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: risk of equine activities, as defined in § 6 — 5—337(b)(6). Estes does not dispute that the horse became startled, and he did not argue before the trial court that Croxton’s failure to assess A.G.E.’s riding ability was a cause of the accident. Estes’s contention is that the defendants are not entitled to immunity under the Equine Act because the defendants “made no attempt to assess what type of rider the minor child was, let alone whether she should have even been on the horse in the first place. Without the defendants fulfilling their obligations, i.e., inquiring to a rider’s ability and handling the horse in accordance with such abilities, the defendants are not entitled to the protection of the Act. See Willeck ex tel. Willeck v. Mrotek, Inc., 616 N.W.2d 526 (Wis.App.2000) (<HOLDING>).” In support of this argument, Estes cites Options: A. holding the act inapplicable to the united states in its role as employer B. holding equine activities liability act immunity inapplicable because the sponsor did not find out riders actual ability before matching horse with rider C. recognizing that under texas law governmental immunity embraces two principles immunity from liability and immunity from suit D. holding immunity from liability is not jurisdictional E. holding that the tucker act does not waive the governments sovereign immunity for federal reserve activities

assistant: The best answer is B. holding equine activities liability act immunity inapplicable because the sponsor did not find out riders actual ability before matching horse with rider
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Parties and the arbitrator will keep confidential, and will not disclose to any person, except the parties’ advisors and legal representatives, or as may be required by law or to enforce in court an arbitrator’s award, the existence of any controversy under this Section 11, the referral of any such controversy to arbitration or the status or resolution thereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Bank may at any time, without the consent of, or notice to, the Borrower, sell participations to any Person (other than a natural person or the Borrower or any of its Affiliates or Subsidiaries) (each, a “ Participant ”) in all or a portion of the Bank’s rights and/or obligations under this Agreement (including all or a portion of its LC Commitment and/or the amounts owing to it hereunder); provided that (i) the Bank’s obligations under this Agreement shall remain unchanged, (ii) the Bank shall remain solely responsible to the other parties hereto for the performance of such obligations and (iii) the Borrower shall continue to deal solely and directly with the Bank in connection with the Bank’s rights and obligations under this Agreement.

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: Any notice required or contemplated by this Warrant shall be deemed to have been duly given if transmitted by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or nationally recognized overnight delivery service, to the Company at its principal executive offices, or to the Holder at the name and address set forth in the Warrant Register maintained by the Company.

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: 124, 125 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1973, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (claim for economic loss); Flax v. McNew, 896 S.W.2d 839, 841 (Tex. App.—Waco 1995, no writ) (claim for economic loss, emotional distress, and other elements of damages). 5 . The IIED claim was Hardin's only claim against Devall. 6 . Through an election of remedies, LeBlanc elected to recover against Devall the conversion damages and abandon the IIED damages. 7 . See supra at n.6. 8 . OGA filed a motion for judgment n.o.v. on other grounds. The trial court could grant it judgment n.o.v. on the "wrongful pregnancy” issue to the extent the law supported such an outcome even without OGA moving on that basis. See McDade v. Tex. Commerce Bank, Nat'l Ass’n, 822 S.W.2d 713, 717-18 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1991, writ denied) (<HOLDING>). 9 . See City of Houston v. Petroleum Traders Options: A. holding that superior court erred in granting judgment nov and remanding for a new trial generally B. holding that the trial court may not grant summary judgment on a ground not raised in the motion C. holding that superior courts erred in granting judgment nov on a wrongful death claim and remanding for new trial on that claim and on damages D. holding that trial court may grant judgment nov on grounds other than that presented in motion for judgment nov so long as the party receiving such relief did file motion E. holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that trial court may grant judgment nov on grounds other than that presented in motion for judgment nov so long as the party receiving such relief did file motion
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: Crain counsels that a proper contract instruction communicates an “objective theory” of contract law. Id. at 916 (citation omitted). We believe that the district court provided an “objective theory” of contract law under Arkansas law and did not abuse its discretion. Having reviewed the jury instructions on the whole, we conclude that they fairly and accurately represent the evidence and applicable Arkansas law in light of the issues presented to the jury- Potlatch next argues that the district court erred when it provided the following jury instruction: Where a contract contains no express ag ., 773 F.2d 987, 989 (8th Cir.1985) (under Arkansas law, only a contract of an indefinite duration may be terminated at will); Griffin v. Erickson, 277 Ark. 433, 642 S.W.2d 308, 310 (1982) (<HOLDING>); Delong v. Rucker, 227 Ark. 869, 302 S.W.2d Options: A. holding that under new york law employment is atwill unless the duration of an employment contract is set forth explicitly B. holding that employee handbook did not give rise to implied contract where it stated that it was not a contract and that employment was terminable at will C. holding that where an oral contract was removed from the statute of frauds by clear and convincing evidence under arkansas law the defendant could not terminate the contract at its will only a contract of indefinite duration may be so terminated D. holding that an employment at will agreement is an enforceable contract until terminated by either party E. holding that an employment contract of an indefinite duration is terminable at will

