flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Warrant and any term hereof may be changed, waived, discharged or terminated only by an instrument in writing signed by the party against which enforcement of such change, waiver, discharge or termination is sought. THIS WARRANT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA WITHOUT REGARD TO PRINCIPLES OF CONFLICTS OF LAWS. ANY ACTION BROUGHT CONCERNING THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS WARRANT SHALL BE BROUGHT ONLY IN THE STATE COURTS OF NEVADA OR IN THE FEDERAL COURTS LOCATED IN THE STATE OF NEVADA; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE HOLDER MAY CHOOSE TO WAIVE THIS PROVISION AND BRING AN ACTION OUTSIDE THE STATE OF NEVADA. The individuals executing this Warrant on behalf of the Company agree to submit to the jurisdiction of such courts and waive trial by jury. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. In the event that any provision of this Warrant is invalid or unenforceable under any applicable statute or rule of law, then such provision shall be deemed inoperative to the extent that it may conflict therewith and shall be deemed modified to conform with such statute or rule of law. Any such provision which may prove invalid or unenforceable under any law shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Warrant. The headings in this Warrant are for purposes of reference only, and shall not limit or otherwise affect any of the terms hereof. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision hereof shall in no way affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision hereof. The Company acknowledges that legal counsel participated in the preparation of this Warrant and, therefore, stipulates that the rule of construction that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be applied in the interpretation of this Warrant to favor any party against the other party.

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: v. Town of Mt. Pleasant, 308 S.C. 205, 208, 417 S.E.2d 579, 581 (1992). “Otherwise, parol evidence could render official minutes uncertain or unreliable so that the minutes would fail to afford dependable evidence of the proceedings____” Id.; see also Moore v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co., 202 S.C. 225, 236, 24 S.E.2d 361, 365 (1943) (stating that where company’s Pension and Benefit Committee was required to keep minutes of meetings, the original minutes of the meetings were the best evidence of changes in the pension plan and parol testimony was properly excluded). A court must initially review the minutes to determine whether the minutes are incomplete or ambiguous and whether parol evidence is admissible to then clarify them. Berkeley Elec. Coop., 308 S.C. at 209, 417 S.E.2d at 582 (<HOLDING>). The OCLEC enabling ordinances require a full Options: A. holding that the trial judge did not err by admitting copies of the indictments as part of the defendants record of conviction B. holding that after review the minutes were unambiguous and the trial judge erred in admitting parol evidence C. holding that because judge who was substituted for posttrial motions erred in finding that trial court judge made mistake of law grant of new trial was error D. holding that court erred in admitting letters written in anticipation of litigation as business records E. holding that the trial court erred in considering the intent of the parties when the document creating the easement was unambiguous

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that after review the minutes were unambiguous and the trial judge erred in admitting parol evidence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any provision of this Plan which is held to be unenforceable or invalid in any respect in any jurisdiction shall be ineffective in such jurisdiction to the extent that it is unenforceable or invalid without affecting the remaining provisions hereof, which shall continue in full force and effect. The unenforceability or invalidity of a provision of this Plan in one jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction.

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 a plaintiff must be a member of the general public in order to allege a UCL “unfair” claim against' a non-competitor defendant. As to Rothschild, the second case cited by DIRECTV, the Court there did not have before it the issue currently in question— i.e., whether a plaintiff must be a member of the general public in order to allege a UCL “unfair” claim against a non-competitor defendant. Instead, the issue there was whether the False Claims Act barred the plaintiffs UCL claim. See Rothschild, 83 Cal.App.4th at 494, 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 721. Therefore, and based on the foregoing, the Court finds that DIRECTV has not carried its initial burden to show that the UCL “unfair” prong applies only to direct competitors or to the general public. See Celotex, 477 U.S. at 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548 (<HOLDING>). Indeed, California courts have consistently Options: A. holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment B. holding that the moving party has tjhe burden of showing no genuine issue of material fact exists C. recognizing that the burden on summary judgment shifts to the nonmoving party once the moving party has met its initial responsibility of showing the absence of a triable issue of fact and that the moving party is entitled to summary judgment if the nonmoving party fails to make a sufficient showing on an essential element of the case D. holding a party moving for summary judgment on an issue on which it bears the burden of proof at trial must show that it has produced enough evidence to support the findings of fact necessary to win E. holding that the moving party for summary judgment bears the initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact for trial

