thereof, or any collateral security or guarantee therefor or right of offset with respect thereto, may, from time to time, in whole or in part, be renewed, extended, amended, modified, accelerated, compromised, waived, surrendered or released by the Collateral Agent or any other Secured Party (with the consent of the applicable Credit Parties where required by the terms hereof or thereof); (c) the Credit Agreement and the other Guaranteed Transaction Documents and any other documents executed and delivered in connection therewith may be amended, modified, waived, supplemented or terminated, in whole or in part, in accordance with the terms of the applicable documents; and (d) any collateral security, guarantee or right of offset at any time held by the Collateral Agent or any other Secured Party for the payment of the Obligations may be sold, exchanged, waived, surrendered or released. Neither the Collateral Agent nor any other Secured Party shall have any obligation to protect, secure, perfect or insure any Lien at any time held by it as security for the Obligations or for this Guarantee or any property subject thereto. When making any demand hereunder against any of the Guarantors, the Collateral Agent or any other Secured Party may, but shall be under no obligation to, make a similar demand on the Borrower or any other Guarantor or guarantor, and any failure by the Collateral Agent or any other Secured Party to make any such demand or to collect any payments from the Borrower or any such other Guarantor or guarantor or any release of the Borrower or such other Guarantor or guarantor shall not relieve any of the Guarantors in respect of which a demand or collection is not made or any of the Guarantors not so released of their several obligations or liabilities hereunder, and shall not impair or affect the rights and remedies, express or implied, or as a matter of law, of the Collateral Agent or any other Secured Party against any of the Guarantors. For the purposes hereof “demand” shall include the commencement and continuance of any legal proceedings.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of any ip protection action or , if you timely provide niantic with an arbitration opt-out notice , will be the state and federal courts located in the northern district of california , and each of the parties hereto waives any objection to jurisdiction and venue in such courts .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Hall fails to support the dissent’s position. In that case, there was no specific statute granting the availability of habeas relief. Here, OCGA § 37-3-148 (a) provides that habeas relief is available “at any time” to detainees such as Nagel. Because the statutory scheme demonstrates the legislature’s intent that the availability of the writ of habeas corpus not be restricted, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the motion to dismiss. Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Sears, Carley, and Thompson, JJ, who dissent. 1 See Nagel v. State, 264 Ga. 150 (442 SE2d 446) (1994) (affirming the denial of relief). 2 Nagel v. Osborne, 164 F3d 582 (11th Cir. 1999). 3 Richardson v. Hall, 199 Ga. 602, 606 (34 SE2d 888) (1945). 4 Morton v. Bell, 264 Ga. 832, 833 (452 SE2d 103) (1995) (<HOLDING>). 5 See OCGA § 9-14-1 et seq. 6 Ga. Laws 1980, Options: A. holding that for purposes of statutory construction expression of one thing is the exclusion of the other B. recognizing principles of statutory construction expressio unius est exclusio alterius the express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of smother and expressum facit cessare taciturn if some things are expressly mentioned the inference is stronger that those omitted were intended to be excluded C. recognizing timehonored precept of expressio unius est exclusio alterius the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another D. holding that maxim of expression of one implies exclusion of another is aid to determine legislative intent E. recognizing rule of statutory construction that statutes must be read as a whole and sections which are part of the same general statutory scheme must be construed together and each given effect if it can be done by any reasonable construction

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing principles of statutory construction expressio unius est exclusio alterius the express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of smother and expressum facit cessare taciturn if some things are expressly mentioned the inference is stronger that those omitted were intended to be excluded
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and understanding between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes and preempts any prior understandings, agreements or representations by or between the Parties, written or oral, which may have related in any manner to the subject matter hereof, including without limitation, the Employment Agreement between the Parties dated August 11, 2016.

