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: Subject at all times to the other provisions of this Agreement, the Borrower will use the proceeds of the Loans solely for general working capital needs (including letters of credit) and other general corporate purposes. Without limiting the right of the Borrower to make requests for Loans as provided in §2.5 hereof, it is agreed by the Lenders that, from time to time, on not less than forty-five (45) days’ notice in writing to the Administrative Agent (which the Administrative Agent will send to the Lenders within two (2) Business Days), the Borrower may request proceeds of the Loans be specifically used to refinance certain secured mortgage Indebtedness of the Borrower and/or its Subsidiaries, in which event, a portion of the Loans equal to the amount of the advances made hereunder in connection with such refinancing, at the Borrower’s election, may be secured by an amended and restated mortgage on the property securing the mortgage to be refinanced (a “ Refinancing Mortgage ”) and evidenced by a mortgage note executed by the Borrower and/or one or more Subsidiaries (provided that if the Borrower shall not execute such mortgage note, the Borrower shall execute a guaranty of such mortgage note), provided that no Refinancing Mortgage may encumber a property located in a Special Flood Hazard Area as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in connection with the National Flood Insurance Program.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: as to municipal liability. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). The district court properly dismissed Orr’s claim regarding the defective shower slippers because Orr alleged in his amended complaint that he did not exhaust available grievance procedures. Cf. Wyatt v. Terhune, 280 F.3d 1238, 1246 (9th Cir. 2002) (<HOLDING>). The district court properly dismissed without Options: A. holding that failure to plead affirmative defense to original complaint does not amount to waiver where defense is raised in response to amended complaint B. holding that complaint need not anticipate statute of limitations which is an affirmative defense C. recognizing lack of consideration as an affirmative defense to a release that is valid on its face D. holding that where plaintiffs claims are timely on the face of the allegations of the complaint a court should strike the affirmative defense of statute of limitations E. holding that exhaustion is an affirmative defense where the face of the complaint and exhibits thereto do not establish a failure to exhaust

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that exhaustion is an affirmative defense where the face of the complaint and exhibits thereto do not establish a failure to exhaust
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: for example, is a claim and time barred by the nonclaim statute. Nelson, 288 Kan. at 596. We also agree the time to file a will passed on July 27, 2014, no timely petition to admit a will was filed, and Beverly’s allegation of a will has no merit. K.S.A. 59-617 establishes tire general rule. The statute provides in its entirety: “No will of a testator who died while a resident of this state shall be effectual to pass property unless a petition is filed for the probate of such will within six months after the death of the testator, except as hereinafter provided.” Simply put, K.S.A. 59-617 functions as a statute of limitations prohibiting the admission of a will to probate more than 6 months after a testator s death. In re Estate of Reed, 157 Kan. 602, 607-08, 142 P.2d 824 (1943) (<HOLDING>); In re Estate of Tracy, 36 Kan. App. 2d 401, Options: A. holding that limitation period begins to run at the time of the breach B. holding that duration of limitation is a factor in determining whether limitation is significant C. holding the then 1year time limitation in gs 1941 supp 59617 to be a statute of general limitation D. recognizing a fouryear statute of limitation for fraud claims E. recognizing that a principal may limit the authority of its agent and such limitation will be binding on a third party who is aware of the limitation

assistant: The best answer is C. holding the then 1year time limitation in gs 1941 supp 59617 to be a statute of general limitation
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: There is no Proceeding pending or, to such Founder’s knowledge, threatened against such Founder before any Governmental Authority which would impair such Founder’s ownership of the applicable Founder Shares or otherwise prevent or delay the Closing of SHA Transactions. Such Founder is not subject to any outstanding Order that would impair such Founder’s ownership of the applicable Founder Shares or otherwise prevent or delay the Closing of SHA Transactions.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No Grantor will create or suffer to exist any Lien on the Collateral (except a Lien in favor of the Administrative Agent). Each Grantor will warrant and defend the right and title herein granted unto the Administrative Agent in and to the Collateral (and all right, title, and interest represented by the Collateral) against the claims and demands of all Persons (other than the Administrative Agent). Each Grantor agrees that at any time, and from time to time, at the expense of such Grantor, such Grantor will promptly execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take all further action, that may be necessary or desirable, or that the Administrative Agent may reasonably request, in order to perfect, preserve and protect any security interest granted or purported to be granted hereby or to enable the Administrative Agent to exercise and enforce its rights and remedies hereunder with respect to any Collateral.

