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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT AND THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES HEREUNDER AND ANY CLAIM OR CONTROVERSY RELATING HERETO SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO AND THE FEDERAL LAWS OF CANADA APPLICABLE THEREIN.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: clearly erroneous and, thus, will not be disturbed on appeal. Judgment affirmed. Smith, P. J., and Mikell, J., concur. Decided September 8, 2011. Clegg & Petrey, John H. Petrey, for appellant. Daniel J. Porter, District Attorney, Stephen A. Fern, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee. 1 See, e.g., Goolsby v. State, 299 Ga. App. 330, 330-31 (682 SE2d 671) (2009); 98) (2009). 20 261 Ga. 640 (409 SE2d 649) (1991). 21 Payne, 285 Ga. at 138; see Williams, 261 Ga. at 642 (2) (b). 22 Id. 23 See Davis v. State, 279 Ga. 786, 787-88 (3) (621 SE2d 446) (2005) (finding that evidence of defendant’s murder of witnesses to the murder for which he was being tried was admissible to show defendant’s course of conduct and bent of mind); Rainey v. State, 179 Ga. App. 584, 586 (4) (347 SE2d 341) (1986) (<HOLDING>); see also McCoy v. State, 273 Ga. 568, 571 (5) Options: A. holding that before a defendant is entitled to introduce evidence of the victims character for violence there must be sufficient evidence to support a finding that the victim was the first aggressor and that once the defendant testified that he was attacked and cut by the victim without provocation before using the victims utility tool to stab the victim the defendant was clearly entitled to question the victim about past acts of violence reflected in court documents from the state of oregon B. holding that a defendant who alleges selfdefense can show through the testimony of another witness that the alleged victim had a propensity for violence thereby inferring that the alleged victim was the aggressor a defendants prior knowledge of the victims reputation for violence is irrelevant because the evidence is offered to show the conduct of the victim rather than the defendants state of mind C. holding that uncharged sexual acts committed upon the same victim are admissible to show the conduct of the defendant toward the victim and to corroborate the evidence of the offense charged in the indictment D. holding that evidence of assault on victim that was subsequent to the arson for which defendant was tried was admissible to show defendants bent of mind toward violence directed at the victim E. holding evidence of sexual assault relevant to show defendants motive in kidnapping victim

