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: Corp., 794 S.W.2d at 4. Misidentification arises when two separate legal entities actually exist and a plaintiff mistakenly sues the entity with a name similar to that of the correct entity. Chilkewitz, 22 S.W.3d at 828; Enserch Corp., 794 S.W.2d at 5. In such a case, the plaintiff has sued the wrong party and limitations is not tolled. Enserch Corp., 794 S.W.2d at 5. It would be difficult to justify a set of rules that extended limitations when a plaintiff intentionally named a fictitious defendant, but barred an action when a plaintiff misidentified the defendant. See Grantham, 683 So.2d at 542. In either case, the true defendant was not notified of the action before limitations expired. See id.; cf. James v. Gru.ma Corp., 129 S.W.3d 755, 761 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2004, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>); see also Pierson, 959 S.W.2d at 347 (stating Options: A. holding that the government had not produced evidence that the defendant intended to influence an official proceeding because the evidence showed only that he intended to influence the state civil proceedings that he had brought against his insurance agency B. recognizing primary reason that limitations is tolled in cases of misnomer is that the party intended to be sued has been served and put on notice that he is the intended defendant C. holding that it is not enough that the defendant has acted with an intent that is tortious malicious or even criminal or that he has intended to inflict emotional distress the conduct itself must be extreme and outrageous D. recognizing that when a state employee is sued in his official capacity the state is the real party in interest and as a result the eleventh amendment is implicated E. holding that to establish estoppel defense to copyright infringement defendant must prove inter alia that plaintiff intended that its conduct would be acted on or so acted that defendant has a right to believe that it was so intended

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing primary reason that limitations is tolled in cases of misnomer is that the party intended to be sued has been served and put on notice that he is the intended defendant
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: expenses. There is conflicting evidence as to whether James Reiser experienced conscious pain and suffering between the time of the accident and his death, and the jury could have reasonably concluded that the evidence did not sustain this element of damage. During trial, the parties stipulated that medical and funeral bills in the total amount of $33,747.72 were “necessitated as a result of the accident which occurred on September 19, 1994, which resulted in the death of James Reiser.” These expenses were itemized in an exhibit which was received in evidence. It is true that a ju 8 (1970) (involving verdict of $1,600 where there was evidence of special damages of approximately $2,000, plus evidence of pain and permanent scarring); Bohn v. Kruger, 185 Neb. 407, 176 N.W.2d 14 (1970) (<HOLDING>). In Murrish v. Burkey, 1 Neb. App. 650, 510 Options: A. holding verdict inadequate when stipulated medical expenses were 319499 and verdict was in same amount notwithstanding evidence of additional uncontested damages B. holding that verdict of 1000 was inadequate where special damages for medical expenses were stipulated in amount of 164118 C. holding that the verdict must be sustained if there is any competent evidence to support the verdict D. holding that jurys damagesrelated questions and verdict of liability with clearly inadequate damages of only medical expenses but no noneconomic damages in case where liability was hotly contested strongly suggested compromised verdict E. holding that notwithstanding defendants consent the verdict was a nullity where the trial court proceeded to verdict with a jury of eleven

assistant: The best answer is A. holding verdict inadequate when stipulated medical expenses were 319499 and verdict was in same amount notwithstanding evidence of additional uncontested damages
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: Co., 716 F.2d 504, 510-12 (8th Cir.1983). Finally, we see no merit in Branson’s contention that the statute of repose violates an open courts provision allegedly contained within Article I, Section 6 of the Iowa Constitution. See Iowa Const, art. I., § 6 (“All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation; the General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens.”). We have found no cases, and Branson points us to none, which have interpreted this section of the Iowa Constitution to provide a right to open courts. Even assuming that such a right exists in Iowa, we are not convinced that the statute of repose would violate it. See Van Den Hul, 716 F.2d at 512 (<HOLDING>). The judgment of the District Court is Options: A. holding 10year statute of repose violates state constitutions guarantee of open courts in case involving defective machine B. holding that provision has the characteristics of a statute of repose C. holding that statute of repose was not subject to toiling provision applicable to statute of limitations because among other reasons it would ignore fundamental distinctions between ordinary statutes of limitations and statutes of repose D. holding that provision is a statute of repose because by its own terms the provision does not just procedurally bar an untimely claim it substantively extinguishes the cause of action E. holding that south dakotas products liability statute of repose does not violate south dakota constitutional provision providing that all courts shall be open

