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: argument that he ever sought promotion to any job other than the job to which he was promoted. It is certainly true that a plaintiff’s promotion does not mean he may not be a representative of a class with respect to promotions, but it is equally certain that it is a factor which may be evaluated in considering whether such a person satisfies the requirements of Rule 23. Compare Miller v. Motorola, Inc., 76 F.R.D. 516 (N.D.Ill.1977) (“since plaintiff was hired, promoted, and given an opportunity to transfer, as the undisputed facts show, she cannot properly represent a class consisting of people who were allegedly denied those opportunities because of sex.”); Scott v. University of Delaware, 601 F.2d 76 (3rd Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 931, 100 S.Ct. 275, 62 L.Ed.2d 189 (1979) (<HOLDING>). In the present case, the fact that Mr. Spears Options: A. holding that the district court erred in not decertifying the class on the basis of facts adduced at trial including the fact that scott seeks to lead a challenge against the same university hiring policies which resulted in his employment B. holding the findings of fact required to support an alimony award are sufficient if findings of fact have been made on the ultimate facts at issue in the case and the findings of fact show the trial court properly applied the law in the case C. holding that the trial court did not err in charging the jury that the defendant was in the custody of the victim officer when he shot and killed the officer due to the undisputed evidence presented at trial including the defendants pretrial statement to police admitting that fact D. holding that it is the claimants burden to show that the injury was the result of an accident that not only arose in the course of the employment but that it also grew out of or resulted from the employment E. holding that the district court abused its discretion by decertifying the class without permitting class counsel reasonable time to determine whether a new class representative could be substituted

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the district court erred in not decertifying the class on the basis of facts adduced at trial including the fact that scott seeks to lead a challenge against the same university hiring policies which resulted in his employment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Every provision of this Guaranty is intended to be severable. If, in any jurisdiction, any term or provision hereof is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, (a) the remaining terms and provisions hereof shall be unimpaired, (b) any such invalidity or unenforceability in any jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such term or provision in any other jurisdiction, and (c) the invalid or unenforceable term or provision shall, for purposes of such jurisdiction, be deemed replaced by a term or provision that is valid and enforceable and that comes closest to expressing the intention of the invalid or unenforceable term or provision. If a court of competent jurisdiction determines that any covenant or restriction, by the length of time or any other restriction, or portion thereof, set forth in this Guaranty is unreasonable or unenforceable, the court shall reduce or modify such covenants or restrictions to those which it deems reasonable and enforceable under the circumstances and, as so reduced or modified, the parties hereto agree that such covenants and restrictions shall remain in full force and effect as so modified. In the event a court of competent jurisdiction determines that any provision of this Guaranty is invalid or against public policy and cannot be so reduced or modified so as to be made enforceable, the remaining provisions of this Guaranty shall not be affected thereby, and shall remain in full force and effect.

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: hand, if the district court concludes, following an evi-dentiary hearing, that Krause forfeited his right to appointed counsel, a new trial is not necessary. c. Because we conclude that the district court denied Krause his due process rights, we do not decide whether the district court erred in its ruling. Instead, we remand the matter to the district court for an evidentiary hearing with the due process protections outlined above to determine whether Krause engaged in “extremely serious misconduct” warranting forfeiture of his right to counsel. Goldberg, 67 F.3d at 5 (8th Cir.2003) (concluding that defendant’s threat to kill his counsel justified permitting counsel to withdraw and refusing to appoint substitute counsel); United States v. McLeod, 53 F.3d 322, 325-26 (11th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); People v. Sloan, 262 A.D.2d 431, 693 N.Y.S.2d Options: A. holding that defendant forfeited his right to counsel by verbally abusing and threatening to harm his attorney threatening to sue his attorney on four different occasions and attempting to persuade his attorney to engage in unethical conduct B. holding that defendant waived his confrontation rights by threatening witness not to testify C. holding that a defendant forfeited his right to counsel when he verbally abused and refused to communicate with a succession of attorneys D. holding that a habeas petitioner was not entitled to relief from a state courts determination that he had forfeited his right to counsel by physically assaulting his attorney and threatening to put a contract on his attorneys life E. holding that a defendant must demonstrate that the governments intrusion upon his relationship with his attorney created a possibility of either injury to his defense or benefit to the government in order to establish a violation of the right to counsel

