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: polling). In contrast, the defendant’s and the public’s right to open and public trials also encompasses circumstances in which the public’s mere presence passively contributes to the fairness of the proceedings, such as deterring deviations from established procedures, reminding the officers of the court of the importance of their functions, and subjecting judges to the check of public scrutiny. See, e.g., Brightman, 155 Wn.2d at 514; Leyerle, 158 Wn. App. at 479. ¶12 Thus, even in proceedings involving purely legal matters, the public’s presence may ensure the fairness of such proceedings, although the same cannot be said for ministerial or administrative matters that do not impact the defendant’s rights. But see In re Det. of Ticeson, 159 Wn. App. 374, 383-86, 246 P.3d 550 (2011) (<HOLDING>). ¶13 Sadler is broadly cited for the Options: A. holding that washington law historically supports inchambers conferences on purely legal issues B. holding that a section 225 action should not be used for trying purely collateral issues C. holding the court need not rule on remaining issues when the disposition of prior issues is dispositive D. holding that state law controlled damage issues E. holding that state law controls whether issues decided in a prior state court action are entitled to preclusive effect and setting forth the elements of collateral estoppel under washington law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that washington law historically supports inchambers conferences on purely legal issues
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 the event of a breach or threatened breach by the Executive of any of the provisions of this Agreement, the Executive hereby consents and agrees that the Employer shall be entitled to seek, in addition to other available remedies, a temporary or permanent injunction or other equitable relief against such breach or threatened breach from any court of competent jurisdiction, without the necessity of showing any actual damages or that money damages would not afford an adequate remedy, and without the necessity of posting any bond or other security. The aforementioned equitable relief shall be in addition to, not in lieu of, legal remedies, monetary damages or other available forms of relief.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been, and each other Loan Document to which the Borrower is a party, when delivered hereunder, will have been, duly executed and delivered by the Borrower. This Agreement constitutes, and each other Loan Document when so delivered will constitute, a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Borrower, enforceable against the Borrower in accordance with its terms subject to all applicable bankruptcy, receivership, insolvency, reorganization, fraudulent conveyance, moratorium or other similar laws affecting the enforcement of the rights and remedies of creditors and parties to contracts generally and subject to all general principles of equity.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and signatures may be delivered by facsimile or in electronic format (e.g., “PDF”), each of which may be executed by less than all parties hereto, each of which shall be enforceable against the parties hereto actually executing such counterparts, and all of which together shall constitute one instrument.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: law enforcement objectives, and the concomitant need for the courts to maintain vigilance, is a recurrent theme in our cases and those of other courts. In United States v. Schafer, 461 F.2d 856 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 881, 93 S.Ct. 211, 34 L.Ed.2d 136 (1972), for example, we upheld the admission of evidence inadvertently discovered during a routine agricultural quarantine search, but were careful to note that “[n]othing in the record suggests that the administrative search in this case was ‘employed as an instrument of criminal law enforcement to circumvent the latter’s legal restrictions....’” Id. at 859 (quoting Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 230, 80 S.Ct. 683, 692, 4 L.Ed.2d 668 (1960)). See also United States v. Pulido-Baquerizo, 800 F.2d 899, 902 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added); United States v. Epperson, Options: A. recognizing the courts continued holding that visual observation is no search at all B. holding that a visual inspection and limited hand search of luggage which is used for the purpose of detecting weapons or explosives and not in order to uncover other types of contraband is a privacy intrusion we believe free society is willing to tolerate C. holding that a canine sniff of luggage does not constitute a search D. holding that defendants consent to a search of their luggage was undermined by officers misrepresentation that a drug dog had alerted to their luggage E. holding that there is no intrusion on a legitimate privacy interest where a dog sniff of an automobile reveals only information regarding contraband items and concluding that society does not recognize a legitimate expectation of privacy in the public airspace surrounding a vehicle where the odor of narcotics escapes from the interi or of a vehicle into that public airspace