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: via a stale summons. This in turn requires the Court to consider the effect of such defective service. II. Is the judgment void? The Seventh Circuit has never addressed the validity of a judgment entered in an adversary proceeding under the Bankruptcy Code where the underlying service of process is improper. The Debtor cites no controlling precedent on point. The Seventh Circuit has addressed the issue of whether the sale of real estate free and clear of all liens was void where the second mortgage holder never received notice of the sale. In re Edwards, 962 F.2d 641 (7th Cir.1992). The Court in Edwards found that when the rights of innocent third parties may be affected, the court must consider competing interests and not merely find the judgment to be void per se. Id. at 644, 645-46 (<HOLDING>). Courts in the Ninth Circuit have held that if Options: A. holding that the trustee did not have constructive knowledge of an improperly executed mortgage because ohio law provided that an improperly executed mortgage does not provide constructive notice to a subsequent bona fide purchaser B. holding that the rights of a bona fide purchaser outweighed those of an under secured second mortgage holder C. holding that one who acquires legal title with notice of a prior equitable interest in the property is not a bona fide purchaser D. holding that under mississippi law a purchaser is a bona fide purchaser for value without notice unless there is actual notice or circumstances which would put a purchaser on inquiry notice E. holding that a bona fide purchaser may be considered in privity with its predecessor

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the rights of a bona fide purchaser outweighed those of an under secured second mortgage holder
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: Acts, As Affecting Recovery Against United States Under Federal Tort Claims Act, 135 A.L.R. Fed. 403, 1997 WL 260129 (1996). Mr. Tippetts also argues that the FECA does not apply to him because he was not performing any work duties during the time his emotional-distress claim accrued by virtue of the fact that he was on administrative leave. It is for the Secretary to determine whether an injury occurred during the employee’s performance of his duty. Tarver v. United States, 25 F.3d 900, 903 (10th Cir.1994). To the extent Mr. Tippetts claims his suffering and financial hardship after his employment was terminated are outside FECA coverage, we look to whether the claim arose from the employment context. Id.; cf. Lombardi v. Small Bus. Admin., 889 F.2d 959, 961 (10th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). Mr. Tippetts further maintains that because Options: A. holding that plaintiffs were not released from the exclusive remedial framework of the csra when their claims arose from their federal employment even though the csra provided plaintiffs with no remedy B. holding csra controlled plaintiffs claims which arose as result of employment relationship C. holding that plaintiffs claims were precluded by csra because actions complained of arose from federal employment relationship even though many of the alleged violations occurred after the employment relationship was terminated D. holding that where the employment of the injured employees was the occasion of the injury the injuries arose out of employment E. holding that the csras exclusive and comprehensive remedial scheme precludes review under the apa of disputes that concern not only employment practices specifically prohibited under the csra but also employment practices that are so insignificant as not even to bear mention in the csra

assistant: The best answer is B. holding csra controlled plaintiffs claims which arose as result of employment relationship
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: Lender shall have the right to issue press releases, advertisements and other promotional materials describing the Loan (including the amount and purpose of the Loan) and Lender’s participation in the origination of the Loan or the Loan’s inclusion in any Secondary Market Transaction effectuated or to be effectuated by Lender. All news releases, publicity or advertising by Borrower or its Affiliates through any media intended to reach the general public which refers to the Loan Documents or the financing evidenced by the Loan Documents, to Lender or any of its Affiliates shall be subject to the prior approval of Lender, except for disclosures required by Legal Requirements which shall not require Lender approval but which shall require prior notice to Lender.

