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: was not reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, the District Court erred in holding that the same justification permitted the officers to enter Timmann’s bedroom. C. Finally, the District Court held that even if the officers’ warrantless entry into Timmann’s apartment was illegal under the Fourth Amendment, Timmann’s statements to police during the 3:33 PM phone call need not be suppressed, although his statements made during 4:13 PM and 6:49 PM telephone calls were inadmissible. We agree. Under the so-called “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, admissions or confessions that the police induce by confronting a suspect with evidence obtained through an illegal search or seizure must be suppressed. See Fahy v. State of Conn., 375 U.S. 85, 91, 84 S.Ct. 229, 232, 11 L.Ed.2d 171 (1963) (<HOLDING>); see also Amador-Gonzalez v. United States, Options: A. holding that a petitioner must show that the outcome of his appeal would have been different had counsel raised the issue B. holding that a contractor lacked standing because it failed to show a substantial chance it would have received the contract award but for agency error C. holding that petitioner should have had a chance to show that his admissions were induced by being confronted with the illegally seized evidence D. holding that a contractor failed to show a substantial chance it would have received the contract award but for agency error E. holding that a protester must show only that there was a substantial chance it would have received the contract award but for that error

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that petitioner should have had a chance to show that his admissions were induced by being confronted with the illegally seized evidence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: argues that there are controverted facts such that the entry of summary judgment for the defendants was unwarranted. He refers to his own affidavit and “numerous other documentary evidence.” See id. at 6. However, this documentary evidence is not further identified. Upon review of the record, we conclude that we need not address the res judicata issue. In the instant case, the defendants have set forth detailed evidentiary materials that support the district court’s conclusion that they did not violate Mr. Davison’s constitutional rights or his rights under the EMTALA. Neither Mr. Davison’s affidavit nor the other evidence in the record raises controverted factual issues warranting a trial. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 256, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) (<HOLDING>). In particular, we note that Mr. Davison Options: A. recognizing that the burden on summary judgment shifts to the nonmoving party once the moving party has met its initial responsibility of showing the absence of a triable issue of fact and that the moving party is entitled to summary judgment if the nonmoving party fails to make a sufficient showing on an essential element of the case B. holding that when the moving party submits a properly supported summary judgment motion the nonmoving party must produce affirmative evidence to demonstrate genuine issue of fact and may not rely simply on denials or allegations in pleadings C. holding that the nonmoving party may not defeat a summary judgment motion by standing on the bare allegations in the pleadings D. holding that the nonmoving party may not rest upon mere denials or allegations in the pleadings but must set forth specific facts sufficient to raise a genuine issue for trial E. recognizing that nonmoving party must present affirmative evidence to defeat summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that when the moving party submits a properly supported summary judgment motion the nonmoving party must produce affirmative evidence to demonstrate genuine issue of fact and may not rely simply on denials or allegations in pleadings
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 acknowledges that a breach by it of its obligations hereunder will cause irreparable harm to the Holder, by vitiating the intent and purpose of the transaction contemplated hereby. Accordingly, the Company acknowledges that the remedy at law for a breach of its obligations under this Note will be inadequate and agrees, in the event of a breach or threatened breach by the Company of the provisions of this Note, that the Holder shall be entitled, in addition to all other available remedies at law or in equity, and in addition to the penalties assessable herein, to an injunction or injunctions restraining, preventing or curing any breach of this Note and to enforce specifically the terms and provisions thereof, without the necessity of showing economic loss and without any bond or other security being required.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: affidavit was properly stricken, the relevant facts for analyzing summary judgment are the un-controverted ones in Defendants’ motion. Thom further contends that the. district court erred in granting Officers .McGary and Bryant qualified immunity from his § 1983 claim. We review a grant of summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity de novo. Curtis v. Anthony, 710 F.3d 587, 593 (5th Cir. 2013) (per curiam). “A public official is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff demonstrates that (1) the defendant violated the plaintiffs constitutional rights and (2) the defendant’s actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the violation. uent arrest of Thorn. See Resendiz v. Miller, 203 F.3d 902, 903 (5th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Based on the totality of the circumstances Options: A. holding that a warrantless arrest on probable cause does not violate the fourth amendment even if state law required the police to have prior authorization B. holding that a search of a students purse that was not based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment C. holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment D. holding 1983 action lies for warrantless arrest without probable cause E. holding that a warrantless arrest does not violate the fourth amendment if at the time of the defendants arrest police had probable cause to believe that an offense has been is being or will be committed