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a visual inspection and limited hand search of luggage which is used for the purpose of detecting weapons or explosives and not in order to uncover other types of contraband is a privacy intrusion we believe free society is willing to tolerate
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Without the prior written consent of the Company or except as may be required by applicable law or regulation, the Receiving Party and its Representatives shall not disclose to any person that any discussions or negotiations are taking place between the parties concerning a possible Transaction, including the content, timing and status of such discussions or negotiations (the “Discussion Information”).

assistant: No
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (9th Cir.1986)). Notably, in their reply, Petitioners argue that members of their proposed social group are “easily identified,” but they do not address at all the issue of the breadth of the proposed group. Petitioners’ Reply, pp. 18-19. As for their claim for withholding of removal, to qualify Petitioners must prove it is “more likely than not” that they will be persecuted on account of a statutorily-protected ground. See Al-Harbi v. INS, 242 F.3d 882, 888 (9th Cir.2001). As we have already held that the BIA did not err in holding that the particular social group identified by the Petitioners is insufficient to merit asylum protection, we also hold that Petitioners fail to present a prima facie case for withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Petitioners’ motion to reopen Options: A. holding that if an applicant fails to meet the standard for asylum he a fortiori fails to meet the requirements for withholding of removal and relief under the cat B. holding that the standard for withholding of removal is more demanding than the standard for asylum C. holding that an applicant who fails to satisfy the lower standard of proof for asylum necessarily fails to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal D. recognizing that a withholding of removal claim necessarily fails if the applicant is unable to show the objective likelihood of persecution needed to make out an asylum claim and the factual predicate for the claims is the same E. holding that an alien who has failed the wellfounded fear test for asylum will necessarily fail the more stringent more likely than not test for withholding of removal

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an applicant who fails to satisfy the lower standard of proof for asylum necessarily fails to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal
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: 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 or stock award agreements under the Equity Incentive Plan.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: excluded, has been recognized by many courts as excluded by implication. See, e.g., Kugel v. United States, 947 F.2d 1504, 1506-07 (D.C.Cir.1991); Aviles v. Lutz, 887 F.2d 1046, 1049-50 (10th Cir.1989); Hoesl v. United States, 629 F.2d 586, 587 (9th Cir.1980). Because the United States has expressly withheld waiver of its sovereign immunity as to claims of libel and slander, and, the court finds, by implication as to claims of defamation, plaintiffs defamation claims could not have been brought in federal district court under the FTCA. Federal prisoners who are injured by fellow inmates by reason of the negligence of federal employees can sue for their injuries under the Federal Tort Claims Act. See United States v. Muniz, 374 U.S. 150, 150, 83 S.Ct. 1850, 10 L.Ed.2d 805 (1963) (<HOLDING>); see also Plummer v. United States, 580 F.2d Options: A. holding the united states liable under the ftca for injuries sustained by a prisoner where the prison guard had confined an altercation between the prisoner and twelve fellow inmates instead of interceding B. holding a prisoner has no constitutional right to a job in prison C. holding that a pro se prisoner complaint is deemed filed as of the date the prisoner gives the complaint to prison officials to be forwarded to the court D. holding that a prisoner has no first amendment right to provide legal assistance to other inmates and that therefore prison officials did not violate the prisoners constitutional rights when they intercepted a letter containing legal advice that he sent to another prisoner E. holding that an noa filed by a pro se prisoner is deemed filed on the date that the prisoner delivers it to prison authorities for mailing