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that evidence of assault on victim that was subsequent to the arson for which defendant was tried was admissible to show defendants bent of mind toward violence directed at the victim
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 Seller is a limited liability company duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the Laws of the State of Georgia, has all requisite power to own, lease and operate its properties and to carry on its business as now being conducted, and is licensed or qualified to do business in each jurisdiction in which the ownership of the Purchased Assets or the operation of the Business as currently conducted makes such licensing or qualification necessary.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth in the Borrower’s filings with the SEC prior to the ARCA Effective Date or as otherwise disclosed in writing prior to the ARCA Effective Date to the Administrative Agent for distribution to the Lenders, there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or, to the Knowledge of Borrower, threatened in writing against Borrower, any of its Subsidiaries or against any of their respective properties or assets which would reasonably expected to have (individually or collectively) a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with the plans for the Holcomb Expansion Project in the manner the company desired without RUS approval, plaintiff has not persuaded this Court that the provisions generally prevent a borrower from undertaking this type of project without RUS approval. 12 . This is commonly seen in the cases involving the construction of a highway, a rail line or a power line. In these instances, courts have repeatedly held that, while the federal agency might be expected to consider environmental impacts with respect to the small segment in which it was involved, the agency was not required to consider the environmental impact of the entire project if it had no involvement in the remaining portions of the project. See, e.g., Coal. for Underground Expansion v. Mineta, 333 F.3d 193, 198 (D.C.Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Weiss v. Kempthorne, 580 F.Supp.2d 184, 189 Options: A. holding that the court may only consider the discrete acts that occurred within the appropriate time period B. holding that although the express warranty claim was not federally preempted the plaintiff had not alleged sufficient facts for the claim to survive dismissal under rule 8 where the pjlaintiff alleged no facts demonstrating that defendants made any affirmations specifically to plaintiff or her physician so as to form the basis of the bargain C. holding that although other parts of the rail transit system are federally funded this does not make the discrete claytonshrewsbury extension federally funded D. recognizing that order denying confirmation of a plan does not resolve a discrete issue E. holding that the protection of the double jeopardy clause does not preclude a defendant from being charged under a statute defining as the criminal offense a discrete act after a prior conviction or acquittal of a distinguishable discrete act that is a separate violation of the statute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that although other parts of the rail transit system are federally funded this does not make the discrete claytonshrewsbury extension federally funded
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Waxfield Ltd., 424 F.3d 278, 283-85 (2d Cir.2005); Personal Sec. & Safety Sys. Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 297 F.3d 388, 395-96 (5th Cir.2002). Escobal next contends that he cannot be compelled to arbitrate his claim against Celebration Cruise Line because it is not a signatory to the arbitration agreement. Again, we disagree. Escobal’s claim against Cruise Line is inextricably intertwined with his claims against the contract signatory Celebration Cruise Operator. Thus, the district court properly applied equitable estoppel in requiring Es-cobal to arbitrate his claim against Cruise Line. See MS Dealer Serv. Corp. v. Franklin, 177 F.3d 942, 947-48 (11th Cir.1999), abrogated on other grounds, Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle, 556 U.S. 624, 631, 129 S.Ct. 1896, 1902, 173 L.Ed.2d 832 (2009) (<HOLDING>). Escobal next contends that if he must Options: A. holding that nonsignatory was estopped from denying applicability of arbitration clause where nonsignatory received direct benefits from contract including lowered insurance rates and the ability to sail under the french flag B. holding that when an arbitration clause has provisions that defeat the remedial purpose of the statute the arbitration clause is not enforceable and that the language insulating an employer from damages and equitable relief renders the clause unenforceable C. holding that the best way to harmonize a choice of law clause and an arbitration clause is to apply the substantive case law of the named state to the entire agreement including the arbitration clause D. holding that state law governs whether an arbitration clause is enforceable against a nonsignatory under the faa E. holding that an exception to the rule that a nonsignatory cannot invoke arbitration exists when under agency or related principals the relationship between the nonsignatory and a signatory is sufficiently close that the only way to avoid eviscerating the arbitration agreement is to allow the nonsignatory to compel arbitration

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that state law governs whether an arbitration clause is enforceable against a nonsignatory under the faa
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: upon termination by you , or by truecaller due to your breach of these terms , you will not be refunded any license fees or other prepaid fees , if any .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is the result of negotiations between and has been reviewed by respective counsel to the Borrower, the REIT, the Administrative Agent and the Lenders and is the product of all parties hereto. Accordingly, this Agreement shall not be construed against any party merely because of its involvement in the preparation hereof.

assistant: Interpretations
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 Lender may at any time, without the consent of, or notice to, the Borrower or the Administrative Agent, sell participations to any Person (other than (i) a natural person (or a holding company, investment vehicle or trust for, or owned and operated for the primary benefit of, a natural Person), (ii) the Borrower or any of the Borrower’s Affiliates or Subsidiaries or (iii) to any Defaulting Lender or any of its Subsidiaries, or any Person who, upon becoming a Lender hereunder, would constitute any of the foregoing Persons) (each a “ Participant ”) in all or a portion of such Lender’s rights and/or obligations under this Agreement (including all or a portion of its Commitment and/or the Loans owing to it); provided that (i) such Lender’s obligations under this Agreement shall remain unchanged, (ii) such Lender shall remain solely responsible to the other parties hereto for the performance of such obligations and (iii) the Borrower, the Administrative Agent, the Issuing Lenders and the Lenders shall continue to deal solely and directly with such Lender in connection with such Lender’s rights and obligations under this Agreement. For the avoidance of doubt, each Lender shall be responsible for the indemnity under Section 11.3(c) with respect to any payments made by such Lender to its Participant(s).

