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: is so ordered. 1 . At the time of the relevant events in this case, the disclosure and recusal provisions of the Ethics in Government Law were codified at Nev. Rev. Stat. § 281.501 (2003). They were recodified without relevant change in 2007 at § 281A.420, and all citations are to that version. The Nevada Legislature further amended the statute in 2009, see Nev. Stats., ch. 257, § 9.5, p. 1057, but those changes are not relevant here. 2 . The House first achieved a quorum on April 1, 1789, 1 Annals of Cong. 96, and it adopted rules governing its procedures on April 7, 1789, see id., at 98-99. 3 . We have held that restrictions on judges’ speech during elections are a different matter. See Republican Party of Minn. v. White, 536 U.S. 765, 788, 122 S. Ct. 2528, 153 L. Ed. 2d 694 (2002) (<HOLDING>). 4 . A number of States enacted early judicial Options: A. holding that primary election ballot filing fee violated fourteenth amendment and noting that the primary election may be more crucial than the general election in certain parts of texas B. holding that limits on contributions to political committees which advocate the views and candidacies of a number of candidates induce no greater first amendment scrutiny than limits on contributions to an individual candidate C. holding that it violated the first amendment to prohibit announcement of views on disputed legal and political issues by candidates for judicial election D. holding that regulations forcing mushroom producers to fund generic advertising violated the first amendment even though they did not compel the expression of political or ideological views E. holding that ohio election law forbidding all anonymous political leafletting violated the first amendment but noting that the right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it violated the first amendment to prohibit announcement of views on disputed legal and political issues by candidates for judicial election
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 law, which on appeal is reviewed de novo. Okla. Gas & Elec. Co. v. Beecher, 2011 OK CIV APP 1, ¶¶ 7-8, 256 P.3d 1008, 1011. 7 . Muskogee cannot avoid constitutional restrictions on the power of eminent domain by merely labeling the proposed parking facility as a public utility. The purpose and use behind the exercise of eminent domain-here the purpose and use of the parking facility-must be analyzed to discern if it passes constitutional muster. See, e.g., City & County of San Francisco v. Ross, 44 Cal.2d 52, 279 P.2d 529, 533 (1955) (rejecting the argument that the provision of off-street parking facilities at a reasonable rate regardless of ownership and primary purpose of operation ipso facto serves a public purpose); Shizas v. City of Detroit, 333 Mich. 44, 52 N.W.2d 589 (1952) (<HOLDING>); Reel v. City of Freeport, 61 Ill.App.2d 448, Options: A. holding the bia did not abuse its discretion in finding petitioner did not satisfy the procedural requirements for his motion in part because petitioner failed to submit a completed application for relief B. holding that care of the grounds was part of the business of the hospital C. holding that no consideration existed for part of the settlement D. holding that a challenge to part b determinations in an order involving both part a and part b must begin in district court E. holding statute providing for condemnation of property to be used in part for offstreet parking facilities and in part for rental for private business void for failure to satisfy the public purpose test

assistant: The best answer is E. holding statute providing for condemnation of property to be used in part for offstreet parking facilities and in part for rental for private business void for failure to satisfy the public purpose test
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) One or more ERISA Events shall have occurred that, when taken together with all other ERISA Events that have occurred, could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, or (b) any fact or circumstance shall exist that could reasonably be expected to result in the imposition of a Lien or security interest under Section 430(k) of the Code or under Section 303(k) of ERISA or a violation of Section 436 of the Code that, individually or in the aggregate, could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: default judgment from challenging the enforceability of the contract. Finally, the Court must decide whether the contract is enforceable. If the contract is unenforceable, then there is no debt upon which the Plaintiff may maintain its complaint for an exception to the discharge. See Mandalay Resort Group v. Miller (In re Miller), 292 B.R. 409, 412 (9th Cir. BAP 2003) (“Absent an enforceable prepetition debt, there is no debt to except from discharge.”) The answer is found in 37 U.S.C. § 701(c), which states that “[a]n enlisted member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps may not assign his pay, and if he does so, the assignment is void.” 37 U.S.C. § 701(c). Military retirement is considered “pay.” See Barker v. Kansas, 503 U.S. 594, 605, 112 S.Ct. 1619, 118 L.Ed.2d 243 (1992) (<HOLDING>) Based upon the plain language of § 701(c), the Options: A. holding that military retirement benefits are to be considered deferred pay for past services B. holding that retirement benefits are marital property because they would be a form of deferred compensation funded by money earned during the parties marriage C. holding that military retirement benefits are current pay and thus significantly different than other retirement benefits D. holding that disposable retirement pay from military pension was equal to gross retirement pay less federal income taxes E. holding that retirement benefits are accrued benefits under erisa

