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: her family, friends, and child that she had the disease. (Pl.’s Mem. in Opp’n at App. I). Plaintiff failed to relay, however, any of this information to the UNUM appeals board. Therefore, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that it would have been futile to appeal the term , 1990. A. Validity of Contractual Limitations Period The Plan contains an enforceable three year limitations period. ERISA does not provide a statute of limitations in the Act itself. Thus, courts often borrow analogous statutes of limitations from state law. Courts have found, however, that reasonable contractual limitations of a party’s right to bring suit are enforceable and supersede the statute of limitations under state law. Thomas v. Allstate Ins. Co., 974 F.2d 706, 709-10 (6th Cir.1992) (applying Ohio law) (<HOLDING>); Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United, 112 Options: A. holding that one year limitations period in insurance policy was reasonable and therefore enforceable to shorten the fifteen year statute of limitations for breach of contract B. holding that insurance plans thirtynine 39 month contractual limitations period shorter than statute of limitations was reasonable and thus enforceable C. holding that under such unique circumstances the five 5 year statute of limitations controls D. holding that a reasonable contractedfor limitations period that is not contrary to public policy is generally enforceable E. holding that kentuckys one year statute of limitations period applies to 1983 actions

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that one year limitations period in insurance policy was reasonable and therefore enforceable to shorten the fifteen year statute of limitations for breach of contract
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: and, given the absence of contrary law in the First Circuit, this Court concludes that the award of $8,000 of Wife’s pension to Husband did not create a dischargeable debt. It is both equitable and in conformance with the clear majority rule, that this Court affirms the Order of the Bankruptcy Court that Husband has a vested property interest in an amount of $8,000 in Wife’s pension fund and that such interest was not a prepetition debt of the Bankruptcy estate. ORDER For the foregoing reasons, the ruling of the Bankruptcy Court is AFFIRMED and this appeal is DISMISSED. SO ORDERED. 1 . A vast majority of courts have followed the line of cases holding that an interest in a spouse’s pension awarded prepetition is not a dischargeable debt. Chandler v. Chandler, 805 F.2d 555 (5th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>), Hall v. Hall, 51 B.R. 1002 (S.D.Ga.1985) Options: A. holding former wifes cause of action accrued at the time of former husbands failure to pay her the portion of his retirement benefits to which she was entitled which was no earlier than the date of his actual retirement B. holding that wife had standing to seek disinterment where death of husband occurred prior to entry of decree of divorce C. holding that a wife obtained a vested interest in her portion of the retirement benefits as of the date of the divorce decree and any act of the military spouse that unilaterally decreases the nonmilitary spouses vested interest is an impermissible modification of a division of marital property and a violation of the final decree of divorce D. recognizing that a divorce decree which obligated the divorcing husband to name the children of his first marriage as the irrevocable beneficiaries of an insurance policy precluded him from naming his new wife as a beneficiary entitled to a portion of the insurance benefits E. holding debtor could not discharge that portion of his monthly army retirement benefits awarded to his wife pursuant to a divorce decree

assistant: The best answer is E. holding debtor could not discharge that portion of his monthly army retirement benefits awarded to his wife pursuant to a divorce decree
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: thus further shortening the time he had to research and write his petition. Cf. Garrick, 162 Fed. Appx. at 124-25 (“[T]he record shows no allegation that he was misled or tricked, or that anything (or anyone) actually ‘stood in his way.’ ” (emphasis added) (quoting Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 418, 125 S.Ct. 1807, 161 L.Ed.2d 669 (2005))); Bonilla, 2001 WL 253605, at *2 (“The one year period cannot be ‘tolled’ further while a potential petitioner seeks forms from the court (at least absent unusual circumstances, not present here).” (emphasis added)). Further, petitioner was diligent in pursuing his rights. Petitioner tried to obtain habeas forms immediately after receiving the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s denial of allocatur in his PCRA action. Cf. Rios, 2008 WL 2952352, at *8 (<HOLDING>). Unlike the petitioners in Garrick and similar Options: A. holding that the petitioner was not entitled to equitable tolling where he filed his habeas petition more than two months late B. holding that petitioner was dili gent for equitable tolling purposes where petitioner filed state petition two months after conviction was final and filed federal petition seven days after discovering state had denied petition on the merits C. holding that a petitioner was not entitled to equitable tolling where he waited six months to file a federal petition after any state misconduct ended D. holding that equitable tolling did not apply in part because petitioner waited three months after his pcra appeal was denied before attempting to secure the habeas forms E. holding that we lacked jurisdiction to review the veterans courts determination that equitable tolling did not apply in the case before it

