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: (Colo. 1982) (noting that strict prima facie case may be impossible at discovery stage). Decisions regarding discovery are best left to the trial court in its reasoned discretion; Standard Tallow Corp. v. Jowdy, 190 Conn. 48, 57, 459 A.2d 503 (1983); and employing the typical prima facie burden shifting could lead to endless minitrials to settle discovery matters in the underlying action. Accordingly, we reject a strict burden shifting approach and instead employ the test adopted by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which requires a showing of probable cause to believe that the privileged communications were made with the intent to perpetrate a civil fraud and that the communications were made in furtherance of that fraud. See United States v. Zolin, supra, 491 U.S. 563 n.7 (<HOLDING>); Matter of Mendel, 897 P.2d 68, 74 (Alaska Options: A. recognizing confusion caused by prima facie language B. holding that unintended damage to a pipeline caused by the defective coating supplied by insureds subsidiary was caused by an occurrence within the meaning of the liability policy C. holding that delay caused by or consented to by a defendant is not unreasonable D. holding that eco nomic injury caused by contractual obligations that stemmed from compliance with a regulation were sufficiently caused by the regulation to support standing E. holding under the policy language that diminution of market value is not a cause of loss but a measure of a loss caused by something else

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing confusion caused by prima facie language
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: contemporaneous affidavit filing requirement of OCGA § 9-11-9.1 (a) would be negated if a plaintiff was allowed to bring an ordinary negligence claim without an affidavit, and then later add claims for professional negligence after the expiration of the statute of limitation. Fales, however, is inapplicable to the instant situation. There, the plaintiff originally brought a medical malpractice claim, but failed to attach the requisite expert affidavit. Fales, supra, 263 Ga. App. at 461. The plaintiff instead filed an amended complaint that included an expert affidavit, claiming that OCGA § 9-11-9.1 allowed an amended complaint to cure a failure to file an affidavit. Id. at 461-462. This Court rejected the plaintiff’s argument. Id. at 462; see also Roberson, supra, 302 Ga. App. at 407 (<HOLDING>). Here, on the other hand, Engler did not raise Options: A. holding that the ada does not create a remedy for medical malpractice B. holding that ocga 91191 does not allow a plaintiff suing for medical malpractice to cure a failure to attach an expert affidavit through amendment C. recognizing that a plaintiff must produce a medical expert to testify as to causation in all but the most selfevident medical malpractice actions D. holding amendment to statute of limitations was a procedural amendment to be applied retroactively in a medical malpractice case E. holding that physician testifying as to personal knowledge of medical treatment was not required to attach medical chart to affidavit in order to verify the affidavit testimony

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that ocga 91191 does not allow a plaintiff suing for medical malpractice to cure a failure to attach an expert affidavit through amendment
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 contains the entire agreement and understanding among the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes and replaces all prior and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, inducements and conditions, express or implied, oral or written, of any nature whatsoever with respect to the subject matter hereof, including the Advisory Agreement. The express terms hereof control and supersede any course of performance or usage of the trade inconsistent with any of the terms hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Executive dies during the Employment Period, this Agreement will terminate without any further obligation on the part of the Company under this Agreement, other than for (i) payment of the Accrued Obligations and six months of the Executive’s Base Salary (which shall be paid to the Executive’s beneficiary designated in writing or his estate, as applicable, in a lump sum cash payment within 30 days of the date of death); (ii) the timely payment of the Welfare Continuance Benefit to the Executive’s spouse and other dependents; and (iii) the timely payment of all death and retirement benefits pursuant to the terms of any plan, policy or arrangement of the Company and its affiliated companies.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or defect, the court will conduct a hearing. If the court determines that Billy Terrell Adams is no longer affected by mental disease or defect, the court will immediately discharge Billy Terrell Adams.” This instruction is required pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-2-312(a)(2), which provides that, when the affirmative defense of mental disease or defect is presented to a jury, “the jury shall be instructed regarding the disposition of a defendant acquitted on a ground of mental disease or defect[.]” Because the prosecutor’s remark is consistent with the law, any objection raised by trial counsel would have been meritless. Therefore, counsel were not deficient for not objecting to the prosecutor’s comments. Lambert v. State, 2012 Ark. 150, 2012 WL 1130590 (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Our review of the circuit court’s decision Options: A. holding that in order to carry his burden to demonstrate prejudice a petitioner must show when making a claim of ineffective assistance for failing to raise an objection or poinake an argument that the objection or argument would have been successful if made B. holding an argument waived on appeal for failure to raise the issue in objection to the magistrates recommendation C. holding that an attorney is not ineffective for failing to make a meritless objection D. holding that to show prejudice in a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel the petitioner must show a reasonable probability that but for counsels errors the result of the proceeding would have been different E. holding that an appellant must not only specifically identify the deficiencies in counsels performance but also identify the specific objection that should have been made and provide authority in support of his argument that the objection would have been meritorious

