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: erroneously deprived of their fundamental rights. See United States v. Laurent, 861 F. Supp. 2d 71, 108 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (citing Salerno, 481 U.S. at 751); United States v. Scott, 450 F.3d 863, 874 (9th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Williams, 616 F.3d 685, 692-93 (7th Cir. 2010); Arzherger, 592 F. Supp. 2d at 602-03. “Absent any individualized determination, there is simply no way of knowing whether the deprivation of liberty is warranted or wholly erroneous.” Smedley, 611 F. Supp. 2d at 975. ¶54 The mandatory restrictions of RCW 9.41.040(2)(a)(iv) create the irrebuttable presumption that the safety of the community cannot be reasonably assured absent the restrictions on arrestees of certain crimes. Cf. United States v. Polouizzi, 697 F. Supp. 2d 381, 390, 391 (E.D.N.Y. 2010) (<HOLDING>). This presumption, akin to the presumption Options: A. holding that a 50 percent error rate would constitute a substantial risk of erroneous deprivation B. holding that defamation standing alone is not sufficient to establish a claim for deprivation of a liberty interest citations omitted C. holding that a prior hearing is not required where the potential length or severity of the deprivation does not indicate a likelihood of serious loss and where the procedures are sufficiently reliable to minimize the risk of erroneous determination D. holding that the adam walsh amendments in categorically preventing an individualized determination of risk provide near certainty of erroneous deprivation of defendants liberty interest E. holding that the government interest in preventing crime is compelling

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the adam walsh amendments in categorically preventing an individualized determination of risk provide near certainty of erroneous deprivation of defendants liberty interest
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 connect defendant to offense, but failure to instruct jury in accordance with corroboration requirement for accomplice witness testimony was nevertheless harmful error). When the State elicits testimony from an accomplice for the purpose of proving a defendant’s guilt, the defendant is entitled to an instruction that a conviction cannot be based on the accomplice testimony unless the jury believes the testimony to be true, and unless there is other evidence tending to connect the defendant to the offense. Green v. State, 72 S.W.3d 420, 423 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2002, pet. ref'd) (citing Selman v. State, 807 S.W.2d 310, 311 (Tex.Crim.App.1991)). This rule serves the legislative policy reflected by article 38.14 that such testimony implicating another person should b 99 S.W.3d at 793 (<HOLDING>). Appellant concedes that no objection was made Options: A. holding failure to instruct jury on requirement of corroboration of informants testimony is error B. holding that the failure to properly instruct the jury on the burden of proof required a new trial C. holding failure to instruct jury as to requirement of corroboration of accomplice witness testimony was error D. holding that the district courts failure to instruct the jury as to the proper standard of proof constituted plain error E. holding that the failure to instruct on a definition or to amplify an element is not a failure to instruct on an essential element

assistant: The best answer is A. holding failure to instruct jury on requirement of corroboration of informants testimony is error
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: these Guidelines to permit a developer to wait until the sale of a unit in excess of the first ninety-nine to qualify for an exemption for the remaining units. Grove Towers teaches that exemption eligibility for the subdivision as it relates to a prospective purchaser is determined at the time the sale is made. For these and other reasons, we find HUD’s advisory opinion letter in the instant case unpersuasive. ILSA is a strict liability statute enacted for the purpose of protecting the public and should be liberally construed in favor of the public. The Act is clear that the improved lot exemption does not apply if the method of disposition is adopted for the purpose of evasion of ILSA. See 15 U.S.C. § 1702(a)(2). See also Pigott v. Sanibel Dev. LLC, 576 F.Supp.2d 1258 (S.D.Ala.2008) (<HOLDING>). This court finds that because 200 East failed Options: A. holding that various versions of the statute qualify as an exemption 3 statute B. holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court C. holding that two hour rest breaks were compensable sleep time for law enforcement employees that were subject to the exemption under 207k D. holding that nonsignatories to a contract have no rights under the contract and thus no standing to assert claims under the contract E. holding developers argument that nine of 108 units were subject to a preconstruction contract obligating the developer to construct within two years operated to circumvent ilsa and thus did not qualify for the improved lot exemption

