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: under the FDCPA. Repossession agents and agencies, whose only role in the debt collection process are the enforcement of security interests, generally fall outside of the ambit of the FDCPA, except for the provisions of § 1692f(6). See, e.g., Wilson v. Draper & Goldberg, P.L.L.C., 443 F.3d 373, 378 (4th Cir.2006); Montgomery, 346 F.3d at 699; Jordan v. Kent Recovery Serv., Inc., 731 F.Supp. 652, 656 (D.Del.1990). In the case at bar, Eley has not alleged any violation of § 1692f(6), in particular subsection (A). Eley did not allege that Evans, Bryan, or Bad Boys Towing were enforcing a security interest, to which there was no present right to possess the collateral. See supra note 8; see also Purkett v. Key Bank USA, N.A., No. 01-C-162, 2001 WL 503050, at *2 (N.D.Ill. May 10, 2001) (<HOLDING>). As a result, Eley has not stated a claim Options: A. holding a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the constitution and laws of the united states to state a claim under 1983 B. holding that plaintiff must present such evidence C. holding that to prevail on a 1983 claim a plaintiff must allege that the defendant acted under color of state law in other words that there was state action D. holding that material prejudice was not present under the facts however an agency of the state was not a party to the action E. holding that plaintiff must allege repossession agency was enforcing a security interest and did not have a present right to possess the collateral in order to state a claim under 1692f 6a

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that plaintiff must allege repossession agency was enforcing a security interest and did not have a present right to possess the collateral in order to state a claim under 1692f 6a
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 414 U.S. 29 94 S.Ct. 193. 38 L.Ed.2d 187 Richard BERRYv.CITY OF CINCINNATI, OHIO, No. 73—5245. Nov. 5, 1973. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner, who was serving a sentence for a misdemeanor offense when Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, 92 S.Ct. 2006, 32 L.Ed.2d 530 (1972), was decided, sought relief in the state courts claiming that because Argersinger should be accorded retroactive effect and because his trial and sentencing were uncounseled, his conviction should be invalidated. The Supreme Court of Ohio refused to apply Argersinger to convictions occurring prior to that decision. City of Cincinnati v. Berry, 34 Ohio St.2d 106, 296 N.E.2d 532 (1973). Petitioner was enlarged on bail pending action on his claim and faces reincarceration should the judgment of the Ohio courts remain undisturbed. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for certiorari are granted, and the judgment of the Ohio Supreme Court is reversed. Those convicted prior to the decision in Argersinger are entitled to the constitutional rule enunciated in that case, Kitchens v. Smith, 401 U.S. 847, 91 S.Ct. 1089, 28 L.Ed.2d 519 (1971); Williams v. United States, 401 U.S. 646, 653 and n. 6, 91 S.Ct. 1148, 1152, 28 L.Ed.2d 388 (1971) (opinion of White, J.); Burgett v. Texas, 389 U.S. 109, 114, 88 S.Ct. 258, 261, 19 L.Ed.2d 319 (1967); cf. Adams v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 278, 92 S.Ct. 916, 31 L.Ed.2d 202 (1972), if they allege and prove a bona fide, existing case or controversy sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court. Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 50—58, 88 S.Ct. 1889, 1896—1900, 20 L.Ed.2d 917 (1968); Carafas v. LaVallee, 391 U.S. 234, 237—238, 88 S.Ct. 1556, 1559—1560, 20 L.Ed.2d 554 (1968); Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629, 633—634, n. 2, 88 S.Ct. 1274, 1276—1277, 20 L.Ed.2d 195 (1968). 2 Reversed. 3 So ordered.

assistant: 1
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 Servicer and each of its Subsidiaries is in compliance with all Laws applicable to it or its property, except where the failure to do so, individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All actions or proceedings that, directly or indirectly, arise out of or relate to this Agreement shall be heard and determined exclusively in the State and Federal Courts in the County of Los Angeles in the State of California (such courts, " California Courts "). Each of the Parties further agrees that service of any process, summons, notice or document by U.S. registered mail to such Party's respective address set forth in Section 7.12 shall be effective service of process for any action or proceeding in the California Courts with respect to any matters to which it has submitted to jurisdiction in this Section 7.3 . Consistent with the foregoing in this Section 7.3 , each of the Parties hereby (a) submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the California Courts for the purpose of any action or proceeding brought by any Party that, directly or indirectly, arises out of or relates to this Agreement; (b) irrevocably waives and releases, and agrees not to assert by way of motion, defense, or otherwise, in or with respect to any such action or proceeding, any claim that (i) such action or proceeding is not subject to the subject matter jurisdiction of at least one of the above-named courts; (ii) its property is exempt or immune from attachment or execution in the State of California; (iii) such action or proceeding is brought in an inconvenient forum; (iv) that the venue of such action or proceeding is improper; or (v) this Agreement or the transactions contemplated by this Agreement may not be enforced in or by any of the above-named courts; and (d) agrees not to move to transfer any such action or proceeding to a court other than any of the above-named courts.