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that in order to carry his burden to demonstrate prejudice a petitioner must show when making a claim of ineffective assistance for failing to raise an objection or poinake an argument that the objection or argument would have been successful if made
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: Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730, 751-52, 109 S.Ct. 2166, 104 L.Ed.2d 811 (1989) (citing Restatement (Second) of Agency § 220(2) (1958))). “In weighing these factors, ‘all of the incidents of the relationship must be assessed and weighed with no one factor being decisive.’ ” Lerohl, 322 F.3d at 489 (quoting Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Darden, 503 U.S. 318, 324, 112 S.Ct. 1344, 117 L.Ed.2d 581 (1992)). “The district court may properly consider economic aspects of the parties’ relationship.” Id. (citing Wilde v. County of Kandiyohi, 15 F.3d 103, 106 (8th Cir.1994)). Appellant argues that RCRH exercised a heightened level of control over Dr. Wojewski to such an extent that he was an employee for ADA purposes. Appellant contends that the terms of the 2003 Le 9, 805-06 (7th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); Cilecek, 115 at 262; Alexander v. Rush N. Options: A. holding that anesthesiologist whose staff privileges were terminated was not a hospital employee and thus could not bring suit under either the age discrimination in employment act or title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 B. holding that title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 provides the exclusive remedy for claims of employment discrimination by federal agencies C. holding that congress intended for idea to be interpreted consistent with fee provisions of statutes such as title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 D. holding that physician was an independent contractor and thus could not sue hospital under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 E. holding that physician with staff privileges is not an employee and thus cannot bring claim under title vii of 1964 civil rights act

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that anesthesiologist whose staff privileges were terminated was not a hospital employee and thus could not bring suit under either the age discrimination in employment act or title vii of the civil rights act of 1964
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 the issuance of a Letter of Credit (or an amendment to a Letter of Credit increasing the amount thereof) and without any further action on the part of the Issuing Bank or the Revolving Lenders, the Issuing Bank hereby grants to each Revolving Lender, and each Revolving Lender hereby acquires from the Issuing Bank, a participation in such Letter of Credit equal to such Revolving Lender’s Applicable Percentage of the aggregate amount available to be drawn under such Letter of Credit. In consideration and in furtherance of the foregoing, each Revolving Lender hereby absolutely and unconditionally agrees to pay to the Administrative Agent, for the account of the Issuing Bank, such Revolving Lender’s Applicable Percentage of each LC Disbursement made by the Issuing Bank and not reimbursed by the Applicable Borrower on the date due as provided in paragraph (e) of this Section, or of any reimbursement payment required to be refunded to the Applicable Borrower for any reason. Each Revolving Lender acknowledges and agrees that its obligation to acquire participations pursuant to this paragraph in respect of Letters of Credit is absolute and unconditional and shall not be affected by any circumstance whatsoever, including any amendment, renewal or extension of any Letter of Credit or the occurrence and continuance of a Default or reduction or termination of the Commitments, and that each such payment shall be made without any offset, abatement, withholding or reduction whatsoever.

assistant: Participations
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, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. Signatures transmitted via facsimile shall be deemed equivalent to originals.