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that equitable tolling did not apply in part because petitioner waited three months after his pcra appeal was denied before attempting to secure the habeas forms
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: The disclosing Party shall retain all right, title and interest in and to the Confidential Information, including all intellectual property represented thereby or associated therewith, and no license or assignment, by implication, estoppel or otherwise, is granted by the disclosing Party to the receiving Party to make, have made, use, or sell any product using the Confidential Information, or a license under any patent, patent application, utility model, copyright, trade secret, trademark, service mark or any other similar industrial or intellectual property right.

assistant: Yes
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: alleged that the acceleration clause had.anticompetitive effects. It may be that with more factual and expert discovery, . the Warner Chilcott. .Defendants can establish that there were no anticom-petitive effects, or that, on the second prong of the rule of reason analysis, the “challenged payment was justified by some precompetitive objective.” Nexium II, 42 F.Supp.3d at 262-63. But at this juncture, the Court is not prepared to hold that an acceleration clause like the one in the Watson Agreement may never be cognizable as a component of a complex settlement agreement amounting to a large and unjustified reverse payment. Accordingly, the acceleration clause may be considered, a least for the time being, as a component in the greater calculus. But see Actos, 2015 WL 5610752, at *16 (<HOLDING>). c. Promotional Deals Defendants contend that Options: A. holding that the acceleration clause was not cognizable as a large and unjustified payment B. holding claim is cognizable C. holding that the term reverse payment is not limited to a cash payment D. holding that a clause making payment by the owner an express condition precedent to payment by the general contractor to the subcontractor was enforceable E. holding claim is not cognizable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the acceleration clause was not cognizable as a large and unjustified payment
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: you agree that we may , at our sole discretion , suspend or terminate your access to all or part of our website and resources with or without notice and for any reason , including , without limitation , breach of this user agreement .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding Paragraph 6 above, if the Grantee incurs an involuntary Termination of Service (other than due to Cause) (a) during the two year period immediately following a Change in Control that occurred after the Grant Date, and (b) before the Vesting Date, any RSUs that had not vested prior to the date of such Termination of Service shall vest. In addition, upon a Change in Control, the Grantee will have such rights with respect to the RSUs as are provided for in the Plan.

assistant: Change In Control
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 New York without regard to principles of conflicts of laws thereof or any other State. Any action brought by any party against any other party hereto concerning the transactions contemplated by this Agreement shall be brought only in the state courts of New York or in the federal courts located in the state and county of New York. The parties to this Agreement hereby irrevocably waive any objection to jurisdiction and venue of any action instituted hereunder and shall not assert any defense based on lack of jurisdiction or venue or based upon forum non conveniens. The parties executing this Agreement and other agreements referred to herein or delivered in connection herewith on behalf of the Company agree to submit to the in personam jurisdiction of such courts and hereby irrevocably waive trial by jury. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. In the event that any provision of this Agreement or any other agreement delivered in connection herewith is invalid or unenforceable under any applicable statute or rule of law, then such provision shall be deemed inoperative to the extent that it may conflict therewith and shall be deemed modified to conform with such statute or rule of law. Any such provision which may prove invalid or unenforceable under any law shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of any agreement. Each party hereto hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any suit, action or proceeding in connection with this Agreement or any other transaction document contemplated hereby by mailing a copy thereof via registered or certified mail or overnight delivery (with evidence of delivery) to such party at the address in effect for notices to it under this Agreement and agrees that such service shall constitute good and sufficient service of process and notice thereof. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any other manner permitted by law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any and all actions brought in court shall be filed in the state or federal district court located in Delaware and the Parties specifically consent and submit to the jurisdiction and venue of each such state or federal court. Each Party further agrees that service of any process, summons, notice or document by U.S. registered mail to such Party’s respective address set forth above shall be effective service of process for any action with respect to any matters to which it has submitted to jurisdiction in this Section 11(n) . Each Party irrevocably and unconditionally waives any objection to the laying of venue of any action arising out of this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby or thereby in any such court, and hereby further irrevocably and unconditionally waives and agrees not to plead or claim in any such court that any such action brought in any such court has been brought in an inconvenient forum.

assistant: Jurisdictions
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 Administrative Agent and, if applicable, the relevant Issuing Bank or the Swingline Lender, shall have received notice from the Borrower Representative, which, if in writing, may be in the form of a Borrowing Request.

