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: militate against absolute adherence to archaic rules, Tucker held that the failure to allege venue is not fundamental and may not be urged on appeal unless first raised in the trial court. Id. I believe that a similar reassessment of the statute of limitations pleading requirements, and their longstanding characterization as “jurisdictional facts,” leads to the very same conclusion reached by the Florida Supreme Court in Tucker. 5, The non-jurisdictional nature of the statute of limitations This view finds further support in the fact that the court in Tucker (addressing the second issue raised in that case) expressly held that a defendant can validly waive the statute of limitations defense under certain circumstances. Id. See also Sturdivan v. State, 419 So.2d 300, 302 (Fla. 1982) (<HOLDING>) Such a view has been espoused by the district Options: A. holding if the state does not allege in the charging document the tolling of the statute in an otherwise sufficient information or indictment a defendant may by his actions waive this defense B. holding that failure to identify the defendant in the information is an omission of an essential element because the primary purpose of the charging document is to inform the defendant of the nature of the accusations brought against him C. holding that in determining whether the defendant has a prior conviction for burglary under the armed career criminal act the federal court may look only to the terms of the charging document the terms of a plea agreement or transcript of colloquy between judge and defendant in which the factual basis for the plea was confirmed by the defendant or to some comparable judicial record of this information D. holding that an indictment charging one offense during the commission of another crime need not allege the elements of the latter offense E. holding that in connection with a motion to dismiss the court may consider a document not attached to the pleadings where the plaintiffs claim depends on the contents of a document the defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss and the parties do not dispute the authenticity of the document even though the plaintiff does not explicitly allege the contents of that document in the complaint

assistant: The best answer is A. holding if the state does not allege in the charging document the tolling of the statute in an otherwise sufficient information or indictment a defendant may by his actions waive this defense
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: exaction claim and invokes Tucker Act jurisdiction by alleging that taxes have been improperly collected or withheld by the Government for which the remedy is a refund. See, e.g., City of Alexandria v. United States, 737 F.2d 1022, 1028 (Fed.Cir.1984); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a); New York Life Ins. Co. v. United States, 118 F.3d 1553, 1558 (Fed.Cir.1997) (reaffirming the jurisdiction of the United States Court of Federal Claims over a suit concerning a federal tax refund). To invoke Tucker Act jurisdiction over a tax refund claim, however, a plaintiff must meet three jurisdictional prerequisites. First, a plaintiff must make full payment of the tax, penalties, and interest at issue under the so called “full payment rule.” See Shore v. United States, 9 F.3d 1524, 1527 (Fed.Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); see also Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. Options: A. holding that full payment of the assessment is also required for tax refund suits brought in the united states court of federal claims B. holding rule applicable to witness C. holding that the trial court lacked authority to order a refund where the defendants case did not meet the specific statutory requirements authorizing a refund D. holding that the full payment rule is applicable to refund suits in the court of federal claims E. holding that the full payment rule literally requires full not partial payment and rejecting the argument that a partpayment remedy is necessary when a taxpayer is too poor to pay the full amount of the tax

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the full payment rule is applicable to refund suits in the court of federal claims
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: (7th Cir.1994) ] focused on corporate managers, nothing in its reasoning precludes us from applying it to supervisors and subordinates, so long as all are working in the corporation’s (or governmental entity) interest.”) (emphasis added). Mnyofu argues that the Defendants are not employed by the same entity because Norwood and Hunigan are Board members, Leak and Motten are district administrators, and Winfrey was acting as a Park Forest police officer. (Resp. at 12.) Mnyofu has not pled Winfrey is a “co-conspirator” but argues that “the facts alleged in the Complaint show his involvement in the conspiracy.” (Id.) But with respect to Winfrey, Mnyofu fails to allege an essential element of a conspiracy claim: an agreement. See Mosley v. City of Chicago, 614 F.3d 391, 399 (7th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). The remaining four Defendants, who are all Options: A. holding that because original interception was not unlawful subsequent use by prosecutor could not be found unlawful B. holding that conspiracy requires an agreement to accomplish either an unlawful purpose or a lawful purpose by unlawful means C. holding that evidence to prove a conspiracy need only be such that reasonable jurors could infer that the parties entered into an unlawful agreement D. holding that a plaintiff who charged the defendants with conspiring to perpetrate an unlawful purpose could not recover because the defendants committed no unlawful act E. holding that both the unlawful possession and unlawful use prongs were met and noting that the firearm transferred to the individual was not registered making the individuals possession of it necessarily unlawful