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: until the statute of limitations had run) would continue to have a significant chilling effect on the defendant’s exercise of its First Amendment rights. At that point, the plaintiff would have accomplished all the wrongdoing that triggers the defendant’s eligibility for attorney’s fees, but the defendant would be cheated of redress. Coltrain v. Shewalter, 66 Cal.App.4th 94, 106-07, 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 600 (1998), as modified (Sept. 4, 1998). Thus, consistent with the courts of the Ninth Circuit and of this state, the Court will consider the merits of Attorney Defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion, in spite of Plaintiffs voluntary dismissal, for the limited purpose of determining whether Attorney Defendants are “prevailing defendants” under the statute. See, e.g., id. at 107, 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 600 (<HOLDING>); Moore v. Liu, 69 Cal.App.4th 745, 751, 81 Options: A. 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 B. holding that where the plaintiff voluntarily dismisses an alleged slapp suit while a special motion to strike is pending the trial court has discretion to determine whether the defendant is the prevailing party for purposes of attorneys fees under code of civil procedure section 42516 subdivision c C. holding that a defendant who is voluntarily dismissed with or without prejudice after filing a section 42516 motion to strike is nevertheless entitled to have the merits of such motion heard as a predicate to a determination of the defendants motion for attorneys fees and costs under subdivision c of that section D. holding award of attorneys fees to party prevailing on contract claim is mandatory under section 38001 if there is proof of the reasonableness of the fees E. holding that the party prevailing on the significant issues in the litigation is the party that should be considered the prevailing party for attorneys fees

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that where the plaintiff voluntarily dismisses an alleged slapp suit while a special motion to strike is pending the trial court has discretion to determine whether the defendant is the prevailing party for purposes of attorneys fees under code of civil procedure section 42516 subdivision c
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: benefits may not be implied into ERISA itself, § 502(a)(1)(B). See Russell, 473 U.S. at 146-47, 105 S.Ct. 3085 (“The six carefully integrated civil enforcement provisions found in § 502(a) of the statute as finally enacted ... provide strong evidence that Congress did not intend to authorize other remedies that it simply forgot to incorporate expressly. The assumption of inadvertent omission is rendered especially suspect upon close consideration of ERISA’s interlocking, interrelated, and interdependent remedial scheme, which is in turn part of a comprehensive and reticulated statute____Where a statute expressly provides a particular remedy or remedies, a court must be chary of reading others into it.”) (emphasis in original) (internal quotations omitted); Dobson 389 F.3d at 398 (<HOLDING>) (emphasis in original). The issue, thus, is Options: A. recognizing that russell rejected a remedy that was neither expressed nor implied in the plan but that plaintiff claimed was implicit in the erisa statute B. holding that congress had clearly expressed through the structure and legislative history of erisa an intention that the federal remedy displace state causes of action C. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant D. holding that erisa does not preempt the plaintiffs claim that the erisa plan administrator is liable for medical malpractice where the plaintiff premised the claim solely on state law and did not invoke the erisa plan E. holding that plaintiff in erisa action was entitled to restitution under similar circumstances