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment
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 CSO Guaranty may be executed and delivered by the parties hereto in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. In proving this CSO Guaranty in any judicial proceedings, it shall not be necessary to produce or account for more than one such counterpart signed by the party against whom such enforcement is sought. Delivery of a signature hereto by facsimile transmission or by e-mail transmission of a document in the form of an Adobe portable digital file (PDF) shall be as effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart hereof, and any such facsimile or PDF signature shall be treated as an original signature to this Guaranty.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Whenever the consent or approval of Sublandlord is required, Subtenant shall also be obligated to obtain the written consent or approval of Prime Landlord, if required pursuant to the terms of the Primary Lease. Sublandlord shall promptly make such consent request on behalf of Subtenant and Subtenant shall promptly provide any information or documentation that Prime Landlord may request. Subtenant shall reimburse Sublandlord, not later than ten days after written demand by Sublandlord, for any fees and disbursements of attorneys, architects, engineers or others charged by Prime Landlord in connection with any consent or approval. Sublandlord shall have no liability of any kind to Subtenant for Prime Landlord’s failure to give its consent or approval.

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: This Letter Agreement may not be amended or otherwise modified without the prior written consent of CF Corp and Sponsor. Any such amendment shall be subject to the Company’s written consent to the extent required under the Merger Agreement. This Letter Agreement constitutes the sole agreement, and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings and statements, written or oral, between Sponsor or any of its Affiliates, on the one hand, and CF Corp or any of its Affiliates, on the other, with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby (other than the Merger Agreement, the FNF Information Letter Agreement, the Equity Commitment Letter among Blackstone Fund, Sponsor and CF Corp, the Forward Purchase Agreement among CF Corp, BilCar, LLC and CF Capital Growth, LLC, the Voting Agreement, dated as of the date hereof, among the Company, Sponsor, BilCar, LLC and the other shareholders party thereto (the “ Voting Agreement ”) and the other agreements expressly referred to herein or therein as being entered into in connection with the Merger 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: page 21C, Defendant Harvey argues in his Fifth Supplement at pp. 16-17 that the absence of reference in Copus’ affidavit to evidence obtained in controlled trash collections as part of the state investigation vitiated the showing of necessity under § 2518(3)(c) and rendered the affidavit materially false. This argument is without merit. Even with this evidence, the state investigators had told the FBI agents that the state lacked sufficient evidence to arrest Harvey. 9 . Both parties agree that the requirements of the federal Act apply to determine whether authorization for disclosure of the contents of the state wiretap was necessary and sufficient. There has been some disagreement on this point in the reported decisions. Compare United States v. Tortorello, supra, 480 F.2d at 782 (<HOLDING>) with United States v. Marion, supra, 535 F.2d Options: A. holding that outofstate defendants transmittal into new york of ceaseanddesist letter to new york plaintiff for purported trademark infringement was insufficient to create jurisdiction over defendant in a new york declaratory judgment action B. holding the new york state wiretap statute controlling on this issue C. holding that contract signed in new york by promisor from florida and partially performed in florida was governed by new york law because it was executed in new york D. holding jurisdiction over nonresident defendant existed where note was payable in new york contained new york choice of law clause and proceeds were used to finance new york limited partnership E. holding that new york law applies to this matter