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that conspiracy requires an agreement to accomplish either an unlawful purpose or a lawful purpose by unlawful means
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: appraisal was not an “independent appraisal,” Mrs. Jameson’s estate owns only 80,405 shares of Johnco. E. Constitutionality of the Estate Tax. The Estate raises a challenge to the constitutionality of the federal estate tax. It argues that the tax as applied in this case is an uneonstitutionál direct tax. The Estate concedes that a tax on property actually transferable to a decedent’s heirs is constitutional. It asserts, however, that a tax on the portion of the estate used to pay the estate tax is an unconstitutional tax on a tax, resulting in this case in an effective rate of 92.7% on the property actually received by the heirs. The Estate contends that 0 S.Ct. 356, 74 L.Ed. 991 (1930) (same); New York Trust Co. v. Eisner, 256 U.S. 345, 348-49, 41 S.Ct. 506, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (<HOLDING>); Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U.S. 41, 82-83, 20 Options: A. holding that a claim for breach of contract against a lawyer regarding estate taxes arose no later than the date on which the estate tax return was filed not when the alleged error was discovered B. holding that the tax was indirect even though the recipient could not shift the tax to others C. holding that the tax was not direct even though it encompassed a spouses joint interest in the decedents property D. holding that for estate tax purposes property is to be valued as it exists in the hands of the estate E. holding that the tax was not direct even though the government imposed it on the estate rather than the recipient

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the tax was not direct even though the government imposed it on the estate rather than the recipient
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 Unwind Agreement and Unwind Documents shall be governed by and construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without giving effect to the rules of conflicts of law. In the event of any action at law or in equity to enforce or interpret the terms of this Unwind Agreement or any of the other transaction documents, the parties agree that the party who is awarded the most money shall be deemed the prevailing party for all purposes and shall therefore be entitled to an additional award of the full amount of the attorneys’ fees, deposition costs, and expenses paid by such prevailing Party in connection with arbitration or litigation without reduction or apportionment based upon the individual claims or defenses giving rise to the fees and expenses.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Buyer has full power and authority and the legal right to enter into this Agreement and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby. The execution, delivery, and performance of this Agreement have been duly approved by all necessary actions, and this Agreement constitutes a valid and binding obligation of Buyer, enforceable in accordance with its terms.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof are merged herein. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts each of which shall be an original and all of which counterparts taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: reflected in the non-economic damages “cap” was not so strong as to override lex loci delicti. Erie Insurance Exchange, 399 Md. at 628, 925 A.2d at 653. Because the Maryland General Assembly had not addressed specifically the issue of the applicability of the non-economic damages “cap” to claims for uninsured/underinsured motorist damages, and had not given “an unequivocal directive to the Maryland judiciary to apply the cap in these cases,” we determined that lex loci delicti applied and that Maryland’s public policy as reflected in the statutory “cap” was not “sufficiently strong to warrant overriding the rule of lex loci delicti.” Erie Insurance Exchange, 399 Md. at 633-34, 925 A.2d at 657; see Black v. Leatherwood Motor Coach Corp., 92 Md.App. 27, 43, 606 A.2d 295, 302-03 (1992) (<HOLDING>). Anti-waiver provisions and explicit Options: A. holding that the termination of the fee cap did not affect litigation in progress when the fee cap was in effect B. holding that noneconomic damages cap mandated by orrevstat 317101 is unconstitutional as applied to commonlaw negligence claims C. holding that the existence of a cap on noneconomic damages was not of sufficient importance to override the principle of lex loci delicti D. holding that jury not required to award noneconomic damages merely because it has awarded economic damages E. recognizing principle