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 capitalization of the Company is as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g) of the Disclosure Schedules. Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g) , the Company has not issued any capital stock since its most recently filed periodic report under the Exchange Act, other than pursuant to the exercise of employee stock options under the Stock Option Plans, the issuance of shares of Common Stock to employees pursuant to the Stock Option Plans and pursuant to the conversion and/or exercise of Common Stock Equivalents outstanding as of the date of the most recently filed periodic report under the Exchange Act, all as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g) . Except as disclosed in the SEC Reports, no Person has any right of first refusal, preemptive right, right of participation, or any similar right to participate in the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. Except as disclosed in the SEC Reports or on Schedule 3.1(g) , there are no outstanding options, employee or incentive stock option plans, warrants, scrip rights to subscribe to, calls or commitments of any character whatsoever relating to, or securities, rights or obligations convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for, or giving any Person any right to subscribe for or acquire any shares of Common Stock, or material contracts, commitments, understandings or arrangements by which the Company or any Subsidiary is or may become bound to issue additional shares of Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents. Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g) , the issuance and sale of the Securities will not obligate the Company to issue shares of Common Stock or other securities to any Person (other than the Purchasers) and will not result in a right of any holder of Company securities to adjust the exercise, conversion, exchange or reset price under any of such securities. All of the outstanding shares of capital stock of the Company are duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable, have been issued in material compliance with all federal and state securities laws, and none of such outstanding shares was issued in violation of any preemptive rights or similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. Except as contemplated by Section 3.1(e) no further approval or authorization of any stockholder, the Board of Directors or others is required for the issuance and sale of the Securities. There are no stockholders agreements, voting agreements or other similar agreements with respect to the Company’s capital stock to which the Company is a party or, to the knowledge of the Company, between or among any of the Company’s stockholders.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company agrees that, from time to time upon the written request of the Secured Party, the Company will execute and deliver such further documents and do such other acts and things as the Secured Party may reasonably request in order fully to effect the purposes of 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: It is a corporation, or other legal entity, duly incorporated or formed and existing under the laws of its jurisdiction of incorporation or formation and has the corporate or other power to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement. It has all governmental and regulatory licences, registration and approvals required by Applicable Law as may be necessary to perform its obligations under this Agreement.

assistant: Qualifications
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 Subordination Agreement shall in all respects be a continuing agreement and shall remain in full force and effect until the earlier of (a) the payment in full of the Senior Debt and (b) the payment in full in cash of the Subordinated Debt. Upon such payment in full, this Subordination Agreement shall terminate (subject to Section 4 ); provided that the parties hereto agree to each execute such instruments as may be reasonably requested by any other party hereto to further evidence such termination.