assistant: The best answer is E. holding developers argument that nine of 108 units were subject to a preconstruction contract obligating the developer to construct within two years operated to circumvent ilsa and thus did not qualify for the improved lot exemption
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: providing this coverage simply because Plaintiffs chose to file for benefits in another state that may also have jurisdiction. If the interpretation propounded by General Casualty is adopted, then it is conceivable that a North Carolina employer who had policy with this provision - but providing coverage for benefits required under North Carolina law - would be afforded no coverage under its policy for an accident occurring in North Carolina where the employee chose to file for benefits in another state that might also have jurisdiction. For instance, another state may assert jurisdiction because the injured employee originally accepted the employer’s offer of employment while in the that state. See Murray v. Ahlstrom Indus. Holdings, Inc., 131 N.C. App. 294, 506 S.E.2d 724 (1998) (<HOLDING>). General Casualty, which drafted the policy Options: A. holding that a debtor is required to claim any exemptions under north carolina law because north carolina is an opt out state under 11 usc 522b B. holding that a foreign subsidiary that is not registered to do business in north carolina has no place of business employees or bank accounts in north carolina does not design manufacture or advertise its products in north carolina and does not solicit business in north carolina cannot be subject to personal jurisdiction in north carolina even if some of the companys products do enter north carolina through the stream of commerce C. holding that because north carolina has opted out of the exemptions provided under 11 usc 522d the exemptions available for bankruptcy debtors in north carolina depend upon the law of north carolina D. holding that north carolina has jurisdiction over a claim arising from an accident in mississippi because the original offer of employment was accepted over the telephone while the employee was in north carolina E. holding that north carolina court lacked personal jurisdiction over illinois bank even though some of its customers resided in north carolina and loan proceeds were used in north carolina

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that north carolina has jurisdiction over a claim arising from an accident in mississippi because the original offer of employment was accepted over the telephone while the employee was in north carolina
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that “arrange[s] for disposal or treatment ... of hazardous substances” is strictly liable for the clean-up costs. 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a)(3). 3 . In addition, CERCLA imposes liability on persons who "arranged for disposal or treatment ... of hazardous substances,” and persons who accepted "hazardous substances for transport to disposal or treatment facilities.” 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a)(3), (4). 4 . See 42 U.S.C. § 9607(b)(3). 5 . Henceforth, CERCLA apportionment in the Ninth Circuit will be governed — not by a test that allows a landowner to avoid joint and several liability only with “perfect information” that portions of the contamination are "in no respect traceable” to its land — but by a "reasonable basis” test under the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 433A(l)(b). See Panel Op. at 938 (<HOLDING>). 6 .For the same result, albeit with a Options: A. holding that the statute incorporated all the rights and obligations of the contract emphasis added B. holding that the only question on a rule 35a motion is whether the sentence imposed was illegal on its face emphasis added C. holding a landowner can establish divisibility by demonstrating a reasonable basis for concluding that a certain proportion of the contamination did not originate on its facility emphasis added D. holding that the prosecution must present sufficient evidence to support a reasonable belief that defendant committed a crime emphasis added E. holding that demonstrating incompetence to be executed requires a showing that the petitioner does not understand and is incapable of understanding his impending fate emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a landowner can establish divisibility by demonstrating a reasonable basis for concluding that a certain proportion of the contamination did not originate on its facility emphasis added
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: during the commission of a first degree assault. 5 Augustine’s fails to cite any relevant case law supporting the contention that a deadly weapon under 14 V.I.C. § 297(2) cannot include a firearm. 6 Augustine argues that the trial court erred in not defining “public place” to the jury. Augustine, however, failed to raise this issue at trial, and the trial court’s failure to define the term “public place” did not constitute plain error. See United States v. McCaleb, 552 F.3d 1053, 1059 (9th Cir. 2009) (“A [trial] court does not commit plain error by failing to define a word when it is a common word which an average juror can understand and which the average juror could have applied to the facts of [the] case without difficulty.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); see also id. (<HOLDING>); United States v. Garza-Juarez, 992 F.2d 896, Options: A. holding trial court did not err by failing to consider amended petition filed after hearing without leave of court B. holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment C. holding trial court did not err in failing to define manufacture D. holding that trial court did not err E. holding trial court did not err in failing to conduct a hearing on motion for reinstatement when appellants failed to call to the trial courts attention the need for a hearing