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the moving party for summary judgment bears the initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact for trial
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 Retainer Fee and the Success Fee set forth in Sections 3 and 4 of this Agreement, respectively, the Client hereby agrees to promptly reimburse the Advisor and Advisor Rep, upon request from time to time, not more than once monthly, for any reasonable expenses, including, but not limited to, securities laws compliance, legal, travel, research and mailing fees and expenses, incurred by the Advisor and Advisor Rep in connection with the provision of the Services pursuant to this Agreement. To be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to this Section 8, any such expenses in excess of One Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($1,000.00) must first be approved by the Client prior to being incurred by the Advisor and Advisor Rep.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be the shooter (and, therefore, might be carrying a gun). Upon being asked to exit the vehicle, the defendant balked; instead of exiting, he uttered more profanity, further heightening Officer Hyland’s legitimate concerns. Even without that further incitement, the pat-frisk would have been permissible. Once an officer has formed a reasonable belief that a detained person may be armed and dangerous, a pat-down for protective purposes is, without more, deemed reasonably related in scope to the stop. See Terry, 392 U.S. at 30, 88 S.Ct. 1868; United States v. Ivery, 427 F.3d 69, 72 (1st Cir.2005). Thus, when the defendant refused to accede to Officer Hyland’s request, the officers were constitutionally entitled to remove him from the vehicle and pat-frisk him. See Soares, 521 F.3d at 121 (<HOLDING>). The defendant discourages this holding and Options: A. holding removal from car and patfrisk constitutional when defendant among other things refused to remain still and used profanity B. holding that there was probable cause for arrest where officers knew defendants had recently been with suspected drug dealer officers saw defendants car being maneuvered so as to indicate that surveillance had been detected and when officers approached car defendant attempted to place package under car and then pulled the package back inside the car and closed and locked the car door C. holding on habeas review that defendant was not in custody for miranda purposes and reciting among other facts that defendant was transported to a police station for questioning in an unmarked police car which was not equipped with a shield inside the car D. holding drug addiction admissible to show motive to rob and kill when defendant had the victims car check book and credit cards told his wife and a friend that he had killed the victim in selfdefense sold the car to a drug dealer and used all the money from forged checks credit card cash advances and car sale to purchase and use drugs E. holding that defendant violated 148a1 when he refused officers repeated requests to step away from the patrol car

assistant: The best answer is A. holding removal from car and patfrisk constitutional when defendant among other things refused to remain still and used profanity
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: Unless converted as described herein, all payments of interest and principal shall be made to the Holder by bank wire transfer, in immediately available funds, to the account so specified by the Holder in lawful money of the United States of America (or to such other account as the Holder hereof shall notify the Company in writing) at the time each payment is due. Under no circumstances shall the Company have the right to prepay the principal before the maturity date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Barring exclusion by the Court, this attachment could possibly convert the motion to dismiss into one for summary judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b). Under the Third Circuit's recent opinion in Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. White Consolidated Industries, Inc., however, the Court may consider the agreement, notwithstanding its introduction into the record via the motion to dismiss, since Loftus's claim is based on the agreement. See 998 F.2d 1192, 1196 (3d Ci r to have read Leatherman to have eliminated the requirement of "heightened specificity” in all § 1983 actions including those against individual government officials, albeit without much discussion. See, e.g., Holloway v. Watson, Civ. A. No. 93-4436, 1993 WL 328589, at *1 (E.D.Pa. Aug. 27, 1993); Piazza, 831 F.Supp. at 428 (<HOLDING>); Lassiter v. Kalp, Civ. A. No. 93-1176, 1993 Options: A. recognizing the liberal notice and simplified pleading principles underlying the federal rules of civil procedure B. holding that under leatherman a federal court may not apply a pleading requirement more stringent than that provided for in the federal rules of civil procedure even in 1983 litigation C. holding that a court may not apply a heightened pleading standard more stringent than the usual pleading requirements of rule 8 in civil rights cases alleging municipal liability under 1983 D. holding that the fact that federal rule of civil procedure 9b requires a heightened pleading standard for some claims but not for a section 1983 claim against a municipality means that the rules do not require a heightened pleading standard for such a claim E. holding that a shotgun pleading is in no sense the short and plain statement of a claim required by rule 8 of the federal rules of civil procedure