assistant: Consent To 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Your vested Restricted Stock Unit Award will be paid in cash, less all applicable withholding taxes, as soon as reasonably practicable after the applicable Vesting Date. For the avoidance of doubt, in the event of a Termination of employment in accordance with Section 2.1, no payment will be made prior to the [MONTH] following the fifth (5 th ) anniversary of the Grant Date.

assistant: Payments
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 Eligible Employees and Company agree that any and all disputes, controversies or claims of any kind or nature, including but not limited to any arising out of or in any related to the interpretation of this Plan or to the employment or separation of an Eligible Employee from the Company that have not been resolved by the Company within 90 days of the filing of a formal claim by the Eligible Employee under Section 5.7.3, shall be submitted to binding arbitration under the auspices and rules of the American Arbitration Association located nearest to where the Eligible Employee resides. Judgment upon an award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any competent court having jurisdiction over the dispute. The Eligible Employees and Company agree that arbitration is in lieu of any and all other civil legal proceedings and that all rights to resolve disputes through court or trial by jury are hereby waived. Furthermore, the Company agrees that it will reimburse an Eligible Employee for any legal costs arising from an Arbitration proceeding that results in a favorable outcome for such Eligible Employee.

assistant: Arbitration
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: I agree that I will not make any statement, written or verbal, in any forum or media or take any action in disparagement of the Company, including but not limited to negative references to the Company or its products, services, corporate policies, or current or former officers or employees, customers, suppliers, or business partners or associates. I understand that this Paragraph 6 is not intended to restrict or limit in any way the Protected Rights set forth in Paragraph 7 of this Agreement.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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: date of this Act. An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is covered by the law in effect when the offense was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose. For purposes of this section, an offense was committed before the effective date of this Act if any element of the offense was committed before that date. Act effective Sept. 1, 2005, 79th Leg., R.S., ch. 831, § 5, 2005 Tex. Gen. Laws 2841, 2853-54. Under the terms of this savings clause, Former Article 46.03 remains in effect for appellant’s purposes because it was the operative law at the time of her offense. The trial court accordingly had jurisdiction to issue its renewal order pursuant to Former Article 46.03. See Laney v. State, 223 S.W.3d 656, 660-61 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2007, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). Appellant also advances two more grounds for Options: A. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to accept the defendants guilty pleas to two counts of the indictment and stating that even if the trial court erred the error had not prejudiced the defendant because he was found guilty by the jury of the charges to which he intended to plead and the evidence of the other crimes would have been admissible in the trial for the first degree murder charge B. holding that where the arbitrator found that an employee committed an offense listed as a ground for discharge he lacked discretion to order the employees reinstatement C. holding no error was committed in denying an order of protection when the trial court found the respondents actions justified under the law D. holding that a change of an element of an offense could not be applied retroactively to a crime committed prior to the statutes enactment E. holding that the trial court had jurisdiction under former article 4603 as applied to a person found not guilty by reason of insanity for an offense committed before that statutes repeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the trial court had jurisdiction under former article 4603 as applied to a person found not guilty by reason of insanity for an offense committed before that statutes repeal
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 REFINANCING AMENDMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS REPRESENT THE FINAL AGREEMENT AMONG THE PARTIES AND MAY NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS, OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES. THERE ARE NO UNWRITTEN ORAL AGREEMENTS AMONG THE PARTIES.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by its contemporaneous negligent activity, directly and foreseeably causing Murillo’s injuries. But it did not. If it had done so, it would necessarily have concluded that the evidence was both legally and factually sufficient to support the jury’s findings regarding Oncor based on the negligence theory of liability submitted to it. B. Legal and Factual Sufficiency of the Evidence to Support the Jury’s Verdict 1. Standard of Review In reviewing the legal sufficiency of the evidence, we must, view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, crediting favorable evidence if reasonable jurors could and disregarding contrary evidence unless reasonable jurors could not. See City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802, 822 (Tex.2005); Tiller v. McLure, 121 S.W.3d 709, 713 (Tex.2003) (<HOLDING>). To sustain a challenge to the legal Options: A. holding that in reviewing no evidence point court views evidence in light that tends to support finding of disputed fact and disregards all evidence and inferences to contrary B. holding that in reviewing sufficiency of the evidence claims we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and draw all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in favor of the jurys verdict C. holding that there was no evidence or inferences to be drawn from the evidence to support the damage award D. holding that in reviewing whether there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and draw all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in favor of the jurys verdict E. holding that in reviewing sufficiency of evidence in juvenile adjudication the appellate court considers the evidence most favorable to the judgment and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom and affirms if those inferences constitute substantial evidence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that in reviewing no evidence point court views evidence in light that tends to support finding of disputed fact and disregards all evidence and inferences to contrary
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: speedy trial statute and the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The state court acknowledged that the right to a speedy trial is ■ grounded in the Sixth Amendment, but the entirety of its analysis centered upon counting days and continuances under the strict time limit set forth in Ohio Rev.Code § 2945.71. The court denied Brown’s claim, stating “appellant was brought to trial within the 270 day speedy-trial limit. Accordingly, appellant’s first assignment of error is without merit.” State v. Brown, 03-MA-32, 2005 WL 1385715, at *8 (Ohio App. June 7, 2005). This exclusive focus on Ohio’s statutory limit may have previously led to the conclusion that the court did not adjudicate Brown’s federal speedy-trial claim. See Lyell v. Renico, 470 F.3d 1177, 1182 (6th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>); Danner v. Motley, 448 F.3d 372, 376 (6th Options: A. holding that de novo standard of review applies on federal claims never addressed by state courts B. holding that a court of appeals should review de novo a district courts determination of state law C. holding that there was no adjudication on the merits and applying de novo review where petitioner presented claims based upon both federal and state law and the state court addressed them only in statelaw terms D. holding that review is de novo where there has been no adjudication on the merits in state court E. holding that when presented with petitioners claim based upon state and federal law and the state court confined its analysis to state law aedpa deference does not apply

