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: the defective motor. See Tucker v. Aqua Yacht Harbor Corp., 749 F.Supp. 142 (N.D.Miss.1990) (applying Mississippi law) (finding that in a case which was instituted while repairs were being made to piston defect on boat motor, manufacturer should have been allowed to cure and thus could not be held liable for breaches of express and implied warranties). ¶ 15. Also, this case is readily distinguishable from our prior opinions in which we found that the right to cure was not unlimited in the wake of repeated deficiencies and repeated attempts at repair. Guerdon Indus., Inc. v. Gentry, 531 So.2d 1202 (Miss.1988) (finding right to cure not unlimited in case where seller made ten attempts to repair a mobile home’s defects in a five-month period); Rester v. Morrow, 491 So.2d 204 (Miss.1988) (<HOLDING>). II. WHETHER MERCURY MARINE’S “REPAIR OR Options: A. holding employer justified in relying upon plaintiffs physician B. holding that buyers retention and use of boiler was an act inconsistent with sellers ownership and constituted acceptance precluding rejection C. holding that performance may be valid acceptance D. holding likewise in a ease where plaintiffs renault automobile experienced problems with its electrical system air conditioner and oil indicator gauge justified buyers revocation of acceptance E. holding that although sellers acknowledgment was not valid acceptance of buyers offer under 22071 buyers subsequent acceptance of and payment for goods along with buyers objection to a particular term within counteroffer constituted assent to remaining terms of counteroffer

assistant: The best answer is D. holding likewise in a ease where plaintiffs renault automobile experienced problems with its electrical system air conditioner and oil indicator gauge justified buyers revocation of acceptance
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: property by will is a devise.” (Emphasis added.) Black’s Law Dictionary 517 (9th ed. 2009). Notably, section 20 — 19(a) of the Probate Act, which clearly only applies to real property, does not rely on traditional terminology and does not specifically reference property that is “devised”; rather, it refers to real estate that is “specifically bequeathed” even though the traditional use of the term “bequeath” refers to personal, rather than real, property. 755 ILCS 5/20—19(a) (West 2006). Indeed, if one were to strictly adhere to the historical definition of “bequest,” its usage in the statute would be illogical because that section clearly refers to the payment of real estate taxes. See Antioch Community High School District 17 v. Board of Education, 373 Ill. App. 3d 544, 552 (2007) (<HOLDING>). Although this provision was perhaps Options: A. holding that when interpreting statute court must avoid a conclusion that is not supported when construing every part or section of the statute and would yield an absurd result B. holding that the dominant rule to be observed in construction of statute is to give effect to intention of legislature C. recognizing that the cardinal rule in statutory construction is to give effect to the intent of the legislature and to avoid construing a statute in a manner that produces an absurd unjust or unreasonable result D. recognizing the legal concept that when interpreting a statute it is presumed that the legislature did not intend an absurd or unreasonable result E. holding that a statute cannot be construed in a manner that would lead to an absurd or unreasonable result

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that the cardinal rule in statutory construction is to give effect to the intent of the legislature and to avoid construing a statute in a manner that produces an absurd unjust or unreasonable result
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: caused by the intoxication of the dram shop patron. The last sentence of the portion of section 123.92 quoted above provides that the dram shop may assert an affirmative defense that the intoxication was not a proximate cause of the patron’s injurious action. See Gremmel v. Junnie’s Lounge, Ltd., 397 N.W.2d 717, 721 (Iowa 1986) (defense that intoxication was not a proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries was available upon showing that animosity between combatants and not intoxication precipitated assault). The rise of the claim created by section 123.92 extending liability to liquor purveyors is mirrored by the recent genesis of separate common law actions against those who sell or provide liquor in violation of criminal statutes. See Lewis v. State, 256 N.W.2d 181, 191-92 (Iowa 1977) (<HOLDING>); Haafke v. Mitchell, 347 N.W.2d 381, 385 (Iowa Options: A. holding that negligence must be the proximate cause of injury B. holding iowa code section 63113 which is now section 6317 contains no provision for posttrial motions on appeal from a small claims court judgment C. holding a common law cause of action exists against a nonlicensee who furnishes alcohol to a minor in violation of iowa code section 12347 where the minor subsequently causes the plaintiffs injuries D. holding in a case in which negligence was based on the illegal sale of alcohol to a minor in violation of iowa code section 12343 now section 12347 that proximate cause was an issue to be resolved by the finder of fact E. holding that a physicians negligence need only be a proximate cause not the proximate cause of plaintiffs injury