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that defendant forfeited his right to counsel by verbally abusing and threatening to harm his attorney threatening to sue his attorney on four different occasions and attempting to persuade his attorney to engage in unethical conduct
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 legal action, suit, arbitration or other legal, administrative or other governmental investigation, inquiry, proceeding or other Actions pending or, to the knowledge of the Purchaser, threatened against or affecting the Purchaser or relating to any of the Wecast Agreements or the Contemplated Transactions which, if determined adversely to the Purchaser, individually or in the aggregate, has had or would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Purchaser’s ability to consummate the Contemplated Transactions. The Purchaser is not subject to any Decree that, individually or in the aggregate, has had or would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Purchaser’s ability to consummate the Contemplated Transactions.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: control inquiry would be focused on the performance of the work and the condition of the premises. Unless specific facts (e.g., a contract which required the Space Needle to provide for the safety of the workers) pointed to retained right of control, the principal would have no liability. Here the alleged dangerous condition relates to a condition of the work site and the failure to provide protective barriers, so our scope of retained control inquiry must focus on the elevators. Within the scope of that limited control, the Space Needle had a duty of care. Accord Phillips, 74 Wn. App. at 751; Greenleaf v. Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Co., 58 Wn.2d 647, 652, 364 P.2d 796 (1961) (finding the common law duty was breached by failing to provide proper lighting); Doss, 60 Wn. App. at 130 (<HOLDING>). The Space Needle retained sufficient control Options: A. holding that summary judgment was improper because the common law duty might have been breached by failing to provide a safety net above the worker to guard against falling slag B. holding that the issue of whether or not a defendant airline breached its duty of due care by failing to transfer a pregnant employee from a flight precluded summary judgment for the defendant on plaintiffs negligence claim C. holding that the trial court correctly entered summary judgment in favor of defendant and denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment where plaintiff failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that defendant breached its duty to act in good faith D. holding on summary judgment before the question of the insurers obligation to indemnify was decided that the insurer was liable for the costs of the insured in defending the declaratory judgment action because it breached its duty to defend E. holding that the rule bars subcontractors negligence claim because no independent duty was breached

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that summary judgment was improper because the common law duty might have been breached by failing to provide a safety net above the worker to guard against falling slag
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Blachly, 305 Or 578, 581, 753 P2d 955 (1988). The workers’ compensation scheme involves a quid pro quo, in which the employer gives up the right to defend against certain actions involving workplace injuries, while receiving the benefit of a limit on potential damages. Conversely, the employee is compensated for injuries regardless of whether the employer would be liable in tort, while giving up the right to pursue other statutory or common-law remedies. See Shoemaker v. Johnson, 241 Or 511, 518-19, 407 P2d 257 (1965) (discussing “the present-day needs of society [to] provid[e] a means whereby an employee was guaranteed a monetary recovery” but spared certain costs and risks associated with litigation). But see Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc., 332 Or 83, 23 P3d 333 (2001) (<HOLDING>). The exceptions to the exclusive remedy rule Options: A. recognizing principle B. recognizing exceptions to immunity C. recognizing first two exceptions D. recognizing constitutionally mandated exceptions to that statutory principle E. recognizing same principle

