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: Harline claims defendants failed to amend his schedules such that his profit-sharing plan could be considered and found exempt. This claim has no merit. The bankruptcy court subsequently allowed the schedules to be amended and the profit-sharing issue was considered on the merits. 2 . Defendants for the first time on appeal claim summary judgment was appropriate because Harline failed to produce expert testimony that defendants had breached their standard of care. Wycalis v. Guardian Title, 780 P.2d 821, 826 n. 8 (Utah App.1989), cert, denied, 789 P.2d 33 (1990) (acknowledging expert testimony must ordinarily be presented to establish standard of care in cases dealing with duties owed by a particular profession); see also Brown v. Small, 251 Mont. 414, 825 P.2d 1209, 1212 (1992) (<HOLDING>). We refuse to consider this issue for the Options: A. holding that allowing the statute of limitations to run on the clients claim is an example of obvious malpractice that does not require expert testimony to establish a standard of care B. holding expert testimony not required to defeat summary judgment in medical malpractice suit because defendant doctors admissions were sufficient to establish the standard of care C. holding expert testimony is generally required to establish proximate cause in medical malpractice cases D. holding expert testimony is ordinarily required in legal malpractice cases to establish the standard of care E. holding that a manufacturers insert in and of itself may not establish the relevant standard of care in a medical negligence action but may be considered by the fact finder along with expert testimony to define the standard of care

assistant: The best answer is D. holding expert testimony is ordinarily required in legal malpractice cases to establish the standard of care
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 provided in Section 8, all issues and questions concerning the construction, validity, enforcement and interpretation of this Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Texas, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law rules or provisions (whether of the State of Texas or any other jurisdiction) that would cause the application of the laws of any jurisdiction other than the State of Texas. In furtherance of the foregoing and except as provided in Section 8, the internal law of the State of Texas shall control the interpretation and construction of this Agreement, even though under the jurisdiction’s choice of law or conflict of law analysis, the substantive law of some other jurisdiction would ordinarily apply.

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: In addition to their other obligations under this Agreement, the Borrowers hereby agree to protect, indemnify, pay and hold the LC Issuer harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, damages, losses, costs, charges and expenses (including reasonable counsel fees and disbursements) that the LC Issuer may incur or be subject to as a consequence, direct or indirect, of (A) the issuance of any Letter of Credit or (B) the failure of the LC Issuer to honor a drawing under a Letter of Credit as a result of any act or omission, whether rightful or wrongful, of any present or future de jure or de facto government or Governmental Authority (all such acts or omissions, herein called “ Government Acts ”). As between the Borrowers and the LC Issuer, the Borrowers shall assume all risks of the acts, omissions or misuse of any Letter of Credit by the beneficiary thereof. In the absence of gross negligence or willful misconduct, the LC Issuer shall not be responsible for: (A) the form, validity, sufficiency, accuracy, genuineness or legal effect of any document submitted by any party in connection with the application for and issuance of any Letter of Credit, even if it should in fact prove to be in any or all respects invalid, insufficient, inaccurate, fraudulent or forged; (B) the validity or sufficiency of any instrument transferring or assigning or purporting to transfer or assign any Letter of Credit or the rights or benefits thereunder or proceeds thereof, in whole or in part, that may prove to be invalid or ineffective for any reason; (C) failure of the beneficiary of a Letter of Credit to comply fully with conditions required in order to draw upon a Letter of Credit; (D) errors, omissions, interruptions or delays in transmission or delivery of any messages, by mail, cable, telegraph, telex or otherwise, whether or not they be in cipher; (E) errors in interpretation of technical terms; (F) any loss or delay in the transmission or otherwise of any document required in order to make a drawing under a Letter of Credit or of the proceeds thereof; and (G) any consequences arising from causes beyond the control of the LC Issuer, including, without limitation, any Government Acts. None of the above shall affect, impair, or prevent the vesting of the LC Issuer’s rights or powers hereunder.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 378 U.S. 584 84 S.Ct. 1929 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 Sidney SMITHv.Sherman H. CROUSE, Warden. No. 915, Misc. Supreme Court of the United States June 22, 1964 Sidney Smith, pro se. William M. Ferguson, Atty. Gen. of Kansas, and J. richard Foth, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Kansas. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811. 2 Mr. Justice HARLAN, dissenting. 3 In my opinion the question whether Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811, should be given retroactive application is deserving of plenary consideration. Cf. my dissenting opinion, LaVallee v. Durocher, 84 S.Ct. 1921.