assistant: Terminations
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 Party’s failure to enforce, at any time or for any period of time, any provision of this Agreement, or to exercise any right or remedy will not constitute a waiver of that provision, right or remedy or prevent such Party from enforcing any or all provisions of this Agreement and exercising any rights or remedies. To be effective any waiver must be in writing. The rights and remedies provided in this Agreement are cumulative and do not exclude any other right or remedy provided by law or otherwise available except as expressly set forth in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws.” To maintain an action under section 1985(3), a plaintiff must allege, with particularity, overt acts of the defendants, Powell v. Workmen’s Compensation Board, 327 F.2d 131, 137 (2d Cir.1964), and the allegations must indicate “some racial, or perhaps otherwise class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus behind the conspirators’ action.” Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88, 102, 91 S.Ct. 1790, 1798, 29 L.Ed.2d 338 (1971); see also United Bhd. of Carpenters v. Scott, 463 U.S. 825, 838-39, 103 S.Ct. 3352, 3360-61, 77 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1983). This requirement has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in several cases and most recently, in Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, et al., — U.S.-, 113 S.Ct. 753, 122 L.Ed.2d 34 (1993) (<HOLDING>). For reasons stated above, we have already Options: A. holding that absent evidence to the contrary court proceedings are presumed to be procedurally proper B. holding that hearsay statement did not constitute competent evidence and thus could not be considered in opposition to motion for summary judgment C. holding that arguments not raised in opposition to a motion for summary judgment are waived D. holding that a party could not use an opposition motion as a means of amending the complaint E. holding that opposition to abortion could not be presumed to reflect sexbased intent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that opposition to abortion could not be presumed to reflect sexbased intent
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 (and the Employment Agreement to the extent referenced in Sections 8 above and Sections 10 and 11 below) constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the matters herein provided. No modifications or waiver of any provision hereof shall be effective unless in writing and signed by each party.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: law. Central Wharf, 57 S.W. at 983. We believe this principle applies equally to Article 3, sec. 56. See JC-0101. Our conclusion that this constitutional provision does not limit the legislature’s inherent power to repeal laws is further supported by decisions from other states construing similar constitutional provisions. See People ex rel. Williamson v. Rinner, 52 Cal.App. 747, 199 P. 1066 (3 Dist.1921)(citing Central Wharf and numerous other cases with approval, Court held act which repealed special act creating school district did not violate constitutional provision against creation of local or special laws because the legislature’s inherent power to repeal is not expressly limited by the state constitution); People ex rel. Rogerson v. Crawley, 274 Ill. 139, 113 N.E. 119 (1916)(<HOLDING>); State v. Prather, 84 Kan. 169, 112 P. 829 Options: A. holding a city liable for personal injuries caused by a driver colliding with a girder in the center of a city street where the city did not give a warning B. holding that a city charter is a law under the whistleblower act C. holding that constitutional provision which prohibited local and special laws did not limit legislatures inherent power to repeal the corporate privileges of a particular community and therefore act which repealed the charter of the city of memphis was not unconstitutional D. holding that legislation which repealed the charter of the city of jacksonville did not violate constitutional provision prohibiting local or special laws which change the charter of a city E. holding that city attorneys promise in an oral settlement agreement for city to annex and rezone land was within the legal authority of the city of joliet to accomplish and were not absolutely void acts per se therefore city could be estopped from avoiding enforcement of contract

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that legislation which repealed the charter of the city of jacksonville did not violate constitutional provision prohibiting local or special laws which change the charter of a city
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: immediately stop using and consult a doctor if you experience any of these symptoms , or consult a doctor before using the applications if you 've ever suffered symptoms linked to seizures .

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: furthermore , you may not submit or publish user submissions that contain falsehoods or misrepresentations , solicit funds or services , contain advertising , promotional materials , junk mail , spam , chain letters or any form of solicitation , impersonate others or include programs that contain viruses or any other programs designed to impair the functionality of any computer .

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: but require automatic reversal”). In Arizona v. Fulminante, the United States Supreme Court distinguished between structural errors, which are not subject to the harmless-error analysis, and “trial errors.” 499 U.S. 279, 306-08, 111 S.Ct. 1246, 1263-64, 113 L.Ed.2d 302 (1991). Trial errors occur during the presentation of a case to the jury and may be quantitatively assessed in the context of all evidence presented to determine whether the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. In determining whether an error is a structural error, the Supreme Court looks to: (1) “the difficulty of assessing the effect of the error” on the trial; and (2) “the irrelevance of harmlessness.” United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140, 149 n. 4, 126 S.Ct. 2557, 2564 n. 4, 165 L.Ed.2d 4 05) (<HOLDING>). But the Minnesota Supreme Court has not yet Options: A. holding that under the sixth amendment right to trial by jury aggravating factors that operate as the functional equivalent of an element of a charged offense must be found by a jury B. holding omission in the jury instruction of element of offense requires a new trial C. holding that the trial court committed fundamental error in not instructing the jury on the knowledge element of the offense of resisting an officer without violence when that element was in dispute at trial D. holding that failure to submit an element of the offense to the jury is subject to harmless error analysis E. holding that a jury instruction directing the verdict on one element deprived defendant of the right to a jury determination on every element of the charged offense and thus constituted structural error