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that under leatherman a federal court may not apply a pleading requirement more stringent than that provided for in the federal rules of civil procedure even in 1983 litigation
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: you certify that you are of the legal age of majority in the jurisdiction in which you reside or , if you are between the ages of 13 and the legal age of majority , that you are using the services with the supervision of your parent or legal guardian who agrees to be bound by these terms of 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, upon request of Parent, each Covered Stockholder shall execute and deliver such additional documents and take all such further action as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate to fulfill such Covered Stockholder’s obligations under this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, on the Closing Date each Covered Stockholder shall execute and deliver to Skadden, for purposes of the opinion described in Section 6.03(c) of the Merger Agreement, a certificate that contains the representation set forth in Section 9(g) as of the Closing Date if such Covered Stockholder may truthfully make such representation.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Employment Term, the Executive shall serve as the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, reporting to the Company’s Board of Directors (the “ Board ”). In such position, the Executive shall have such duties, authority and responsibility as shall be determined from time to time by the Board, which duties, authority and responsibility are consistent with the Executive’s position. The Executive shall, if requested, also serve as a member of the Board or as an officer or director of any affiliate of the Company and shall provide services to affiliates of the Company consistent with his position and duties, in each case for no additional compensation.

assistant: Positions
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: admissible at trial. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255, 106 S.Ct. at 2514; Thomas v. Price, 975 F.2d 231, 235 (5th Cir.1992) (“To avoid a summary judgment, the nonmoving party must adduce admissible evidence which creates a fact issue....”). “The mere existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the plaintiffs position will be insufficient; there must be evidence on which the jury could reasonable find for the plaintiff.” Anderson, 477 U.S. at 252, 106 S.Ct. at 2512. Summary judgment evidence in discriminatory treatment cases brought under Title VII or the ADEA is examined under the three-step burden-shifting analysis set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973). See also Bodenheimer v. PPG Indus., Inc., 5 F.3d 955, 957 (5th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). First, a plaintiff must establish a prima Options: A. holding that the mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting framework applies to retaliation claims in the same manner as to discrimination claims B. holding that adea and phra claims proceed under the mcdonnell douglas framework C. holding that mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting approach applies to claims brought under the adea D. holding that threestep analysis outlined in mcdonnell douglas applies to claims brought under 1983 E. holding that the threestep mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting analysis applies to 1983 claims

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting approach applies to claims brought under the adea
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 by one or more of the parties to this Agreement on any number of separate counterparts (including by facsimile or other electronic imaging means), and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument.

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: to serve as a fair and impartial juror. The import of asking the juror whether she could put the comment aside and decide the case based solely on the evidence and law given by the court is not inconsequential. A district court “may rely [on a juror’s assurance of continued impartiality] in deciding whether a defendant has satisfied the burden of proving actual prejudice,” if the court finds the juror’s assurance credible. United States v. Pennell, 737 F.2d 521, 533 (6th Cir.1984) (discussing Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209, 102 S.Ct. 940, 71 L.Ed.2d 78 (1982)). But absent such assurance, the court cannot fully assess whether a juror who is exposed to an outside communication can remain impartial. See Corrado, 227 F.3d at 537; United States v. Davis, 177 F.3d 552, 557 (6th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). For example, in Pennell, this court held the Options: A. holding that a reasonable man would be convinced that the trial judges impartiality might be questioned where the judge commented that defendant had broken faith with the court at his first trial by consenting to the judge visiting the jury room but then raising the issue on appeal and stated that he intended to increase defendants sentence because of these circumstances B. holding that the relevant inquiry is not whether the court has discretion to facilitate notice but whether this is an appropriate case in which to exercise discretion C. holding that because the trial judge did not inquire of the remaining jurors whether they were influenced in any manner further inquiry seems not only appropriate but necessary to ensure the impartiality of the jury D. holding that a defendant was not entitled to a relief under section 2255 when he asserted that the sentencing judge who was not the trial judge was influenced by the sentence imposed by the trial judge on a codefendant E. holding that the unobjected to statements made by the prosecutor did not indicate an intent on the part of the prosecuting attorney to inflame the minds of the jurors or to arouse passion or prejudice against the defendant nor were they so inflammatory that the jurors might be influenced to determine guilt on factors outside the evidence and thus there was no misconduct

