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: (<HOLDING>); United States v. Rubinson, 543 F.2d 951, Options: A. holding that right to testify not denied where inter alia defendant made no objection to his attorneys statements that defendant would not testify and made no request to testify B. holding that the fact that parallel proceedings force a defendant to make a difficult choice as to whether to testify does not of itself violate the constitution C. holding that parallel importation of genuine goods does not violate lanham act D. holding the exclusion did not violate the equal protection clause of the wyoming constitution or the fourteenth amendment to the united states constitution E. holding that where the plaintiffs evidence supported a finding that the defendants had applied force to restrain him the jury must determine not only whether the officers were justified in using force at all but if so whether the degree of force actually used was reasonable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the fact that parallel proceedings force a defendant to make a difficult choice as to whether to testify does not of itself violate the constitution
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 a Participant incurs an Employment Termination for any reason, the Participant will automatically forfeit any unvested Restricted Shares and the Company will acquire such unvested Restricted Shares for the amount paid by the Participant for such Restricted Shares (or, if no amount was paid by the Participant for such Restricted Shares, then the Company will acquire such Restricted Shares for no consideration).

assistant: Forfeitures
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: the skype website does not enable users in such territories to take advantage of this vat exemption and we therefore do not provide the products in such territories : mount athos , canary islands , french overseas departments , aland islands , channel islands , heligoland island , büsingen / buesingen territory , ceuta , melilla , livigno , campione d'italia and italian waters of lake lugano .

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: All representations and warranties made hereunder and in any other Loan Document or other document delivered pursuant hereto or thereto or in connection herewith or therewith shall survive the execution and delivery hereof and thereof and any subsequent making or deemed making thereof. Such representations and warranties have been or will be relied upon by the Agent, the Collateral Agent and each Lender, regardless of any investigation made by the Agent, the Collateral Agent or any Lender or on their behalf and notwithstanding that the Agent, the Collateral Agent or any Lender may have had notice or knowledge of any Default or Event of Default at the time of any Borrowing, and shall continue in full force and effect as long as any Loan or any other Obligation shall remain unpaid or unsatisfied.

assistant: Warranties
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: (“We allow the admission of survey evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule if the survey is material, more probative on the issue than other evidence and if it has guarantees of trustworthiness.” (citations omitted) (internal quotations omitted)), C.A. May Marine Supply Co. v. Brunswick Corp., 649 F.2d 1049, 1054 (5th Cir.1981) (“Surveys and customer questionnaires are admissible, if they are pertinent to the inquiry, upon a showing that the poll is reliable and was compiled in accordance with accepted survey methods.”), Baumholser v. Amax Coal Co., 630 F.2d 550, 552 (7th Cir.1980) (“To qualify a study or opinion poll for admission into evidence, there must be a substantial showing of reliability.”), and Pittsburgh Press Club v. United States, 579 F.2d 751, 758 (3d Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>). Courts have, however, rarely articulated Options: A. holding that testimonial statements are subject to the requirements of the confrontation clause even if they are otherwise admissible under the hearsay exception for excited utterances B. holding that when regulations are intended to have different purposes and are not dependent on each other they are not intertwined C. holding that surveys are admissible only if they are conducted with proper safeguards to insure accuracy and reliability D. holding that the remedy under another subsection of 1581 is not manifestly inadequate because 1581s builtin safeguards and limitations are not to be dismissed because they are inconvenient E. holding that claims are related if they involve a common core of facts or they are based on related legal theories

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that surveys are admissible only if they are conducted with proper safeguards to insure accuracy and reliability
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: 1605(a)(7) coupled with the Executive Branch’s inherent constitutional authority in the area of foreign affairs provide more than enough guidance to the Secretary of State to make a finding of fact upon which the operation of § 1605(a)(7) partially depends. We hold that § 1605(a)(7) does not include an unconstitutional delegation of authority to the Executive Branch. B. Sufficiency of the Pleadings Sudan argues that appellees failed to plead the jurisdictional causation requirement; specifically, it argues appellees failed to plead sufficient facts to “reasonably support a finding” that Sudan’s mate rial support of al Qaeda in the early 1990s caused the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. See Price v. Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 294 F.3d 82, 94 (D.C.Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Because “causation is indeed a jurisdictional Options: A. holding that plaintiffs allegations of abuse did not amount to the allegations of torture required by 1605a7 to survive a motion to dismiss B. holding plaintiffs must provide particularized allegations as to why demand would be futile to survive a motion to dismiss conclusory allegations are not enough C. recognizing inferential factual allegations to defeat a motion to dismiss D. holding it appropriate to grant a motion to dismiss a discrimination claim where claim is not supported by factual allegations E. holding that evidence of other allegations of torture was inadmissible in part because it was not similar to the allegations made by defendant

