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: In other words, Long argues, there is no temporal limitation imposed by the opening clause of Subsection (A), and thus it applies, for example, to insurance section (A) would exclude any money or benefits that have already been paid to an insured or beneficiary. Two longstanding decisions of the Oklahoma Supreme Court, however, lead us to conclude that the opening clause of Subsection (A) must be interpreted in the broader manner argued by Long. See Etherton v. Owners Ins. Co., 829 F.3d 1209, 1223 (10th Cir. 2016) (“If the state’s highest court has interpreted a state statute, we defer to that decision. If the state’s highest court has not interpreted a state statute, we instead predict how that court would rule.”) (citation omitted); In re Borgman, 698 F.3d 1255, 1259 (10th Cir. 2012) (<HOLDING>). In State ex rel. Lankford v. Collins, 70 Options: A. holding that federal courts are bound by state interpretations of state law B. holding that the scope and application of state exemptions are defined by the state courts and that we are bound by their interpretations C. recognizing that state agencies which are independent of the state are citizens of the state D. holding federal courts are bound by state court determinations of state law E. holding that state courts in construing and interpreting state law are not bound by the decisions of federal courts

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the scope and application of state exemptions are defined by the state courts and that we are bound by their interpretations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: In contrast to the above cases, Thomas was not charged under two habitual offender statutes. Rather, he was charged with being an habitual offender under Ind. Code 35-50-2-8 and with committing the crime of carrying a handgun without a license as a Class C felony. The fact that the handgun charge was elevated from a misdemeanor to a felony does not render application of the habitual offender statute in any way duplicative. Hence, the State was not barred from using Thomas’s 1981 robbery conviction as an underlying felony to support the habitual offender charge. Because Thomas’s convictions were not already enhanced by a specific habitual offender scheme, use of the general habitual offender statute does not result in double enhancement. See Haymaker v. State, 667 N.E.2d 1113 (Ind.1996) (<HOLDING>); see also Williams v. State, 676 N.E.2d 1074 Options: A. holding that defendants habitual traffic violator conviction could also serve as a predicate felony conviction under the general habitual offender statute B. holding that to constitute a prior conviction for purposes of the habitual felony offender act the defendant must have been adjudicated guilty before the present crime was committed C. holding that under habitual felony offender statute a sentence includes the sanction of probation D. holding that defendants auto theft conviction could serve to support his conviction for auto theft as a class c felony and as a prior unrelated felony conviction under the habitual offender statute E. holding that under the 1991 version of the habitual offender statute defendant could not receive habitual offender sentence for life felony

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that defendants habitual traffic violator conviction could also serve as a predicate felony conviction under the general habitual offender statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by Holdings and each Borrower and constitutes, and each other Loan Document when executed and delivered by each Loan Party that is party thereto will constitute, a legal, valid and binding obligation of such Loan Party, enforceable against each such Loan Party in accordance with its terms, subject to (a) the effects of bankruptcy, insolvency, moratorium, reorganization, fraudulent conveyance or other similar laws affecting creditors’ rights generally, including in the case of the Debtors only the entry by the Bankruptcy Court of the Interim Order and the Final Order and to the terms thereof (b) general principles of equity (regardless of whether such enforceability is considered in a proceeding in equity or at law), and (c) implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing.

assistant: Enforceability
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 any provision of the Plan or any Award Agreement is or becomes or is deemed to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any jurisdiction or as to any Person or Interest, or would disqualify the Plan or any Interest under any law deemed applicable by the Plan Administrator, such provision shall be construed or deemed amended to conform to the applicable laws to the extent necessary to so conform and give maximum effect to such provision, or if it cannot be construed or deemed amended without, in the determination of the Plan Administrator, materially altering the intent of the Plan or the Interest, such provision shall be stricken as to such jurisdiction, Person or Interest and the remainder of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.

