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: P.3d 516 (quoting State v. Reed, 2000 UT 68, ¶18, 8 P.3d 1025). Additionally, the prejudice must be "such that there is a reasonable likelihood the jury would have reached a more favorable result absent the comments." Reed, 2000 UT 68, 1 18, 8 P.3d 1025. Unlike the majority, however, I would hold that Defendant has satisfied his burden in meeting this two-prong test. ¶ 25 First, the prosecutor called the jurors' attention to matters not proper for their consideration. - During closing arguments, the prosecutor relied on information not admitted into evidence and implied both that Defendant had stolen software licenses and that Myers could not have legally consented to Defendant taking the computer because of that software. See generally State v. Kohl, 2000 UT 35, ¶¶ 23-24, 999 P.2d 7 (<HOLDING>). Further, the charge against the Defendant Options: A. holding that district court had not abused discretion in denying rule 59 motion because no persuasive reason has been shown why this evidence could not have been presented during the trial nor does it appear that it would have altered the result B. holding that it is inappropriate to make a claim to the jury during closing arguments when no evidence hals been presented during trial to support it C. holding that to obtain the proper context of a challenged statement made during closing arguments the court must recount in its entirety the portion of the closing argument wherein those statements appear D. holding that plaintiffs failure to object to the improper comments of defendant during closing arguments resulted in waiver of plaintiffs right to argue the issue on appeal because the trial court was not given an opportunity to rule on the issue E. holding that this court has discretion to hear arguments presented to it in the first instance provided that it otherwise has jurisdiction over the claim

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that it is inappropriate to make a claim to the jury during closing arguments when no evidence hals been presented during trial to support it
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: reliance on the misrepresentation. See Souran v. Travelers Ins. Co., 982 F.2d 1497, 1503 (11th Cir.1993) (citing Horn v. Pate Constr. Co., Inc., 607 So.2d 423, 427 (1992)). As with the fraud count, CS and TS argue that MeterLogic has not stated a claim for negligent misrepresentation because it has not alleged it took any action in reliance on their statements. A plaintiff is not required to describe the action it took with a high degree of specificity. It is enough for a plaintiff to allege, as Me-terLogic has, that the defendant was aware the plaintiff would rely on the defendant’s representations and that the plaintiff did in fact rely on them by, for example, entering into a contract with the defendant. See Florida Women’s Med. Clinic, Inc. v. Sultan, 656 So.2d 931, 933 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Under its negligent misrepresentation count, Options: A. holding that allegation that plaintiff relied on defendants representation by entering into a lease with it stated valid cause of action for negligent misrepresentation B. holding negligent misrepresentation sufficient C. holding plaintiffs allegation that defendants committed torts in houston texas was sufficient to bring defendants under the longarm statute for plaintiffs claims of various forms of fraud and negligent misrepresentation D. holding that continuing course of negligent representation postpones accrual of cause of action until that representation is terminated unless plaintiff earlier discovers injury or fraudulent concealment E. holding that the plaintiff could bring an action for negligent misrepresentation although the plaintiff could not sue on the contract because the contract was void