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an employment contract of an indefinite duration is terminable at will
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the crime” -without being “present at the commission of the offense.” Tolley v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 341, 348, 218 S.E.2d 550, 555 (1975). Plainly, it is possible to incite, advise, or abet in the commission of a crime without at the same time having agreed to commit such crime. As the United States Supreme Court has stated, “[a]iding, abetting, and counseling are not terms which presuppose the existence of an agreement. Those terms have a broader application, making the defendant a principal when he consciously shares in a criminal act, regardless of the existence of a conspiracy.” Pereira, 347 U.S. at 11, 74 S.Ct. at 364. Thus, murder, even when committed as an accessory before the fact, does not require proof of an agreement. See also Ramsey, 2 Va.App. at 272, 343 S.E.2d at 470 (<HOLDING>). Because the charged murder and conspiracy Options: A. recognizing that felony and misdemeanor dwi are separate offenses because a prior conviction is an essential element of felony driving while intoxicated but it is not an element of the misdemeanor offense B. holding that reversal of conviction for felony murder was required where jury failed to find the defendant guilty of the underlying felony as essential element of the felony murder offense C. holding that for facilitation of a felony the state must prove the commission of a specified felony and the assistance the accused gave to the person committing the specified felony D. holding that a prior nonarizona conviction to be used as a prior felony conviction under the statute must both be for an offense that would constitute a felony in arizona and be classified as a felony in the other jurisdiction E. holding that proof of an agreement to commit a felony is not a necessary element in a conviction for the commission of the felony

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that proof of an agreement to commit a felony is not a necessary element in a conviction for the commission of the felony
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 the Borrower may not assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender (except to Holdings pursuant to a transaction permitted under Section 8.2.3[Fundamental Changes], 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 11.8.2 [Assignments by Lenders], (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.8.4 [Participations], or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of Section 11.8.5 [Certain Pledges; Successors and Assigns Generally] (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 11.8.4 [Participations] 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: 6.3 to the extent not prohibited by law , in no event shall the licensor be liable for personal injury , or any incidental , special , indirect , consequential or punitive damages whatsoever , including , without limitation :

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 223, 228 (N.D.N.Y.1999). In terms of the level of skill that it required, Eisenberg’s moving work was not analogous to any of these jobs. Indeed, in this case White and Ewing all but offered Eisenberg a job without first asking her about moving-related work that she had done in the past, or about relevant skills that she might have developed over the years. See ante at 112-13. That White seemed to view Eisenberg as qualified for the job solely on the basis of her football and carpentry abilities, see ante at id., only emphasizes the point: While simple moving of the sort Eisenberg performed certainly requires skills — strength, for example, and agility— it does not demand specialized skills of the sort typically acquired through experience and/or education. See Aymes, 980 F.2d at 862 (<HOLDING>). As to the third and fourth factors, the Options: A. holding that if the putative employee has the discretion to adopt the means and methods he wishes to accomplish the required work he is an independent contractor B. holding that an employees injury while on college grounds to report for first day of work before he reached either the administration building where he was to complete payroll forms or the athletic field house where he was to do the work was an injury suffered in the course of the employment C. holding that the level of skill involved in a computer programmers work suggested that he was an independent contractor because his programming demanded that he use skills developed while a graduate student and through his work experience D. holding that defendant was not resident of his mothers household even though his drivers license listed his mothers address and he received mail there because he expressed a belief that his residence was in a different location than his mothers home he rented and occupied his own residence and he testified that he was only living with his mother after expiration of his lease until he could find another place to live E. holding that duty to ensure that independent contractor performs its work in safe manner arises if the general contractor retains some control over the manner in which the independent contractor performs its work

