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: A similar method of analysis was utilized in State v. Bennett, 172 W.Va. 131, 304 S.E.2d 35 (1983), wherein this Court focused upon the pivotal fact that the defendant was the only person who could have denied the drug offense. Thus, in the prosecution for an alleged delivery of a controlled substance, the prosecutor’s repeated reminders that the State’s evidence had not been denied could only have been referring to the defendant’s absence of denial. This Court reversed the conviction, finding that the prosecuting attorney’s remarks constituted an impermissible comment upon the defendant’s failure to testify, since the defendant was the only one who could have denied the drug offense. The Court explained as follows: This Court has permitted prosecutorial statements that did not spec ) (<HOLDING>); Dean v. State, 690 So.2d 720 (Fla.App.1997) Options: A. holding that statute which prohibited possession of machines designed to produce credit cards did not have a rational relationship to goal of preventing credit card fraud because the statute did not require intent to put the equipment to an unlawful use B. recognizing statutory credit C. holding that thirteen fraudulent uses of credit cards were not pursuant to a single scheme D. holding that comment on absence of explanation as well as insufficiency of girlfriends explanation for defendants possession of stolen credit cards was not harmless error since defendant was only person other than his girlfriend who could have explained the possession of the credit cards E. holding victims with poor credit histories were particularly susceptible to schemes involving offers of preapproved credit cards

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that comment on absence of explanation as well as insufficiency of girlfriends explanation for defendants possession of stolen credit cards was not harmless error since defendant was only person other than his girlfriend who could have explained the possession of the credit cards
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 Existing Credit Agreement is, effective as of the Amendment Closing Date (as defined below), hereby amended to delete the stricken text (indicated textually in the same manner as the following example: stricken text ) and to add the double-underlined text (indicated textually in the same manner as the following example: double-underlined text ) as set forth in the pages of the Existing Credit Agreement attached as Exhibit A hereto.

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 shall not use any of the net proceeds from the sale of the Debenture for: (a) the satisfaction of any portion of the Company’s debt (other than payment of trade payables in the ordinary course of the Company’s business and prior practices), (b) the redemption of any Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents or (c) the settlement of any litigation. From the Purchaser’s First Closing Subscription Amount, the Purchaser may withhold up to $10,000 in order to pay the fees due its counsel.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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: her “pee.” Transcript at 62. C.S. said that Surber did not touch her younger sister, K.S., because “she’s only four (4) and Daddy said you don’t do that until you’re old enough to start school like me.” Id. at 87. Our review of the character of the offender reveals that Surber has misdemeanor convictions for minor consumption, possession of marijuana, possession of paraphernalia, battery, operating while intoxicated, and resisting law enforcement. Surber violated his probation in 1996 and twice in 2004. After due consideration of the trial court’s decision, we cannot say that the thirty-six-year sentence imposed by the trial court is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender. See, e.g., McCoy v. State, 856 N.E.2d 1259, 1264 (Ind.Ct.App.2006) (<HOLDING>). For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Surber’s Options: A. holding that the defendants sentence was reasonable when the district court considered the parties arguments and provided a reasoned basis for its choice of sentence B. holding that the defendants sentence for robbery was not inappropriate C. holding that a district courts rejection of an argument for an inappropriate reason was error D. holding that defendant was not deprived of any procedural rights or prejudiced by trial court hearing the evidence at defendants child molesting trial as evidence in the states petition to revoke defendants probation E. holding that the defendants fortyfiveyear sentence for molesting his stepdaughter was not inappropriate

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the defendants fortyfiveyear sentence for molesting his stepdaughter was not inappropriate
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: where formation of an opinion on a subject requires knowledge, information, or skill beyond what is possessed by the ordinary juror.' ”) (quoting Commonwealth v. Carter, 403 Pa.Super. 615, 589 A.2d 1133, 1134(1991)). The Welding Companies specifically contend Donoughe was wrongly decided and encourage this Court en banc to overrule that panel decision. We decline to do so, except to the extent it treats favorably a plaintiff’s expert causation testimony based upon the any-exposure theory. Donoughe, 936 A.2d at 57, 64. Moving forward, Donoughe shall not be cited with approval to the extent that it provides or implies that the any-exposure theory of specific causation is admissible in an asbestos action. 17 . The doctrine is not without exception. See, e.g., DGS, 898 A.2d at 601 n. 10 (<HOLDING>) (citing Davis v. Berwind Corp., 547 Pa. 260, Options: A. holding that under 1b13a1b and 2d11b1 a defendant may be held accountable for reasonably foreseeable weapons possession by a codefendant B. holding a manufacturer strictly liable in tort for injury to plaintiff caused by defective power tool C. recognizing that a manufacturer may be held strictly liable for subsequent changes to an otherwise safe product where such alterations are reasonably foreseeable D. holding that an alien may be held in confinement until it has been determined that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future E. holding that trial counsel cannot be held ineffective for failing to anticipate changes in law

