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: liable for compensatory damages. The individual agent defendants — King, Munoz, Scarpiniti, and Walker — all engaged in racial steering. The facts demonstrate that the four agents treated the black testers worse than the white testers. The magistrate judge’s conclusion that this different treatment was because of race is amply supported by the record. Matchmaker agents King, Munoz, Scarpiniti, and Walker consistently steered white testers toward white areas and black testers toward black areas. The four agents also denied the black testers information about housing that they readily gave to similarly situated white testers. We agree with the magistrate judge’s conclusion that the individual agents violated the testers rights under Sections 1982 and 3604. See Dwivedi, 895 F.2d at 1533 (<HOLDING>); Tolliver v. Amici, 800 F.2d 149 (7th Options: A. recognizing implied private action for violation of the real estate brokers and salesmen license act B. holding inter alia that real estate brokers who treat customers differently from one another because of their race violate the fair housing act C. holding brokers were not entitled to commission where agreement provided commission was payable at closing of real estate transaction because brokers did not produce clients that closed D. holding that the real estate brokers law which provided for the investigation of the acts of real estate brokers and the suspension or revocation of their licenses for specified acts is penal and must be strictly construed E. recognizing provisions of the fair housing act that forbid false statements that housing is unavailable to a person because of his race

assistant: The best answer is B. holding inter alia that real estate brokers who treat customers differently from one another because of their race violate the fair housing act
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: When Joseph ren-unciated the powers granted to him under the power of attorney, agreed that the document be declared null and void, and destroyed the original and all copies, his actions necessarily mooted the complaint and was the functional equivalent of a judgment or verdict in favor of the appel-lees. See Augustin v. Health Options of S. Fla., Inc., 580 So.2d 314, 315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (finding that when the defendant changed its position in the matter and made full payment as prayed for in the plaintiffs complaint, it necessarily mooted the complaint and was the functional equivalent of a judgment or verdict in favor of the plaintiff entitling the plaintiff to an award of attorney’s fees as the prevailing party); see also Smith v. Adler, 596 So.2d 696, 697 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we affirm the orders on appeal. Options: A. holding that it is the results not the procedure which govern the determination of which party prevailed for purposes of awarding attorneys fees B. holding that plaintiff was not the prevailing party for purposes of awarding attorneys fees even where the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the terms of a settlement agreement because there was insufficient judicial sanctioning of the alteration of the parties legal relationship C. holding that a defendant is the prevailing party within the meaning of statutory provisions awarding attorneys fees to the prevailing party even when the plaintiff voluntarily dismisses the action D. holding trial court erred in awarding attorneys fees to physicians in absence of any evidence of attorneys fees E. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to consider the appeal because it was filed before the final order awarding attorneys fees

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it is the results not the procedure which govern the determination of which party prevailed for purposes of awarding attorneys 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the number of such debts exceeds the number of their consumer liabilities. Taking the contrary position, the UST argues that the Debtors have primarily consumer debts because the aggregate dollar amount of their consumer debt exceeds 50% of their total liabilities. Courts have interpreted the phrase “primarily consumer debts” in several different ways. The majority view is that a debtor’s liabilities are primarily consumer debts if the aggregate dollar amount of such debts exceeds 50% of the debtor’s total liabilities. See Hoffner, 2007 WL 4868310 at *2 (“The majority of courts that have considered the issue have found that ‘primarily’ means more than half of the total dollar amount owed.”). See also Stewart v. United States Tr. (In re Stewart), 175 F.3d 796, 808 (10th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); Kelly, 841 F.2d at 913 (same); Naut, 2008 WL Options: A. holding that the fdcpa applies only to consumer debts incurred primarily for personal family or household purposes B. holding that a debtor has primarily consumer debts if the aggregate amount of consumer debt is more than 50 of the total debt C. holding that debt collectors have no obligation to warn a consumer that her debt may increase over time D. holding that a credit transaction is not a consumer debt when it is incurred with a profit motive E. holding that a debt incurred for a personal family or household purpose is a consumer debt even though it is secured by the debtors real property

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a debtor has primarily consumer debts if the aggregate amount of consumer debt is more than 50 of the total debt
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, whether or not the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are consummated, each of the parties hereto shall pay the fees and expenses of its respective counsel, accountants, and other professionals incident to the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby. All costs and obligations incurred upon a change of control of Sellers will be borne by the Sellers.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of the Plan is deemed illegal or invalid, the illegality or invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions of the Plan, and the Plan shall be construed and enforced as if the illegal or invalid provision had not been included .