assistant: The best answer is D. holding in a case in which negligence was based on the illegal sale of alcohol to a minor in violation of iowa code section 12343 now section 12347 that proximate cause was an issue to be resolved by the finder 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: All payments to be made by any Guarantor pursuant to this Guaranty shall be made in Dollars, in immediately available funds to the Administrative Agent at the Principal Office, not later than 2:00 p.m. New York City time on the date of demand therefor.

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: which led the DOE to believe that “money may be due back to the DOE.” The e-mail further stated that, “[u]ntil the DOE is confident that no money is owed to it for prior false invoices from [RESG], the account will remain frozen and money withheld in order to protect the City’s interests and tax payer dollars.” Before the District Court, and now on appeal, UCF has argued that the objection in the February 3 e-mail was insufficiently specific inasmuch as it did not directly address each of the 3,913 invoices in the allegedly stated account. We are aware of no authority under New York law that requires such extreme specificity. On the contrary, numerous New des the plaintiffs statement of an account. See Navimex S.A. De C.V. v. S/S “Northern Ice”, 617 F.Supp. 103, 106 (S.D.N.Y.1984) (<HOLDING>). Upon a thorough review of the record, and in Options: A. holding that a statement that the affiant is president of the company asserting a claim on an account is sufficient to affirmatively show how the affiant has personal knowledge of the affidavit statements regarding the account B. holding that a supplementary statement of account dated february 1978 did not constitute an account stated because there was an underlying dispute between the parties as evidenced by defendants objection in january 1978 to plaintiffs august 1977 statement of account thereby precluding a finding of consent by the defendants to the february 1978 statement C. holding that improper statement was rendered harmless because the district court sustained the defendants objection and admonished the jury to disregard the statement D. holding that it was error for the court to rule that the statement of mortgage debt was incorrect prior to submission of the auditors statement of account E. holding that language in a merrill lynch customer account agreement that the plaintiff signed upon opening the first account providing for arbitration of any controversy arising out of its business applied to the disputed second account even though the plaintiff did not sign a separate customer account agreement for the second account

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a supplementary statement of account dated february 1978 did not constitute an account stated because there was an underlying dispute between the parties as evidenced by defendants objection in january 1978 to plaintiffs august 1977 statement of account thereby precluding a finding of consent by the defendants to the february 1978 statement
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: still would have held that the error was constitutional absent the involvement of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Defendant also cites Darden v Wainwright, 477 US 168; 106 S Ct 2464; 91 L Ed 2d 144 (1986) (in evaluating a prosecutorialmisconduct claim, the Court asked whether the conduct so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process; the Court did not indicate whether error was constitutional); Donnelly, supra at 640-645 (observing that the respondent’s “claims of constitutional error” focused on remarks made by the prosecutor and holding that the errors did not render the respondent’s trial so fundamentally unfair as to deny him due process); Berger v United States, 295 US 78; 55 S Ct 629; 79 L Ed 1314 (1935) (<HOLDING>). But none of these decisions holds that Options: A. holding new trial was warranted where trial court did not make adequate determination pursuant to nc gen stat 15a1242 whether defendants decision to proceed pro se was knowingly intelligently and voluntarily made B. holding that prosecutorial misconduct was harmless in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt C. holding prosecutorial misconduct claim barred by procedural default D. holding that a new trial was warranted where prejudice stemming from prosecutorial misconduct was highly probable court did not indicate whether error was constitutional E. holding that evidence consisting of the testimony of three witnesses who each had motives to lie was not overwhelming and that prosecutorial misconduct therefore was not harmless error