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: Upon and during the continuance of any one or more Events of Default, (i) Agent may, at its option, accelerate and demand payment of all or any part of the Secured Obligations together with a Prepayment Charge and declare them to be immediately due and payable ( provided , that upon the occurrence of an Event of Default of the type described in Section 9.5 , all of the Secured Obligations shall automatically be accelerated and made due and payable, in each case without any further notice or act), (ii) Agent may, at its option, sign and file in Borrower's name any and all collateral assignments, notices, control agreements, security agreements and other documents it deems necessary or appropriate to perfect or protect the repayment of the Secured Obligations, and in furtherance thereof, Borrower hereby grants Agent an irrevocable power of attorney coupled with an interest, and (iii) Agent may notify any of Borrower's account debtors to make payment directly to Agent, compromise the amount of any such account on Borrower's behalf and endorse Agent's name without recourse on any such payment for deposit directly to Agent's account. Agent may exercise all rights and remedies with respect to the Collateral under the Loan Documents or otherwise available to it under the UCC and other applicable law, including the right to release, hold, sell, lease, liquidate, collect, realize upon, or otherwise dispose of all or any part of the Collateral and the right to occupy, utilize, process and commingle the Collateral. All Agent's rights and remedies shall be cumulative and not exclusive.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, all of which will be considered one and the same agreement and will become effective when counterparts have been signed by each of the parties and delivered to the other parties, it being understood that each party need not sign the same counterpart.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: These RSUs are subject to vesting, with 6,184 RSUs vesting on March 1, 2018, and 6,184 RSUs vesting on September 1, 2018, provided the Employee is in the employ of the Company at the time of each such vesting.

assistant: Vesting
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 other Loan Documents (EXCEPT, AS TO ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT, AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH THEREIN) and any claims, controversy, dispute or cause of action (whether in contract or tort or otherwise) based upon, arising out of or relating to this Agreement or any other Loan Document (except, as to any other Loan Document, as expressly set forth therein) and the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the law of the State of NEW YORK.

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: See id. Marrero concedes in her amended complaint that on May 3, 2002, she received a letter informing her of the Housing Department’s intention to remove her from office. This letter, along with a second letter, required her to appear at an informal meeting to discuss the removal proceedings. She attended the meeting and was given a full opportunity to respond to each of the allegations. Even drawing all inferences in Marrero’s favor, the process provided her in this pre-termination hearing comported with due process guarantees by providing her notice and an opportunity to be heard. As a result, the pre-termination hearing provided constitutionally adequate process without necessitating a post-termination hearing. See Feliciano-Angulo v. Rivera-Cruz, 858 F.2d 40, 43-44 (1st Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). 2. Equal Protection Claim Under the Equal Options: A. holding that there is no due process right to appellate review B. holding that due process requires no irreducible combination of pre and posttermination hearings C. holding no due process violation with respect to hearings for protective orders against domestic abuse D. holding that due process requires a hearing appropriate to the nature of the case E. holding there is no meaningful distinction between due course and due process

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that due process requires no irreducible combination of pre and posttermination hearings
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 terminated by (a) any Purchaser, as to such Purchaser’s obligations hereunder only and without any effect whatsoever on the obligations between the Company and the other Purchasers, by written notice to the other parties, if the Closing has not been consummated on or before June 20, 2017, and (b) the Company by written notice to the Purchasers, if the Closing has not been consummated on or before June 20, 2017; in each case provided , however , that no such termination will affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party (or parties).