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: over a defendant who “[pjarticipated in tortious acts within Puerto Rico personally or through his agent....” Puerto Rico R.Civ.P.Rule 4.7(a)(2). The Rivera Court found this provision could be satisfied by tortious acts committed outside the jurisdiction where the defendant knew that the effects of his actions “were going to be felt specifically” in Puerto Rico. Rivera, 145 F.R.D. at 620. [Jjurisdietion may be asserted under 4.7(a)(2) where a defendant ... commits a tortious act within or without the Commonwealth that he knows or reasonably should know will cause injury within Puerto Rico. Id. at 620 (quoting Mangual v. General Battery Corp., 710 F.2d 15, 19 (1st Cir.1983)). Massachusetts courts have applied a similar rationale. Murphy v. Erwin-Wasey, 460 F.2d 661, 664 (1st Cir.1972) (<HOLDING>). The Murphy court’s analysis rests on the Options: A. holding that nonresident defendants failure to make payments in florida coupled with forum selection clause sufficient for court to exercise personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendant B. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident printing customer despite the fact that texas printer solicited the business in alabama and nonresident sent no personnel to texas because nonresident placed additional orders from which it expected to profit sent payments to texas sent and received printing materials to and from texas paid for shipping of printed goods from texas and sent payments to texas the transactions were governed by texas law and substantial part of performance occurred in texas C. holding that absence of evidence that appellee internet company directed advertising towards pennsylvanians via its website and the initiation by appellant to receive information via mail precluded a finding of general jurisdiction D. holding that californias tolling statute could not constitutionally be applied to a nonresident entering into a sales transaction with a resident since the nonresident was engaged in interstate commerce E. holding that a nonresident defendant who knowingly sent false information about billing commissions into massachusetts via us mail in order to deceive the plaintiff into accepting a lower percentage than was due him was subject to specific jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a nonresident defendant who knowingly sent false information about billing commissions into massachusetts via us mail in order to deceive the plaintiff into accepting a lower percentage than was due him was subject to specific jurisdiction
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: They also rely on Oswego Laborers’ Local 214 Pension Fund v. Marine Midland Bank, 85 N.Y.2d 20, 623 N.Y.S.2d 529, 647 N.E.2d 741 (1995), which held that a plaintiff “must demonstrate that the acts or practices have a broader impact on consumers at large.” Defs.’ Mem. at 14 (quoting Oswego Laborers’, 623 N.Y.S.2d 529, 647 N.E.2d at 744). As explained above, however, Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that Defendants’ unauthorized use of the DEL MONICO’S name in connection with non-Ocinomled restaurants and products caused consumer harm or injury to the public, and that they had a broad impact on consumers at large inasmuch as such. use was likely to cause consumer confusion. See, e.g., CommScope, Inc. of N.C. v. Commscope (U.S.A.) Int’l Grp. Co., 809 F.Supp.2d 33, 38 (N.D.N.Y. 2011) (<HOLDING>); New York City Triathlon, LLC v. NYC Triathlon Options: A. holding that plaintiff stated a 349 claim where plaintiff alleged facts plausibly suggesting that defendant intentionally registered its corporate name to be confusingly similar to plaintiffs commscope trademark B. holding that plaintiff stated a claim for breach of contract when it alleged the government failed to purchase insurance for plaintiff as agreed by contract C. holding that the plaintiff stated a claim for tortious interference D. holding that the plaintiff had not stated a claim for inducement to breach a contract where she had not alleged facts sufficient to show the existence of an enforceable underlying contract E. holding plaintiff stated claim in his individual capacity