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 Security Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Security Agreement by facsimile or by e-mail “PDF” copy shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Security Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Capitalized terms that are used but are not otherwise defined in this Agreement have the meanings assigned to them in the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of January 13, 2016, by and among the Issuer, the Seller, the Servicer and The Bank of New York Mellon, a New York banking corporation, as Trust Collateral Agent.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with the other applicable provisions of this title.” § 1325(a)(1). IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW A. Jurisdiction & Venue This Court holds jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334, which provides “the district courts shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all cases under title 11.” Section 157 allows a district court to “refer” all bankruptcy and related cases to the bankruptcy court, wherein the latter court will appropriately preside over the matter. 28 U.S.C. § 157(a); see also In re: Order of Reference to Bankruptcy Judges, Gen. Order 2012-6 (S.D. Tex. May 24, 2012). In the instant case, the Court is considering whether the Debtors’ Sixth Amended Plan is confirmable under the s a core matter, this Court acknowledges the issues Stem presents. 564 U.S. at 473-74, 131 S.Ct. 2594 (<HOLDING>). An order denying confirmation of a proposed Options: A. holding that the bankruptcy court has constitutional and implied statutory authority to conduct jury trials in core proceedings B. holding that bankruptcy judges may hear and enter final judgments in core proceedings C. holding bankruptcy courts cannot enter final judgment on fraudulent transfer claims D. holding that bankruptcy court may issue proposed findings and conclusions in a core proceeding over which the bankruptcy court does not have constitutional authority E. holding that after stem bankruptcy judges have the authority to enter interlocutory orders in noncore proceedings and in core proceedings as to which the bankruptcy court may not enter final orders or judgment consistent with article iii absent consent

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that bankruptcy judges may hear and enter final judgments in core proceedings
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Managing Member is removed as Managing Member in accordance with the provisions of this Article 3 or otherwise pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, and a replacement Managing Member has been selected by the Class A Member, or if the Class A Member has elected to exercise any of the remedies set forth in Section 3.3, then, in each case, the Managing Member shall cooperate fully with the Class A Member and, to the extent applicable, the replacement Managing Member, and furnish all books and records and any and all other information in its possession, or reasonably obtainable by the existing Managing Member, related to the management and development of the Company and the Properties as reasonably requested by such persons.

assistant: Cooperation
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: In the event that any provision of this Letter Agreement is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, the remaining provisions of this Letter Agreement will be unaffected thereby and will remain in full force and effect to the fullest extent permitted by law. The captions of this Letter Agreement are not part of the provisions of this Letter Agreement and will have no force or 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: was signed and deemed filed on February 2, 2011. Thus, his federal habeas petition was untimely. According to Weddington, the district court erred in dismissing his petition because the limitations period should have been equitably tolled by the state’s confiscation of his legal papers. The state responds that the record fails to support his contention. Its argument against equitable tolling, on appeal as in the district court, is based solely on its challenge as to whether Weddington was prohibited access to his legal materials while he was housed in disciplinary segregation. “The intentional confiscation of a prisoner’s ha-beas corpus petition and related legal papers by a corrections officer is ‘extraordinary’ as a matter of law.” Valverde v. Stinson, 224 F.3d 129, 133 (2d Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Gabaldon, 522 F.3d Options: A. holding that prisons complete confiscation of petitioners legal materials six weeks before filing deadline and its holding of papers until after limitations period expired constituted an extraordinary circumstance for purposes of equitable tolling B. holding that aedpas oneyear period of limitations does not support a delay of filing of habeas petition by capital defendant C. holding that a corrections officers confiscation of a prisoners draft habeas petition and related legal papers can justify equitable tolling of the oneyear limitations period D. holding that attorney miscalculation of aedpa time period did not justify equitable tolling E. holding that oneyear limitations period set forth in 2255 is not a jurisdictional bar and is thus subject to equitable tolling

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a corrections officers confiscation of a prisoners draft habeas petition and related legal papers can justify equitable tolling of the oneyear limitations period
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 with respect to the material terms and conditions of the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents, the Company confirms that neither it nor any other Person acting on its behalf has provided the Purchaser or its agents or counsel with any information that it believes constitutes material, non-public information that is not otherwise disclosed in the SEC Reports. The Company understands and confirms that the Purchaser will rely on the foregoing representation in effecting transactions in the Securities. The press releases disseminated by the Company during the twelve months preceding the date of this Agreement, each as of the date of its issuance, did not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made and when made, not misleading. The Company acknowledges and agrees that the Purchaser does not make and has not made any representations or warranties with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby, other than those specifically set forth in Section 3.2 hereof.