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that russell rejected a remedy that was neither expressed nor implied in the plan but that plaintiff claimed was implicit in the erisa statute
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: (11) In any other situations were representation is constitutionally required. (b) The public defender, after being satisfied of the person’s inability to procure sufficient funds to obtain legal counsel to represent him, shall provide such counsel. Every person who requests legal counsel shall sign an affidavit that he is unable to procure sufficient funds to obtain legal counsel to represent him and shall provide, under oath, such other information as may be required by the court, the public defender, or the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure. 16 P.S. § 9960.6. The Public Defender argued that its appointment as counsel conflicts with this Court’s decision in Dauphin County Public Defender’s Office v. Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, 578 Pa. 59, 849 A.2d 1145 (2004) (<HOLDING>). While acknowledging that it was not directly Options: A. holding that the county attorney had de facto authority and noting that the objection to the county attorneys authority was first made on appeal B. recognizing the transfer of jurisdiction to the commonwealth court of those classes of cases previously heard by the court of common pleas of dauphin county as the court wherein the seat of state government is located C. recognizing the court of common pleas of dauphin county as the predecessor to the commonwealth court D. holding in considering a writ of prohibition that the court of common pleas lacked authority to dictate to the county public defenders office criteria for representation of applicants seeking its services E. holding that the prohibition of section 35 article iii against the increase or diminution of compensation for public officers applied to the treasurer of calvert county and therefore even though the legislature retained the power to alter or abolish the office it could not change the treasurers salary while in office

assistant: The best answer is D. holding in considering a writ of prohibition that the court of common pleas lacked authority to dictate to the county public defenders office criteria for representation of applicants seeking its services
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: mature claim for review.” Id. at 7. The ASB Defendants contend that the Plaintiffs failure "to diligently pursue their available state law remedies establish that no mature case or controversy exists.” Id. (citing Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83, 88 S.Ct. 1942, 20 L.Ed.2d 947 (1968); and, Miller v. F.C.C., 66 F.3d 1140 (11th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155, 116 S.Ct. 1543, 134 L.Ed.2d 647 (1996)). 32 . ASB Defendants contend that the ASB informal Advisory Opinion and Canon 7(b)(1) are constitutional. (Doc. 15 at 10). 33 . This Court does not at this time reach the questioned constitutionality of the Advisory Opinions themselves or the constitutionality of the Canons, as that is not at issue. 34 . See e.g., O’Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 497, 94 S.Ct. 669, 38 L.Ed.2d 674 (1974), (<HOLDING>). See also International Society for Krishna Options: A. holding that plaintiffs claim was moot because there was no standing because the supreme court considered plaintiffs claims to have drifted into the area of speculation and conjecture so that there was no cognizable injuryinfact and hence no case or controversy upon which jurisdiction could stand B. holding that district court has no jurisdiction to take further action where there was no remand order C. holding that a negligent retention claim was properly dismissed when there was no underlying tort upon which it could have been based D. holding that contract failed for indefiniteness because there were essential terms upon which there was no agreement E. holding a case becomes moot when a ruling will have no practical effect upon the existing controversy

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that plaintiffs claim was moot because there was no standing because the supreme court considered plaintiffs claims to have drifted into the area of speculation and conjecture so that there was no cognizable injuryinfact and hence no case or controversy upon which jurisdiction could stand
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, except that, other than pursuant to any Debt Assumption effected in compliance with this Agreement, neither ADI nor any other Loan Party may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an assignee in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.06(b) , (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.06(d) , or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of Section 10.06(f) (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in Section 10.06(d) and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

assistant: Successors
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 of the rights, powers, preferences and other terms of the Series B Preferred Stock set forth herein may be waived on behalf of all holders of Series B Preferred Stock by the affirmative written consent or vote of the holders of at least a majority of the shares of Series B Preferred Stock then outstanding.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: railroad employee, brings this action under FELA, which provides the exclusive remedy for plaintiff in this case. 45 U.S.C. §§ 51, et seq. See Rivera v. Union Pacific jected the argument that FELA is not preempted by the FRSA, based on the analysis that FELA is a negligence based statute and “[l]ike common law negligence claims, FELA negligence claims may not be used to impose duties beyond those imposed by Congress or the FRA— that is, FELA claims may, indeed, be subject to preemption.” In re Amtrak “Sunset Ltd.” Train Crash, 188 F.Supp.2d 1341, 1349 (S.D.Ala.1999) (citing Thirkill v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., 950 F.Supp. at 1107-08); accord Rice v. Cincinnati New Orleans & Pac. Ry., 955 F.Supp. at 740-41;) see also CSX Transp., Inc. v. Easterwood, 507 U.S. at 664, 113 S.Ct. 1732 (<HOLDING>). Thus, the question to be determined is Options: A. holding that the meaning of doubtful terms or phrases may be determined by reference to their relationship with other associated words or phrases noscitur a sociis B. holding that a breach of duties that a fiduciary contractually assumes beyond those duties imposed by law is considered to arise out of contract C. holding that insider transaction did not fall within scope of 547c2 D. holding that declaratory judgments fall outside the scope of the court of claims jurisdiction E. holding that legal duties imposed on railroads by the common law fall within the scope of these broad phrases