assistant: Terminations
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: cases have held to the contrary. In Sikirica v. Cohen (In re Cohen), Case No. 05-38135-JAD, Adv. No. 07-02517-JAD, 2012 WL 5360956 (Bankr.W.D.Pa. Oct. 31, 2012), rev’d on other grounds, 487 B.R. 615 (W.D.Pa.2013), the court rebuffed a chapter 7 trustee’s effort to recover payments made by the debtors for tuition for their children’s undergraduate educations, holding that “[wjhile the Pennsylvania legislature has not yet enacted a statute that requires parents to pay for their children’s post-secondary education, this Court holds that such expenses are reasonable and necessary for the maintenance of the Debtor’s family for purposes of the fraudulent transfer statute only.” Cohen, 2012 WL 5360956, at *10. Accord, Shearer v. Oberdick (In re Oberdick), 490 B.R. 687, 712 (Bankr.W.D.Pa.2013) (<HOLDING>). See N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413 (in child support Options: A. holding that funds paid for undergraduate college tuition for debtors children constituted expenditures for necessities that were therefore not avoidable under the pennsylvania uniform fraudulent transfer act B. holding that debtors daughter was not liable under fraudulent transfer law for the amount her parents paid for her wedding prepetition C. holding that a college received federal funds where the funds were granted to its students as financial aid rather than directly to the college because the language of the section does not distinguish between direct and indirect receipt of federal funds D. holding that a college received federal funds where the funds were granted to its students as financial aid rather than directly to the college E. holding that debtors cannot claim an exemption in a homestead after trustee avoided the transfer of the property as a fraudulent conveyance because the transfer by the debtors was voluntary

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that funds paid for undergraduate college tuition for debtors children constituted expenditures for necessities that were therefore not avoidable under the pennsylvania uniform fraudulent transfer act
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: Rather, the jury was restricted to answering three questions relating to intent, provocation and future dangerousness. Id. The Court found that Penry’s “mitigating evidence of mental retardation and childhood abuse ha[d] relevance to his moral culpability beyond the scope” of the three questions posed to the jury. Id. at 322, 109 S.Ct. 2934. Thus, the jury instructions were unconstitutional because they precluded the jury from acting upon the mitigating evidence Penry introduced. Id. at 319-22, 109 S.Ct. 2934. The Supreme Court noted that, under Lockett and Eddings, the “sentencer must ... be able to consider and give effect to that evidence in imposing sentence.” Id. at 319, 109 S.Ct. 2934; see also Penry v. Johnson, 532 U.S. 782, 797, 121 S.Ct. 1910, 150 L.Ed.2d 9 (2001) (Penry IP) (<HOLDING>). When considering challenges for cause, a Options: A. holding that the sentencing procedure was inadequate in failing to allow jury to give mitigating effect to defendants mental retardation and abusive background B. holding that the sentencing structure allowed the jury to give mitigating effect to petitioners prison record C. holding that the key under pewy i is that the jury be able to consider and give effect to a defendants mitigating evidence in imposing sentence D. holding that the trier of fact must be allowed to consider and give effect to all relevant mitigating evidence E. holding that a defendants sentence is controlled by the law in effect at the time he committed the offense

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the key under pewy i is that the jury be able to consider and give effect to a defendants mitigating evidence in imposing sentence
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: Code defines “security interest” as “a hen created by an agreement.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(51) (emphasis added). In contrast, the Code provides that the term “statutory hen” means a “hen arising solely by force of a statute on specified circumstances or conditions ... but does not include security interest or judicial hen.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(53) (emphases added). Because plaintiffs’ tax hens arose under state statute, and not from a consensual or voluntary agreement with the taxpayer defendants, we concur in the bankruptcy court’s ruling that those hens are not “security interests” for purposes of § 1322(b)(2). The foregoing interpretation of § 1322(b)(2) is supported by substantial authority from other jurisdictions. See, e.g., In re DeMaggio, 175 B.R. 144, 146-47 (Bankr. D.N.H.1994) (<HOLDING>); In re Sabec, 137 B.R. 659, 667-68 (Bankr. Options: A. holding plain language compelled that reading B. holding that general statement of intent does not override plain language of statute C. holding that plain language and statutory history of 1322b2 establish that noneonsensual tax hens do not fall within antimodification provision of that statute D. recognizing that legislative history is not used to create ambiguity where statutory language is clear E. recognizing that where the statutory language is not ambiguous the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute must be given effect