assistant: Disclosures
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: Following the Effective Date, the Company and Investor shall execute and deliver, or shall cause to be executed and delivered, such additional documents, instruments, conveyances and assurances, and take or cause to be taken, such further actions as may be reasonably required to carry out the provisions hereof and give effect to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may not be terminated, amended, supplemented, waived or modified, except by an instrument in writing signed by WEST and the Administrative Agent with notice to the Indenture Trustee and the Security Trustee; provided that WEST may only terminate, amend, supplement, waive or modify this Agreement in accordance with Section 5.02(a) of the Indenture; provided further that no amendment, supplement, waiver or modification which affects the Indenture Trustee’s or Security Trustee’s rights, duties, indemnities or immunities hereunder may be made without the express written consent of the Indenture Trustee or Security Trustee, respectively. No failure or delay of any party in exercising any power or right thereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any such right or power, or any abandonment or discontinuance of steps to enforce such a right or power, preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right or power.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: to the maximum extent permitted by law , these limitations and exclusions apply to anything or any claims related to these terms , the services , or the software related to the services .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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: 45, 822 N.E.2d 748 (2005) (denying summary judgment based, inter alia, on expert testimony that parking lot had improper pitch). Consequently, no reasonable jury could conclude from the plaintiffs observations alone that the parking lot was designed or maintained in a defective condition. Plaintiffs photographs also provide him little solace. Notably, most of the photographs were taken in August, 2008, or later. The condition of the. parking lot four years after plaintiffs accident sheds no light on whether it was in a defective and unsafe condition in December, 2004. Although photographs taken soon after the accident show puddling, the existence of puddles, without more, could not lead a reasonable jury to conclude that the parking lot design was defective. See Athas, 904 F.2d at 81 (<HOLDING>). Because the plaintiff has failed to present Options: A. recognizing that a prosecutors office is an entity and that information in the possession of one attorney in the office must be attributed to the office as a whole B. holding that the district where the defendant attorneys office was located was the proper venue because the defendants omissions related to their failure to communicate from their office in savannah the details of the ongoing case C. holding that an employee had a legitimate expectation of privacy in his office even though the papers seized from the office were not the property of the employee D. holding that when a judicial office is created by legislative act or municipal ordinance the office is regarded as a de facto office until the act or ordinance is declared invalid E. holding post office could not be liable to patron who fell on its property because there was no evidence that the wet spots on the post office platform resulted from a defect or unnatural condition

assistant: The best answer is E. holding post office could not be liable to patron who fell on its property because there was no evidence that the wet spots on the post office platform resulted from a defect or unnatural condition
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 representations and warranties contained in Article III of the Credit Agreement are true and correct in all material respects on and as of the date hereof, with the same force and effect as if made on and as of the date hereof (except for any representations and warranties that expressly refer to another date, which shall be true and correct in all material respects as of such date).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Hawaii, without regard to any otherwise applicable principles of conflict of laws. Seller and Buyer hereby agree and stipulate that any suit or action arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be brought in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii, or in the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii, and the Parties each hereby unconditionally submit to the jurisdiction of such courts for such purposes. Each Party hereto irrevocably waives to the fullest extent permitted by law any objection that it may now or hereafter have to the laying of the venue of any judicial proceeding brought in such courts and any claim that any such judicial proceeding has been brought in an inconvenient forum.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Investor agrees and covenants that at any time and from time to time it will promptly execute and deliver to the Company such further instruments and documents and take such further action as the Company may reasonably require in order to carry out the full intent and purpose of this Agreement and to comply with state or federal securities laws or other regulatory approvals.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices by the Participant or the Participant’s successors or permitted assigns shall be addressed to Differential Brands Group, Inc., 1231 South Gerhart Avenue, Commerce, California 90022, Attention: Lori Nembirkow, Senior Vice President, Legal & General Counsel, or such other address as the Company may from time to time specify. All notices to the Participant shall be addressed to the Participant at the Participant’s address in the Company’s records.