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that military retirement benefits are to be considered deferred pay for past services
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 Revolving Credit Collateral Agent and each Term Loan Collateral Agent may demand specific performance of this Agreement. The Revolving Credit Collateral Agent, on behalf of itself and the Revolving Credit Claimholders, and each Term Loan Collateral Agent, on behalf of itself and the applicable Term Loan Claimholders, hereby irrevocably waive any defense based on the adequacy of a remedy at law and any other defense which might be asserted to bar the remedy of specific performance in any action which may be brought by the Revolving Credit Collateral Agent or the Revolving Credit Claimholders or any Term Loan Collateral Agent or the Term Loan Claimholders, as the case may be.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: court at this time.” Id. That amounted to a withdrawal of the matter from the bankruptcy court. 5 . The Magistrate's Act provides that a district judge may either “designate a magistrate to hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before" that judge or "designate a magistrate to conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and to submit to [the] judge of the court proposed findings of facts and recommendations,” depending upon the particular matter pending before the district judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Title 28, § 157, in contrast, pertains only to matters arising under the Bankruptcy Code, or arising in or related to cases under the Bankruptcy Code. The Magistrate's Act is not so limited. See Rosario v. Livaditis (In re Livaditis), 150 B.R. 224 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.1993) (<HOLDING>). 6 . While at first blush it may appear that Options: A. holding that the district court cannot refer a matter to a bankruptcy judge under the magistrates act B. holding that a proceeding that by its nature could arise only in the context of a bankruptcy case is a core matter subject to the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court C. holding that only a district judge in the charging district and not a magistrate judge in that district may review the release order of a magistrate judge in the arresting district D. holding the broad jurisdictional grant given the bankruptcy courts under the 1978 bankruptcy act unconstitutional E. holding that the district court did not have jurisdiction and remanding the matter to state court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the district court cannot refer a matter to a bankruptcy judge under the magistrates act
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: presented by individual questions). When individual issues predominate over common issues, a class action is neither fair nor efficient, and regardless of the impracticability of individual litigation, the certification must fail. Jackson, 130 F.3d at 1006 n. 12 (noting that when individual issues predominate, the class action is singularly inefficient and unjust). {34} The court’s discretion is paramount when it determines whether a class action is manageable. See In re Visa Check/Master Money Antitrust Litig., 280 F.3d at 141 (indicating that the certification issue is peculiarly within the discretion of the trial court as management is “always a matter of justifiable and serious concern for the trial court”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); Coleman, 141 F.R.D. at 529 (<HOLDING>). There is a whole range of practical problems Options: A. holding that a showing that common issues predominated also established superiority and a presumption against dismissal for management reasons B. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion C. holding that the faas action in this case was analogous to an exercise of prosecutorial discretion and noting that when prosecutorial discretion is at issue the matter is presumptively committed to agency discretion by law D. holding that discretion to determine superiority issue is paramount E. holding that claim construction is a matter of law for the court to determine

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that discretion to determine superiority issue is paramount
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 nothing more than contracts.” Like the Sixth Circuit, we refuse to make that leap, as it is unsupported by the applicable ease law. See Blessing, 520 U.S. at 329, 117 S.Ct. 1353 (recognizing viability of § 1983 action brought under Ex parte Young for violation of federal rights created under Spending Clause programs); Wilder v. Va. Hosp. Ass’n, 496 U.S. 498, 110 S.Ct. 2510, 110 L.Ed.2d 455 (1990) (recognizing viability of § 1983 claim for violation of federal right involving federal-state Medicaid program). Second, in an analogous context, the Supreme Court has specifically held that, under the Supremacy Clause, federal Spending Clause legislation trumps conflicting state statutes or regulations. See Blum v. Bacon, 457 U.S. 132, 145-46, 102 S.Ct. 2355, 72 L.Ed.2d 728 (1982) (<HOLDING>); Carleson v. Remillard, 406 U.S. 598, 604, 92 Options: A. recognizing that the supremacy clause is not a source of any federal rights B. holding an illinois statute and regulation that conflicted with the social security act invalid under the supremacy clause C. holding the provisions of a new york welfare program that conflicted with federal regulations under the social security act invalid under the supremacy clause D. holding the illinois statute at issue in templeton invalid under the supremacy clause E. holding a california regulation that conflicted with the social security act invalid under the supremacy clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding the provisions of a new york welfare program that conflicted with federal regulations under the social security act invalid under the supremacy clause
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you use or misuse the service , or if you violate these terms or any other applicable rules , including the community rules or feature terms , and that results in loss or damage or in a claim or liability against zynga or any zynga affiliate , you agree to indemnify , defend and hold harmless zynga and/or the zynga affiliate ( which means you agree to compensate zynga and/or the zynga affiliate on a `` dollar for dollar '' basis ) for that loss , damage , claim or liability , including compensating zynga and/or the applicable zynga affiliate for our legal fees or expenses .