assistant: 2
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Comply, and cause each of its Subsidiaries to comply, in all material respects, with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and orders, such compliance to include, without limitation, compliance with applicable tax laws, ERISA and environmental laws.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Lenders, the Administrative Agent, the arrangers and counsel to the Administrative Agent and the arrangers shall have received all fees required to be paid, and all expenses for which invoices have been presented at least three Business Days prior to the Initial Closing Date or such later time as may be reasonable under the circumstances, but at least one Business Day prior to the Initial Closing Date (including the reasonable fees and expenses of legal counsel), on or before the Initial Closing Date. All such amounts will be paid with proceeds of Loans made on the Initial Closing Date and will be reflected in the funding instructions given by the Borrower to the Administrative Agent on or before the Initial Closing Date.

assistant: Fees
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 also represent and warrant that neither your user content , nor your use and provision of your user content to be made available through the services , nor any use of your user content by niantic on or through the services will infringe , misappropriate , or violate a third party 's intellectual property rights , or rights of publicity or privacy , or result in the violation of any applicable law or regulation .

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: abstraction, therefore, never produces reversible error in the court’s charge because it has no effect on the jury’s ability fairly and accurately to implement the commands of the application paragraph or paragraphs.” Ramirez, 967 S.W.2d at 922 (citing Plata, 926 S.W.2d at 302). The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that if a jury charge improperly “ ‘singles out a specific type of evidence and tells the jury that it may infer an element of the crime’ from that evidence,” then there is error. Kirsch, 357 S.W.3d at 651 (citing Brown v. State, 122 S.W.3d 794, 800-01 (Tex.Crirm.App.2003)). However, our sister courts have found that even when there is error due to improper definitions, the error is frequently harmless. See Crenshaw v. State, 378 S.W.3d 460, 466 (Tex.Crim.App.2012) (<HOLDING>); Baggett v. State, 367 S.W.3d 525 Options: A. holding that courts may not find a per se sixth amendment violation where the defendant was unable to present relevant evidence B. holding that the trial courts definition of normal use was harmless error C. holding the erroneous deprivation of the right to counsel constitutes per se reversible error D. holding that the statutory definition of responsibly connected provided a per se rule E. holding that the trial courts inclusion of per se definition of intoxication did not expand the allegations against the defendant and was not error

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the trial courts inclusion of per se definition of intoxication did not expand the allegations against the defendant and was not 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: certain procedural , advantages in attempting to present and develop direct-service-connection claims does not mean that any of those claims necessarily have merit. That is what the claims-development process under § 3.311 is designed to determine, just as is the duty to assist that attaches under section 5107(a) as to well-grounded claims, regarding which the Court has emphasized:“The amount of evidence sufficient to make a claim well grounded differs from the amount sufficient for an award of service connection”, Meyer v. Brown, 9 Vet.App. 425, 432 (1996); “to be well grounded a claim need not be supported by evidence sufficient for the claim to be granted. Rather, the law establishes only a 'preliminary threshold of plausibility”. Robinette, 8 Vet.App. at 76; see also Alemany, supra (<HOLDING>). It must be remembered that the § 3.311 Options: A. holding service requirements under fedrcivp 4 to be jurisdictional B. holding that no federal nexus is required C. holding medical evidence as to nexus to service expressed as possible suffices for that aspect of wellgroundedclaim requirements D. holding that there was no new and material evidence to reopen claim where newly presented evidence was not accompanied by any medical evidence indicating a nexus to service E. holding that medical evidence as to nexus to service expressed as very well might have been although not conclusive suffices to well ground claim

assistant: The best answer is C. holding medical evidence as to nexus to service expressed as possible suffices for that aspect of wellgroundedclaim requirements
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 Borrower will use the proceeds of the Revolving Credit Loans and the Letters of Credit solely for the repayment of all amounts under the Existing Credit Agreement and other existing Indebtedness (unless repayment or prepayment thereof is otherwise prohibited hereunder), and for working capital and capital expenditures and all other lawful corporate purposes, including, without limitation, for the payment of dividends permitted hereunder, for the acquisition of assets and or Capital Stock of Persons in any lines of business that are substantially the same as, similar to, in complementary fields of enterprise to, or ancillary to any lines of business then engaged in by the Borrower or its Subsidiaries and for share repurchases, in each case, to the extent permitted under this Credit Agreement.