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that plaintiff stated a 349 claim where plaintiff alleged facts plausibly suggesting that defendant intentionally registered its corporate name to be confusingly similar to plaintiffs commscope trademark
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: did not arise out of her employment, given that she was no longer employed at Riverside when she was injured. Respondents counter that, for purposes of the NIIA, the employment relationship continues for a reasonable amount of time after an employee quits or is fired, so that Fanders was still considered an employee when she was injured, and thus, the NILA applied and was Fanders’ sole remedy. The NIIA only covers injuries that arise out of and in the course of the injured claimant’s employment. NRS 616C. 150(1). An in jury occurs within the course of employment when there is a causal connection between the injury and the nature of the work or the workplace. Wood, 121 Nev. at 733, 121 P.3d at 1032; Rio Suite Hotel & Casino v. Gorsky, 113 Nev. 600, 604, 939 P.2d 1043, 1046 (1997) (<HOLDING>); see also MGM Mirage v. Cotton, 121 Nev. 396, Options: A. recognizing that an injury arises out of the employment relationship if it can be traced to the nature of employment or the workplace environment B. holding employees under age discrimination in employment acts adea parallel retaliation provision includes former employees as long as the alleged discrimination is related to or arises out of the employment relationship C. holding that it is the claimants burden to show that the injury was the result of an accident that not only arose in the course of the employment but that it also grew out of or resulted from the employment D. holding that where the employment of the injured employees was the occasion of the injury the injuries arose out of employment E. holding that language in employee handbook stating that it was not to be considered as creating terms and conditions of an employment contract and that the employment relationship was employment atwill was sufficiently explicit to preclude the creation of implied contractual obligations as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that an injury arises out of the employment relationship if it can be traced to the nature of employment or the workplace environment
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 following provisions of this Agreement will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement: Section 1.9 (End of Research Term), Section 1.10.1(d) (End of ASO Development Candidate Identification Term), Section 2.1.1(f) (Failure to Defer or Designate a High Interest Target a Collaboration Target or Biogen Alternate Modality Target), Section 3.1.3 (Option and Option Deadline) (but only with respect to Biogen’s transfer obligations thereunder), Section 4.1.3 (Effect of Termination on Sublicenses), Section 4.2.2 (Grant Back to Ionis), Section 4.3.3 (Enabling License to Biogen), Section 4.3.4 (Enabling License to Ionis), Section 4.4 (Licenses to Ionis for Biogen Results), Section 4.5 (Right to Obtain Direct License from Biogen to Ionis Partner; Sublicensees of Ionis), Section 4.8.2 (Technology Transfer after License Effective Date) (but only to the extent necessary to satisfy the requirements of Section 10.4.4 ), Section 6.12 (Reverse Royalty Payments to Biogen for a Discontinued Collaboration Product), Section 6.14.3 (Records Retention), Section 6.15 (Audits), Section 7.1.1 (Ionis Technology and Biogen Technology), Section 7.1.2 (Agreement Technology), Section 8.4 (Disclaimer), ARTICLE 9 (Indemnification; Insurance), Section 10.2.3(b) , Section 10.2.7 (Termination for Insolvency), Section 10.4 (Consequences of Expiration or Termination of the Agreement) (except Section 10.4.5 (Remedies Available to Biogen for Ionis’ Material Breach After License Effective Date)), ARTICLE 11 (Confidentiality), ARTICLE 12 (Miscellaneous) and Appendix 1 (Definitions) (to the extent definitions are embodied in the foregoing listed Articles and Sections).

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the arbitrator may only award relief ( including monetary , injunctive , and declaratory relief ) in favor of the individual party seeking relief and only to the extent necessary to provide relief necessitated by that party 's individual claim ( s ) .