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the level of skill involved in a computer programmers work suggested that he was an independent contractor because his programming demanded that he use skills developed while a graduate student and through his work experience
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: State v. Marshall, 148 N.J. 89, 284, 690 A.2d 1, cert. denied, 522 U.S. 850, 118 S.Ct. 140, 139 L.Ed.2d 88 (1997). However, the Court implicitly acknowledged a defendant’s right of access to witnesses, stating, “Of course, if the State were to interfere with a defendant’s ability to answer criminal charges by using its influence to discourage witnesses from speaking to counsel or counsel’s agents, a very different case would be presented.” Ibid. See also State v. Murtagh, 169 P.3d 602, 608 (Alaska 2007) (finding certain provisions of the Alaska Victims’ Right Act of 1991, Alaska Stat. §§ 12.61.100 to -.150, were unconstitutional because they interfered with criminal defense investigations without adequate justification). Cf. Coppolino v. Helpern, 266 F.Supp. 930, 935-36 (S.D.N.Y.1967) (<HOLDING>); but see Fenenbock, supra, 681 F.3d at 970-71, Options: A. holding that waiver by attorney was binding upon the accused when before the state introduced the evidence complained of on appeal counsel for the state in the presence of the accused and his counsel stated the agreement and the evidence of the witness was then read to the jury in the presence of the accused and his counsel without objection B. holding because the svp is civil the accused has no constitutional right to counsel C. holding that medical examiners order to toxicologist not to speak with accused his counsel or experts violated defendants constitutional rights D. holding that patients constitutional due process rights were violated when his trial counsel was not allowed to present a closing argument prior to involuntary commitment E. recognizing defendants state and federal constitutional rights to testify

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that medical examiners order to toxicologist not to speak with accused his counsel or experts violated defendants constitutional rights
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 Employer shall indemnify and hold harmless each member of the Committee against any and all expenses and liabilities arising out of his administrative functions or fiduciary responsibilities, including any expenses and liabilities that are caused by or result from an act or omission constituting the negligence of such member in the performance of such functions or responsibilities, but excluding expenses and liabilities that are caused by or result from such member’s own gross negligence or willful misconduct. Expenses against which such member shall be indemnified hereunder shall include, without limitation, the amounts of any settlement or judgment, costs, counsel fees, and related charges reasonably incurred in connection with a claim asserted or a proceeding brought or settlement thereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 221, 222 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Alvarez, 51 F.3d 36, 39 (5th Cir.1995); United States v. Gregory, 932 F.2d 1167, 1168 (6th Cir.1991); United States v. Gant, 902 F.2d 570, 572-73 (7th Cir.1990); United States v. Vizcarra-Angulo, 904 F.2d 22, 23 (9th Cir.1990); United States v. Bromberg, 933 F.2d 895, 896 (10th Cir.1991); United States v. Wright, 895 F.2d 718, 719-22 (11th Cir.1990) (per cu-riam); Hazel, 928 F.2d at 423-24. 16 . See Bromberg, 933 F.2d at 897. 17 . United States v. King, 53 F.3d 589, 591 (3d Cir.1995); United States v. Johnson, 33 F.3d 8, 10 (5th Cir.1994). 18 . Johnson, 33 F.3d at 10. 19 . King, 53 F.3d at 591. 20 . Witte v. United States, - U.S. -, -, 115 S.Ct. 2199, 2209, 132 L.Ed.2d 351 (1995). 21 . United States v. Jones, 18 F.3d 1145, 1151 (4th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); Porter, 909 F.2d at Options: A. holding that imposition of a sentence within the properly calculated range is not reviewable B. holding 3742a does not authorize appellate review of a district courts underlying factfinding so long as the sentence imposed was within a properly calculated guideline range C. holding that a sentence within a properly calculated guideline range is usually reasonable D. holding that when a court miscalculates the guideline range yet imposes a sentence that falls within a properly calculated guideline range the sentence enjoys a presumption of reasonableness E. holding that a sentence within the properly calculated guideline range is presumptively reasonable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding 3742a does not authorize appellate review of a district courts underlying factfinding so long as the sentence imposed was within a properly calculated guideline range
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: During Executive’s Company Employment and for two (2) years following the termination of such employment for any reason, Executive (i) will not criticize or disparage the Company or its directors, officers, employees or products, and (ii) will fully cooperate with the Company in all investigations, potential litigation or litigation in which the Company is involved or may become involved with respect to matters that relate to Executive’s Company Employment (other than any such investigations, potential litigation or litigation between Company and Executive); provided , that , with regard to Executive’s duties under clause (ii), Executive shall be reimbursed for reasonable travel and out-of-pocket expenses related thereto, but shall otherwise not be entitled to any additional compensation.