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that allegation that plaintiff relied on defendants representation by entering into a lease with it stated valid cause of action for negligent misrepresentation
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: Payment of the Purchase Price Adjustment, if any, shall be made by Purchaser or Seller, as the case may be, by wire transfer of immediately available funds to the wire transfer address of the other party not later than the fifth (5th) Business Day following the date on which the period for Objections has expired or, if any Objections are asserted, not later than the fifth (5th) Business Day following the date on which the procedures for resolution of the Objections in this Section 2.2 have been completed. The wire transfer address for such payment shall be designated by Purchaser or Seller, as the case may be, by notice to the other party on or before the second (2nd) Business Day prior to the date for payment set forth above.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: conduct did not violate the Fourth Amendment.'" Id., ¶ 33 (citing United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 918 (1984)). The exception encompasses situations in which "police officers act in objectively reasonable reliance upon [a search] warrant, which ha[s] been issued by a detached and neutral magistrate." State v. Eason, 2001 WI 98, ¶ 74, 245 Wis. 2d 206, 629 N.W.2d 625. "[T]he burden is upon the State to show that the process used in obtaining the search warrant included a significant investigation and a review by either a police officer trained and knowledgeable in the requirements of probable cause and reasonable suspicion, or a knowledgeable government attorney." Id. ¶ 16. The search warrant in this case was signed by a Milwaukee County Court Commissioner, and t 1007 (Md. 2004) (<HOLDING>); Porter v. State of Texas, 93 S.W.3d 342, Options: A. holding that a drugdetection dog sniff outside a garage door at a home was not a search under the fourth amendment B. holding a dog sniff outside the defendants front door was not a fourth amendment search C. holding that a dog sniff outside the defendants door in his apartment building was not a search within the meaning of the fourth amendment so long as the police were lawfully present in the hallway when the search occurred D. holding that a dog sniff of an apartment door from a common area is a permissible nonsearch under the fourth amendment E. holding that a dog sniff of the area outside the door of a hotel room is not a search under the fourth amendment or the texas constitution because the dogs sniff does not explore the details of the hotel room and the sniff reveals nothing about the room other than the presence of cocaine in which there is no legitimate privacy interest

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a dog sniff of an apartment door from a common area is a permissible nonsearch under the fourth amendment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: properly be resolved by summary judgment.” Id. (quoting Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Steve Hull Chevrolet, Inc., 513 So.2d 218, 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)). Because certain provisions in the parties’ contract are disputed and are reasonably susceptible to more than one construction, an issue of fact remains in the instant case. As such, the trial court erred in entering summary judgment. See Strama, 793 So.2d at 1132 (“When ‘there is a genuine issue of material fact as to the interpretation that the parties gave the ambiguous contract provision,’ summary judgment is inappropriate.”) (quoting Hancock v. Brumer, Cohen, Logan, Kandell & Kaufman, 580 So.2d 782, 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)); see also Birwelco-Montenay, Inc. v. Infilco Degremont, Inc., 827 So.2d 255, 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND for Options: A. holding that rules of contract construction are to be applied where the language used is ambiguous B. holding that when a contract is unambiguous the court will enforce the plain meaning of the contract as the intention of the parties C. holding that when a contract is ambiguous and the parties suggest different interpretations summary judgment is inappropriate because an issue of fact exists D. holding that where the language of the contract is unambiguous and conveys a definite meaning the court may decide the meaning of the contract as a matter of law E. holding that where each side ascribes a different meaning to what the sides claim is the unambiguous language in a contract the contract is ambiguous and summary judgment is improper

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that where each side ascribes a different meaning to what the sides claim is the unambiguous language in a contract the contract is ambiguous and summary judgment is improper
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: Any notices or other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been sufficiently given if delivered personally or three business days after deposit in the United States mail by Certified Mail, return receipt requested, properly addressed and postage prepaid, if to the Company, the Bank or the Committee, at the Bank’s principal office address at 3980 Premier Drive, High Point, North Carolina 27265; and, if to Participant, at his last address appearing on the books of the Bank. The Bank and Participant may change their address or addresses by giving written notice of such change as provided herein. Any notice or other communication hereunder shall be deemed to have been given on the date actually delivered or as of the third (3rd) business day following the date mailed as set forth above, as the case may be.

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

user: 2. The Receiving Party shall limit the possession and use of the Information to a “need-to-know” basis among its Representatives. 4. The Receiving Party agrees that the Information will be used solely for giving effect to the Business Under Discussion and further that it will not disclose to any person (i) the Information and (ii) the fact that the Information has been made available to the Receiving Party or that the Receiving Party have inspected any portion of the Information, for any reason or purpose whatsoever, unless the Providing Party has consented in writing to such disclosure or except as stated otherwise herein or as required by law, order, decree, regulation, or governmental agency request. No modification, amendment or waiver of this Agreement shall be binding unless it is in writing and signed by each of the Parties.