assistant: Publicity
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 SAR is being issued pursuant to Section 6.5 of the Long-Term Incentive Plan and are subject to the terms of the Long-Term Incentive Plan. A copy of the Long-Term Incentive Plan has been given to the Participant, and additional copies of the Long-Term Incentive Plan are available upon request during normal business hours at the principal executive offices of the Company. To the extent that any provision of this Award violates or is inconsistent with an express provision of the Long-Term Incentive Plan, the Long-Term Incentive Plan provision shall govern and any inconsistent provision in this Award shall be of no force or effect.

assistant: Construction
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 burden of establishing that the sentence is unreasonable. United States v. Talley, 431 F.3d 784, 788 (11th Cir.2005). We review for reasonableness under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard, meaning that we “must first ensure that the district court committed no significant procedural error, such as failing to calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the § 3553(a) factors, selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or failing to adequately explain the chosen sentence — including an explanation for any deviation from the Guidelines range.” Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); see also United States v. Livesay, 525 F.3d 1081, 1093 (11th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>). If the district court made no procedural Options: A. holding that a reviewing court must first ensure that the district court committed no significant procedural error B. holding that despite the advisory nature of the sentencing guidelines they remain the starting point and the initial benchmark of a district courts sentencing analysis the district court should begin all sentencing proceedings by correctly calculating the applicable guidelines range and keep that range in mind throughout the sentencing process and that failing to calculate or improperly calculating the guidelines range or failing to adequately explain the chosen sentenceemdashincluding an explanation for any deviation from the guidelines range constitutes significant procedural error C. holding guidelines to be only advisory D. holding that a sentence is procedurally reasonable if the district court committed no significant procedural error such as failing to calculate or improperly calculating the guidelines range treating the guidelines as mandatory failing to consider the 3553a factors selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts or failing to adequately explain the chosen sentence emphasis added E. holding that the district court committed procedural error by failing to provide an indication of what facts it relied on to make a significant variance from the advisory guidelines range

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district court committed procedural error by failing to provide an indication of what facts it relied on to make a significant variance from the advisory guidelines range
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: This defense fails as a matter of law for reasons tó numerous too detail. 4. Statute of Limitations Defendant’s position that Plaintiffs claim is barred by a six-year statute of limitations governing breach of contract actions is in error. There is no statute of limitations applicable to the federal government’s collection of student loans. See 20 U.S.C. § 1091a(a) (1994); see also United States v. Smith, 811 F.Supp. 646, 647-48 (S.D.Ala.1992) (discussing elimination of statute of limitations by virtue of Higher Education Technical Amendments Act of 1991). 5. Laches Although the federal government may, in certain circumstances, be subject to the defense of laches in the context of student loan collection, see United States v. Rhodes, 788 F.Supp. 339, 342-43 (E.D.Mich.1992) (<HOLDING>), this defense fails in this case because there Options: A. holding no prejudice occurred because no new information was presented on the material matter in dispute B. holding a fivemonth delay in searching a computer did not invalidate the search because there was no showing that the delay caused a lapse in probable cause that it created prejudice to the defendant or that officers acted in bad faith C. holding that delay caused by or consented to by a defendant is not unreasonable D. holding that seventeen missing records does not constitute improper record keeping because the fact that the records are not at the station does not mean that the records are incorrect or inaccurate E. holding seventeen year delay in collection effort caused material prejudice to defendant because relevant records were no longer accessible and therefore laches barred claim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding seventeen year delay in collection effort caused material prejudice to defendant because relevant records were no longer accessible and therefore laches barred claim
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 BORROWER, AGENT AND LENDERS HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES ANY AND ALL RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THE FINANCING DOCUMENTS OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED THEREBY AND AGREES THAT ANY SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING SHALL BE TRIED BEFORE A COURT AND NOT BEFORE A JURY. EACH BORROWER, AGENT AND EACH LENDER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THIS WAIVER IS A MATERIAL INDUCEMENT TO ENTER INTO A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP, THAT EACH HAS RELIED ON THE WAIVER IN ENTERING INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER FINANCING DOCUMENTS, AND THAT EACH WILL CONTINUE TO RELY ON THIS WAIVER IN THEIR RELATED FUTURE DEALINGS. EACH BORROWER, AGENT AND EACH LENDER WARRANTS AND REPRESENTS THAT IT HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY OF REVIEWING THIS JURY WAIVER WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, AND THAT IT KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY WAIVES ITS JURY TRIAL RIGHTS.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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 determination of res judicata or collateral estoppel.” EEOC v. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., 383 F.3d 1280, 1285 (11th Cir.2004). 4 . Moreover, the two analyses also differ insofar as Florida's forum non conveniens test considers the extent of the defendant’s business activities in Florida alone, whereas the Rhoditis analysis considers business activities in the entire United States. Compare Rolls-Royce, Inc. v. Garcia, 77 So.3d 855, 861-62 (Fla.Ct.App.2012) (reversing where trial court erroneously considered defendant's activities outside of Florida), with Rhoditis, 398 U.S. at 307, 90 S.Ct. 1731 (considering business activities in the entire U.S.). The district court noted this discrepancy and gave preclusive effect only to the state c ales, 656 So.2d 541, 544-545 (Fla.Ct.App.1995) (<HOLDING>). 7 . Although the Florida court's order Options: A. holding that prior dismissal for lack of standing was not an adjudication on the merits under language identical to rule 1420b subsequent suit not barred by res judicata B. holding that a dismissal on statute of limitations grounds is an adjudication on the merits for purposes of res judicata C. holding that res judicata applies when the question of jurisdiction is raised and determined D. holding res judicata inapplicable where previous dismissal was based on lack of jurisdiction E. holding that res judicata barred a claim that had been voluntarily abandoned in a previous litigation