assistant: Cooperation
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: since the Supreme Court decided IBP. The statutory language of the exemptions does not allow for a clean analytical distinction between those activities that are “integral and indispensable” and those that are not. But it is clear to us from the Act’s language and history that the activity in question must be work in the benefit of the employer, and that the security screening mandated by the FAA in this case is not compensable work. We therefore hold that the time appellants spent going through the mandatory security screening is not compensable under the FLSA because that screening is not “integral and indispensable” to a principal activity under IBP, Steiner, or Dunlop. III. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summa 46, 651 (2d Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); Vega v. Gasper, 36 F.3d 417 (5th Cir.1994) Options: A. holding that when parties voluntarily submit to binding arbitration they generally believe that they are trading their right to appeal an arbitration award for a relatively speedy and inexpensive resolution to their dispute B. holding that time workers spent traveling on an employers boat to a construction site was not compensable under the act C. holding that the scope and application of state exemptions are defined by the state courts and that we are bound by their interpretations D. recognizing the exemptions under the flsa are narrowly construed against the employers seeking to assert them and their application limited to those establishments plainly and unmistakably within their terms and spirit and that the burden of invoking these exemptions rests upon the employer E. holding that dog handlers commutes are not compensable just because they bring their dogs into work and also noting that the portaltoportal act exemptions properly protect employers from responsibility for commuting time and for relatively trivial nononerous aspects of preliminary preparation maintenance and clean up

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that dog handlers commutes are not compensable just because they bring their dogs into work and also noting that the portaltoportal act exemptions properly protect employers from responsibility for commuting time and for relatively trivial nononerous aspects of preliminary preparation maintenance and clean up
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 Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts and by each of the undersigned on separate counterparts and may be delivered by facsimile or other electronic delivery (such as, without limitation, scanned signatures in .pdf format), and each such counterpart will be deemed to be an original, but all such counterparts will together constitute but one and the same 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and all claims relating to or arising out of this Agreement, or the breach thereof, whether based in contract, tort or otherwise, shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without regard to its conflict of laws, rules or principles.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Use the proceeds of the Loans, and the Letters of Credit, solely for working capital purposes for Capital Expenditures and for other general business purposes; and not use or permit any proceeds of any Loan to be used, either directly or indirectly, for the purpose, whether immediate, incidental or ultimate, of “purchasing or carrying” any Margin Stock.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: equipment,” held controlling as to coverage); American States Ins. Co. v. Dick’s Crane Serv., Inc., 399 So.2d 442, 443-44 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1981) (declining to order trial court, on remand, to grant insurer’s summary-judgment motion, based upon automobile policy’s “mobile equipment” exclusion, because policy schedules showed that a premium had been charged for coverage of the truck crane at issue); United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Gillis, 164 Ga.App. 278, 282, 296 S.E.2d 253, 256 (1982) (affirming a summary judgment in favor of insureds under a commercial automobile policy where, among other things, the only truck listed as a “covered auto” fell within the definition of “mobile equipment”); and Canal Ins. Co. v. Insurance Co. of North America, 315 S.C. 1, 3, 431 S.E.2d 577, 579 (1993) (<HOLDING>). But see Mouton v. Armco, Inc., 431 So.2d 776, Options: A. holding location of named driver exclusion in endorsement did not make it ambiguous exclusion applied to all coverage afforded by the policy including the um coverage B. holding that a household exclusion in the policy was void insofar as it denied coverage in the amount required by 3031902 but it was valid as to any coverage exceeding that amount C. holding that trial court properly construed mobile equipment exclusion as not prohibiting coverage for the only vehicle contemplated by the parties to the policy citing gillis supra D. holding named driver exclusion eliminating liability coverage as well as um coverage did not contravene um statute because statute required um coverage only if the claimant otherwise qualifies for liability coverage under the policy E. holding that the plaintiffs asserted legal basis for coverage is irrelevant to the determination of whether the insurance policy provides coverage and instead looking to the facts underlying the claim for coverage

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that trial court properly construed mobile equipment exclusion as not prohibiting coverage for the only vehicle contemplated by the parties to the policy citing gillis supra
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 section headings in this Agreement are for convenience of reference only; they form no part of this Agreement and shall not affect its interpretation. The provisions of this Agreement are independent of and separable from each other. If any provision hereof shall for any reason be held invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision hereof, but this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein.