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: claim, when the final disposition of the proceeding involves the merits and indicates the accused’s innocence.” However, in Smith-Hunter, the Court of Appeals described this language from MacFawn as dicta and “rejected] the notion — as contrary to the common law and our longstanding precedents — that ... [a] plaintiff must demonstrate innocence in order to satisfy the favorable termination prong of the malicious prosecution action.” 95 N.Y.2d at 198-99, 712 N.Y.S.2d 488, 784 N.E.2d 750. The court read MacFawn narrowly to “stand only for the proposition that dispositions inconsistent with innocence ... cannot be viewed as favorable to the accused.” Id. at 199, 712 N.Y.S.2d 438, 734 N.E.2d 750; see also Cantalino v. Danner, 96 N.Y.2d 391, 392, 729 N.Y.S.2d 405, 754 N.E.2d 164 (2001) (<HOLDING>). If the law were as Trigg argues, it would Options: A. holding that pretrial diversion agreement in which accused must acknowledge responsibility for offense conduct does not terminate the criminal action in favor of the criminal defendant for purposes of bringing a malicious prosecution claim B. holding that for the purposes of a malicious prosecution action a favorable termination must be one indicating that the accused is innocenta disposition that does not indicate the plaintiffs innocence is not considered a favorable termination C. holding that a dismissal in the interest of justice was a favorable termination for the purposes of a malicious prosecution action where the courts reasons for dismissing the criminal charges were not inconsistent with the innocence of the accused D. holding that only malicious prosecution requires a favorable termination of the criminal proceedings and that claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and abuse of process accrue on the date of arrest E. holding the same for malicious prosecution

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a dismissal in the interest of justice was a favorable termination for the purposes of a malicious prosecution action where the courts reasons for dismissing the criminal charges were not inconsistent with the innocence of the accused
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: a letter stating a no tolerance policy on violence or threatening behavior in the workplace, sent after Rodas was the subject of a complaint from a co-worker of threatening behavior. Finally, the remainder of the actions identified by Rodas fall well within the bounds of “minor annoyances” that we have previously deemed insufficient as a matter of law to be materially adverse. See Rivera v. Rochester Genesee Reg’l Transp. Auth., 743 F.3d 11, 26 (2d Cir. 2014) (concluding that disciplinary citations, assignment to drive dirtier buses, one late overtime payment, and refusal to be provided with half-day off for doctor’s appointment did not rise to level of materially adverse actions for retaliation claim); Tepperwien v. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., 663 F.3d 556, 568-72 (2d Cir. 2011) (<HOLDING>). No different conclusion is warranted when the Options: A. holding that switching police officers to a rotating momingafternoonnight shift from a permanent night shift was an adverse employment action because it severely affected their sleep schedules and made it more difficult for them to work overtime and parttime day jobs B. holding delayed paychecks denial of personal time criticism of work performance and shift change were adverse actions C. holding that a plaintiff alleging a hostile work environment claim under title vii may seek damages for all behavior contributing to a hostile work environment claim including behavior allegedly occurring outside the limitations period provided that an act contributing to the claim occurs within the filing period D. holding that counseling sessions and written criticisms of employees work performance did not fall within the types of materially adverse employment actions E. holding that investigatory sessions counseling threats of termination hostile behavior during meeting being made to come to work on day off under false pretenses and being switched to night shift were not materially adverse actions for retaliation claim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that investigatory sessions counseling threats of termination hostile behavior during meeting being made to come to work on day off under false pretenses and being switched to night shift were not materially adverse actions for retaliation claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Security Agreement may be executed in counterparts (and by different parties hereto in different counterparts), each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute a single contract. This Security Agreement constitutes the entire contract among the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any and all previous agreements and understandings, oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Security Agreement by telecopy, pdf or other electronic transmission shall be as effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Security Agreement.

assistant: Effectiveness
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: act of aberrant behavior.” 13. According to the Ninth Circuit, a case such as United States v. Carey, 895 F.2d 318 (7th Cir.1990), falls at the other end of the spectrum. In Carey, defendant engaged in a check-kiting scheme over a period of at least fifteen months. The Seventh Circuit held that “the defendant’s actions could not be characterized as aberrant behavior because they consisted of overt acts taking place over a prolonged period of time.” Id. at 325. Even the Ninth Circuit acknowledges that Carey would not qualify as “a single act of aberrant behavior.” 14. Under the Ninth Circuit’s analysis, Russell and Carey represent the terminal points on its “aberrant behavior spectrum.” See, e.g., Dickey, 924 F.2d at 838. See also United States v. Andruska, 964 F.2d 640 (7th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). The other cases which the Ninth Circuit has Options: A. recognizing the ninth circuits aberrant behavior spectrum B. recognizing that aberrant criminal behavior may justify downward variance C. recognizing limitations existence in other circuits D. holding there was no jurisdiction to review district courts discretionary refusal to depart downward on the grounds that defendants conduct constituted a single act of aberrant behavior E. holding that the enactment of the one central reason standard invalidates the ninth circuits prior at least in part analysis

