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: Plan Administrator’s interpretation renders any language in the Plan meaningl explanation for its decision, supported by substantial evidence, it should not be disturbed.” Parkman v. Prudential Insurance Co., 439 F.3d 767, 772 (8th Cir.2006)(citing Fletcher-Merrit v. NorAm Energy Corp., 250 F.3d 1174, 1180-81 (8th Cir.2001)); McGee, 360 F.3d at 924 (8th Cir.2004). Therefore, as the administrative record demonstrates that the Plan Administrator’s decision was reasonable, was supported by substantial evidence on the record, and was not an abuse of discretion, defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 63) is GRANTED and plaintiffs motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 56) is DENIED. Because the Court finds that the Plan Administrator’s decision to deny coverage 655 (8th Cir.2006)(<HOLDING>) and Davolt, 206 F.3d at 809 (holding same). Options: A. holding that plan administrator that was also insurer operated under conflict of interest B. holding that when the insurer is also the plan administrator we have recognized something akin to a rebuttable presumption of a palpable conflict of interest C. holding that it is wrong to assume a financial conflict of interest from the fact that the plan administrator is also the insurer D. holding that a structural conflict of interest exists when an insurer acts as both the plan administrator and the funding source E. holding the district court erred by finding an automatic conflict of interest merely because insurer and administrator were the same

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it is wrong to assume a financial conflict of interest from the fact that the plan administrator is also the insurer
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, including the Schedules and Exhibits hereto, and together with the Other Agreements, contains the entire agreement and understanding among the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, arrangements and understandings, and shall not be modified or affected by any offer, proposal, statement or representation, oral or written, made by or for any party in connection with the negotiation of the terms hereof. All references herein to this Agreement shall specifically include, incorporate and refer to the Schedules and Exhibits attached hereto which are hereby made a part hereof. There are no representations, promises, warranties, covenants, undertakings or assurances (express or implied) other than those expressly set forth or provided for herein and in the other documents referred to herein. This Agreement may not be modified or amended orally, but only by a writing signed by all the parties hereto.

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: Use the proceeds of all Loans in connection with the Transactions. No part of the proceeds of any Loan will be used, whether directly or indirectly, for any purpose that would violate any rule or regulation of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, including Regulations T, U or X.

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: in who was child’s natural father. Id. at 20-34. ¶ 6 Mother’s father, appellant Jackie Wyland, also testified on his own behalf. Wyland testified that following the birth of child, as a consequence of appellee’s late-night phone calls and threats of kidnapping, he did order appellee to not come onto his property. Id. at 44-45. Wyland also testified that while he did order appel-lee not call their residence, he never told Claar she was not allowed to see child. Id at 46-47. Wyland acknowledged appel-lee’s presence at the hospital when child was born but stated mother never told him appellee was the birth father. ¶ 7 The trial judge heard this testimony and apparently found appellee credible. We will not disturb this finding. See Luminella v. Marcocci, 814 A.2d 711 (Pa.Super.2002) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 8 “The doctrine of estoppel in paternity Options: A. holding that the postconviction court is the sole judge of the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses B. holding trial court is sole and exclusive judge of witnesses credibility C. holding that because the trial court sitting as the trier of fact conducts an evidencebalancing test from the vantage point of being best able to judge credibility of witnesses and the weight to be assigned thereto we will defer to its opinion D. holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony E. recognizing trial courts superior vantage point in assessing credibility of witnesses