assistant: Yes
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 execution, delivery and performance by the Partnership Entities of this Agreement and each of the other Operative Documents to which they are a party, the issuance and sale of the Purchased Units, and any other transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the other Operative Documents and the application of the proceeds from the sale of the Purchased Units will not, and the consummation of the Conveyance did not, (i) conflict with or result in a breach or violation of any of the terms or provisions of, or constitute a default under, or result in the creation or imposition of any lien, charge or encumbrance upon any property or assets of any of the Partnership Entities pursuant to, any indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, loan agreement, license, lease or other agreement or instrument to which any of the Partnership Entities is a party or by which any of the Partnership Entities is bound or to which any of the property, right or assets of any of the Partnership Entities is subject; (ii) result in any violation of the provisions of the Organizational Documents of any of the Partnership Entities; or (iii) result in any violation of any law or statute or any judgment, order, decree, rule or regulation of any court or arbitrator or governmental or regulatory authority, except, in the case of clauses (i) and (iii) above, for any such conflict, breach, violation or default that would not, individually or in the aggregate, have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: Section 3.17 of Sellers’ Disclosure Letter sets forth a true, complete and correct list and description of all insurance policies in force and held by WST Seller or any of its Affiliates with respect to the Project Assets, together with a statement of the aggregate amount of claims relating to the Project, the Project Site or the Project Assets paid out since the applicable insurance policy was obtained and claims relating to the Project, the Project Site or the Project Assets pending under each such insurance policy. As of the Development Completion Acknowledgement Date, all such insurance policies are in full force and effect, all premiums due thereon have been paid and WST Seller is in compliance in all material respects with the terms and provisions of such insurance policies. Furthermore, solely as they relate to the Project, the Project Site and the Project Assets, as of the Development Completion Acknowledgement Date: (a) there is no claim pending under any of such insurance policies as to which coverage has been questioned, denied or disputed by the underwriters of such insurance policies; and (b) WST Seller has received no written notice that the Project, the Project Site, or any Project fixtures, equipment or improvements, or the operation thereof, will not be insurable or will be subject to exclusions arising from actual or potential defects in the Project, Project Site or Project Assets.

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: (a) With respect to any payment made to or by you hereunder, you agree to pay (or, alternatively, to permit us to pay on your behalf) any present or future taxes, levies, imposts, deductions, charges, or withholdings, and all liabilities with respect thereto, excluding taxes imposed on net income and all income and franchise taxes (all such non-excluded taxes, levies, imposts, deductions, charges, withholdings and liabilities being hereinafter referred to as “ Taxes ”).

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: 5.7 content of communications : skype is not the source of , does not verify or endorse and takes no responsibility for the content of communications made using the software .

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: At the closing of the Transfer of a Membership Interest pursuant to Sections 3.6(b) or 3.6(c) , the Transferee shall deliver to the Transferring Member the full consideration required by this Agreement. Any transfer or similar taxes involved in such sale shall be paid by the Transferring Member, and the Transferring Member shall provide the Transferee with such evidence of the Transferring Member’s authority to Transfer hereunder and such tax lien waivers and similar instruments as the Transferee may reasonably request.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: not to exceed two (2) stories in height, or tri-level single[-]family dwelling and a private garage not to exceed one (1) story in height for not more than three (3) cars. (Emphasis added.) ¶ 13 Neither party to this action requested that t a contract between the property owners as a whole and each individual property owner and that the interpretation of the Restrictions presents a question of law, we review the trial court’s interpretation of the Restrictions de novo. Tezak, 177 Ariz. at 448, 868 P.2d at 1081. The Hortons took possession of Lot 1 with both actual and constructive knowledge of the Restrictions, and are therefore entitled to enforce the contractual obligations contained therein. See O’Malley v. Cent. Methodist Church, 67 Ariz. 245, 250-51, 194 P.2d 444, 448 (1948) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 15 By dismissing the Hortons’ complaint and Options: A. recognizing that commonplan restrictive covenants are enforceable by any grantee as against any other upon the theory that there is a mutuality of covenant and consideration which binds each and gives to each the appropriate remedy quoting korn v campbell 192 ny 490 85 ne 687 689 1908 B. holding that a contract need not have mutuality of obligation as long as it is supported by consideration C. holding that where covenant contained in each deed and contract to purchase lot in development provided that purchaser covenanted to pay developer and its successors 20 each year for general maintenance that covenant remained in force until stated date and that it should be automatically renewed for each tenyear period thereafter unless owners of at least twothirds of lots agreed in writing to change or abrogate it covenant was not invalid on theory that it imposed perpetual obligation incapable of abrogation D. holding that state courts may not enforce racially restrictive covenants E. holding that the restrictive covenants at issue are unenforceable as a matter of public policy