assistant: The best answer is D. holding res judicata inapplicable where previous dismissal was based on lack of 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: the plan because there is no plan. While some of the damages requested by the Plaintiffs certainly parallel the benefits they would have received from the insurance plan had it remained in existence, this is not enough to compel ERISA preemption. As justification for concluding that ERISA preemption does not apply in certain situations, some circuit courts have focused on the fact that the plaintiff was not a “participant” in a plan, and that, consequently, there was no ERISA plan which would be affected in the event the plaintiff were to recover. Ethridge v. Harbor House Restaurant, 861 F.2d 1389, 1405 (9th Cir.1988); Freeman v. Jacques Orthopaedic & Joint Implant Surg., 721 F.2d 654, 655-56 (9th Cir.1983). See also Pizlo v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 884 F.2d 116, 120-21 (4th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). In Scott v. Gulf Oil Corp., 754 F.2d 1499, Options: A. holding that erisa permits suits to recover benefits only against the plan as an entity and thus the beneficiary had erred by suing her exhusbands employer and plan administrator when proper party would have been the benefits plan itself B. holding that district courts order remanding an erisa benefits determination to a plan administrator was nonfinal and therefore not appealable after the remand to plan administrator plan participant still could appeal the district courts decision that erisa preempted her state law claim and if successful she would be able to pursue punitive damage C. holding that erisa does not preempt the plaintiffs claim that the erisa plan administrator is liable for medical malpractice where the plaintiff premised the claim solely on state law and did not invoke the erisa plan D. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant E. holding that erisa preemption does not apply where the plan itself would not be liable even though a successful plaintiffs damages would be measured in part by the lost pension benefits the plaintiff would have received had he been a participant in the plan