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that legal duties imposed on railroads by the common law fall within the scope of these broad phrases
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: further proceedings regarding those claims. Parties to bear their own costs. 1 . We refer in this and the next two paragraphs to the itemization in supra Section I.B. 2 . In his supplemental brief requested by this panel, Alvin also suggests that he did not have to use these procedures, noting that Dr. De-tre, Senior Vice Chancellor, testified that the correct appeals process is "[d]epartmental chairman to the dean, from the dean to me, from me to the provost, from the provost to the chancellor of the University.” However, Alvin never suggested that he did not need to use the channels provided in the Faculty Handbook prior to the supplemental briefs to the panel after oral argument. Therefore, this argument is waived. See Harris v. City of Philadelphia, 35 F.3d 840, 845 (3d Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). 3 . We also note that Alvin has not framed Options: A. holding that court will not consider issue raised for first time on appeal B. holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered C. holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be asserted for the first time on appeal D. holding claims raised for first time on appeal will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances E. holding that an argument not raised before the bankruptcy court will not be considered for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered
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 Fourth Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which constitutes an original, and all of which, collectively, constitute only one agreement. The signatures of the parties need not appear on the same counterpart, and delivery of an executed counterpart signature page by facsimile or other form of electronic transmission shall be as effective as executing and delivering this Fourth Amendment in the presence of the other parties to this Fourth Amendment.

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: Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 170, 102 S.Ct. 1584, 71 L.Ed.2d 816 (1982) (emphasis in original). “To ascertain the level to which such errors taint the constitutional sufficiency of the trial, they must ‘be evaluated in the total context of the events at .trial.’ ” See Paradis v. Arave, 130 F.3d 385, 393 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting Frady, 456 U.S. at 169, 102 S.Ct. 1584). Lastly, the “miscarriage of justice” exception is limited to habeas petitioners who can show, based on “new reliable evidence,” that “ ‘a constitutional violation has probably resulted in the conviction of one who is actually innocent.’” Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 324-27, 115 S.Ct. 851, 130 L.Ed.2d 808 (1995) (quoting Murray, 477 U.S. at 496, 106 S.Ct. 2639); see, e.g., Wildman v. Johnson, 261 F.3d 832, 842-43 (9th Cir. 2001) (<HOLDING>). Here, Petitioner summarily argues that the Options: A. holding that to show prejudice in a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel the petitioner must show a reasonable probability that but for counsels errors the result of the proceeding would have been different B. holding that petitioners challenge to jury instructions in light of some new cases did not demonstrate his actual innocence because petitioner only asserts legal innocence not actual innocence C. holding that petitioner did not fairly present federal due process claim by bringing a somewhat similar but doctrinally distinct miscarriage of justice claim under the california constitution D. holding that a petitioner must show that the outcome of his appeal would have been different had counsel raised the issue E. holding petitioner must establish factual innocence in order to show fundamental miscarriage of justice would result from application of procedural default