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that commonplan restrictive covenants are enforceable by any grantee as against any other upon the theory that there is a mutuality of covenant and consideration which binds each and gives to each the appropriate remedy quoting korn v campbell 192 ny 490 85 ne 687 689 1908
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute but one and the same instrument, and may be transmitted by fax or electronic mail.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS JOINDER SHALL BE CONSTRUED AND ENFORCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND GOVERNED BY THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REFERENCE TO ITS CONFLICT OF LAWS PRINCIPLES TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SAME ARE NOT MANDATORILY APPLICABLE BY STATUTE AND WOULD PERMIT OR REQUIRE THE APPLICATION OF LAWS OF ANOTHER JURISDICTION.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Seller hereby irrevocably submits to the jurisdiction of the state or federal courts located in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin in connection with any suit, action or other proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, and hereby agrees not to assert, by way of motion, as a defense, or otherwise in any such suit, action or proceeding that the suit, action or proceeding is brought in an inconvenient forum, that the venue of the suit, action or proceeding is improper or that this Agreement or the subject matter hereof and thereof may not be enforced by such courts.

assistant: Jurisdictions
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: (same). 2. Plaintiffs appeal was properly before the Civil Service Commission and the City Council, which upheld his termination. Plaintiff made a general appearance in the administrative proceedings, notwithstanding his insistence to the contrary. See §66-368 Geary St., L.P. v. Superior Court, 219 Cal.App.3d 1186, 268 Cal.Rptr. 678, 681 (1990) (<HOLDING>). 3. The district court, at our instruction, Options: A. holding that one of the effects of submitting to the courts jurisdiction by making a general appearance is that a party waives any objection to service of process B. holding that defendant did not waive his special appearance by filing a motion for new trial subject to the special appearance C. holding that party waived special appearance D. holding that defendant did not waive special appearance E. holding that partys label of appearance as general or special does not control and that a request for continuance is a form of relief that a party may seek only by submitting to the courts jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that partys label of appearance as general or special does not control and that a request for continuance is a form of relief that a party may seek only by submitting to the courts 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: as "Leykis" unless context requires otherwise. On issues that Westwood One alone appeals, we refer to it by name. 4 . Treacy v. Municipality of Anchorage, 91 P.3d 252, 260 (Alaska 2004). 5 . Botelho v. Griffin, 25 P.3d 689, 692 (Alaska 2001). 6 . Alaska Legislative Council v. Knowles, 21 P.3d 367, 370 (Alaska 2001). 7 . French v. Jadon Inc., 911 P.2d 20, 32 (Alaska 1996); see also Restatement (SEcomp) or Torts § 558 (1977). 8 . Briggs v. Newton, 984 P.2d 1113, 1120-21 (Alaska 1999) (quoting French, 911 P.2d at 32); see also RestatemENT (SEcomp) or Torts § 559 (1977). 9 . Restatement (SEeconp) or Torts § 566 cmt. a (1977); see also Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1, 13, 110 S.Ct. 2695, 111 LEd.2d 1 (1990). 10 . See Restatement (Second) or Torts § 559 .2d 890 (9th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). 17 . FCC v. Pacifica Found., 438 U.S. 726, 98 Options: A. recognizing as a distinct social group gay men with female sexual identities in mexico B. holding article describing leidholdt and members of her organization as pus bloated sexually repressed hjating men hating sex and hating themselves and frustrated group of sexual fascists was not defamatory C. holding experts twenty years of experience investigating and supervising sex offenders and her extensive and continuous training qualified her to testify as an expert on the issue of whether a convicted sex offender posed a continuing threat to society D. holding that the government was not obligated to turn over the names of three men who had had previous sexual relations with a rape and murder victim where the police themselves learned of these men either from sources with whom the defendants attorney spoke or from persons readily accessible to the defendant E. holding that government informants are not members of a particular social group