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that a manufacturer may be held strictly liable for subsequent changes to an otherwise safe product where such alterations are reasonably foreseeable
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 matters relating to the interpretation, construction, application, validity, and enforcement of this Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota without giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision or rule, whether of the State of Minnesota or any other jurisdiction, that would cause the application of laws of any jurisdiction other than the State of Minnesota.

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: If any provision of this Agreement or any portion thereof is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable or invalid, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and shall not be adversely affected.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the extent required by any applicable law, Agent may withhold from any payment to any Lender under a Loan Document an amount equal to any applicable withholding tax. If (i) the IRS or any other Governmental Authority asserts a claim that Agent did not properly withhold tax from amounts paid to or for the account of any Lender (because the appropriate certification form was not delivered, was not properly executed, or fails to establish an exemption from, or reduction of, withholding tax with respect to a particular type of payment, or because such Lender failed to notify Agent or any other Person of a change in circumstances which rendered the exemption from, or reduction of, withholding tax ineffective, or for any other reason); or (ii) Agent reasonably determines that it was required to withhold Taxes from a prior payment but failed to do so, such Lender shall promptly indemnify Agent fully for all amounts paid, directly or indirectly, by Agent as tax or otherwise, including penalties and interest, and together with all expenses incurred by Agent, including legal expenses, allocated internal costs and out-of-pocket expenses. Agent may offset against any payment to any Lender under a Loan Document, any applicable withholding tax that was required to be withheld from any prior payment to such Lender but which was not so withheld, as well as any other amounts for which Agent is entitled to indemnification from such Lender under this Section 7.8(c) .

assistant: Tax 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: If a court of competent jurisdiction finds any provision of this Deed of Trust to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable as to any circumstance, that finding shall not make the offending provision illegal, invalid, or unenforceable as to any other circumstance. If feasible, the offending provision shall be considered modified so that it becomes legal, valid and enforceable. If the offending provision cannot be so modified, it shall be considered deleted from this Deed of Trust. Unless otherwise required by law, the illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability of any provision of this Deed of Trust shall not affect the legality, validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Deed of Trust.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Restructuring is not consummated, or if this Agreement is terminated for any reason, the Parties fully reserve any and all of their rights. Pursuant to Rule 408 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and any other applicable rules of evidence, this Agreement and all negotiations relating hereto shall not be admissible into evidence in any proceeding other than a proceeding to enforce its terms.

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: During the Term, the Executive ’ s annual base salary shall be $ 340,000 . The Executive ’ s base salary shall be re - determined annually by the Board or the Comp ensation Committee and shall be subject to increase but not decrease while serving in this role . The annual base salary in effect at any given time is referred to herein as “ Base Salary. ” The Base Salary shall be payable in a manner that is consistent with the Company ’ s usual payroll practices for senior executives.

assistant: Base Salary
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 MSA shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Colorado without giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision or rule (whether the state of Colorado or any other jurisdiction) that would cause the application of the laws of any jurisdiction other than the state of Colorado.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the improper juror contact, the court was entitled to infer the opposite from their testimony. See United States v. Allison, 908 F.2d 1531, 1535 (11th Cir.1990). Thus, the court did not clearly err in finding that William and Chantal indirectly were involved in the improper juror contact. The issue that we must now resolve is whether the court abused its discretion by excluding the Roberts Affidavit with respect to William and Chantal in light of its finding that they violated Local Rule 5.01(d). In excluding the affidavit, the court concluded that “a criminal defendant must not be allowed to benefit from evidence he or she caused to be obtained in violation of the prohibitions against unauthorized post-verdict contact of jurors.” (R.22-972 at 42.) William and Chantal conte Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>). Concomitant with the district court’s power Options: A. holding trial judge was at the very limit of his discretion in refusing to remove prospective jurors for cause B. recognizing the range of discretion of the trial judge C. holding statute stating that judge could excuse jurors was violated when jury commissioners excused jurors D. recognizing our authority to order suspension of a judge E. recognizing power of trial judge to order all postverdict investigation of jurors to be conducted under his supervision