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because the trial court sitting as the trier of fact conducts an evidencebalancing test from the vantage point of being best able to judge credibility of witnesses and the weight to be assigned thereto we will defer to its opinion
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: There is no action, suit, proceeding or claim (any of the foregoing, an “ Action ”) affecting Seller or the Property or any portion thereof (including, without limitation, any plan or effort by any governmental authority or agency which in any way affects or would affect the present use or zoning of the Subject Premises), including, without limitation, any Action affecting Seller and relating to the ownership, construction, operation, use or occupancy of the Property for its intended purpose, which is pending or being prosecuted in any court or by or before any federal, state, county or municipal department, commission, board, bureau or agency or other governmental entity, or to the knowledge of Seller, has any such Action been threatened or asserted, other than claims (1) for personal injury, property damage or worker’s compensation, for which the insurance carrier has not disclaimed liability and in which the amounts claimed do not exceed the applicable insurance policy limits, or (2) in respect of landlord-tenant proceedings, for non-payment of rent.

assistant: Litigations
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 shall (a) by 9:15 a.m. (New York City time) on the date hereof, issue a press release disclosing the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereby, and (b) within the time required by Commission rules, file a Current Report on Form 8-K with the Commission, including the Transaction Documents as exhibits thereto. From and after the issuance of such press release, the Company represents to the Purchasers that it shall have publicly disclosed all material, non-public information delivered to any of the Purchasers by the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, or any of their respective officers, directors, employees or agents in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. In addition, effective upon the issuance of such press release, the Company acknowledges and agrees that any and all confidentiality or similar obligations under any agreement, whether written or oral, between the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any of their respective officers, directors, agents, employees or Affiliates on the one hand, and any of the Purchasers or any of their Affiliates on the other hand, shall terminate. The Company and each Purchaser shall consult with each other in issuing any other press releases with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby, and neither the Company nor any Purchaser shall issue any such press release nor otherwise make any such public statement without the prior consent of the Company, with respect to any press release of any Purchaser, or without the prior consent of each Purchaser, with respect to any press release of the Company, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed, except if such disclosure is required by law, in which case the disclosing party shall promptly provide the other party with prior notice of such public statement or communication. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company shall not publicly disclose the name of any Purchaser, or include the name of any Purchaser in any filing with the Commission or any regulatory agency or Trading Market, without the prior written consent of such Purchaser, except (a) as required by federal securities law in connection with the filing of final Transaction Documents with the Commission and (b) to the extent such disclosure is required by law or Trading Market regulations, in which case the Company shall provide the Purchasers with prior notice of such disclosure permitted under this clause (b).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: BORROWER AGREES TO DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS LENDER AND ITS AFFILIATES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, ATTORNEYS AND ADVISORS (EACH, AN “ INDEMNIFIED PARTY ”) FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, DAMAGES, LOSSES, LIABILITIES, COSTS AND EXPENSES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES) THAT MAY BE INCURRED BY OR ASSERTED OR AWARDED AGAINST ANY INDEMNIFIED PARTY, IN EACH CASE ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH OR BY REASON OF (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, IN CONNECTION WITH ANY INVESTIGATION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING OR PREPARATION OF DEFENSE IN CONNECTION THEREWITH) THIS AGREEMENT, THE NOTES, THE SECURITY INSTRUMENTS OR ANY OTHER INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT EXECUTED IN CONNECTION THEREWITH OR HEREWITH, ANY OF THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED THEREIN OR HEREIN OR THE ACTUAL OR PROPOSED USE OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE LOANS MADE PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT (INCLUDING ANY OF THE FOREGOING ARISING FROM THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE INDEMNIFIED PARTY), EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT SUCH CLAIM, DAMAGE, LOSS, LIABILITY, COST OR EXPENSES IS FOUND IN A FINAL, NON-APPEALABLE JUDGMENT BY A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION TO HAVE RESULTED FROM SUCH INDEMNIFIED PARTY’S GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT. IN THE CASE OF AN INVESTIGATION, LITIGATION OR OTHER PROCEEDING TO WHICH THE INDEMNITY IN THIS SECTION APPLIES, SUCH INDEMNITY SHALL BE EFFECTIVE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH INVESTIGATION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING IS BROUGHT BY BORROWER OR ITS RESPECTIVE DIRECTORS, SHAREHOLDERS OR CREDITORS OR AN INDEMNIFIED PARTY IS OTHERWISE A PARTY THERETO AND WHETHER THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY ARE CONSUMMATED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE SURVIVAL OF ANY OTHER AGREEMENT OF BORROWER HEREUNDER, THE AGREEMENTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF BORROWER CONTAINED IN THIS SECTION SHALL SURVIVE THE PAYMENT IN FULL OF THE INDEBTEDNESS AND ALL OTHER AMOUNTS PAYABLE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT.