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plain language and statutory history of 1322b2 establish that noneonsensual tax hens do not fall within antimodification provision of that statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The grant of RSUs and the issuance of shares of common stock hereunder shall be subject to, and shall comply with, any applicable requirements of any foreign and U.S. federal and state securities laws, rules and regulations (including, without limitation, the provisions of the Securities Act, the Exchange Act and in each case any respective rules and regulations promulgated thereunder) and any other law, rule regulation or exchange requirement applicable thereto. The Company shall not be obligated to issue the RSUs or any shares of common stock pursuant to this Agreement if any such issuance would violate any such requirements. As a condition to the settlement of the RSUs, the Company may require the Participant to satisfy any qualifications that may be necessary or appropriate to evidence compliance with any applicable law or regulation.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 358 U.S. 64 79 S.Ct. 116 3 L.Ed.2d 106 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, plaintiff,v.STATE OF WASHINGTON. No. 12, Original. Supreme Court of the United States November 10, 1958 Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1958. See 358 U.S. 923, 79 S.Ct. 285. Mr. Wallace Howland, Asst. Atty. Gen. of California (Messrs. Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen. and Leonard M. Sperry, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen., on the brief), for plaintiff. Messrs. John J. O'Connell, Atty. Gen. of Washington and Thomas R. Carlington (Mr. Franklin K. Thorp, Asst. Atty. Gen., on the brief), for defendant. Messrs. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. and Paxton Blair, Sol. Gen. for State of New York, as amicus curiae. On motion for leave to file bill of complaint. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion for leave to file bill of complaint is denied. U.S.Const. Amend. XXI, § 2; Indianapolis Brewing Co. v. Liquor Control Commission, 305 U.S. 391, 59 S.Ct. 254, 83 L.Ed. 243; Joseph S. Finch & Co. v. McKittrick, 305 U.S. 395, 59 S.Ct. 256, 83 L.Ed. 246; Mahoney v. Joseph Triner Corp., 304 U.S. 401, 58 S.Ct. 952, 82 L.Ed. 1424; State Board of Equalization of California v. Young's Market Co., 299 U.S. 59, 57 S.Ct. 77, 81 L.Ed. 38.

assistant: 11
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 market. Boeh-ringer, in turn, explains that it seeks two types of recalls in this case; a mandatory recall and a voluntary recall. First, Boeh-ringer requests a mandatory recall of all of the infringing products which Schering currently owns. Second, Boehringer requests a voluntary recall of “products not owned by Schering, but in the possession of its distributors and customers.” Letter of J. Gordon to Court of July 11, 2000. The scope of an injunction is left to the sound discretion of the court and may include an appropriate recall of infringing goods. Johns Hopkins University v. Cellpro, Inc., 152 F.3d 1342, 1354 (Fed.Cir.1998) (scope of injunctive relief is reviewed for abuse of discretion); Perfect Fit Industries, Inc. v. Acme Quilting Co., Inc., 646 F.2d 800, (2d Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>); Rohm and Haas Co. v. Cumberland Chemical Options: A. holding that the idea grants district courts broad discretion to craft appropriate relief B. recognizing inherent power of courts of appeals C. recognizing trial courts power to fashion a remedy appropriate to the vindication of a prior consent judgment D. recognizing the broad power of federal courts to fashion appropriate relief E. recognizing the supervisory power of appellate courts