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the united states liable under the ftca for injuries sustained by a prisoner where the prison guard had confined an altercation between the prisoner and twelve fellow inmates instead of interceding
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: law. If the foreclosure sale conducted by the Bank in this case, was made in accordance with Alabama law, its objection should be sustained. In re Connors, 497 F.Bd 314, 318-19 (3rd Cir. 2007) (debtor loses the right to cure a default when the gavel falls); McCarn v. WYHY FCU (In re McCam), 218 B.R. 154, 160-61 (10th BAP Cir.); In re Morgan, Case No. 06-30531, 2006 WL 2338147 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. Aug. 9, 2006) (Williams, B.J.); In re Fothergill, 293 B.R. 263 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2003); In re Cottrell, 213 B.R. 378 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 1996) (Steele, B.J.); In re Sims, 185 B.R. 853, 863-66 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1995) (section 1322(c)(1) prohibits debtor from reinstating mortgage after the foreclosure sale); see also Commercial Fed. Mtg. Corp. v. Smith (In re Smith), 85 F.3d 1555, (11th Cir. 1996) (<HOLDING>). C. Burden of Proof on Chapter 13 Plan Options: A. holding that 1322c1 did not allow debtors to cure home mortgage defaults after a foreclosure sale regardless of state law redemption rights B. holding debtor could cure after the debtor had previously made payments to the bank C. holding that debtor could not cure and maintain mortgage after foreclosure sale in case decided prior to effective date adding 1322c1 D. holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage E. holding that 1322c1 is not ambiguous that the debtors cure right terminates on the date of the foreclosure sale regardless of the intricacies of the state foreclosure sale process and refusing to attach significance to the legislative record indicating that more extensive cure rights under state law persevere

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that debtor could not cure and maintain mortgage after foreclosure sale in case decided prior to effective date adding 1322c1
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. Foutty & Foutty, LLP, No. 1:07-cv-0274-DFH-TAB, 2007 WL 2413026, *4 (S.D.Ind. Aug. 21, 2007) (in determining whether party is “debtor collector,” focus “is not on the events of the particular transaction but on the principal purpose of the defendant’s business and/or the defendant’s regular activities”) (citing Kaltenbach). In the case at bar, the evidence does not support plaintiffs allegation that the Massey defendants were “debt collectors” under the § 1962a(6) general definition. Plaintiff does not argue that the “principal purpose” of Shapiro & Massey is the collection of debts, but he does contend that the law firm, and Gary Massey, regularly collect or attempt to collect debts, and hence qualify as debt collectors. See Garrett v. Derbes, 110 F.3d 317, 318 (5th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). However, an affidavit by Gary Massey Options: A. holding that fdcpa applies to attorneys who regularly engage in consumer debt collection activities B. holding that a person may regularly render debt collection services even if these services are not a principal purpose of his business C. holding the fdcpa applies to attorneys who regularly engage in consumer debt collection activity even when that activity consists of litigation D. recognizing distinction between general debt collection and enforcement of a security interest and observing that by the plain language of 1692a6 a person whose business has the principal purpose of enforcing security interests but who does not otherwise satisfy the definition of a debt collector is subject only to 1692f6 E. recognizing that generally services that benefit debtor are services that facilitate completion of a case

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a person may regularly render debt collection services even if these services are not a principal purpose of his business
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: entirely on Gallagher's holding that the State could use both the child declarant’s live testimony and past statements. We agree and hold that the trial court did not err in admitting recorded statements to buttress T.S.’s live testimony. ¶ 17. Defendant argues, however, that the recorded statements were not admissible under Rule 804a, apparently believing that the rule requires that a witness to the statements testify to their content. In fact, the rule makes the statements admissible and does not impose any restriction on how they will be introduced. Thus, we have previously held that recorded statements made by a victim are admissible under Rule 804a. State v. LaBounty, 168 Vt. 129, 136-38, 761 A.2d 1, 6-8 (1998); see also State v. Blackburn, 162 Vt. 21, 25, 643 A.2d 224, 226 (1993) (<HOLDING>). In LaBounty, social workers tape-recorded Options: A. holding that the victims prior videotaped testimony from a preliminary hearing was admissible as testimony at trial where the victim was unavailable to testify B. holding that it was error to admit a videotaped interview of an alleged child victim of sexual abuse because the defendant was deprived of the right to crossexamine the child C. holding that even if videotaped interview of child violated sparkmans constitutional right to confront this witness the evidence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where appellant admitted engaging in inappropriate sexual conduct with child among other evidence of direct accusation of criminal sexual conduct D. holding that a videotaped interview between the child and an investigator was admissible E. holding that since petitioner made specific request for counsel before interview policeinitiated interview was impermissible