assistant: Indemnifications
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: where the reviewing court held that the evidence “wholly failed to prove the felonious conduct proscribed by the statute.” Id. at 231. Similarly, in this ease, we hold that there simply was no evidence to support the state’s case, and the trial court should have granted appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal. By this holding, we are not suggesting that a glass or plastic bottle filled with liquid could not be the type of missile contemplated by the statute. Rather, we are merely concluding that under these circumstances, where the object did not come close to hitting the officer on his motorcycle and there was no other evidence that appellant intended it to do so, the state has failed to present a prima facie case. See, e.g., J.W.B. v. State, 419 So.2d 407 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)(<HOLDING>); compare Wilton v. State, 455 So.2d 1142 (Fla. Options: A. holding that it was error for the trial judge to find that the throwing of an orange at a school bus without proof of either striking the bus or any person was a crime under section 79019 B. holding that it was error for the trial judge to answer a jurys question without giving defendants counsel an opportunity to be heard before the trial judge responded C. holding that it was appropriate for the trial court to find that lack of a prior criminal record was not a mitigating factor in light of the violent nature of the crime committed D. holding that while it was error for the regular judge to disqualify himself for only the habitual phase of the trial the error was harmless E. holding that a defendant was not entitled to a relief under section 2255 when he asserted that the sentencing judge who was not the trial judge was influenced by the sentence imposed by the trial judge on a codefendant

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it was error for the trial judge to find that the throwing of an orange at a school bus without proof of either striking the bus or any person was a crime under section 79019
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 movement; their initial contact was not a stop. Nor was Officer Robinson’s observation of the inside of defendant’s pickup a search for constitutional purposes. In State v. Orlovski, 146 Or App 632, 933 P2d 976 (1997), we explained, “It is well settled that a police officer’s unaided observation, purposive or not, from a lawful vantage point is not a search under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. Moreover, the Supreme Court has held that “ ‘[a]n officer who has lawfully stopped a vehicle does not violate any occupant’s rights in walking around the vehicle and looking through the windows of the vehicle to observe that which can be plainly seen.’ State v. Jackson, 296 Or 430, 438, 677 P2d 21 (1984); see also State v. Wacker, 317 Or 419, 426-27, 856 P2d 1029 (1993) (<HOLDING>).” Id. at 636-37 (internal quotation marks and Options: A. holding that no privacy interest was invaded when the officers saw the defendants activities while he was parked in a tavern parking lot and seated in a vehicle with the console light on B. holding automobile exeeption did not apply to warrantless search of vehicle where vehicle was not readily mobile because the vehicle was legally parked in parking lot occupants of vehicle were seated on a bench in the playground near the parking lot police officers surrounded the vehicle and the driver of the vehicle was handcuffed for safety purposes C. holding that the prisoner should have been allowed to choose whether to leave his car parked in a public parking lot D. holding that the presence requirement of the carjacking statute was satisfied when keys were taken from a bank employee whose car was parked in a parking lot outside the bank E. holding that the police officer had reasonable suspicion when he saw a vehicle moving with its lights off in the parking lot of a closed business in a rural area at 300 am

