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: All questions concerning the construction, validity, enforcement and interpretation of the Transaction Documents shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York, without regard to the principles of conflicts of law thereof. Each party agrees that all legal Proceedings concerning the interpretations; enforcement and defense of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and any other Transaction Documents (whether brought against a party hereto or its respective affiliates, directors, officers, shareholders, partners, members, employees or agents) shall be commenced exclusively in the state and federal courts sitting in the City of New York. Each party hereby irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts sitting in the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan for the adjudication of any dispute hereunder or in connection herewith or with any transaction contemplated hereby or discussed herein (including with respect to the enforcement of any of the Transaction Documents), and hereby irrevocably waives, and agrees not to assert in any Action or Proceeding, any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of any such court, that such Action or Proceeding is improper or is an inconvenient venue for such Proceeding. Each party hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any such Action or Proceeding by mailing a copy thereof via registered or certified mail or overnight delivery (with evidence of delivery) to such party at the address in effect for notices to it under this Agreement and agrees that such service shall constitute good and sufficient service of process and notice thereof. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any other manner permitted by law. If any party hereto shall commence an Action or Proceeding to enforce any provisions of the Transaction Documents, then, in addition to the obligations of the Company under Section 4.8, the prevailing party in such Action or Proceeding shall be reimbursed by the non-prevailing party for its reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs and expenses incurred with the investigation, preparation and prosecution of such Action or Proceeding.

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: signed it, the represented party, or both, an appropriate sanction.” Courts have found the principal in a closely-held corporation who signs a document, although in his official capacity, or causes a false or misleading document to be filed in bad-faith personally liable for Rule 9011 sanctions. See In re Memorial Estates, Inc., 116 B.R. 108 (N.D.Ill.1990); Midwest Properties No. Two v. Big Hill Investment Co., 93 B.R. 357 (N.D.Tex.1988); In re D & V Construction, 150 B.R. 362 (Bankr.W.D.Pa. 1993); County of Chesterfield v. Tamojira, Inc., 197 B.R. 815 (Bankr.E.D.Va.1995); accord, Jones v. Bank of Santa Fe (In re Courtesy Inns, Ltd. Inc.), 40 F.3d 1084 (10th Cir.1994); In re Rainbow Magazine, Inc., 136 B.R. 545 (9th Cir. BAP 1992) on appeal after remand 77 F.3d 278, 282 (9th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); but see In re Chisholm Co., 166 B.R. 706 Options: A. holding that filing a bankruptcy petition days before an important state court deadline amounted to bad faith and upholding sanctions under rule 9011 B. holding that the bankruptcy court has the inherent power to award sanctions for badfaith conduct in a bankruptcy court proceeding C. holding that regarding rule 9011 this court is only concerned with documents filed in this court and thus filings in state court provide no basis to impose sanctions under rule 9011 D. holding sanction of 250000 under federal rule of bankruptcy procedure 9011 to be excessive and reducing to 5000 E. holding that rule 9011 allows a bankruptcy court to sanction attorneys parties and individuals that sign and file false documents in badfaith with the court

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that rule 9011 allows a bankruptcy court to sanction attorneys parties and individuals that sign and file false documents in badfaith with the court
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 purported termination of your employment by the Corporation or by you following a Change in Control shall be communicated to the other party by a Notice of Termination. A Notice of Termination shall indicate the specific termination provision in this Agreement relied upon and shall set forth in reasonable detail the facts and circumstances claimed to provide a basis for termination of your employment under the provision so indicated. For the purpose of this Agreement, notices and all other communications provided for in the Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when delivered or mailed by United States registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to the respective addresses set forth on the first page of this Agreement, provided that all notices to the Corporation shall be directed to the attention of the Board of the Corporation with a copy to the Secretary of the Corporation or to such other address as either party may have furnished to the other in writing in accordance herewith, except that notice of change of address shall be effective only upon receipt.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: in no event will tinder 's aggregate liability to you for all claims relating to the service exceed the amount paid , if any , by you to tinder for the service while you have an account .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice or filing required or permitted to be given to the Plan administrator or the Committee under the Plan shall be sufficient if in writing and hand delivered, or sent by registered or certified mail, to the Human Resources Department, or to such other entity as the Plan administrator or the Committee may designate from time to time. Such notice shall be deemed given as to the date of delivery, or, if delivery is made by mail, as of the date shown on the postmark on the receipt for registration or certification.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Subject to Section 10.01 of the Credit Agreement, no amendment or waiver of any provision of this Guaranty and no consent to any departure by any Guarantor therefrom shall in any event be effective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by the Administrative Agent, the Required Lenders and the Guarantors and then such waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which given. Upon a Guarantor becoming an Excluded Subsidiary as a result of a transaction permitted under the Loan Documents, such Guarantor shall be released from this Guaranty in accordance with the provisions of the applicable Loan Document(s), including, without limitation, Section 9.11 of the Credit Agreement.