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a videotaped interview between the child and an investigator was admissible
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: SUBJECT TO ANY CONTRARY PROVISION IN THE SECURITY AND INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENT RELATING TO FORUM SELECTION BY THE COLLATERAL AGENT WITH RESPECT TO ACTIONS BROUGHT THEREUNDER BY THE COLLATERAL AGENT, ANY LITIGATION BASED HEREON, OR ARISING OUT OF, UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR ANY COURSE OF CONDUCT, COURSE OF DEALING, STATEMENTS (WHETHER VERBAL OR WRITTEN) OR ACTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT, ANY ISSUER, ANY LENDER OR THE BORROWER SHALL BE BROUGHT AND MAINTAINED EXCLUSIVELY IN THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK OR IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK; PROVIDED THAT ANY SUIT SEEKING ENFORCEMENT AGAINST ANY COLLATERAL OR OTHER PROPERTY MAY BE BROUGHT, AT THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT’S OPTION, IN THE COURTS OF ANY JURISDICTION WHERE SUCH COLLATERAL OR OTHER PROPERTY MAY BE FOUND. THE BORROWER HEREBY EXPRESSLY AND IRREVOCABLY SUBMITS TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FOR THE PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH LITIGATION AS SET FORTH ABOVE AND IRREVOCABLY AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ANY JUDGMENT RENDERED THEREBY IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH LITIGATION. THE BORROWER FURTHER IRREVOCABLY CONSENTS TO THE SERVICE OF PROCESS BY REGISTERED MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID, OR BY PERSONAL SERVICE WITHIN OR WITHOUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK. THE BORROWER HEREBY EXPRESSLY AND IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ANY OBJECTION WHICH IT MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE TO THE LAYING OF VENUE OF ANY SUCH LITIGATION BROUGHT IN ANY SUCH COURT REFERRED TO ABOVE AND ANY CLAIM THAT ANY SUCH LITIGATION HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN AN INCONVENIENT FORUM. TO THE EXTENT THAT THE BORROWER HAS OR HEREAFTER MAY ACQUIRE ANY IMMUNITY FROM JURISDICTION OF ANY COURT OR FROM ANY LEGAL PROCESS (WHETHER THROUGH SERVICE OR NOTICE, ATTACHMENT PRIOR TO JUDGMENT, ATTACHMENT IN AID OF EXECUTION OR OTHERWISE) WITH RESPECT TO ITSELF OR ITS PROPERTY, THE BORROWER HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES SUCH IMMUNITY IN RESPECT OF ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Whenever notice is required to be given under this Warrant, unless otherwise provided herein, such notice shall be given in accordance with Section 9(f) of the Securities Purchase Agreement. The Company shall provide the Holder with prompt written notice of all actions taken pursuant to this Warrant (other than the issuance of shares of Common Stock upon exercise in accordance with the terms hereof), including in reasonable detail a description of such action and the reason therefor. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Company will give written notice to the Holder (i) immediately upon each adjustment of the Exercise Price and the number of Warrant Shares, setting forth in reasonable detail, and certifying, the calculation of such adjustment(s), (ii) at least ten (10) days prior to the date on which the Company closes its books or takes a record (A) with respect to any dividend or distribution upon the shares of Common Stock or (B) for determining rights to vote with respect to any Fundamental Transaction, dissolution or liquidation, provided in each case that such information shall be made known to the public prior to or in conjunction with such notice being provided to the Holder, (iii) at least ten (10) Trading Days prior to an FT Closing Date, and (iv) within one (1) Business Day of the occurrence of an Event of Default (as defined in the Notes), setting forth in reasonable detail any material events with respect to such Event of Default and any efforts by the Company to cure such Event of Default. To the extent that any notice provided hereunder constitutes, or contains, material, non-public information regarding the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, the Company shall simultaneously file such notice with the SEC (as defined in the Securities Purchase Agreement) pursuant to a Current Report on Form 8-K. It is expressly understood and agreed that the time of execution specified by the Holder in each Exercise Notice shall be definitive and may not be disputed or challenged by the Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company may amend this Award at any time, provided that the Participant’s consent to any amendment is required to the extent the amendment materially diminishes the rights of the Participant or that results in the cancellation of the Award. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company need not obtain Participant (or other interested party) consent for (a) the adjustment or cancellation of an Award pursuant to the adjustment provisions of the Plan; (b) the modification of the Award to the extent deemed necessary to comply with any applicable law, the listing requirements of any principal securities exchange or market on which the Shares are then traded; (c) the modification of the Award to preserve favorable accounting or tax treatment of the Award for the Company; or (d) the modification of the Award to the extent the Committee determines that such action does not materially and adversely affect the value of an Award or that such action is in the best interest of the affected Participant or any other person(s) as may then have an interest in the Award.