assistant: The best answer is B. holding article describing leidholdt and members of her organization as pus bloated sexually repressed hjating men hating sex and hating themselves and frustrated group of sexual fascists was not defamatory
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: price. Moreover, as a practical matter, there is no “interim” between the placement of the customer’s bid and its acceptance or rejection during which the customer could exert control over Priceline. The electronic transaction is nearly instantaneous. In effecting that transaction, Priceline’s actions are akin to those of an intermediary or middleman rifling through its inventory of discounted hotel rooms until it locates an item for which the customer has stated a willingness to pay a specified price. The fact that only Priceline has access to both its algorithm and its particular inventory of discounted hotel rooms does not create a fiduciary relationship with a customer where none otherwise exists. See Hi-Ho Tower, Inc. v. Com-Tronics, Inc., 255 Conn. 20, 42, 761 A.2d 1268 (2000) (<HOLDING>). No different conclusion regarding agency is Options: A. holding that technical expertise or sjuperior skill and knowledge alone do not create a fiduciary duty among parties involved in a business transaction B. holding that a fiduciary who receives consideration in connection with a transaction involving plan assets violated section 406b and a nonfiduciary who facilitated that transaction could be liable C. holding that parties intent to create or extend agency relationship may be inferred from their conduct viewed in light of all circumstances surrounding transaction D. recognizing step transaction doctrine whereby courts must consider all steps of transaction in light of entire transaction so that substance of transaction will control over form of each step E. holding that a sellers superior knowledge of a product does not justify imposition of a fiduciary relationship in the absence of a conscious assumption of fiduciary duties

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that technical expertise or sjuperior skill and knowledge alone do not create a fiduciary duty among parties involved in a business transaction
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 defined terms used herein without definition shall have the meaning ascribed thereto in the Agreement; provided that all references to "Baltic Avenue" or "Baltic Drive" in the Agreement shall be deemed to be "Baltic Way" for all purposes.

assistant: Definitions
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., 407 U.S. 1, 15, 92 S.Ct. 1907, 32 L.Ed.2d 513 (1972), the Supreme Court held that “the forum clause should control absent a strong showing that it should be set aside.” The Second Circuit, however, has since made clear that the “extra protection that Bremen accords to mandatory forum selection clauses,” is not applicable to a permissive forum-selection clause which “contemplates more than one forum.” Blanco v. Banco Indus. de Venezuela, S.A., 997 F.2d 974, 979 (2d Cir.1993). Further, “[a]n agreement conferring jurisdiction in one forum will not be interpreted as excluding jurisdiction elsewhere unless it contains specific language of exclusion.” John Boutari and Son, Wines and Spirits, S.A v. Attiki Importers and Distribs., Inc., 22 F.3d 51, 53 (2d Cir.1994) (emphasis added) (<HOLDING>). Defendants argue that, despite the Franchise Options: A. holding that a forumselection clause which stated that any dispute arising between the parties hereunder shall come within the jurisdiction of the competent greek courts was permissive rather than mandatory B. holding that a forumselection clause was mandatory where it stated that for any action brought to enforce such terms and conditions venue shall lie exclusively in clark county washington C. holding that a forumselection clause was mandatory because it provided for exclusive jurisdiction and venue in a particular court D. holding clause reading the parties agree that in any dispute jurisdiction and venue shall be in california to be mandatory E. holding that the clause any dispute that shall arise between the parties with reference to the interpretation of this agreement or their rights with respect to any transaction involved was broad