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: individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by [the ADA].” 42 U.S.C. § 12203(a). To state an ADA retaliation claim, ASWAN must allege that (1) it engaged in protected conduct, (2) suffered an adverse action, and (3) a causal link exists between the protected conduct and the adverse action. Rhoads v. F.D.I.C., 257 F.3d 373, 392 (4th Cir .2001). VCU does not maintain that it arrived at its decision not to provide funding for transportation to the Conrad Center independent from this lawsuit. Rather, VCU conceded at oral argument that there was a “causal link” between its decision not to honor the transportation funding agreement and the filing of this lawsuit by ASWAN. See also Hunt-Golliday v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist. of Greater Chi, 104 F.3d 1004, 1011 (7th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). VCU maintains, however, that this causal link Options: A. holding that the employers deviation from its established procedure when terminating the plaintiff was circumstantial evidence of retaliation B. holding that circumstantial evidence alone is sufficient to support a cocaine conspiracy conviction C. holding that placing employee on performance improvement plan was insufficient to support disparate treatment claim but could support retaliation claim because of lesser standard D. holding suspicious timing as circumstantial evi dence to support retaliation claim E. holding that motive is circumstantial evidence of intent

assistant: The best answer is D. holding suspicious timing as circumstantial evi dence to support retaliation claim
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: SECTION 4.3. . The execution, delivery, and performance by each of AXE, Anixter, and each Subsidiary of Anixter of each Related Transactions Documents to which it is party and each of the transactions contemplated thereby, do not and will not (a) except for any filings to perfect the security interests granted pursuant to the Loan Documents, require any consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, except such as have been obtained or made and are in full force and effect, (b) conflict with or violate such Person’s Organization Documents, (c) except as set forth on Schedule 4.03 , conflict with, result in a breach of, or constitute (with or without notice or lapse of time or both) a default under any Requirement of Law or Contractual Obligation of any such Person, or require termination of any Contractual Obligation of any such Person, in each case, which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, (d) conflict with any Contractual Obligation of any such Person, any liability resulting from which has resulted in or could be reasonably expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, (e) result in or require the creation or imposition of any Lien on any asset of any such Person, except Liens permitted by Section 7.02 or (f) require any approval of stockholders of any such Person, unless such approval has been obtained.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: can be sufficient evidence that “tends to connect the accused to the alleged offense even if none of the circumstances would be sufficient individually.” Brown, 159 S.W.3d at 708; Cantelon, 85 S.W.3d at 460-61. “All the law requires is that there be some [corroborating] evidence from which rational jurors could conclude that this [other] evidence sufficiently tended to connect Appellant to the offense.” Jefferson, 99 S.W.3d at 793 (quoting Hernandez v. State, 939 S.W.2d 173, 179 (Tex.Crim.App.1997)). When corroborating evidence required for a conviction is lacking, the defendant will be entitled to a verdict of acquittal. Tex.Code CRiM. PROC. Ann. art. 38.17 (Vernon 2005); see Ex parte Reynolds, 588 S.W.2d 900, 902 (Tex.Crim.App.1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 920, 100 S.Ct. 1284 (1980) (<HOLDING>); Fare v. State, 1 S.W.3d 928, 930 Options: A. holding jury cannot return any verdict except acquittal when evidence is insufficient to corroborate accomplice witness B. recognizing distinction made in maynard that one accomplices outofcourt statement may corroborate the incourt testimony of another accomplice but outofcourt testimony of a testifying accomplice cannot be used to corroborate his own testimony C. holding suspicion that some combination of individuals participated in five robberies was insufficient to corroborate accomplice testimony D. holding possession alone cannot sufficiently corroborate the testimony of an accomplice when the stolen property was not sufficiently identified at trial E. holding that mere speculation is insufficient to support a jury verdict

assistant: The best answer is A. holding jury cannot return any verdict except acquittal when evidence is insufficient to corroborate accomplice witness
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 hereby employs the Employee, and the Employee hereby accepts employment with the Company, beginning on March 9, 2015 (the "Start Date"), until termination of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 6 of this Agreement (the "Term").