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that there was no adjudication on the merits and applying de novo review where petitioner presented claims based upon both federal and state law and the state court addressed them only in statelaw terms
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party agrees that it will perform its obligations hereunder in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations now or hereafter in effect. If any term or provision of this Agreement shall be found to be wholly illegal, invalid or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall be given full effect as if such provision were stricken. In the event any term or provision of this Agreement shall be held overbroad in any respect, then such term or provision shall be narrowed, modified or limited by a court only to the extent necessary to make such provision or term enforceable while effectuating the intent of the parties herein expressed.

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 Executive will be solely responsible for any associated tax filings and payment of taxes associated with employment, without any gross-up or additional compensation from the Company (except as otherwise specifically provided herein), provided that the Company will withhold taxes at what it determines to be appropriate rates and in what it determines to be appropriate jurisdictions based on the information available to the Company.

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: Can take “the bulk of the factual material from a preexisting compilation without infringement.” Id. at 1445. The protection available for a compilation is “thin.” Feist, 499 U.S. at 349, 111 S.Ct. at 1289; see also BellSouth, 999 F.2d at 1439 (applying Feist and concluding that defendant did not appropriate “original elements” of BellSouth directory “as a whole” by preparing data base and sales leads based upon listing information and units of advertising appearing in preexisting directory). The focus is on “the selection, coordination, or arrangement of listings in the directory [which must be] sufficiently original or creative [that] the directory will be entitled to a copyright.” Key Publications, Inc. v. Chinatown Today Publ’g Enters., Inc., 945 F.2d 509, 513, 516 (2d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). See also Feist, 499 U.S. at 345-47, 111 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that contributory trademark infringement requires some predicate act of infringement B. holding that a publishers selection of 260 different categories even if including particular categories that have been used in other directories involved sufficient creativity to contribute to the overall originality of a classified directory C. recognizing statutory nature of stay but concluding that court still has interest in ensuring compliance D. recognizing copyrightability of specialty directory but concluding no infringement by smaller competing publication that utilized significantly different principles of listing selection E. recognizing possible adverse action where reassignment left plaintiff with significantly different and diminished supervisory and programmatic responsibilities