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a forumselection clause which stated that any dispute arising between the parties hereunder shall come within the jurisdiction of the competent greek courts was permissive rather than mandatory
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: shall not be held out or used by me in any manner nor for any purpose whatsoever. 3. I have destroyed the original of said document, and turned over all copies thereof for destruction. We therefore affirm the trial court’s order dismissing the appellees’ complaint as moot. As to the attorney’s fees and costs awarded to the appellees as the prevailing parties, we also affirm. Section 709.08(11), Florida Statutes (2007), provides that the prevailing party in power of attorney litigation is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs. The determination of the prevailing party for the purpose of awarding attorney’s fees and costs is based on whether the party seeking fees succeeded on any significant issue(s) in the litigation. See Moritz v. Hoyt Enters., Inc., 604 So.2d 807, 810 (Fla.1992) (<HOLDING>); Boxer Max Corp. v. Cane A. Sucre, Inc., 905 Options: A. recognizing that a school district must be a prevailing party in order to be entitled to attorneys fees under the idea B. holding that successful party is one who is the ultimate prevailing party in the litigation C. holding that a defendant is the prevailing party within the meaning of statutory provisions awarding attorneys fees to the prevailing party even when the plaintiff voluntarily dismisses the action D. holding that the party prevailing on the significant issues in the litigation is the party that should be considered the prevailing party for attorneys fees E. holding that prevailing party has no standing to appeal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the party prevailing on the significant issues in the litigation is the party that should be considered the prevailing party for attorneys fees
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 member of the ERISA Group has fulfilled its obligations under the minimum funding standards of ERISA and the Code with respect to each Plan and is in substantial compliance in all material respects with the presently applicable material provisions of ERISA and the Code with respect to each Plan. No member of the ERISA Group has (a) sought a waiver of the minimum funding standard under Section 412 of the Code in respect of any Plan, (b) failed to make any contribution or payment to any Plan or Multiemployer Plan or made any amendment to any Plan which, in either case has resulted or could result in the imposition of a material Lien or the posting of a material bond or other material security under ERISA or the Code or (c) incurred any material liability under Title IV of ERISA other than a liability to the PBGC for premiums under Section 4007 of ERISA.

assistant: Erisa
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 principal amounts of the Restatement Effective Date Term Loans shall be repaid in consecutive quarterly installments (each, an “ Installment ”) on each Payment Date, commencing March 31, 2017, based on an amortization schedule, as set forth in Schedule 2.09 as such Schedule may be supplemented or increased from time to time pursuant to a Joinder Agreement to reflect an increase in the size of the Restatement Effective Date Term Loans pursuant to Section 2.22, and the balance of the Restatement Effective Date Term Loans shall be repaid at the Restatement Effective Date Term Loan Maturity Date; provided that, except as set forth above, in the event any New Term Loans are made, such New Term Loans shall be repaid after the applicable Increased Amount Date based on an amortization schedule, if any, determined by the Borrower and the applicable holders of the New Term Loans.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: judgment |fiwithin the ambit of La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B). Therefore, it is not appealable absent designation as a final judgment by the district court. No such designation appears in the record, nor do the Rosenbergs assert that they have sought or obtained one. We therefore lack appellate jurisdiction to review the September 6, 2016 judgment. See Delahoussaye v. Tulane Univ. Hosp. & Clinic, 2012-0906, p. 4 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2/20/13), 156 So.3d 560, 562. Next, considering the September 27, 2016 judgment, the district court’s ruling, denying Lobell’s motion to amend the August 22, 2013 judgment, is an interlocutory decree and is not part of an unrestricted appeal from a valid final judgment. See Dunker v. New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, 411 So.2d 71, 72 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1982) (<HOLDING>). See also Input/Output Marine Sys., Inc. v. Options: A. holding that there was no right to appeal an order denying a motion for correction of judgment which was filed after delays for applying for new trial and appeal expired B. holding an order denying a motion for summary judgment is interlocutory and not appealable C. holding that notice of appeal was not effectively taken where appeal was filed simultaneously with timely motion for reconsideration because when timely motion for reconsideration is filed a notice of appeal filed prior to disposition of the motion to reconsider has no effect D. holding trial court did not abuse discretion in denying motion for new trial by operation of law because motion was not properly presented even though a notice of presentment was filed and the docket sheet contained an entry for the motion having been filed E. holding an appeal may be taken from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that there was no right to appeal an order denying a motion for correction of judgment which was filed after delays for applying for new trial and appeal expired
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 Court will review whether a reasonable jury could conclude, based on the evidence submitted by plaintiff and drawing favorable inferences therefrom, that the alleged actions taken against plaintiff after August 12, 2003 were taken in retaliation for his protected activity. As defendant does not dispute that the supervisors in question were aware of plaintiffs protected activity and that he suffered adverse employment actions, the Court will examine whether a reasonable jury could conclude that the two were causally related. A plaintiff may establish a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse employment action either through direct evidence of retaliatory animus, or by circumstantial evidence. See Sumner v. U.S. Postal Serv., 899 F.2d 203, 209 (2d Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Where there is no direct evidence of Options: A. holding that plaintiff may prove discriminatory motive by presenting evidence of conduct or statements by persons involved in the decisionmaking process that may be viewed as directly reflecting the alleged retaliatory attitude B. holding that discrimination can be established through other evidence such as disparate treatment of fellow employees who engaged in similar conduct C. holding that employers intent may be inferred through circumstantial evidence D. holding that a causal connection may be established indirectly with circumstantial evidence for example by showing that the protected activity was followed by discriminatory treatment or through evidence of disparate treatment of employees who engaged in similar conduct or directly through evidence of retaliatory animus E. holding that lack of consent may be established by adequate circumstantial evidence