assistant: The best answer is E. holding petitioner must establish factual innocence in order to show fundamental miscarriage of justice would result from application of procedural default
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: major hospital who possessed a master’s degree in medical management, was not able to convince the jury that any of this was good faith error. Given this evidence, the question of whether Palazzo billed more hours than were possible in a day was minor, or even irrelevant, because none of the bills charged in the indictment were properly submitted for eligible services actually performed. In other words, the evidence, without the chart, showed that Palazzo had never performed any of the services in question and that none of the services submitted were eligible for reimbursement, and therefore the implication created by the demonstrative aid, if any, that she could not have performed all of the fictitious services in the time she claimed was not prejudicial. See Winn, 948 F.2d at 157-58 (<HOLDING>). Loss & Forfeiture Calculations Factual Options: A. holding improperly admitted evidence was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt B. holding that any error in admission of demonstrative aid was harmless because evidence of defendants guilt was overwhelming C. holding the error harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt D. holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt E. holding that any error that court may have made in admitting inadmissible evidence was harmless because government presented overwhelming evidence establishing defendants guilt

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that any error in admission of demonstrative aid was harmless because evidence of defendants guilt was overwhelming
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: 779. However, “[t]he fact that proof of causation is difficult does not provide a plaintiff with an excuse to avoid introducing some evidence of causation.” Schaefer v. Texas Employers’ Ins. Ass’n, 612 S.W.2d 199, 205 (Tex.1980); see also Parker v. Employers Mut. Liab. Ins. Co., 440 S.W.2d 43, 46 (Tex.1969). As the dissent in the court of appeals explained, “[t]he harsh reality is that if the plaintiff cannot prove facts to support her cause of action, there is simply no recovery. This is true not only in slip and fall cases, but in all cases.” 954 S.W.2d at 784. Dirt in macaroni salad lying on a heavily-traveled aisle is no evidence of the length of time the macaroni had been on the floor. That evidence can no more support the inferen 189, 191 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1982, no writ) (<HOLDING>). There were no comparisons between the dirt on Options: A. holding that testimony that the grape on which plaintiff slipped was squashed and muddy that the floor was dirty and that pieces of paper were strewn around nearby was no evidence that the grape had been on the floor long enough to charge the store with notice B. holding that the trial court committed no error in sustaining objection to plaintiffs testimony that the water had been there for some time because the plaintiff had no personal knowledge of how long the puddle had been there C. holding that evidence that the defendant and a witness sold drugs together was relevant to prove how the witness knew the defendant D. holding evidence insufficient to support conviction when none of the defendants had any proprietary interest nor previous association with the premises and there was no evidence of how long the defendants had been on the premises prior to the arrival of the police E. holding that testimony that grapes were stepped on and that the juices from both red and green grapes had blended together was no evidence of how long the grapes were on the floor

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that testimony that grapes were stepped on and that the juices from both red and green grapes had blended together was no evidence of how long the grapes were on the floor
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 First Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed and original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. An electronic or faxed copy of this First Amendment shall have the same force and effect as the original thereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Withdraw from participation in, permit any full or partial termination of, or permit the occurrence of any other event with respect to any Plan maintained for the benefit of Borrower’s employees under circumstances that could result in liability to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, or any of its successors or assigns, or to any entity which provides funds for such Plan; or withdraw from any Multiemployer Plan described in Section 4001(a)(3) of ERISA which covers Borrower’s employees.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Company is duly organized, validly existing, and in good standing (or comparable concept in the applicable jurisdiction) under the laws of its state or jurisdiction of incorporation or organization, and is duly qualified and authorized to do business and is in good standing (or comparable concept in the applicable jurisdiction) as a foreign entity in the jurisdictions set forth opposite its name on Schedule 6.1 hereto, which are all of the states or jurisdictions where the character of its property or its business activities makes such qualification necessary, except where the failure to so qualify could not reasonably be expected to cause or result in a Material Adverse Effect. Each Foreign Subsidiary is validly existing under the laws of its jurisdiction of organization. Schedule 6.1 hereto sets forth, as of the Closing Date, each Subsidiary of the Borrower (and whether such Subsidiary is a Dormant Subsidiary), its state (or jurisdiction) of formation, its relationship to the Borrower, including the percentage of each class of stock or other equity interest owned by a Company, each Person that owns the stock or other equity interest of each Company, its tax identification number, the location of its chief executive office and its principal place of business. Except as set forth on Schedule 6.1 hereto, the Borrower, directly or indirectly, owns all of the equity interests of each of its Subsidiaries.