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: the decisions of the other circuits that have considered whether § 2412(d)(1)(A) authorizes fees for administrative proceedings that either preceded or followed district court litigation. See Maritime Mgmt., Inc. v. United States, 242 F.3d 1326, 1336 (11th Cir.2001) (denying pre-litigation fees incurred during administrative proceedings before the General Accounting Office); Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness v. Thomas, 53 F.3d 881, 887 (8th Cir.1995) (declining to award fees for pre-litigation expenses incurred during the Forest Service’s administrative appeals process because there was “no básis for extending Hudson [ ]” to cases “where the administrative proceedings precede the civil action”); Full Gospel Portland Church v. Thornburgh, 927 F.2d 628, 629, 631-33 (D.C.Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied 502 U.S. 1030, 112 S.Ct. 867, Options: A. holding that where us citizenship and immigration services was required to adjudicate naturalization applications it was required by the apa to do so within a reasonable time regardless of whether the immigration and naturalization act specifies a timeframe for action B. holding that because the district court does not retain jurisdiction sentencefour social security remands do not fall within the scope of hudson and noting that the court had limited hudson to a narrow class of qualifying administrative proceedings where the district court retains jurisdiction of the civil action pending the completion of the administrative proceedings internal quotation marks and citation omitted C. holding that the exclusionary rule generally does not apply to immigration proceedings D. holding that the plaintiffs could not recover fees for postlitigation administrative proceedings before the immigration and naturalization service because the pjroceedings under the immigration and nationality act lacked the specific features of the ssa proceedings that in hudson demonstrated the intimate tie between administrative and judicial proceedings E. holding that regulations that permitted an immigration official to reinstate removal orders violated the immigration and nationality act

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the plaintiffs could not recover fees for postlitigation administrative proceedings before the immigration and naturalization service because the pjroceedings under the immigration and nationality act lacked the specific features of the ssa proceedings that in hudson demonstrated the intimate tie between administrative and judicial proceedings
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: In the State’s view, because these issues “predate the presumptive period of prejudice which began on February 19, 2011 [,]” they are attributed to the initial filing of the indictment and not to any delay in prosecuting the case. As we noted earlier in this Opinion, Defendant testified, and the court found, that the medical and employment adversities continued through the date of the October 19, 2012, evidentiary hearing. Indeed, according to Defendant, some of her stress-related maladies worsened over time. Thus, even accounting for the anxiety naturally associated with the filing of criminal charges, we are not persuaded the district court erred in concluding that Defendant’s extended period of suffering from stress and anxiety was “undue.” See Valencia, 2010-NMCA-005, ¶ 29 (<HOLDING>). {56} Defendant’s anxiety, loss of employment, Options: A. recognizing the inherent anxiety associated with pending criminal charges B. holding there was no constitutional requirement that the administrative hearing be postponed pending disposition of the criminal charges C. recognizing the inherent policy problems associated with applying issue preclusion to permanent disability proceedings and construing wyomings workers compensation act as inconsistent with the doctrine in that context D. recognizing inherent power of courts of appeals E. holding that the final termination of the criminal proceedings occurred when criminal charges were dismissed with prejudice rather than when the accused was released from prison pending a retrial