assistant: The best answer is B. holding the new york state wiretap statute controlling on this issue
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All governmental, shareholder and third party consents and approvals necessary in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby shall have been obtained; all such consents and approvals shall be in force and effect; and all applicable waiting periods shall have expired without any action being taken by any authority that could restrain, prevent or impose any material adverse condition on the transactions contemplated hereby or that could seek or threaten any of the foregoing, and no Law shall be applicable which has, or could reasonably be expected to have, such effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to 161 months of imprisonment. Nicholson timely appeals. Counsel has raised two issues: (1) whether Nicholson’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary and (2) whether his sentence was unreasonable. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. The Government first asks us to dismiss the appeal, based on Nicholson’s waiver of his appellate rights in his plea agreement. We decline to enforce the waiver, however, as this provision of the plea agreement was not reviewed at Nicholson’s plea hearing. See United States v. Wessells, 936 F.2d 165, 167-68 (4th Cir. 1991). Nonetheless, we find that Nicholson’s claims fail on the merits. First, the record reveals that Nicholson’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 73-74, 97 S.Ct. 1621, 52 L.Ed.2d 136 (1977) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, because Nicholson did not move in Options: A. holding that when the courts oral statements in the plea colloquy conflict with the written agreement the courts oral statements control B. holding sworn statements made during a codefendants plea colloquy were properly received as substantive evidence pursuant to fedrevid 801d1a C. holding that in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary a defendant is bound by statements made under oath during his plea colloquy D. holding that a defendant is bound by representations made during a guilty plea absent a valid reason for controverting those statements E. holding that despite the lack of a statutory requirement that severe child abuse be shown by clear and convincing evidence due to the consequences of such a finding the clear and convincing standard must be applied

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary a defendant is bound by statements made under oath during his plea colloquy
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All covenants, agreements, representations and warranties made by the Loan Parties herein and in the certificates or other instruments delivered in connection with or pursuant to this Agreement or any other Loan Document shall be considered to have been relied upon by the other parties hereto and shall survive the execution and delivery of the Loan Documents and the making of any Loans, regardless of any investigation made by any such other party or on its behalf and notwithstanding that any Agent, any Lender or any Issuing Bank may have had notice or knowledge of any Default or incorrect representation or warranty at the time any credit is extended hereunder, and shall continue in full force and effect as long as the principal of or any accrued interest on any Loan or any fee or any other amount payable under this Agreement or any other Loan Document is outstanding and unpaid (other than with respect to any obligations under Secured Cash Management Agreements and Secured Hedge Agreements) and so long as the Commitments have not expired or terminated. The provisions of Sections 2.12, 2.13, 2.14 and 9.03 and Article VIII shall survive and remain in full force and effect regardless of the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, the repayment of the Loans, the expiration or termination of the Commitments or the Letters of Credit, the resignation of the Administrative Agent or the Collateral Agent, the replacement of any Issuing Bank or any Lender or the termination of this Agreement or any other Loan Document or any provision hereof or thereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except to the extent that any of the following would not reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a Company Material Adverse Effect, the Company is in compliance with all requirements of Applicable Law relating to the Program Assets and neither the Company nor any of Subsidiaries is subject to any order, directive or restriction of any kind issued by any Governmental Authority that restricts in any respect the Company’s ability to perform its obligations under the Program.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subtenant shall furnish to Sublandlord such information as may be reasonably necessary to obtain Prime Lessor’s unconditional consent to this Sublease. Sublandlord and Subtenant agree to enter into such agreements among Prime Lessor, Sublandlord and Subtenant as Prime Lessor may reasonably require pursuant to the Lease in connection with giving its consent to this Sublease including, without limitation, an agreement to attorn to Prime Lessor in the event of a termination of this Sublease, subject to the provisions of the Prime Lessor’s Non-Disturbance Agreement. Any delay in Prime Lessor’s furnishing such consent shall not postpone or extend the Expiration Date. If such consent is denied, this Sublease shall thereupon terminate and be of no further force or effect. Sublandlord shall request Prime Lessor’s consent with reasonable promptness following Subtenant’s submission of the executed Sublease to Sublandlord and Sublandlord shall use its best efforts to obtain such consent. Upon receiving written consent from Prime Lessor, Sublandlord shall promptly deliver a copy thereof to Subtenant.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the record indicates that these were projected costs with no indication when or if Vicky had actually incurred these costs. AFFIRMED. * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. 1 . Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). 2 . Id.; United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 753 (5th Cir.2009). 3 . 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c). 4 . Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 356, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007). 5 . United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 363-64 (5th Cir.2009). 6 . Rita, 551 U.S. at 358-59, 127 S.Ct. 2456; see also United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565 (5th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, Options: A. holding that explanation that sentencing judge was persuaded by the arguments at the hearing and in the sentencing memos that he should not depart downward from the guidelines range was sufficient B. holding that a district court must notify the parties that it intends to upwardly depart from the sentencing range established by the sentencing guidelines C. holding apprendi is not implicated by an application of the sentencing guidelines that increases the sentencing range so long as the sentence imposed does not exceed the statutory maximum D. 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 E. holding that a court may depart downward from the applicable guideline range under section 4a13