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the existence of a cap on noneconomic damages was not of sufficient importance to override the principle of lex loci delicti
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: no licenses or rights are granted to you by implication or otherwise under any intellectual property rights owned or controlled by academia.edu or its licensors , except for the licenses and rights expressly granted in these terms .

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: tending to show that Bree-land’s weapon was manufactured as a shotgun and later altered, and he acknowledged at oral argument that the weapon had apparently been modified. The evidence at trial supporting this conclusion consisted of Officer Barnett’s testimony that the stock appeared to have been sawed off and filed down, and the weapon itself, the stock of which has been visibly changed into a pistol-grip. Viewing this evidence and all reasonable inferences to be drawn f 7, 124 (5th Cir.1995) (“To warrant reversal of a conviction, prosecutorial misconduct must be so pronounced and persistent that it casts serious doubts upon the correctness of the jury’s verdict.”). We similarly decline to reverse Bree-land’s conviction based on the allegedly erroneous admission of a (5th Cir. 1995) (<HOLDING>). Ill For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM Options: A. holding that any error that court may have made in admitting inadmissible evidence was harmless because government presented overwhelming evidence establishing defendants guilt B. holding any error in admitting eye witness testimony was harmless because it was cumulative to other overwhelming evidence that established defendants guilt C. holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt D. holding the error harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt E. holding improperly admitted evidence was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that any error that court may have made in admitting inadmissible evidence was harmless because government presented overwhelming evidence establishing defendants guilt
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrowers shall hold their books and records relating to the Collateral segregated from all Borrowers’ other books and records in a manner satisfactory to the Bank; and shall deliver to the Bank from time to time promptly at its request all invoices, original documents of title, contracts, chattel paper, instruments and any other writings relating thereto, and other evidence of performance of contracts, or evidence of shipment or delivery of the merchandise or of the rendering of services; and Borrowers will deliver to the Bank promptly at the Bank’s request from time to time additional copies of any or all of such papers or writings, and such other information with respect to any of the Collateral and such schedules of inventory, schedules of accounts and such other writings as the Bank may in its sole discretion deem to be necessary or effectual to evidence any loan hereunder or the Bank’s security interest in the Collateral.

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: evidence already collected. For example, the Alaskan Court of Appeals recently stated that [w]hile officers have a duty to preserve potentially exculpatory evidence actually gathered during a criminal investigation, the due process clause has never required officers to undertake a state-of-the-art investigation of all reported crimes. Officers investigating a crime need not “track down every conceivable investigative lead and seize every scintilla of evidence regardless of its apparent importance or lack of importance at the time, or run the risk of denying a defendant due process or his discovery rights.” March, 859 P.2d at 716 (quoting Nicholson v. State, 570 P.2d 1058, 1064 (Alaska 1977)); see also, People v. Bradley, 159 Cal.App.3d 399, 205 Cal.Rptr. 485, 489-90 (Ct.App.1984) (<HOLDING>). Bradley, a case factually similar to the Options: A. holding that the issue is not whether a plaintiff will ultimately prevail but whether the claimant is entitled to offer evidence to support the claims B. holding that trial court may not consider whether plaintiff will ultimately prevail C. holding that the police do not have to gather up everything that might ultimately prove helpful to the defense D. holding that a two month period might be enough to prove the causation prong E. holding that courts must consider any adverse effect that the prosecutors failure to disclose might have had on not only the presentation of the defense at trial but the preparation of the defense as well