assistant: Terms
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 fairness to litigants.” Busch v. Biggs, 264 N.J.Super. 385, 396, 624 A.2d 1017 (App.Div.1993). The Cogdell Court explained that in the present day litigation explosion, the judicial system must “conserve judicial resources; judicial energy is not inexhaustible or endlessly renewable. Thus, a rule that can control litigational extravagance and reduce piecemeal litigation is a necessity.” Id., 116 N.J. at 24, 560 A.2d 1169. We are cognizant that application of the doctrine is limited in that, “as in the ease of all other preclusionary doctrines ... the party whose claim is being sought to be barred must have had a fair and reasonable opportunity to have fully litigated that claim in the original action.” Cafferata v. Peyser, 251 N.J.Super. 256, 261, 597 A.2d 1101 (App.Div.1991) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the doctrine does not bar related Options: A. holding that a patients settlement of a prior action brought against him by doctors for payment of a bill did not bar medical malpractice action against doctors B. holding that doctors do not have to accept patients C. holding expert testimony not required to defeat summary judgment in medical malpractice suit because defendant doctors admissions were sufficient to establish the standard of care D. holding that review of medical history during an examination assisted doctors medical conclusions E. holding doctors letter is inadmissible hearsay

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a patients settlement of a prior action brought against him by doctors for payment of a bill did not bar medical malpractice action against doctors
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 provided in Schedule 3.1(g), the capitalization of the Company immediately prior to Closing is, in all material respects, as set forth in the SEC Reports. Except as provided in Schedule 3.1(g) , no Person has (i) 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 for such, if any, as will have been validly waived before the Closing and (ii) except pursuant to the operation of agreements filed as exhibits to or disclosed in the SEC Reports before the date of this Agreement, 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 Purchaser) 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 validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable, have been issued in 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. No further approval or authorization of any stockholder, the Board of Directors or others is required for the issuance and sale of the Securities. Except as filed as exhibits to the SEC Reports, 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: Use the proceeds of any Credit Extension, whether directly or indirectly, and whether immediately, incidentally or ultimately, in any manner than might cause the Credit Extension or the use of such proceeds to violate Regulation U of the FRB, in each case as in effect on the date or dates of such Credit Extension and such use of proceeds.

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: (2007). “The possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence does not prevent the Commission’s finding from being supported by substantial evidence.” Id. LAW/ANALYSIS I. Injury to Lower Back First, Burnette asserts substantial evidence does not support the finding she did not injure her lower back in the June 2007 incident. We agree. An injured employee “who has a permanent physical impairment or preexisting condition” may receive benefits for a subsequent work-related disability if he establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that “the subsequent injury aggravated the preexisting condition or permanent physical impairment.” S.C.Code Ann. § 42-9-35 (Supp.2011); see also Mullinax v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 318 S.C. 431, 436-37, 458 S.E.2d 76, 79 (Ct.App.1995) (<HOLDING>). Nonetheless, “an employee who suffers a Options: A. recognizing the natural consequences flowing from a compensable injury absent an independent intervening cause are compensable as well as the aggravation of a preexisting condition infirmity or disease by a workrelated injury B. holding that when a preexisting infirmity is aggravated by repetitive minute trauma as a result of the ordinary and necessary duties of employment the disability resulting from such aggravation is compensable as a personal injury under the workers compensation statute C. holding that psychological conditions resulting from workrelated trauma are compensable D. recognizing that a preexisting disease or infirmity of the employee does not disqualify a claim arising out of employment if the employment aggravated accelerated or combined with the disease or infirmity to produce disability for which compensation is sought E. holding that although cause of dystonia unknown experts opinion regarding causation based on temporal relationship between plaintiffs workrelated injury and onset of condition was sufficient to support commission s finding that dystonia was caused by compensable injury

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the natural consequences flowing from a compensable injury absent an independent intervening cause are compensable as well as the aggravation of a preexisting condition infirmity or disease by a workrelated injury
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 parties hereto have jointly participated in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement. If an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises, this Agreement will be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties hereto and no presumption or burden of proof will arise favoring or disfavoring any party hereto because of the authorship of any provision of this Agreement. Any reference to any federal, state, local or foreign Law will also be deemed to refer to such Law as amended and all rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, unless the context otherwise requires. All references in this Agreement to articles, sections, subsections and other subdivisions refer to corresponding articles, sections, subsections and other subdivisions of this Agreement unless expressly provided otherwise. The word “or is not exclusive and the words “including,” “includes” and “include” shall be deemed to be followed by “without limitation.” Pronouns in masculine, feminine and neuter genders will be construed to include any other gender, and words in the singular form will be construed to include the plural and vice versa, unless the context otherwise requires. The words “this Agreement,” herein, “hereof,” “hereby,” “hereunder” and words of similar import refer to this Agreement as a whole and not to any particular subdivision unless expressly so limited.