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing copyrightability of specialty directory but concluding no infringement by smaller competing publication that utilized significantly different principles of listing selection
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 rights of the Company set forth in this Section 4 shall not limit or restrict in any manner any rights or remedies which the Company or any of its affiliates may have under law or under any separate employment, confidentiality or other agreement with the Employee or otherwise with respect to the events described in Section 4(b) hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance by the Borrower, the Subsidiary Guarantor and each Designated Borrower of each Loan Document to which such Person is party, have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate action, and do not and will not contravene (a) the terms of any of the Borrower’s, the Subsidiary Guarantor’s or any Designated Borrower’s Organization Documents or (b) any Law or any material contractual restriction binding on or affecting it, except, in each case referred to in clause (b), to the extent such contravention could not, in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Authorizations
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 agreements in this Section and the indemnity provisions of Section 10.02(e) shall survive the resignation of the Administrative Agent, any L/C Issuer and the Swing Line Lender, the replacement of any Lender, the termination of the Aggregate Commitments, the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all the other Obligations and the termination of this Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: improper voir dire questions, a party must make a timely, specific objection at the earliest possible opportunity. Turner v. State, 805 S.W.2d 423, 431 (Tex.Crim.App.1991). The State asked the jury panel members whether they would require more evidence than one witness if they found the witness to be credible and believed the State proved all the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt through that witness. Appellant did not object until after the State had directed the question to two panel members, and one of those potential jurors had further dialogue with the State about the question. Accordingly, appellant did not object at the earliest possible opportunity and waived the issue for our review. See Thrift v. State, 134 S.W.3d 475, 477 (Tex.App.-Waco 2004, no pet. granted) (<HOLDING>). Appellant’s first issue is overruled. Options: A. holding error was not preserved where matter was explored with jury panel before defendant objected B. holding that where the trial court is on notice of error in seating the panel before the jury is sworn and the error is not corrected automatic reversal is required C. holding that error was preserved when defendant objected to question regarding defendant was under arrest immediately following question about postarrest event sufficient to put trial court on notice of appellants state constitutional grounds for objection D. holding issues not raised before the district court are not preserved for appeal E. holding that defendant must have clearly objected at trial to the matter he is raising on appeal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding error was not preserved where matter was explored with jury panel before defendant objected
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: was the owner, owner pro hac vice, agent, operator, or charterer of the vessel.” 33 U.S.C. § 905(b). In Bush v. Eagle-Picher Indus., Inc., 927 F.2d 445, 449 (9th Cir.1991), we incorrectly stated in dicta that the amendment barred all dual-capacity suits. We have already acknowledged this error. See Heise v. Fishing Co. of Alaska, Inc., 79 F.3d 903, 907 n. 2 (9th Cir.1996) (noting that the statement in Eagle-Picher that the 1984 amendment barred dual-capacity suits was incorrect dicta). To the extent any confusion remains, the 1984 change bars only shipbuilders, ship repairers and ship breakers from bringing a claim where the employer and the vessel owner are the same entity. See also Morehead v. Atkinson-Kiewit, J/V, 97 F.3d 603, 608 (1st Cir.1996) (en banc); G 5, 1033 (5th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). The Second Circuit, in a case preceding Jones Options: A. holding that the duty owed by a shipowner to a longshoreman under section 905b is that established by scindia and its progeny this duty is neither heightened nor diminished when the longshoreman is employed directly by the vessel B. holding that the duty of good faith and fair dealing is a contractual duty C. holding that clause eight requires time charterer to indemnify shipowner for any damages awarded because of injury to longshoreman D. holding that a charter party creates no contractual duty towards a longshoreman on the part of a time charterer E. holding that shipowner owed the plaintiff longshoreman a duty of care to keep the vessel free of dangerous and nonobvious tripping hazards and remanding for determination of breach

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the duty owed by a shipowner to a longshoreman under section 905b is that established by scindia and its progeny this duty is neither heightened nor diminished when the longshoreman is employed directly by the vessel
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 of the Buyers and the Company acknowledges and agrees that irreparable damage would occur to the other parties hereunder in the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement or the Transaction Documents were not performed by such party in accordance with their specific terms or were otherwise breached. It is accordingly agreed that each party shall be entitled to an injunction or injunctions to prevent or cure breaches of the provisions of this Agreement and the Transaction Documents by any other party and to enforce specifically the terms and provisions hereof and thereof this being in addition to any other remedy to which the parties may be entitled by law or equity.