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 Participant must pay the Company upon its demand the amount equal to its liability, if any, for the withholding of federal, state or local income or earnings tax or any other applicable tax or assessment (plus interest or penalties thereon, if any, caused by a delay in making such payment) incurred by reason of the Participant’s exercise of the Option or otherwise in connection with the Option. The Participant must pay these withholding obligations in cash or by a sale to cover. If, on the date of exercise, the Participant is an executive officer, the Participant must pay these withholding tax obligations in cash, by Stock withholding, or, solely in connection with any 10b5-1 plan approved by the company or as required by local law, a sale to cover. Non-U.S. Participants see applicable Non-U.S. Participant Exhibit for special rules.

assistant: Withholdings
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 Plan, ach award hereunder and the related Agreement, and all determinations made and actions taken pursuant thereto, to the extent not otherwise governed by the Code or the laws of the United States, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Delaware and construed in accordance therewith without giving effect to principles of conflicts of laws.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the parties to this Agreement hereby unconditionally agrees to waive, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, its respective rights to a jury trial of any claim or cause of action (whether based on contract, tort or otherwise) based upon, arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby. The scope of this waiver is intended to be all-encompassing of any and all disputes that may be filed in any court and that relate to the subject matter of this Agreement, including contract claims, tort claims and all other common law and statutory claims. Each party hereto: (i) acknowledges that this waiver is a material inducement to enter into this Agreement, that each has already relied on this waiver in entering into this Agreement, and that each will continue to rely on this waiver in their related future dealings, (ii) acknowledges that no representative, agent or attorney of any other party has represented, expressly or otherwise, that such other party would not in the event of any action or proceeding, seek to enforce the foregoing waiver and (iii) warrants and represents that it has reviewed this waiver with its legal counsel and that it knowingly and voluntarily waives its jury trial rights following consultation with legal counsel. THIS WAIVER IS IRREVOCABLE, MEANING THAT IT MAY NOT BE MODIFIED EITHER ORALLY OR IN WRITING (OTHER THAN BY A MUTUAL WRITTEN WAIVER SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO THIS SECTION 8.9 AND EXECUTED BY EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO), AND THIS WAIVER SHALL APPLY TO ANY SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS, RENEWALS, SUPPLEMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS AGREEMENT. In the event of litigation, this Agreement may be filed as a written consent to a trial by the court.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be binding upon each party hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, this Agreement shall not be construed so as to confer any right or benefit upon any Person other than the parties to this Agreement and their respective successors and permitted assigns.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All costs and expenses incurred by the Company and the Sponsor Stockholders in connection with any proposed Post-Closing Issuance of Participation Securities (whether or not consummated), including all attorney’s fees and charges, all accounting fees and charges and, only with respect to the Company, all finders, brokerage or investment banking fees, charges or commissions, shall be paid by the Company. The Sponsor Stockholders shall be required to pay their own finders, brokerage or investment banking fees, charges or commissions, if any, in connection with any proposed Post-Closing Issuance of Participation Securities, unless otherwise agreed with the Company.