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you may not transfer or sublicense any licenses granted by linden lab in this agreement without the prior , written consent of linden lab , except solely to the extent this agreement or an applicable product policy permits transfer of any applicable virtual tender licenses .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Subject to the provisions of Section 2.09(b) , (i) each Eurocurrency Rate Committed Loan shall bear interest on the outstanding principal amount thereof for each Interest Period at a rate per annum equal to the Eurocurrency Rate for such Interest Period plus the Applicable Rate; (ii) each Base Rate Loan shall bear interest on the outstanding principal amount thereof from the applicable borrowing date at a rate per annum equal to the Base Rate plus the Applicable Rate; (iii) each Competitive Loan shall bear interest on the outstanding principal amount thereof for the Interest Period therefor at a rate per annum equal to the Eurocurrency Rate for such Interest Period plus (or minus) the Eurocurrency Bid Margin, or at the Absolute Rate for such Interest Period, as the case may be, and (iv) each Swing Line Loan shall bear interest on the outstanding principal amount thereof from the applicable borrowing date at a rate per annum equal to the Base Rate plus the Applicable Rate applicable to Base Rate Loans.

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: that exist as a result of their breach of a duty established by the city ordinance. We do not think this case can be shoehorned into our taxation doctrine. Like the majority of cases from other jurisdictions, we regard the ordinance as a police regulation not unlike building or housing codes or protections against public and private nuisances. We therefore reject the State’s challenge to the Iowa City ordinance on the ground that it imposes an unauthorized tax. VII. Whether the City’s Cause of Action Against the State is a “Claim” Under the ITCA. A. Positions of the Parties. 1. The State. The State maintains that at common law, an injured party could not seek to recover for damages due to a sidewalk defect from an abutting landowner. City of Keokuk, 53 Iowa at 355-57, 5 N.W. at 506-07 (<HOLDING>). The State next maintains that when the ITCA Options: A. holding that regulatory restrictions on abutting landowners right of ingress and egress are not compensable when landowner has adequate alternative means to access property B. holding that city may by ordinance require abutting landowner to repair sidewalk but that the abutting landowner is not liable in an action in tort for injuries C. holding the department liable for the fall of a tree that stood on private property abutting a highway D. holding in case where railroad grant was an easement and not a right of way that title vested in abutting landowner once railroad abandoned land E. holding that a subsequent abandonment of a public rightofway over such a road has no effect on a private easement owned by an abutting landowner

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that city may by ordinance require abutting landowner to repair sidewalk but that the abutting landowner is not liable in an action in tort for injuries
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 is personal to you and may not be assigned by you. This Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of you, your legal representatives, heirs and distributees, and will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Company, its successors and assigns.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The nature and transaction of the Credit Parties' business and operations and the use of its properties and assets, including the Collateral or any real estate owned, leased, or occupied by the Credit Parties, do not and during the term of the Loans shall not, violate or conflict with any applicable law, statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or order of any kind or nature, including the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act or any zoning, land use, building, noise abatement, occupational health and safety or other laws, any Permit or any condition, grant, easement, covenant, condition or restriction, whether recorded or not, except to the extent such violation or conflict would not result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: for each alleged misrepresentation or omission, “state with particularity facts giving rise to a strong inference that the defendant acted with the required state of mind.” 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(2) (emphasis added). “Moreover, the complaint must allege facts supporting a strong inference of scienter for each defendant with respect to each violation.” Mizzaro v. Home Depot, Inc., 544 F.3d 1230, 1238 (11th Cir.2008) (emphasis added) (citing Phillips v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 374 F.3d 1015, 1016 (11th Cir.2004)). Courts may consider materials that are incorporated by reference into a complaint without converting a motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment if the document is (1) central to plaintiffs claim and (2) undisputed. Day v. Taylor, 400 F.3d 1272, 1276 (11th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); see also Harris v. Ivax Corp., 182 F.3d 799, Options: A. holding that the district court did not err by concluding that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for continuance motion to withdraw and motion for reconsideration and rehearing B. holding district court did not err by considering a contract central to the dispute without converting the motion to a motion for summary judgment C. holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment D. holding district court not required to uncover disputed facts when considering summary judgment motion E. holding that where a complaint makes express reference to attachments that are central to the plaintiffs claims those documents may be considered on a motion to dismiss without converting it into a motion for summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding district court did not err by considering a contract central to the dispute without converting the motion to a motion for summary judgment
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 capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings given to them in the Lease. The Lease, as amended by this Addendum, is referred to herein as the “Lease.” Unless otherwise specifically provided herein, all provisions of this Addendum shall be effective as of the later of the dates on which Landlord and Tenant execute this Addendum.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Employee represents and agrees that he will keep all terms and provisions of this Agreement confidential, except for possible disclosures to his legal and financial advisors and his spouse or to the extent required by law, and Employee further agrees that he will not disclose the terms, provisions or information contained in or concerning the Agreement to anyone other than those persons named above, including, but not limited to, any past, present or prospective employee or applicant for employment with the Company or any affiliate of the Company. The Agreement is not intended in any way to proscribe Employee’s or the Company’s right and ability to provide information to any federal, state or local government in the lawful exercise of such governments’ governmental functions.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you have a dispute and our customer service representatives ca n't resolve it , send a notice of dispute by u.s. mail to microsoft corporation , attn : cela arbitration , one microsoft way , redmond , wa 98052-6399 , u.s.a. ( or to your mobile phone carrier at its principal place of business in the united states marked attn : legal department ) .