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a causal connection may be established indirectly with circumstantial evidence for example by showing that the protected activity was followed by discriminatory treatment or through evidence of disparate treatment of employees who engaged in similar conduct or directly through evidence of retaliatory animus
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you acknowledge that opinions expressed in user content on the spotify support community are those of contributors of such user content only and do not reflect the opinions or policies of spotify or any of its officers , shareholders , employees , agents , directors , subsidiaries , affiliates , suppliers , or licensors .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the Buyer Ancillary Agreements by Buyer have been duly authorized and approved by all necessary action of Buyer and do not require any further authorization or consent of Buyer. This Agreement is, and each Buyer Ancillary Agreement when made by Buyer and the other parties thereto will be, a legal, valid and binding agreement of Buyer enforceable in accordance with its terms, except in each case as such enforceability may be limited by bankruptcy, moratorium, insolvency, reorganization or other similar laws affecting or limiting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally and except as such enforceability is subject to general principles of equity (regardless of whether such enforceability is considered in a proceeding in equity or at law).

assistant: Authorizations
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: habeas corpus discharging petitioner with directions to trial court to permit a guilty plea to third degree arson for consideration by trial court). Accordingly, we reverse the lower court’s decision and remand this ease solely for the purpose of conducting a new sentencing hearing, wherein the lower court will consider the State’s recommendation of a ten-year sentence in exchange for the Appellant’s conviction of one count of aggravated robbery, prior to resentencing the Appellant. We recognize that once the State has made its recommendation of a ten-year sentence, the trial court is not bound by that recommendation as sentencing under the aggravated robbery statute is within the sound discretion of the trial court. See State v. Phillips, 199 W.Va. 507, 514, 485 S.E.2d 676, 683 (1997) (<HOLDING>); Syl. Pt. 4, State v. Goodnight, 169 W.Va. Options: A. holding that if the legislature has granted the agency discretion over a particular matter then we review the agencys action pursuant to the deferential abuse of discretion standard bearing in mind that the legislature determines the boundaries of that discretion B. recognizing that the legislature has provided circuit courts with broad openended discretion in sentencing individuals for the offenses of aggravated robbery C. holding that district courts discretion is extremely broad D. recognizing the courts discretion to find aggravated circumstances E. recognizing that congress has the power to completely divest the courts of their sentencing discretion and that congress granted broad authority to the sentencing commission guided by specific goals and principles