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a new trial was warranted where prejudice stemming from prosecutorial misconduct was highly probable court did not indicate whether error was constitutional
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: Regardless of any action the Company or Participant’s employer takes with respect to any or all income tax, social insurance, payroll tax, payment on account or other applicable taxes (“Tax Items”) in connection with the Award, Participant hereby acknowledges and agrees that the ultimate liability for all Tax Items legally due by Participant is and remains the responsibility of Participant. Further, if Participant has become subject to tax in more than one jurisdiction between the date of grant and the date of any relevant taxable or tax withholding event, as applicable, Participant acknowledges that the Company and/or the Employer (or former employer, as applicable) may be required to withhold or account for Tax-Related Items in more than one jurisdiction.

assistant: Tax Withholdings
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: big difference in this case, but the City Council members never testified to any such legitimate, good-faith belief, and we can find no evidence to that effect in the record.. Therefore, it seems that the City Council terminated Singleton simply because of the conversation between his wife and daughter. In this country, guilt is individual. We do not, as a general rule, punish A for the sins of B. Nor does the law today generally impute the actions of one spouse to another, or the actions of an adult child to the parent. See Forbes v. Arkansas Educational Television Comm’n, 93 F.3d 497, 501-02 (8th Cir.1996) (“We do not think any general inference can be drawn from the opinion of one spouse to that of the other.”), rev’d on other grounds, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1633, 140 L.Ed.2d 875 986) (<HOLDING>). And courts have held that a parent is not Options: A. holding that the deceased defendant trustees wife was a representative of her husbands estate and a proper party for substitution purposes where the wife was the primary distributee of her deceased husbands estate B. holding that the former wife did not waive her attorneyclient privilege simply because the credibility of her claim that she relied on her husbands representations could be impeached by deposing her former attorney C. holding that a wifes minimal involvement in her husbands business coupled with the lack of evidence that she knew of or intended to further her husbands fraudulent schemes was insufficient evidence of conspiracy D. holding that a wife is not liable simply by virtue of the marital relationship for her husbands fraudulent acts E. holding that a wifeis not liable simply by virtue of the marital relationship for her husbands negligent acts

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a wife is not liable simply by virtue of the marital relationship for her husbands fraudulent acts
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: Employee's employment and this Agreement shall terminate in the event of his death. Except as provided herein, OrangeHook shall have no obligation to pay or provide any compensation or benefits under this Agreement on account of Employee's death, or for periods following Employee's death.

assistant: Death
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: 1985). 34 Bourne v. Nat’l Labor Relations Bd., 332 F.2d 47, 48 (2d Cir. 1964). 35 See City of Vancouver v. Pub. Emp’t Relations Comm’n, 107 Wn. App. 694, 706, 33 P.3d 74 (2001). These factors are (1) the history of the employer’s attitude towards its employees; (2) the type of information sought; (3) the company rank of the questioner; (4) the place and manner of the conversation; (5) the truthfulness of the employee’s responses; (6) whether the employer had a valid purpose for obtaining the information; (7) if so, whether the employer communicated it to the employee; and (8) whether the employer assured the employee that no reprisals would be forthcoming should he or she support the union. 36 See Clallam County v. Pub. Emp’t Relations Comm’n, 43 Wn. App. 589, 599, 719 P.2d 140 (1986) (<HOLDING>). 37 No. 5579-B, 1998 WL 812651 (Wash. Pub. Options: A. holding that the right to drive is not a fundamental right B. holding that a prisoners right to hie grievances is constitutionally protected under the first and fourteenth amendments C. holding that to pursue a grievance is a right protected under chapter 4156 rcw D. recognizing that a defendants right to be heard in criminal proceedings prior to sentencing is constitutionally protected E. holding that while there is not a constitutionally protected right of intrastate travel under equal protection there is a constitutionally protected right to intrastate travel arising from the due process clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that to pursue a grievance is a right protected under chapter 4156 rcw
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 Holding Company, the Borrower and the ERISA Affiliates have fulfilled their respective obligations under the minimum funding standards of ERISA and the Code with respect to each Plan and are in compliance in all material respects with the presently applicable provisions of ERISA and the Code, and have not incurred any liability to the PBGC or any Plan or Multiemployer Plan (other than to make contributions in the ordinary course of business).

assistant: Erisa
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 First Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts and by different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed an original but all of which when taken together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed signature page of this First Amendment by facsimile transmission or PDF electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart hereof.