assistant: The best answer is C. holding trial court did not err in failing to define manufacture
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at *3 (Tex.App.-San Antonio, January 19, 2000, no pet.) (not designated for publication) (citation omitted). In this case, perhaps there were such facts, possibly in the testimony that was struck from the record or in the testimony that might have been elicited from Pugh, had he been called to testify, but these circumstances are not in the record before us. We concur in the sentiments of our sister court expressed in In re J.J.K., that "we are reluctant to deny court-ordered treatment for anyone who is ill. However, within Lthe record] before us, we do not find the State proved its case by clear and convincing evidence as it is required to do.” Nos. 14-03-00379-CV, 14-03-00380-CV, 2003 WL 22996950, at *5 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, no pet.) (not designated for publication) (<HOLDING>). CORRECTED DISSENTING OPINION EVELYN V. KEYES, Options: A. holding the wifes testimony that husbands release would cause psychological harm to other family members was insufficient to support commitment courts finding that husband would cause serious bodily harm to another person B. holding that an opinion of a potential danger to others is not sufficient to support a commitment under this standard C. holding that bare psychiatric expert opinion of potential danger to others insufficient to support commitment D. holding that evidence that patient who had a history of not taking medication and who murdered husband during a period when she was off of her medication and delusional tends to confirm the likelihood of serious harm to patient or others E. holding that evidence that appellant suffered severe delusions became so agitated at the hospital that she had to be physically restrained knocked door off hinges in hospital and engaged in verbal altercations with others was insufficient to support commitment determining that there was no evidence of overt acts that would tend to confirm that appellant would cause serious harm to self or others

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that evidence that appellant suffered severe delusions became so agitated at the hospital that she had to be physically restrained knocked door off hinges in hospital and engaged in verbal altercations with others was insufficient to support commitment determining that there was no evidence of overt acts that would tend to confirm that appellant would cause serious harm to self or others
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 have and maintain, at its sole cost and expense, an adequate liability insurance (including product liability insurance) obtained from a reputable insurer to protect against potential liabilities and risk arising out of activities to be performed under this Agreement and any agreement related hereto and upon such terms (including coverages and deductible limits) as are customary in the pharmaceutical industry generally for the activities to be conducted by such Party under this Agreement. Such liability insurance shall insure against all types of liability, including personal injury, physical injury or property damage arising out of such Party’s activities hereunder. This Section 12.6 shall not create any limitation on the Parties’ liability under this Agreement. Such insurance information shall be kept in confidence in the same manner as any other Confidential Information disclosed by the Parties hereunder.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: `` servers '' are the online environments that support the service , including without limitation : the server computation , electronic data storage , software access , messaging and protocols that simulate the service .

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: to plead a prima facie intentional infliction of emotional distress claim). And the fact that Turner had already concluded that Nelson intentionally took the wallet and interviewed her for the sole purpose of persuading Nelson to admit it simply does not offend "generally accepted standards of decency and morality." See Franco, 2001 UT 25, ¶ 25, 21 P.3d 198 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also Dubois v. Grand Central, 872 P.2d 1073, 1079 (Utah Ct.App.1994) (concluding that the plaintiff's allegations that a retail store "fired her ... based on incorrect information[] does not rise to the level of outrageous or intolerable conduct necessary to establish a prima facie claim of emotional distress"); cf. Cabaness v. Thomas, 2010 UT 23, ¶¶ 39-45, 232 P.3d 486 (<HOLDING>). Consequently, the district court did not err Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs evidence that his back injury precluded him from performing at least 50 of the jobs previously available to him was enough to classify him as disabled under the ada B. holding that the defendant was placed in official detention when two police officers approached him and told him that he was under arrest as the defendant could not reasonably have believed that he was free to leave C. holding that the plaintiff failed to show retaliation where there was no evidence that the employees who disciplined him knew of his protected activity D. holding that there was a factual issue about whether a supervisors conduct was outrageous where the supervisor insulted and demeaned the plaintiff every day for years told him to divorce his wife forced him to work on a power line in the rain and criticized him about personal matters in front of other employees after learning that the plaintiff suffered from depression E. holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion to substitute counsel on the strength of gonzalezs sworn responses at the pleataking that no one was threatening him or forcing him to plead where the defendant alleged that his attorney forced him to plead guilty and threatened him if he did not take the plea