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: The Executive agrees that any and all information, reports, other documents and other works (whether in an electronic format or otherwise) created by the Executive for or on behalf of the Corporation and the Bank during the Executive’s service with the Bank, whether or not developed on the Bank’s premises or equipment or during the Bank’s normal business hours (the “ Intellectual Property ”), are and shall remain works made for hire and the sole and exclusive property of the Corporation and the Bank. To the extent that such Intellectual Property is not considered work made for hire, the Executive hereby assigns to the Bank (or its nominee) any and all interest that the Executive may now or in the future have in the Intellectual Property. Upon request by the Bank, the Executive shall execute and deliver to the Bank any document or instrument that may be necessary to secure or perfect the Bank’s title to or interest in any Intellectual Property so assigned.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If such termination of employment is because of the Employee’s Disability while in the employ of the Company, then the continued employment requirement for the Employee shall cease to apply and the Profit Requirement for the PSUs shall be determined as of the End of the Performance Period and paid in accordance with Section 2(a) above; provided, however , that number of shares of Stock paid to the Employee shall be multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of days elapsed from the Grant Date to the date of the Employee’s Disability, and denominator of which is 1095.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: value of community property interest upon divorce, based on Taggart formula); Phillips v. Parrish, 814 S.W.2d 501, 504 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1991, writ denied) (applying Berry formula); May, 716 S.W.2d at 707 (same). In this case, it is undisputed that all of the property in the defined benefit plans (plans B-E) at th post-divorce increases in benefits that are separate property). But post-divorce cost-of-living increases and other increases in value that are not attributable to the employee’s continued employment after divorce are community property subject to division. See Grier, 731 S.W.2d at 933 (awarding nonemployee wife pe ee spouse her share of post-divorce cost-of-living increases and increases due to upgrading of benefits); see also Burchfield, 968 S.W.2d at 424 (<HOLDING>). Applying these principles to this situation, Options: A. holding that retirement benefit increases due to postdivorce promotion were separate property B. holding that postdivorce increases in an individuals retirement benefits are subject to community property division if they are not attributable to postdivorce employment or contributions C. holding railroad retirement benefits are not community property by congressional action D. holding that costofliving increases are not the result of any postdivorce labor but rather are a means of offsetting the otherwise declining value of retirement benefits after they become fixed E. holding that berry prohibits nonemployee spouse from sharing in any postdivorce increases in value of employees retirement benefits

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that postdivorce increases in an individuals retirement benefits are subject to community property division if they are not attributable to postdivorce employment or contributions
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: Dec. 533 (rejecting implied private action for rate violations under the Illinois Insurance Code; Peel v. Yellow Cab Co., Inc. (1st Dist. 1986), 147 Ill. App. 3d 992, 498 N.E.2d 788, 101 Ill. Dec. 464 (rejecting implied private action under the City Consumer Services Ordinance); Anzinger v. Illinois State Medical Inter-Insurance Exchange (1st Dist. 1986), 144 Ill. App. 3d 719, 494 N.E.2d 655, 98 111. Dec. 533 (rejecting implied private action for reparation under the Insurance Code); Cook v. Optimum/Ideal Managers, Inc. (2d Dist. 1984), 130 Ill. App. 3d 180, 473 N.E.2d 334, 84 Ill. Dec. 932 (rejecting implied private actions for retaliatory termination of payments and for withholding of medical reports under Workers’ Compensation 115 Ill. App. 3d 481, 450 N.E.2d 811, 71 Ill. Dec. 123 (<HOLDING>); Lehmann v. Arnold (4th Dist. 1985), 137 Ill. Options: A. recognizing the tort of retaliatory discharge B. recognizing implied private action under the collection agency act C. recognizing retaliatory discharge tort implied by the workers compensation act D. recognizing implied private retaliatory discharge action under the guardianship and advocacy act E. recognizing implied private action under the plat act rejecting implied private action under the national flood insurance act of 1968

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing implied private retaliatory discharge action under the guardianship and advocacy act
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: Trust Account. IV. We will remand for a proper determination of how the Attorney Trust Account should be apportioned and for an evaluation of Chicago Title’s proposal of a 65%-35% distribution. We recognize matters of interest and other costs are treated in different ways, depending upon the circumstances. Compare In re United States Lines, Inc., 79 B.R. 542, 547-48 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1987) (noting that entitlement to accrued interest could inequitably deplete the proceeds available to all creditors when funds cannot be traced) with A. Scott, The Law of Trusts § 207 (1988) (reviewing case law that states that when a trustee commits a breach of trust, he is ordinarily liable for interest); see also Nicholas v. United States, 384 U.S. 678, 687, 86 S.Ct. 1674, 1681, 16 L.Ed.2d 853 (1966) (<HOLDING>). We also note that a pro rata distribution of Options: A. recognizing that potential creditors adjust their interest rates to accommodate their prognosis of the particular debtors chances of rehabilitation B. holding that parents who feared drug lord retaliation notified police and pressed their children to enter rehabilitation consented as a matter of law to their childrens drug activity because they did not search the premises for drugs and did not evict their children C. holding that inmates have a property interest in their money D. holding that the interest of the public especially the debtor and creditors could limit compensation to a debtors counsel E. recognizing governmental interest in rehabilitation