assistant: Specific Performance
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: Borrower shall furnish to Administrative Agent and shall cause each Borrower Party to furnish to Administrative Agent such financial statements and other financial information as may be required pursuant to this Article 6 and such other financial information as Administrative Agent may require pursuant to this Article 6 and such other financial information as Administrative Agent may reasonably request from time to time. All such financial statements shall be in Excel format, shall reflect all material contingent liabilities in accordance with GAAP and shall accurately and fairly present the results of operations and the financial condition of Borrower at the dates and for the period indicated and shall be sufficient to permit Administrative Agent and Lenders to calculate and/or verify Borrower’s calculation of Debt Service Coverage Ratio, Project Yield and Adjusted Net Operating Income.

assistant: Financial Statements
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: as a tripadvisor member , you will be able to post travel reviews , participate in discussion forums , email tripadvisor content to yourself and to others , access and receive members-only newsletters and travel planning content , and enter surveys , contests , or sweepstakes .

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: The Company may amend the Plan at any time and for any reason, provided that any such amendment shall not adversely affect the rights to which a Participant is entitled as of the date of any such amendment or restatement.

assistant: Amendments
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 responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive computer service .... 47 U.S.C. § 230 (1998) (bold emphasis added). In the leading case on Section 230 immunity, the federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Zeran v. Am. Online, Inc., 129 F.3d 327 (4th Cir.1997), noted that: By its plain language, § 230 creates a federal immunity to any cause of action that would make service providers liable for information originating with a third-party user of the service. Specifically, § 230 precludes courts from entertaining claims that would place a computer service provider in a publisher’s role. Thus, lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider liable for its exerci 206 F.3d 980, 984-86 (10th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). And even those courts which have not Options: A. holding that an online dating service provider was not liable when an unidentified party posted a false online profile for a popular actress leading her to receive sexually explicit phone calls letters and faxes at home B. holding that a defamation claim based on statements in a written disciplinary notice was preempted C. holding that a provider of software and hardware was not an information provider and thus could not be charged with negligent misrepresentation D. holding that online service provider was immune from defamation claim based on inaccurate stock information E. holding that a defamation claim is a personal injury tort claim

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that online service provider was immune from defamation claim based on inaccurate stock information
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 of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of each Company are set forth on Schedule 3.1(a) . Each Company owns, directly or indirectly, all of the capital stock or other equity interests of each Subsidiary free and clear of any Liens, and all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of each Subsidiary are validly issued and are fully paid, non-assessable and free of preemptive and similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. If each Company has no subsidiaries, all other references to the Subsidiaries or any of them in the Transaction Documents shall be disregarded.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is effective as of the date of this Agreement. Except for the provisions of this Agreement that specifically provide they will survive the expiration, termination, or cancellation of this Agreement, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until (i) the Indebtedness is paid in full (including principal, interest, costs, expenses, attorneys' fees, and other fees and charges); (ii) this Agreement is terminated or canceled as provided in this Agreement; or (iii) this Agreement is terminated pursuant to a written agreement signed by the parties.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: allows the court to proceed as it never could under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and it is “free to weigh the evidence and satisfy itself as to the existence of its power to hear the case.” Id., at 163 (citing Lawrence v. Dunbar, 919 F.2d 1525, 1529 (11th Cir.1990)). B. Federal Tort Claims Act The FTCA provides a limited waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity. The Act provides that the United States is liable for torts caused by negligent acts or omissions of employees of the Government while acting under circumstances where the Government, if a private person, would be liable under the law of the place where the act or omission occurred. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1) and 2674 (emphasis added); United States v. Olson, 546 U.S. 43, 126 S.Ct. 510, 163 L.Ed.2d 306 (2005)(<HOLDING>); Abreu-Guzman v. Ford, 241 F.3d 69, 75 (1st Options: A. holding that the united states is liable for interest only in the event of a clear statutory waiver of sovereign immunity B. holding that the ats does not waive the united states sovereign immunity C. holding that the united states waives sovereign immunity where local law would make a private person liable in tort under analogous not the same circumstances D. holding that the government is liable under the ftca in the same respect as a private person under the law of the place where the act occurred E. holding that local school boards were not entitled to eleventh amendment immunity even though entitled to sovereign immunity in the same degree as the state itself from tort suits