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: Bd., 507 Pa. 270, 489 A.2d 1325, 1327 (1985) (citations omitted). We do not dispute the proposition that the courts are considered the employers of judicial personnel. In our view, however, this fact does not preclude the possibility that a county may share co-employer or joint employer status with the courts. While we have found no ease which directly implicates this issue in the factual scenario we confront here (that is to say, which involves the narrow question of the division of responsibilities between counties and courts vis-a-vis judicial personnel), we draw some guidance from eases which have found joint employment status when two entities exercise significant control over the same employees. Cf. NLRB v. Browning-Ferris Indus. of Penn. Inc., 691 F.2d 1117, 1123 (3d Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>); Rivas v. Federacion de Asociaciones Options: A. holding that the joint employer concept recognizes that business entities involved are in fact separate but they share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment B. holding that notice statute applies to both municipal entities and employees of municipal entities acting within the scope of their employment C. recognizing ability of one or more joint tortfeasors to settle on behalf of themselves and another joint tortfeasor and then pursue that joint tortfeasor for its share of the settlement payment D. holding each share in a joint tenancy is presumed to be equal for purposes of alienation E. recognizing concept of joint employer when separate entities share or eodetermine conditions of employment

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing concept of joint employer when separate entities share or eodetermine conditions of employment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement as applied to any party or to any circumstance should be adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction or arbitrator, as the case may be, to be void or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity of that provision shall in no way affect (to the maximum extent permissible by law) the application of such provision under circumstances different from those adjudicated by the court or arbitrator, the application of any other provision of this Agreement, or the enforceability or invalidity of this Agreement as a whole. Should any provision of this Agreement become or be deemed invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction by reason of the scope, extent or duration of its coverage, then such provision shall be deemed amended to the extent necessary to conform to applicable law so as to be valid and enforceable or, if such provision cannot be so amended without materially altering the intention of the parties, then such provision will be stricken and the remainder of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except for the Lien granted to Lender pursuant to this Agreement and other Permitted Liens (except for those Permitted Liens not permitted to exist on any Collateral) under any Loan Document (including Section 4.2 ), such Grantor owns each item of the Collateral free and clear of any and all Liens or claims of others. Such Grantor (a) is the sole, record and beneficial owner of the Collateral pledged by it hereunder constituting instruments or certificates and (b) has rights in or the power to transfer each other item of Collateral in which a Lien is granted by it hereunder, free and clear of any other Lien other than Permitted Liens. Such Grantor is the sole and exclusive owner of all Intellectual Property pledged by it hereunder and no Intellectual Property pledged by such Grantor is jointly owned.