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: registration document. Moreover, the latter document was issued after the petitioner had emigrated to the United States, raising an obvious question as to why the Chinese government would certify her place of abode at a time when she was no longer there. The IJ considered these inconsistencies in light of the widespread document fraud among asylum seekers from the petitioner’s home region and the seeming pattern of falsehoods that emerged. See U.S. Dep’t of State, China: Profile of Asylum Claims and Country Conditions (April 14, 1998); see also 8 C.F.R. § 208.12 (enabling immigration officials to consider such reports in making asylum determinations). The adverse inferences that she drew from that evidence were supportable. See Qin v. Ashcroft, 360 F.3d 302, 307 (1st Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). To be sure, the petitioner offered Options: A. holding the profile considered in light of contradictory documentary evidence sufficient to support a finding of fabrication B. holding evidence insufficient to support finding of implied contract C. holding that in reviewing no evidence point court views evidence in light that tends to support finding of disputed fact and disregards all evidence and inferences to contrary D. holding that the agency may properly conclude that a prior adverse credibility determination undermines the authenticity of documentary evidence filed in support of a motion to reopen E. holding evidence sufficient to support trial courts finding in aggravation that the offense was planned

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the profile considered in light of contradictory documentary evidence sufficient to support a finding of fabrication
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: You acknowledge that the only consideration for your execution and non-revocation of this Agreement (which includes a general release of claims) and, if applicable, your execution and non-revocation of the Second General Release are the benefits which are expressly stated in this document. All other promises or agreements of any kind, including, but not limited to, your offer letter agreement with Avon dated September 10, 2012 (other than the provision that expressly excludes you from coverage under the Avon Products, Inc. Severance Pay Plan), that have been made by or between the parties or by any other person or entity whatsoever that are related to the subject matter of this Agreement are superseded, revoked and cancelled by this Agreement, except that any arbitration, nondisclosure, intellectual property protection, non-solicit, or classified information provisions and/or agreements with the Company continue to apply in accordance with their terms (and the greater protection to Avon applies in the event of any conflict between this Agreement and such other agreements) and any plans (such as the PRA), equity award agreements, or policies that are referenced in this Agreement as continuing to be applicable (including, without limitation, the Company’s “Associate Arbitration Policy”) are not superseded and will remain in effect. In addition, any compensation recoupment provisions, practices or policies, will continue to apply, as applicable. You agree that this Agreement and, if applicable, the Second General Release, may not be changed orally, by email, or by any other form of electronic communication, but only by a written agreement, signed by both you and an authorized representative of Avon.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: linden lab reserves the right to delete or change any account name that violates this paragraph , and will have no liability regarding the use , modification , or deletion of any account name .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance by the Company of this Agreement and the other Transaction Documents to which it is a party, the issuance and sale of the Securities and the consummation by it of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby do not and will not: (i) conflict with or violate any provision of the Company's or any Subsidiary's certificate or articles of incorporation, bylaws or other organizational or charter documents, (ii) conflict with, or constitute a default (or an event that with notice or lapse of time or both would become a default) under, result in the creation of any Lien upon any of the properties or assets of the Company or any Subsidiary, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation (with or without notice, lapse of time or both) of, any agreement, credit facility, debt or other instrument (evidencing a Company or Subsidiary debt or otherwise) or other understanding to which the Company or any Subsidiary is a party or by which any property or asset of the Company or any Subsidiary is bound or affected, or (iii) subject to the Required Approvals, conflict with or result in a violation of any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment, injunction, decree or other restriction of any court or governmental authority to which the Company or a Subsidiary is subject (including federal and state securities laws and regulations), or by which any property or asset of the Company or a Subsidiary is bound or affected; except in the case of each of clauses (ii) and (iii), such as could not have or reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: limit Section 74.351(a) imposes on a health liability claimant. Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant a new trial with respect to dismissal of her claims. We overrule Awoniyi’s second point of error. Attorney’s-Fee AwaRD to the Hospital In her third point of error, Awoniyi contends the trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees to the hospital because she timely served her expert report on the hospital. As discussed above, Awoniyi’s expert report was not served timely. Where an expert report is not served timely, Section 74.351 imposes a duty on the trial court, upon a health care provider’s motion, to dismiss the claims and to award reasonable attorney’s fees to the health care provider. See Bocquet v. Herring, 972 S.W.2d 19, 20-21 (Tex.1998) (<HOLDING>). The trial court thus did not err in awarding Options: A. holding that the term shall is mandatory for purposes of statutory construction when the statute is unambiguous B. holding that attorneys fee statute using shall language is not discretionary C. holding that a statute shall not be given retroactive effect unless such construction is required by explicit language or by necessary implication D. holding that a states use of the word shall is mandatory language E. holding provision in attorneys fee contract requiring client that terminated contract to immediately pay attorney fee equal to present value of attorneys interest in case was inconsistent with public policy and unconscionable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that attorneys fee statute using shall language is not discretionary
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: its patrons, of any responsibility anywhere on its business premises regardless of its negligence. This we decline to do. V. To recapitulate, the limited duty rule, as set forth above and in Schneider, will apply to injuries occurring in the stands. However, traditional rules of negligence, specifically the business invitee rule, will govern owner and operator liability for injuries that occur in all other areas of the stadium. That adjustment of the ground rules is a fair and appropriate accommodation of the competing interests.- We remand this matter to the trial court for application of the standard we have set forth in this 394 A.2d 546 (1978) (discussed further in Part IV below). See also Costa v. Boston Red Sox Baseball Club, 61 Mass.App.Ct. 299, 809 N.E.2d 1090, 1092-93 (2004) (<HOLDING>). Justice WALLACE, JR., concurring. I concur Options: A. holding that a general contractor owed no duty to an employee of a subcontractor to warn of dangers of electrocution B. holding manufacture had no duty to warn of the dangers of smoking because the dangers of cigarette smoking have long been known to the community C. holding only duty is to warn of unreasonable dangers which do not include foul balls D. recognizing under illinois law that pharmaceutical manufacturer has duty to warn of any dangers associated with offlabel use of product if such dangers were reasonably known E. holding a duty to warn arises only when the potential victim is known and foreseeable