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that potential creditors adjust their interest rates to accommodate their prognosis of the particular debtors chances of rehabilitation
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: Scobbie v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Greenville Steel Car Co.), 118 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 424, 427, 545 A.2d 465, 466 (1988). However, the fact that the claimant’s residual disability no longer renders him incapable of performing his pre-injury job does not justify a suspension of benefits if the pre-injury job is no longer available to the claimant through no fault of his own. The burden is on the employer to demonstrate job availability. Id. at 428-29, 545 A.2d at 467. 6 . Once an employee is fully recovered, the employer is not required to show work availability. See Celio v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Canonsburg General Hospital), 109 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 442, 531 A.2d 55 peal Board (Federici), 96 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 208, 214-15, 506 A.2d 1357, 1360 (1986) (<HOLDING>) 9 . As the Board correctly noted, Employer may Options: A. holding that a presumptive partial disability exists by virtue of the order to suspend compensation the employer can eliminate liability only by offering suitable work B. holding that claims actionable only by virtue of the nlra are preempted C. holding evidence of a 13 permanent partial disability insufficient to establish disability for purposes of ada D. holding that a district court only has jurisdiction to order compliance with compensation orders entered by an administrative law judge alj and reviewed by the benefits review board and to screen for procedural defects but may not otherwise affirm modify suspend or set aside a compensation order based on the substantive merits of the aljs decision E. holding that where the employer discontinues a specially created job the employer must offer another suitable job to the claimant or continue total disability payments

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a presumptive partial disability exists by virtue of the order to suspend compensation the employer can eliminate liability only by offering suitable work
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: thousands of jobs that exist in the national economy. Id. Social Security Ruling 00-4p SSR 00-4p prescribes guidelines for treating VE occupational testimony in conjunction with the information contained in the DOT. The ruling imposes upon an ALJ an “affirmative responsibility” to identify and obtain a reasonable explanation of any conflicts between a VE’s testimony regarding the requirements of a specific job and the information provided in the DOT, which, with the companion publication Selected Characteristics of Occupations Defined in the Revised Dictionary of Occupational Titles (“SCO”), is the primary source of job requirements relied upon in making disability determinations. SSR 00-4p, 2000 WL 1898704, at *2, *4; see also Rutherford v. Barnhart, 399 F.3d 546, 557 (3d Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>) The language of the ruling is mandatory, not Options: A. holding that under the first amendment where there is no proof of actual malice damages are limited to actual injury which excludes punitive damages but is not limited to outofpocket loss B. recognizing that ssr 004ps scope is limited to expert testimony concerning the actual requirements of a job C. holding that a request for funds for expert testimony must show inter alia that the testimony is crucial and is subject to varying expert opinions D. holding that recovery is limited to actual compensatory damages E. holding that the admission of expert testimony was prejudicial where the testimony was pervasive

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that ssr 004ps scope is limited to expert testimony concerning the actual requirements of a job
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: v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 435, 111 S.Ct. 2382, 2386, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991); Hunter v. State, 955 S.W.2d 102, 104 (Tex.Crim.App.1997). 17 . Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 500, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 1325, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983); Balentine v. State, 71 S.W.3d 763, 770-71 (Tex. Crim.App.2002); Davis v. State, 947 S.W.2d 240, 245 (Tex.Crim.App.1997). 18 . United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 685, 105 S.Ct. 1568, 1575, 84 L.Ed.2d 605 (1985). 19 . Kothe v. State, 152 S.W.3d 54, 65 n. 43 (Tex.Crim.App.2004) (citing with approval United States v. Wellman, 185 F.3d 651, 656 (6th Cir.1999), which holds that prolonging a detention for the purpose of issuing the citation is “well within the bounds of the initial stop”); see Coleman v. State, 188 S.W.3d 708, 719 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2005, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>), cert, denied,-U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 502, 166 Options: A. holding that reasonable suspicion is required to prolong a traffic stop after the purpose for which the investigatory stop was instituted has been accomplished B. holding complete prohibition on use of crime or accident reports for purpose of soliciting clients too broad a means of effectuating the intended purpose of the law C. holding that although the investigation of the traffic offense that served as the basis for the stop was complete when the officer issued the citation the officers continued detention of the appellant thereafter for a canine search was lawful because during the investigation of the traffic offense the officer had developed a reasonable suspicion that the appellant had committed a drugrelated offense D. holding that purpose of stop was complete upon the issuance of the citation E. holding that if an agent does not develop reasonable suspicion of criminal activity before the justifying purpose of a checkpoint stop has been accomplished he may not prolong the stop