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that plaintiffs allegations of abuse did not amount to the allegations of torture required by 1605a7 to survive a motion to dismiss
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All payments to be made by any Borrower shall be made without condition or deduction for any counterclaim, defense, recoupment or set-off. All payments of principal and interest on each Loan shall be made in the currency in which the principal amount of such Loan was funded. All fees in respect of BAs and Canadian Letters of Credit shall be paid in Canadian Dollars and all other fees shall be paid in Dollars. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all payments by any Borrower hereunder shall be made to the Administrative Agent, for the account of the respective Lenders to which such payment is owed, at the Administrative Agent’s Office and in immediately available funds not later than 1:00 p.m. on the date specified herein. The Administrative Agent will promptly distribute to each applicable Lender its Applicable Percentage (or other applicable share as provided herein) of such payment in like funds as received by wire transfer to such Lender’s Lending Office. All payments received by the Administrative Agent after 1:00 p.m. shall be deemed received on the next succeeding Business Day and any applicable interest or fee shall continue to accrue. If any payment to be made by any Borrower shall come due on a day other than a Business Day, payment shall be made on the next following Business Day, and such extension of time shall be reflected in computing interest or fees, as the case may be.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: whether “special factors counseling hesitation in the absence of affirmative action by Congress” exist, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 396, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971); see Sosa, 124 S.Ct. at 2763. Here, the key question is should this Court infer the existence of a private right of action from the alleged violations of international law. An implied private action lies under the ATS “only for violations of treaties or customary international law.” Flores, 414 F.3d at 253; see Sosa, 124 S.Ct. at 2761-62. Thus, because Pfizer is not alleged to have violated any treaty, to state a claim under the ATS, Plaintiffs must demonstrate violation of a “clear and unambiguous” rule of customary international law. Filartiga, 630 F.2d at 884 (<HOLDING>). This Court has already discussed in Abdullahi Options: A. holding that a suit against a state official in his or her official capacity is not a suit against the official but rather is a suit against the officials office B. holding that because the prohibition on official torture is clear and unambiguous it can serve as a basis for suit under the ats C. holding that a suit against a state official in his or her official capacity is a suit against the state itself and not cognizable under 1983 D. holding that an official capacity suit should be treated as a suit against the entity E. holding that official torture is now prohibited by the law of nations and that federal courts may exercise jurisdiction under the ats concerning such international violations

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that because the prohibition on official torture is clear and unambiguous it can serve as a basis for suit under the ats
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: Muenster after disposing of her body Friday morning. After Houchin was murdered, Winning-ham attempted to obtain an expedited passport before anyone at the clinic knew Houchin was missing. After being denied a passport because he lacked an itinerary, Winningham decided that he would accompany Jaggers during her travels to Germany — despite having twice-previously declined to accompany her. After buying tickets, he returned, itinerary in hand, and again attempted to obtain an,. expedited passport. Winningham also withdrew a large amount of cash shortly after Houchin was murdered. The jury could have reasonably inferred that Winningham was planning to flee the country even before Houchin’s coworkers knew she had disappeared. See Gosch v. State, 829 S.W.2d 775, 783 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 509 U.S. 922, 113 S.Ct. 3035, Options: A. holding that conditional intent sufficient to satisfy specific intent mens rea for solicitation to commit murder offense B. holding that where congressional intent is clear a court must give effect to such intent C. holding that evidence of withdrawing cash with intent to flee country probative of intent to murder D. holding defendant must act with specific intent to cause death of another in order to be convicted of attempted murder E. holding that the relevant intent is not the intent to return ultimately but the intent to return to the united states within a relatively short period

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that evidence of withdrawing cash with intent to flee country probative of intent to murder
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of Section 3, Section 5, and this Section 6 shall survive each Closing (provided, Section 3 and Sections 5.1 and 5.2 shall only apply to Properties as to which the Closing has not occurred). The representations of FVE in Sections 4.1(1) and 4.1(2) and of SNH in Section 4.2(1) and 4.2(2) and the indemnity set forth in Section 5.3 and Section 5.5 shall survive indefinitely and all other representations and warranties of the parties set forth in a Transaction Document shall survive the final Closing Date for a period of one (1) year unless a longer period for survival is otherwise specified in the applicable Transaction Document.