assistant: Titles
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: § 42-217. If, based on the proof submitted by the applicant and the field examination, the Department “is satisfied that the law has been fully complied with and that the water is being used at the place claimed and for the purpose for which it was originally intended, the [Department shall issue to such user or users a license confirming such use.” I.C. § 42-219(1). On the other hand, “[i]n the event that the [Department shall find that the applicant has not fully complied with the law and the conditions of permit, it may issue a license f ls Ground Water Dist., 141 Idaho 746, 753, 118 P.3d 78, 85 (2005) (finding that “a party is not entitled to vested rights in a water right by virtue of filing a permit application”); Hardy v. Higginson, 123 Idaho 485, 491, 849 P.2d 946, 952 (1993) (<HOLDING>). However, this Court has never considered the Options: A. holding that until the state issues a certificate of appropriation any right to use the water remains inchoate B. holding that simply because claimants had diverted the entire run of the water at issue did not give them the ability to claim a right to all the water when they could not and had not put it to beneficial use C. holding that the legislative assembly intended the water right certificate not the permit even when followed by a beneficial use to mark the point at which a water right becomes vested D. holding that permits only give the applicant an inchoate or contingent right to put the water to a beneficial use E. holding that a water right is a property right created by a person appropriating unappropriated water and applying it to a beneficial use

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that permits only give the applicant an inchoate or contingent right to put the water to a beneficial use
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: THOMAS, MOORE, and DONALDSON, JJ., concur. 1 . The will contained two codicils, and for the purposes of this opinion, the will and the codicils are referred to collectively as "the will.” 2 . As is explained in later analysis in this opinion, and in notes 3 and 5, infra, we have used the term "personal representative” for ease of reference, but JaNell and David, and, ultimately, Mary Elizabeth, technically sought to be the administrators with the will annexed. 3 .Mary Elizabeth is seeking to be appointed an administrator with the will annexed. An administrator is subject to the residency requirements of § 43-2-22, Ala.Code 1975, but an executor named in a will is not subject to those residency restrictions. See § 43-2-191, Ala.Code 1975, and Ex parte Adams, 168 So.3d 40, 44 (Ala.2014) (<HOLDING>). 4 . Mary Elizabeth did not testify regarding Options: A. holding that oneyear limitations period set forth in 2255 is not a jurisdictional bar and is thus subject to equitable tolling B. holding that the specific date restriction set forth in 541a5 controls and that 1306a1 does not eliminate that restriction C. holding that an executor named in a will is not subject to the nonresident restriction set forth in 43222 D. holding that it is generally sufficient that an indictment set forth the offense in the words of the statute itself E. holding that plea in bar may be based only on grounds set forth in statute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an executor named in a will is not subject to the nonresident restriction set forth in 43222
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: warnings about the dangers of working with those materials; failed to provide El-sey with appropriate safety equipment, such as a breathing apparatus, to prevent the inhalation of carcinogens; and failed to take other appropriate safety precautions. These allegations are directed to an employer’s duty to use ordinary care in providing a safe workplace, not a duty arising from the special knowledge, education, and training of a licensed professional engineer. See Elwood, 197 S.W.3d at 794; see also Exxon Corp. v. Tidwell, 867 S.W.2d 19, 21 (Tex.1993) (“The standard of conduct required of the employer is ordinary care based on general negligence principles.”); Kroger Co. v. Milanes, 474 S.W.3d 321, 335 (Tex.A 2013 WL 6795390, at *5 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth Dec. 19, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.) (<HOLDING>); with UOP, L.L.C. v. Kozak, No. Options: A. holding that elevator rider who asserted premisesliability claims against professional engineering firm that provided management services to premises owner was not required to provide certificate of merit because claims as alleged did not clearly arise out of the provision of professional engineering services B. holding that the prosecutors comment regarding the defendants failure to call a potential witness did not shift the burden of proof because it did not implicate the defendants fifth amendment right not to testify C. holding that ban on unauthorized practice of law did not implicate the first amendment D. holding that admission of statement with references to we or they which did not directly implicate defendant did not violate defendants confrontation rights E. holding that homebuyers claims against professional engineering firm acting as thirdparty inspector did not did not implicate the practice of engineering