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: Seller hereby represents to Buyer and Agent that as of the date hereof and taking into account the terms of this Amendment Number Twelve, Seller is in full compliance with all of the terms and conditions of the Agreement and each other Repurchase Document and no Default or Event of Default has occurred and is continuing under the Agreement or any other Repurchase Document .

assistant: Representations
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: Rous., Tex., 495 F.2d 1223, 1225 n. 3 (5th Cir.1974). By relying on the Tucker Act, which no longer confers jurisdiction on this Court, Dixie cannot establish federal question jurisdiction or waiver of sovereign immunity. C. Dixie also contends that the Court has diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Again, as movant, Dixie bears the burden of proving that “complete diversity” exists and that the amount in controversy exceeds $75.000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; Smallwood v. Ill. Cent. R.R. Co., 385 F.3d 568, 572 (5th Cir.2004)(en banc). Complete diversity requires that the citizenship of every plaintiff be diverse from the citizenship of every defendant. “In cases involving multiple plaintiffs or defendants, the pre ., No. 09-170, 2009 WL 2032406, at *6-7 (S.D.Miss. July 9, 2009) (<HOLDING>); see also In re Olympic Mills, 477 F.3d at 7 Options: A. holding that a district court had jurisdiction to impose rule 11 sanctions regardless of the existence of subjectmatter jurisdiction B. holding that a reviewable final order is necessary for subjectmatter jurisdiction C. holding that standing is component of subjectmatter jurisdiction and subjectmatter jurisdiction is essential to courts authority to hear case D. holding that a postfiling nondiverse intervenor may divest the court of subjectmatter jurisdiction if considered indispensable E. holding that standing is component of subjectmatter jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a postfiling nondiverse intervenor may divest the court of subjectmatter jurisdiction if considered indispensable
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each New Lender (a) represents and warrants that (i) it has full power and authority, and has taken all action necessary, to execute and deliver this Amendment and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby and to become a Lender under the Credit Agreement, (ii) it meets all the requirements to be an assignee under Sections 11.06(b)(iii) , (v) and (vi) of the Credit Agreement (subject to the consents, if any, as may be required under Section 11.06(b)(iii) of the Credit Agreement), (iii) from and after the Second Amendment Closing Date, it shall be bound by the provisions of the Credit Agreement as a Lender thereunder and shall have the obligations of a Lender thereunder, (iv) it is sophisticated with respect to decisions to acquire assets of the type represented by the Loans and either it, or the Person exercising discretion in making its decision to acquire such Loans, is experienced in acquiring assets of such type, (v) it has received a copy of the Credit Agreement, and has received or has been accorded the opportunity to receive copies of the most recent financial statements delivered pursuant to Section 6.01 of the Credit Agreement, as applicable, and such other documents and information as it deems appropriate to make its own credit analysis and decision to become a Lender under the Credit Agreement and to purchase such Loans, and (vi) it has, independently and without reliance upon Administrative Agent or any other Lender and based on such documents and information as it has deemed appropriate, made its own credit analysis and decision to become a Lender under the Credit Agreement and to purchase the Loans; and (b) agrees that (i) it will, independently and without reliance upon Administrative Agent or any other Lender, and based on such documents and information as it shall deem appropriate at the time, continue to make its own credit decisions in taking or not taking action under the Loan Documents, and (ii) it will perform in accordance with their terms all of the obligations which by the terms of the Loan Documents are required to be performed by it as a Lender.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THE BORROWER AND THE LENDER WAIVE TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY JUDICIAL PROCEEDING INVOLVING, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ANY MATTER (WHETHER SOUNDING IN TORT, CONTRACT OR OTHERWISE) IN ANY WAY ARISING OUT OF, RELATED TO, OR CONNECTED WITH ANY LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE RELATIONSHIP ESTABLISHED THEREUNDER.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: illegality. See People v. Mitchell, 355 Ill.App.3d 1030, 291 Ill.Dec. 786, 824 N.E.2d 642, 644, 649-50 (2005) (affirming suppression of evidence when “officers stopped defendant for no apparent reason other than to ran a warrant check”). ¶ 13 If, as the court of appeals suggested, a warrant automatically dissipated the taint of illegality, law enforcement could then “create[ ] a new form of police investigation” by routinely illegally seizing individuals, knowing that the subsequent discovery of a warrant would provide after-the-fact justification for illegal conduct. United States v. Gross, 624 F.3d 309, 320-21 (6th Cir.2010). We cannot reconcile such a situation with the Fourth Amendment or the logic of Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 485, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963) (<HOLDING>). We therefore hold that the subsequent Options: A. holding evidence that derived so immediately from violation is fruit of illegality and should be suppressed B. holding all evidence be suppressed traceable to the unlawfully seized C. holding that consent given immediately after an illegal stop was vitiated by the illegality D. holding that the physical fruits of a miranda violation must be suppressed E. holding that evidence resulting from an unconstitutional search or seizure must be suppressed