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the legislature has provided circuit courts with broad openended discretion in sentencing individuals for the offenses of aggravated robbery
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: not carried the initial burden of establishing either proper cause or a change of circumstances, the trial court is not authorized by statute to revisit an otherwise valid prior custody decision and engage in a reconsideration of the statutory best interest factors. ’ [Emphasis added.]” These initial steps to changing custody — finding a “change of circumstance or proper cause” and not changing an “established custodial environment” without clear and convincing evidence — are intended to “erect a barrier against removal of a child from an established custodial environment and to minimize unwarranted and disruptive changes of custody orders.” Heid v AAASulewski (After Remand), 209 Mich App 587, 593; 532 NW2d 205 (1995). See also Foskett v Foskett, 247 Mich App 1, 6; 634 NW2d 363 (2001) (<HOLDING>). The movant, of course, has the burden of Options: A. recognizing the compelling need to give a measure of finality to custody decrees in order to ensure a more stable environment for the child B. holding that the failure to attach a custody order was not reversible error because there was no showing of prejudice where there was no indication that the respondent was unaware of the placement or custody of the children at any time the motion to terminate stated that dss was given legal custody of the minor children and the record included a copy of an order in effect when the motion was filed that awarded dss custody of the children C. recognizing the legislatures intent in enacting the child custody act was to prevent the removal of children from established custodial environments except in the most compelling cases quoting braver v baker 411 mich 567 577 309 nw2d 532 1981 D. holding that the uccja applied to a california child custody order granting temporary custody of two children to their father E. holding that in cases of ambiguity we may resort to subsequent amendments in order to glean the legislatures intent

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing the legislatures intent in enacting the child custody act was to prevent the removal of children from established custodial environments except in the most compelling cases quoting braver v baker 411 mich 567 577 309 nw2d 532 1981
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: UCL and CLRA. In considering whether the plaintiff in Bruno had standing to bring claims arising from the defendants’ gelcap product, when the plaintiff had only purchased the defendants’ liquid product, the court noted that “treatises and the vast majority of persuasive authority indicate that ... the issue of whether a class representative may be allowed to present claims on behalf of others who have similar, but not identical, interests depends not on standing, but on an assessment of typicality and adequacy of representation.” Id. at 530 (citing Greenwood v. Compucredit Corp., No. 4:08-cv-04878, 2010 WL 4807095, at *3 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 19, 2010); Arevalo v. Bank of Am. Corp., 850 F.Supp.2d 1008, 1017 (N.D.Cal.2011); Fallick v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 162 F.3d 410, 423 (6th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); 7AA Wright et al., Federal Practice and Options: A. holding that employers have standing to sue B. holding that plaintiffs did not have standing because they did not sue the party with the clear ability to act C. recognizing associational standing when members would have standing in own right D. holding that because plaintiff had standing to sue for injury arising from his own benefit plan his ability to represent class members with different benefit plans should be analyzed under rule 23 not standing E. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to sue

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that because plaintiff had standing to sue for injury arising from his own benefit plan his ability to represent class members with different benefit plans should be analyzed under rule 23 not standing
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 of the parties hereto does hereby covenant and agree on behalf of itself, its successors, and its permitted assigns, without further consideration, to prepare, execute, acknowledge, file, record, publish, and deliver such other instruments, documents and statements, and to take such other actions as may be required by law or reasonably necessary to effectively carry out the intent and purposes of this Agreement.

assistant: Further Assurances
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: No waiver of, or any breach of any covenant or provision herein contained shall be deemed a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach thereof, or of any other covenant or provision herein contained. No extension of time for performance of any obligation or act shall be deemed an extension of the time for performance of any other obligation or act.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In consideration of the services rendered to the Company hereunder by Executive and Executive’s covenants hereunder and in the Company’s Employment Covenants Agreement, during the Employment Term, the Company shall pay Executive an annualized salary of $275,000 (the “ Base Salary ”), less statutory and other authorized deductions and withholdings, payable in accordance with the Company’s regular payroll practices.

assistant: Base Salary