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that homebuyers claims against professional engineering firm acting as thirdparty inspector did not did not implicate the practice of engineering
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: assets from the confluence of events appearing on this record is essentially speculative and is based on assumptions that are not sufficiently supported by the record. It is obvious that the former wife’s investment practices and her conduct was troubling to the court; however, given the history of the parties’ mutual treatment of their financial and investment affairs, in which the former husband left all such matters in the former wife’s hands, there is an insufficient basis for an unequal distribution of assets. The former husband, who would have shared in any profits, must share equally in the losses, notwithstanding that the former wife’s investment conduct may well have been imprudent. See § 61.075(1)®, Fla. Stat. (2001); Gentile v. Gentile, 565 So.2d 820, 823 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)(<HOLDING>). We also conclude that the amount arrived at Options: A. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allocating the husbands unvested stock options as marital property B. holding that husbands imprudent investments which lost their value in 1987 stock market crash not adequate justification for inequitable distribution of marital assets C. holding that if the market value of an asset can be ascertained the decree should account for the change in value between the date of the decree and the timely execution of the distribution plan in the decree the distribution based on value at the distribution date D. holding in action for breach of contract caused by wrongful foreclosure and sale of shares of stock plaintiff was entitled to recover the fair market value of the stock at the time of its sale E. holding that fair market value was proper measure of damages for stock brokers breach of margin agreement caused by sale of plaintiffs shares without authorization noting that generally speaking fair market value is proper measure of damages for breach of contract relating to sale of goods which have an ascertamable value on the market

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that husbands imprudent investments which lost their value in 1987 stock market crash not adequate justification for inequitable distribution of marital assets
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Jefferson County, 668 F.2d 869, 874 (6th Cir.1982). Plaintiffs here have adduced evidence of a discussion of a continuing investigation, but no evidence that tends to show the authorization, approval, or knowing acquiescence of the supervisory Defendants to any constitutional violations allegedly visited upon Plaintiffs. Furthermore, even if Plaintiffs had established that Defendants Marshall, Freeman, May, Rucker, Reitz, Brink, Gibson and Vander Wissel were aware of the alleged constitutional violations — which in itself would be quite a stretch for the Court to find, given the state of the record — and did nothing to stop them, Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims against the supervisory Defendants still would not survive summary judgment. See Poe v. Haydon, 863 F.2d 418, 429 (6th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). Here, Plaintiffs have adduced no evidence Options: A. holding that liability may not be imposed on supervisory personnel under 1983 where at best the plaintiff has merely claimed that the appellants were aware of alleged violation but did not take appropriate action B. holding that supervisory liability under 1983 requires a showing that the supervisory official at least implicitly authorized or approved or knowingly acquiesced in the unconstitutional conduct of the offending subordinate C. holding supervisory personnel liable for 1983 violations only where evidence establishes that they authorized or approved the unconstitutional conduct D. holding that a constitutional violation by a subordinate is a predicate for supervisory liability under 1983 E. holding that individual liability under 1983 must be based on personal involvement in the alleged constitutional violation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that liability may not be imposed on supervisory personnel under 1983 where at best the plaintiff has merely claimed that the appellants were aware of alleged violation but did not take appropriate action
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 term of Executive’s employment by the Company under this Agreement will begin on the Effective Date, and will continue until the third anniversary of the Effective Date, unless earlier terminated pursuant to Section 4 hereof; provided , however , that on the third anniversary of the Effective Date and each annual anniversary of such date thereafter, the Agreement shall automatically be extended for one additional year unless either the Company or Executive shall have terminated this automatic extension provision by written notice to the other party at least 60 days prior to the automatic extension date. The term of employment in effect from time to time hereunder is hereinafter called the “Employment Period.” Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Executive’s employment is at will, which means that either Executive or the Company may terminate this relationship with or without Cause or notice.

assistant: Employment
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 execution, delivery and performance by the Company of this Agreement and the issuance and sale of the Purchased Securities will not (i) conflict with or result in a breach or violation of any of the terms or provisions of, or constitute a default under, result in termination, modification or acceleration of, or result in the creation or imposition of any lien, charge or encumbrance upon any property or assets of the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or, the best knowledge of the Company after due inquiry, any Drilling Partnership, pursuant to any indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, the Credit Facility or other loan agreement or other Contract or instrument to which the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any Drilling Partnership is a party or by which the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any Drilling Partnership is bound or to which any of the Properties of the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any Drilling Partnership is subject, (ii) result in any violation of the provisions of the charter or bylaws or similar organizational documents of the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any Drilling Partnership or (iii) result in the violation of any Law or any judgment or order of any arbitrator, except, in the case of clauses (i) and (iii) above, for any such conflict, breach, violation or default that would not, individually or in the aggregate, have a Material Adverse Effect.