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a jury instruction directing the verdict on one element deprived defendant of the right to a jury determination on every element of the charged offense and thus constituted structural error
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise disclosed by those certain Phase I environmental reports (or Phase II environmental reports, if required) in respect of the Property (individually and/or collectively referred to below as the context may require as the “ Environmental Report ”), copies of which have been provided to, or received by, Indemnitee, (a) there are no Hazardous Substances (defined below) or underground storage tanks in, on, or under the Property, except those that are in compliance with all Environmental Laws (defined below) and with permits issued pursuant thereto (b) to Indemnitor’s knowledge, there are no past or present Releases (defined below) of Hazardous Substances in, on, under or from the Property which have not been remediated in accordance with Environmental Law; (c) Indemnitor does not know of, and has not received any written notice from any Person (including but not limited to a governmental entity) relating to the threat of any Release of Hazardous Substances migrating to the Property; (d) there is no past or present material non-compliance with Environmental Laws, or with permits issued pursuant thereto, in connection with the Property which has not been remediated or otherwise corrected in all material respects in accordance with Environmental Law; (e) Indemnitor does not know of, and has not received, any written notice from any Person (including but not limited to a governmental entity) relating to Hazardous Substances or Remediation (defined below) thereof, of possible liability of any Person pursuant to any Environmental Law, other environmental conditions in connection with the Property in violation of Environmental Law, or any actual or potential administrative or judicial proceedings in connection with any of the foregoing; (f) Indemnitor has provided to Indemnitee, in writing, any and all information relating to conditions in, on, under or from the Property that is known to Indemnitor and that is contained in files and records of Indemnitor or that has been provided to Indemnitor, including but not limited to any reports relating to Hazardous Substances in, on, under or from the Property and/or to any environmental condition of the Property; and (j) to Indemnitor’s knowledge, no Hazardous Substances have been handled, manufactured, generated, stored or processed on the Property.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: would lead a reasonable man of caution to believe that certain items may be contraband ony concerning facts which would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the gun was contraband. For example, there was no evidence that the officers knew appellant to be a convicted felon, that the shotgun was immediately recognizable as being illegal (i.e., sawed off shotgun), or that the shotgun was suspected of having been used in a crime which the officers were investigating. Furthermore, since appellant was arrested outside of the apartment and immediately handcuffed, and the officers entered the apartment only to check on the welfare of the small child, the safety of the officers was not a concern which would justify seizure of the gun. Compare Spinkellink v. State, 313 So.2d 666 (Fla.1975)(<HOLDING>); Braham v. State, 724 So.2d 592 (Fla. 2d DCA Options: A. holding that police seizure of weapon in plain view even though appellant was handcuffed and under the control of the officers was lawful because there were other occupants in the house who were not handcuffed and who would have had access to the weapon B. holding that police seizure of weapon in plain view was lawful search incident to arrest where appellant was handcuffed but sitting within a few feet from where the gun was located C. holding that a seizure was lawful under the plain view doctrine where there was probable cause to associate the property with criminal activity D. holding that a search incident to a lawful arrest does not violate the fourth amendment E. holding that an officer may search a suspects vehicle incident to a lawful arrest

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that police seizure of weapon in plain view was lawful search incident to arrest where appellant was handcuffed but sitting within a few feet from where the gun was located
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: 480). 8 . Scifres v. Kraft, Ky.App., 916 S.W.2d 779, 781 (1996). 9 . Ky., 457 S.W.2d 485, 488-90 (1970). 10 . Id. (quoting Wood v. Foster & Creighton Co., 191 Tenn. 478, 235 S.W.2d 1 (1950)). 11 . See also Combs v. Codell Construction Co., 244 Ky. 772, 773, 52 S.W.2d 719, 720 (1932)(stating that ‘‘[t]he defendant denied negligence and claimed immunity from liability because it was but executing its contract with the highway commission and building the roadway according to plans and specifications provided by it. The immunity does not absolve the contractor from negligence in performing his contract”). 12 . Ky., 288 S.W.2d 43, 46 (1956). 13 . Ky., 497 S.W.2d 218, 224 (1973)(quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 385 (1965)). 14 . See also Adams v. Combs, Ky., 465 S.W.2d 288, 290 Options: A. holding that a landowner owed no duty of care to a contractors employee in the situation posed by the parties B. holding that the basis of liability is negligence and not injury C. holding that the independent contractor exception in the ftca would not insulate the government from the contractors negligence if the duty was nondelegable under florida law D. holding that the citys acceptance or nonacceptance of the contractors work would have no bearing on the issue of the contractors liability since it was his primary and active negligence that created the dangerous situation and the citys negligence in failing to remedy the situation would be only secondaiy and passive E. holding that citys negligence in determining the legal status of plaintiffs property wasnt negligence in the operation of the storm drain that city installed on that property because citys negligence was unrelated to actual operation of storm drain