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing the broad power of federal courts to fashion appropriate relief
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: relationship between putative father and child, statute depriving putative father of standing to challenge paternity did not violate due process); Markert v. Behm, 394 N.W.2d 239, 243-44 (Minn.Ct.App.1986) (statute denying putative fathers standing to bring paternity action does not violate due process or equal protection rights under the United States Constitution); Merkel v. Doe, 63 Ohio Misc.2d 490, 635 N.E.2d 70, 72 (Ohio Ct.Com.Pl.1993) (finding paternity statute which granted putative fathers standing to assert paternity to a child born during a marriage was unconstitutional due process infringement on fundamental interest of child’s family and statute was not sufficiently narrowly tailored for due process purposes); Amrhein v. Cozad, 714 A.2d 409, 411 (Pa.Super.Ct.1998) (<HOLDING>); Evans v. Steelman, 970 S.W.2d 431, 434-35 Options: A. holding that a defendants right to an independent blood alcohol test means the right to a test that is not subject to government manipulation B. holding blood test taken for independent medical purpose is not same as blood test taken pursuant to section 3755a C. recognizing presumption D. holding that the trial court must specifically consider whether it would be in the best interest of the child for the case to proceed before a putative father may be permitted to seek blood tests in an attempt to rebut the presumption of paternity E. holding presumption of paternity that applies to intact family prevented an order by the court for a blood test or the use of privately obtained blood test to rebut the presumption of legitimacy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding presumption of paternity that applies to intact family prevented an order by the court for a blood test or the use of privately obtained blood test to rebut the presumption of legitimacy
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 constructive notice. Defendant’s second argument requires more discussion. District of Columbia cases show a tendency to merge claims for implied warranty of merchantability with strict liability. That is the second basis for Defendant’s argument to dismiss this count. In Cottom v. McGuire Funeral Service, Inc., 262 A.2d 807, 808 (D.C.1970), the court characterized the doctrines of implied warranty and strict liability in tort as “but two labels for the same right and remedy, as the governing principles are the same.” The reason why implied warranty merges with the strict liability claim is that both are based on the sale of a product alleged to be defective. (M.D. at 13.) Precedent supports the merging of these two claims: Bowler v. Stewart-Wamer Corp., 563 A.2d 344, 346 (D.C.1989) (<HOLDING>); MacPherson v. Searle & Co., 775 F.Supp. 417, Options: A. holding warranty liability and strict liability were both shown by proof a product was defective B. holding the learned intermediary doctrine as adopted by georgia courts insulated a defendant from liability for negligence strict liability and breach of implied warranty claims C. recognizing strict product liability actions D. holding that a commercial buyer of defective goods cannot maintain a strict liability or negligence suit for economic loss to the product as the remedy is a breach of warranty suit under the ucc E. holding that to prevail on strict liability claim for a defective product plaintiff must show the product was defective when it left the defendants possession and control

assistant: The best answer is A. holding warranty liability and strict liability were both shown by proof a product was defective
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof; and this Agreement supersedes all other agreements and drafts hereof, oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. No promises, statements, understandings, representations or warranties of any kind, whether oral or in writing, express or implied, have been made to Former Director to induce Former Director to enter into this Agreement other than the express terms set forth herein, and Former Director is not relying upon any promises, statements, understandings, representations, or warranties other than those expressly set forth in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms of this Agreement, the Secured Party having a senior security interest or lien in the Collateral shall, subject to such Secured Party’s rights under its agreements with Borrower, have the sole and exclusive right (but not the obligation), as against the other Secured Party, to adjust settlement of any insurance policy in the event of any loss affecting such Collateral. All proceeds of such policy shall be applied by the Secured Party having the senior security interest as set forth in Section 5 of this Agreement.