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the inherent anxiety associated with pending criminal charges
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: Awards may be granted on the terms and conditions set forth in this Section 5. In addition, the Committee may impose on any Award or the exercise thereof, at the date of grant or thereafter (subject to Section 8(d)), such additional terms and conditions, not inconsistent with the provisions of the Plan, as the Committee shall determine, including terms regarding forfeiture of Awards or continued exercisability of Awards in the event of termination of service by the Eligible Person.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and United States v. Missouri Pacific R. Co. (1929) 278 U.S. 269, 278, 49 S.Ct. 133, [136] 73 L.Ed. 322 (setting forth the standard formulation of the “plain meaning rule”), it is now settled that available extrinsic interpretive aids may not be disregarded even though the statutory language appears to have a “plain meaning” which does not lead to an absurd result. See, e.g., U. S. v. Amer. Trucking Ass’ns (1940) 310 U.S. 534, 543-44, 60 S.Ct. 1059, 1064, 84 L.Ed. 1345: When aid to construction of the meaning of words, as used in the statute, is available there certainly can be no “rule of law” which forbids its use, however clear the words may appear on “superficial examination.” Accord, Train v. Colorado Pub. Int. Research Group (1976) 426 U.S. 1, 96 S.Ct. 1938, 48 L.Ed.2d 434 (<HOLDING>) and McMann v. United Air Lines, Inc. (4th Options: A. holding that court of appeals erred in relying on the plain meaning of a statute when the legislative history clearly indicated another meaning B. holding that when the language of a statute is clear and unambiguous no need exists for the court to examine the legislative histo ry and the court must give effect to the plain meaning of the statute C. holding that absent unusual circumstances this court must apply the plain meaning of a statute D. holding that an appellate court must give a statute its clear and plain meaning when the statute is unambiguous E. holding that the meaning of a notwithstandingotherlaw proviso was straightforward in reinforcing the plain meaning of the legislative prescription to which it was attached

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that court of appeals erred in relying on the plain meaning of a statute when the legislative history clearly indicated another meaning
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: novo legal determinations of the BIA, Carrillo-Gonzalez v. INS, 353 F.3d 1077, 1079 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition. Murillo-Ledesma contends that the statements he made to arresting officers regarding his alienage and the date and manner of his entry into the United States should have been suppressed by the IJ as fruit of an unlawful arrest. He further contends that he was denied a full and fair hearing because he was not permitted to present evidence concerning his unlawful arrest. These contentions fail because generally, the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule does not apply to administrative proceedings, and petitioner has not demonstrated that his case warrants an exception to the rule. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032, 1040, 104 S.Ct. 3479, 82 L.Ed.2d 778 (1984) (<HOLDING>); Adamson v. CIR, 745 F.2d 541, 545-46 (9th Options: A. holding that the exclusionary rule generally does not apply to immigration proceedings B. holding that exclusionary rule does apply to civil forfeiture proceedings C. holding that the exclusionary rule does not apply to proceedings other than criminal trials D. holding that exclusionary rule applies to civil forfeiture proceedings E. holding that the exclusionary rule does not apply to knockandannounce violations

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the exclusionary rule generally does not apply to immigration proceedings
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: EmCare, which resulted in Scott’s firing. Also similar to Scott, the plaintiff in Butler used the same equipment as the manufacturer’s employees and produced the goods that were the manufacturer’s core business. See id. But there are important differences between the two cases. For example, the manufacturer’s employees supervised the Butler plaintiff on the factory floor. See id. Here, Scott was supervised by an EmCare employee. Further, the Butler plaintiff performed the same tasks as the manufacturer’s employees, whereas all hospitalists like Scott were EmCare employees. Given these differences, Butler does not convince us that the jury here rendered a verdict against the great weight of the evidence. Cf. Ling Nan Zheng v. Liberty Apparel Co. Inc., 617 F.3d 182, 185-86 (2d Cir. 2010) (<HOLDING>). The relationship between Scott and the Options: A. holding that probable cause determination presents a mixed question of law and fact B. holding that an error pertaining to a mixed question of law and fact under state law is not cognizable in a federal habeas proceeding C. holding the question of necessity is one of mixed law and fact and accordingly one for the fact finder in the ordinary case D. holding that whether the defendants confession was voluntary was a mixed question of law and fact subject to de novo review E. holding that joint employment determination was a complex mixed question of law and fact properly determined by jury