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that no privacy interest was invaded when the officers saw the defendants activities while he was parked in a tavern parking lot and seated in a vehicle with the console light on
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party’s obligations under Sections 5.9 and 5.10 shall survive the resignation or replacement of the Administrative Agent or any assignment of rights by or replacement of a Lender, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction, discharge or Full Payment of any Obligations.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice, demand or other communication which may or is required to be given under this Agreement must be in writing and must be: (a) personally delivered; (b) transmitted by United States postage prepaid mail, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested; (c) transmitted by reputable overnight courier service, such as Federal Express; or (d) transmitted by electronic mail to Purchaser and Seller as listed below. Notice to one Purchaser shall constitute notice to all Purchaser and notice to one Seller shall constitute notice to all Seller.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: this record. See Ex parte Moussazadeh, 64 S.W.3d 404, 412 (Tex.Crim.App.2001) (“We hold that any finding that parole eligibility formed an essential part of a plea agreement must be founded upon the express terms of the written plea agreement itself, the formal record at the plea hearing, or the written or testimonial evidence submitted by both the prosecution and applicant in a habeas proceeding.”). We cannot conclude on this record that appellant’s plea was the result of an agreed punishment recommendation by the State as contemplated by rule 25.2(b)(3). Thus, we hold that rule 25.2(b)(3) does not apply to appellant’s appeal, and his general notice of appeal is sufficient to invoke our jurisdiction. See Guerrero v. State, 64 S.W.3d 436,440 (Tex. App.-Waco 2001, no pet.) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). RELEVANT FACTS Appellant’s complaints center Options: A. recognizing that a voluntary and understanding guilty plea entered without the benefit of a plea bargain waives all nonjurisdictional defects that occurred before the entry of the plea B. holding that guilty plea is voluntary and knowing only if defendant understands the range of allowable punishment that will result from his plea C. holding that the defendants guilty plea was entered into knowingly voluntarily and intelligently D. holding that a defendants guilty plea was unconditional where the guilty plea was not in writing and the government did not consent to it being conditional E. holding that rule 252b3 did not apply to an appeal from a guilty plea entered without the benefit of an agreed punishment recommendation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that rule 252b3 did not apply to an appeal from a guilty plea entered without the benefit of an agreed punishment recommendation
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 Plaintiffs interests in the speech outweigh the employers interests in workplace efficiency because the speech concerned public officials in the performance of their official duties. As such, Plaintiff has satisfied the first element of a prima facie retaliation claim. The second element of a retaliation claim requires Plaintiff to demonstrate that each defendant took adverse action against him. Here, while Plaintiff has borne this burden with respect to Morawski and the BPW he has failed to make the necessary showing as to Esparaza. Plaintiff alleges that a variety of actions were adverse. The Court need not address each of these assertions since it is convinced that the March 15, 1996 termination was serious enough to qualify as an adverse action. See Thaddeus-X, 175 F.3d at 394 (<HOLDING>); Mattox v. City of Forest Park, 183 F.3d 515, Options: A. holding that an action is considered adverse if it is capable of deterring a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that conduct B. holding that termination is an adverse employment action C. holding that an unrealized risk of future adverse action even if formalized is too ephemeral to constitute an adverse employment action D. holding that if status is not a fundamental right and that 1915g is rationally related to the legitimate end of deterring frivolous lawsuits E. holding that it is not

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an action is considered adverse if it is capable of deterring a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that conduct
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 and other communications given or made pursuant hereto shall be in writing, in English and shall be deemed effectively given: (i) upon delivery to the party if delivered personally or via courier; (ii) when sent by confirmed electronic mail or facsimile if sent during normal business hours of the recipient; if not, then on the next business day; or (iii) on the date set forth on the return receipt, if sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid. All notices and communications shall be sent to the parties at the addresses set forth on the signature page below (or at such other addresses as shall be specified by notice given in accordance with this Section 8.2 ).