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: was not considered a break in service. Accordingly, the 2000 Qwest Plan treats persons who had a break in service for pregnancy differently than those who had a break in service for a nonpregnancy disability, resulting in a present violation of Title VII. Although the act of discriminating against Woods is 1969 is not actionable, Qwest’s decision to discriminate against Woods in the adoption and application of its plan in 2000 is actionable. See id. The court thus finds Qwest’s reclassification of employees as either “classic” or nonclassic for receipt of enhanced pension benefits in 2000, using a system tainted by earlier discrimination, amounted to a fresh violation of the PDA. See id.; Ameritech Ben. Plan Committee v. Communication Workers, 220 F.3d 814, 823 (7th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). The Qwest Plan distinguishes between Options: A. holding that the defendant withheld pension benefits in breach of the plan B. holding that discriminatory act occurred when employer amended its plan in response to pda but did not amend service credit for pension purposes C. holding that appropriate remedy was to compute service credit for veterans in accordance with vrra rather than pursuant to employers pension plan and requiring retroactive pension plan payments to be made D. holding that plan participants in a defined benefit pension plan have no claim to the plans surplus assets E. holding that employer may not orally modify a pension plan and citing 29 usc 1102a1 which provides that all plan terms must be in writing

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that discriminatory act occurred when employer amended its plan in response to pda but did not amend service credit for pension purposes
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: Assuming satisfaction of the conditions to this Agreement, and after giving effect to the transactions contemplated hereby, payment of all amounts required to be paid in connection with the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and payment of all related fees and expenses, the Buyer and its respective affiliates will not be insolvent as of the Closing and immediately after the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby.

assistant: Solvency
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: doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); United States v. Nevils, 598 F.3d 1158, 1161 (9th Cir.2010) (en banc). a. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence introduced at trial was sufficient to convict Connelly of the false statement charge. A rational jury could have concluded that (a) E.J.R.C. was truthful when she testified that Connelly threatened her with jail if she did not perform oral.sex; (b) Connelly, an experienced police officer and former tribal prosecutor, fully understood the FBI agents’ questions; and (c) Connelly was not credible because his statements to Agent Kimball and Agent Smiedala about whether he threatened E.J.R.C. with jail were inconsistent. See, e.g., Selby, 557 F.3d at 978 (<HOLDING>). b. Moreover, we find no inconsistency between Options: A. holding that persecution of a woman because of her government job or her husbands position as a police officer was not on account of a particular social group B. holding that a wifes minimal involvement in her husbands business coupled with the lack of evidence that she knew of or intended to further her husbands fraudulent schemes was insufficient evidence of conspiracy C. holding that no rational jury could conclude there was no intent to distribute where the defendants possessed 3000 pounds of marijuana D. holding that it was appellants burden to prove that her husbands death occurred in the scope of employment and that she was eligible for widows benefits E. holding a rational jury was entitled to conclude that a government officials misstatement regarding her husbands employment was not an inadvertent mistake