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the united states waives sovereign immunity where local law would make a private person liable in tort under analogous not the same circumstances
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: Following the Closing, each of the Parties will, and will cause their respective Affiliates to, execute and deliver such additional documents, instruments, conveyances, and assurances, and take such further actions, as may be reasonably required to carry out the provisions of this Agreement and give effect to 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Tenant’s indemnity of Landlord as set forth in this Lease shall also apply with respect to any and all costs, losses, damages, injuries and liabilities related in any way to any negligence or willful misconduct of Tenant or Tenant’s Agents, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or in connection with Tenant’s non-payment of any amount arising out of the Improvements and/or Tenant’s disapproval of all or any portion of any request for payment.

assistant: Indemnity
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: plan provided that No-vastar’s secured claim “will be paid in accordance with the pre-petition contract held by the holder of the secured claim”. The Padillas’ plan provided that Wells Fargo’s secured claim would be paid “directly to the creditor”, and that payment would be pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2). Section 1322(b)(2) authorizes a mortgage lender to collect post-confirmation professional fees and expenses by incorporating the lender’s pre-petition contract rights within a chapter 13 plan. Section 1322(b)(2) provides that a chapter 13 plan can not: “modify the rights of holders of ... a claim secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence ...” (emphasis added). The Supreme Court has specifically held that § 1322(b)(2) x.2007) (<HOLDING>). However, Plaintiffs correctly note that Options: A. holding that 1322b2 trumps 506b B. holding that it is not C. holding that 1 D. holding that a courts prior judicial construction of a statute trumps an agency construction otherwise entitled to chevron deference only if the prior court decision holds that its construction follows from the unambiguous terms of the statute and thus leaves no room for agency discretion E. holding that an earlier specific statute trumps a later more general one

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 1322b2 trumps 506b
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 his application to UNC, he would receive in-state residency status for tuition purposes. The Ort letter re-emphasized that “your athletic scholarship may be immediately reduced or cancelled if you fail to meet UNC, ACC, or NCAA continuing eligibility requirements; become ineligible to participate in your sport;... or engage in misconduct warranting disciplinary penalty.” Ort renewed Plaintiff’s scholarship on 19 June 2009 and 30 June 2010 using similar form letters. i. No Breach of ASA Plaintiff has not alleged UNC or Thorp breached the terms of the ASA. In North Carolina, a plaintiff must allege injury to a contractual interest to have standing to maintain a contract-based claim. See Beachcomber Props., L.L.C. v. Station One, Inc., 169 N.C. App. 820, 824, 611 S.E.2d 191, 194 (2005) (<HOLDING>). In the present case, Plaintiff has alleged no Options: A. holding that plaintiff had no standing because he had no intention of seeking further medical advice or treatment from defendant B. holding that because a violation of a statute had no practical effect there was no concrete injury C. holding that nonsignatories to a contract have no rights under the contract and thus no standing to assert claims under the contract D. holding that plaintiff had no claim under fmla because she had suffered no diminution in income and incurred no costs as a result of alleged violation E. holding that a plaintiff had no injury in fact and consequently no standing when it had no enforceable contract right against the defendant

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a plaintiff had no injury in fact and consequently no standing when it had no enforceable contract right against the defendant
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate counterparts and when signed by all of the parties shall constitute a single binding agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart to this Agreement by facsimile transmission or electronic transmission (e.g., “.pdf”) shall be as effective as delivery of a manually signed original.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at 1136, was inappropriate given the pattern-or-practice nature of plaintiffs’ claim. In particular, this factor encompasses factual issues relevant to both the first and second stages of the pattern-or-practice trial, i.e., whether the blocker policy continued after Lanik’s alleged repudiation and, if it did, whether a link existed between that policy and the individual employment decisions affecting the named plaintiffs. Although these issues could be considered in the context of a properly framed summary judgment motion, it was improper for the district court to consider, and effectively make findings regarding, these questions in determining whether the plaintiffs were similarly situated for purposes of certifying a class. See Adamson v. Bowen, 855 F.2d 668, 676 (10th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>); Anderson v. City of Albuquerque, 690 F.2d Options: A. holding that putative class members are not parties to an action prior to class certification B. holding that tolling applies to a subsequent class action when class certification was granted in a prior case C. holding that a district of columbia consumer protection statute that authorized representative actions and did not reference class action requirements or mandate class certification was a separate and distinct procedural vehicle from a class action and thus did not constitute a class action under cafa D. holding that where named plaintiff was employee of class counsel district court did not abuse its discretion by denying class certification E. holding that district court in making class certification decision should avoid focusing on merits of underlying class action