assistant: Construction
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 become effective when it shall have been executed by the Borrower, the other Credit Parties signatory hereto and Agent and when Agent shall have been notified by each Lender that such Lender has executed it. Thereafter, it shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of, but only to the benefit of, the Borrower, the other Credit Parties hereto (in each case except for Article VIII ), Agent, each Lender and each L/C Issuer receiving the benefits of the Loan Documents and, to the extent provided in Section 8.11 , each other Secured Party and, in each case, their respective successors and permitted assigns. Except as expressly provided in any Loan Document (including in Section 8.9 ), none of the Borrower, any other Credit Party, any L/C Issuer or Agent shall have the right to assign any rights or obligations hereunder or any interest herein.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: property tax sale. In reviewing section 6323(b)(6), this Court noted that it provides that a county’s tax lien has priority over a federal lien, and thus, Taylor purchased the property still subject to the county’s lien. Taylor v. Mill, 310 S.C. 526, 528, 426 S.E.2d 311, 312 (1992). Thus, this Court has already noted that section 6323 operates to establish priority, not extinguish ection in this manner will stifle tax sales, potential buyers must research tax sale property purchases and would be put on notice of any federal tax liens. Finally, Appellants argue that the master erred by not giving section 6323, a more specific statute, priority over section 7425, a general statute. See Capco of Summerville, Inc. v. J.H. Gayle Constr. Co., 368 S.C. 137, 142, 628 S.E.2d 38, 41 (2006) (<HOLDING>). While this is a correct statement of the law, Options: A. holding that where there is a conflict between statutes the more recent statute is controlling and a specific provision prevails over a general provision relating to the same subject matter B. holding that specific statutory provisions take priority over general statutory provisions C. holding wills more specific provision prevails over general provision D. recognizing that a specific statute controls over a general one E. holding that a specific statutory provision prevails over a more general one

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a specific statutory provision prevails over a more general one
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: Attorney]: The defendant has sat up here and told you a story. That is at times very different than what the Howard’s [sic] told you and he is the one who has had the three felony conviction for this same offense. Who’s got the motivation to he here[?]” Defendant never objected to the State’s reference to his prior convictions during closing arguments. Defendant now complains that the trial court erred in allowing the State to present evidence of his prior convictions of home repair fraud and prohibiting him from explaining to the jury that he was unable to complete performance on the contract because he was in jail. However, defendant has waived consideration of this issue by failing to obtain a ruling on his posttrial motions. See People v. Land, 178 Ill. App. 3d 251, 256 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, as we explain below, even if this Options: A. holding that failure to file a postjudgment motion on alleged error of law relating to ruling on exception to the statute of frauds that was committed for first time in the judgment waives any objection to that ruling and that in the absence of any other formal objection the issue is not preserved for appellate review B. holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion C. holding that the failure to obtain a ruling on a motion for new trial waives the issues raised for appellate review D. holding that appellants failure to obtain a ruling at the trial level even on a constitutional issue precluded review on appeal E. holding issues not raised to and ruled upon by the trial court are not preserved for appellate review