assistant: The best answer is E. holding a rational jury was entitled to conclude that a government officials misstatement regarding her husbands employment was not an inadvertent mistake
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Voting Agreement shall be deemed severable and the invalidity or unenforceability of any provision hereof shall not affect the validity or enforceability or the other provisions hereof. If any provision of this Voting Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or any circumstance, is invalid or unenforceable, (a) a suitable and equitable provision shall be substituted therefor in order to carry out, so far as may be valid and enforceable, the intent and purpose of such invalid or unenforceable provision; and (b) the remainder of this Agreement and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected by such invalidity or unenforceability, nor shall such invalidity or unenforceability affect the validity or enforceability of such provision, or the application thereof, in any other jurisdiction.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the extent available on commercially reasonable terms, the Company may purchase, at its expense, insurance to cover Losses covered by the foregoing indemnification provisions and to otherwise cover Losses for any breach or alleged breach by any Covered Person of such Covered Person's duties in such amount and with such deductibles as the Management Committee may reasonably determine; provided , that the failure to obtain such insurance shall not affect the right to indemnification of any Covered Person under the indemnification provisions contained herein, including the right to be reimbursed or advanced expenses or otherwise indemnified for Losses hereunder. If any Covered Person recovers any amounts in respect of any Losses from any insurance coverage, then such Covered Person shall, to the extent that such recovery is duplicative, reimburse the Company for any amounts previously paid to such Covered Person by the Company in respect of such Losses.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: 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 Closing has not been consummated on or before June 30, 2016; provided , however , that no such termination will affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by the 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: At all times prior to the Closing Date or the earlier termination of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, the Company and the Investors shall consult with each other prior to issuing any press releases, public documents and public filings (and provide each other a reasonable opportunity to review and comment upon such release, and the Company will consider in good faith any comments the Requisite Investors have to any such documents) or otherwise making public announcements with respect to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement; provided that nothing in this Section 26 shall prohibit any party hereto from filing any motions or other pleadings or documents with the Bankruptcy Court in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Credit Agreement and the Notes, except to the extent of the amendments specifically provided in Section 1 above, are and shall continue to be in full force and effect and are hereby in all respects ratified and confirmed. The execution, delivery and effectiveness of this Letter Amendment shall not, except as expressly provided herein, operate as a waiver of any right, power or remedy of any Lender or the Agent under the Credit Agreement, nor constitute a waiver of any provision of the Credit Agreement.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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: before bringing a formal legal case , first contact our customer support team at https://zyngasupport.helpshift.com , or for black diamond slots , email support@risingtidegames.com , or for natural motion games email contact@naturalmotion.com to address your issue most disputes can be resolved that way .

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: This First Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts and on separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Signatures to this First Amendment may be given by facsimile, PDF format or other electronic transmission, and such signatures shall be fully binding on the party sending the same.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: academia.edu makes no effort to review any third party account content for any purpose , including but not limited to , for accuracy , legality or non-infringement and academia.edu is not responsible for any third party account content .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a statutory argument that Shepard and Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (1990) should be applied to a district court’s categorization of a particular prior conviction for purposes of § 4B1.1 (i.e., whether the conviction was a drug offense, a crime of violence, and not related to the other conviction), or how the district court should arrive at that categorization when sentencing under an advisory guidelines system. Thus, he has waived that argument. See United States v. Duncan, 400 F.3d 1297, 1299 n. 1 (11th Cir.2005) (declining to address the Booker implications of firearm and role enhancements because appellant did not challenge those enhancements in his initial brief); see also Wilkerson v. Grinnell Corp., 270 F.3d 1314, 1322 (11th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). AFFIRMED. 1 . Compare United States v. Spell, Options: A. holding that issues not raised in an appellants initial brief are deemed abandoned B. holding that issues not clearly raised in initial briefs are considered abandoned C. holding that issues not raised in an initial brief on appeal are deemed abandoned D. holding that issues not raised in the initial brief on appeal are deemed abandoned E. recognizing that we lack jurisdiction to consider issues not raised in the parties briefs

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that issues not clearly raised in initial briefs are considered abandoned
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 Smith court rationalized that the case was “practically ‘on all fours’ ” with Meeks because the 1997 Amendments imposed a mandatory time assessment of 15 months. Id. at 589. It argued that the “previously non-existent ‘mandatory minimum’ penalty removes discretion and is thus, ... subject to ex post facto rejection.” Id. at 590. Consequentially, the Smith court found the guidelines unconstitutional. Even if Smith were the only state court precedent, rather than a solitary departure from the prevailing au 1997 Amendments as being procedural, rather than affecting matters of substance and therefore as not violative of the Ex Post Facto Clause because they are not laws within the meaning of the Clause. See Miller, 482 U.S. at 430, 107 S.Ct. 2446; see also DiNapoli, 764 F.2d at 146 (<HOLDING>); Shepard v. Taylor, 556 F.2d 648, 654 (2d Options: A. holding that parole guidelines are subject to the ex post facto clause B. holding that use of the guidelines in effect at time of sentencing does not violate ex post facto clause after booker C. holding that work release and security classification regulations were not ex post facto laws D. holding that the ex post facto clause has no application to deportation E. holding that the federal parole guidelines at issue were not laws within meaning of ex post facto clause