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that south dakotas products liability statute of repose does not violate south dakota constitutional provision providing that all courts shall be open
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: 115 S.Ct. 316, 130 L.Ed.2d 278 (1994), in support of its contention that, under SMCRA, administrative review of OSM orders is mandated. Southern Ohio is inapplicable to this case, because it concerned OSM enforcement under 30 U.S.C. § 1271(a)(2), for which administrative review is specifically mandated at § 1275. Id. at 1421. Section 1275 does not mandate administrative review for enforcement actions brought under § 1271(a)(1), as in this case. Darby, there fore, applies, and Coteau need not exhaust optional administrative remedies before seeking judicial review. Second, OSM argues that Coteau does not have standing to contest OSM’s reversal of the PSC determination. According to the Department of the Interior itself, this is incorrect. See Brothers, Inc. v. OSMRE, 101 IBLA 84 (1988) (<HOLDING>). B. Preliminary Relief In determining whether Options: A. holding that dismissal of prior action in louisiana federal court on the grounds of the statute of limitations bar subsequent action filed in minnesota federal district court B. holding that the federal action at issue must be authorized C. holding that if an individual is possessed of state authority and purports to act under that authority his action is state action D. holding that a mining operator subject to a federal enforcement action has standing based on the grounds that the state had taken appropriate action to challenge osms authority to issue a cessation order or notice of violation E. holding that the action taken need not be the substantial equivalent of dismissal in order to constitute adverse employment action

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a mining operator subject to a federal enforcement action has standing based on the grounds that the state had taken appropriate action to challenge osms authority to issue a cessation order or notice of violation
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 will reimburse all reasonable costs and expenses you incur and that are required for performance of your duties and responsibilities, upon presentment of receipts for such costs and expenses; provided however that any such costs and expenses comply with the Company’s expense reimbursement policy as such may be adopted and amended from time to time. The Company will also reimburse you for up to two reasonable roundtrip, coach class airfares per month between the San Diego area and the Chicago area through December 31, 2017 and so long as you remain employed with the Company as CFO through that date. You will be responsible for all applicable taxes related to the roundtrip airfares.