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing power of trial judge to order all postverdict investigation of jurors to be conducted under his supervision
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: It is clear from the above that the duty to supervise is only triggered under the common law where the employer had notice of incompetence or misconduct. See 30 C.J.S. Employer — Employee §205, at 254 (2007); see also Keller v. Koca, 111 P.3d 445, 448 (Colo. 2005) (“Thus, where a plaintiff asserts a claim for negligent supervision, the question of whether the employer o the scope of that duty the majority seek to impose is much too broad. As a practical matter, to prevent any mistake or criminal behavior or “harm to the public” (as the trial court said), Kinko’s would need supervisors for the supervisors and so on and so on. I believe this would put an unsupportable burden on defendant and violate one of the tenets for imposition of a duty. Sollami v. Eaton, 201 Ill. 2d 1, 17 (2002) (<HOLDING>). Could the Secretary of State be sued for Options: A. holding no duty and noting that foreseeability bears on the scope of a duty and not whether it exists in the first place B. holding that the burden is on the plaintiff C. holding that in determining whether to impose a duty the following factors must be balanced 1 the relationship between the parties 2 the reasonable foreseeability of harm to the person injured and 3 public policy concerns D. holding that the burden of proving that the employee did not make reasonable efforts is on the defendant E. holding that in determining whether a duty exists a court should consider the following factors 1 the reasonable foreseeability of injury 2 the reasonable likelihood of injury 3 the magnitude of the burden that guarding against injury places on the defendant and 4 the consequences of placing that burden on the defendant emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that in determining whether a duty exists a court should consider the following factors 1 the reasonable foreseeability of injury 2 the reasonable likelihood of injury 3 the magnitude of the burden that guarding against injury places on the defendant and 4 the consequences of placing that burden on the defendant emphasis added
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: For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, each Credit Party hereby, for itself and its successors and assigns, fully and without reserve, releases, acquits, and forever discharges each of the Lender Parties and each Lender CounterParty, its respective successors and assigns, officers, directors, employees, representatives, trustees, attorneys, agents and affiliates (collectively the "Released Parties" and individually a "Released Party") from any and all actions, claims, demands, causes of action, judgments, executions, suits, liabilities, costs, damages, expenses or other obligations of any kind and nature whatsoever, direct and/or indirect, at law or in equity, whether now existing or hereafter asserted, whether absolute or contingent, whether due or to become due, whether disputed or undisputed, whether known or unknown (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY OFFSETS, REDUCTIONS, REBATEMENT, CLAIMS OF USURY OR CLAIMS WITH RESPECT TO THE NEGLIGENCE OF ANY RELEASED PARTY) (collectively, the "Released Claims"), for or because of any matters or things occurring, existing or actions done, omitted to be done, or suffered to be done by any of the Released Parties, in each case, on or prior to the effective date of this Amendment and are in any way directly or indirectly arising out of or in any way connected to any of this Amendment, the Credit Agreement or any other Loan Document (collectively, the "Released Matters"). In entering into this Amendment, each Credit Party consulted with, and has been represented by, legal counsel and expressly disclaim any reliance on any representations, acts or omissions by any of the Released Parties and hereby agrees and acknowledges that the validity and effectiveness of the releases set forth herein do not depend in any way on any such representations, acts and/or omissions or the accuracy, completeness or validity hereof. The provisions of this Section 5.08 shall survive the termination of this Amendment, the Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents and payment in full of the Obligations.