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that joint employment determination was a complex mixed question of law and fact properly determined by jury
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: to establish eligibility-triggering factors: Though Ia-beled as "sentencing factors,” those factors are more appropriately considered as elements of a capital offense. This logic applies equally to the establishment of any sentencing factors necessary to expose a defendant to a higher maximum penalty in the noncapital context. As discussed supra, Fields’s Confrontation Clause challenge relates only to evidence that the government introduced relevant to the jury's ultimate selection decision. The applicability of the Confrontation Clause to the establishment of eligibility-triggering factors is therefore not a question squarely presented by this case, and we decline to resolve it definitively. 19 .See McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 U.S. 79, 93, 106 S.Ct. 2411, 91 L.Ed.2d 67 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Cabana v. Bullock, 474 U.S. 376, 385, 106 Options: A. holding federal sentencing guidelines are subject to jury trial requirements of sixth amendment B. holding that there is no sixth amendment right to jury sentencing C. holding that if a jury is to be provided the defendant at capital sentencing regardless of whether the sixth amendment requires it the jury must stand impartial and indifferent to the extent commanded by the sixth amendment D. holding that there is no distinction in the right to jury trial between sentencing factors and elements E. holding the sixth amendment right to a jury trial applies to the states through the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that there is no sixth amendment right to jury sentencing
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: detailed expert reports that were explored at a lengthy deposition. In essence, he compared C & F’s sales and growth rates to comparable competitors. Except in certain respects not relevant here, the admissibility of evidence is governed by the law of the forum. See Restatement (Second), supra, § 138. Elson may not have previously provided an opinion of this nature in the insurance setting — a fact greatly relied upon by the trial judge — but that is not dispositive. See Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., 425 N.J.Super. 335, 372, 41 A.3d 739 (App. Div. 2012) (observing that it “was not necessary for ... a well-qualified economist quantifying plaintiffs alleged losses [to also] be an expert on employability”); see also Hammond v. Int’l Harvester Co., 691 F.2d 646, 652-53 (3d Cir. 1982) (<HOLDING>); Knight v. Otis Elevator Co., 596 F.2d 84, Options: A. holding automobile exclusion in general liability policy did not apply because plaintiffs claim of negligent supervision and training was a separate and distinct theory of recovery from the use of an automobile B. holding that an engineer whose only qualifications were sales experience in the field of automatic and agricultural equipment and teaching high school automobile repair could testify in a products liability action involving tractors C. recognizing products liability and products actions based on negligence as part of the general maritime law D. holding that where a high school student and the students mother received adequate notice of the charges had sufficient opportunity to prepare for the meeting with school personnel were accorded an orderly hearing and were given a fair and impartial decision no due process violation occurred even though the school failed to provide advance notice that the potential disciplinary actions included a transfer to another school E. recognizing the significance of control in strict products liability