assistant: The best answer is C. holding only duty is to warn of unreasonable dangers which do not include foul balls
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: 618, 564 N.E.2d 1280, 1290-92 (1990). 35 . Id., 151 Ill.Dec. 618, 564 N.E.2d at 1292-93. 36 . Koenig v. McCarthy Const. Co., 344 Ill.App. 93, 100 N.E.2d 338, 340 (1951). 37 . 1999 Ill. Legis. Serv. P.A. 91-524 (S.B.458) (West) (Public Act 91-524, Medical Practice— Automatic External Defibrillator Act). 38 . TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U.S. 19, 31, 122 S.Ct. 441, 151 L.Ed.2d 339 (2001). 39 . Allegis Realty Investors v. Novak, 223 Ill.2d 318, 307 Ill.Dec. 592, 860 N.E.2d 246, 252-55 (2006). 40 . 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 128 L.Ed.2d 229 (1994). 41 . 5 Ill. Comp. Stat. 70/4 (1998). 42 . Allegis Realty Investors, 307 Ill.Dec. 592, 860 N.E.2d at 253. 43 . Id. 44 . The Illinois Good Samaritan Act also provides an exemption from civil liability for those using AE p.2d 802 (N.D.Ill.2005) (<HOLDING>). In Muno v. Condell Medical Center, 383 Options: A. holding that the fact that the insurance agents perform functions that are an essential part of the companys normal operations is a decisive factor B. holding that evidence of prior similar act was not relevant for the purpose of proving doctors negligence in performing operation at issue on particular occasion C. holding that the samaritan act does not immunize doctors from suit when they are performing their normal job functions D. holding that qualified immunity extends to government officials performing discretionary functions E. holding advice of counsel does not per se immunize a person from a malicious prosecution suit