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing constitutionally mandated exceptions to that statutory principle
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: Anything in this Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, this Agreement shall not constitute an agreement to assign all or any portion of the Gold Bar North Property or any claim or right or any benefit or obligation thereunder or resulting therefrom if an assignment thereof, without the consent of a third party thereto, would constitute a breach or violation thereof and such consent is not obtained. If such a consent is required or if an attempted assignment is ineffective, the Seller shall use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain such consent as soon as possible after the Closing Date and shall cooperate with Buyer in any reasonable arrangement requested by Buyer to provide for Buyer the benefits under any such property until such consent is obtained.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement and the other Credit Documents shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and thereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, except that the Borrower may not assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder or thereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an assignee in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of this Section, (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this Section or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of subsection (e) of this Section (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in subsection (e) of this Section and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth in the SEC Reports, none of the officers or directors of the Company or any Subsidiary and, to the knowledge of the Company, none of the employees of the Company or any Subsidiary is presently a party to any transaction with the Company or any Subsidiary (other than for services as employees, officers and directors), including any contract, agreement or other arrangement providing for the furnishing of services to or by, providing for rental of real or personal property to or from, providing for the borrowing of money from or lending of money to or otherwise requiring payments to or from any officer, director or such employee or, to the knowledge of the Company, any entity in which any officer, director, or any such employee has a substantial interest or is an officer, director, trustee, stockholder, member or partner, in each case in excess of $120,000 other than for: (i) payment of salary or consulting fees for services rendered, (ii) reimbursement for expenses incurred on behalf of the Company and (iii) other employee benefits, including stock option agreements under any stock option plan of the Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Because of the interrelated nature of the actions of the Parties required to obtain the necessary permits and authorizations from the appropriate Governmental Authorities and the necessary consents, rights of way and other authorizations from other Persons necessary to drill and complete each Planned Well and construct the required extensions of the applicable Individual System to each Planned Well Pad, the Parties agree to work together in good faith to obtain such permits, authorizations, consents and rights of way as expeditiously as reasonably practicable, all as provided in this Agreement. The Parties further agree to cooperate with each other and to communicate regularly regarding their efforts to obtain such permits, authorizations, consents and rights of way. Upon request by Shipper, Gatherer shall promptly provide to Shipper copies of all state and federal permits and approvals obtained by Gatherer in order to construct any extension of any Individual System to a Planned Well or a Planned Well Pad. Upon request by Gatherer, Shipper shall promptly provide to Gatherer copies of all state and federal permits and approvals obtained by Shipper in order to drill and complete any Well or to construct Shipper’s Facilities.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (and, following the conversion of the Company into a corporation or the Company being merged into, or otherwise succeeded by, a corporation, the relevant state corporation law) shall govern all questions arising under this Agreement concerning the relative rights of the Company and its stockholders. All other questions concerning the construction, validity and interpretation of this Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the domestic laws of the State of Delaware applicable to contracts made and to be performed in the State of Delaware.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Johnson, 503 U.S. 393, 112 S.Ct. 1386, 1389, 118 L.Ed.2d 39, 46 (1992); Butner v. United States, 440 U.S. 48, 54-55, 99 S.Ct. 914, 918, 59 L.Ed.2d 136, 141-42 (1979)). 24 . See In re Huffman, 204 B.R. 562, (Bankr.W.D.Mo.1997) ("Missouri law determines a creditor's right to a deficiency following the repossession of personal property secured by a properly perfected security interest.”). 25 . In re Fleming, 339 B.R. at 724. 26 . Id. ("Section 1322(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code expressly permits modification of the [c]ar [creditor's] rights subject to the limitations set forth in Section 1325 of the Bankruptcy Code.”) 27 . See Mo. Stat. Ann. § 400.9-623 (providing that a debtor may redeem collateral up until the time the property is sold). 28 . See In re Knaus, 889 F.2d 773 (8th Cir.1989) Options: A. holding that creditors failure to voluntarily turn over property lawfully seized prepetition constituted violation of automatic stay B. holding judgment in violation of automatic stay void C. holding that the denial of a motion to find a violation of the automatic stay was a final order D. holding secured creditors refusal to turn over property of debtors estate to debtor upon demand constituted an exercise of control over such property in violation of automatic stay E. holding refusal to turn over property seized prepetition constituted violation of stay once notice of the stay had been given