assistant: Expenses
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 August 30, 2017; provided , however , that no such termination will affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party (or parties).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was satisfied that protocols were followed after examining their case notes and the data collected. Further, Quartaro testified to the various safeguards Cellmark employed to protect against the risk of errors and to detect any such errors, if made. Accordingly, Quartaro could have been meaningfully cross-examined on the general and specific risks of error in forensic testing, whether the result of carelessness, incompetence, or fraud. See Boyd, 686 F.Supp.2d at 385 (finding no constitutional violation when only the DNA analyst who wrote the report, and not the intervening-testing analysts, testified because “the testifying expert was himself familiar with the[ ] intervening procedures and could be fully cross-examined as to their efficacy, accuracy, etc.”); Munoz, 958 N.E.2d at 1174 (<HOLDING>). Moreover, Quartaro certainly could have been Options: A. holding that an expert opinion on a question of law is inadmissible B. holding that a forensic accountant is an expert witness not a lay witness C. holding that an expert who offers an independent opinion based on another analysts report can be meaningfully crossexamined on the general risk of error in forensic testing D. recognizing that an advisory opinion is one that offers an opinion on a moot issue E. holding that an administrative agencys decision may not be based upon inadmissible expert opinion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an expert who offers an independent opinion based on another analysts report can be meaningfully crossexamined on the general risk of error in forensic testing
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in Carey were thus not parties to Ralph I. This procedural variation does not affect the issues now presented. 4 The petitioners assert that “transfer of these cases to Lewis County was a viable alternative’’ even before Ralph I. MDR at 10 n.31. That is incorrect. Prior cases held that actions initially brought in the proper county pursuant to RCW 4.12.010 could later be transferred to another county, but not the other way around. Ralph I, 182 Wn.2d at 245, 255 (citing Snyder, 48 Wn.2d at 639; Cugini, 24 Wn.2d at 409; N. Bend Lumber Co. v. City of Seattle, 147 Wash. 330, 336, 266 P. 156 (1928)). 5 We note that such language would be possible if that were the legislature’s intent. See ZDI Gaming, Inc. v. Wash. State Gambling Comm’n, 173 Wn.2d 608, 619, 618, 268 P.3d 929 (2012) (<HOLDING>). 6 At oral argument, counsel for the Options: A. holding that both saline county and grant county had jurisdiction to try the appellant for murder where the actual killing occurred in one county but the acts requisite to the consummation of the murder and the subsequent disposal of the body occurred in the other county B. holding a county and a road district had standing to sue state highway commission and county tax collector based on their interest in and control over the public roads of the county C. holding that the legislature wanted to have cases involving the gambling commission heard in thurston county pursuant to a statutory provision that no court of the state of washington other than the superior court of thurston county shall have jurisdiction over any action or proceeding against the commission quoting rcw 946095 D. recognizing the transfer of jurisdiction to the commonwealth court of those classes of cases previously heard by the court of common pleas of dauphin county as the court wherein the seat of state government is located E. holding before the apa definition of person was amended to include county that the board of county commission ers of dolores county could not sue the state agency that had ordered reappraisals of real property in dolores county in connection with valuation for ad valorem taxation because the board of county commissioners was not a person under the apa and did not otherwise have authority to sue under statute or constitution

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the legislature wanted to have cases involving the gambling commission heard in thurston county pursuant to a statutory provision that no court of the state of washington other than the superior court of thurston county shall have jurisdiction over any action or proceeding against the commission quoting rcw 946095
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 payment of principal made pursuant to this Section 3.01, or any refinancing, substitution or replacement of any Loans (including pursuant to any amendment or waiver of this Agreement) that effectuates such a payment, refinancing, substitution or replacement, shall be accompanied by accrued interest on the Loans at such time and, to the extent applicable, the Yield Maintenance Amount and the Call Protection Amount, all of which amounts shall be due and payable on the date of the effectiveness of such payment, refinancing, substitution or replacement.

assistant: Interests
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: born after 1962 must have 1/4 Blackfeet blood to be enrolled as members, without provision for any “descendant” membership), with Sioux & Assini-boine Ord. No. 1, § 1(d) & (e) (providing that “[e]ach child of one-fourth (1/4) or more Assiniboine and/or Sioux blood born after [October 1, 1960] to any member of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes” qualifies for full membership, and that “[e]ach child of one-eighth (1/8) or more but less than one-quarter (1/4), Assiniboine and/or Sioux blood born to any member of the Assini-boine and Sioux Tribes” qualifies for associate membership). We recognize that Smith relinquished his tribal enrollment in 1996. This decision does not definitively show, however, that Smith or the tribe ceased to consider Smith an Indian person. See Cruz, 554 F.3d at 850 (<HOLDING>). A tribal investigator, Tom Atkinson, Options: A. holding that bruce requires an analysis of indian status from the perspective of the individual as well as from the perspective of the tribe B. holding that as a matter of federal law an indian tribe is subject to suit only where congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity C. holding that an official of an indian tribe should be stripped of his authority and corresponding immunity to act on behalf of his tribe whenever he exercises a power his tribe was powerless to convey to him D. holding that an indian tribe is subject to suit only where congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity E. holding that state could require indian tribe to affix tax stamps purchased from the state to individual packages of cigarettes prior to the time of sale to nonmembers of the tribe and that state has power off the reservation to seize unstamped cigarettes as contraband