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the samaritan act does not immunize doctors from suit when they are performing their normal job functions
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 of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of the Company are as disclosed in the SEC Reports. Except as set forth in the SEC Reports, the Company owns, directly or indirectly, a majority of the capital stock or other equity interests of each Subsidiary free and clear of any Liens, other than Permitted Liens, subject to restrictions under applicable laws, and all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of each Subsidiary are validly issued and are fully paid, non-assessable and free of preemptive and similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: under state law to discovery in federal courts. See id. Making the case for a privilege here even stronger than in Jaffee, federal authorities also favor recognizing a privilege for reporters’ confidential sources. As noted earlier, we ourselves have limited discovery of reporters’ sources in both civil and criminal litigation, see Zerilli, 656 F.2d at 707; Carey, 492 F.2d at 636; Ahn, 231 F.3d at 37, as have other federal courts, see, e.g., Bruno & Stillman, 633 F.2d at 593-99; Burke, 700 F.2d at 76-77; Silkwood, 563 F.2d at 436-37, including some acting on the basis of Rule 501, see, e.g., Riley v. City of Chester, 612 F.2d 708, 715 (3d Cir.1979) (recognizing a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation); but see In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 5 F.3d 397, 398 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). In addition, the Justice Department Options: A. recognizing privilege B. holding that the joint defense privilege preserved the attorneyclient privilege against waiver in the context of a group with common interests seeking common representation C. holding that no scholars privilege exists under the first amendment or common law D. holding that there is no statutory deliberative process privilege in arizona and declining to create such a privilege under the common law E. holding that there is no first amendment or common law right of access to documents which played no role in a judicial decision

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that no scholars privilege exists under the first amendment or common law
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: vacate the TTD award. Employer argues that because “Claimant opted not to continue employment with the City, Claimant is not entitled to [TTD] benefits from the City and the City was under no obligation to offer light duty work to Claimant.” We are not persuaded by Employer’s argument. The clear weight of the evidence supports the trial court’s finding, affirmed by the panel, that Claimant’s termination from employment was not voluntary. Employer’s characterization of the events following Claimant’s receipt of the “Final Lay-off Notice” as a voluntary resignation lacks record support. ¶ 14 First, we note that “continued employment is not a statutory requirement for eligibility for workers’ compensation benefits.” Patterson v. Sue Estell Trucking Co. Inc., 2004 OK 66, 8, 95 P.3d 1087 (<HOLDING>). An employer is not relieved from its Options: A. holding that an injured dump truck driver who was at fault in a workrelated automobile accident and cited for driving with a suspended license could not be denied ttd benefits even though employer fired him after his injury B. holding that probable cause existed to arrest for driving on a suspended license under state law C. holding motorist entitled to hearing before taking his license under statute that required loss of license if uninsured driver involved in an accident D. holding that an evidentiary basis for the search was lacking because gant was arrested for driving with a suspended license an offense for which police could not expect to find evidence in the passenger compartment of his car E. holding that a truck driver who was on call was not compensated for an injury in a motel room provided by his employer

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an injured dump truck driver who was at fault in a workrelated automobile accident and cited for driving with a suspended license could not be denied ttd benefits even though employer fired him after his injury
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 subject to and governed by the laws of the State of Delaware, excluding any conflicts-of-law rule or principles that might refer the construction or interpretation of this Agreement to the laws of another state. Any action or proceeding seeking to enforce any provision of, or based on any right arising out of, or relating in any manner to, this Agreement must be brought against any of the Parties in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County or, if the Court of Chancery lacks subject matter jurisdiction, in another court of the State of Delaware, County of New Castle, or in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, and each of the Parties consent to the jurisdiction of such courts (and of the appropriate appellate courts) in any such action or proceeding and waives any objection to venue laid therein. Process in any action or proceeding referred to in the preceding sentence may be served on any Party anywhere in the world.