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: To the extent not prohibited by applicable Laws or Permits, each Debtor agrees that any provision of any Constituent Document of any issuer of Collateral, any applicable Law, any certificate or instrument evidencing Collateral, or any other governance document that in any manner restricts, prohibits or provides conditions to (a) the grant of a Lien on any Equity Interest of such issuer or any other Collateral, (b) any transfer of any Equity Interest of such issuer or any other Collateral, (c) any change in management or control of such issuer or any other Collateral, (d) the admission of any transferee of any Collateral as a shareholder, member, partner or other equity holder of the issuer of such Collateral, or (e) any other exercise by Administrative Agent or any other Secured Party of any rights pursuant to this Agreement, any other Loan Document or Law, in each case shall not apply to (i) the grant of any Lien hereunder, (ii) the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by such Debtor, (iii) the foreclosure or other realization upon any interest in any Collateral, or (iv) the exercise of rights with respect to such Collateral, including the right to participate in the management of such issuer. Furthermore, to the extent not prohibited by applicable Laws or Permits, no Debtor will permit any amendment to or restatement of any Constituent Document or any other governance document or enter into or permit to exist any agreement that in any manner adversely affects Administrative Agent's ability to foreclose on any Collateral or which conflicts with the provisions of this Section 4.09 .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The rules of interpretation specified in the Credit Agreement (including Section 1.02 thereof) shall be applicable to this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between the provisions hereof and the provisions of the Credit Agreement, the provisions of the Credit Agreement shall control.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: credibility, but not deciding whether such a crime was one involving moral turpitude, finding issue of fact to be settled on remand as to whether conviction was too remote to be used in any event). Yet, the question presented here is whether the crime of involuntary manslaughter is also a crime universally recognized as a “crime involving moral turpitude.” A merely anecdotal survey of court decisions, many of which involve impeachment of witnesses, would suggest that a conviction for involuntary manslaughter is not such a crime, because of the lack of any intent, let alone an “evil intent.” See, e.g., United States ex rel. Mongiovi v. Karnuth, 30 F.2d 825 (W.D.N.Y.1929) (involuntary manslaughter does not involve moral turpitude); Carreker v. State, 661 So.2d 784 (Ala.Crim.App.1994) (<HOLDING>); Matter of Frascinella, 1 Cal.State Bar Options: A. recognizing the longstanding rule that crimes that have fraud as an element are categorically crimes involving moral turpitude and a court may not apply the modified categorical approach if the statute proscribes only conduct that involves moral turpitude B. holding that involuntary manslaughter defined either as reckless or negligent was not a crime of moral turpitude because itwas based on unintentional conduct in contrast to those crimes involving some form of evil intent it is not an offense that is mala in se and thus does not fall within the definition of crimes involving moral turpitude C. holding that robbery under california law categorically qualified as a crime involving moral turpitude and noting precedent in this and other circuits that theft crimes are crimes involving moral turpitude D. recognizing involuntary manslaughter as an offense that does not in and of itself constitute a crime involving moral turpitude for purposes of attorney disbarment E. holding that missouris reckless conduct statute establishes a crime involving moral turpitude

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that involuntary manslaughter defined either as reckless or negligent was not a crime of moral turpitude because itwas based on unintentional conduct in contrast to those crimes involving some form of evil intent it is not an offense that is mala in se and thus does not fall within the definition of crimes involving moral turpitude
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: 488 U.S. 590 109 S.Ct. 858 102 L.Ed.2d 951 Mark H. ORING, appellant,v.STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA. No. 87-1224. Supreme Court of the United States January 23, 1989 Rehearing Denied March 20, 1989. See 489 U.S. 1092, 109 S.Ct. 1562. PER CURIAM. 1 The appeal is dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.

assistant: 9
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: 381 U.S. 414 85 S.Ct. 1575 14 L.Ed.2d 692 KENNECOTT COPPER CORP.v.UNITED STATES. No. 995. Supreme Court of the United States June 1, 1965 Arthur H. Dean and Howard T. Milman, for appellant. Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Lionel Kestenbaum, Jerome S. Wagshal and Donald L. Hardison, for the United States. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 82 S.Ct. 1502, 8 L.Ed.2d 510 and United States v. Aluminum Co. of America, 377 U.S. 271, 84 S.Ct. 1283, 12 L.Ed.2d 314. 2 Mr. Justice HARLAN and Mr. Justice GOLDBERG, dissenting. 3 We would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for argument. In so voting, we indicate no opinion on the merits. Under the Expediting Act, 32 Stat. 823, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 29 (1964 ed.), this is appellant's first and only appeal. So long as this statute remains on the books and Congress provides no intermediate review, see United States v. Singer Mfg. Co., 374 U.S. 174, 175, 83 S.Ct. 1773, 1774, 10 L.Ed.2d 823, it is our view that the policy of the Act is, in general, best served by plenary rather than summary dispositions of such appeals. Ibid. Of course, if the question presented by an appeal is plainly insubstantial or directly governed by a controlling decision of this Court, summary disposition would still be appropriate. Since we do not believe that this can be said of this case, we would give plenary consideration to this appeal.