assistant: Subsidiaries
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: means any person who is in need of hospitalization and who, if an adult, together with his or her spouse, ... does not have income and other resources available to him from whatever source which shall be sufficient to enable the person to pay for necessary medical services.” This definition is in sharp contrast to that of the term “indigent,” which the legislature has defined as “any person who is destitute of property and unable to provide for the necessities of life.” I.C. § 31-3502(7). Thus, it is clear that the legislature did not intend that a person be completely destitute or devoid of all resources in order to be considered medically indigent, but only that the person be unable to pay for necessary medical services. See McMullen v. Hargis, 128 Ariz. 142, 624 P.2d 339 (1980) (<HOLDING>); County Department of Public Welfare v. Options: A. holding that the person who travels as an agent of person defrauded is a victim B. holding with no analysis that any person or organization who may be legally liable therefor applies to a person legally liable for injuries caused by an accident 4 when under the facts of the case the only person to whom the clause could have applied was a tortfeasor C. holding that a person is seized when a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave D. holding that burglary may qualify as offense against person if as committed it is in fact a crime against a person E. holding that under the applicable statutory provisions a person need not be impoverished or devoid of all assets to qualify as an indigent sick person but only that the person be unable to pay for necessary medical care

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that under the applicable statutory provisions a person need not be impoverished or devoid of all assets to qualify as an indigent sick person but only that the person be unable to pay for necessary medical 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (e) The Tenant Provision The state challenges the district court’s conclusion that barring a landlord’s ability to “restrict the lawful carry or possession of firearms by tenants or their guests” is unconstitutional as applied to tenant-used portions of church premises. Minn.Stat. § 624.714, subd. 17(e). We presume that the restriction is intended to protect tenants and guests who have complied with the statutory provisions for obtaining permits to carry firearms and who are conducting themselves lawfully. The sincerely held religious beliefs of a landlord sometimes require an exemption from laws designed to protect the rights of tenants and potential tenants, especially if those affected are not members of constitutionally recognized classes. See State by Cooper, 460 N.W.2d at 10-11 (<HOLDING>). The record establishes that the respondent Options: A. holding act qualifies as exemption statute under exemption 3 B. holding that landlord whose sincere religious beliefs were inconsistent with premarital cohabitation was entitled to exemption from states enforcement of human rights act prohibiting discrimination based on marital status C. holding discrimination based on pregnancy was not sex discrimination D. holding unmarried couples are included within the state and municipal prohibitions against discrimination based on marital status E. holding that the government cannot waive foia exemption 6 on behalf of the individual whose privacy interests the exemption protects

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that landlord whose sincere religious beliefs were inconsistent with premarital cohabitation was entitled to exemption from states enforcement of human rights act prohibiting discrimination based on marital status
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: read as a purported admission by McCollough was outrageous, or at the very least, is a matter to be determined by the trier of fact. He also points to Noblesville Schools and argues that its intentional publication of an altered statement that was attributed to McCollough as an admission that he hit a player with a ball, an allegation that McCollough adamantly denied, was extreme and outrageous conduct. [16] We agree with the Defendants that even accepting the facts as presented by McCollough, we cannot say that the Defendants’ conduct, even if intentional, qualifies as being so outrageous in character or extreme in degree that it is to be regarded as atrocious or utterly intolerable in a civilized community. See Jaffri v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 26 N.E.3d 635, 640 (Ind.Ct.App.2015) (<HOLDING>); cf. Mitchell v. Stevenson, 677 N.E.2d 551 Options: A. holding article 1802 claims only survive where the conduct alleged of is based on tortious or negligent conduct different from the conduct covered by other specific labor laws involved B. holding that uncharged conduct may be considered at sentencing when that conduct is proven by a preponderance of the evidence C. holding that even assuming defendant intentionally mishandled mortgagerelated documents such conduct is notthe type of beyondthepale outrageous conduct that may be covered by an iied claim D. holding that standard for iied is objective and there was no outrageous conduct where plaintiff simply made vague assertions about employers motives for his dismissal E. holding that it was not error for trial court to decline to conduct full evidentiary hearing before trial on outrageous government conduct claim