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an engineer whose only qualifications were sales experience in the field of automatic and agricultural equipment and teaching high school automobile repair could testify in a products liability action involving tractors
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: But, the Court found no such problem in Street’s case, “holding] that the trial judge’s instructions were the appropriate way to limit the jury’s use of [the co-conspirator’s confession] in a manner consistent with the Confrontation Clause.” Id. at 417, 105 S.Ct. 2078. Street is one application of the general, long-standing principle that the potential for jury misuse of evidence can often be curbed by a limiting instruction. Indeed, whenever the Supreme Court has permitted a jury to consider evidence that has the potential to be misused, e.g., to be considered in a way that would violate the defendant’s constitutional rights, it has required that a proper jury instruction be given to avoid the misuse. See, e.g., Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222, 226, 91 S.Ct. 643, 28 L.Ed.2d 1 (1971) (<HOLDING>); Spencer v. Texas, 385 U.S. 554, 559-61, 87 Options: A. holding that statements elicited from a defendant in violation of his miranda rights could be introduced to impeach that defendants credibility when the jury was instructed that the statements were not to be considered as evidence of his guilt B. holding that evidence of a defendants prior criminal convictions could be introduced for the purpose of sentence enhancement if the jury was instructed that the evidence could not be used for the purposes of determining guilt C. holding that the admission of unlawfully seized evidence of a crime was admissible if the jury was instructed that the evidence could be considered only in assessing a defendants credibility and not for determining guilt D. holding that admission of statements obtained in violation of miranda was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where the substance of the statements was introduced through other untainted testimony E. holding that where a defendant expressly manifested his belief in the truth of the statements contained in the motion to dismiss thereby adopting those statements as his own such statements are admissible against the defendant in the states case in chief

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that statements elicited from a defendant in violation of his miranda rights could be introduced to impeach that defendants credibility when the jury was instructed that the statements were not to be considered as evidence of his guilt
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: approached Richard Teng and attempted to ascertain his identity. Id. While Donovan and Quinones were ascertaining Richard Teng’s identity, they were standing in the “open area.” Id. It took “a matter of minutes” to ascertain Richard Teng’s identity. Id. at 176. From the time that Donovan and Quinones entered the warehouse, they passed by a number of rows of stacked boxes and proceeded to have a conversation with a suspected fugitive in an “open area.” Throughout this period, an attack could have been launched from any of the aisles that Donovan and Quinones passed. In most of the published cases that this court has reviewed, the space from which an attack can be immediately launched is a relatively small space. See e.g., United States v. Lauter, 57 F.3d 212, 213, 216-17 (2d Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Vargas, 2003 WL 21313721, at Options: A. holding that protective sweep was justified incident to arrest outside residence where officers had reasonable suspicion that dangerous individuals were in apartment B. holding that protective sweep was permitted of adjacent room of apartment where apartment consisted of two small rooms C. holding that statements by defendant and apartment manager that defendant lived in the apartment where drugs were found demonstrated his control over the apartment even though no documents personal effects or keys were found D. holding a protective sweep unconstitutional where officers had no information that any other persons were in the apartment E. holding a landlord liable for injuries sustained in the laundry room of an apartment complex

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that protective sweep was permitted of adjacent room of apartment where apartment consisted of two small rooms
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: we provide these links only as a convenience and are not responsible for the content , products , or services on or available from those websites , or resources or links displayed on such websites .

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: the New York support decree expired by its own terms, Pastor provided no authority for this position and, in fact, UIFSA provides to the contrary. To begin with, as set forth above, section 159.205 provides only two ways in which a court may lose its continuing exclusive jurisdiction: (1) the obligor, the obligee, and the child move out of the rendering state; or (2) all individuals file written consents in Texas allowing a Texas court to assume jurisdiction and modify the other state’s decree. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 159.205. We agree with Martinez that if the Texas Legislature had intended to provide an additional opportunity for Texas courts to gain jurisdiction it certainly could have, but did not. See, e.g., Mid-Century Svs. Co. of Tex. v. Kidd, 997 S.W.2d 265, 273-74 (Tex.1996) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, despite the expiration of the Options: A. holding that determining legislative intent is a question of law B. holding that for purposes of statutory construction expression of one thing is the exclusion of the other C. holding that the title of legislation is relevant to legislative intent D. holding that maxim of expression of one implies exclusion of another is aid to determine legislative intent E. holding that the narrowing of the use of parnar claims only applies absent a clear expression of legislative intent to the contrary and citing to hrs 37869 as an example of such legislative intent

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that maxim of expression of one implies exclusion of another is aid to determine legislative intent
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 notices required or permitted under this Agreement will be sufficient if in writing and sent by certified mail to, in the case of Executive, the last address he has filed in writing with the Company or, in the case of the Company, its principal office.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Other than as could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, the insurance maintained by or reserved on the books of the Company and its Subsidiaries is sufficient to protect the Company and its Subsidiaries and their respective directors and officers against such risks as are usually insured against in accordance with industry practice by companies in the same or similar business.