assistant: Submission To Jurisdiction
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: or former spouse can be as much for “support” for dischargeability purposes under § 523(a)(5) as payments owing directly to a former spouse. Leibowitz v. County of Orange (In re Leibowitz), 217 F.3d 799, 803 (9th Cir.2000). Accord Falk & Siemer, LLP v. Maddigan (In re Maddigan), 312 F.3d 589, 593 (2d Cir.2002) (stating the fact that a debt is payable to a third party does not prevent classification of that debt as nondis-chargeable under § 523(a)(5)); Williams v. Kemp (In re Kemp), 232 F.3d 652, 653 (8th Cir.2000) (stating that it is the nature of the debt, not the identity of the payee, that determines the debt's nondischargeability under § 523(a)(5)); Miller v. Gentry (In re Miller), 55 F.3d 1487, 1490 (10th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 916, 116 S.Ct. 305, 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995) (<HOLDING>); Long v. Calhoun (In re Calhoun), 715 F.2d Options: A. holding that courtappointed guardian ad litem for child in child custody dispute did not act under color of state law B. holding that debts for a guardian ad litem and a psychologist were nondischargeable under 523a5 because the emphasis is to be placed on the determination of whether a debt is in the nature of support rather than on the identity of the payee C. holding that guardian ad litem and psychologist fees incurred in child custody proceedings and ordered to be paid directly to the guardian ad litem and psychologist were nondischargeable under 523a5 D. holding the district court properly allowed guardian ad litem fees to be taxed as costs E. holding that legal fees for a childs guardian ad litem in a custody proceeding were clearly for the ehilds benefit and support and as such were nondischargeable under 523a5

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that guardian ad litem and psychologist fees incurred in child custody proceedings and ordered to be paid directly to the guardian ad litem and psychologist were nondischargeable under 523a5
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 execution, delivery and performance by each Loan Party of each Loan Document to which such Person is a party (a) have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate or other organizational action, and (b) do not (i) contravene the terms of any of such Person’s Organization Documents; (ii) conflict with or result in any material breach or contravention of any Material Contract to which such Person is a party; (iii) result in the creation of any Lien (other than the creation of Liens permitted under this Agreement) under, or require any payment to be made under any Contractual Obligation to which such Person is a party or affecting such Person or upon or with respect to the properties of such Person or any of its Subsidiaries; (iv) conflict with or result in any material breach or contravention of any order, injunction, writ or decree of any Governmental Authority or any arbitral award to which such Person or its property is subject; or (v) violate any material Law that has or could reasonably be expected to have or result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Second, if the State can err as asserted by appellant, we do not find that the “error” was preserved for review by an objection or otherwise. See Tex.RApp. P. 33.1. After the “order” was granted, appellant did not object to the State’s failure to act, request enforcement of the “order” by the trial court, or obtain an adverse ruling. No motion for continuance was filed. Appellant permitted the trial to conclude without requesting any further relief. Moreover, there is no showing that if the State had produced the requested items for an in camera inspection by the trial court, appellant would have been given access to items or be legally entitled to the same. In the Interest of Justice Nevertheless, appellant has cited Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) (<HOLDING>) and Thomas v. State, 837 S.W.2d 106 Options: A. holding that police officers have no affirmative duty to search out favorable evidence for the defendant B. holding state has affirmative duty to disclose favorable and material evidence to defense C. holding prosecutor has affirmative duty to disclose material exculpatory evidence D. holding the government has an affirmative duty to disclose exculpatory evidence to a criminal defendant E. holding that the prosecution must disclose evidence favorable to the accused that is material either to guilt or to punishment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding state has affirmative duty to disclose favorable and material evidence to 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: court’s factual findings. To the extent that the conclusions of the district court contain any error cognizable as a matter of law, said error is limited to the finding that Alaka was responsible for loss from the Krashen account. The fraud leading to the $65,100 loss on behalf of that individual did not appear to involve any of the fake identities, proxy accounts, or withdrawal locations used by the conspiracy elsewhere. Under the deferential review we accord to district court sentencing decisions, however, this error is harmless because the other, properly established fraud totals more than $200,000 and pushes Alaka into the 24-30 month guideline range. Cf. United States v. Abbas, 560 F.3d 660, 667 (7th Cir.2009). But see United States v. Eubanks, 593 F.3d 645, 655-56 (7th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). III. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, we Options: A. holding that imposition of a sentence within the properly calculated range is not reviewable B. holding that a sentence within the properly calculated guideline range is presumptively reasonable C. holding that where a properly calculated guideline range did not include the sentence handed down by the district court and the district court did not provide reasons for handing down a nonguideline sentence a guidelinescalculation error was not harmless D. holding that a sentence within a properly calculated guideline range is usually reasonable E. holding that when a court miscalculates the guideline range yet imposes a sentence that falls within a properly calculated guideline range the sentence enjoys a presumption of reasonableness