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that there was a factual issue about whether a supervisors conduct was outrageous where the supervisor insulted and demeaned the plaintiff every day for years told him to divorce his wife forced him to work on a power line in the rain and criticized him about personal matters in front of other employees after learning that the plaintiff suffered from depression
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/or intentional misconduct of the officers in the improper operation of the jail facilities. (Amended Compl. ¶27.) Where a plaintiff does not allege that a defendant personally participated in alleged constitutional deprivations, the plaintiff must establish an affirmative causal connection between the act or omission complained of and the alleged constitutional deprivations in order to sustain a § 1983 cause of action against the defendant. Swint v. City of Wadley, 51 F.3d 988 (11th Cir.1995). See also Bailey v. Board of County Commissioners of Alachua County, 956 F.2d 1112, 1124 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 832, 113 S.Ct. 98, 121 L.Ed.2d 58 (1992). Thus, for Defendant Counts, as Sheriff and supervisor of the Coffee County Jail, to be liable for the C 1557 (11th Cir.1989)(<HOLDING>). In its August 19, 1997 Order denying Options: A. holding the chief of police was an atwill employee because the parties agreed that the chief of police was an appointed officer and the citys charter stated that officers shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor with consent of the council B. holding statute requiring parties in tax suit to take notice of subsequent pleadings was not unconstitutional when city failed to take such notice C. holding that canine sniff not a search under the fourth amendment D. holding that supervisory liability might exist where police chief was on notice that canine unit was operating in unacceptable manner but failed to take remedial action E. holding that chief of police was entitled to immunity for demoting police officer pending appeal of hearing officers decision to contrary because although statute made hearing officers decision final and binding statute nowhere addressed enforceability of decision pending appeal thus chief of polices action was discretionary

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that supervisory liability might exist where police chief was on notice that canine unit was operating in unacceptable manner but failed to take remedial action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Following termination of Executive’s employment with the Company, Executive shall provide his reasonable cooperation in connection with any action or proceeding (or any appeal from any action or proceeding) which relates to events occurring during Executive’s employment hereunder and the Company agrees that it shall promptly reimburse Executive for his reasonable and documented expenses in connection with his rendering assistance and/or cooperation under this Section 11(j) upon his presentation of documentation for such expenses. This provision shall survive any termination of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: murder; the information alleged the appellant killed the victim by “shooting him with a firearm.” The jury was instructed on the lesser-included offense of third-degree (felony) murder, based on the underlying felony of aggravated assault. The trial court classified the conviction as a first-degree felony, and the Second District reversed: We recognize it is possible to commit a third-degree murder without a weapon or firearm. However, the information and the jury instruction in this case caused the use of a firearm to be an essential element of the offense. Under these circumstances, the reclassification was error. See Gonzalez v. State, 585 So.2d 932 (Fla.1991); Franklin v. State, 541 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Id. See also Rodriguez v. State, 650 So.2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (<HOLDING>). In this case, the discharge of the firearm Options: A. holding that separate sentences for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and with intent to rob were barred B. holding reclassification impermissible where underlying felony of attempted thirddegree murder with a firearm was aggravated assault and aggravated assault includes the use of a deadly weapon as a necessary element C. holding that aggravated assault was not a lesser included offense in prosecution for armed burglary attempted robbery and use of a firearm in the com mission of a felony because the allegation in the information that the accused carried a firearm was insufficient to charge the elements of aggravated assault D. holding that an unloaded gun used in the commission of an aggravated assault is a deadly weapon E. holding in case in which defendant pleaded guilty to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon that same conduct could be used as element of offense and also serve as basis for deadly weapon finding

assistant: The best answer is B. holding reclassification impermissible where underlying felony of attempted thirddegree murder with a firearm was aggravated assault and aggravated assault includes the use of a deadly weapon as a necessary element
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: Business Associate agrees to make its internal practices, books, and records relating to the use and disclosure of Protected Health Information received from, or created or received by Business Associate on behalf of, Covered Entity available to the Covered Entity, or to the Secretary, in a time and manner designated by the Covered Entity or designated by the Secretary, for purposes of the Secretary determining compliance with the HIPAA Regulations.

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: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, and each such counterpart hereof shall be deemed to be an original instrument, but all such counterparts together shall constitute but one agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Agreement by facsimile or other electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed original counterpart of this Agreement.