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: Any notice to the Company provided for herein shall be in writing to the attention of the Secretary of the Company at Symmetry Surgical Inc., 3034 Owen Dr. Antioch, TN 37013, and any notice to the Grantee shall be addressed to the Grantee at his address currently on file with the Company. Except as otherwise provided herein, any written notice shall be deemed to be duly given if and when hand delivered, or five business days after having been mailed by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, or three business days after having been sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier service, addressed as aforesaid. Any party may change the address to which notices are to be given hereunder by written notice to the other party as herein specified, except that notices of changes of address shall be effective only upon receipt.

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: resource. Power that is not exercised is not management or control even though in a legal sense the resource may belong in part or appertain to that party. While the Government is correct in their argument that there is not a double recovery until the total value of the damaged or injured resource has been recovered, a given trustee cannot recover more than what its stewardship is determined to be. To allow otherwise would create the undesirable situation of a race to the courthouse between co-trustees with the first in time being the first in right. Moreover, once a state, federal or other public trustee recovers such damages, res judicata would prevent a second trustee from recovering the same public losses. Alaska Sport Fishing Ass’n v. Exxon Corp., 34 F.3d 769 (9th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Likewise, settlement would be discouraged by Options: A. holding that claims to the vsf benefits under various theories were barred by the res judicata effect of the state court judgment in castellano iii B. holding that the plaintiffs earlier claims of infringement by possession and its later claims of infringement by use of its source code arose from the same nucleus of operative facts and therefore the later claims were barred by res judicata C. holding that a trustees claim was barred by res judicata and stating that the trustee could have asked the bankruptcy court to reserve his fraud claims for later adjudication which would have avoided his claims being barred D. holding that the plaintiffs claims were barred by res judicata when the federal courts judgment was finalized by denial of his petition for certiorari E. holding that the united states and the state of alaska as public trustees under the cwa and cercla could recover all lost use damages caused by the spill and that private claims for lost recreational use were barred under res judicata

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the united states and the state of alaska as public trustees under the cwa and cercla could recover all lost use damages caused by the spill and that private claims for lost recreational use were barred under res judicata
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the jury.”). This is particularly true where the arrest occurred on January 31, 2007, over four years prior to the incident which gave rise to this action. Accordingly, evidence of Goodman’s prior arrest to establish that she in fact engaged in acts of prostitution is excluded. In addition to using this evidence to establish truthfulness of any alleged defamatory statements, Defendants also seek its admission on the question of defamation damages. Although Goodman’s, San Diego arrest may be minimally relevant to her reputation at the time she was detained at the Cosmopolitan, reputational damage is presumed in a slander per se action like this one, as explained below in the Court’s discussion of Goodman’s defamation claim. See Branda v. Sanford, 97 Nev. 643, 637 P.2d 1223, 1225 (1981) (<HOLDING>). This is because “[a]t the heart of the libel- Options: A. recognizing distinction between actual and per se conflicts of interest B. holding that under south carolina law slander is actionable per se where plaintiff is alleged to have committed adultery C. holding that statements that insinuated that plaintiff was an adulteress were actionable as slander per se under missouri law D. recognizing that slander per se is actionable without a showing of actual or special damages E. recognizing continued vitality of kassowitz on what is slander per se