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the failure to obtain a ruling on a motion for new trial waives the issues raised for appellate review
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the Borrowers may request the issuance of standby or, subject to the limitations set forth in the definition of “Issuing Bank,” commercial, Letters of Credit denominated in Dollars for its own account, in a form reasonably acceptable to the Issuing Bank, at any time and from time to time during the Availability Period. In the event of any inconsistency between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the terms and conditions of any form of letter of credit application or other agreement submitted by the Borrowers to, or entered into by the Borrowers with, the Issuing Bank relating to any Letter of Credit, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There is no pending action, suit, claim, inquiry, investigation, audit or proceeding by or before any governmental authority, or any arbitration, mediation or other similar proceeding (each of the foregoing, a “ Proceeding ”), and to the knowledge of the Company, there is no Proceeding threatened against the Company or any of its subsidiaries, that seeks to prevent, hinder, modify, delay or challenge the transactions contemplated hereby or any action taken or to be taken pursuant hereto.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: all liability of vivino , its directors , employees , agents , representatives , partners , suppliers or content providers howsoever arising for any loss suffered as a result of your use the site , service , content , user submissions or add-to link is expressly excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law , save that , if a court of competent jurisdiction determines that liability of vivino , its directors , employees , agents , representatives , partners , suppliers or content providers ( as applicable ) has arisen , the total of such liability shall be limited in aggregate to one hundred us dollars ( $ 100 ) .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: above, the bankruptcy trustee’s rights arose in 2007, after the effective date of the 2007 Amendment. In contrast to the present case, in Dieter, an amended statute required the government to pay for any adverse judgment against its employees if the government defended or had the opportunity to defend its employee; under the prior version of the statute, the government could decline to indemnify the employee on the basis of public interest. See 576 F.3d at 696. The Seventh Circuit determined that the amended statute attached new consequences to past events because the government chose to defend the employees at trial before it knew that it would necessarily be on the hook for a possible adverse judgment. Id. at 696-97; see also State v. Pelley, 828 N.E.2d 915, 919-20 (Ind.2005) (<HOLDING>). Trying to apply the reasoning of Dieter to Options: A. holding that a statute that created a counselorclient privilege should not be retroactively applied to records created prior to the statute because of the presumption against retroactivity B. holding amendment to statute permitting administrative body to award up to 1000 in damages in discrimination cases applied retroactively because it created a supplemental remedy for enforcement of a preexisting right C. holding that a similar statute created separate offenses D. holding that a shortened statute of limitations should not be applied retroactively as to bar otherwise valid civil claims E. holding statute that extended statute of limitations for certain criminal sexual conduct could not be applied retroactively to a prosecution commenced after the limitations statute in effect at the time of the alleged offense had expired

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a statute that created a counselorclient privilege should not be retroactively applied to records created prior to the statute because of the presumption against retroactivity
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 counterparts, with the same effect as if both parties had signed the same document. All such counterparts shall be deemed an original, shall be construed together and shall constitute one and the same instrument.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: seems to be that he “abandon[ed] the company in the middle of its problems with Lovejoy.” See note 25, supra. But there was nothing in the limited liability company agreement — or, for that matter, any other agreement — that obligated Glenn to continue serving as Mii’s employee, as opposed to its member (a role that, as just discussed, did not come with any obligations to render services to the company). Nor did the limited liability company agreement obligate Glenn to continue serving as Mii’s manager. See Part II. A.1, supra. Thus, the only provision of the limited liability agreement that Glenn violated by withdrawing was the prohibition on voluntary withdrawal itself, and Alan has not identified any damages that followed from that withdrawal. Cf. Federalpha Steel, 368 B.R. at 690 (<HOLDING>). Glenn is therefore entitled to summary Options: A. recognizing the right of an llc member or assignee to bring a derivative action on behalf of the llc when another member breaches a contractual or fiduciary duty owed to the llc B. recognizing cause of action for wrongful death C. recognizing claim for wrongful dissociation based on members ceasing participation in the llcs management and ceasing honoring its duties and obligations under the llc agreement D. recognizing similar duties E. recognizing action for wrongful death based on unseaworthiness

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing claim for wrongful dissociation based on members ceasing participation in the llcs management and ceasing honoring its duties and obligations under the llc agreement
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: whole-complaint approach. 19 . In light of the foregoing, a strong argument could be made that, even under the claim-by-claim approach, Mississippi would be the sole real party in interest. See, e.g., South Carolina v. LG Display Co., Ltd., No. 3:1l-cv-00729-JFA, 2011 WL 4344074, at *6 (D.S.C. Sept. 14, 2011) (stating that the state would be a real party in interest to its restitution claim even under a claim-by-claim approach because the state has a "a quasi-sovereign interest ... in bringing an action to enforce its laws, disgorge the proceeds of ill-gotten gains, and refund them to its citizens”); South Carolina v. AU Optronics Corp., No. 3:1 l-cv-00731-JFA, 2011 WL 4344079, at *6 (D.S.C. Sept. 14, 2011) (same); Illinois v. AU Optronics Corp., 794 F.Supp.2d 845, 855 (N.D.Ill.2011) (<HOLDING>). The Court, however, need not reach that Options: A. holding that when a state sues on behalf of its residents without a sovereign or quasisovereign interest it is only a nominal party and thus not the real party in interest B. holding that the state would be the real party in interest with respect to its claim for restitution even under the claimbyclaim approach because it has a quasisovereign interest in seeking recovery on behalf of a wide range of consumers and aiming to deter future antitrust conduct by corporations in the state C. holding that when the action is in essence one for the recovery of money from the state the state is the real substantial party in interest and is entitled to invoke its sovereign immunity from suit even though individual officials are nominal defendants D. holding that a state has a quasisovereign interest in the economic wellbeing of its citizens and in not being denied its rightful status within the federal system E. holding that the state was a real party in interest when the attorney general filed suit under the illinois consumer fraud act on behalf of residents who were specifically aggrieved by violations of the act because the attorney general decides whether to bring the litigation and maintains control of it in her role as protector of the public and not as personal representative of the consumers for whom she seeks restitution