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: but are not necessarily limited to the persons, dates, and documents associated with the plaintiff's alleged injury and filing of written notice. By contrast, whether one or more documents constitute written notice of a claim under section 24-10-109(1) is a question of law subject to de movo review."). Accordingly, the trial court should have held an evidentia-ry hearing pursuant to 12(b)(1) to resolve those factual issues upon which jurisdiction turns, and we remand the case for this purpose. See Walton, 968 P.2d at 641 ("When disputed facts exist regarding application of the CGIA's immunity bar, the trial court on its own motion may hold an evidentiary hearing, and should do so upon a public entity's request."); Lafitte v. State Highway Dep't, 885 P.2d 338, 341-42 (Colo.App.1994) (<HOLDING>); Reynolds v. State Bd., 873 P.2d 1, 1 Options: A. holding that an issue not presented to the trial court will not be considered on appeal B. holding that a remand and possibly an evidentiary hearing was necessary for reconsideration of the plaintiffs claim for injuries allegedly caused by the states negligent failure to maintain a public highway because court of appeals could not tell whether parties presented and court considered all relevant evidence on the issue C. holding that a deposition that was not presented to the trial court could not be considered on appeal D. holding that because defendant did not raise a newly discovered evidence claim or amend his postconviction motion after the evidentiary hearing the issue was not timely presented to the trial court and was not cognizable on appeal E. holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to consider an argument not presented to the board in a motion for reconsideration

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a remand and possibly an evidentiary hearing was necessary for reconsideration of the plaintiffs claim for injuries allegedly caused by the states negligent failure to maintain a public highway because court of appeals could not tell whether parties presented and court considered all relevant evidence on the issue
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 addition to the specific costs to be assumed by each of XOMA and Novartis as described herein, each Party will be responsible for all costs that it incurs in exercising its rights and meeting its obligations under this Agreement, except as expressly set forth otherwise in this Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such manner as to be effective and valid under Applicable Law, but if any provision of this Agreement is held to be prohibited by or invalid under Applicable Law, such provision shall be ineffective only to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity, without invalidating the remainder of such provisions or the remaining provisions of this Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that stem from an independent source such as state law-rules or understandings that secure certain benefits and that support claims of entitlement to those benefits.” Id. {14} A statutory scheme providing for the receipt of government benefits may give rise to property interests protected by the due process clause. In Mathews, the United States Supreme Court determined that the private interest affected by state action was the claimant’s continued receipt ofbenefits, which was a source of income, pending a final decision on his claim for Social Security disability benefits. See 424 U.S. at 339-40. Similarly, a private interest affected by state action is a claimant’s continued receipt of welfare benefits. See Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 267, 90 S.Ct 1011, 25 L.Ed.2d 287 (<HOLDING>); Roth, 408 U.S. at 576 (“a person receiving Options: A. holding that an administrator was not in substantial compliance with 1133 where the initial denial notice omitted one of the grounds later relied on for the denial of benefits B. holding that a termination of benefits must go handinhand with a termination of the liability of an employer C. holding that the pretermination hearing has one function only to produce an initial determination of the validity of the welfare departments grounds for discontinuance of payments in order to protect a recipient against an erroneous termination of his benefits citations omitted D. holding that an evidentiary hearing is not required prior to the termination of social security disability benefits E. holding that the district courts application of batson was clearly erroneous but then reviewing the record to make our own determination as to the validity of the objection