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that bruce requires an analysis of indian status from the perspective of the individual as well as from the perspective of the tribe
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in error were not tried by a jury of the state and district in which the crime was committed, in violation of the Sixth Amendment, because the jurors were drawn not from the entire district but only from one division thereof. The proposition disregards the plain text of the Sixth Amendment, the contemporary construction placed upon it by the Judiciary Act of 1789 ..., and the continuous legislative and judicial practice from the beginning.”); United States v. Cannady 54 F.3d 544, 547 (9th Cir.1995)(“[T]here is no constitutional right to a jury drawn from an entire judicial district, rather than from one division of the district.... [D]emographic differences between divisions do not render division-based jury selection invalid.”); Zicarelli v. Dietz, 633 F.2d 312, 316-318 (3d Cir.1980)(<HOLDING>). Rule 18 provides: Unless a statute or these Options: A. holding that there is no constitutional right to appeal a criminal conviction B. holding that there is no constitutional right to a jury selected from the whole district despite differences between divisions C. holding that there is no sixth amendment right to jury sentencing D. holding that there is both a statutory and a constitutional right to a jury trial under erisa because congress lacks constitutional authority to limit right to a jury E. holding that there is no distinction in the right to jury trial between sentencing factors and elements

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that there is no constitutional right to a jury selected from the whole district despite differences between divisions
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: right to a jury trial is guaranteed by the Constitution, ordinarily, a party must demand a trial by jury not later than ten days after the service of the last pleading directed towards an issue. Fed.R.Civ.P. 38(b). According to Rule 38(b), failure to file a timely demand results in waiver of the right. Id.; K-Mart Corp. v. Oriental Plaza, Inc., 875 F.2d 907, 914 (1st Cir.1989). Amendments and supplemental pleadings do not extend the time to make a jury demand except as to “new issues” that are raised. Lutz v. Glendale Union High Sch., Dist. No. 205, 403 F.3d 1061, 1066 (9th Cir.2005) (finding that if additional claims are new issues under Rule 38(b), then the plaintiffs jury trial demand is timely as to them); First Wisconsin Nat’l Bank v. Klapmeier, 526 F.2d 77, 79-80 (8th Cir.1975) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, amendments not introducing new Options: A. holding that an issue not raised on appeal is waived B. holding that defendant already waived jury trial on issues raised in original complaint but could get jury trial solely on new issue raised in amended answer C. holding that issues not raised in the trial court may not be raised later on appeal D. holding that issues not raised before the trial court cannot be raised on appeal E. holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendant already waived jury trial on issues raised in original complaint but could get jury trial solely on new issue raised in amended answer
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: witness admitted that he had prior convictions when he took the stand. Because Garcia failed to object to the information provided, failed to make any offer of proof, and fails to cite to relevant portions of the record, Garcia’s claim of error is unpreserved, unsupported by the record, and deficiently briefed. Cf. Rojo, 1999-NMSC-001, ¶53, 126 N.M. 438, 971 P.2d 829 (“Where there is a doubtful or deficient record, every presumption must be indulged ... in favor of the correctness and regularity of the [trial] court’s judgment.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted) (alteration in original)); State v. Herrera, 2004-NMCA-015, ¶¶ 8-9, 135 N.M. 79, 84 P.3d 696 (observing that “a defendant can waive fundamental rights, including constitutional rights,” and 0, 274 (Ct.App.1977) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we perceive no abuse of Options: A. holding that a photograph of the body of the victim at the scene was relevant and admissible because it illustrated clarified and corroborated the testimony of various witnesses B. holding photograph showing victim with his family photograph fell within the prosecutors latitude in showing victim and was not unduly prejudicial C. holding that because the photograph of the victim was for identification purposes only and the victims military service was never discussed at trial even if the photograph did evoke sympathy from the jury it was not reversible error to admit it D. holding autopsy photograph of victim was admissible even if defendant stipulated identity of victim E. holding that ownership of vehicle and presence at scene of crash sufficiently corroborated appellants statement