assistant: Releases
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: between the time he stopped and the time he fled with Kennedy; instead, she testified that Appellant was "smirking” at her during this period. 4 . This analysis provokes the question of why the legislature included both the phrase "acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense” and the phrase "solicits, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense” in section 7.02(a)(2)’s definition of party liability. One reason is that in some situations, an actor may aid another in the commission of an offense without intending that an offense be committed if the actor does not know the other’s conduct is an offense; under that circumstance, the actor is not a party to the offense. See, e.g., Amaya v. State, 733 S.W.2d 168, 175 (Tex.Crim.App.1986) (<HOLDING>). Such lack of knowledge is not a factor in a Options: A. holding that appellants fourteenth amendment due process claim did not require reversal where they failed to show that they were prejudiced B. holding that allegations that defendants designed and implemented improper accounting practices failed to state claim for securities fraud in absence of allegations of particular facts demonstrating how defendants knew of scheme at time they made their statements of compliance that they knew the financial statements overrepresented the companys true earnings or that they were aware of a gaap violation C. holding that defendants failed to carry burden of proof to show that plaintiffs failed to mitigate damages when among other things they offered no evidence contradicting the plaintiffs evidence D. holding that creditors could not seek relief from a bankruptcy stay because they were not the real parties in interest and lacked standing as they were not holders of the notes and failed to establish that mers was the holder or had authority to transfer the notes E. holding defendants could not be guilty as parties when the state failed to show they knew the criminality of the conduct they assisted

assistant: The best answer is E. holding defendants could not be guilty as parties when the state failed to show they knew the criminality of the conduct they assisted
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 by each party hereto on a separate counterpart, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart by facsimile or electronic mail shall be equally effective as delivery of an original executed counterpart. Headings in this Agreement are for reference only and shall not form part of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you consent to the collection , use , and disclosure of your personally identifiable information by accessing to the service and/or participating in the gift points program in accordance with the company 's privacy policy available at http://musical.ly/privacy.html ( `` privacy policy '' ) and the gift points policy , including with respect to the collection of location information or payment related information ;

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: Assuming that all conditions to closing have been satisfied and this Agreement has not otherwise been terminated, the consummation of the transaction contemplated hereby (the “ Closing ”) shall be held at the offices of the Title Company, located at the address set forth in Section 9.1 hereof, on the date (the “ Closing Date ”) that is ten (10) days following Completion of the Work; provided, however, that in the event Completion of the Work has not occurred by the Outside Completion Date, then Seller shall be in default under this Agreement, and Purchaser shall be entitled to pursue any remedies available to Purchaser under Section 8.1 below. Seller and Purchaser agree that the Closing shall be consummated through an escrow closing with the Title Company acting as Title Company, and neither party need be present at Closing.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement shall become effective when it shall have been executed by Administrative Agent and when Administrative Agent shall have received counterparts hereof that, when taken together, bear the signatures of each of the other parties hereto. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Agreement by facsimile or other electronic imaging means (e.g. “pdf” or “tif”) shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower agrees to pay to KeyBank, the Agent and KBCM for their own account certain fees for services rendered or to be rendered in connection with the Loans as provided pursuant to a separate fee letter among the REIT, KeyBank and KBCM (the “Agreement Regarding Fees”). Borrower hereby assumes all obligations of REIT under the Agreement Regarding Fees. All such fees shall be fully earned when paid and nonrefundable under any circumstances.

assistant: 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: There are no actions, suits, proceedings, claims or disputes pending or, to the knowledge of the Borrower, threatened in writing, at law, in equity, in arbitration or before any Governmental Authority, by or against the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries or against any of their properties or revenues that (a) purport to affect or pertain to this Agreement, any other Loan Document, or the consummation of the transactions contemplated herby or thereby, or (b) either individually or in the aggregate, if determined adversely, would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Litigations
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: added). ¶ 20 Further, common law from other states has developed addressing the responsibility of tenants using an easement regardless of them status as servient or dominant tenant. These cases set forth a general principle that a party having rights to use an easement should share in the maintenance and repair expense for that easement. See Barnard v. Gaumer, 146 Colo. 409, 361 P.2d 778, 781 (1961) (noting that “the burden of upkeep should be distributed between dominant and servient tenements in proportion to their relative use of the road, as nearly as such may be ascertained”); Story v. Bly, 217 P.3d 872, 878-79 (Colo.Ct.App.2008) (relying on § 4.13 of the Restatement (Third)); Lakeland Prop. Owners Ass’n v. Larson, 121 Ill.App.3d 805, 77 Ill.Dec. 68, 459 N.E.2d 1164, 1170 (1984) (<HOLDING>); Larabee v. Booth, 463 .App.1980) (“In this Options: A. holding that the duty to maintain an easement was upon those entitled to its use rather than upon the servient estate B. holding that one who possesses deeded easement need not use the easement to maintain his title and easement cannot be extinguished from nonuser alone C. recognizing that an easement may entitle the easement owner to do acts which were not for the easement would constitute a nuisance D. recognizing that where a grantee has an easement which he shares with others his duty to repair and maintain it must be apportioned with all other easement holders based upon the extent of the individuals use of the easement E. holding that an easement agreement and an unrecorded easement plan created an easement