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the pretermination hearing has one function only to produce an initial determination of the validity of the welfare departments grounds for discontinuance of payments in order to protect a recipient against an erroneous termination of his benefits citations omitted
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: Schedule 3.14 sets forth a description of all insurance maintained by or on behalf of the Loan Parties and their Subsidiaries as of the Effective Date. As of the Effective Date, all premiums in respect of such insurance have been paid. The Borrowers maintain, and have caused each Subsidiary to maintain, with financially sound and reputable insurance companies, insurance on all their real and personal property in such amounts, subject to such deductibles and self-insurance retentions and covering such properties and risks as are adequate and customarily maintained by companies engaged in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 798 n. 7 (3d Cir.1994) (concluding that defendant’s age of 57 offered no basis for downward departure). Marin-Castaneda does not assert any extraordinary condition other than the fact that he was 67 years old at the time of sentencing. He does not seem to suffer from any unusual impairments for a man his age; certainly nothing suggesting that home confinement would be as effective as incarceration. In fact, he had never been hospitalized before his stay at the Bayonne Medical Center. Appendix at 98 (referring to Presentence Investigation Report ¶ 37). Absent some extraordinary infirmity, we cannot conclude that the bare fact that Marin-Castaneda was 67 years old would have justified a downward departure by the district court. See United States v. Goff, 20 F.3d 918, 921 (8th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Tucker, 986 F.2d 278, 280 Options: A. holding that section 5h11 does not permit downward departure for 67yearold defendant in good health B. holding that a defendants substance abuse or addiction does not justify a downward departure C. holding that despite the defendants status as the sole supporter of his wife and three children the district court erred when it gave a downward departure for familial obligations because departure downward in sentencing is not justified for family reasons except in unusual circumstances D. holding that the district courts denial of a downward departure was an exercise of discretion and therefore not reviewable E. holding that district court had authority to grant section 5k20 downward departure despite governments opposition

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that section 5h11 does not permit downward departure for 67yearold defendant in good health
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties agree that this Agreement is confidential and each party agrees not to disclose any information regarding the terms of this Agreement to any Person, except that the Company may disclose information regarding the terms of this Agreement to its Affiliates and any lenders or as required by law or regulation or the rules of any stock exchange or market on which the Company’s securities are listed or traded, and the Executive may disclose information regarding the terms of this Agreement to his immediate family. Each party may also disclose this information to its tax, legal or other counsel. Each party shall instruct each of the foregoing not to disclose the same to anyone.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The obligations of each party hereto under this Section 2.15 shall survive the resignation or replacement of the Administrative Agent or any assignment of rights by, or the replacement of, a Lender, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all obligations under any Loan Document.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: bringing a deliberate-indifference claim). Appointment of counsel in a civil case “is a privilege justified only by exceptional circumstances, such as where the facts and legal issues are so novel or complex as to require the assistance of a trained practitioner.” Fowler v. Jones, 899 F.2d 1088, 1096 (11th Cir.1990). We conclude from the record that the magistrate judge did not abuse its discretion in denying Wallace’s request for appointment of counsel. Though the magistrate judge determined that Wallace stated a claim sufficient to survive preliminary dismissal, that, alone, is not an exceptional circumstance. Wallace’s claims were fairly straightforward and did not present complex or novel issues. See Fowler, 899 F.2d at 1096; Bass v. Perrin, 170 F.3d 1312, 1320 (11th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). Finally, Wallace demonstrated his ability to Options: A. holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to certify class action when claims were so individualized that certification was improper B. holding that an inmates eighth amendment legal claims were straightforward and that the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to appoint counsel C. holding that a district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to give a mere inspection instruction in a firearm possession case D. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to order production of government files under rule 16a1c E. holding district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to sever numerous substantively unconscionable terms from arbitration agreement

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an inmates eighth amendment legal claims were straightforward and that the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to appoint counsel
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Loan Party and its properties and businesses, and the properties and businesses of its Subsidiaries, are insured with financially sound and reputable insurance companies (which are not Loan Parties or Affiliates of the Loan Parties) against loss or damage as required by Section 6.01(e).

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the rules of procedure, the court must, in effect, fit the punishment to the crime. “Although the trial court’s discretion to choose an appropriate sanction is broad, when a court imposes a ‘drastic’ sanction such as dismissal or default we will closely scrutinize the court’s decision.” Saucier v. State Tax Assessor, 1998 ME 61, ¶ 6, 708 A.2d 281, 288. [¶ 17] In determining the appropriate sanction to be imposed upon a party for failure to comply with the rules, the court should take into account the purpose of the specific rule at issue, the party’s conduct throughout the proceedings, the party’s bonafides in its failure to comply, prejudice to other parties, and the need for the orderly administration of justice. See, e.g., Estate of Dineen, 1998 ME 268, ¶ 11, 721 A.2d 185, 188 (<HOLDING>); Ricci v. Delehanty, 1998 ME 281, ¶ 15, 719 Options: A. holding sanctions were appropriate due to prejudice imposed on other party from failure to disclose subject matter of expert testimony B. holding sanctions were appropriate when excessive responsive pleadings were filed for purposes of delay C. holding sanctions were appropriate where party filed motions merely for purposes of delay D. holding that although the defendant filed a number of motions because the original trial date never changed as a result of those motions no delay could be attributed to the motions E. holding sanctions order not final where the amount of sanctions had not yet been determined

assistant: The best answer is C. holding sanctions were appropriate where party filed motions merely for purposes of delay
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement shall not be assignable by any party, without the other party's written consent, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld, except that such consent is not required in connection with the assignment of any parties’ obligation s to an affiliate of such party ; provided , however , that any such assignment shall not relieve the parties hereto from any obligations under this Agreement.