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that creditors failure to voluntarily turn over property lawfully seized prepetition constituted violation of automatic stay
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: Executive agrees that he or she shall not disparage, criticize or defame the Company, its affiliates and their respective affiliates, directors, officers, agents, partners, shareholders or employees, either publicly or privately. The Company agrees that it shall not, and it shall instruct its officers and members of its Board to not, disparage, criticize or defame Executive, either publicly or privately. Nothing in this Section 11(b) shall have application to any evidence or testimony required by any court, arbitrator or government agency.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless a clear contrary intention appears: (i) the defined terms herein shall apply equally to both the singular and plural forms of such terms; (ii) reference to any Person includes such Person’s successors and assigns but, if applicable, only if such successors and assigns are not prohibited by this Agreement, and reference to a Person in a particular capacity excludes such Person in any other capacity or individually; (iii) any pronoun shall include the corresponding masculine, feminine and neuter forms; (iv) reference to any agreement, document or instrument means such agreement, document or instrument as amended or modified and in effect from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof; (v) reference to any law, rule or regulation means such law, rule or regulation as amended, modified, codified, replaced or reenacted, in whole or in part, and in effect from time to time, including rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, and reference to any section or other provision of any law, rule or regulation means that provision of such law, rule or regulation from time to time in effect and constituting the substantive amendment, modification, codification, replacement or reenactment of such section or other provision; (vi) “hereunder,” “hereof,” “hereto,” and words of similar import shall be deemed references to this Agreement as a whole and not to any particular article, section or other provision hereof; (vii) numbered or lettered articles, sections and subsections herein contained refer to articles, sections and subsections of this Agreement; (viii) “including” (and with correlative meaning “include”) means including without limiting the generality of any description preceding such term; (ix) “or” is used in the inclusive sense of “and/or”; (x) references to documents, instruments or agreements shall be deemed to refer as well to all addenda, exhibits, schedules or amendments thereto; and (xi) reference to dollars or $ shall be deemed to refer to U.S. dollars.

assistant: Interpretations
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: On the First Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and each Purchaser, severally and not jointly, agrees to purchase, such Purchaser’s Closing Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by the Purchaser. At each Closing, the Purchasers shall deliver to the Company, via wire transfer to an account designated by the Company, immediately available funds equal to such Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser, and the Company shall deliver to such Purchaser its respective Note, as determined pursuant to Section 2.3(a), and the Company and such Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.3 deliverable at the First Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.3 and 2.4 for each Closing, each Closing shall occur at the offices of Robinson Brog or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree, and may by agreement be undertaken remotely by electronic exchange of Closing documentation.

assistant: Closings
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: Morris, “concealed or omitted material information not otherwise known or available knowing that the material was false or misleading or failed to disclose a material fact concerning the health effects or addictive nature of smoking cigarettes or both.” Id. at 1277. Engle also established that the tobacco corporations “agreed to conceal or omit information regarding the health effects of cigarettes or their addictive nature with the intention that smokers and the public would rely on this information to their detriment.” Id. Thus, in a post -Engle case, a plaintiff alleging fraudulent concealment need only prove that he or she detrimentally relied upon the defendant tobacco corporation’s misinformation. See Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Hess, 95 So.3d 254, 260-61 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (<HOLDING>). Similarly, a plaintiff claiming conspiracy to Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs mere failure to execute on a judgment the only allegedly fraudulent act is not fraudulent concealment B. holding that engle established the conduct elements of a fraudulent concealment cause of action C. holding allegation of fraudulent concealment did not affect the running of the survival statute D. holding misleading partial disclosures may constitute fraudulent concealment E. recognizing the cause of action

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that engle established the conduct elements of a fraudulent concealment cause of action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and dissenting in part). And third, the Majority’s reliance on this IRS notice goes over and above any canon of judicial deference to agency interpretation. In this respect, it’s important to ask: what authority was' the IRS interpreting to support its view that all double deductions should be disallowed? The IRS does not claim to be “implementing a statute,” so we know that it is not entitled to Chevron or Skidmore deference. See United States v. Mead, 533 U.S. 218, 227-28, 121 S.Ct. 2164, 150 L.Ed.2d 292 (2001). And since the IRS concedes that §§ 1.337(d) and 1.1502 did not disallow these deductions, its belief could not have been derived from those regulations — and therefore is not entitled to deference under Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452, 461, 117 S.Ct. 905, 137 L.Ed.2d 79 (1997) (<HOLDING>). Rather, the Majority seems to claim that the Options: A. holding that deference is owed to an agencys interpretation of its own categorical exclusion regulations so long as that interpretation is not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation B. holding that deference is owed to state agencys interpretation of state law C. holding that agency interpretation which is reasonable is entitled to deference D. holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference E. holding that the district courts apa review of a sba size decision was not entitled to deference but that the agencys interpretation and application of its own regulations did merit deference