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that explanation that sentencing judge was persuaded by the arguments at the hearing and in the sentencing memos that he should not depart downward from the guidelines range was sufficient
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 district court on his behalf, the facts of the case, and Jebril’s health. Based on these factors, Jebril asked to be sentenced at the bottom of the recommended Guidelines. Jebril did not, however, explicitly ask the district court to sentence him below the recommended Guidelines. Prior to sentencing, the district court outlined its reasoning. It noted that it read and considered all of the letters provided. It explained that it could not reconcile the man portrayed in those letters with the defendant it witnessed in court. Eventually, the district court sentenced Jebril to fifty-eight months on each felony count and twelve months on each misdemeanor count, to be d” because they “were committed within a short period of time.” United States v. Alford, 436 F.3d 677, 684 (6th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Prior crimes are not considered “related” Options: A. holding that separate instances of harassment committed against the same victim were not related because the defendant did not jointly plan the crimes B. holding that plan did not comply C. holding that two robberies committed within hours of each other were not part of a common scheme or plan when the defendant did not originally plan to rob his second victim D. holding that professionals who advised the plan were not fiduciaries because they had no decision making authority over the plan or plan assets also noting that the power to act for the plan is essential to status as a fiduciary E. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that two robberies committed within hours of each other were not part of a common scheme or plan when the defendant did not originally plan to rob his second victim
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 rights and obligations of the parties set forth in this Section 17.5 and Section 1 , Section 14 , Section 15.1 , Section 15.3 , Section 15.4 , Section 16 , Section 18 , Section 19 , Section 21 and Section 22 , and any right or obligation of the parties in this Agreement which, by its express terms or nature and context is intended to survive termination or expiration of this Agreement, will survive any such termination or expiration.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that overruled the earlier holding of the Court of Appeals in Xerox Corp. v. Comptroller of Treasury, 290 Md. 126, 428 A.2d 1208 (1981), that dividend income could be taxed by the State if earned as part of the taxpayer’s unitary business. In fact, our review of ASARCO and other Supreme Court cases convinced us that the same analysis applied to dividend or interest income, the superficial form of the income being irrelevant and the real focus turning on the “economic realities” of the corporate transaction. Support for this position is found in other jurisdictions, where courts have focused on whether the investment income arose from the regular course of the taxpayer’s business. See, e.g., Silent Hoist & Crane v. Director, Division of Taxation, 100 N.J. 1, 494 A.2d 775, 783-86 (1985) (<HOLDING>); Lone Star Steel Company v. Dolan, 668 P.2d Options: A. recognizing as a substantial factor that the state in that case included dividends from the subsidiaries to the parent in its calculation of the parents apportionable taxable income but did not include the underlying income of the subsidiaries themselves B. holding a state cannot impose an income tax on indians whose income is solely from reservation sources C. recognizing that entities holding intellectual property for parent company had no real economic substance and allowing taxation of a portion of income attributable to parent corporations business in the state D. holding that corporations real estate investment activity was part of its unitary business and thus its portfolio income was correctly included in its apportioned income E. holding that there is no unitary business in part because there is no flow of international business

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that corporations real estate investment activity was part of its unitary business and thus its portfolio income was correctly included in its apportioned income
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, consisting of Sections 1 through 21 with Schedules A and B, and the Technology License Agreement (which is expressly incorporated by reference herein), constitutes the entire understanding between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior discussions, agreements and representations, whether oral or written. This Agreement may be amended, altered or modified only by an instrument in writing duly executed by the authorized representations of both parties.