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the police do not have to gather up everything that might ultimately prove helpful to the defense
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 shall employ Executive, and Executive hereby accepts employment with the Company, upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. The initial term of employment under this Agreement (the “ Initial Term ”) shall be for the period beginning on June 20, 2016 (the “ Start Date ”) and ending on the third (3 rd ) anniversary thereof, unless earlier terminated as provided in Section 4 . The employment term hereunder shall be automatically renewed for successive one-year periods (each an “ Extension Term ” and together with the Initial Term, the “ Employment Period ”), unless either party hereto gives written notice of non-renewal to the other no later than ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term or any Extension Term, as applicable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event that any provision of this Local Country Agreement conflicts with the law under which this Local Country Agreement is to be construed or if any such provision is held invalid or unenforceable by a court with jurisdiction over the parties hereto, such provision will be deemed to be restated to reflect as nearly as possible the original intentions of the Parties in accordance with applicable law. The remaining provisions of this Local Country Agreement and the application of the challenged provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is invalid or unenforceable will not be affected thereby, and each such provision will be valid and enforceable to the full extent permitted by law.

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: (a) There are no actions, suits or proceedings by or before any arbitrator or Governmental Authority pending against or, to the actual knowledge of the Senior Financial Officers, threatened against or affecting the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries (i) as to which there is a reasonable possibility of an adverse determination and that, if adversely determined, could reasonably be expected, individually or in the aggregate, to result in a Material Adverse Effect (other than the Disclosed Matters), or (ii) that involve this Agreement, the other Loan Documents or the Transactions.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and its noncompete provision." Id. at 283. IMN asserts that under Raymundo v. Hammond Clinic Ass'n, 449 N.E.2d 276 (Ind.1983), a party cannot claim the benefits under a transaction or instrument and, at the same time, repudiate its obligations. Keeping in mind the previously stated summary judgment standard of review, we also note that "the existence of facts necessary to constitute waiver is ordinarily a question of fact[.]" Pohle v. Cheatham, 724 N.E.2d 655, 658 (Ind.Ct.App.2000) (clarifying that when only the inferences and legal conclusions to be drawn from the agreed upon facts are argued, the question of waiver is proper for the court to consider as a matter of law on summary judgment); see also Cablevision of Chicago v. Colby Cable Corp., 417 N.E.2d 348, 357 (Ind.Ct.App.1981) (<HOLDING>). Again, the Agreement included the following Options: A. holding agreed judgment presents question of waiver or estoppel rather than question of jurisdiction B. holding it is a question of fact C. holding the question of whether insurance companys requests were reasonable under policy language was a fact question D. holding that plaintiff failed to show genuine issue of material fact on equitable estoppel claim E. holding that estoppel was a question of fact

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that estoppel was a question of fact
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, including the Confirmatory Claire’s Trademark Assignment Agreement attached as Exhibit C , Confirmatory Icing Trademark Assignment Agreement attached as Exhibit D , and Confirmatory Domain Name Assignment Agreement attached as Exhibit E , constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to its subject matter, and supersedes all prior and/or contemporaneous oral or written negotiations, offers, representations, warranties, and agreements with respect to this subject matter.

assistant: Integration
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 shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the domestic substantive laws of the State of Delaware without giving effect to any choice or conflict of laws provision or rule that would cause the application of the domestic substantive laws of any other jurisdiction.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you are a resident of the united states or any country other than france or germany : to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law , you agree to indemnify and hold under armour , its subsidiaries , suppliers and other partners harmless from any claim or demand , including reasonable accounting and attorneys ' fees , made by any third party due to or arising out of ( a ) the user-generated content you access or share through the services ; ( b ) your use of the services , ( c ) your athletic activities in connection with the services ( including , but not limited to , athletic activities in connection with any contests , races , group activities , third-party activities or other events that we may sponsor , organize , participate in , or where the services are employed ) , ( d ) your connection to the services , ( e ) your violation of these terms , ( f ) your use or misuse of any athlete 's personal data and location data , ( g ) any violation of the rights of any other person or entity by you , or ( h ) your employment of the services to meet another athlete in person or to locate and attend any offline place or event .