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where a properly calculated guideline range did not include the sentence handed down by the district court and the district court did not provide reasons for handing down a nonguideline sentence a guidelinescalculation error was not harmless
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: statute’s language, “assault which inflicts grievous bodily injury,” and hence outside the scope of the disqualification statute. We shall consider each of these arguments in turn. II First, does it make a critical difference that the “intimidation” statute under which Lynch was convicted aims not at “assault which inflicts grievous bodily injury,” but rather (as its title says) at “deprivation of rights by violence”? We do not think that this difference is significant. For one thing, the simple fact that the “intimidation” statute does not use the words “assault which inflicts grievous bodily injury” or their direct equivalent cannot, in and of itself, make a difference, for Congress could not have meant to include on its “disqualification” list only convictions under sta a.1969) (<HOLDING>). The “intimi dation" statute's language, "use Options: A. holding that a conviction for simple assault under pennsylvania law does not qualify under 18 usc 16b by way of 11 usc 1101a43 as an aggravated felony B. holding conviction of labor leader for accepting illegal payments from employers under 29 usc 186 to be bribery under 504 C. holding conviction for willful misapplication of bank funds under 18 usc 656 1982 to be grand larceny under 504 D. holding that because the bank had no duty to report defendants structured transactions these transactions did not constitute material facts within the meaning of 18 usc 1001 consequently defendant may not be held criminally liable under 18 usc 2b for causing the bank to fail to disclose a material fact E. holding that good faith is a defense to the willful filing of false statements under 18 usc 1001

assistant: The best answer is C. holding conviction for willful misapplication of bank funds under 18 usc 656 1982 to be grand larceny under 504
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any term or provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other term or provision of this Agreement or invalidate or render unenforceable such term or provision in any other jurisdiction. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible in a mutually acceptable manner in order that the transactions contemplated hereby be consummated as originally contemplated to the greatest extent possible.

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: The Ostrich Group (a total of $567,767). This provision provides that a defendant is responsible for: (B) in the ease of a jointly undertaken criminal activity (a criminal plan, scheme, endeavor, or enterprise undertaken by the defendant in concert with others, whether or not charged as a conspiracy), all reasonably foreseeable acts and omissions of others in furtherance of the jointly undertaken criminal activity, that occurred during the commission of the offense of conviction, in preparation for that offense, or in the course of attempting to avoid detection or responsibility for that offense.... U.S.S.G. § lB1.3(a)(l). The district court adopted the PSR, which described the scheme and Whitney’s involvement in detail. See United States v. Ortiz, 362 F.3d 1274, 1277 (9th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Additionally, the district court specifically Options: A. holding sentencing court did not commit procedural error when record showed court had psr heard oral argument from both parties and was aware of section 3553a factors B. holding that district court may find facts to support both factors by adopting psr C. holding remand not required where district court relied on federal psr that incorporated facts from state psr not objected to by defendant to determine prior conviction was controlled substance offense for purposes of career offender sentence enhancement under guidelines D. holding that the district court may adopt facts contained in the psr without further inquiry if the facts have an adequate evidentiary basis and the defendant does not present rebuttal evidence E. holding that defendant adopted facts found in the psr by not objecting

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that district court may find facts to support both factors by adopting psr
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 any provision or provisions of these terms of use shall be held to be invalid , illegal , or unenforceable , the validity , legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect .

assistant: None