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: dismissed, and allegations four through eight must be submitted to the trier-of-fact. S. Unjust Enrichment In this claim, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have been benefited by the improvements which Plaintiffs have made to the property, and that, absent compensation to the Plaintiffs, Defendants will be unjustly enriched. It is established that “the existence of a valid and enforceable written contract governing a particular subject matter ordinarily precludes recovery in quasi-contract [ie., unjust enrichment] for events arising out of the same subject matter.” MacDraw, Inc. v. CIT Group Equip. Fin., Inc., 157 F.3d 956, 964 (2d Cir.1998) (alteration in original) (citation and internal quotations omitted); see also City of Yonkers v. Otis Elevator Co., 844 F.2d 42, 48 (2d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). Here, the Agreement specifically addresses Options: A. holding that the existence of a valid contract bars the imposition of a constructive trust because quasicontractual claims such an unjust enrichment are not permitted if a written contract between the parties governs the subject matter of their dispute B. holding that the law will not imply a contract where there is an existing express contract covering the same subject matter C. holding that consideration for a contract as a whole covers the arbitration clause D. holding that quasicontractual relief is unavailable where an express contract covers the subject matter E. holding that an arbitration clause encompassing all disputes under a contract covers any dispute between the parties that has a significant relationship to the contract

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that quasicontractual relief is unavailable where an express contract covers the subject matter
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: Participant acknowledges that a waiver by the Company of breach of any provision of this Award Agreement shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any other provision of this Award Agreement, or of any subsequent breach by Participant or any other Plan participant.

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: 25 . In addition, the Class's claims on the merits are complicated by various defenses. BP claims immunity under both the Clean Water Act and the Federal Tort Act, and asserts that Plaintiffs' state and maritime law claims are preempted by federal law because it was following directives from the FOSC to implement a comprehensive federal response scheme created by the Clean Water Act, the Oil Pollution Act, and the National Contingency Plan. BP would also argue that its decisions related to, for example, the training and protection of workers and that the use of the dispersants were all done with the input and approval of the government, and were therefore reasonable and cannot form the basis for any liability. 26 . See, e.g., Howard v. Union Carbide Corp., 50 So.3d 1251, 1256 (La.2010) (<HOLDING>); Arabie v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 89 So.3d 307 Options: A. holding that it is within the courts discretion to award both reinstatement and punitive damages for violation of 2114 although finding that the district courts decision not to award such remedies did not constitute an abuse of discretion B. holding there was no abuse of discretion where although the district court did not discuss the relationship that the damages awarded had to the damages sought the district courts opinion made clear that it was well aware of this relationship C. recognizing recovery under common law for tort damages that are proven to be reasonably foreseeable damages of ones tortious acts D. holding that trial courts awards of 1500 to 3500 to plaintiffs exposed to a chemical leak were a clear abuse of discretion given that the damages proven such as eye nose and throat irritations are not unlike the symptoms suffered by persons afflicted with common seasonal allergies and might be characterized as mere annoyances reducing damages to 100 to 500 E. holding that when plaintiff has proven injury but has failed to prove the amount of damages the plaintiff is only entitled to nominal damages

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that trial courts awards of 1500 to 3500 to plaintiffs exposed to a chemical leak were a clear abuse of discretion given that the damages proven such as eye nose and throat irritations are not unlike the symptoms suffered by persons afflicted with common seasonal allergies and might be characterized as mere annoyances reducing damages to 100 to 500
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 term of the Company commenced, and the Certificate was filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware, on September 6, 2011, and the Company shall continue for any term set forth from time to time in the Certificate, subject to the provisions set forth in Article XI and applicable Law. The existence of the Company as a separate legal entity shall continue until cancellation of the Certificate in the manner required by the Act.

assistant: Terms
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: Neither Borrower nor Guarantor is in default of a material provision under any material agreement, instrument, decree or order to which it is a party or by which it or its property is bound or affected and assuming that this Agreement had been previously executed and delivered, no Default or Event of Default has occurred and is continuing hereunder.