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because the trial judge did not inquire of the remaining jurors whether they were influenced in any manner further inquiry seems not only appropriate but necessary to ensure the impartiality of the jury
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party has seven (7) days after that Party signs this Agreement to revoke it. This Agreement will become effective on the eighth (8th) day after Employee signed this Agreement, so long as it has been signed by the Parties and has not been revoked by either Party before that date (the “Effective Date”).

assistant: Effective Dates
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 Plan, all Cash Incentives granted hereunder and all determinations made and actions taken pursuant hereto, to the extent not otherwise governed by the laws of the United States, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Delaware without giving effect to principles of conflicts of law.

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: Any notice to be given under the terms of the Plan shall be addressed to the Company in care of its principal office, and any notice to be given to the Participant shall be addressed to such Participant at the address maintained by the Company for such person or at such other address as the Participant may specify in writing to the Company.

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: Any consent, notice or report required or permitted to be given or made under this Agreement by one of the Parties hereto to the other Party shall be in writing, delivered by any lawful means to such other Party at its address indicated below, or to such other address as the addressee shall have last furnished in writing to the addressor and (except as otherwise provided in this Agreement) shall be effective upon receipt by the addressee.

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: All representations and warranties in this Agreement shall survive the Closing for a period of 18 months and shall then expire and be of no force or effect, except that a representation or warranty made in Sections 2.1(a) or (b) , 2.2 , 2.4 , 2.12 , 2.13 , 3.1 , and 3.2 (each, a “ Fundamental Representation ”) shall survive the Closing and terminate upon the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. All covenants and obligations in this Agreement, as well as the other Transaction Documents, shall survive the Closing for the period explicitly specified therein (or, if no such period is explicitly specified, until the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations). It is the express intent of the Parties that, if the applicable survival period for an item as contemplated by this Section 5.1 is shorter than the statute of limitations that would otherwise have been applicable to such item, then the applicable statute of limitations with respect to such item shall be reduced to the shortened survival period contemplated hereby. The right to indemnification, reimbursement, or other remedy based on such representations, warranties, covenants and obligations are not to be affected by any investigation conducted with respect to, or any knowledge obtained (or capable of being obtained), whether before or after the date of this Agreement, about, the accuracy or inaccuracy of or compliance with, any such representation, warranty, covenant or obligation.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 346 U.S. 327 74 S.Ct. 2 98 L.Ed. 4 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIONv.CARTER PRODUCTS, Inc. No. 114. Oct. 12, 1953. PER CURIAM. 1 Certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated. The cause is remanded to the Court of Appeals with directions to reinstate its prior judgment and order after amending it so that it specifically authorizes the Federal Trade Commission to open this proceeding for further evidence and a new order consistent with the Court of Appeals opinion herein. Cf. Reilly v. Pinkus, 338 U.S. 269, 277, 70 S.Ct. 110, 114, 94 L.Ed. 63; National Labor Relations Board v. Donnelly Garment Co., 330 U.S. 219, 224—228, 67 S.Ct. 756, 759—761, 91 L.Ed. 854. 2 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS dissents. 3 The CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 9
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: As used in this Agreement, the terms "CompuCom's Confidential Information" means proprietary or confidential information concerning the Business including, without limitation, information regarding prices charged for Products, the assets, liabilities, and financial condition of the Business, names and identities of customers and analyses of the amount and types of Products purchased by each such customer. As used in this Agreement, the terms "Seller's Confidential Information" means proprietary or confidential information and business secrets of Seller pertaining to its Services Business in-cluding, without limitation, information regarding prices charged for Services, copies of existing Services contracts to which Seller is a party (other than any such contracts provided to CompuCom pursuant to the provisions of the Asset Purchase Agreement) and analyses of the amount and types of Services purchased by customers.

assistant: No
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: either party may bring a lawsuit solely for injunctive relief to stop unauthorized use or abuse of the fitbit products or fitbit service , or infringement of intellectual property rights ( for example , trademark , trade secret , copyright or patent rights ) without first engaging in arbitration or the informal dispute-resolution process described above .