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that slander per se is actionable without a showing of actual or special damages
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: Valeant shall maintain complete and accurate records in reasonably sufficient detail of Net Sales, License Fees, Development Milestone Payments, [***] Sales-Based Milestone Payments, [***] Sales-Based Milestones Payments and the Royalties and all other amounts due from it to Eyegate under this Agreement, for a period of at least two (2) years after the end of the Calendar Year in respect of which payment is to be made hereunder, and during the Term of this Agreement, Valeant shall maintain accurate data collection and reporting systems for the foregoing. Eyegate shall maintain, for a period of at least two (2) years after the end of the Calendar Year in respect of which payment is to be made hereunder, complete and accurate records in reasonably sufficient detail of all proceeds received by Eyegate and its Affiliates in respect of the Product and all Development costs incurred pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, and during the Term of this Agreement, Eyegate shall maintain accurate data collection and reporting systems for the foregoing.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Executive shall report to the Company’s Board of Directors (the “ Board ”) and be subject to the lawful direction of the Board. The Executive agrees to perform to the best of his ability, experience and talent those acts and duties, consistent with the position of Chief Executive Officer as the Board shall from time to time direct. During the Term, the Executive also shall serve in such other executive-level positions or capacities as may, from time to time, be reasonably requested by the Board, including, without limitation (subject to election, appointment, re-election or re-appointment, as applicable) as (a) a member of the Board and/or as a member of the board of directors or similar governing body of any of the Company’s subsidiaries or other Affiliates (as defined below), (b) an officer of any of the Company’s subsidiaries or other Affiliates, and/or (c) a member of any committee of the Company and/or any of its subsidiaries or other Affiliates, in each case, for no additional compensation. As used in this Agreement, “ Affiliate ” of any individual or entity means any other individual or entity that directly or individual controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, the individual or entity. For avoidance of doubt, any election of the Executive as a member of the Board is independent from the employment of the Executive under this Agreement and subject to normal procedures, bylaws and agreements regulating the election and/or removal of the members of the Board; provided, however, that, as set forth above, such service shall be for no additional compensation.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 507 U.S. at 732-37, 113 S.Ct. 1770; Knowles, 29 F.3d at 951. In this circuit, “[i]t is self-evident that basing a conviction on an unconstitutional statute is both ‘plain’ and ‘error’ .... ” Knowles, 29 F.3d at 951. Alfaro’s argument that §§ 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional, however, fails in light of Almendarez-Torres and Fifth Circuit precedent. As Alfaro recognizes, in Almendarez-Torres, the Supreme Court effectively rejected his argument. See Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219. Almendarez-Torres has not been overruled and is still good law. Additionally, this court has repeatedly rejected arguments like the one made by Alfaro as being foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres. See, e.g., United States v. Mendez-Villa, 346 F.3d 568, 570-71 (5th Cir.2003) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Delgado-Nunez, 295 F.3d 494, Options: A. holding that apprendi v new jersey 530 us 466 120 sct 2348 147 led2d 435 2000 did not overrule almendareztorres v united states 523 us 224 118 sct 1219 140 led2d 350 1998 B. holding that almendareztorres remains binding despite apprendi v new jersey 530 us 466 120 sct 2348 147 led2d 435 2000 C. holding that apprendi v new jersey 530 us 466 120 sct 2348 147 led2d 435 2000 does not apply to a judges exercise of discretion within a statutory range so long as a defendants sentence is not set beyond the maximum term specified in the substantive statute D. holding that the safety valve provision of 18 usc 3553f is not unconstitutional under apprendi 530 us 466 120 sct 2348 147 led2d 435 or blakely v washington 542 us 296 124 sct 2531 159 led2d 403 2004 E. holding that 851 factfinding falls within the prior conviction exception set out in apprendi v new jersey 530 us 466 490 120 sct 2348 147 led2d 435 2000

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that almendareztorres remains binding despite apprendi v new jersey 530 us 466 120 sct 2348 147 led2d 435 2000
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 fees and expenses of the Selling Member incurred in connection with a Tag-along Sale and for the benefit of all Tag-along Members (it being understood that costs incurred by or on behalf of a Selling Member for its sole benefit will not be considered to be for the benefit of all Tag-along Members), to the extent not paid or reimbursed by the Company or the prospective Transferee, shall be shared by the Selling Member and all the participating Tag-along Members on a pro rata basis, based on the aggregate consideration received by each such Tag-along Member.

assistant: Expenses
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: guidelines; and (4) that the special conditions of Neffs supervised release were beyond the limits described in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d). For the reasons explained below, the motion is denied in all respects. I. BACKGROUND On April 29, 1992, Anthony Neff was arrested on charges of driving while intoxicated by Nassau County Police who found in his possession a receipt from a licensed firearms dealership. The receipt indicated that on April 23, 1992, he had purchased a 12 gauge shotgun. Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (“ATF”) interviewed the owner of the firearms dealership and discovered that Neff, who was then on parole for a 1989 attempted burglary conviction, had not revealed that he was a convicted felon when he executed ATF form 4473, a necessar 3 (3d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). Although this language appears broad in Options: A. recognizing a claim that the sentence exceeded the statutory maximum B. holding that for purposes of apprendi the statutory maximum is the maximum sentence that may be imposed based solely on the jurys findings C. holding that where the guideline range is higher than the statutory maximum sentence the court should depart from the lowest range that could support the statutory maximum D. holding that the sentence was reasonable in part because it was well below the statutory maximum E. holding statutory maximum for prior conviction is the potential maximum sentence defined by the applicable state criminal statute not the maximum sentence which could have been imposed against the particular defendant according to the states sentencing guidelines

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing a claim that the sentence exceeded the statutory maximum