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that purpose of stop was complete upon the issuance of the citation
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: case, however, the over-breadth doctrine does not apply. Sections 1037(a)(3) and (4) specifically require as an element that the emails be “commercial.” “Commercial electronic mail message” is defined in 15 U.S.C. § 7702. However, the overbreadth doctrine does not apply to commercial speech. Village of Hoffman, 455 U.S. at 496-97, 102 S.Ct. 1186 (citing Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Comm’n, 447 U.S. 557, 565 n. 8, 100 S.Ct. 2343, 65 L.Ed.2d 341 (1980)). This is because “commercial speech is more hardy, less likely to be ‘chilled,’ and not in need of surrogate litigators.” Board of Trustees of State University of New York v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469, 481, 109 S.Ct. 3028, 106 L.Ed.2d 388 (1989). But see S.O.C.,. Inc. v. County of Clark, 152 F.3d 1136, 1143 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Because it is clear the challenged portion of Options: A. holding that speech about financial assistance and handling racial discrimination does not qualify as protected speech B. recognizing that code is speech C. holding that the plaintiffs right to political speech is fully in accord with the publics interest in free speech and association D. holding that when protected speech is inextricable from unprotected speech the court will treat the entire message as protected E. holding that statute reaching beyond purely commercial speech to chill fully protected speech can merit application of the overbreadth doctrine

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that statute reaching beyond purely commercial speech to chill fully protected speech can merit application of the overbreadth doctrine
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 notice or communication having to do with this Agreement must be given by personal delivery or by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed, if to the Company, to the principal office of the Company, and, if to the Grantee, to the Grantee's last known address provided by the Grantee to the Company.

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: The captions to the several Articles and Sections of this Agreement are included only for convenience of reference and shall not in any way affect the construction of, or be taken into consideration in interpreting, this Agreement. In this Agreement: (a) the word “including” shall be deemed to be followed by the phrase “without limitation” or like expression; (b) references to the singular shall include the plural and vice versa; (c) references to masculine, feminine and neuter pronouns and expressions shall be interchangeable; and (d) the words “herein” or “hereunder” relate to this Agreement. Each accounting term used herein that is not specifically defined herein shall have the meaning given to it under GAAP, but only to the extent consistent with its usage and the other definitions in this Agreement.

assistant: Interpretations
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: hr" (Att, 4 at unnumbered page 4). According to Dr. Mash, the combined effects of PCP intoxication and Smith's low intellectual functioning and organic brain ' damage together impaired his higher order reasoning and judgment abilities such that "he could not adequately comprehend his Miranda rights or assess the ramifications of a waiver of those rights" (Att. 4 at unnumbered page 2). 1 24 We find that this proffered evidence is insufficient to show that trial counsel was ineffective. Specifically, we are convinced that expert testimony such as that contained in these two reports would not have changed the district court's decision on the voluntariness of Smith's waiver or our opinion on direct appeal affirming that decision. See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 693-94, 104 S.Ct. at 2067-68 (<HOLDING>). 125 In finding that Smith voluntarily waived Options: A. holding that to establish stricklandpierce prejudice in the appellate representation context the petitioner must show that there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the direct appeal proceeding would have been different but for counsels deficient performance B. holding that to establish prejudice sufficient to warrant finding of ineffective assistance the defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different C. holding that for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim to be established a defendant must show that but for counsels error the outcome of his proceedings would have been different D. holding that to satisfy the prejudice prong a petitioner must establish that but for counsels errors there is a reasonable probabil ity the result of the proceeding would have been different E. holding that to show prejudice in a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel the petitioner must show a reasonable probability that but for counsels errors the result of the proceeding would have been different