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that district court in making class certification decision should avoid focusing on merits of underlying class action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If a Cash Incentive Award is intended to qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code, all requirements set forth in Section 6(e) must be satisfied in order for a Participant to be entitled to payment.

assistant: Payments
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: op. 8177, [607 F.3d at 602], the following sentence < Unfortunately, under the current Bivens regime, asymmetries will remain irrespective of whether we recognize or deny a Bivens cause of action here.> is amended to read: < Unfortunately, under the current Bivens regime, asymmetries may remain irrespective of whether we recognize or deny a Bivens cause of action here.> 3. At slip op. 8177, [607 F.3d at 602], the paragraph beginning < Unlike officers employed ... > is amended to read: < Unlike officers employed by public prisons, the GEO employees may not be entitled to qualified immunity, and as a result, prisoners asserting claims against them may be able to recover more often than their counterparts in governmentally run prisons. Compare Richardson, 521 U.S. at 401, 117 S.Ct. 2100 (<HOLDING>), with Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 501, 98 Options: A. holding that where defendant claiming qualified immunity relies on facts that are in dispute qualified immunity cannot be granted B. holding officials are entitled to qualified immunity for reasonable mistakes of law C. holding that employees of privately operated state prisons are not entitled to qualified immunity D. holding that an officer applying for a warrant without probable cause may be entitled to qualified immunity but is not entitled to absolute immunity E. holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that employees of privately operated state prisons are not entitled to qualified immunity
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 representations and warranties of each entity comprising Seller contained in this Agreement shall be true and correct in all material respects as of the Closing Date as though made on and as of the Closing Date (other than such representations and warranties that refer to a specified date, which need only be true and correct in all material respects on and as of such specified date).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: what public policy — “the community common sense and common conscience,” as this Court once described it — abides in any given case. Payne v. Rozendaal, 147 Vt. 488, 492, 520 A.2d 586, 588 (1986) (quotation omitted). For even while acknowledging the influence that “inherited instincts, traditional beliefs and acquired convictions” inevitably exert in the judicial process, Justice Cardozo — that other great common law jurist — also cautioned that courts must be “slow to substitute their own varying views of policy” for “settled institutions . . . and practices, which have taken root and flourished.” Messersmith v. Am. Fid. Co., 133 N.E. 432, 433 (N.Y. 1921); see B.N. Cardozo, The Nature of the Judicial Process 12-13 (1921); Rothstein v. Snowbird Corp., 2007 UT 96, ¶ 10, 175 P.3d 560 (<HOLDING>). The case before us offers a textbook Options: A. holding that an arbitration award involving the appellants challenge to the failure of the insurance company to ensure that he had read and understood a signed waiver and to attach the waiver to the insurance policy as contrary to public policy is not reviewable by the courts because there is no challenge to a provision or term of the policy the appellant never claimed that the waiver or policy language itself was contrary to the public policy of this commonwealth B. holding that where agreement prohibits recovery of attorneys fees in civil rights case the relevant portions of the arbitration policy are therefore void as against public policy C. holding similar agreement void on public policy grounds D. holding skiers waiver of ski areas own negligence void as against public policy and noting the protean quality of public policy determinations and risk of inconsistent and subjective decisionmaking E. holding that prospective waivers of claims are void as against public policy

assistant: The best answer is D. holding skiers waiver of ski areas own negligence void as against public policy and noting the protean quality of public policy determinations and risk of inconsistent and subjective decisionmaking
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 the Plan set forth the entire understanding of the parties hereto and supersede all prior agreements, arrangements, and communications, whether oral or written, pertaining to the subject matter hereof. The Optionee hereby acknowledges receipt of a copy of the Plan and this Agreement, represents that he or she has read and understands the terms and provisions thereof, and accepts the Option subject to all the terms and conditions of the Plan and this Agreement.

assistant: Entire Agreements