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you will not upload , display or otherwise provide on or through the service any content that : ( i ) is libelous , defamatory , abusive , threatening , harassing , hateful , offensive or otherwise violates any law or infringes upon the right of any third party ( including copyright , trademark , privacy , publicity or other personal or proprietary rights ) ; or ( ii ) in duolingo 's sole judgment , is objectionable or which restricts or inhibits any other person from using the service or which may expose duolingo or its users to any harm or liability of any kind .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and thereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, except that the Borrower may not assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder or thereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an assignee in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of this Section, (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this Section or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of subsection (e) of this Section (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in subsection (d) of this Section and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent, the L/C Issuer and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the disputed parcel of land, and deny that the other party was in possession. To go forward with the quiet title action, the trial court must have concluded that the Moores were in possession of the .534 acre parcel at issue here. The trial court failed, however, to set forth its reasoning on this issue; in fact, it is unclear whether the question was ever considered. The Moores also fail to discuss the matter. Regardless of the rationale, however, we conclude that the trial court’s maintenance of this case as an action to quiet title was not fatal to the cause of action claimed. This Court has previously determined that, even on appeal, we may amend the pleadings when necessary to conform to the proper form of action as established by the evidence. See Sutton v. Miller, supra (<HOLDING>); Plauchak v. Boling, supra, at 163, 653 A.2d Options: A. holding that the trial court did not violate due process in considering the defendants motion to dismiss because the defendant had corrected its error in not serving its motion to dismiss on the plaintiff and because the plaintiff had received adequate time to consider and respond to the arguments made in the motion B. holding that the failure to charge an essential element of a crime in the indictment is an error which should be noted by an appellate court sua sponte as plain error C. holding that in admitting evidence the failure of the trial court to give a limiting instruction sua sponte is not reversible error D. holding that the trial courts failure to dismiss the action to quiet title was error because the plaintiff was not in possession of the land in question but the error was not fatal to the claim because the superior court could sua sponte amend the pleadings to include an action in ejectment E. recognizing that a district court may sua sponte dismiss a complaint for failure to serve after notice to the plaintiff

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the trial courts failure to dismiss the action to quiet title was error because the plaintiff was not in possession of the land in question but the error was not fatal to the claim because the superior court could sua sponte amend the pleadings to include an action in ejectment
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 the dispute has a claimed value of not more than $ 10,000,000 , then the arbitration will be heard and determined by a single , neutral arbitrator who is a retired judge or a lawyer with not less than ten ( 10 ) years ' experience as a practicing member of the bar in the substantive practice area related to the dispute , who will administer the proceedings in accordance with the aaa 's supplementary procedures for consumer related disputes .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: enough for his crime reflected no potential bias in Max well’s favor, whereas Juror 29’s comments about the legalization of drugs tended to favor Maxwell. Because Maxwell failed to establish that the government’s proffered reasons for the strike were a pretext for race discrimination, the District Court did not err in rejecting Maxwell’s Batson challenge with respect to Juror 29. The government explained that it struck Juror 26 because the juror lacked strong ties to the community, and because the juror’s body language suggested to the government that he held significant doubts about the credibility of police officers’ testimony. The absence of community attachment is a legitimate, race-neutral reason for striking a juror. See United States v. Atkins, 25 F.3d 1401, 1406 (8th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 953, 115 S.Ct. 371, Options: A. recognizing that discrimination causes injury to the whole community B. recognizing that either party to a divorce action may bring in third parties who claim an interest in the property alleged to be community or third parties themselves may intervene and have their rights therein determined C. holding that an expert can comply with the timing requirement if an experts research even after his or her deposition revealed that the standard of care in his or her community was the same or similar to the standard of care in the community in which he or she is testifying when the injury occurred D. holding that louisiana will not execute an individual who lacks the capacity to understand the death penalty E. recognizing that party may strike a veniremember who lacks an attachment or commitment to the community