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the ninth circuits aberrant behavior spectrum
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: a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial.’ As a result, 'we repeatedly have stressed the importance of resolving immunity questions at the earliest possible stage in litigation.’ ” (citations omitted)). 5 . As discussed below, whether Plaintiffs' asserted interest in the remains of their relative amounts to a "property interest" for constitutional due process is determined by reference to state law. See infra subpart A.2. 6 . We agree with the reasoning of the Sixth Circuit and believe that reasoning is applicable here.” Newman, 287 F.3d at 796. 7 . The California Supreme Court granted review, and, under California appellate rules, the opinion was superseded. Following the disposition in Conroy v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 45 Cal.4th 1244, 91 Cal.Rptr.3d 532, 203 P.3d 1127 (2009) (<HOLDING>), the appeal was dismissed. 94 Cal.Rptr.3d 684, Options: A. holding university owed no duty to family members of a decedent who donated his remains to dispose of the remains in a particular manner B. holding that almendareztorres remains good law after apprendi C. holding that a case under the declaratory judgments act remains a live controversy even if all requests for substantive declaratory relief become moot during the actions pendency as long as a claim for attorneys fees under the act remains pending D. holding that almendareztorres remains the law after apprendi E. holding that a company that entered into liquidation remains in business for purposes of the act

assistant: The best answer is A. holding university owed no duty to family members of a decedent who donated his remains to dispose of the remains in a particular manner
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 material fact exists as to whether this incident occurred on school property. 6 . Stennis argues that Gammel is not applicable, as Gammel was a trespasser — a status clearly distinguishable from that of a student attending school. Yet, Gammel’s status when he was in the school bus parking lot is irrelevant to the Court of Appeals’ holding. The critical aspect was that Gammel relinquished any status he possessed when he exited the school property — the result being the same had he been an invitee or licensee. 7 . In Groner, this Court explicitly held that a "regulation” created by the Mississippi High School Activities Association imposed a duty on Pearl High School. Groner, 784 So.2d at 915; see also Mississippi Dep’t of Human Servs. v. S.W., 111 So.3d 630, 639 (Miss.Ct.App.2012) Options: A. holding that the childrens court exceeded its authority in prohibiting the human services department from placing a child with her brother B. holding that the department of human services policy manual set forth ministerial duties to act to care for and protect children in its custody C. holding that natural parents have a fundamental liberty interest in the care custody and management of their children D. recognizing parents fundamental liberty interest in the care custody and management of their children E. holding care custody and control of children is a fundamental right

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the department of human services policy manual set forth ministerial duties to act to care for and protect children in its custody
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: is synonymous with “handbag.” See id. Furthermore, an unknown proportion of respondents may have qualified only because they had bought a “handbag” or “purse or wallet” costing more than the required amount “in the past year or two,” but were not likely to do so in “the next year or so.” It is well-established that only potential future purchasers, not past purchasers, are relevant to a confusion study. See Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., 746 F.2d 112, 118 (2d Cir.1984) (“[T]he survey utilized an improper universe in that it was conducted among individuals who had already purchased or leased Donkey Kong machines rather than those who were contemplating a purchase or lease.”); American Footwear Corp. v. General Footwear Co., 609 F.2d 655, 660-661, n. 4 (2d Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>); Jordache Enterprises, Inc. v. Levi Strauss & Options: A. holding that former municipal judge did not have property interest in continued employment B. holding trial court erred when it permitted jury to consider ucc impliedwarranty theories where evidence was insufficient to prove defective product at issue was sold C. holding that to prevail on strict liability claim for a defective product plaintiff must show the product was defective when it left the defendants possession and control D. holding that issue preclusion extends to a matter that the court must necessarily albeit implicitly have decided E. holding that a survey was defective where survey participants although former purchasers of the product at issue did not necessarily have any present purchasing interest in the particular matter being surveyed