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: The parties hereto agree to take all further actions and execute all further documents as may from time to time be reasonably requested by another party hereto for the purpose of carrying out the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Facts A. Procedural Due Process 1. Application of Mathews Balancing Test Application of the Mathews balancing test requires finding the Adam Walsh Act’s requirement of electronic monitoring unconstitutional as applied to this defendant in present circumstances. a) Private Interest and Risk of Erroneous Deprivation There is a valid liberty interest in freedom of movement that is arbitrarily and substantially reduced by the Adam Walsh Act. The right to travel from one place to another free of hindrances is a well established aspect of constitutionally protected private freedom. See Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 358, 103 S.Ct. 1855, 75 L.Ed.2d 903 (1983); Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. 186 (1900); Ramos v. Town of Vernon, 353 F.3d 171, 172 (2d Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Spencer v. Casavilla, 903 F.2d 171, 174 (2d Options: A. recognizing that the accuseds right to be represented by counsel is a fundamental component of our criminal justice system B. recognizing repayment of damages to society as remedial C. holding a town councils curfew for juveniles unconstitutional noting that the right to free move ment is a vital component of life in an open society D. holding that the fourth amendment right implicated in a malicious prosecution action is the right to be free of unreasonable seizure of the person E. holding unconstitutional a sentence of life imprisonment for passing a bad check by a convicted felon

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a town councils curfew for juveniles unconstitutional noting that the right to free move ment is a vital component of life in an open society
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: should either you or linden lab elect to resolve the dispute by way of binding arbitration , the arbitration shall proceed in accordance with the then-current commercial arbitration rules of the american arbitration association ( `` aaa '' ) , except that , as noted , in no event shall the arbitration proceed as a class or representative action .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: those who choose to access the tripadvisor website from outside of the united states do so on their own initiative and are responsible for compliance with local laws , if and to the extent that local laws are applicable .

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: by dragging him to the ground and pinning him there because [plaintiffs] posed no danger to the officers, did nothing to provoke them, and there was no severe crime at issue.”). This is especially so with regard to the tasings and the dog bite. See Brooks v. City of Seattle, 661 F.3d 433, 446 (9th Cir.2011) (reasonable juror could find excessive force where officer contact tased plaintiff three times over the course of one minute after plaintiff, who had been pulled over and issued a speeding citation, “actively resisted arrest [by] refusing] to get out of her car when instructed to do so and stiffening] her body and clutching] her steering wheel to frustrate the officers’ efforts to remove her from her car”); Watkins v. City of Oakland, Cal., 145 F.3d 1087, 1093 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Kyles has raised genuine issues of fact Options: A. holding that inquiry as to whether officers are entitled to qualified immunity for use of excessive force is distinct from inquiry on the merits of the excessive force claim B. holding officers punch of an inmate was not excessive force C. holding in case where po lice dog bit plaintiff for approximately fifteen seconds in officers presence that excessive duration of the bite and improper encouragement of a continuation of the attack by officers could constitute excessive force D. holding that the owner of a dog who bit the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment when although the dog had previously jumped on the plaintiff in an aggressive manner the dog did not attempt to bite or scratch and the plaintiff conceded that she was unaware of any prior instance when the dog had bitten a person E. holding that in 1998 the law was clearly established that excessive duration of a police dog bite and improper encouragement of a continuation of the attack by officers could constitute excessive force

assistant: The best answer is C. holding in case where po lice dog bit plaintiff for approximately fifteen seconds in officers presence that excessive duration of the bite and improper encouragement of a continuation of the attack by officers could constitute excessive force
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 payment of the Guaranteed Obligations will be made by each Loan Party without withholding for any Taxes, unless such withholding is required by law. If any Loan Party determines, in its sole discretion exercised in good faith, that it is so required to withhold Taxes, then such Loan Party may so withhold and shall timely pay the full amount of withheld Taxes to the relevant Governmental Authority in accordance with applicable law. If such Taxes are Indemnified Taxes, then the amount payable by such Loan Party shall be increased as necessary so that, net of such withholding (including such withholding applicable to additional amounts payable under this Section), the Administrative Agent, Lender or Issuing Bank (as the case may be) receives the amount it would have received had no such withholding been made, and Section 2.17(g) shall apply to the extent relevant.