assistant: Insurances
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: In the event that Employee breaches or attempts to breach the Covenants contained, the Company shall be entitled to reimbursement from Employee for all costs and expenses associated with any successful action to enforce any of the Covenants, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation. Should the Company file an action against Employee relating to a breach of the Covenants, and a court of competent jurisdiction determines that Employee did not breach any of the Covenants, Employee shall be entitled to reimbursement from the Company of all costs and expenses associated with defending against such action asserting a breach, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: since it is not a judgment of “not guilty” on that charge. Rule 7-701 NMRA (“If the defendant has been acquitted, a judgment of not guilty shall be rendered.”). {19} New Mexico cases address similar circumstances in the context of sentencing. Where a defendant is on notice that the trial court’s oral sentence was not final, he has no reasonable expectation of finality. State v. Rushing, 103 N.M. 333, 706 P.2d 875 (1985). Double jeopardy considerations “exist to protect a defendant’s expectations of finality without providing ... [him] with the right to know at any specific moment in time what the exact limit of his punishment will turn out to be.” Id. at 335, 706 P.2d at 877 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Angel, 2002-NMSC-025, ¶ 15, 132 N.M. 501, 51 P.3d 1155 (<HOLDING>). Here, where Defendant specifically asked the Options: A. holding that a defendant must have knowledge of the likely consequences of entering the guilty plea in order for a plea to be voluntary and knowing B. holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to withdraw guilty plea filed three weeks after entering the plea C. holding that a defendants expectations of finality after entering a nocontest plea were outweighed by states right to a full and fair opportunity to convict criminals D. holding that entering a guilty plea is an admission of guilt and a waiver of the right to jury trial E. holding that a motion to withdraw a guilty or nocontest plea is a presenlence motion if the sentence was void for lack of postreleasecontrol notification

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a defendants expectations of finality after entering a nocontest plea were outweighed by states right to a full and fair opportunity to convict criminals
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: (2001). 1 16 To the contrary, D-Mil cites Williams v. Cont'l Constr., Corp., 1984 OK 887, 34 P.2d 254 and title 52, sections 2 , 3 , 7 , and 26 , of the Oklahoma Statutes, contending that, under Williams, because it has complied with Oklahoma's general corporation laws and accepted the Oklahoma Corporation Commission's rules, regulations and applicable statutes, D-Mil is entitled to exercise eminent domain across Landowner's land to market gas from a well it operates. And, no statute requires D-Mil to be specifically designated as or become a "pipeline company." We disagree. 17 D-Mil correctly notes that a pipeline company is not expressly required to be named as such. See eg. Mo.-Kan.-Tex.R. Co. v. State, 1985 OK 108, 11 85, 712 P.2d 40, 46; French v. Ayres, 1949 OK 88, 207 P.2d 308 (<HOLDING>). Under title 52, a company's business name is Options: A. holding that service is not avoided by service on a partys attorney as service on an attorney is ineffective unless he has been authorized to accept such service B. holding that claims of corporation vest in corporation C. holding that directors of a whollyowned corporation could consider the interests of the parent company as well as the interests of their corporation because there was only one substantive interest to be protected D. holding public service corporation obligated to furnish service to each patron at same price charged to other patrons for substantially similar service E. recognizing a pipeline company as a public service corporation even though it was not expressly named as such

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing a pipeline company as a public service corporation even though it was not expressly named as such
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: T h i s A g re e m e nt m a y be e x e c u t e d in a n y nu m b e r o f c o u nt er p a r ts, in c l u di n g fac s i m i l e c o unt e r p a r ts, e ac h o f w h i c h sh a ll be d ee m e d a n o r i g in a l inst r u m e n t , but a ll of w h i c h t o g e th e r sh a ll c o nst i t ute b ut o ne a nd t h e s a m e i n s t r um e nt.