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 471 U.S. 153 105 S.Ct. 2011 85 L.Ed.2d 119 State of OHIOv.Commonwealth of KENTUCKY No. 27 Supreme Court of the United States April 15, 1985 1 On bill of complaint. 2 The Report of the Special Master is received and ordered filed. The Report is adopted. DECREE It is ordered, adjudged and decreed that: 3 1. The boundary line between the State of Ohio and the Commonwealth of Kentucky is fixed as geodetically described in Joint Exhibit 30 to the Special Master's Report filed with this Court on April 15, 1985. Joint Exhibit 30 is incorporated by reference herein. 4 2. Copies of this Decree, and the Special Master's Report (including Joint Exhibits 1-31 and 35) shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court, the Auditor of the State of Ohio, and the Secretary of State of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. 5 3. Copies of this Decree, and the Special Master's Report (including Joint Exhibits 30 and 35, and paper prints of Joint Exhibits 1-29, once they become available) shall be filed with the County Recorder's Office in Ohio and with the County Clerk's Office in the Commonwealth of Kentucky in each of the following counties: in Ohio, the Counties of Lawrence, Scioto, Adams, Brown, Clermont, and Hamilton; and in Kentucky, the Counties of Boyd, Greenup, Lewis, Mason, Bracken, Pendleton, Campbell, Kenton, and Boone. 6 4. The State of Ohio and the Commonwealth of Kentucky each have concurrent jurisdiction over the Ohio River. 7 5. The costs of this proceeding shall be divided between the parties as recommended by the Special Master.

assistant: 11
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower agrees to pay interest on the outstanding principal amount of the Revolving Credit Loan at the rate and at the time specified in the Revolving Credit Note. Each change in the interest rates due to a change in the Prime Rate shall take effect simultaneously with the corresponding change in the Prime Rate. Interest may be charged to Borrower’s loan account as an Advance at Lender’s option, whether or not Borrower then has a right to obtain an Advance pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

assistant: Interests
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 Kendall’s Wi-shon’s life.” ■ • As a factual matter, although Clark never articulated for the jury a coherent basis for a lesser verdict, he did not concede that Gallegos was guilty of first-degree murder. Rather, in his opening statement he reminded the jury of the State!s burden, ‘arguing that Gallegos “is presumed to be innocent. He is innocent.” In his closing argument, Clark “submitted] to [the jury] that all of the facts- that [they had] heard certainly show that” Gallegos was guilty of “reckless manslaughter.” His admission, therefore, was only that Gallegos was guilty of some offense involving Kendall’s death; it was not a cqncession of a lack of reasonable doubt on all factual issues or of guilt of a.capital offense. See Hovey v. Ayers, 458 F.3d 892, 906 (9th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). As a strategic matter, disputing Gallegos’s Options: A. holding that even though defendant stated he did not read and discuss psr with his counsel he could not show any error that affected his substantial rights B. holding counsel did not concede preineditation when he stated that there could be findings of willful deliberate and premeditated because he made this point in the context of weighing the jurys options C. holding that the district court did not err in continuing the trial without defendant when the trial had commenced in defendants presence he vigorously expressed his desire to be absent he was given ample opportunity to change his mind despite the disturbance he had created he had competent counsel and he knew of his right to be present D. holding that the petitioner in that case could not invoke the protections provided by miranda including the right to counsel because he was not in custody at the time he stated t think i need a lawyer E. holding that admission of oral statements voluntarily made by accused after he had stated that he would not make a written statement without advice of counsel did not violate edwards

assistant: The best answer is B. holding counsel did not concede preineditation when he stated that there could be findings of willful deliberate and premeditated because he made this point in the context of weighing the jurys options
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in the public domain during the pendency of the case by virtue of a civil lawsuit filed by the executor of the victim’s estate. Heemstra, 721 N.W.2d at 563. This factor tended to diminish the need to protect the confidential interests of the particular patient. Finally, the nature of the confidential information was such that it could reasonably be viewed as an aid to the defendant in his self-defense claim. Id. This factor was considered to be the most important criteria in the ease because it not only placed the constitutional right to a fair trial into play, but it identified the specific need for the information and the particular prejudice that would be suffered by the accused without the information. See United States v. Alperin, 128 F.Supp.2d 1251, 1255 (N.D.Cal.2001) (<HOLDING>). The factors we identified in Heemstra were Options: A. recognizing a broader ethical duty of confidentiality B. recognizing strong public interest in maintaining confidentiality of official records concerning child abuse C. recognizing records material to selfdefense claim outweigh victims interest in confidentiality D. recognizing a corporations legal rights to confidentiality and privilege E. recognizing employers interest in protecting confidentiality of data bearing on employees basic competence