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that where a grantee has an easement which he shares with others his duty to repair and maintain it must be apportioned with all other easement holders based upon the extent of the individuals use of the easement
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: party against the other, requiring credibility determinations. Wife asked repeatedly for the trial court to take the testimony of the witnesses anew. Both Husband and Wife were available to testify. Although Husband points out that both Husband and Wife were in Judge Hutt’s presence on various occasions when Judge Hutt could have observed them, the witnesses’ mere presence obviously is not the same as their testimony under oath. ¶ 26 Our supreme court stated that “[t]he right to a new trial necessarily follows [the declaration of a mistrial], as a mistrial is equivalent to no trial.” Gray, 92 Ariz. at 211, 375 P.2d at 564. This court has reasserted that position as recently as 1995. Hall Family Properties, Ltd. v. Gosnell Dev. Corp., 185 Ariz. 382, 386, 916 P.2d 1098, 1102 (App.1995) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 27 For the reasons stated in this opinion, Options: A. holding order granting motion to withdraw plea to be the functional equivalent of an order granting a new trial because like a postverdict mistrial it returns case to posture it had been before trial B. holding that when there was no manifest necessity for aborting a trial rather than using other less drastic remedies to cure problems in the absence of defendants motion for a mistrial the granting of a mistrial is an abuse of discretion C. holding court had jurisdiction to consider appeal of postverdict decision granting mistrial D. holding that the granting of a mistrial due to a defect in the wording of the indictment did not prevent retrial even though the mistrial was declared after the jury was impaneled and sworn and over the objection of defendant E. holding that filing of appeal to federal circuit divests this court of jurisdiction to consider motion to stay court order pending appeal

assistant: The best answer is C. holding court had jurisdiction to consider appeal of postverdict decision granting mistrial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court to be invalid or unenforceable, that determination shall not affect the other provisions hereof, each of which shall be construed and enforced as if the invalid or unenforceable portion were not contained herein. Such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any valid and enforceable application thereof, and each such provision shall be deemed to be effective, operative, made, entered into or taken in the manner and to the full extent permitted by law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: upon which it operates its game preserve. The injury suffered by the plaintiffs occurred as an incident to state operation of state-owned land. The plaintiffs apparently recognize this distinction by arguing that the operation of the wildlife management areas amounts to a nuisance and that this nuisance is the cause of their injury. Missouri courts have recognized that damage to private property in the nature of a nuisance creates a cause of action sounding in inverse condemnation when the nuisance is operated by an entity holding the power of eminent domain. See Stewart v. City of Marshfield, 431 S.W.2d 819, 822-23 (Mo.App.1968) (plaintiffs’ property suffered damage from the city’s operation of its sewer system); Page v. Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District, 377 S.W.2d 348 (Mo.1964) (<HOLDING>). Since the Missouri Department of Conservation Options: A. holding city not immune from liability where claims were based on the citys failure to maintain clean and inspect an area of the street B. holding that the government is immune from liability for its choice of traffic protection devices C. holding that the city was immune from tort liability for maintaining a nuisance but suggesting that the case should be refiled under a theory of inverse condemnation D. recognizing that a judge is not absolutely immune from criminal liability E. holding that a city could not be held vicariously liable for the act of a magistrate who was immune from liability

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the city was immune from tort liability for maintaining a nuisance but suggesting that the case should be refiled under a theory of inverse condemnation
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 not be assigned by the Buyer without the prior written consent of the Sellers, which consent may be granted or withheld in the Sellers’ sole discretion. Notwithstanding the foregoing, (i) the Buyer may assign this Agreement to one or more (a) direct or indirect subsidiaries of the Buyer or any Affiliate of the Buyer in which the Buyer or the Buyer’s Affiliate owns at least fifty percent (50%) of the direct or indirect ownership interests in each such subsidiary or (b) Affiliates of the Buyer (as applicable, a “ Majority Owned or Controlled Entity ”) and (ii) the Buyer may designate one or more Majority Owned or Controlled Entities to which one or more of the Transferred Assets will be assigned at the applicable Closing (each, a “ Designated Subsidiary ”). Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, at any time prior to the applicable Closing, any Seller may transfer any Asset to a single purpose entity that is directly or indirectly wholly owned by such Seller or one of its Affiliates, and such single purpose entity shall be deemed a “Seller” for all purposes under this Agreement and the Closing Documents, as applicable.