assistant: No Defaults
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 not inconsistent with existing Minnesota law. Because we have afforded substantial discretion to trial courts in permitting expert testimony of police officers testifying about matters within the ambit of their law enforcement expertise, we hold that a trial court does not abuse its discretion in permitting a police officer to offer an expert opinion as to whether a particular group constitutes a criminal gang. As always, the admissibility of such testimony is subject to a trial court’s preliminary, discretionary determination that the expert officer’s testimony will be helpful to the jury and that the officer possesses an adequate foundation of knowledge in the subject area to justify the opinion. Minn. R.Evid. 702; see also State v. Bauer, 598 N.W.2d 352, 369 (Minn.1999) (<HOLDING>). Carillo maintains that the question of Options: A. recognizing that prosecutors are vested with wide discretion in determining how and when to file criminal charges B. holding that trial justice has wide discretion to determine relevancy of evidence C. recognizing that the trial judge must be given a wide range of discretion in determining whether a mistrial should be declared D. holding that trial court has wide discretion in determining sufficiency of foundation for opinion testimony E. holding family court has wide discretion in determining how marital property is to be distributed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that trial court has wide discretion in determining sufficiency of foundation for opinion testimony
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be terminated by any Purchaser, as to such Purchaser’s obligations hereunder only and without any effect whatsoever on the obligations between the Company and the other Purchasers, by written notice to the other parties, if the Initial Closing has not been consummated on or before October 31, 2016; provided , however , that such date may be extended, without notice, to November 30, 2016 with the consent of the Company and Laidlaw; provided , further , however , that such termination will not affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party (or parties).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall terminate on the date upon which the Collateral Trustee shall have released the Transaction Liens on the Collateral pursuant to Section 7(a)(ii) ; provided, however, that (x) this Agreement shall continue to be effective or be reinstated, as the case may be, if at any time payment of any Secured Obligation, or any part thereof, is rescinded or must otherwise be restored by the Collateral Trustee, any Secured Party, the Issuers or any other Grantor in any Bankruptcy Proceeding of the Issuers, any other Grantor or otherwise, and (y) the provisions of clauses (c) through (f) of Section 5 and Section 6 shall survive termination of this Agreement.

assistant: Terminations
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: income to yield projected disposable income, i.e. subtract the current monthly expenses on Schedule J from the current monthly income on Schedule I. See, e.g., In re Fuller, 346 B.R. 472 (Bankr.S.D.Ill. June 21, 2006) (projected disposable income to be determined by subtracting expenses from Schedule I); In re Demonica, 345 B.R. 895 (Bankr. N.D.Ill. July 31, 2006) (Schedule I should be used to determine projected disposable income since it reflects current income at the time of filing). Still others have treated the disposable income figure reached by Form B22C to be merely a “starting point” for determining the debtor’s projected disposable income which may be adjusted according to the debtor’s current financial situation. See, e.g., In re Jass, 340 B.R. 411 (Bankr.D.Utah 2006) (<HOLDING>); In re Risher, 344 B.R. 833 Options: A. holding that for abovemedian income debtors projected disposable income calculated on form b22c is the starting point but not the ending point in determining debtors correct minimum obligation and both income and expenses must be determined as of date of confirmation B. holding that projected disposable income for abovemedian income debt or is not fixed by means test calculation that includes expenses that would not actually be incurred under plan such as car payments for car to be surrendered C. holding that a debtors disposable income as calculated under 11 usc 1325b2 is not the same as a debtors projected disposable income but that it can be used as the presumptive projected disposable income D. holding that the statement of current monthly income was the presumptive amount of projected disposable income but presumption could be rebutted by the debt or upon a showing of substantial change of circumstances E. holding that projected disposable income for abovemedian debtors is disposable income as defined by 1325b

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the statement of current monthly income was the presumptive amount of projected disposable income but presumption could be rebutted by the debt or upon a showing of substantial change of circumstances
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: Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Restated Credit Agreement, except that the defined terms “Lender”, “Term Lender” and “Required Lenders” shall have the meaning given such terms by the Existing Credit Agreement.

assistant: Defined Terms
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: government’s right to prosecute the case and each defendant’s constitutional rights. A primary example of this problem is best seen by referring to the court’s dismissal of the first indictment on October 19,1998. Therefore, the magistrate was correct in deciding that the time limits applicable under the Speedy Trial Act must give way to the interests of justice in this case pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A), and I will adopt this portion of the recommendation and order as well. III. CONCLUSION For the aforementioned reasons, the court rules accordingly on the defendants’ objections. The court will continue its established practice of adopting without review any recommendation to which no objection is made. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the motions Options: A. recognizing that subject matter jurisdiction can be questioned at any time and with respect to any claim B. holding that failure to file a postjudgment motion on alleged error of law relating to ruling on exception to the statute of frauds that was committed for first time in the judgment waives any objection to that ruling and that in the absence of any other formal objection the issue is not preserved for appellate review C. holding that section 636b1c does not require any review at all of any issue that is not the subject of an objection D. holding that an issue was not preserved for appellate review because appellants trial objection does not comport with the issue he raised on appeal E. holding that parties waived any choice of law objection by not raising an objection