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: circumspect to utilize federal common law to address issues that bear at most a tangential relationship to the purposes of ERISA." Singer v. Black & Decker Corp., 964 F.2d 1449, 1452 (4th Cir.1992). The federal substantial compliance doctrine suggested by the district court does not pose any of these problems. 22 . The device of federal common law does not authorize federal courts to smuggle state common law principles into ERISA without regard for the statutory text.... State rights and remedies that are expressly preempted under ERISA by 29 U.S.C. § 1144 may not be resuscitated as federal common law claims without an exacting examination of whether ERISA permits such a result. Singer v. Black & Decker Corp., 964 F.2d 1449, 1453 (4th Cir.1992) (Wilkinson, J., concurri , 866 (1940) (<HOLDING>), the district court characterized South Options: A. holding that insured had not substantially complied with the policys change of beneficiary provisions when the hospitalized insured was physically unable to leave her bed and was unable to retrieve the policy from her lock box at the bank to return to the company for endorsement as required by the terms of the policy B. holding that insured substantially complied with the manner of changing the beneficiary as required by the policy C. holding that an insured has substantially complied with the change of beneficiary provisions of a life insurance policy when he has done all that he could to comply with the provisions D. holding that insureds widow as beneficiary of life insurance policy had standing as an injured person under the insurance code E. holding change of beneficiary effective where city employee listed a new beneficiary for his group life insurance policy in an employee personal data form next to the words designated beneficiary even though this did not comply with the policy terms

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an insured has substantially complied with the change of beneficiary provisions of a life insurance policy when he has done all that he could to comply with the provisions
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 with respect to (i) the material terms and conditions of the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents and (ii) information given to the Investor, if any, which the Company hereby confirms will not constitute material non-public information six months from the date hereof, the Company confirms that neither it nor any other Person acting on its behalf has provided the Purchaser or their agents or counsel with any information that it believes constitutes or might constitute material, nonpublic information. The Company understands and confirms that the Purchaser will rely on the foregoing representation in effecting transactions in securities of the Company. All disclosure furnished in writing by or on behalf of the Company to the Purchaser regarding the Company, its business and the transactions contemplated hereby, including the Disclosure Schedules to this Agreement, is true and correct and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The press releases disseminated by the Company during the twelve months preceding the date of this Agreement taken as a whole do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made and when made, not misleading.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, demands and other communications to be given or delivered under or by reason of the provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when personally delivered, sent by telecopy (with receipt confirmed) on a business day during regular business hours of the recipient (or, if not, on the next succeeding business day) or one business day after sent by reputable overnight express courier (charges prepaid). Such notices, demands and other communications shall be addressed to the Executive at his last known address on the books of the Company or, in the case of the Company, to it at its principal place of business, attention Chairman of the Board of Directors, or to such other address as either party may specify by notice to the other actually received.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the term of Executive’s employment, Executive shall be entitled to such number of days of paid vacation as set forth under the label “Vacation Days” on the Executive Data Sheet annexed hereto as Exhibit A , to be taken in accordance with the existing policies of the Company and past practice. Any paid vacation shall be taken at such times as are consistent with Executive’s responsibilities hereunder. Unless otherwise approved by the Company, any vacation days not taken in any calendar year shall be forfeited without payment thereof as permitted by applicable law. No such vacation days shall be forfeited to the extent that such vacation days are not taken at the request of the Company.