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that erisa preemption does not apply where the plan itself would not be liable even though a successful plaintiffs damages would be measured in part by the lost pension benefits the plaintiff would have received had he been a participant in the plan
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and applying section 24.007 and Rule 510.3(e)—for lack of appellate jurisdiction. I would dismiss the entire case for lack of appellate jurisdiction. I would not address the Church’s other issues on their merits. I agree with Jelinis and HREAL that we lack appellate jurisdiction over this dispute because Property Code section 24.007 prohibits appeals from the decision of a county court contesting issues of possession when, as here, the disputed premises were used for commercial purposes. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 24.007 (West Supp, 2016). Accordingly, we have jurisdiction only to address and rule on our own jurisdiction and to dismiss this appeal. It follows that we do not have jurisdiction to address and rule on the 555, 558-59 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2001, pet. dism’d w.o.j.) (<HOLDING>). A foreclosure purchaser is entitled to Options: A. holding that a franchisor did not waive his arbitrable claims by prosecuting the unlawful detainer action in california state court because that action involved different issues B. holding that forcible detainer action is cumulative not exclusive of other remedies party may have so that parties may pursue both forcible detainer action in justice court and suit to quiet title in district court C. holding that defects in foreclosure process or in title may not be considered in forcible detainer action but may only be pursued in suits for wrongful foreclosure or to set aside substitute trustees deed D. holding that the remedies are exclusive E. recognizing actions to quiet title are equitable in nature and a court sitting in equity has jurisdiction to quiet title as a remedy for fraud

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that forcible detainer action is cumulative not exclusive of other remedies party may have so that parties may pursue both forcible detainer action in justice court and suit to quiet title in district court
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: by treating the question of statelessness as one of jurisdiction, but as my analysis above seeks to demonstrate, the status of Trinidad’s boat goes far beyond the question of whether United States courts have jurisdiction. It goes to the very heart of whether there has been any crime committed at all. Matos-Luchi, 627 F.3d at 14 (Lipez, J., dissenting) (“[A] failure to prove that defendants’ conduct, occurred on board a covered vessel amounts to a failure to prove that the defendants violated the MDLEA.”). If Trinidad cannot face any criminal penalty at all in the absence of proof of his vessel’s statelessness, how can proof of his vessel’s statelessness possibly be subjected to a preponderance of the evidence standard? See United States v. Perlaza, 439 F.3d 1149, 1167 (9th Cir. 2006) (<HOLDING>). IV. With due respect, I cannot join an Options: A. holding that common issues of fact did not predominate because it was necessary to make an individualized inquiry into equitable circumstances B. holding that exhaustion of issues is jurisdictional C. holding that disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved based on affidavits and must be decided based on evidentiary hearings the only admissible procedure for resolving such issues D. holding that because article iii standing is jurisdictional it must be decided before other legal issues E. holding that when a jurisdictional inquiry into statelessness turns on factual issues then it must be resolved by a jury

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that when a jurisdictional inquiry into statelessness turns on factual issues then it must be resolved by a 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of a single controlling criterion, each reflects a careful scrutiny of all the surrounding circumstances. Schnekloth, 412 U.S. at 226, 93 S.Ct. at 2046, 36 L.Ed.2d at 861. Accordingly, this Court has held that an analysis of the voluntariness of a confession is a factual question that must take into account the totality of the circumstances. State v. Mayes (1992), 251 Mont. 358, 376, 825 P.2d 1196, 1208 (citing Allies, 606 P.2d at 1050). Pursuant to § 46-13-301(1), MCA, a defendant may move to suppress a confession that the defendant feels was involuntary. This section places the burden on the State to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the confession was voluntary. The central question is whether the State has established by a preponderance of the . 844, 2 L.Ed.2d 975 (<HOLDING>); Miranda, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602 (holding Options: A. holding that physical brutality led to an involuntary confession B. holding that an officers promise to bring defendants cooperation to the attention of the prosecutor did not make confession involuntary C. holding that impermissible police procedures rendered confession involuntary D. holding that mental coercion led to an involuntary confession E. holding that under elstad the first question that must be answered when determining whether a subsequent confession is tainted by an earlier confession is whether the initial confession was obtained in violation of the defendants fifth amendment rights ie whether it was involuntary or whether the confession was voluntary but obtained in technical violation of miranda