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: The provision of a Table of Contents, the division of this Agreement into Articles, Sections and other subdivisions and the insertion of headings are for convenience of reference only and shall not affect or be utilized in construing or interpreting this Agreement. All references in this Agreement to any “Section” are to the corresponding Section of this Agreement unless otherwise specified.

assistant: Headings
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, the Plan, and all acts and transactions pursuant hereto and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be governed, construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and the Courts of England and Wales shall have exclusive jurisdiction in relation to all matters arising under this Agreement and the Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The employment of the Executive by the Company as provided in Section 1 of this Agreement will commence on February 9, 2017 and end on February 9, 2020, unless further extended by mutual agreement or sooner terminated as hereinafter provided (the “Employment Period”).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: presented at trial does not support the finding that he was armed with a weapon when he broke into the Gillespie home. We find no merit in this argument. The state bears the burden of proving the existence of aggravating factors. State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 249, 337 S.E. 2d 497 (1985). The existence of such factors must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence. N.C.G.S. § 15A-1340.4(a) (1983). At trial the state’s evidence tended to show defendant removed Coggins’ service revolver from the trooper’s holster, shot him once in the head and took the revolver from the patrol car. The state also introduced William Bray’s sworn testimony from his own sentencing hearing to this effect: Q. Mrs. Gillespie was gone and you did go into the house did you not? A. Yes, I did. ... Q. 1986) (<HOLDING>); State v. Chatman, 308 N.C. 169, 301 S.E. 2d Options: A. holding evidence sufficient to support aggravating factors of old age and infirmity B. recognizing attorneys substantial experience in the practice of law as an aggravating factor C. holding that the trial court did not err in using the particularized factual circumstances of the case namely the victims age as an aggravating factor D. holding evidence sufficient to support aggravating factor of old age E. holding that the death of a victim may not be considered an aggravating factor in a homicide sentencing