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the citys acceptance or nonacceptance of the contractors work would have no bearing on the issue of the contractors liability since it was his primary and active negligence that created the dangerous situation and the citys negligence in failing to remedy the situation would be only secondaiy and passive
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: statutes do not mandate the issuance of an injunction, and that plaintiffs must still show some tangible irreparable environmental injury. See Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456 U.S. 305, 102 S.Ct. 1798, 72 L.Ed.2d 91 (1982); Amoco Production Co. v. Gambell, 480 U.S. 531, 107 S.Ct. 1396, 94 L.Ed.2d 542 (1987); Town of Huntington v. Marsh, 884 F.2d 648 (2nd Cir.1989) (applying Weinberger and Amoco and concluding that they require a showing of irreparable injury apart from the violation of NEPA procedural requirements). Although NEPA violations may not create a presumption of irreparable injury, the Court believes that such violations do create a type of injury that courts must consider when deciding whether to grant injunctive relief. Sierra Club v. Marsh, 872 F.2d 497 (1st Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). More specifically, such violations by their Options: A. holding that the threat of irreparable harm must be immediate B. holding that the district court erred when it failed to consider the presumption of irreparable harm C. holding that nepa is designed to prevent harm to the environment through inadequately informed decision making and that courts should take account of this harm and its potentially irreparable nature D. holding that a party who can show a significant risk of irreparable harm has demonstrated that the harm is not speculative E. holding that likelihood of irreparable harm must be based on evidence in the record not unsupported and conclusory statements regarding harm the plaintiff might suffer

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that nepa is designed to prevent harm to the environment through inadequately informed decision making and that courts should take account of this harm and its potentially irreparable nature
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: Since May 10, 2016, the Company has timely filed all reports, schedules, forms, statements and other documents required to be filed by it with the Commission pursuant to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act (all of the foregoing including filings incorporated by reference therein being referred to herein as the “ SEC Documents ”). At the times of their respective filings, the SEC Documents complied in all material respects with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations of the Commission promulgated thereunder. The SEC Documents did not, and do 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, not misleading. As of their respective dates, the financial statements of the Company included in the SEC Documents complied as to form in all material respects with Regulation S-X and all other published rules and regulations of the Commission. Such financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“ GAAP ”) applied on a consistent basis during the periods involved (except (i) as may be otherwise indicated in such financial statements or the notes thereto or (ii) in the case of unaudited interim statements, to the extent they may not include footnotes or may be condensed or summary statements), and fairly present in all material respects the financial position of the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries as of the dates thereof and the results of operations and cash flows for the periods then ended (subject, in the case of unaudited statements, to normal year-end audit adjustments). The Company does not currently have any reason to believe that it will not timely file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2016.

assistant: Financial Statements
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 given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given (a) when delivered personally, (b) three business days after being mailed by first class certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, (c) one business day after being sent by a reputable overnight delivery service, postage or delivery charges prepaid, or (d) on the date on which a facsimile is transmitted to the parties at their respective addresses stated below. Any party may change its address for notice and the address to which copies must be sent by giving notice of the new addresses to the other party in accordance with this Section 14, except that any such change of address notice shall not be effective unless and until received.