assistant: The best answer is A. holding evidence that derived so immediately from violation is fruit of illegality and should be suppressed
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Borrower Party and their Subsidiaries is a U.S. Person and has timely filed all tax returns that are required to be filed by them and have paid all taxes, except for any such taxes as are being appropriately contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings diligently conducted and with respect to which adequate reserves have been provided. The charges, accruals and reserves on the books of each Borrower Party and their Subsidiaries in respect of taxes and other governmental charges are, in the opinion of Borrower or Guarantor, as applicable, adequate.

assistant: Taxes
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: interest in the Vehicle was being assigned. The Restatement provides the following further guidance concerning the impact of an assignment on the security interest: An assignee is entitled to priority of payment from the obligor’s insolvent estate to the extent that the assignor would have been so entitled in the absence of the assignment. Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 340(1). A number of courts have held that the assignment of a security interest does not destroy its purchase-money status. See, e.g., In re Brooks, 74 B.R. 418, 420 (Bankr. N.D.Ga.1987)(“Only the identity of the holder of the security interest was changed by the assignment, not the nature of the interest itself.”); Credithrift of America v. Littlejohn (In re Littlejohn), 20 B.R. 695, 697 (Bankr. W.D.Ky.1982)(<HOLDING>); In re Smallwood, 20 B.R. 699 Options: A. holding that purchaser of vehicle was required to arbitrate her claims even though seller did not sign bill of sale containing arbitration clause when seller accepted and acted upon bill of sale by contemporaneously executing retail installment contract B. holding that twentythree purchase orders made up a single installment contract C. holding courts must look to the law of the state in which the security interest was created to determine if creditor retains a purchase money security interest despite refinancing D. holding that creditor held a purchase money security interest in household furniture by virtue of assignment of the retail installment contract from the seller E. holding that a purchase money security in jewelry was not lost when the perfected purchase money security interest was consolidated with a subsequent retail installment contract

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that creditor held a purchase money security interest in household furniture by virtue of assignment of the retail installment contract from the seller
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: reviewed the record and conclude that Mohammed has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Mohammed’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED. * To the extent Mohammed’s motion is construed as a motion for authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, that claim fails, as Mohammed has failed to allege: (1) newly-discovered evidence or (2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable. 28 U.S.C. § 2255; see United States v. Morris, 429 F.3d 65, 72 (4th Cir.2005) Options: A. holding booker is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review B. holding that booker does not apply retroactively to collateral proceedings under 2255 C. holding that the apprendi decision is not applicable on collateral review D. holding that the rule announced by booker does not operate retroactively E. holding that batson v kentucky does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review

assistant: The best answer is A. holding booker is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review
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 you engage in any exercise program you receive or learn about through the fitbit service , you agree that you do so at your own risk and are voluntarily participating in these activities .