assistant: 8
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 land occupied or to be occupied by a building or a group of buildings and their accessory uses” [emphasis added]) with the ordinance cited in Loveladies Property Owners Assn., Inc. v. Barnegat City Service Co., 60 N.J. Super. 491, 498, 159 A.2d 417 (App. Div.) (defining lot in relevant part as “ [a] parcel of land on which a main building and its accessory buildings are or may be placed” [emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 33 N.J. 118, 162 A.2d 342 (1960). Additionally, other cases that we have reviewed, which hold that the area beneath private roadways cannot be considered “open space” simply because it contains impervious pavement, also are unpersuasive. See, e.g., Board of County Commissioners v. Aurora, 62 P.3d 1049, 1052-53 (Colo. App. 2002) (<HOLDING>). This is so because one of the required areas Options: A. holding that roadway improved by grading and surfacing could not be open space B. holding that a deposition that was not presented to the trial court could not be considered on appeal C. holding that a jury could not be instructed that attempted murder can be committed knowingly D. holding twomonth delay could be unreasonable where employee could not work and was not paid in interim E. holding that a new trial could not be ordered until there was a finding the parties could not agree on complete reporters record

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that roadway improved by grading and surfacing could not be open space
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: DRL shall keep, and cause its Affiliates to keep, complete, true and accurate books of accounts and records for the purpose of determining the amounts payable to XenoPort pursuant to this Agreement. Such books and records shall be kept for [ * ] . Such records will be open for inspection during [ * ] , by an independent auditor chosen by [ * ] for the purpose of verifying the amounts payable by DRL hereunder. Such inspections may be made [ * ] , at reasonable times and [ * ] written notice. Such records [ * ] shall be subject to [ * ] . The independent auditor from the audit firm of international repute [ * ] , shall be obligated to execute a reasonable confidentiality agreement prior to commencing any such inspection. Inspections conducted under this Section 7.4 shall be at the expense of [ * ] , unless a variation or error producing [ * ] for a period covered by the inspection is established, in which case all reasonable costs relating to the inspection for such period and any [ * ] amounts that are discovered shall be paid by [ * ] , together with interest on such [ * ] amounts at the rate set forth in Section 7.1 above. If the audit establishes that [ * ] period covered by the audit, then such [ * ] amount shall be credited against [ * ] under this Agreement after the completion of the audit. The Parties will endeavor in such inspection to minimize disruption of DRL’s normal business activities to the extent reasonably practicable.

assistant: Records
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 titles to the sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and should not be deemed a part hereof or affect the construction or interpretation of any provision hereof. Whenever the context may require, any pronoun used in this Agreement shall include the corresponding masculine, feminine, or neuter forms, and the singular form of nouns, pronouns, and verbs shall include the plural and vice versa.

assistant: Titles
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 is duly organized and validly existing in good standing under the laws of the jurisdiction of its organization. The Company has full power and authority to own, operate and occupy its properties and to conduct its business as presently contemplated and is registered or qualified to do business and in good standing in each jurisdiction in which the nature of the business conducted by it or the location of the properties owned or leased by it requires such qualification and where the failure to be so qualified would have a material adverse effect upon the condition (financial or otherwise), earnings, business, properties or operations of the Company (a “Material Adverse Effect”), and no proceeding has been instituted in any such jurisdiction, revoking, limiting or curtailing, or seeking to revoke, limit or curtail, such power and authority or qualification.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party shall, and shall ensure that their respective Affiliates shall, take out and maintain such types and amounts of liability insurance or, if applicable, self-insurance to cover liabilities related to its activities under this Supply Agreement as is normal and customary in the pharmaceutical industry generally for Persons similarly situated, and shall upon request provide to the other Party evidence of such insurance coverage. Such insurance coverage shall remain in effect throughout the Supply Term and for a period of three years thereafter.