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that mental coercion led to an involuntary confession
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 Period, Executive shall be eligible to participate in the employee and executive benefit plans and programs maintained by the Company from time-to-time in which executives of the Company are eligible to participate, including, to the extent maintained by the Company, life, medical, dental, accidental and disability insurance plans and retirement, deferred compensation and savings plans, in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof as in effect from time-to-time. As of the date of this Agreement, Executive is eligible and shall remain eligible to participate in the Company’s existing 401(k) plan and the Company shall match Executive’s contributions in accordance with the terms of that plan, provided that such matching does not violate any provisions of law applicable to the 401(k) plan.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: margin of the record, and properly attested by the probate judge, or his chief clerk, or the filing of a release by such party, properly notarized, acknowledging full satisfaction of any mortgage in the names of two or more persons jointly as mortgagees standing on the probate records of any counly in this state, shall be sufficient to extinguish the lien of such mortgage. Ala.Code § 35-10-28. 8 . Secor argues that a judgment lienor is not protected under Alabama law because such a lienor does not rely upon the nonexistence of a mortgage. We reject this argument as contrary to Alabama law. The operative inquiry under Alabama law is notice: a judgment creditor without notice is protected against an unrecorded instrument. Department of Revenue v. Price-Williams, 545 So.2d 7, 9 (Ala.1989) (<HOLDING>). Even were Secor correct in its assertion that Options: A. holding that because the department of revenue is subordinate to the board of tax review in the decision making process the department is not an adversely affected or aggrieved party having standing to petition for judicial review of the boards order reversing a decision of the department B. holding that revenue rule did not bar prosecution of a money laundering scheme to defraud the canadian government of tax revenue C. holding that it is apparent that this act is not a revenue bill within the contemplation of said section of the constitution fpr the reason that the revenue to be derived therefrom is merely an incident to the main object of the bill and that its general purpose was not that of raising revenue id 5 D. holding that alabamas department of revenue is a judgment creditor for purposes of 35490 E. holding that a company registered with the new york department of state is found for purposes of rule b

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that alabamas department of revenue is a judgment creditor for purposes of 35490
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall comply with applicable securities laws by filing a Current Report on Form 8-K, within four (4) Trading Days following the date hereof, disclosing all the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereby, if the Company deems the transactions contemplated hereby to constitute material non- public information. The Company and Purchaser shall consult with each other in issuing any other press releases with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby, and neither the Company nor Purchaser shall issue any such press release or otherwise make any such public statement without the prior consent of the Company, with respect to any press release of any Purchaser, or without the prior consent of Purchaser, with respect to any press release of the Company, except if such disclosure is required by law, in which case the disclosing part y shall promptly provide the other party with prior notice of such public statement or communication.

assistant: Publicity
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 adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report in its entirety, which found that Starns had filed his habeas petition on April 1, 2005. This was error. Under the “prison mailbox rule,” a pro se prisoner’s federal habeas corpus petition is deemed filed when the prisoner delivers it to prison officials according to the proper prison procedures. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988); Coleman v. Johnson, 184 F.3d 398, 401 (5th Cir.1999). Here, the record reveals that Starns delivered his petition to the prison officials on March 24, 2005. April 1, 2005, is merely the date that the district court clerk filed Starns’s petition, which is not the "filing date” in the prisoner context. Therefore, on remand, the di 01332, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Nov.25, 2003) (<HOLDING>). 5 . Practically speaking, if Starns or his Options: A. holding that the person who travels as an agent of person defrauded is a victim B. holding that where the limitations period had run for 364 days petitioner had one day remaining in which to file the habeas petition C. holding that where oral loan was silent as to the time of repayment the statute of limitations began to run at the time the contract was made D. holding that the limitations period under aedpa began to run after the petitioners investigator interviewed the person who found the victim and the petitioners trial attorneys informed the petitioner that they had never received the police report regarding this person E. holding that the statute of limitations began to run when the plaintiff first received notice of an alleged deficiency from the irs not when he received a final determination of tax liability