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: By accepting the Performance, you expressly acknowledge and agree to comply with applicable Brazilian laws and to pay any and all applicable taxes associated with the vesting of the Performance Shares, the issuance and/or sale of shares of Common Stock acquired under the Plan or the receipt of any dividends.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: permit Bakke to compete for all 100 places in the class, simply because of his race.” Bakke, 438 U.S. at 280-81 n. 14, 98 S.Ct. at 2743 n. 14 (opinion of Powell, J.). As stated above, “[t]he ‘injury in fact’ ... is the denial of equal treatment resulting from the imposition of the barrier, not the ultimate inability to obtain the benefit.” Jacksonville, -— U.S. at-, 113 S.Ct. at 2303. Similarly, the injury to the Belmont plaintiffs cannot be defeated by showing that, as a practical matter, the plaintiffs would never receive housing assistance anyway. The injury is not the failure to obtain housing assistance in the suburbs, but is the missed opportunity to compete for suburban housing on an equal footing with the local residents. See Trafficante, 409 U.S. at 208-12, 93 S.Ct. at 366-68 (<HOLDING>); Havens, 455 U.S. at 372-74, 102 S.Ct. at Options: A. holding that the white defendants association with a black defendant was not sufficient to give them standing to join in the black defendants batson challenge B. holding that a white and a black tenant had standing to challenge their landlords acts of discriminating against nonwhite rental applicants C. holding that a white office was not similarly situated to a black officer who was charged with more offenses than the white officer D. holding white female employee lacks standing under title vii to allege injury on behalf of black applicants to employment agency who were discriminated against because of race E. holding that white female had standing under title vii to challenge her employees alleged racial discrimination against blacks

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a white and a black tenant had standing to challenge their landlords acts of discriminating against nonwhite rental applicants
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: 127 (1988). The act is effective; it is a rare event when a federal court is asked to intervene to stop a state court proceeding. It is even more rare when the federal court accepts the invitation. As cautious as courts may be about reaching out to enjoin a state court from proceeding with litigation, there are circumstances that require such action. One such circumstance is the specter of parties relitigating in state court the same matters that have been decided by the federal court. See 17 Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller, E. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure § 4226 (2d ed. 1988) (“The courts have clearly understood that the third exception [to the Anti-Injunction Act] does allow injunctions to prevent re-litigation.”). See also Midkiff v. Tom, 725 F.2d 502 (9th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>); In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Options: A. holding that courts must look to the state that rendered the judgment to determine whether the courts of that state would afford the judgment preclusive effect B. holding that a federal court acting under its federal as opposed to diversity jurisdiction may also give greater preclusive effect to a state court judgment than the state courts would give C. holding that issuance of injunction was necessary to protect federal court judgment when hawaiian state courts refused to grant it preclusive effect D. holding that state court judgment settling shareholders state and federal claims had preclusive effect in federal court even though shareholders could not have pressed their federal claims in state court E. holding that illinois federal court erred in giving preclusive effect to minnesota state courts dismissal of action on statute of limitations grounds based on minnesotas treatment of statutes of limitations as procedural in nature and without preclusive effect