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: and intelligently exercise [his] peremptory strikes.” (Smallwood Brief, at 19.) He further asserts that as a result of the district court’s limitation of voir dire, he was unable “to determine whether the all-white jury harbored biased racial attitudes.” (Id.) This argument is unpersuasive. Smallwood did not ask any questions about race during his thirty minutes of questioning. He does not indicate what he would have asked if he had been given additional time. Most importantly, he does not explain his failure to object or ask for additional time when the district court indicated that his time was up. In short, he has provided no basis for us to conclude that the district court improperly limited his voir dire. See United States v. Ricketts, 146 F.3d 492, 495-96 (7th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). D. Life Sentence Smallwood argues that, Options: A. holding that the time to disposition is more important than time to trial B. holding that the relevant time is the time of the employment decision C. holding that defendant waived review of an issue which he raised for the first time during oral argument D. holding that a case remained pending where the time to file a rehearing petition had not expired E. holding that defendants argument that the district court improperly limited voir dire was meritless when the defense wasted time during voir dire and failed to request additional time when its time had expired

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that defendants argument that the district court improperly limited voir dire was meritless when the defense wasted time during voir dire and failed to request additional time when its time had expired
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: 88-89, 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 530, 52 P.3d 703 (2002)). Thus, the Court finds that any state law claims based on the Property Defendants’ actions relating to the prosecution of the UD action are independently barred under California’s antiSLAPP statute. E. Remaining Defendants Not all of the parties named as Defendants have filed motions to dismiss or otherwise responded to the Complaint. The docket indicates that each of the summons as to these non-responding Defendants was returned unexecuted. Dkt. 19, 21, 23-33. Nonetheless, because the Court’s reasoning as set forth above is equally applicable to Drawsand’s claims against all of the Defendants, the complaint against the remaining Defendants likewise will be dismissed. See Silverton v. Dept. of Treasury, 644 F.2d 1341, 1345 (9th Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>); see also Columbia Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. Options: A. holding that district court has discretion when deciding to convert a defendants motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment B. holding that the court implicitly denied the plaintiffs motion to strike certain submissions because the court in its opinion granting defendants motion to dismiss relied on defendants materials C. holding district court may properly on its own motion dismiss an action as to defendants who have not moved to dismiss where such defendants are in a position similar to that of moving defendants or where claims against such defendants are integrally related D. holding that documents integral to the complaint are properly considered on a motion to dismiss E. holding that the trial court erred by granting the defendants motion to dismiss

assistant: The best answer is C. holding district court may properly on its own motion dismiss an action as to defendants who have not moved to dismiss where such defendants are in a position similar to that of moving defendants or where claims against such defendants are integrally related
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: [Tr. 412-413] William A. Schroeder, 22 Missouri Practice, Missouri Evidence, section 106:1 (4th ed. 2012) (observing that the rule of completeness only applies where “[t]he parts introduced to complete the whole ... relate to the same subject matter” as that which has been admitted). It is true, as Ellis notes in his Brief, that Saxton (V.W.’s school principal), was permitted on direct examination, over Ellis’s objection, to read from an incident report she prepared that V.W. told her she would “have to turn the TV off [at Ellis’s house] so [M.W.] does not see. They kiss and take them clothes off.” [Tr. 689-695] Ellis objec inadmissible, self-serving hearsay statement denying that he showed the girls pornography. State v. Beishline, 920 S.W.2d 622, 626-27 (Mo. App. W.D. 1996) (<HOLDING>) (citing State v. Sweet, 796 S.W.2d 607, 614 Options: A. holding rule 16a1a does not include statements made by coconspirators even if those statements can be attributed to the defendant for purposes of the rule against hearsay B. holding that federal rule of evidence 8034 the hearsay exception for statements made for medical diagnosis or treatment does not apply to statements made by doctors C. holding exculpatory statements by a third party should have been admitted in the punishment phase notwithstanding the hearsay rule D. holding selfserving declarations are inadmissible hearsay unless defendant testifies E. holding that as a general rule a defendant cannot create exculpatory evidence by introducing selfserving hearsay statements made by the defendant to another