assistant: Vacations
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, together with the other Transaction Documents, contains the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the matters covered herein and therein and, except as specifically set forth herein or therein, neither Company nor Investor makes any representation, warranty, covenant or undertaking with respect to such matters. For the avoidance of doubt, all prior term sheets or other documents between Company and Investor, or any affiliate thereof, related to the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents (collectively, "Prior Agreements" ), that may have been entered into between Company and Investor, or any affiliate thereof, are hereby null and void and deemed to be replaced in their entirety by the Transaction Documents. To the extent there is a conflict between any term set forth in any Prior Agreement and the term(s) of the Transaction Documents, the Transaction Documents shall govern.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: presented for our consideration concern attorney’s fees and costs and whether the trial court erred in failing to reserve jurisdiction over the charging lien filed by the Former Wife’s counsel. We affirm the amended final judgment with the following exception. The Former Wife raises several arguments regarding the propriety of the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees and costs. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction her challenge to the award because, not only is the amended final judgment ambiguous regarding entitlement, the trial court reserved jurisdiction to determine the amount of fees to be awarded. Because the amount has not been determined, that portion of the amended final judgment is nonfinal and nonappealable. See McIlveen v. McIlveen, 644 So.2d 612, 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (<HOLDING>); see also Zuberer v. Zuberer, 28 So.3d 993, Options: A. holding dismissal without prejudice to refile a facially sufficient motion is a nonappealable nonfinal order B. holding that an order granting a motion or application to compel arbitration is nonappealable because it is not listed in the uaa arbitration provision and because it is not a final order C. holding that although the trial courts failure to determine amount of fees does not render underlying order nonfinal the fee award itself is not reviewable until the amount is determined D. holding that an order that determines only the right to attorneys fees without setting the amount is a nonappealable nonfinal order E. holding that the dismissal of a complaint ordinarily is a nonfinal nonappealable order since amendment generally is available while dismissal of the entire action ordinarily is final

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an order that determines only the right to attorneys fees without setting the amount is a nonappealable nonfinal order
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 order to facilitate filings with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the United States Copyright Office, each Grantor shall, upon the reasonable request of the Collateral Agent, execute and deliver to the Collateral Agent one or more Copyright Security Agreements, Trademark Security Agreements and Patent Security Agreements in such form as is acceptable to the Collateral Agent in its reasonable discretion and such other documentation as may be necessary, appropriate or reasonably requested by the Collateral Agent to evidence the Collateral Agent’s Lien on such Grantor’s Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Intellectual Property Licenses, and the General Intangibles of such Grantor relating thereto or represented thereby. Each Grantor agrees to give the Collateral Agent written notice of the acquisition or creation of any Intellectual Property at the times required pursuant to Section 6.8(a) of the Credit Agreement (for purposes thereof, such notice being deemed necessary in order for the Collateral Agent to have a perfected Lien on such Intellectual Property).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Exxon Corp., 860 F.Supp. 332 (M.D.La.1994). 29 . Mitchell, 860 F.Supp. at 335. 30 . Corriere v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., 893 F.2d 98 (citing B., Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co., 663 F.2d 545, 549 n. 9 (5th Cir.1981)). 31 . Bourque v. Nan Ya Plastics Corp., 906 F.Supp. 348 (M.D.La.1995). 32 . 893 F.2d 98, 101 (5th Cir.1990). See also Mitchell, 860 F.Supp. at 336. 33 . Bourque, 906 F.Supp. at 352 (citing Tapia v. Schwegmann Giant Supermarkets, Inc., 590 So.2d 806 (La.App. 4th Cir.1991)); Bankston v. BASF Corp., 827 F.Supp. 1239, 1240 (citing Waldrop v. Vistron Corp., 391 So.2d 1274 (La.App. 1st Cir.1980)); Courtney v. BASF Wyandotte Corp., 385 So.2d 391 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 386 So.2d 359 (1980). In Bourque, Judge Parker found "[k]nowledge by an employer that it utiliz a.1994) (<HOLDING>); Mitchell v. Exxon Corp., 907 F.Supp. 198 Options: A. holding that a worker who was injured when his hand was caught in a plastic press and burned by molten polyvinyl chloride could not establish a cause of action against a nondiverse defendant under the intentional act exception to workers compensation exclusivity and therefore the nondiverse defendants coworkers were fraudulently joined B. holding that were the court to find fraudulent joinder as to a nondiverse defendant on the basis of evidence equally dispositive of the liability of that defendant and a nondiverse defendant a refusal later in the proceedings to give judgment for the diverse defendant on the same grounds in turn would require the court to revisit a ruling that the nondiverse defendant was fraudulently joined C. holding that the coemployee immunity provision in workers compensation law was constitutional D. holding that exclusivity provision of workers compensation act barred wifes loss of consortium claim E. holding employee who suffered damages as a result of fire and explosion that occurred on the job could not establish a cause of action against nondiverse coemployee defendants under the intentional act exceptions to the workers compensation exclusivity provision and therefore defendant coemployees were fraudulently joined

assistant: The best answer is E. holding employee who suffered damages as a result of fire and explosion that occurred on the job could not establish a cause of action against nondiverse coemployee defendants under the intentional act exceptions to the workers compensation exclusivity provision and therefore defendant coemployees were fraudulently joined
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: Set forth in Schedule 4.13 is a complete and correct list of all of the Subsidiaries of the Company as of the date hereof, together with, for each Subsidiary, (i) the jurisdiction of organization of such Subsidiary, (ii) each Person holding ownership interests in such Subsidiary and (iii) the nature of the ownership interests held by each such Person and the percentage of ownership of such Subsidiary represented by such ownership interests. As of the date hereof, except as disclosed in Schedule 4.13 , (x) each of the Company and its Subsidiaries owns, free and clear of Liens (other than Liens created pursuant to the Security Documents and Permitted Encumbrances), and has the unencumbered right to vote, all outstanding ownership interests in each Subsidiary shown to be held by it in Schedule 4.13 , (y) all of the issued and outstanding Capital Stock of each Subsidiary organized as a corporation is validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable and (z) there are no outstanding Equity Rights with respect to each such Subsidiary.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Sell, lease or otherwise transfer any property or assets to, or purchase, lease or otherwise acquire any property or assets from, or otherwise engage in any other transactions with, any of its Affiliates, except (a) in the ordinary course of business at prices and on terms and conditions not less favorable to the Parent or such Subsidiary than could be obtained on an arm’s-length basis from unrelated third parties, (b) transactions between or among the Loan Parties, (c) reasonable and customary fees and expenses paid to members of the board of directors (or similar governing body) of the Parent and its Subsidiaries and (d) any Restricted Payment permitted by Section 7.5 .