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: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes all prior oral and written agreements between the Parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be changed, waived, discharged or terminated orally, except by a statement in writing signed by the party or Parties against whom enforcement or the change, waiver discharge or termination is sought.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the Small Estate Affidavit, which includes an estimate of the Property’s value. As evidence of Mrs. Brush's loan indebtedness, Wells Fargo relies on an affidavit attached as an exhibit to its summary judgment motion. This affidavit estimate falls outside the range of materials that a court may consider in a Rule 12(c) motion. Wells Fargo’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied as to its argument that the Brushes’ have failed to show damages for Wells Fargo’s breach of the loan modification contract. 6 . The Texas Supreme Court has yet to address whether foreclosure is “debt collection” under the TDCA. Other courts applying Texas law have permitted foreclosure-related claims under the TDCA. See, e.g., Watson v. Citimortgage, Inc., 814 F.Supp.2d 726, 734-35 (E.D.Tex.2011) (<HOLDING>); Akintunji v. Chase Home Fin., L.L.C., 2011 WL Options: A. holding that debtors allegation that mortgage holder failed to provide him with the statutorily required notice of foreclosure was sufficient to state a claim for wrongful foreclosure B. holding that a failure to comply with the foreclosure statutes invalidates a foreclosure sale C. holding that foreclosure is debt collection under the tdca and allowing the plaintiffs claim that the mortgagors representations surrounding the foreclosure were fraudulent deceptive or misleading D. holding that after a judgment entry grants a decree of foreclosure and order of sale the foreclosure action cannot be dismissed as the judgment is final E. holding that 24 foreclosure was substantial under the facts of that case

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that foreclosure is debt collection under the tdca and allowing the plaintiffs claim that the mortgagors representations surrounding the foreclosure were fraudulent deceptive or misleading
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: To Seller’s Knowledge, Seller has provided (or upon the execution hereof will provide) Buyer with, or has made available to Buyer, true, correct and complete copies of the items scheduled in Schedule 6(a)(3) attached hereto (all of the foregoing collectively the “ Property Information ” ). The Property Information consists of all documents relating to the Property in Seller’s possession or control.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: this did not create a legitimate business concern, or that attempts to counteract it were not, in the light of Bosch’s history, in the ordinary course of business. Many cases have found that recording or otherwise intercepting calls for reasons much less serious than concern for potential bomb threats is in the ordinary course of business. See Epps v. Saint Mary’s Hosp. of Athens, Inc., 802 F.2d 412 (11th Cir.1986) (finding that the monitoring of a call between employees during working hours that involved disparaging remarks regarding company management was within the exception, and stating that “[c]ertainly the potential contamination of a working environment is a matter in which the employer has a legal interest”); Briggs v. American Air Filter Co., 630 F.2d 414, 420 (5th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>); James v. Newspaper Agency Corp., 591 F.2d Options: A. holding that boat repair was done in the ordinary course of business of river transportation company B. holding outside context of recording of a minor childs phone conversations that a telephone extension used without authorization or consent to surreptitiously record a private telephone conversation is not used in the ordinary course of business C. holding that monitoring telephone calls is in the ordinary course of business where the employer has reason to suspect an employee of disclosing confidential information to business competitor D. holding that the debtors deposit of funds was not in the ordinary course of business and was for the purpose of creating a setoff right for the bank E. holding that 632 contains no exceptions applicable when a business monitors a telephone conversa tion even if the monitoring is for a legitimate business purpose

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that monitoring telephone calls is in the ordinary course of business where the employer has reason to suspect an employee of disclosing confidential information to business competitor
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: II claims based on accessibility to public education. In Association for Disabled Americans, Inc. v. Florida International University, 405 F.3d 954 (11th Cir.2005), the Eleventh Circuit expanded the holding of Lane to find that Title II of the ADA is valid legislation enacted pursuant to § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment as applied to public higher education, and that the Eleventh Amendment does not pose a bar to claims against the states under Title II of the ADA for such claims. Id. at 959. Association for Disabled Americans is not controlling in this case, however, as it did not address employment discrimination claims under Title II. 11 . Predictably, courts outside this circuit have split on this issue as well. Compare Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle, 184 F.3d 999, 1010 (8th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>) with Coolbaugh v. Louisiana, 136 F.3d 430 (5th Options: A. holding that title ii does not apply to the states B. holding that title ii of the ada is not applicable to the federal government C. recognizing that most other courts apply title vii principles to title ix cases but refusing to apply title viis knew or should have known standard to a title ix claim D. holding that title ii of the ada was a valid use of congress power under section 5 of the fourteenth amendment E. holding that prudential limitations on standing do not apply to title ii ada claims

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that title ii does not apply to the states
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 be executed in two or more identical counterparts (including by facsimile or electronic transmission), each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument, and, subject to Section 6.01, shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by each of the parties hereto and delivered (by facsimile, electronic transmission or otherwise) to the other party.

assistant: Counterparts