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a survey was defective where survey participants although former purchasers of the product at issue did not necessarily have any present purchasing interest in the particular matter being surveyed
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: not assert that she imported Pike is inconsistent with her interpretation of Shallal. No cases support Talhelm’s attempt to read the public-body requirement out of the statute. The relevant precedents are strictly to the contrary. See, e.g., Richards v. Metron Integrated Health Sys., No. 242502, 2004 WL 443991, at *2 (Mich. Ct.App. Mar.11, 2004) (unpublished opinion) (nursing home employee did not meet the “public body” element when he threatened to report patient abuse to higher-ups at the company); Roulston, 608 N.W.2d at 530-31 (denying employer’s motion for summary judgment against employee who had reported suspected resident abuse at a nursing home to state investigators); see also Allen v. Charter County of Wayne, 192 Fed.Appx. 347, 350-51 (6th Cir.2006) (unpublished opinion) (<HOLDING>). The Michigan Supreme Court has recently Options: A. holding woman who alleged she was terminated for having an abortion stated a prima facie case for discrimination B. holding that a juror who initially equivocated as to her impartiality could be found impartial after she affirmatively said she thought she could be fair C. holding that plaintiff could not establish a prima facie case of discrimination because she was unable to present evidence that she was qualified for the position D. holding that the plaintiff made out a prima facie case of age discrimination based upon a showing that she was a member of the protected group she was qualified and capable of doing her job she was discharged and that her manager called her old woman thus evincing agebased animus sufficient to demonstrate discriminatory intent E. holding that employee who admitted that she had no intention of affirmatively seeking out the state auditors or giving them any information unless she was specifically asked could not establish a prima facie case

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that employee who admitted that she had no intention of affirmatively seeking out the state auditors or giving them any information unless she was specifically asked could not establish a prima facie case
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: notwithstanding anything to the contrary in our terms , in such cases , the liability of the masquerade parties will be limited to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law .

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: the view or otherwise within the knowledge of the defendant.” 11 Md.App. at 518, 275 A.2d 184 (emphasis supplied). By contrast, one of the factors running through cases holding evidence of joint constructive possession insufficient to convict is “the fact that the contraband was secreted away in a hidden place not shown to be within [the defendant’s] gaze or knowledge or in any way under his control.” Id. at 514, 275 A.2d 184 (emphasis supplied). This second Folk factor (the first being proximity) “concerns the [defendant’s] knowledge, through one sense or another, of the presence of the contraband.” Herbert v. State, 136 Md.App. 458, 466, 766 A.2d 190 (2001). Seeing something is one way of knowing of its presence. See e.g. Johnson v. State, 142 Md.App. 172, 199, 788 A.2d 678 (2002) (<HOLDING>). Line of sight or plain view evidence is not Options: A. holding that after making an arrest of the driver of a vehicle the police may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle B. holding that officers had probable cause to arrest driver and two passengers where cocaine and contraband were found in glove compartment and backseat armrest of vehicle and none of the men offered any information regarding the ownership of the drugs and contraband on the ground that the drugs and contraband could have been in the possession of any one of the three vehicle occupants or all three of them jointly C. holding that evidence was sufficient to sustain conviction of front seat passenger of possession with intent to distribute marijuana in paper bag in foot well of volkswagen on passengers side near gearshift in presence of marijuana smoke D. holding that it was inconceivable that the defendant a passenger in a vehicle did not know of the presence of contraband on the gearshift in his plain view and arms reach E. holding that where a qualified drug dog alerts to the presence of contraband in a vehicle officers have probable cause to search the vehicle