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a photograph of the body of the victim at the scene was relevant and admissible because it illustrated clarified and corroborated the testimony of various witnesses
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in the record suggests what law, if any, the arbitrators selected to decide the issues presented. Instead, plaintiff in effect seeks to overturn the arbitration award on the merits by arguing that the arbitrators improperly applied Colorado law to the facts as he perceives them. We agree with the trial court’s finding that the arbitration award is consistent with Colorado law and the conclusion that “the arbitrators resolved contested factual issues against plaintiff.” B. Plaintiff nevertheless argues that, pursuant to the FAA and federal cases construing it, an arbitration award may be set aside as exceeding the powers of the arbitrators if the award is arbitrary and capricious or manifests a complete departure from the law. See Borden v. Hammers, 941 F.Supp. 1170 (M.D.Fla.1996) (<HOLDING>); Checkrite of San Jose, Inc. v. Checkrite, Options: A. holding that a moiety award will be upheld unless it is arbitrary or capricious B. holding an authority ruling may only be set aside if arbitrary capricious an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law C. holding that an agencys decision is to be set aside only if it is arbitrary capricious an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law D. holding it is not arbitrary and capricious to request additional evidence of continuing disability E. recognizing a nonstatutory basis for setting aside an arbitration award if it is arbitrary and capricious

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing a nonstatutory basis for setting aside an arbitration award if it is arbitrary and capricious
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: Visa Inc. agrees that, as between Visa Inc. and the Administrative Agent and the Lenders, the obligations of any Borrower under this Agreement, the Notes or any other Loan Documents may be declared to be forthwith due and payable as provided in Article VII (and shall be deemed to have become automatically due and payable in the circumstances provided in said Article VII) for purposes of Section 11.1, notwithstanding any stay, injunction or other prohibition preventing such declaration (or such obligations from becoming automatically due and payable) as against any Borrower and that, in the event of such declaration (or such obligations being deemed to have become automatically due and payable), such obligations of any other Borrower shall forthwith become due and payable by Visa Inc. for purposes of said Section 11.1.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: grant empowering a court of common pleas to enforce a guardianship decree of a foreign state or nation. Particularly because the common pleas court ultimately appointed Mrs. Hilkmann as guardian, Mr. Hilkmann asserts that the court’s jurisdiction, as well as other aspects of the regularity of the proceedings, must be tested by the requirements of the statutory framework authorizing the appointment of a guardian of an incapacitated person, 20 Pa.C.S. §§ 5511-5518. Employing those requirements, Mr. Hilkmann indicates that the common pleas court lacked jurisdiction, because: 1) Daniel was not made a party to the Pennsylvania proceedings; 2) Daniel was never given the notice required by statute, see 20 Pa.C.S. § 5511; cf In re Hicks’ Estate, 414 Pa. 131, 134-35, 199 A.2d 283, 285 (1964) (<HOLDING>); 3) the court made no determination of Options: A. holding that a complete failure to serve a defendant with process deprives the trial court of personal jurisdiction violates due process and results in a judgment that is void as to that defendant and subject to challenge at any time B. holding that failure to take available appeal to board of immigration appeals constitutes failure to exhaust administrative remedies and deprives the court of appeals of jurisdiction to review C. recognizing that failure by state to provide the required certification deprives appeals court of jurisdiction over appeal D. holding that a lack of a waiver of sovereign immunity deprives federal courts of subject matter jurisdiction E. recognizing that failure to observe the required process deprives the court of jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that failure to observe the required process deprives the court of jurisdiction
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of expert evidence on the subject.... The rule in Arizona will continue to be that in the usual case we will support the trial court’s discretionary ruling on admissibility of expert testimony on eyewitness identification. Nor do we invite opinion testimony in even the most extraordinary case on the likelihood that a particular witness is correct or mistaken in identification or that eyewitness identification in general has a certain percentage of accuracy or inaccuracy. 135 Ariz. at 297, 660 P.2d at 1224 (emphasis supplied). If those words were not clear enough, we explicitly state at this time that trial courts should not admit direct expert testimony that quantifies the probabilities of the credibility of another witness. Cf. State v. Buell, 22 Ohio St.3d 124, 489 N.E.2d 795 (1986) (<HOLDING>). Thus, even where expert testimony on Options: A. holding that a specific instruction was unnecessary because eyewitness was crossexamined and the eyewitness testimony was discussed in defense counsels opening statement B. holding the error harmless due to eyewitness corroboration of the victims testimony C. holding admissible expert testimony concerning factors that may impair eyewitness identification and rejecting that concerning a particular eyewitness credibility and the statistical probability of eyewitness misidentification D. holding that the trial court did not err by failing to instruct the jury to consider certain additional factors in evaluating the validity of eyewitness identification testimony E. holding no abuse of discretion to exclude expert eyewitness identification testimony where governments case relied on more than eyewitness identification