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing records material to selfdefense claim outweigh victims interest in confidentiality
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: gun used during the carjacking. Without confirmation that the gun is the same, the car theft is neither a prelude to the charged offense, nor probative of it. It does not arise from the same events as the carjacking; in fact, it is a completely separate and distinct offense that is not essential for providing a “coherent and intelligible description of the charged offense.” McCormick on Evidence § 190 (6th ed.2006). The government relies on two cases in which evidence of prior acts involving a gun were admitted pursuant to the res gestae exception to show that the defendant had access to a gun in the charged offense. In both of these cases, there was no dispute that the defendant or the weapon were the same. See United States v. Brown, 22 Fed.Appx. 102, 103 (4th Cir. 2001) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Mitchell, 613 F.2d 779, 782 Options: A. holding that in a prosecution for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon defendants assault with the firearm the evening before the charged offense was necessary to complete the story and prove that brown possessed the gun B. holding alford plea admissible in prosecution for felon in possession of firearm C. holding that dual convictions of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of ammunition by a convicted felon violated double jeopardy D. holding that to apply the firearm enhancement the firearm need only reflect the context of the defendants possession and the defendants ability to use the firearm to promote the controlled substance offense E. holding that the government was required to prove that the defendant lacked a license to possess a firearm but not that the defendant possessed the firearm for any duration of time

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that in a prosecution for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon defendants assault with the firearm the evening before the charged offense was necessary to complete the story and prove that brown possessed the gun
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: Other Arguments Fail. Given this conclusion, I would reach the Jerrels’ Open Meetings Act and due process argu 6 . See Op. at 143-144. 17 . Op. at 139. 18 . See Kodiak Seafood Processors, 900 P.2d at 1197 (agency action was not regulation when it affected only one individual). 19 . AS 03.40.020; see 11 AAC 60.070. 20 . 11 AAC 60.070. 21 . Op. at 144. 22 . See 11 AAC 60.070. 23 . See AS 38.05.035. 24 . See AS 38.05.005 (establishing Division of Lands); AS 38.05.020(b)(1) (stating that DNR Commissioner may adopt reasonable regulations); AS 38.05.035 (showing that Division of Lands director has not been delegated regulatory authority). 25 . See Kachemak Bay Watch, 935 P.2d at 825; Kodiak Seafood Processors, 900 P.2d at 1197. 26 . Kachemak Bay Watch, 935 P.2d at 825-26. 27 . See id. (<HOLDING>); Kodiak Seafood Processors, 900 P.2d at Options: A. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion B. holding that if the legislature has granted the agency discretion over a particular matter then we review the agencys action pursuant to the deferential abuse of discretion standard bearing in mind that the legislature determines the boundaries of that discretion C. holding that under mayfield the exercise of discretion based on a mistaken premise of law can be a failure to properly exercise discretion D. holding that the faas action in this case was analogous to an exercise of prosecutorial discretion and noting that when prosecutorial discretion is at issue the matter is presumptively committed to agency discretion by law E. holding that dnrs exercise of task assigned to it by legislature invariably involved exercise of agency discretion and did not constitute regulation under apa nor abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that dnrs exercise of task assigned to it by legislature invariably involved exercise of agency discretion and did not constitute regulation under apa nor abuse of discretion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Employee is engaged and shall serve as the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Employer and, as may be requested by Employer from time to time, any other direct or indirect subsidiaries of Employer that may be formed or acquired. In addition, Employee shall have such other duties and hold such other offices as may from time to time be reasonably assigned to him by Employer’s Chief Executive Officer and consistent with the office of Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. These services shall be provided from offices located in Oak Brook, Illinois, or such other location as may be mutually agreed.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement (together with any Other Arrangements) sets forth the entire understanding between Executive and Olin with respect to the subject matter hereof and thereof. All oral or written agreements or representations, express or implied, with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement are set forth in this Agreement and any Other Arrangements. All prior agreements, understandings and obligations (whether written, oral, express or implied) between Executive and Olin with respect to the subject matter hereof are terminated as of the date hereof and are superseded by this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of Section 8 of this Agreement shall not supersede any other agreements, understandings or obligations between Executive and Olin with respect to the subject matter thereof, which shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with their terms and, for the avoidance of doubt, Executive hereby acknowledges and agrees that the restrictive covenants under Section 8 of this Agreement shall operate independently of, and shall be in addition to, any similar restrictive covenants to which Executive may be subject pursuant to any other agreement or understanding between Olin and Executive.