assistant: Taxes
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 negligent conduct. Although expert opinions are not inadmissible merely because they “embrace” ultimate issues to be decided by the trier of fact, Fed.R.Evid. 704, legal conclusions or statements of advocacy do not assist the factfinder. Snap-Drape, Inc. v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 98 F.3d 194, 197-98 (5th Cir.1996). Despite its permissive language, Rule 704 “does not allow an expert to render conclusions of law.” Id. Most of Martin’s report is inadmissible on this basis. To the extent Martin’s report addresses contract interpretation, it is inadmissible. Expert testimony on the proper interpretation of contract terms may be admissible when the meaning depends on trade or industry practice. See, e.g., Kona Tech. Corp. v. S. Pac. Transp. Co., 225 F.3d 595, 611 (5th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). But such expert testimony is admissible only Options: A. holding that the industry norm was established by expert who presented percentages of the industry making late payments B. holding the district court properly admitted expert testimony on defendants active gang membership C. holding that the district court properly admitted expert testimony under daubert that was based on inter alia the doctors clinical experience and review of the medical records D. holding improperly admitted testimony was cumulative to the other properly admitted evidence and was therefore harmless E. holding that the district court properly admitted expert testimony to interpret contract provisions having a specialized meaning in the railroad industry

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district court properly admitted expert testimony to interpret contract provisions having a specialized meaning in the railroad industry
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 the court of appeals’ reliance on ProMax was misplaced. In the case before us, Wilshire’s only request for attorney fees was based on those awardable under section 38-9-7(5) at the summary lien proceeding. That request was denied. The district court reserved the right to consider awarding attorney fees only if such requests were made at further proceedings. This reservation, contingent upon the occurrence of an uncertain event, was insufficient to leave the attorney fees issue pending. ¶28 The ProMax rule is inapplicable to cases where, as in this case, a court makes an outright denial of a request for attorney fees. For the attorney fees issue to be pending, there must be something left for the district court to decide. Cf. State v. Mullins, 2005 UT 43, ¶ 10, 116 P.3d 374 (<HOLDING>). As a result, we hold that the court of Options: A. holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to withdraw guilty plea filed three weeks after entering the plea B. holding the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendants motion to withdraw his guilty plea because the defendant did not admit to facts demonstrating the required mental state C. holding that defendant was entitled to withdraw guilty plea upon habeas corpus proceedings where he pled guilty in exchange for an illegal sentence D. holding that a motion to withdraw a guilty plea was not pending because nothing was left for the court to decide E. holding that trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider defendants motion to withdraw guilty plea filed beyond term of court in which defendant was sentenced

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a motion to withdraw a guilty plea was not pending because nothing was left for the court to decide
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: Notices and communications hereunder must be in writing and either personally delivered or sent by registered or certified United States mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid. Notices to the Company must be addressed to Global Payments Inc., 10 Glenlake Parkway, North Tower, Atlanta, Georgia 30328, Attn: Corporate Secretary, or any other address designated by the Company in a written notice to Grantee. Notices to Grantee will be directed to the address of Grantee then currently on file with the Company, or at any other address given by Grantee in a written notice to the Company.

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: Without granting any right or license, the Disclosing Party agrees that the foregoing clauses (i), (ii), (iii) and (v) shall not apply with respect to all obligations after five (5) years following the disclosure thereof or any information that the Receiving Party can document

assistant: No
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 mere fact that the accident occurred is not sufficient grounds for concluding that Mullins was probably negligent, and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is therefore inapplicable. See Drake, 924 P.2d at 1391. In his affidavit, Seligman asserts that the circumstances of the accident support an inference that Mullins may have fallen asleep at the wheel. However, Seligman’s opinion is insufficient to establish that “in the ordinary course of events, [the] injury would not [have] occur[red] except by the negligence of [Mullins].” Drake, 924 P.2d at 1391. Specifically, Seligman has not ruled out other possible causes of the accident and has therefore failed to establish a probability that the accident occurred as a result of Mullins’s negligence. See Mireles, 872 P.2d at 866 (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs claim that the accident could only Options: A. holding res ipsa loquitur inapplicable in case where both liability and causation had to be established by expert witnesses B. holding that permitting jury to find malpractice from blood draw without expert testimony by applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur instead of eliciting expert testimony as to the standard of care to be reversible error C. holding that in order to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to call a witness to testify the claimant must allege 1 the identity of the potential witness 2 that the witness was available to testify at trial 3 the substance of the witnesss testimony and 4 an explanation of how the omission of the testimony prejudiced the case D. holding that the burden of laying the proper foundation for the admission of the expert testimony is on the party offering the expert and admissibility must be shown by a preponderance of the evidence E. holding that while a foundation for an inference of negligence under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur may be based on the testimony of an expert witness the experts testimony must establish that the occurrence indicates the probability of negligence