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: Ditech shall, at its own expense, indicate in its books and records (including its computer records) that the Receivables in respect of a Designated Pool arising under each Designated Servicing Agreement and the related Transferred Assets have been sold, assigned, transferred and conveyed to the Depositor in accordance with this Agreement and are owned by the Issuer and pledged to the Indenture Trustee on behalf of the Noteholders. Ditech shall not alter the indication referenced in this paragraph with respect to any Receivable during the term of this Agreement (except in accordance with Section 9(b) ). If a third party, including a potential purchaser of a Receivable, should inquire as to the status of the Receivables, Ditech shall promptly indicate to such third party that the Receivables have been sold, assigned, transferred and conveyed and Ditech (except in accordance with Section 9(b) ) shall not claim any right, title or interest (including, but not limited to ownership interest) therein.

assistant: Records
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: direction must be resisted.’ ” Id. at 321, 122 S.Ct. 1465 (quoting Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, 533 U.S. 606, 636, 121 S.Ct. 2448, 150 L.Ed.2d 592 (2001) (O’Connor, J.) (concurring)). C. Resolution Of Government’s Motion To Dismiss. 1. Count IV — Taking Of “Vested Contract Rights” Claim. The complaint alleges that SMUD’s “vested contract rights” are a constitutionally protected property interest. See Compl. at ¶¶ 66-67. The United States Supreme Court has recognized that “[ejontraet rights are a form of property and as such may be taken for a public purpose provided that just compensation is paid.” United States Trust Co. of N.Y. v. New Jersey, 431 U.S. 1, 19, n. 16, 97 S.Ct. 1505, 52 L.Ed.2d 92 (1977); see also Cienega Gardens v. United States, 331 F.3d 1319, 1328-31 (Fed.Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). The complaint also alleges that SMUD’s Options: A. holding that plaintiffs had no vested interest in former interpretation of state law B. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property C. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in vested contractual rights D. holding that inmates have a property interest in their money E. recognizing that water rights constitute a real property interest

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in vested contractual rights
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party shall take, or cause to be taken, any and all reasonable actions, including the execution, acknowledgment, filing and delivery of any and all documents and instruments, that the other Party may reasonably request in order to effect the intent and purpose of this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 941 (Tex.1998). “With respect to resolution of factual issues,” “[t]he relator must establish that the trial court could reasonably have reached only one decision.” Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 840. However, “[a] trial court has no ‘discretion’ in determining what the law is or applying the law to the facts. Thus, a clear failure by the trial court to analyze or apply the law correctly will constitute an abuse of discretion, and may result in appellate reversal by extraordinary writ.” Id. Abatement We have repeatedly held that a trial court abuses its discretion when it arbitrarily abates a civil case for an indefinite period of time. See In re Sims, 88 S.W.3d 297, 306 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2002, orig. proceeding); Gebhardt v. Gallardo, 891 S.W.2d 327, 330-32 (Tex s 2000, orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>); Trapnell v. Hunter, 785 S.W.2d 426, 429 Options: A. holding that because the order lacked an independent basis it was an abuse of discretion to issue the mutual restraining order B. holding that order abating discovery from all but small group of plaintiffs until that groups claims were resolved unreasonably interfered with defendants ability to prepare a defense and was abuse of discretion C. holding that a notice of appeal filed in an adversary proceeding could not appeal the main proceeding D. holding blanket order staying discovery on main issue because of related criminal proceeding was abuse of discretion because it vitiated defendants ability to prepare defense in civil case E. holding that it was within the trial courts discretion to refuse any additional discovery and that the courts refusal to allow additional discovery was not an abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is D. holding blanket order staying discovery on main issue because of related criminal proceeding was abuse of discretion because it vitiated defendants ability to prepare defense in civil case
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: when a reservation is paid by credit or debit card , it will be processed by enett international usa , llc ( for credit or debit cards issued in the united states excluding american express ) or enett international ( uk ) limited ( trading as `` hotel booking services '' ) ( for all other cards and all american express cards ) , which act as an independent third party and the merchant of record .

assistant: None