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: The Parent and the Borrower will, at their expense, and will cause each Subsidiary to, promptly execute and deliver to the DIP Agent all such other documents, agreements and instruments reasonably requested by the DIP Agent to comply with, cure any defects or accomplish the covenants and agreements of the Parent, the Borrower or any Subsidiary, as the case may be, in this Agreement or any other Loan Document, or to further evidence and more fully describe the Collateral, or to correct any omissions in this Agreement or any other Loan Document, or to state more fully the security obligations set out herein or in any of the Collateral Documents, or to perfect, protect or preserve any Liens created pursuant to any of the Collateral Documents or the priority thereof, or to make any recordings, file any notices or obtain any consents, all as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate in connection therewith.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: ink addressing each other’s contentions, but the dispute about the supplemental affidavit is immaterial to the resolution of this appeal. Even if the second affidavit was legally defective (because it was unsworn and uncertified), the return of service and original affidavit Relational offered were sufficient to discharge its prima facie burden. To make a prima facie showing, the movant must simply produce a return of service identifying the recipient and noting when and where service occurred, thereby providing enough detail so the opposing party knows what evidence he must rebut. See Homer, 415 F.3d at 754 (suggesting a bare-bones return of service lacking an address or a receiving individual might be insufficient to discharge the prima facie burden); cf. Robinson, 223 F.3d at 451-53 (<HOLDING>). Relational’s original return of service and Options: A. holding that an affidavit did not provide probable cause sufficient to validate a warrant where the affidavit stated an incorrect date uncontradicted by any other specific fact in the affidavit B. recognizing that a default judgment based on improper service is void C. holding that it was improper for the court to grant a default judgment where the process server stated in his affidavit that he served an unidentified individual D. holding that an affidavit in opposition to a motion for summary judgment that is not served at least one day before the hearing is barred by the civil practice act from consideration as evidence unless the record discloses the trial court in the exercise of its discretion has allowed the affidavit to be served and considered E. holding that an individual who is not served cannot be at fault or negligent in allowing a default judgment to be rendered

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it was improper for the court to grant a default judgment where the process server stated in his affidavit that he served an unidentified individual
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 the parties are unable to resolve any dispute hereunder in accordance with the non-binding mediation terms of Section 12, each party agrees to submit itself to binding statutory arbitration. Such dispute shall be submitted to arbitration in the city of Houston, County of Harris, State of Texas, before a panel of three neutral arbitrators in accordance with the Commercial Rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect, and the arbitration determination resulting from any such submission shall be final and binding upon the parties hereto. Judgment upon any arbitration award may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction.