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that while a foundation for an inference of negligence under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur may be based on the testimony of an expert witness the experts testimony must establish that the occurrence indicates the probability of negligence
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 Loan Party and each of its Restricted Subsidiaries own, or possess the right to use, all of the trademarks, service marks, trade names, copyrights, patents, patent rights, franchises, licenses and other intellectual property rights (collectively, “ IP Rights ”) that are necessary for the operation of their respective businesses, without conflict with the rights of any other Person, except where the failure to do so could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. No claim or litigation regarding any of the foregoing is pending or, to the knowledge of the Borrower, threatened, which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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: utility records reveal only the total amount of electricity a person is using in his home on a periodic basis and the amount being paid for those services. It does not divulge personal details — whether or when the person is watching television, talking on the telephone, or using any particular appliance. Thus, one could easily conclude that a person has a far greater expectation of privacy in his bank records than his utility records. Significantly, no state court has interpreted its own constitution to mandate that the police first obtain a warrant to obtain electric utility records. The state courts that have considered the issue have rejected the notion that there is a legitimate expectation of privacy in such records. See Samson v. State, 919 P.2d 171, 173 (Alaska Ct.App.1996) (<HOLDING>); People v. Stanley, 72 Cal.App.4th 1547, 86 Options: A. holding that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in utility records under either state or federal constitution B. holding no reasonable expectation of privacy in medical records because of statutory exception to physicianpatient privilege in homicide trials C. holding that a bank customer did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records maintained by the bank D. holding that no reasonable expectation of privacy in utility records exists under alaska constitution E. holding that prisoners have no reasonable expectation of privacy in their prison cells

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that no reasonable expectation of privacy in utility records exists under alaska constitution
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: such a restrictive application could be given the case, the impact would likely be substantial. The range of time and offenses involved, and the size of our military forces underscore the effect of ret-roactivity on the administration of justice. The difficulties and dangers in reopening large numbers of such cases obviously argue with great force for prospective application of O’Callahan. In sum we are persuaded that the criteria under Supreme Court decisions justify and strongly call for limiting to prospective application the ruling in O’Callahan v. Parker. We agree with the view of the District Judges in these proceedings and those of the several courts that have reached a like conclusion. See Gosa v. Mayden, supra; Mercer and Paroles, 357 U.S. 214, 78 S.Ct. 1061, 2 L.Ed.2d 1269 (<HOLDING>). 9 . Alaska does provide for indictment by Options: A. holding the right to assistance of counsel as announced in gideon v wainwright 372 us 335 83 sct 792 9 led2d 799 to be retroactive B. holding that counsel must be appointed to indigents for purposes of appeal as announced in douglas v california 372 us 353 83 sct 814 9 led2d 811 to be retroactive C. holding the rule requiring that counsel be furnished in proceedings for probation or imposition of deferred sentence as announced in mempa v rhay 389 us 128 88 sct 254 19 led 2d 336 to be retroactive D. holding that indigents have a right to a transcript on appeal as announced in griffin v illinois 351 us 12 76 sct 585 100 led 891 to be retroactive E. holding the rule against adverse comments on a defendants failure to testify as violative of the privilege against selfincrimination announced in griffin v california 380 us 609 85 sct 1229 14 led2d 106 not to he retroactive

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that indigents have a right to a transcript on appeal as announced in griffin v illinois 351 us 12 76 sct 585 100 led 891 to be retroactive
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: No failure on the part of the Lender to exercise, and no delay in exercising, any right under any of the Loan Documents shall operate as a waiver thereof; nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right under any of the Loan Documents preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right. The remedies herein are cumulative and are not exclusive of any remedies provided by law.

assistant: No Waivers