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the limitations period under aedpa began to run after the petitioners investigator interviewed the person who found the victim and the petitioners trial attorneys informed the petitioner that they had never received the police report regarding this person
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the Release constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the parties hereto regarding the termination of your employment. This Agreement supersedes all prior negotiations, discussions, correspondence, communications, understandings and agreements between the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, including, without limitation, your Employment Agreement and the Grant Agreements, except that it does not replace (x) Sections 5, 8(a), 8(c), 9 – 12 and 16 of your Employment Agreement, which you and the Company agree shall remain in full force and effect and that you are obligated to comply with all such provisions, (y) the 2015 Stock Option Agreement (other than Section 3(e) therein), or (z) the 2016 Stock Option Agreement (other than Section 3(e) therein). For the avoidance of doubt, (a) the Company hereby waives Section 8(b) of the Employment Agreement and (b) the Company specifically reminds you that Section 11 of your Employment Agreement regarding the Company’s right to claw back any amount paid to you pursuant to the Employment Agreement or otherwise remains in effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: quotation marks omitted). As with other Plaintiffs, Sears neither invoked nor threatened to invoke the arbitration provision of Moses’s credit card agreement, and any ruling made here on the arbitration provision would constitute an advisory opinion. The Plaintiffs also maintain on appeal that a district court “should refuse to entertain a declaratory judgment only for good cause.” Br. of Appellants 27 (citing Aetna Cas. & Surety Co. v. Quarles, 92 F.2d 321, 324 (4th Cir.1987)). The lack of standing is sufficient good cause, however; it is the “threshold question in every federal case, determining the power of the court to entertain the suit.” Warth v. Seldin, ns on the ripeness doctrine. See Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986, 1019-20, 104 S.Ct. 2862, 81 L.Ed.2d 815 (1984) (<HOLDING>); Bd. of Trade v. Commodity Futures Trading Options: A. recognizing that in reviewing ruling on motion to compel arbitration we first determine whether party seeking arbitration established existence of arbitration agreement B. recognizing lack of ripeness on whether arbitration will provide reasonable compensation where plaintiff did not allege or establish that it had been injured by actual arbitration under the statute C. holding that where the arbitration agreement was silent on feesplitting and the costs imposed upon the plaintiff by the aaa were not prohibitive the plaintiff had presented little evidence to indicate that arbitration would be prohibitively expensive and the fees and costs of arbitration did not render the arbitration scheme unconscionable D. holding that the plaintiff did not establish a waiver where the defendants answer had put the plaintiff on notice of an arbitration defense E. holding that in ruling on a motion to compel arbitration a court must consider 1 whether the parties have entered into a valid arbitration agreement 2 whether an arbitrable issue exists and 3 whether the right to arbitration has been waived