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that issuance of injunction was necessary to protect federal court judgment when hawaiian state courts refused to grant it preclusive effect
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: assess his preservation of parental rights unless the father has "first shown that it was 'impossible' for [him] to [comply with Utah's adoption statutes, including the deadlines for filing contained therein], 'through no fault of his own.'" Wells v. Children's Aid Soc'y, 681 P.2d 199, 208 (Utah 1984). In fact, Utah courts have mandated a hearing, such as the one contemplated by the majority, only where the father asserts that it was impossible for him to comply with Utah statutes because he did not know and could not have known certain material facts: that the mother was pregnant, that she was living in Utah, or that she intended to place the child for adoption in Utah. See Ellis v. Social Servs. Dep't of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 615 P.2d 1250, 1256 (Utah 1980) (<HOLDING>); see also Beltran v. Allan, 926 P.2d 892, Options: A. holding that due process required a hearing so the putative father would have an opportunity to present evidence to show as a factual matter that he could not reasonably have complied with utahs statutory requirements or deadlines because he could not reasonably have expected his baby to be born in utah B. holding that because the defendant could not have reasonably believed that the third person would have been justified in using force the trial courts finding of guilt was supported by substantial evidence C. holding that the court could reasonably assume that no rational class member would have purchased the product had he known of the alleged misrepresentation D. holding that the trial court erred when it did not consider what the husband could have been reasonably expected to have earned based upon the recent work history and other pertinent circumstances E. holding that plaintiff could not show that he was disabled because he conceded that he could do his job despite his impairment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that due process required a hearing so the putative father would have an opportunity to present evidence to show as a factual matter that he could not reasonably have complied with utahs statutory requirements or deadlines because he could not reasonably have expected his baby to be born in utah
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: never waived or accepted process, and never made an appearance in the suit before the expunction order was entered. Nothing in the record establishes that Google stands in privity to the Commission or to Jackson. Accordingly, we hold that Google was not a party to the suit and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter orders against Google. Id. When a party is served but there are technical defects in the judgment, the judgment is voidable. PNS Stores, 379 S.W.3d at 275. However, when “the defects in service are so substantial that the defendant was not afforded due process,” the judgment is void. Id. Here, there was no identification of Google as a party or attempt to serve it with process. Accordingly, the judgment against it is void and must be vacated. See id. at 272 (<HOLDING>). We sustain Google’s second issue. Because Options: A. recognizing that a default judgment based on improper service is void B. holding the judgment premature citing one case holding the judgment void and another holding the judgment irregular C. holding judgment in violation of automatic stay void D. holding that void order must exceed courts authority to act and not be merely erroneous E. holding void judgment must be vacated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding void judgment must be vacated
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the continuance of any Event of Default, Mortgagee may take such action, without notice or demand, as it deems advisable to protect and enforce its rights against Borrower and in and to the Property, by Mortgagee itself or otherwise, including declare the entire Debt to be immediately due and payable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions hereof shall in no way be affected or impaired, and such remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect. If a court finds that any provision of this Agreement is invalid or unenforceable, but that by limiting such provision it would become valid or enforceable, then such provision shall be deemed to be written, construed and enforced as so limited.

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: court on this issue. F. The case could be removed despite the fact that the plaintiffs named the IRS in their suit rather than the United States The Butcher defendants next argue that because the plaintiffs named the IRS in their original complaint and in their amended complaint rather than the United States, the action cannot be removed to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1444. This section allows for the removal of any case where suit is brought against the United States regarding one of its liens. Even though the Butcher defendants are correct that the IRS has no capacity to be sued, and that the plaintiffs should have named the United States as a party instead of the IRS, such defects are not fatal. See Labry v. Internal Revenue Serv., 940 F.Supp. 148, 149 (E.D.La.1996) (<HOLDING>); Bernard v. Internal Revenue Service, No. Options: A. holding that a proper eleventh amendment challenge strips the courts of jurisdiction for the purposes of the removal statute 28 usc 1447c B. holding that venue for litigation was proper based on 28 usc 1441 regardless of whether defendant was doing business in the district within the meaning of 28 usc 1391 C. holding that although the united states rather than the irs was the proper party a misnomer does not preclude removal under 28 usc 1444 D. recognizing that section 1498 rather than the tucker act 28 usc 1491a grants this court jurisdiction over patent infringement claims against the united states E. holding that under the fsia personal jurisdiction depends upon the district court finding subject matter jurisdiction under 28 usc 1330a and proper service under 28 usc 1608

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that although the united states rather than the irs was the proper party a misnomer does not preclude removal under 28 usc 1444