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: allegedly deficient investigation shock the conscience. As delineated by the First Circuit, the “conscience-shocking” requirement is extremely stringent. The First Circuit noted in Cummings v. McIntire that: [v]arious formulations have been used to identify conduct sufficiently outrageous to meet that standard, which deliberately was set high to protect the Constitution from demotion to merely “a font of tort law.” Courts have held that the acts must be such as to offend even hardened sensibilities, uncivilized and intolerable, offensive to human dignity, or must constitute force that is brutal, inhumane, or vicious. 271 F.3d 341, 344 (1st Cir.2001) (Coffin, J.) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); see also Cruz-Erazo v. Rivera-Montanez, 212 F.3d 617, 622-24 (1st Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). The Plaintiffs’ allegations that Agent Options: A. holding that it was not a constitutional violation under buie for a police officer to enter the plaintiffs house after the plaintiffs arrest in the attached garage B. holding that plaintiffs allegations that police officers moved into plaintiffs unoccupied house without their consent broke the new locks that the plaintiffs put on their house filed unsupported charges against the plaintiffs perjured themselves in testifying against the plaintiffs and threatened physical violence against them did not sufficiently shock the conscience so as to violate substantive due process C. holding that because plaintiffs iied claim is based on the facts that support plaintiffs malicious prosecution claim plaintiffs iied claim did not accrue until the charges against them were dismissed D. holding the original notice and verified account did not substantiate plaintiffs claim and was insufficient for the court to enter a default judgment against the plaintiffs E. holding that inquiry notice was properly resolved as a matter of law where the sec documents themselves provided sufficient notice to plaintiffs of their claims because the documents disclosed numerous lawsuits and investigations against the company directly related to the claims plaintiffs brought against the company

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that plaintiffs allegations that police officers moved into plaintiffs unoccupied house without their consent broke the new locks that the plaintiffs put on their house filed unsupported charges against the plaintiffs perjured themselves in testifying against the plaintiffs and threatened physical violence against them did not sufficiently shock the conscience so as to violate substantive due process
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 represents and warrants to the other Party that (i) as of the Effective Date, all necessary consents, approvals and authorizations of all government authorities and other Persons required to be obtained by it as of the Effective Date in connection with the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement have been obtained by it as of the Effective Date and (ii) its performance hereunder shall be in material compliance with Applicable Laws.

assistant: Consents
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: review of death sentences in a manner that anticipates the likely effect of Ring and its progeny. First, the special verdict would serve to facilitate our determination of harmless error during appellate review. Second, the additional procedure would assist in the jury override situation because this Court would know whether the jury’s life recommendation was based on a finding of no aggravators or on a determination that the mitigators outweighed the aggravators. Finally, a special verdict form would help to ensure that this Court does not run afoul of the Eighth Amendment by affirming a death sentence based on an invalid aggravator- — i.e. in this context, an aggravator not properly found by the jury. See Sochor v. Florida, 504 U.S. 527, 112 S.Ct. 2114, 119 L.Ed.2d 326 (1992) (<HOLDING>). By acting prospectively, we can act to ensure Options: A. holding that the death of a victim may not be considered an aggravating factor in a homicide sentencing B. holding evidence sufficient to support aggravating factor of old age C. holding that under monge double jeopardy does not prevent retrial of an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes D. recognizing attorneys substantial experience in the practice of law as an aggravating factor E. holding that an eighth amendment violation occurred when under floridas sentencing scheme a trial judge weighed an invalid aggravating factor

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an eighth amendment violation occurred when under floridas sentencing scheme a trial judge weighed an invalid aggravating factor
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: the instagram parties do not endorse content and specifically disclaim any responsibility or liability to any person or entity for any loss , damage ( whether actual , consequential , punitive or otherwise ) , injury , claim , liability or other cause of any kind or character based upon or resulting from any content .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: ALJ made its findings of disability and medical improvement in a single decision, there was no “most recent favorable medical decision” for comparison. The Commissioner’s regulations have no direct application in these circumstances and thus do not neatly prescribe an appropriate baseline. We nevertheless agree with the parties that the thrust of the Commissioner’s regulations applies in closed period cases. Congress enacted the medical improvement standard as a safeguard against the arbitrary termination of benefits. See Pickett v. Bowen, 833 F.2d 288, 292 (11th Cir. 1987). As other circuits have explained, Congress intended this safeguard to apply to all claimants, including those who receive benefits in closed period cases. See Waters v. Barnhart, 276 F.3d 716, 719 (5th Cir. 2002) (<HOLDING>); Shepherd v. Apfel, 184 F.3d 1196, 1200 (10th Options: A. recognizing the circuit split and applying the subjective standard as more stringent without deciding which standard applies B. holding that the preponderance of the evidence standard applies to 523 claims C. holding teague applies to capital cases D. holding the medical improvement standard applies to closed period cases E. holding 3582 proceeding is criminal in nature and tenday appeal period applies and collecting cases