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that even assuming defendant intentionally mishandled mortgagerelated documents such conduct is notthe type of beyondthepale outrageous conduct that may be covered by an iied 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Award, the Cayman Islands action seeks a(l) determination that the District Court wrongfully ordered almost $319 million to be paid to KBC pursuant to the federal judgments confirming and enforcing the Award, and (2) return of all funds obtained by KBC “pursuant to the Arbitral Award (and its enforcement).” Although Pertamina makes new factual allegations in support of its claim that the Award should not have been enforced against it, these new factual allegations are not sufficient to undermine the preclusive effect of several earlier federal court decisions that (1) the Award should be enforced and (2) KBC is entitled to Pertamina’s New York funds in an amount sufficient to satisfy the Award. See Campaniello Imports, Ltd. v. Saporiti Italia S.p.A., 117 F.3d 655, 661-63 (2d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 27 (1982) Options: A. holding that because relitigation of issue was barred by collateral estoppel res judicata determination of finality of judgment dismissed for lack of standing was not relevant B. holding that res judicata is not applicable to a claim for relief that was unavailable in the earlier action C. holding that an unappealed order is a final judgment on the merits for res judicata purposes D. holding that where no member of present plaintiff class had cause of action at time prior judgment was entered claim cannot be barred by res judicata E. holding that a district court properly dismissed as barred by res judicata an independent action for rescission of a prior judgment on the basis of fraud where the plaintiff failed to mount a viable direct attack on the earlier judgment

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a district court properly dismissed as barred by res judicata an independent action for rescission of a prior judgment on the basis of fraud where the plaintiff failed to mount a viable direct attack on the earlier 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: The Credit Parties will, comply, in all material respects, with all laws, rules, regulations, orders, writs, judgments, injunctions, decrees or awards to which it may be subject including, without limitation, all 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (quoting Davis v. Merrill, 133 Va. 69, 78, 112 S.E. 628 (1922)). It follows that when, as here, an FBI employee, consistent with the FBI’s Policy on Harassment, reports an incident of sexual harassment, the employee is acting within the scope of her employment. In sum, the facts and circumstances of this case point convincingly to the conclusion that Schoeneman was acting within the scope of her FBI employment when she complained to FBI officials about alleged workplace sexual harassment. Also pertinent to the scope of employment calculus is that the allegedly false reports of harassment were made at the FBI’s facilities while Schoeneman was on duty. See Gulf Underwriters Ins. Co. v. KSI Services, Inc., 416 F.Supp.2d 417, 420-21 (E.D.Va.2006) aff'd, 233 Fed.Appx. 239 (4th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). Given that reporting workplace sexual Options: A. holding that the inquiry into whether an employee was acting within the scope of his employment depends on the respondeat superior law of the state in which the tort occurred B. holding that whether the tortious act was committed during the time the employee was on duty and whether the tortious act was committed while the employee was on the employers premises were both factors weighing in favor of finding the activity within the scope of employment C. holding that inter alia employees criminal conviction for alleged tortious act demonstrated employee was not acting in scope of his employment D. holding that issues of fact precluded summary judgment on the question of whether an employee was acting within the course and scope of his employment for purposes of insurance coverage when the employee was simply sitting in his vehicle in his employers parking lot waiting for the business to open at the time the accident occurred E. holding that the doctrine of respondeat superior in maryland allows an employer to be held vicariously liable for the tortious conduct of its employee when that employee was acting within the scope of the employment relationship citations omitted

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that whether the tortious act was committed during the time the employee was on duty and whether the tortious act was committed while the employee was on the employers premises were both factors weighing in favor of finding the activity within the scope of employment