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that party may strike a veniremember who lacks an attachment or commitment to the community
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: In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970) for this proposition. While Walker's argument is difficult to assess in its summary form, we perceive the question to be whether we should interpret the statute as requiring separate proof of scienter with respect to an element for which the legislature has not specifically required proof of knowledge. We have encountered this question in a variety of settings, including statutes we concluded were meant to establish strict Hability for so-called "white collar" crimes. Enservco, Inc. v. Indiana Securities Div., 623 N.E.2d 416 (Ind.1998) (declining to read scienter requirement into franchise fraud statute); accord Hacienda Mexican Rest. of Kalamazoo Corp. v. Hacienda Franchise Group, Inc., 641 N.E.2d 1036 (Ind.Ct.App.1994) (<HOLDING>). As we observed in State v. Keihn, 542 N.E.2d Options: A. holding that the trial court erred by giving a misleading instruction B. holding trial court erred in giving jury instruction requiring scienter in franchise fraud case C. holding that in a criminal trial the trial court must correct or amend an improper instruction if the proper instruction is necessary for the jury to understand the case D. holding that the trial court plainly erred in failing to provide a specific unanimity instruction to the jury E. holding that the trial court erred in giving jury instructions that offered alternative theories of murder

assistant: The best answer is B. holding trial court erred in giving jury instruction requiring scienter in franchise fraud case
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 and its Subsidiary are insured by insurers of recognized financial responsibility against such losses and risks and in such amounts as management of the Company believes to be prudent and customary in the businesses in which the Company and its Subsidiary are engaged. Neither the Company nor its Subsidiary has been refused any insurance coverage sought or applied for, and neither the Company nor its Subsidiary has any reason to believe that it will be unable to renew its existing insurance coverage as and when such coverage expires or to obtain similar coverage from similar insurers as may be necessary to continue its business at a cost that would not have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower shall not directly or, to the knowledge of Borrower, indirectly, use the proceeds of any Borrowing, or lend, contribute or otherwise make available such proceeds to any Subsidiary, joint venture partner or other individual or entity, to fund any activities of or business with any individual or entity, or in any Designated Jurisdiction, that, at the time of such funding, is the subject of Sanctions, or in any other manner that will result in a violation by any individual or entity (including any individual or entity participating in the transaction, whether as Bank, Arranger, Agent or otherwise) of Sanctions.

assistant: Sanctions
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: By accepting this Award, Participant expressly warrants that he or she has received Restricted Stock Units under the Plan, and has received, read and understood a description of the Plan. Participant understands that the Plan is discretionary in nature and may be amended, suspended or terminated by the Company at any time.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In consideration of Taggart’s execution and delivery of this Agreement and purchase of the Shares hereunder, and in addition to all of the Company’s and GMS’s other obligations under this Agreement, the Company and GMS shall jointly and severally defend, protect, indemnify and hold harmless Taggart from and against any and all actions, causes of action, suits, claims, losses, costs, penalties, fees, liabilities and damages, and expenses in connection therewith (irrespective of whether Taggart is a party to the action for which indemnification hereunder is sought), and including reasonable attorneys’ fees and disbursements (the “ Indemnified Liabilities ”), incurred by Taggart as a result of, or arising out of, or relating to (a) any material misrepresentation by Company or GMS or any material breach of any covenant, agreement, obligation, representation or warranty by the Company or GMS contained in this Agreement, or (b) after any applicable notice and/or cure periods, any breach or default in performance by the Company or GMS of any covenant or undertaking to be performed by the Company or GMS hereunder. To the extent that the foregoing undertaking by the Company or GMS may be unenforceable for any reason, the Company and GMS shall make the maximum contribution to the payment and satisfaction of each of the Indemnified Liabilities, which is permissible under applicable law.

assistant: Indemnifications
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: battled depression and mental anguish. I was unable to disclose my arrest and the reason for the arrest to my children. It was only when the trial was close that I told my children when they observed serious changes in my attitudes toward them. My social life diminished considerably while the criminal case against me was pending. I suffered in silence for nearly two (2) years until my acquittal on March 9, 2010.... When the case was given to the jury we waited outside the court for a verdict. Waiting for that verdict was suffocating. I felt like dying. Appellant’s App. at 105-06. [39] At the very least, Bah’s affidavit raises a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether Appellees’ conduct caused her severe emotional distress. See Hughley v. State, 15 N.E.3d 1000, 1004 (Ind.2014) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, we reverse and remand for further Options: A. holding that by fading to timely raise the issue before the trial court the defendant had waived the right to raise the issue on appeal that the trial court failed to consider less severe sanctions B. holding that defendants selfserving affidavit was sufficient to raise a factual issue to be resolved at trial C. holding that defendant failed to raise a constitutional issue at trial and thus failed to preserve the issue for appellate review D. holding that trial counsel did not act unreasonably in failing to raise the issue of the defendants mental health at trial E. holding that defendant failed to raise a constitutional issue at trial and thus waived appellate review of that issue