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the medical improvement standard applies to closed period cases
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 Section 6.10 hereof, after the Closing, and for no further consideration, each of the parties shall, and shall cause its Affiliates to, execute, acknowledge and deliver such assignments, transfers, consents, assumptions and other documents and instruments and take such other actions as may reasonably be requested to more effectively consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the Related Agreements.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is essentially a direction that all persons similarly situated should be treated alike.”) The District Court also did not err in denying Day’s due process claim to the extent that Day claimed that his classification deprived him of liberty without due process. Day did not have a liberty interest in the degree of his confinement. See Montanye v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236, 242, 96 S.Ct. 2543, 49 L.Ed.2d 466 (1976) (“As long as the conditions or degree of confinement to which the prisoner is subjected is within the sentence imposed upon him and is not otherwise violative of the Constitution, the Due Process Clause does not in itself subject an inmate’s treatment by prison authorities to judicial oversight.”); see also Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484, 115 S.Ct. 2293, 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995) (<HOLDING>). The District Court also did not err in Options: A. holding that inmates protected liberty interests will be generally limited to freedom from restraint which while not exceeding the sentence in such an unexpected manner as to give rise to protection by the due process clause of its own force nonetheless imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life B. holding that liberty interests that are protected by procedural due process are generally limited to freedom from restraint C. holding that a statecreated liberty interest in ones classification may exist where classification imposes atypical and significant hardship D. holding that liberty interests implicating the due process clause are generally limited to freedom from restraint which imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life E. holding that administrative punishment does not implicate a liberty interest protected by the fifth amendment unless the punishment imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life quoting sandin v conner 515 us 472 484 115 sct 2293 132 led2d 418 1995

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that liberty interests implicating the due process clause are generally limited to freedom from restraint which imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life
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: (applying literal test); Oregon Bureau of Labor & Indus, ex rel. Richardson v. U.S. West Commc’ns, Inc., 288 F.3d 414, 417-18 (9th Cir.2002) (same); see also Sun Buick, supra, 26 F.3d at 1261-64 (criticizing functional test, but stopping short of rejecting it because administrative agency at issue “would not qualify [as a state court] under any circumstances”); Tool & Die Makers Lodge No. 78 Int’l Ass’n of Machinists v. Gen’l Elec. Co. X-Ray Dept., 170 F.Supp. 945, 949-50 (E.D.Wis.1959) (district court decision that has been characterized as the “genesis” of the functional test). The Fourth Circuit appeared to endorse the functional test in the context of the federal officer removal statute in Kolibash v. Committee on Legal Ethics of West Virginia Bar, 872 F.2d 571, 576 (4th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). Consequently, subsequent decisions in this Options: A. holding that the west virginia state bar committee on legal ethics was a state court for purposes of removal and citing favorably to volkswagen de puerto rico supra 454 f2d 38 B. holding that a minimum fee schedule enforced by the virginia state bar did not fall within the parker exception because the fee schedule was not mandated by the virginia supreme court and thus it could not fairly be said that the state of virginia through its supreme court rules required the anticompetitive activities C. holding that the proceedings of the west virginia state bar committee on the unlawful practice were judicial in nature based on hallmarks similar to those discussed herein D. holding that a state procedural default will not bar consideration of a federal claim on habeas review unless the last state court rendering a judgment clearly and expressly stated that its judgment rested on a state procedural bar E. holding that the united states was a statutory employer under puerto rico law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the west virginia state bar committee on legal ethics was a state court for purposes of removal and citing favorably to volkswagen de puerto rico supra 454 f2d 38
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of Parent and Borrower shall not, and shall not permit any other member of the Consolidated Group to, enter into any transaction of any kind with any Affiliate of a member of the Consolidated Group, whether or not in the ordinary course of business, other than on fair and reasonable terms substantially as favorable to such member of the Consolidated Group as would be obtainable by such member of the Consolidated Group at the time in a comparable arm’s length transaction with a Person other than an Affiliate.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any change in the time, manner or place of payment of all or any part of the Guaranteed Obligations, or in any other term thereof, or any renewal, extension, increase, alteration, rearrangement, amendment or other modification to any provision of any of the MDA or any other document, instrument, contract or understanding between the Empire Parties and the EPR Developers or any other Person pertaining to the Guaranteed Obligations.