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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 country only as long as was necessary to arrange on ward travel, and that he or she did not establish significant ties in that country; or (b) That the conditions of his or her residence in that country were so substantially and consciously restricted by the authority of the country of refuge that he or she was not in fact resettled. In making his or her determination, the asylum officer or immigration judge shall consider the conditions under which other residents of the country live; the type of housing, whether permanent or temporary, made available to the refugee; the types and extent of employment available to the refugee; and the extent to which the refugee received permission to hold property and to enjoy other rights and privileges, such as travel 989 WL 331872 (BIA 1989) (<HOLDING>), superseded by regulation as stated in Options: A. holding that admission contained in an answer was binding despite the fact that it was made on information and belief B. holding the immigration judges denial of a continuance request did not constitute an abuse of discretion C. holding that regulations requiring denial of admission to a firmly resettled refugee were only binding on ins directors not immigration judges or the board itself such that resettlement in a third country was a factor to be considered in evaluating an asylum claim as a matter of discretion D. holding that the judges restriction of the class was not an abuse of discretion E. holding denial of continuance to be an abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that regulations requiring denial of admission to a firmly resettled refugee were only binding on ins directors not immigration judges or the board itself such that resettlement in a third country was a factor to be considered in evaluating an asylum claim as a matter of discretion
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, in his own mind, may mean thereby that a pre-existing pathological condition was the overwhelming factor in bringing about the attack and that the part played by the work was insignificant. But, while it may be sound medically to say that the work did not cause the attack, it may be bad law, because, an [sic] general, existing law treats the slightest factor of aggravation as an adequate cause. Id. at 410, 495 P.2d at 1167 (emphasis added; citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Since Akamine, the supreme court has held that “the slightest aggravation or acceleration of an injury by the employment activity mandates compensation.” Van Ness, 131 Hawai'i at 562, 319 P.3d at 481 (citing De Fries v. Ass’n of Owners, 999 Wilder, 57 Haw. 296, 309, 555 P.2d 855, 862 (1976) (<HOLDING>)). In Van Ness, claimant alleged that the Options: A. holding a person commits aggravated dui when his or her driving under the influence was a proximate cause of the injuries citation not the sole and immediate cause of the victims injuries emphasis omitted B. holding that claimant was entitled to recover for injuries resulting from a stumble that aggravated or accelerated the arthritic condition of his knee C. holding that homeowners policy precluded coverage for injuries resulting from intentional acts D. holding that rico claims were personal and plaintiffs were therefore entitled to sue on their own because their injuries were distinct from the injuries to creditors in general resulting from the diversion of corporate assets E. holding that a right of action for personal injuries resulting from negligence cannot be assigned absent statutory law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that claimant was entitled to recover for injuries resulting from a stumble that aggravated or accelerated the arthritic condition of his knee
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: Use of Proceeds . The Borrower will use the proceeds of the Loans only to finance, in part, the Ixia Acquisition and the Ixia Refinancing and the payment of fees and expenses related thereto. The Borrower will not permit the proceeds of any Loan to be used, whether directly or indirectly, and whether immediately, incidentally or ultimately, for any purpose that entails a violation of the provisions of the regulations of the Board of Governors, including Regulation U or Regulation X. The Borrower will not permit more than 25% of the value of the assets of the Borrower individually, or of the Borrower and the Subsidiaries on a consolidated basis, that are subject to any provision of this Agreement under which the sale, pledge or disposition of assets is restricted (within the meaning of Regulation U) to consist of margin stock (as defined in Regulation U).

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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 Amendment has been duly executed and delivered by such Borrower and constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of such Borrower enforceable in accordance with its terms, except as enforceability may be limited by applicable Debtor Relief Laws.

assistant: Binding Effects
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: fee, nor is a fee charged for a number of people in any one vehicle”; and (2) “[t]he fee is strictly a parking fee for the automobile to enter.” Id. at 523. The Georgia Court of Appeals has also examined this issue. In Majeske v. Jekyll Island State Park Auth., 209 Ga.App. 118, 433 S.E.2d 304 (1993), the court held that a per-vehicle fee, not based on the number of occupants, and not charged to individuals entering by means other than motorized vehicle, was not a “charge” sufficient to remove the Authority from the protection of Georgia’s Recreational Property Act. The court also determined that a re-entry fee did not transform what was strictly a parking fee into a “charge” for admission. Id. at 305-06; cf. Hogue v. Stone Mountain Mem’l Ass’n, 183 Ga.App. 378, 358 S.E.2d 852 (1987) (<HOLDING>). Similarly, in Garreans v. City of Omaha, 216 Options: A. holding that a charge for the use of a public wharf was a user fee rather than a tax for constitutional purposes B. holding that allowing moderate use of the resources on the property was not inconsistent with exclusive use C. holding that whether the public invitee may have some commercial purpose in mind was irrelevant to recreational immunity instead by opening up the lands for recreational use without a fee the landowner brought itself under the protection of the immunity statute D. holding that the amendment was a use regulation which was in effect a condition on the use of property in the affected zone E. holding an initial four dollar fee allowing reentry during the course of the patrons stay permitted the use of a vehicle in the park and did not constitute a charge for the recreational use of the park

assistant: The best answer is E. holding an initial four dollar fee allowing reentry during the course of the patrons stay permitted the use of a vehicle in the park and did not constitute a charge for the recreational use of the park