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendants selfserving affidavit was sufficient to raise a factual issue to be resolved at trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: See Kimberlin v. Dep’t of Justice, 139 F.3d 944, 949 (D.C.Cir.) (“although government officials, as we have stated before, may have a ‘somewhat diminished’ privacy interest, they ‘do not surrender all rights to personal privacy when they accept a public appointment’ ”) (quoting Quinon v. FBI, 86 F.3d 1222, 1230 (D.C.Cir.1996)). See also Nat’l Archives & Records Admin. v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157, 170-171, 124 S.Ct. 1570, 158 L.Ed.2d 319 (2004) (explaining that FOIA recognizes a surviving family members’ right to personal privacy with respect to their close relative’s death, including high-profile deaths such as the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr.); Consumers’ Checkbook v. U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 554 F.3d 1046, 1055 (D.C.Cir. 2009) (<HOLDING>). Applying this principle, courts in this Options: A. recognizing such balance of interests B. recognizing the privacy interests when requested documents neither confirm nor refute the plaintiffs allegations of government misconduct C. holding that court may seal documents if publics right of access is outweighed by competing interests D. holding that privacy interests outweighed public interests even though the public is already familiar with certain aspects of the requested data E. holding that the right of privacy does not attach to matters already within the public domain

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that privacy interests outweighed public interests even though the public is already familiar with certain aspects of the requested data
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: Until the Discharge of ABL Priority Claims has occurred, each Term Loan Agent, each on behalf of itself and each applicable Term Loan Lender, (a) will not assert or enforce any claim under, Section 506(c) of the Bankruptcy Code (or any successor provision) senior to or on a parity with the Liens on ABL Facility First Priority Collateral securing the ABL Priority Claims for costs or expenses of preserving or disposing of any ABL Collateral and (b) waives any claim it may now or hereafter have arising out of the election by any ABL Lender of the application of Section 1111(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code (or any successor provision) with respect to any ABL Facility First Priority Collateral. Until the Discharge of Term Priority Claims has occurred, the ABL Agent, on behalf of itself and each ABL Lender, (a) will not assert or enforce any claim under Section 506(c) of the United States Bankruptcy Code senior to or on a parity with the Liens on Term Facility First Priority Collateral securing the Term Loan Priority Claims for costs or expenses of preserving or disposing of any Term Loan Collateral and (b) waives any claim it may now or hereafter have arising out of the election by any Term Loan Lender of the application of Section 1111(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code with respect to any Term Facility First Priority Collateral.

assistant: Waivers
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: case. This ease is set for trial November 8th, next week. Idaho Criminal Rule 12 gives a district court discretion to shorten or enlarge the time for bringing a hearing on pretrial motions or to excuse a party’s noncompliance with deadlines for bringing a hearing. In this case, however, the district court, in effect, refused to hear Ruperd’s motion to suppress at a later time as a sanction for his failure to appear. Nothing in I.C.R. 12 gives the district court the discretion to treat a defendant’s failure to appear as a waiver of his or her right to have a hearing on a timely motion. While Idaho appellate authority is silent on this particular issue, authority exists from other jurisdictions that have addressed it. See, e.g., People v. Martinez, 166 P.3d 223, 224 (Colo.Ct.App.2007) (<HOLDING>); Robinson v. Commonwealth, 445 Mass. 280, 837 Options: A. holding that the right to have counsel present means the right to have counsel physically present during the interrogation not merely the right to consult an attorney by telephone B. holding that the defendants oral promise to appear was insufficient to amount to a required appearance within the meaning of the failure to appear statute C. holding that treating a defendants failure to appear as a waiver not only of the right to be present but of the right to have a hearing on the motion was error D. holding that when defendant failed to appear at scheduled suppression hearing the court could have decided the motion in defendants absence but it did not have the authority to refuse to consider it E. holding that a defendants failure to object to the denial of his right peremptorily to challenge alternates constitutes a waiver of any right to appeal the issue

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that treating a defendants failure to appear as a waiver not only of the right to be present but of the right to have a hearing on the motion was error