assistant: The best answer is C. holding admissible expert testimony concerning factors that may impair eyewitness identification and rejecting that concerning a particular eyewitness credibility and the statistical probability of eyewitness misidentification
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 complaint is not subject to exhaustion because it seeks relief not available under the IDEA, namely compensatory and punitive damages. While the IDEA allows attorney’s fees and costs (which McCauley seek 64 (1st Cir. 2002) (“[W]e hold that plaintiffs who bring an IDEA-based claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in which they seek only money damages, must exhaust the administrative process available under the IDEA as a condition precedent to entering a state or federal court.”); Covington v. Knox Cnty. School Sys., 205 F.3d 912, 917 (6th Cir. 2000) (“[W]e agree with those courts that have decided that a mere claim for money damages is not sufficient to render exhaustion of administrative remedies unnecessary.”); N.B. by D.G. v. Alachua Cnty. School Bd., 84 F.3d 1376, 1379 (11th Cir. 1996) (<HOLDING>). McCauley’s voluntary decision to remove J.M. Options: A. recognizing that issue exhaustion requirement and requirement exhaustion of remedies are different B. holding that exhaustion is required under the plra even if the plaintiff seeks only money damages and money damages are not available as relief C. holding that plaintiffs cannot avoid the exhaustion requirement by limiting relief to money damages because otherwise future litigants could avoid the exhaustion requirement simply by asking for relief that administrative authorities could not grant D. holding a plaintiff cannot avoid exhaustion simply because he or she asks for damages E. holding exhaustion requirement inapplicable when requiring exhaustion would be futile

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plaintiffs cannot avoid the exhaustion requirement by limiting relief to money damages because otherwise future litigants could avoid the exhaustion requirement simply by asking for relief that administrative authorities could not grant
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that revenue sharing information was required by ERISA disclosure provisions: The allegedly omitted disclosures are not required by the language of the regulations and would instead require judicial expansion of the detailed disclosure regime crafted by Congress and the Department of Labor pursuant , to its statutory authority. ■Furthermore, there is nothing to suggest that receiving this additional non-prescribed information would effectively enhance investment decisions. In assessing the likely return on an investment the fees netted against the return are certainly relevant, but knowing the subsequent distribution of those fees has no impact on the investment’s value. See In re Merrill Lynch Investment Management Funds Securities Litigation, 434 F.Supp.2d 233, 238 (S.D.N.Y.2006) (<HOLDING>). In the context of. the disclosure of Options: A. holding inadmissible expert testimony that included statements that failure to disclose certain enumerated information would be a material omission under utah law that the material actually provided to investors did not meet disclosure requirements under the act and that the agreements at issue were securities under utah law B. holding that a plaintiff alleging securities fraud must show that a defendant 1 made a material misrepresentation or a material omission as to which he or she had a duty to speak 2 with scienter 3 in connection with the purchase or sale of securities C. holding that such information is not material under securities law D. holding that omission of information about shares held in corporations was material even if the securities were worthless at the time E. recognizing a duty of best execution under federal securities law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that such information is not material under securities law
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: estate professionals, bankers, appraisers and prospective buyers often view property while it is under construction." Appellant's Appendix at 18. We agree. It was reasonably foreseeable that other construction workers, prospective buyers, and other necessary professionals would be visiting the construction site. Further, it was reasonably foreseeable that a person would step on the Celotex. Guy's Concrete and Modern were performing work and had some control over the opening to the basement and the Celo-tex. Further, Dawn was rightfully on the premises. Consequently, Guy's Concrete and Modern owed a duty of care to Dawn, and the trial court did not err by denying the motions for summary judgment filed by Guy's Concrete and Modern on this issue. See, eg., Blake, 674 N.E.2d at 170-173 (<HOLDING>). II. Proximate Cause The next issue is whether Options: A. holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment B. holding that a probable cause determination is appropriate for summary judgment where there are no genuine issues of material fact and no credibility issues C. holding that when there are no genuine issues of material fact summary judgment is appropriate D. holding that summary judgment was improper where genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether prison officials prevented inmate from filing grievances E. holding that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment to the contractor where genuine issues of material fact existed regarding a duty to an injured construction worker