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that to establish prejudice sufficient to warrant finding of ineffective assistance the defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different
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: investments from more than one hundred people, the Kamans did not present evidence at trial that any of the investors — with the single exception of Mary Valmont — ever contacted Jackson Hewitt to inquire about its purported “backing” of Prewett’s investment schemes. The Kamans certainly did not. In fact, the undisputed evidence showed that until Prewett’s arrest in October 2006, Jackson Hewitt had no knowledge that Prewett was soliciting investments in real estate joint ventures and representing that Jackson Hewitt was involved. Jackson Hewitt did not learn about Prewett’s fraud until long after the Kamans had made their investments. Thus the Kamans failed to prove that Jackson Hewitt had knowingly permitted Prewett and JHIS to solicit their investments based on A.2d 840, 849 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Mobil Oil Corp. v. Frederick, 615 S.W.2d 323, Options: A. holding that chevron deference is due only to a reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency B. holding that the customer of a chevron dealer could not maintain an action against the franchisor on an apparent agency theory when the customer knew that the station was independently owned and operated C. holding that in an action by a customer of a mobil dealer against the franchisor on an apparent agency theory the trial court improperly excluded a letter showing that the customer believed that the service station was owned by an individual not the franchisor D. holding that a railroad operated and owned by the federal government was immune from antitrust liability E. holding that chevron deference is due only when the agency acts pursuant to delegated authority and the agency action has the force of law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the customer of a chevron dealer could not maintain an action against the franchisor on an apparent agency theory when the customer knew that the station was independently owned and operated
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 Loan Party shall use the proceeds of the Advances (a) to develop and acquire and for the exploration and production of Oil and Gas Properties, (b) for general corporate purposes, including closing costs and working capital needs, and (c) to payoff the balance owing pursuant to the Existing Credit Agreement. The Borrower shall use the Letters of Credit for general corporate purposes.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that, although the trial court was initially prepared to suppress based solely on the deputies’ conduct in providing Gomez’s name, the court ultimately applied the Neil factors and, finding that the identification was unreliable, ruled the state failed to establish that the witness’ recollection was independent of the suggestive identification. On these facts, the trial court could properly conclude that it was unnecessarily suggestive for the victims to be provided the defendant’s name and resulting access to his photo on the website before having any opportunity to identify him, thus giving rise to a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification. See generally Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So.2d 495, 518 (Fla.2005)(quoting Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362, 365 (Fla.1994)) (<HOLDING>); Johnson v. State, 566 So.2d 888, 890 (Fla. Options: A. holding that showup identification proce dure was not unduly suggestive where officer said to eyewitness we got two guys in the car similar to the ones you told us about B. holding that unprovoked flight is not necessarily indicative of wrongdoing but it is certainly suggestive of such C. holding showing of a single photo is unduly suggestive D. holding that showup identification procedure was not unduly suggestive where defendant was handcuffed and placed under police spotlight E. holding due process requires suppression of testimony regarding pretrial identification when procedure employed is impermissibly suggestive

assistant: The best answer is C. holding showing of a single photo is unduly suggestive
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the Tennessee collateral review statutes). Even if Smith’s civil rights claim presents an independent basis for the exercise of federal court review, it fails for several reasons. First, the Supreme Court held in Osborne that there is no freestanding substantive due process right to DNA testing. Osborne, 129 S.Ct. at 2322. Second, any procedural due process claim is also untenable because Michigan’s statutory scheme is more comprehensive than the state procedures sanctioned by the Osborne Court. Cf. id. at 2320 (“We see nothing inadequate about the procedures Alaska has provided to vindicate its state right to postcon (noting that judicial immunity protects the judicial function by affording absolute immunity); Pusey v. City of Youngstown, 11 F.3d 652, 657-58 (6th Cir. 1993) (<HOLDING>). We recognize that the Second Circuit has Options: A. holding that a prosecutors preparation and filing of an information and a motion for an arrest warrant are protected by absolute immunity B. holding that prosecutors have absolute immunity C. holding that a prosecutors filing of an arrest warrant and charging documents are protected by absolute immunity D. holding that state prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity for the initiation and pursuit of a criminal prosecution E. holding that the considerations underlying absolute prosecutorial immunity at common law dictate the same absolute immunity under 1983

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that prosecutors have absolute immunity