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the state would be the real party in interest with respect to its claim for restitution even under the claimbyclaim approach because it has a quasisovereign interest in seeking recovery on behalf of a wide range of consumers and aiming to deter future antitrust conduct by corporations in the state
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 remedies provided in this Warrant shall be cumulative and in addition to all other remedies available under this Warrant, at law or in equity (including a decree of specific performance and/or other injunctive relief).

assistant: Remedies
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 could not reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a Material Adverse Effect, no consent or approval of, or notice to, any Person is required by the terms of any Material Contract for the execution or delivery of, or the performance of the obligations of such Credit Party under, this Agreement and the other Note Documents to which such Credit Party is party or the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby or thereby, and such execution, delivery, performance and consummation will not result in any breach or violation of, or constitute a default under any Material Contract or any law applicable to such Credit Party, any of its Subsidiaries or any of its or their assets.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: By executing this Agreement, each Partner expressly agrees, at all times during the term of the Partnership and thereafter and whether or not at the time a Partner of the Partnership, to maintain the confidentiality of, and not to disclose to any person other than the Partnership, another Partner or a person designated by the Partnership, any information relating to the business, financial structure, financial position or financial results, clients or affairs of the Partnership that shall not be generally known to the public or the securities industry, except as otherwise required by law or by any regulatory or self-regulatory organization having jurisdiction; provided , however , that any corporate Partner may disclose any such information it is required by law, rule, regulation or custom to disclose. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to comply with Treasury Regulations Section 1.6011-4(b)(3)(i), each Partner (and any employee, representative or other agent of such Partner) may disclose to any and all persons, without limitation of any kind, the federal income tax treatment and tax structure of the Partnership, it being understood and agreed, for this purpose, (1) the name of, or any other identifying information regarding (a) the Partners or any existing or future investor (or any Affiliate thereof) in any of the Partners, or (b) any investment or transaction entered into by the Partners; (2) any performance information relating to any of the Partners or their investments; and (3) any performance or other information relating to previous funds or investments sponsored by any of the Partners, does not constitute such tax treatment or tax structure information.

assistant: 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Employee hereby represents that his at-will employment with the Company and his performance of all the terms of this Agreement will not result in a breach of any agreement with a third party, including the breach of any agreement to keep in confidence proprietary information acquired by the Employee prior to his employment by the Company or to refrain from competing with any third party. Employee represents that he has not entered into, and agrees he will not enter into, any oral or written agreement in conflict with this Agreement.

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: 2003) (same quoting Mimms); Mendez v. State, 678 So.2d 388, 390 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (<HOLDING>); State v. Bernard, 650 So.2d 100, 102 (Fla. 2d Options: A. holding that a police officer may as a matter of course order the driver of a lawfully stopped car to exit his vehicle B. holding that once the officer asked the defendant to exit his vehicle the encounter became a stop because the defendant was no longer free to leave C. holding that an officer stopped the defendant when he ordered the defendant to take his hand out of his pocket D. holding that for general safety purposes an officer may routinely order the driver of a lawfully stopped vehicle to exit the vehicle because when the vehicle is already stopped the slight additional intrusion associated with being directed to exit the car can only be described as de minimis E. holding that the officer acted within the scope of his authority in requiring the defendant stopped in middle lane of traffic to exit his vehicle

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the officer acted within the scope of his authority in requiring the defendant stopped in middle lane of traffic to exit his vehicle
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: Upon your Termination of Employment for any reason, other than your death, Disability or Retirement, any and all unvested PSUs underlying this Award, together with any and all unvested accumulated Dividend Equivalents, shall automatically be cancelled for no consideration, and shall cease to be outstanding.

assistant: Forfeitures