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the federal parole guidelines at issue were not laws within meaning of ex post facto clause
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: Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 673, 97 S.Ct. 1401, 1413, 51 L.Ed.2d 711 (1977). For citizens who are not in the custody of the slate, however, this right does not include the right to state protection from private violence. See DeShaney v. Winnebago County Dep't of Soc. Services, 489 U.S. 189, 109 S.Ct. 998, 103 L.Ed.2d 249 (1989). The "state created danger” cases based upon this right to personal security do not recognize a right that is implicated here because they do not involve situations where the risk created is justified by the state’s pursuit of a legitimate public interest. See, e.g., Stoneking v. Bradford Area Sch. Dist., 882 F.2d 720 (3d Cir.1989). 26 . Compare Tony L. v. Childers, 71 F.3d 1182 (6th Cir.1995), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1834, 134 L.Ed.2d 938 (1996) (<HOLDING>). 27 . While it is clear that deprivation of a Options: A. recognizing that warrantless arrests with probable cause do not give rise to 1983 claims B. holding that state statutes which merely establish procedures and do not mandate any particular substantive result do not give rise to a statecreated liberty interest C. holding that texas parole statutes do not create a protected liberty interest under an older statutory scheme D. recognizing that nevada statutes do not confer a legitimate expectation of parole release and therefore do not create a constitutionally cognizable liberty interest sufficient to invoke due process E. holding that a prison grievance procedure is not a substantive right and does not give rise to a protected liberty interest requiring the procedural protections envisioned by the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that state statutes which merely establish procedures and do not mandate any particular substantive result do not give rise to a statecreated liberty interest
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: Guidelines, the two incidents of abscondment, and the fact that Redmond was only originally located after being identified as the victim of gun violence, the court found that “[t]wo times is too many” and sentenced Mm to the statutory maximum sentence of 22 months. “These discussions demonstrate the court’s consideration of the relevant statutory factors, and show that the sentence imposed was a carefully considered exercise of discretion.” United States v. Brown, 203 F.3d 557, 558 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam). Furthermore, in response to Redmond’s claims that his sentence is generally excessive, the Eighth Circuit has upheld similar above-Guidelines sentences for violations of supervised release. See, e.g., United States v. Herbeck, 282 Fed.Appx. 490, 491-92 (8th Cir.2008) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); Larison, 432 F.3d at 924 (holding that, where Options: A. holding the district courts revocation of defendants term of supervised release did not end the courts jurisdiction over defendants release B. holding that reasonableness review applies to a sentence imposed upon a revocation of supervised release C. holding that defendants 36month aboveguidelines but belowstatutorymaximum sentence upon revocation of supervised release was not unreasonable where the district court had discussed both the guidelines and other 3553a factors during sentencing D. holding that defendants 46month aboveguidelines sentence upon revocation of supervised release was not unreasonable even where the guidelines recommended a sentence of only seven to thirteen months E. holding that sentence is reasonable when the district court properly addresses sentencing factors of 3553a

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that defendants 36month aboveguidelines but belowstatutorymaximum sentence upon revocation of supervised release was not unreasonable where the district court had discussed both the guidelines and other 3553a factors during sentencing
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: weapon he selected was a firearm. We, therefore, reject Burks’ arguments. The judgment of the superior court is VACATED and this case is REMANDED to enable the trial court to make specific findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to Burks’ motion to suppress his confession. 1 . If the trial court suppresses Burks' confession on remand, he will be entitled to a new trial. A new trial would moot this issue. The same sentencing issue has arisen in a number of cases, however, persuading us to address it at this time rather than defer its consideration until the trial court resolves the confession issue. 2 . Burks appears to reason that it is impossible to cause death without using something capable of causing death. See Wettanen v. State, 656 P.2d 1213, 1218 (Alaska App.1983) (<HOLDING>). 3 . We will retain jurisdiction. Upon Options: A. holding that the evidence was insufficient to support a deadlyweapon finding because a motor vehicle is not a deadly weapon per se and there was no testimony in the record that defendant operated his vehicle in a manner that was capable of causing death or serious bodily injury B. holding section 107a17bs plain language does not require that the actor actually intend death or serious bodily injury an object is a deadly weapon if the actor intends a use of the object in which it would be capable of causing death or serious bodily injury C. holding that a woman possessed immunity from criminal prosecution for causing injury or death to her fetus D. holding that feet whether or not shod may constitute dangerous instrument statutorily defined as anything which is capable of causing death or serious physical injury as 1181900b11 E. holding that although defendants vehicle was not used with deadly effect it was a deadly weapon because it was capable of causing death or serious bodily injury if not for an oncoming drivers evasive maneuver