assistant: Assignments
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: Your initial annual base salary (the “ Base Salary ”) will be four hundred thousand Dollars ($400,000.00), less required deductions and withholdings, payable in accordance with the Company’s normal payroll practices. Thereafter, your annual base salary will be determined by the Leadership Development and Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors (the “ Compensation Committee ”). Your Base Salary will be pro-rated for any partial years of employment during your Employment Term.

assistant: Base Salary
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 Intervention 'Unit, following the issuance of a Protective Order removing the children to Polinsky by the Juvenile Court and the subsequent return of the children to the Mann home. Pis. Opp. and Resp. to Defs. Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts 3, ECF No. 203. As such, Monge and Solis played no role in the initial removal of the Mann children. Moreover, Monge and Solis are entitled to absolute immunity with respect to the actions they took following the court order. See Tamas v. Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 630 F.3d 833, 842 (9th Cir.2010) (noting that “[ajbsolute immunity is extended to state officials, such as social workers, when they are performing quasi-prosecutorial and quasi-judicial functions” such as the execution of court orders); Mabe, 237 F.3d at 1109 (<HOLDING>); see also Engebretson v. Mahoney, 724 F.3d Options: A. holding that social workers are entitled to absolute immunity when prosecuting child delinquency petitions B. holding that social workers enjoy absolute quasijudicial immunity when making postadjudication custody decisions pursuant to a valid court order quotation omitted C. holding that state prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity for the initiation and pursuit of a criminal prosecution D. holding that absolute immunity cannot attach to a quasijudicial officer if his actions are clearly and completely outside the scope of his jurisdiction E. holding that officials charged with the duty of executing a facially valid court order enjoy absolute immunity

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that social workers enjoy absolute quasijudicial immunity when making postadjudication custody decisions pursuant to a valid court order quotation omitted
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: attorney] procured the indictment. See Ray, 561 S.W.2d at 481. The record also shows that appellant used this same argument in requesting his motion in arrest of judgment. But in Ray, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that the appellant failed to meet his burden of showing a violation of the sanctity of the grand jury proceedings because the evidence showed that no one other than grand jurors were present during the grand jury’s voting or deliberations. See id. Therefore, ... the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to grant a hearing on this motion because appellant did not argue that [the district attorney] was present during the grand jury’s vote or deliberations. See id. Id. at *7; see also Walter v. State, 209 S.W.3d 722, 737, 739-40 (Tex. App.—Tex-arkana 2006) (<HOLDING>), rev’d. on other grounds, 267 S.W.3d 883 (Tex. Options: A. holding that right was available in grand jury proceedings B. holding that under california law tjestifying before a grand jury charged with investigating corruption is one part of an officers job and therefore any speech huppert gave during his grand jury testimony was pursuant to his duties as a police officer C. holding that the defendants were not denied their right to be present during the peremptory strike phase of jury selection where they were present during voir dire had a chance to confer with counsel before the jury was impaneled and were present in the courtroom when the peremptory strikes were given actual effect by the clerks reading off the list D. holding that the state violated a statute by allowing the presence of nonwitness police officers during grand jury proceedings but concluding that because those officers were not present during deliberations the indictments were not void E. holding that the government is not required to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the state violated a statute by allowing the presence of nonwitness police officers during grand jury proceedings but concluding that because those officers were not present during deliberations the indictments were not void
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: rule. 991 S.W.2d 830 (Tex.Cr.App.1999). In Vick, the Court of Criminal Appeals concluded that the Legislature intended each separately described act proscribed by section 22.021 to constitute a separate statutory offense. Id. at 832-33. Thus, in this case, submitting the charged offenses in the disjunctive made it possible for some of the jurors to have found that appellant guilty of digital penetration of J.C.’s sexual organ while other jurors chose to find appellant guilty of penetrating or contacting J.C.’s sexual organ with his sexual organ. Appellant was entitled to a unanimous jury verdict, and we hold that the trial court erred in submitting a disjunctive jury charge on the first assault. See Hendrix v. State, 150 S.W.3d 839, 848-49 (Tex.App.Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). Having found error in the court’s charge on Options: A. holding that trial court erred in rendering takenothing judgment notwithstanding jurys verdict in favor of plaintiff based on defendants properly preserved charge error and concluding that proper remedy was for trial court to grant new trial based on the charge error B. holding that the district court erred in failing to properly charge the jury on defendants affirmative defenses C. holding that courts erroneous disjunctive charge on one of several indictments against the appellant was harmful error under almanza standard because the erroneous charge made it possible for the jury to return a nonunanimous verdict D. holding that trial court erred in submitting depravity factor because evidence pointed to drug dispute as motive for killing E. holding that trial court erred in submitting disjunctive charge