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that it was inconceivable that the defendant a passenger in a vehicle did not know of the presence of contraband on the gearshift in his plain view and arms reach
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 sets forth the entire agreement among the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery by fax or PDF shall be as effective as delivery of an original. This Agreement inures to the benefit of PayMeOn Inc.’s subsidiaries and its and their successors and assigns, who are third-party beneficiaries of this Agreement. The validity, construction, interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be construed under, and governed by, the laws of the State of Florida without regard to conflicts of law principles. THE PARTIES WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY PROCEEDING RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable under applicable law, such provision shall be modified by a court of competent jurisdiction to make such provision legal, valid and enforceable, without invalidating the remainder of such provision or the remaining provisions of this Agreement, with the provisions of this Agreement being interpreted, to the maximum extent possible, so as to conform to the original intent of this Agreement. This Agreement may not be changed, supplemented, canceled or terminated, and the terms hereof may not be waived, except by written instrument signed by the parties. No delay in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof. No waiver any such right, power or privilege, nor any single or partial exercise of any such right, power or privilege, shall preclude any further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other such right, power or privilege. The rights and remedies herein provided are cumulative and are not exclusive of any rights or remedies. The time period of a restrictive covenant herein shall only be deemed to have run while the party bound thereby was in full compliance therewith. All notices in respect of this Agreement shall be given in writing, shall be hand delivered or sent by registered or certified first-class mail, postage prepaid, and shall be effective upon delivery if hand delivered, or three days after mailing if mailed. The non-prevailing party shall reimburse the prevailing party for all reasonable collection and enforcement costs, including all reasonable attorneys’ fees and disbursements, in connection with any proceeding related to any breach or threatened breach hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All representations and warranties contained in this Agreement or in any other agreement between Grantor and Secured Party shall survive the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the creation and payment of the Obligations. Grantor waives notice of the acceptance of this Agreement by Secured Party. Captions in this Agreement are for reference and convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation or meaning of any provision of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will, and will cause each of its Restricted Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect its legal existence and the rights, licenses, permits, privileges and franchises material to the conduct of its business, except where the failure to do so, individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect; provided that the foregoing shall not prohibit any merger, consolidation, liquidation or dissolution permitted under Section 6.03 or any transaction permitted under Section 6.05 .

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

user: 1. “Confidential Information” shall mean the Purpose (including the contemplated transaction), identity of, and any discussions or negotiations between, the Parties, existence of this Agreement, and any and all information whether in oral, written, graphic or electronic form, including but not limited to, data, know-how and any and all subject matter (whether patentable or not, including without limitation any derivatives thereof) pertaining to Verenium’s research, financial data, sales information, inventions, development, materials, technology, trade secrets, work in process, marketing, business plans, regulatory information and strategies, scientific, engineering and/or manufacturing processes or equipment, protocols, assays, strains, compounds, genes, gene pathways, enzymes, peptides, the commercial applications of genes, gene pathways, enzymes, peptides, accessing microbial diversity, manipulating and modifying genes and gene pathways, identifying bioactive compounds through recombinant techniques and any other elements of Verenium’s business which Verenium considers to be of value, including its present or future products, projections, sales, pricing, customers, employees, investors and contractual relationships.

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: (“BIA”) order affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s decision denying Lising’s application for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237(a)(1)(H) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 to review the statutory eligibility elements of a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237(a)(1)(H). See San Pedro v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1156, 1157 (9th Cir.2005). Reviewing de novo, Cabrera-Alvarez v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 1006, 1009 (9th Cir.2005), we deny the petition for review. The agency correctly found Lising to be statutorily ineligible for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237(a)(1)(H) because he did not have a qualifying relative at the time of the immigration judge’s decision. See Kalezic v. INS, 647 F.2d 920, 922 (9th Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>). Lising’s contention that he merited relief in Options: A. holding that the date of death is relevant date of inquiry for the applicability of section 541a5a B. holding that the date of discrimination is the date on which a decision not to hire a plaintiff becomes effective C. holding that the date of the federal indictment not the date of the state arrest was the triggering date for the speedytrial act D. holding that the critical date for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237a1h is the date of the immigration judges decision E. holding that the date of sale for an installment contract was the date of contract formation not the date of the last payment due

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the critical date for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237a1h is the date of the immigration judges decision