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that as a general rule a defendant cannot create exculpatory evidence by introducing selfserving hearsay statements made by the defendant to another
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: to be a strategic choice. The court dispensed with the argument that defense counsel should have objected to the foundation for the State’s DNA expert’s testimony by stating that the record would not have supported such an objection. “The record reflects that the expert testified about the DNA testing that she performed herself, and she did not testify about the results of tests performed by another laboratory.” Ibid. Both of these conclusions are reasonable and supported by the record. As discussed above, strategic choices by defense counsel, when reasonable, do not amount to defective performance. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689, 104 S.Ct. 2052. And defense counsel does not perform defectively by failing to make a meritless objection. Mapes v. Coyle, 171 F.3d 408, 413 (6th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). The petitioner is not entitled to a writ of Options: A. holding that there can be no constitutional deficiency in counsels failure to raise meritless issues B. holding that an appellant has no standing to raise a due process issue where he has not shown that the alleged deficiency in the notice had any connection in fact with his own failure to seek review of the denial of his claim C. holding no jurisdiction when trial court granted extension because it found deficiency even though it was not same deficiency complained of by appellant in his motion to dismiss D. holding failure to preserve issues below results in waiver even of constitutional issues E. holding that a second deficiency notice issued for a taxable year was valid where it determined a deficiency in a different type of tax than did the earlier deficiency notice

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that there can be no constitutional deficiency in counsels failure to raise meritless issues
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 Recipient understands and agrees that: (i) he or she will be fully liable for any federal, state or local taxes of any kind owed by him or her with regard to issuance of the Shares, whether owed at the time of transfer pursuant to the Recipient having made an election under Section 83(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (an “83(b) Election”), or at the time that the Shares vest pursuant to the vesting schedule set forth in Section 2 above; and (ii) the Company has the right to deduct from payments of any kind otherwise due to the Recipient any federal, state or local taxes of any kind required by law to be withheld with respect to issuance or vesting of the Shares.

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: vehicle being operated by Scott, the excluded person. It is significant there is no limiting language in the first sentence of the exclusion that would indicate an intent that the exclusion does not apply to claims brought under the UM/UIM coverage. To the contrary, the exclusion encompasses “any claim.” We have previously held that the use of the word “any” in a statute “means all or every.” State v. Bishop, 257 Iowa 336, 341, 132 N.W.2d 455, 458 (1965); accord Lopez v. Dairyland Ins. Co., 890 P.2d 192, 195 (Colo.Ct.App.1994) (interpreting word “any” in named driver exclusion to “mean[ ] ‘every,’ ‘all,’ ‘the whole of,’ and ‘without limit’ ” (quoting Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 97 (1986)); State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. v. Kiehne, 97 N.M. 3d 1228, 1234 (Alaska 2007) (<HOLDING>); O’Brien v. Dorrough, 928 P.2d 322, 325-26 & Options: A. holding automobile exclusion in general liability policy did not apply because plaintiffs claim of negligent supervision and training was a separate and distinct theory of recovery from the use of an automobile B. holding nearly identical exclusion of any claim unambiguously operates to bar recovery of uim benefits under policy when driver is excluded C. holding nearly identical policy language plainly indicates that any claim arising from the excluded drivers operation of the automobile is not covered including negligent entrustment claim against the named insured D. holding claim for injuries arising out of use of truck and not from negligent supervision excluded from coverage by auto exclusion in commercial general liability policy no claim that language in policy was ambiguous or unclear E. holding nearly identical named driver exclusion was plain and unambiguous and excluded claim brought under um coverage

assistant: The best answer is C. holding nearly identical policy language plainly indicates that any claim arising from the excluded drivers operation of the automobile is not covered including negligent entrustment claim against the named insured
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: In connection with this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby, each Party will execute and deliver any additional documents and instruments and perform any additional acts that may be reasonably necessary or appropriate to effectuate and perform the provisions of this Agreement and those transactions.

assistant: Further Assurances