assistant: Arbitration
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: LICENSOR represents and warrants to LICENSEE as follows: (i) LICENSOR is a corporation duly organized and in good standing under the laws of the State of Nevada; (ii) the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by LICENSOR has been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of LICENSOR’s directors and officers and does not violate, conflict with, or require the consent or approval of any third party pursuant to, any state or local law or regulation applicable to LICENSOR or any contract or legally binding obligation to which LICENSOR is subject; (iii) this Agreement constitutes the valid and binding obligation of LICENSOR enforceable against LICENSOR in accordance with its terms; and (iv) the Technology and Licensed Patents do not infringe any third-party rights.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: claim without merit, but any error would be harmless because the mandatory life sentence is triggered by two or more felony drug convictions. This court has adopted a “separate criminal episodes” test for determining whether prior felony drug convictions are separate predicate convictions for purposes of enhancement under § 841(b)(1)(A). This test asks whether the convictions arise from “separate criminal episodes” that are “distinct in time.” “An episode is an incident that is part of a series, but forms a separate unit within the whole. Although related to the entire course of events, an episode is a punctuated occurrence with a limited duration.” United States v. Hughes, 924 F.2d 1354, 1361 (6th Cir.1991). Although the records indicate that the sen 36 (6th Cir.2006) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). C. Constitutionality of Life Sentence Options: A. holding a sentence enhancement for two prior convictions must be based on separate criminal episodes B. holding that although sentencing for separate convictions arising from unrelated crimes can take place on same day sentences cannot be part of same sentencing proceeding those separate convictions in same proceeding cannot be considered sequential for purposes of habitualization C. holding that prior drug convictions that were four ten and eleven years old were not so remote from the charged drug offenses as to render them inadmissible D. holding separate convictions for drug transactions occurring four or five days apart were properly counted as separate convictions E. holding that only one offense should have been charged when four separate packages of the same drug were found

assistant: The best answer is D. holding separate convictions for drug transactions occurring four or five days apart were properly counted as separate convictions
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: informant. Rather, the Investigating Officers themselves observed the drug sales described in the affidavit and relayed the facts to Officer Gram-lich. Consequently, the Court will consider the observation of all of the Investigating Officers in its analysis. 3 . During the Hearing on this Motion, Defendant's counsel also argued that these omissions are in fact circumstantial evidence that the Arresting Officers did field test the bag found on the counter, discovered that the bag did not contain drugs, and intentionally left this information out of the Search Warrant Affidavit. (09/06/05 Tr. at 16-21.) Defendant’s argument is not based on evidence sufficient to support an inference of intentional or reckless falsity. See United States v. Castillo, 287 F.3d 21, 25-26 (1st Cir.2002) Options: A. holding a defendant is not entitled to a franks hearing without making a substantial preliminary showing that defect in the affidavit is material B. holding trial courts finding omission of information was not intentional or with reckless disregard for truth was not clearly erroneous C. holding that speculation as to whether and when the police had actually field tested a bag reported to contain heroin falls far short of the substantial preliminary showing of intentional or reckless omission required by the franks test D. holding that no intentional police misrepresentation occurred E. holding that when the petitioner establishes that the trial court failed to inform him of his constitutional rights and that he would not have pleaded guilty absent the omission then the burden shifts to the state to justify the error by establishing through extrinsic evidence the defendants knowing and voluntary relinquishment of the involved constitutional protections despite the erroneous omission

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that speculation as to whether and when the police had actually field tested a bag reported to contain heroin falls far short of the substantial preliminary showing of intentional or reckless omission required by the franks test
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 failure of the Company or any Participant to insist upon strict adherence to any term of this Plan on any occasion shall not be considered a waiver of such party’s rights or deprive such party of the right thereafter to insist upon strict adherence to that term or any other term of this Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, except that that the Borrower may not assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender, and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an assignee in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (b) of this Section, (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of Section 13.1, or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest, including any pledge or assignment to secure obligations to a Federal Reserve Bank or its foreign equivalent; provided that no such pledge or assignment under this clause (iii) shall release such Lender from any of its obligations hereunder or substitute any such pledgee or assignee for such Lender as a party hereto (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in Section 13.1 and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

assistant: Successors