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment to the contractor where genuine issues of material fact existed regarding a duty to an injured construction worker
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: Parent shall keep reasonable and accurate records pertaining to the amounts billed to Spinco under this Agreement in accordance with Applicable Law (and at a minimum a period of up to four years after the termination of the last Service under this Agreement). Parent shall provide Spinco and its Representatives with reasonable access (to the extent permitted by Applicable Law) to such records during normal business hours and upon reasonable advance notice during the term of this Agreement to the extent reasonably necessary to allow Spinco or its Representatives to audit the amount billed under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, except that no Loan Party may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent, each L/C Issuer and each Lender (except by operation of law or to the extent permitted hereunder) and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an Eligible Assignee in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of this Section , (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this Section , and (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of subsection (f) of this Section (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in subsection (d) of this Section and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent, the L/C Issuers and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Under these circumstances, we elect not to reach Hartford’s proffered alternative basis. As Capianco’s claim is to be reviewed de novo, there is no need at this juncture to return it to Hartford to develop facts or for an exercise of discretion; therefore we simply remand this case back to the district court. See Mongeluzo v. Baxter Travenol Long Term Disability Benefit Plan, 46 F.3d 938, 942, 944 (9th Cir.1995); cf. Canseco v. Constr. Laborers Pension Trust for S. Cal, 93 F.3d 600, 609 (9th Cir.1996); Nelson v. EG & G Energy Measurements Group, Inc., 37 F.3d 1384, 1388-91 (9th Cir.1994). Although we refuse Capianco’s request to issue specific discovery orders, we note that on remand, Capianco’s two remaining theories may justify further discovery. See Mongeluzo, 46 F.3d at 943-44, 944 (<HOLDING>). Finally, because we remand, “neither party Options: A. holding that a court of appeals should review de novo a district courts determination of state law B. holding that district courts have discretion to admit additional evidence necessary to conduct an adequate de novo review C. holding that we review a district courts interpretation of a statute de novo D. holding that appellant was entitled to a de novo review however he was not entitled to a de novo review of an argument never raised E. recognizing de novo standard of review

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that district courts have discretion to admit additional evidence necessary to conduct an adequate de novo 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Revolving Line terminates on the Revolving Line Maturity Date, when the principal amount of all Revolving Advances, the unpaid interest thereon, and all other Obligations relating to the Revolving Line shall be immediately due and payable.

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: All representations and warranties made hereunder, in the other Loan Documents and in any document, certificate or statement delivered pursuant hereto or in connection herewith shall survive the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the making of the Loan and other extensions of credit hereunder.