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that section 636b1c does not require any review at all of any issue that is not the subject of an objection
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 support of the other spouse after divorce do not constitute court-ordered alimony and therefore are not void in the State of Texas. Francis, 412 S.W.2d at 29. The fact that a court expressly approves such an agreement and incorporates it into the final divorce decree does not transform the contractual payments into prohibited court-ordered alimony. Id.; see also Klise v. Klise, 678 S.W.2d 545, (Tex.App l occasions, confirmed that under Texas law the legal force and meaning of marital property settlement agreements are governed by the law of contracts. See McGoodwin v. McGoodwin, 671 S.W.2d 880, 882 (Tex.1984); see also McCray v. McCray, 584 S.W.2d 279, 281 (Tex.1979) (applying law of contracts to contractual alimony agreement); cf. Hutchings v. Bates, 406 S.W.2d 419, 421 (Tex.1966) (<HOLDING>). Following Francis, courts of appeals have Options: A. holding that the court was not bound by the parties agreement that contracts were unambiguous and holding that contracts were ambiguous B. holding that agreement for periodic child support payments is governed by law of contracts C. holding that agreement for periodic child support payments is governed by law of contracts and under contract principles payments survive obligors death absent agreement to contrary shown by provisions of contract or surrounding circumstances D. holding that parents may not voluntarily terminate their rights in a child to avoid child support payments or contract away a child support obligation E. recognizing that payments to secured creditors are only required in equal monthly amounts if property to be distributed is in the form of periodic payments

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that agreement for periodic child support payments is governed by law of contracts
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: finds that Mook in talking with Webb, talked with Webb in a manner that was consistent with the Hospital’s policies. The undisputed evidence establishes that Mook only provided Webb with the dates of Toney’s employment, Toney’s position and the reason why Toney left the Hospital. The Hospital would not be arguing that Mook’s statements were outside the scope of her employment had the information given by Mook to Webb been correct and accurate. Accordingly, in light of Mook’s false statements given as a supervisor at the Hospital to Webb, the Hospital cannot now retroactively discharge Mook as a representative of the Hospital in an attempt to shield itself from Title VII liability. See Buechele v. St Mary’s Hosp. Decatur, 156 Ill.App.3d 637, 109 Ill.Dec. 83, 509 N.E.2d 744, 746 (1987) (<HOLDING>). Applying the criteria set out in Illinois Options: A. holding that a party can be held liable for securities fraud on an agency or a respondeat superior theory B. holding that the liability reform act preempted in part the common law doctrine of respondeat superior C. holding that respondeat superior liability may attach if an employee criticizes a coemployee in bad faith in a report filed with a state agency D. recognizing respondeat superior liability E. holding that county liability under 1983 cannot rest on a theory of respondeat superior

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that respondeat superior liability may attach if an employee criticizes a coemployee in bad faith in a report filed with a state agency
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All representations and warranties contained in this Agreement or in any other agreement between the Pledgor and the Secured Party shall survive the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the creation and payment of the Secured Obligations. The Pledgor waives notice of the acceptance of this Agreement by the Secured Party. Captions in this Agreement are for reference and convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation or meaning of any provision of this Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the date immediately preceding the date hereof, there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or, to the knowledge of the Company, threatened, against the Company, at Law or in equity, or before any Governmental Authority, that would reasonably be expected to, individually or in the aggregate, prevent or materially impair or materially delay the consummation of the Reclassification and the other transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the RMS Proxy.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: we will not be liable for any loss or damage ( of any kind and under any legal theory ) to you or any third party arising from your inability or failure for any reason to comply with any of the foregoing obligations .

assistant: Limitation of liability