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that feet whether or not shod may constitute dangerous instrument statutorily defined as anything which is capable of causing death or serious physical injury as 1181900b11
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company and its ownership and operation of its business are in compliance with all applicable Laws in all material respects. The Company has no Knowledge of any changes to its business nor in any regulations, licensing requirements or orders to which the Company or any of the Company’s Employees (because of their activities on behalf of their employer) are subject that would have a Material Adverse Effect on the Company.

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: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed to be an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. This Agreement may also be executed and delivered by facsimile signature and in counterparts, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed to be an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. Only one such counterpart signed by the party against whom enforceability is sought needs to be produced to evidence the existence of this Agreement.

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: 1183, 629 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1013 (1995). Lawyers who are preparing to leave a law firm face a dilemma, caught between the fiduciary obligations they owe the other members of their firm, on one hand, and the duty of being able to adequately represent clients who choose to follow them to their new place of employment, on the other hand. As a practical matter, then, cases have recognized that some preliminary preparations by lawyers who are leaving a firm must be allowed, and that it is appropriate for lawyers in these circumstances to make arrangements, prior to their departure, to obtain new office space, equipment, and other materials necessary for the practice of law. Bray v. Squires, 702 S.W.2d 266 (Tex. Ct. App. 1985); see also Restatement (Second) of Agency § 393, Comment e (1958) (<HOLDING>). Discussing a similar question, the Supreme Options: A. holding that both agent and principal will be liable when the agent acts within the scope of his employment but for his own purposes B. holding that plea agreement with drug enforcement agency agent not enforceable when agent was not authorized by united states attorney to enter agreement C. holding that a court may not substitute its own construction of a statutory provision for a reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency D. recognizing that authorized representative may be general or only for a certain claim E. recognizing that agent may make certain preparations for own venture prior to termination of agency

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that agent may make certain preparations for own venture prior to termination of 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with respect to his sentence need not be addressed. However, two brief points are noted with respect to the ICA’s decision on this issue. First, respectfully, the ICA mistakenly noted that Gomez-Lobato was sentenced to one thirty-day term of incarceration, suspended for two years. See Gomez-Lobato, 2012 WL 5272234, at *1. Rather, Gomez-Lobato was sentenced to one 30-day term of imprisonment, and to an additional 30-day term of imprisonment, which was suspended provided that Gomez-Lobato comply with the terms and conditions of his probation. Second, at sentencing, the court apparently decided that Gomez-Lobato had failed to take responsibility for his actions before asking him if he would like to make a statement. Cf. State v. Chow, 77 Hawai'i 241, 246-47, 883 P.2d 663, 668-69 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Although the court eventually heard from Options: A. holding that defendants have a right to counsel in criminal proceedings B. recognizing that a criminal defendants right to a fair trial is fundamental C. holding that false statements are constitutionally protected D. recognizing that a defendants right to be heard in criminal proceedings prior to sentencing is constitutionally protected E. recognizing that criminal defendants right to testify is subject to crossexamination

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that a defendants right to be heard in criminal proceedings prior to sentencing is constitutionally protected
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: Waiver of Jury Trial . EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY OR THEREBY (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER THEORY). EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PERSON HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PERSON WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: REIT ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT THIS GUARANTY AND THE OBLIGATIONS OF REIT HEREUNDER SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND INTERPRETED AND DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: limitations period on Plaintiffs hybrid claim. 2. Federal Tolling Principles. The Ninth Circuit has not ruled on whether mental incompetency may toll federal statutes of limitations. Indeed, in Atkins v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 685 F.2d 1146 (9th Cir.1982), the Court explicitly left open the question of whether a plaintiffs mental incompetency could toll the statute of limitations on the Federal Employer’s Liability Act. After finding that the Plaintiff had not established facts sufficient to support a finding that he was mentally incompetent, the Court stated, Because we find no issue of fact, we need not decide whether the plaintiffs in-competeney will ever toll the FELA statute of limitations. But see, Brooks v. Southern Pacific Co., 105 Ariz. 442, 445, 466 P.2d 736, 739 (1970) (<HOLDING>). Id. at 1148 (citation in original). The cases Options: A. holding that the untimely petition in that case tolled the aedpa statute of limitations B. holding that the statute of limitations is tolled during a malicious prosecution suit when a timely complaint is filed C. holding statute of limitations should not be equitably tolled for taxpayer who filed a refund claim after the applicable statute of limitations D. recognizing that 2244dlds statute of limitations can be tolled E. holding that fela statute of limitations is tolled by incompetence