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing lack of ripeness on whether arbitration will provide reasonable compensation where plaintiff did not allege or establish that it had been injured by actual arbitration under the statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement contains the sole and entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to the entire subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes any and all prior discussions, negotiations, commitments and understandings, whether oral or otherwise, related to the subject matter of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Purchaser, severally and not jointly with the other Purchasers, covenants that neither it nor any Affiliate acting on its behalf or pursuant to any understanding with it will execute any purchases or sales, including Short Sales of any of the Company’s securities during the period commencing with the execution of this Agreement and ending at such time that the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are first publicly announced pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4. Each Purchaser, severally and not jointly with the other Purchasers, covenants that until such time as the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are publicly disclosed by the Company pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4, such Purchaser will maintain the confidentiality of the existence and terms of this transaction and all non-public information provided by the Company or the Placement Agent to such Purchaser, directly or indirectly. N otwithstanding the foregoing and notwithstanding anything contained in this Agreement to the contrary, the Company expressly acknowledges and agrees that (i) no Purchaser makes any representation, warranty or covenant hereby that it will not engage in effecting transactions in any securities of the Company after the time that the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are first publicly announced pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4, (ii) no Purchaser shall be restricted or prohibited from effecting any transactions in any securities of the Company in accordance with applicable securities laws from and after the time that the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are first publicly announced pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4 and (iii) no Purchaser shall have any duty of confidentiality or duty not to trade in the securities of the Company to the Company or its Subsidiaries after the issuance of the initial press release as described in Section 4.4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of a Purchaser that is a multi-managed investment vehicle whereby separate portfolio managers manage separate portions of such Purchaser’s assets and the portfolio managers have no direct knowledge of the investment decisions made by the portfolio managers managing other portions of such Purchaser’s assets, the covenant set forth above shall only apply with respect to the portion of assets managed by the portfolio manager that made the investment decision to purchase the Securities covered by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Code § 288(a), does not qualify as a crime of violence. He contends that Estrada-Espinoza v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc), overruled United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 1999), and United States v. Medina-Maella, 351 F.3d 944 (9th Cir.2003). This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Medina-Villa, 567 F.3d 507, 511-16 (9th Cir.2009). Perez-Ramos also contends that Nijhawan v. Holder, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 2294, 174 L.Ed.2d 22 (2009), effectively overruled Medina-Villa. This contention fails. See Nijhawan, 129 S.Ct. at 2300. Finally, Perez-Ramos’s contention that we must call for en banc review based on a conflict between Estrada-E spinoza and Medinor-Villa is without merit. See Pelayo-Gareia v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1010, 1013-16 (9th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). AFFIRMED. ** This disposition is not Options: A. recognizing the two distinct generic definitions of sexual abuse of a minor and holding that a statute contains the element of abuse under the medinavilla definition if it applies to sexual conduct with children younger than fourteen years B. holding that the new york misdemeanor offense of sexual abuse of a minor constitutes an aggravated felony under ina 101a43asexual abuse of a minor C. holding that a conviction under 22039 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the categorical approach D. recognizing that estradaespinoza and medinavilla set out two different generic federal definitions of sexual abuse of a minor and looking to both definitions to determine whether conviction under calpenal code 2615d qualifies as generic federal crime of sexual abuse of a minor under categorical approach E. holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that estradaespinoza and medinavilla set out two different generic federal definitions of sexual abuse of a minor and looking to both definitions to determine whether conviction under calpenal code 2615d qualifies as generic federal crime of sexual abuse of a minor under categorical approach
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 Subsidiary Guarantors jointly and severally agree that, as between the Subsidiary Guarantors and the Lenders, the obligations of Borrower under this Credit Agreement may be declared to be forthwith due and payable as provided in Article IX of this Credit Agreement (and shall be deemed to have become automatically due and payable in the circumstances provided in said Article IX ) for purposes of Section 7.1 notwithstanding any stay, injunction or other prohibition preventing such declaration (or such obligations from becoming automatically due and payable) as against Borrower and that, in the event of such declaration (or such obligations being deemed to have become automatically due and payable), such obligations (whether or not due and payable by Borrower) shall forthwith become due and payable by the Subsidiary Guarantors for purposes of Section 7.1 .

assistant: Remedies
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: Cash Collateral (or the appropriate portion thereof) provided to reduce Fronting Exposure or other obligations shall be released promptly following (i) the elimination of the applicable Fronting Exposure or other obligations giving rise thereto (including by the termination of Defaulting Lender status of the applicable Lender), (ii) the Administrative Agent’s good faith determination that there exists excess Cash Collateral or (iii) repayment in full of the Obligations (other than contingent indemnification obligations for which no claim has been asserted), together with termination of all Commitments hereunder; provided , however , (x) that Cash Collateral furnished by or on behalf of a Loan Party shall not be released during the continuance of a Default or Event of Default (and following application as provided in this Section 2.14 may be otherwise applied in accordance with Section 9.03 ) and (y) the Person providing Cash Collateral and any L/C Issuer or Swing Line Lender, as applicable, may agree that Cash Collateral shall not be released but instead held to support future anticipated Fronting Exposure or other obligations.

assistant: Releases