assistant: Assignments
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 burglary, arson, extortion, and the use of explosives in § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii) limit that part of the definition to crimes against property. As noted above, that argument is inconsistent with the plain language of the statute. It is also contrary to United States v. Mobley, 40 F.3d 688 (4th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 2005, 131 L.Ed.2d 1005 (1995). In Mobley, we concluded, “[wjhile it is possible to infer a property restriction into the structure of the statute, a plain reading of the words suggests that it covers any crime of various enumerated types, and also those crimes of whatever variety that involve conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.” Id. at 696. See also United States v. O’Neal, 937 F.2d 1369, 1372 (9th Cir.1990)(<HOLDING>). Our conclusion in Mobley was based in part on Options: A. holding that failure to stop for a blue light is a violent felony under armed career criminal statute because it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another B. holding that begay rejected that circuits earlier approach under which an offense presented a serious potential risk of physical injury to another if the offense conduct had the potential for serious physical injury to another C. holding that misdemeanor drunk driving by its very nature involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injuiy to another D. holding that vehicular manslaughter qualifies as a violent felony under section 924e2bii in that it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another E. holding that attempted burglary under florida law qualified as a crime of violence under the armed career criminal act 18 usc 924e2biihereinafter acca because it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that vehicular manslaughter qualifies as a violent felony under section 924e2bii in that it involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Mortgagor agrees to release and indemnify the Mortgagee against, and hold the Mortgagee harmless from, any and all losses, claims, damages liabilities and related expenses, including the fees, charges and disbursements of any counsel for the Mortgagee, incurred by or asserted against any of them arising out of, in connection with, or as a result of the execution or delivery of this Mortgage or any agreement or instrument contemplated hereby, the performance by the parties hereto of their respective obligations hereunder or the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, any actual or prospective claim, litigation, investigation or proceeding relating to any of the foregoing, whether or not such claim, litigation, investigation or proceeding is brought Mortgagor, any equity holders of Mortgagor, any Affiliates of Mortgagor, any creditors of Mortgagor or any other third person and whether based on contract, tort or any other theory and regardless of whether the Mortgagee is a party thereto; provided that such indemnity shall not be available (a) to the extent that such losses, claims, damages liabilities or related expenses are determined by a court of competent jurisdiction by final and nonappealable judgment to have resulted from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Mortgagee; or (b) to the extent such indemnity is prohibited by §56-7-1 NMSA 1978 or §56-7-2 NMSA 1978. All court costs, attorneys' fees and other expenses of every character expended by the Mortgagee pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be a demand obligation (which obligation Mortgagor hereby expressly promises to pay) owing by Mortgagor to Mortgagee and shall bear interest, from the date expended until paid, at the rate described in Section 10.1 hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the following sentence, each Unitholder shall bear its own expenses incurred in connection with this Article IV , and any Unitholder effecting a transfer pursuant to this Article IV (other than pursuant to an ECP Forced Sale) shall reimburse the Company for any expenses incurred by the Company in connection therewith. All reasonable and documented fees and expenses of experts and advisors of the Company and the Unitholders incurred in connection with an ECP Forced Sale shall be borne by the Company.

assistant: Expenses
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, the Grant Notice and the Plan together constitute the Participant’s and the Company’s entire understanding with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede and void any and all prior agreements or understandings, written or oral, regarding the subject matter hereof, except as explicitly provided in the Grant Notice. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent that the Participant has signed any restrictive covenant agreements with the Company (including, but not limited to, any confidentiality, intellectual property rights assignment, non-competition, non-solicitation and non-disparagement agreements), such restrictive covenant agreements shall remain in full force and effect.

assistant: Entire Agreements