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that fela statute of limitations is tolled by incompetence
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: CURIAM. In this workers’ compensation case, the Employer/Carrier (E/C) appeals that portion of a final merits hearing order wherein the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) rejected its partial affirmative defense under section 440.09(5), Florida Statutes (2009 , 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (<HOLDING>). In contrast, the JCC here granted Claimant’s Options: A. holding that a district court judgment is not a final judgment appealable by the defendant unless it includes the final adjudication and the final sentence B. holding that there can be only one final appealable order C. holding that a rehearing order was not final or appealable D. holding that order containing both final disposition of claims ripe for adjudication as well as reservation of jurisdiction on unmediated pfbs results in final appealable order E. holding adjudication order based upon a determination on the merits in juvenile court is a final and appealable order

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that order containing both final disposition of claims ripe for adjudication as well as reservation of jurisdiction on unmediated pfbs results in final appealable order
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 Administrative Agent may set up standards and procedures to determine or re-determine the equivalent in Dollars of any amount expressed in any currency other than Dollars and otherwise may, but shall not be obligated to, rely on any determination made by any U.S. Loan Party or any L/C Issuer. Any such determination or redetermination by the Administrative Agent shall be conclusive and binding for all purposes, absent manifest error. No determination or redetermination by any U.S. Loan Party or L/C Issuer and no other currency conversion shall change or release any obligation of any U.S. Loan Party or of any U.S. Secured Party (other than the Administrative Agent and its Related Persons) under any U.S. Loan Document, each of which agrees to pay separately for any shortfall remaining after any conversion and payment of the amount as converted. The Administrative Agent may round up or down, and may set up appropriate mechanisms to round up or down, any amount hereunder to nearest higher or lower amounts and may determine reasonable de minimis payment thresholds.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The authorized capitalization of Grote Molen currently consists of 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, $0.001 par value, of which no shares are issued and outstanding, and 100,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value, of which 22,200,000 shares are issued and outstanding. The authorized capitalization of Merger Co. consists of 10,000 shares, $0.001 par value, of which 100 shares are issued and outstanding. All issued and outstanding shares of Grote Molen and Merger Co. are legally issued, fully paid, and nonassessable and not issued in violation of the preemptive or other right of any person. There are no dividends or other distributions due or payable with respect to any of the shares of capital stock of Grote Molen or Merger Co. On or prior to the Closing Date: (i) Grote Molen shall designate 5,000,000 shares of its authorized Preferred Stock as Series A Preferred Stock having the rights, privileges and preferences set forth in Exhibit B hereto; (ii) offer and sell up to 5,000,000 Common Stock purchase warrants, each entitling the holder to purchase one share of Grote Molen Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.70 per share commencing on or about September 1, 2018 and continuing for a period of five years thereafter, at an offering price not less than $0.01 per warrant; (iii) offer and sell up to 5,000,000 Units, each consisting of one share of Grote Molen Common Stock and one five-year Common Stock Purchase warrant exercisable at $0.70 per share, at an offering price of not less than $0.10 per Unit; (iv) Grote Molen shall cause certain liabilities of Grote Molen to be paid and satisfied in cash, pursuant to the issuance of shares of Grote Molen Common Stock or some combination thereof, so that on the Closing Date Grote Molen has liabilities in an amount not greater than $500,000; and (v) the current stockholders of Grote Molen shall irrevocably submit shares of Grote Molen Common Stock and warrants to Grote Molen for cancellation so that on the Closing Date there are issued and outstanding 8,800,000 shares of Grote Molen Common Stock and warrants to acquire up to 8,800,000 shares of Grote Molen Common Stock, subject to adjustment as provided in Section 6.10 hereof.

assistant: Capitalization