assistant: The best answer is D. holding evidence sufficient to support aggravating factor of old age
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as provided in Section 1.3, the RSUs awarded in Section 1.1 shall fully vest on the first anniversary of the Grant Date (the “ RSU Vesting Date ”) provided that you continue in the service of the Company from the Grant Date through the applicable RSU Vesting Date.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the provisions of the intellectual property , disclaimer of warranty , limitation of liability , and indemnification sections , and anything else that reasonably should be interpreted as surviving termination shall survive the termination , or expiration of the agreement .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, the Plan and the other Definitive Documents may not be modified, amended, or supplemented without the prior written consent of the Debtors and the Requisite Majority Consenting Noteholders; provided that (i) the economic and adequate protection provisions of the DIP Orders may not be modified, amended, or supplemented without the prior written consent of the Initial Restructuring Support Parties for so long as such Initial Restructuring Support Parties hold at least 85% of the First Lien Notes and at least 85% of the Second Lien Notes and (ii) any modification of, or amendment or supplement to, this Section 25 or the definitions of Consenting First Lien Noteholders, Consenting Second Lien Noteholders, Restructuring Support Parties, Initial Restructuring Support Parties, Requisite Majority Consenting First Lien Noteholders, Requisite Majority Consenting Second Lien Noteholders, or Requisite Majority Consenting Noteholders shall require the written consent of all of the Parties.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company and the Executive intend that this Agreement shall supersede the January 1, 2018 Amended and Restated Employment Agreement and that this Agreement together with (i) the attached Annex I , Exhibit A and Exhibit B hereto, (ii) those certain Global Partners LP Long-Term Incentive Plan Grants of Phantom Units to the Executive dated June 27, 2013 and August 16, 2017, and (iii) that certain Global Partners LP 2018 Long-Term Cash Incentive Plan Award Agreement granted to the Executive and dated October 8, 2018, as amended, constitute the entire agreement of the parties with regard to the subject matter hereof, and contain all of the covenants, promises, representations, warranties and agreements between the parties with respect to such subject matter. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company and the Executive acknowledge and agree that the restrictions on non-disclosure of information, non-competition and non-solicitation set forth herein (including in Section 9 and Annex I herein) shall complement and be in addition to (and not supersede or replace) any other restrictions upon Executive with respect to non-disclosure, non-competition or non-solicitation as set forth in any previous agreement between Executive and the Company or any of its affiliates. Subject to the preceding sentence, as of the Effective Date, all understandings and agreements preceding the Effective Date and relating to the subject matter hereof are hereby null and void and of no further force and effect, including, without limitation all prior employment and severance agreements, if any, by and between the Company and the Executive; provided that, nothing contained in the foregoing shall be deemed to supersede or make invalid any prior agreements between the Executive and the Company concerning long-term incentive plan awards and any agreement by and between the Executive and the Company, the Partnership or any affiliated entity or member of the Partnership in his capacity as an interest holder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Make any voluntary or optional payment, prepayment or repayment on, redemption, exchange or acquisition for value of, or any sinking fund or any other payment with respect to, any Subordinated Indebtedness, except as permitted by the subordination provisions in the applicable Subordinated Debt Documents and any subordination agreement with respect thereto in favor of the Administrative Agent and the Lenders; provided that no payments of principal, interest, fees or other amounts shall be made in respect of the Ribbon Shareholder Indebtedness, other than non-cash paid-in-kind interest.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Loan Party and each of its Subsidiaries (i) is a corporation, limited company, limited liability company or limited partnership, as applicable, duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the state or jurisdiction of its incorporation or organization, as applicable, (ii) has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business as now conducted and as presently contemplated and to execute and deliver this Amendment, and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby and by the Financing Agreement, as amended hereby, and (iii) is duly qualified to do business and is in good standing in each jurisdiction in which the character of the properties owned or leased by it or in which the transaction of its business makes such qualification necessary, except (solely for the purposes of this subclause (iii)) where the failure to be so qualified or in good standing, individually or in the aggregate, could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Organizations
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 Second Amendment is binding upon and will inure to the benefit of the Borrower, the Lenders and the Administrative Agent and their respective successors and assigns, except that the Borrower will not have the right to assign its rights hereunder or any interest herein except in accordance with the terms of the Revolving Credit Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Lightning Park, Inc. v. Wise Lerman & Katz, P.C., 197 A.D.2d 52, 609 N.Y.S.2d 904, 906 (App.Div.1994). However, disqualification may be appropriate when the two matters are merely similar when “disqualification is predicated on the extensiveness of the attorney’s exposure during the prior representation to particular practices that are similar to those underlying the subsequent litigation.” Bennett Silvershein Assoc. v. Furman, 776 F.Supp. 800, 804 (S.D.N.Y.1991). See also United States Football League v. Nat’l Football League, 605 F.Supp. 1448, 1459-60 (S.D.N.Y.1985). A more general representation will only be relevant to a later litigation if “the later litigation fairly puts in issue the entire background of the movant.” United States Football, 605 F.Supp. at 1460 (<HOLDING>). The test in such circumstances “should focus Options: A. holding that a firm could be disqualified from bringing an antitrust action against a former client for which the firm had worked on various corporate and tax matters during the relevant period in question B. holding that disbarment was proper where the attorney misappropriated payments from clients of his firm for his own use and took steps to conceal his conduct from his firm C. holding that employees claims against firm were not subject to mandatory arbitration because they did not arise out of business activities of either employee or firm but instead arose out of divorce agreement D. holding that a law firm could intervene in a former clients action to protect its interest in its contingency fee E. holding that an attorney may only undertake to represent a new client against a former client where there is no confidential information received from the former client that is in any way relevant to representation of the current client

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a firm could be disqualified from bringing an antitrust action against a former client for which the firm had worked on various corporate and tax matters during the relevant period in question
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 Executive shall be entitled paid vacation in accordance with the Company’s vacation policy; provided, that the Executive shall be entitled to not less than twenty ( 20 ) days of vacation in each calendar year (or an appropriately pro-rated portion thereof for partial years). The Executive shall be permitted to accrue permitted vacation days at such rate and carry over a maximum of fifteen (15) days of such accrued unused vacation from year to year.

assistant: Vacations
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: here. Belford also argues that the Court should not exercise personal jurisdiction over it because it has no physical presence in Michigan, only a small percentage of its business stems from Michigan residents, and its relationship with its customers is governed by Panamanian law. Even assuming these facts to be true, they do not carry the day in light of the analysis above. See Burger King Corp., 471 U.S. at 476, 105 S.Ct. 2174 (“[jurisdiction ... may not be avoided merely because the defendant did not physically enter the forum State (emphasis in original)”); Neogen, 282 F.3d at 886-887 (exercising personal jurisdiction over a defendant despite the fact that a very small percentage of its customers resided in the forum state); Burger King Corp., 471 U.S. at 482, 105 S.Ct. 2174 (<HOLDING>). Finally, Belford argues that the Court cannot Options: A. recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties B. holding that directing a tort at texas does not establish specific personal jurisdiction because it focus on relationship between plaintiff forum and litigation rather than defendant forum and litigation C. holding that choiceoflaw provisions are alone insufficient to establish jurisdiction although they can reinforce a deliberate affiliation with the forum state and the reasonable foreseeability of possible litigation there D. holding that foreseeability of causing injury in forum state is not sufficient for specific personal jurisdiction E. holding that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over a nonresident auto distributor whose only connection to the forum resulted from a customers decision to drive there failed to provide the defendant with clear notice that it would be subject to suit in the forum state and thus an opportunity to alleviate the risk of burden some litigation there

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that choiceoflaw provisions are alone insufficient to establish jurisdiction although they can reinforce a deliberate affiliation with the forum state and the reasonable foreseeability of possible litigation there
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: or other mental impairment imposing an additional and significant work-related limitation of function.” Id. The ALJ found that Roth-feldt had several severe physical impairments, including probable osteoarthritis. This in and of itself is sufficient to meet the requirement that he have a physical impairment imposing an additional and significant work-related limitation of function. See Edwards v. Heckler, 755 F.2d 1513, 1515 (11th Cir. 1985) (concluding that the term “ ‘significant’ requires something less than ‘severe’” when considering whether an impairment is disabling). It is of no import whether Rothfeldt’s additional impairment is mental; an IQ score between 60 and 70 with an unrelated significant physical impairment satisfies the criteria for Listing 12.05(C). Id. at 1516 (<HOLDING>). We cannot know if Rothfeldt meets the Options: A. holding that the alj erred in rejecting the iq of a claimant whose work history was limited primarily to working for his father B. holding that a claimant was entitled to benefits under listing 1205c because he had an iq score of 67 in addition to asthma and lung disease C. holding petitioners claim was factual in nature where he alleged the bia had failed to accord sufficient weight to the seriousness of his sons asthma D. holding that completing sixth grade and a limited ability to read were not inconsistent with a valid iq score of 68 E. holding that the alj is not obliged to accept an iq if there is a substantial basis in the record for believing that the claimant was feigning the results

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a claimant was entitled to benefits under listing 1205c because he had an iq score of 67 in addition to asthma and lung disease
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: for the mandatory rel e” is a valid ground for relief from deportation where compulsory military service would require the alien “to engage in inhuman conduct.” Ramos-Vasquez v. INS, 57 F.3d 857, 864 (9th Cir.1995). Indeed, the BIA recognizes conscientious objector status as an exception to the general rule that forced recruitment into the military is not persecution in “ ‘those rare cases ... where the alien would necessarily be required to engage in inhuman conduct as a result of military service required by the government.’ ” Barraza Rivera, 913 F.2d at 1451 (quoting In re A-G-, 19 Interim Dec. (“I & N Dec.”) 3040 (BIA 1987), aff'd sub nom. M.A. v. United States INS, 899 F.2d 304, 312 (4th Cir.1990) (en banc)); see also Gomez-Mejia v. INS, 56 F.3d 700, 703 & n. 1 (5th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). In Barraza Rivera, we explicitly held that Options: A. recognizing special circumstances exception B. recognizing that in certain circumstances inquiry notice may be determined as a matter of law C. recognizing such an exception D. recognizing exception E. recognizing the conscientious objector status exception in certain circumstances

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing the conscientious objector status exception in certain circumstances
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, an aggregate of approximately $1.383 million of Shares and Warrants. Each Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser shall be made available for “Delivery Versus Payment” settlement with the Company or its designees. The Company shall deliver to each Purchaser its respective Shares and a Warrant as determined pursuant to Section 2.2(a), and the Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of the Placement Agent or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree. Unless otherwise directed by the Placement Agent, settlement of the Shares shall occur via “Delivery Versus Payment” (“ DVP ”) (i.e., on the Closing Date, the Company shall issue the Shares registered in the Purchasers’ names and addresses and released by the Transfer Agent directly to the account(s) at the Placement Agent identified by each Purchaser; upon receipt of such Shares, the Placement Agent shall promptly electronically deliver such Shares to the applicable Purchaser, and payment therefor shall be made by the Placement Agent (or its clearing firm) by wire transfer to the Company).

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: governing law : except as otherwise required by applicable law , the terms of service and the resolution of any disputes shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of california without regard to its conflict of laws principles .

assistant: Choice of 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement (including any exhibits hereto) supersedes any and all other understandings and agreements (including without limitation the Original Agreement), either oral or in writing, among the parties (including affiliates of the Company) with respect to the subject matter hereof and constitutes the sole agreement among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. For purposes of terminating the Original Agreement, the Company hereby confirms that it is the duly authorized agent of Avadel plc, and by the signatures below of the Company and the Executive, the Original Agreement is terminated and superseded by this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall the termination of the Original Agreement, in connection with the execution of this Agreement, be considered a termination as set forth in Section 3 of the Original Agreement or entitle Executive to any termination-related payment, including without limitation any Severance Indemnity pursuant to Section 3.2 or Change of Control Indemnity under Section 3.3 of the Original Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: § 36-1-2 when Wilkinson was appointed to his crime-lab job, employees holding these positions served within the state’s classified service. Moreover, § 36-4-38 provides in relevant part that “[a] classified employee with permanent status may be dismissed by an appointing authority whenever he or she considers the good of the service to be served thereby, stated in writing, with full and sufficient reason, and filed with the personnel administrator. * * * In every case of dismissal, the appointing authority shall, on or before the effective date thereof give written notice of this action and the reason thereof to the employee and shall file a copy of the notice with the personnel administrator * * (Emphasis added.) See Aniello v. Marcello, 91 R.I. 198, 206, 207, 162 A.2d 270, 274 (1960) (<HOLDING>) (modified by subsequent statutory amendments). Options: A. holding that if good cause does not exist the court has the discretion to either dismiss the action without prejudice or direct that service be effected within a specified time B. holding the trial court was without authority to dismiss an appeal on the ground that the amount of the judgment required the appellant to file an application for discretionary review C. holding that a trial court cannot summarily dismiss a section 2 1401 petition D. holding that lack of good faith is a valid basis to dismiss a chapter 7 case for cause under section 707a E. holding that an appointing authority cannot summarily dismiss a classified employee and that the language the good of the service to be served thereby in 36438 has the effect of limiting the valid exercise of that power to dismiss for cause

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an appointing authority cannot summarily dismiss a classified employee and that the language the good of the service to be served thereby in 36438 has the effect of limiting the valid exercise of that power to dismiss for cause
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and upon their dependents, heirs, representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective dependents, heirs, representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THE EXECUTION, DELIVERY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS THIRD AMENDMENT SHALL NOT OPERATE AS A WAIVER OF ANY EVENT OF DEFAULT (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY EVENTS OF DEFAULT EXISTING ON THE DATE HEREOF, IF ANY), NOR OPERATE AS A WAIVER OF ANY RIGHT, POWER OR REMEDY OF LENDER (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY RIGHTS, POWER OR REMEDIES OF LENDER WITH RESPECT TO ANY EVENTS OF DEFAULT EXISTING ON THE DATE HEREOF, IF ANY), NOR, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT IS EXPRESSLY AMENDED BY THIS THIRD AMENDMENT, CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF, OR CONSENT TO ANY DEPARTURE FROM, ANY PROVISION OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, OR ANY OF THE OTHER TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the reasoning of Stop the Beach Renourishment, supra, — U.S. at-, 130 S.Ct. at 2611, 177 L.Ed.2d at 206, and Penn Central, supra, 438 US. at 124-25, 98 S.Ct. at 2659, 57 L.Ed.2d at 648, that property owners’ interests in any particular access point are not sufficiently bound up with their reasonable expectations of ownership to constitute “property” for Fifth Amendment purposes. Thus, modification or revocation of an access point, so long as free and reasonable access remains, does not constitute a taking. This conclusion, derived from decisions of the United States Supreme Court, is consistent with the Access Act as well as the common law principle, long recognized in New Jersey, that changes in access per se are not compensable. See High Horizons, supra, 120 N.J. at 49, 575 A.2d 1360 (<HOLDING>); Lima & Sons, Inc. v. Borough of Ramsey, 269 Options: A. holding that the states personal injury statutes of limitation should be applied for claims under section 1983 B. holding that limitation of access is accomplished under states police power and is not compensable C. holding that duration of limitation is a factor in determining whether limitation is significant D. holding that damages for diminished access are not compensable as long as suitable access remains E. holding police power is restricted by constitutional bill of rights

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that limitation of access is accomplished under states police power and is not compensable