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that trial court erred in submitting disjunctive charge
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: however , if the services were purchased by another party for you to use ( e.g. recruiter seat bought by your employer ) , the party paying for such service has the right to control access to and get reports on your use of such paid service ; however , they do not have rights to your personal account .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Cir.1966)). The Court does not specifically limit the rule to admi ralty cases, see id. at 10, 92 S.Ct. 1907, and the Restatement of the Conflict of Laws supports the application to mandatory forum-selection clauses in contracts, except in limited circumstances such as where the application would be unfair or unreasonable. See Restatement (Second) of the Conflict of Laws, 2d § 80 cmt. c (1988 Supp.). Furthermore, the same legal concerns once relevant only to admiralty matters are now commonplace in other international ventures, especially those involving the type of electronic communication and computer integration involved in this dispute. The M/S Bremen rule applies soundly to the contract between Evolution and Koninklijke. See also Jones v. Weibrecht, 901 F.2d 17, 19 (2d Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). 11 . A court's discretion to apply the Options: A. holding that forum selection clause applied to tort claims that arose out of a contractual relationship and noting that if forum selection clauses are to be enforced as a matter of public policy that same public policy required that they not be defeated by artful pleadings of tort claims internal citation omitted B. holding that in a diversity action a federal court must apply the law of the forum state C. holding enforceable forum selection clauses in arbitration agreements D. holding in contractual action that ms bremen controls the enforceability of forum selection clauses in diversity cases E. holding order dismissing action without prejudice based on contractual forum selection clause is final and appealable because it terminates the litigation in the plaintiffs chosen forum

assistant: The best answer is D. holding in contractual action that ms bremen controls the enforceability of forum selection clauses in diversity cases
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). “[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require ‘detailed factual allegations,’ but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955). District courts within the Fifth Circuit have divided as to whether Woodfield’s fair-notice standard continues to apply to pleading affirmative defenses and counterclaims, or whether Twombly and Iqbal’s plausibility standard applies. Compare, e.g., Vargas v. HWC Gen. Maintenance, LLC, 2012 WL 948892, at *2 (S.D.Tex. Mar. 20, 2012) (<HOLDING>); with Floridia v. DLT 3 Girls, Inc., 2012 WL Options: A. holding that the pleading standard set forth in twombly applies to all civil actions B. holding that where a complaint pleads facts that are merely consistent with a defendants liability it stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief C. holding that twombly and iqbals plausibility standard applies D. holding that the preponderance of the evidence standard applies to 523 claims E. recognizing the circuit split and applying the subjective standard as more stringent without deciding which standard applies

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that twombly and iqbals plausibility standard applies
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: claim.” Aplee. Br. 15 (emphasis omitted) (quoting United States ex rel. Heath v. AT & T, Inc., 791 F.3d 112, 121 (2015)). And based on that assertion, Little and Motaghed contend that the order the district court certified for appeal “does not involve a controlling issue of law ... as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).” Aplee. Br. 12; see § 1292(b) (permitting party to take interlocutory appeal from an order when district court certifies that order “involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation”). Little and Motaghed acknowledge our previous holding that the first-to-file rule is jurisdictional. Grynberg, 390 F.3d at 1278 (<HOLDING>). But they contend that Grynberg was superseded Options: A. holding that the crossappeal time limit is jurisdictional B. holding 30day limit to be mandatory and jurisdictional C. recognizing a distinction between the power of a federal court to hear statelaw claims and the discretionary exercise of that power D. holding that time limit in rule 35c predecessor to rule 35a is jurisdictional E. holding that firsttofile rule is a jurisdictional limit on the courts power to hear certain duplicative qui tam suits

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that firsttofile rule is a jurisdictional limit on the courts power to hear certain duplicative qui tam suits