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: policy which required all patrons to order a drink if they wished to remain in the club); Taylor v. Bar MT LLC, Civ. A. No. H-09-481, 2009 WL 5195982 (S.D.Tex. Dec.22, 2009) (discussing only a 42 U.S.C. § 2000a claim, not the Plaintiff’s other 42 U.S.C. § 1981 claim, arising from allegations that the dress code at Bar MT was a pretext for racial discrimination); Mazloum v. District of Columbia Police Dep’t, 522 F.Supp.2d 24 (D.D.C.2007); 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (discussing the "full and equal benefit” clause of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (rather the "make and enforce contracts” clause), which does not necessarily implicate contractual rights). 6 . Excepting the Sixth Circuit decision in Watson v. Fraternal Order of Eagles, supra. 7 . See also Perry v. Burger King 924 F.Supp. 548, 552 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (<HOLDING>); Jones v. City of Boston, 738 F.Supp. 604 Options: A. holding that retaliation claims are not cognizable under 42 usc 1981 B. holding in a title vii case but relying on 1981 cases that the issue is not the plaintiffs physical characteristics but whether he was discriminated against by other africanamericans because he was born black C. holding that plaintiff stated a valid liberty interest claim where he contended that based on industry custom he was foreclosed from working at any savings and loan in the state where he had been denied a de facto license D. holding that a prisoner stated a valid equal protection claim when he alleged he was denied a work assignment because of his sexual orientation E. holding that the plaintiff had stated a claim under 42 usc 1981 when he alleged that he was prohibited from using the restroom at a burger king after ordering and eating a meal because he was black

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the plaintiff had stated a claim under 42 usc 1981 when he alleged that he was prohibited from using the restroom at a burger king after ordering and eating a meal because he was black
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 Guarantor unconditionally agrees to pay all reasonable costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, incurred by the Agent or any of the Lenders in enforcing this Guaranty against any Guarantor, and each Guarantor shall pay and indemnify each Lender and Agent for, and hold it harmless from and against, any and all obligations, liabilities, losses, damages, costs, expenses (including disbursements and reasonable legal fees of counsel to any Lender or Agent), penalties, judgments, suits, actions, claims and disbursements imposed on, asserted against or incurred by any Lender or Agent (i) relating to the preparation, negotiation, execution, administration or enforcement of or collection under this Guaranty or any document, instrument or agreement relating to any of the Obligations, including in any bankruptcy, insolvency or similar proceeding in any jurisdiction or political subdivision thereof; (ii) relating to any amendment, modification, waiver or consent hereunder or relating to any telecopy or telephonic transmission purporting to be by any Guarantor or Borrower; (iii) in any way relating to or arising out of this Guaranty, or any document, instrument or agreement relating to any of the Guarantied Obligations, or any action taken or omitted to be taken by any Lender or Agent hereunder, and including those arising directly or indirectly from the violation or asserted violation by any Guarantor or Borrower or Agent or any Lender of any Law, rule, regulation, judgment, order or the like of any jurisdiction or political subdivision thereof (including those relating to environmental protection, health, labor, importing, exporting or safety) and regardless whether asserted by any governmental entity or any other Person.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the plaintiffs emotional distress; and (4) the distress suffered was so severe that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it. Buckley v. Trenton Sav. Fund Soc., 111 N.J. 355, 366, 544 A.2d 857 (1988). Defendants submit that Kounelis’s IIED claim must fail because his distress cannot be characterized as severe. Defendants assert that, despite Kounelis’s allegations of emotional distress, he has never been treated for his alleged anxiety, nor has he presented any objective medical evidence suggesting that his emotional distress was the proximate result of Defendants’ conduct. Contrary to Defendants’ assertions, neither medical treatment, nor expert testimony is necessary in order for a plaintiff to prevail on an IIED claim. Bolden v. SEPTA, 21 F.3d 29, 34 (3d Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, in New Jersey, there is generally no Options: A. holding that a tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress is distinct from a claim for emotional distress damages under the employment discrimination statute B. holding inter alia that expert testimony was not required to prove damages for emotional distress in an abuse of process claim C. holding emotional distress is a distinct claim from wrongful death D. holding in a fcra case that plaintiffs may not rely on mere conclusory statements rather they must sufficiently articulate true demonstrable emotional distress including the factual context in which the emotional distress arose evidence corroborating the testimony of the plaintiff the nexus between the conduct of the defendant and the emotional distress the degree of such mental distress mitigating circumstances if any physical injuries suffered due to the emotional distress medical attention resulting from the emotional duress psychiatric or psychological treatment and the loss of income if any E. holding that expert testimony is not required to corroborate a claim for emotional distress

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that expert testimony is not required to corroborate a claim for emotional distress