assistant: Modifications
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: got into her car and left. (a) Burglary (Counts 1 and 2) The trial court found, and the State concedes, that Andrews’s burglary convictions should have merged because both counts charged Andrews with entering the same building without authority on the same date with intent to commit a felony — theft (Count 1) and rape (Count 2). Accordingly, only one burglary occurred, and the trial court erred in failing to merge Counts 1 and 2 for sentencing purposes. In so holding, we note that the trial court found that these offenses effectively merged because the trial court imposed only one 20-year sentence on Andrews’s convictions for burglary (Counts 1 and 2), aggravated assault (Count 4) and robbery (Counts 5, 6 and 7). See Zachery v. State, 241 Ga. App. 722, 723 (1) (527 SE2d 601) (2000) (<HOLDING>). Nevertheless, because these convictions merge Options: A. holding that when two underlying offenses are charged in an indictment for capital murder the state need only prove one of the two offenses to support the conviction B. holding these two statutes are not criminal offenses and only affect sentencing C. holding that trial court apparently merged two robbery offenses before sentencing as it imposed only one 20year sentence D. holding that duplicative 922g convictions should have been merged for sentencing purposes E. holding that the defendants sentence for robbery was not inappropriate

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that trial court apparently merged two robbery offenses before sentencing as it imposed only one 20year sentence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: reasonable regulations, to process for witnesses .... ” State v. Wilcox, 21 S.D. 532, 114 N.W. 687 (1908) (emphasis added). [¶ 17.] Crawford cites Washington v. Texas in support of his argument that his right to compulsory process was violated. 388 U.S. 14, 23, 87 S.Ct. 1920, 1925, 18 L.Ed.2d 1019 (1967). In Washington, the United States Supreme Court decided the defendant’s right to compulsory process was denied because the State arbitrarily denied him the right to have a witness testify who had relevant and material testimony. Id. See United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal, 458 U.S. 858, 872-73, 102 S.Ct. 3440, 3449-50, 73 L.Ed.2d 1193 (1982) (the government may not deport witnesses who have material and relevant testimony); Fountaine v. State, 460 So.2d 553, 555 (Fla.App.2d Dist.1984) (<HOLDING>), petition for review denied, 464 So.2d 554 Options: A. holding that the defendants due process rights were violated when the trial judge singled out the only defense witness and indicated to that witness that he expected the witness to he and would personally ensure that the witness was prosecuted for perjury and thereby effectively drove that witness off the stand B. holding that despite district courts restriction on crossexamination of government witness concerning the sentencing benefits he would earn through testifying for the government it did not violate defendants confrontation rights because of defense counsels effective impeachment of the government witnesses credibility and sentence reduction C. recognizing that informing the jury that testifying witness has agreed to cooperate with the government is a doubleedged sword as the existence of such agreement may suggest either that the witness will testify in accordance with the governments wishes regardless of the truth or that the witness will not he under threat of revocation of the agreement should the witness commit perjury D. recognizing the right to compulsory process only requires that the government may not prevent an otherwise willing defense witness from testifying E. holding that evidence of a threat to a witness by the defendant is relevant as showing an attempt to prevent a witness from testifying and avoid punishment for the crime

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing the right to compulsory process only requires that the government may not prevent an otherwise willing defense witness from testifying
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 Borrower will not, and will not permit any Subsidiary to, directly or, to the knowledge of any Responsible Officer, indirectly, use the proceeds of any Borrowing or Letter of Credit in any manner that will result in a violation by the Borrower, any Subsidiary, any Arranger, the Administrative Agent, any Lender or any Issuing Bank of any Sanctions. The Borrower will not use directly or, to the knowledge of any Responsible Officer, indirectly, the proceeds of any Borrowing in any manner that will result in a violation of Anti-Corruption Laws.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds