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: that maintenance expenses amounted to $4,800 per year and would escalate at an inflationary rate of five percent. Pomeranz may have been qualified to testify about the cost of maintenance if it had been established that he possessed some personal knowledge of the maintenance costs, that maintenance costs were part of the business records relating to the property, or that his opinion was rationally based on his own perceptions as the managing co- e issue of future maintenance expenses was legally insufficient to provide a basis from which the trial court could arrive at a fair approximation of the amount of those expenses. However, on remand, the trial court may award nominal damages for future maintenance expenses. See Doyle v. McBee, 161 Colo. 130, 137, 420 P.2d 247, 250 (1966) (<HOLDING>). B In attempting to prove the amount of future Options: A. holding that the right to nominal damages was waived in a breach of duty action when plaintiff failed to raise the issue of nominal damages until after the verdict B. holding that the right to nominal damages for eighth amendment violations can be waived if such damages are not timely requested C. holding that in an action for breach of contract only nominal damages can be recovered if there is no evidence produced from which the facts necessary to determine damages under the proper rule can be determined D. holding that the right to nominal damages for race discrimination claims can be waived if such damages are not timely requested E. recognizing attorney fees and expenses may be recovered if they constitute damages from the breach of a contract but not if they are incurred in proving the breach

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that in an action for breach of contract only nominal damages can be recovered if there is no evidence produced from which the facts necessary to determine damages under the proper rule can be determined
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the document be made by the person, whose duty it was to make it, and that the matter it contains be such as belonged to his province, or came within his official cognizance and observation. Documents having these requisites are, in general, admissible to prove, either prima facie or conclusively, the facts they recite.” Simon Greenleaf, 1 A Treatise on the Law of Evidence § 491, 538 (1972 reprint of first ed 1842). See also White v. United States, 164 US 100, 104, 17 S Ct 38, 41 L Ed 365 (1896) (observing that discharge entries from jail records “would be evidence in and of themselves” to show whether a particular prisoner was present in court, where the defendant was charged with defrauding the government while employed to bring witnesses to court); Gaines, 53 US at 570 (<HOLDING>); United States v. Johns, 4 US 412, 415, 1 L Ed Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs acted on behalf of all union members and reimbursing the attorneys fees from the union treasury such that all union members in effect equally contributed to the costs of litigation B. holding that the rule of completeness applies only to writings or recorded statements not to conversations C. recognizing the same rule in texas courts D. recognizing this rule E. recognizing public or official writings exception and noting that the same rule prevails in the courts of all of the states of this union

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing public or official writings exception and noting that the same rule prevails in the courts of all of the states of this union
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 Party acknowledges that it has received adequate information to enter into this Agreement, and that this Agreement and the Exhibits attached hereto have been prepared through the joint efforts of all of the Parties. Neither the provisions of this Agreement or the Exhibits attached hereto nor any alleged ambiguity herein or therein shall be interpreted or resolved against any Party on the ground that such Party’s counsel drafted this Agreement or the Exhibits attached hereto, or based on any other rule of strict construction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: whether or not the debtor willfully attempted to evade or defeat taxes.” Dalton, 77 F.3d at 1301. Thus, nonpayment coupled with the failure to file timely returns, In re Birkenstock, 87 F.3d at 952, or the concealment of assets, In re Bruner, 55 F.3d at 200, demonstrate the conduct requirement of section 523(a)(1)(C). Other factors found sufficient to meet the conduct element include inadequate recordkeeping, intra-family transfers for insufficient consideration, transfers made in the face of serious financial difficulties, and a lavish or extravagant lifestyle. Geiger v. IRS (In re Geiger), 408 B.R. 788, 791 (C.D.Ill.2009); Hamm v. United States (In re Hamm), 356 B.R. 263, 276-77 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.2006); see also Volpe v. IRS (In re Volpe), 377 B.R. 579, 587 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 2007) (<HOLDING>). Significantly, such acts or omissions are Options: A. holding that irs claim for taxes and claim of debtor against irs for violation of automatic stay did not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence B. holding the conduct element satisfied where debtor failed to timely file tax returns and failed to pay taxes for those years C. holding that the irs proved the conduct element of section 523a1c by showing among other things that a debtor failed to pay his taxes even though he had enough money to pay for nonnecessities such as vacations and private school D. holding that failure to pay sales taxes is a breach of trust E. holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to require a defendant to pay all back taxes

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the irs proved the conduct element of section 523a1c by showing among other things that a debtor failed to pay his taxes even though he had enough money to pay for nonnecessities such as vacations and private school
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 and delivered in separate counterparts (including by means of facsimile), each of which is deemed to be an original and all of which taken together constitute one and the same agreement. This Agreement shall become effective only when counterparts have been executed and delivered by all parties whose names are set forth on the signature page(s) hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Guaranty shall be interpreted and construed under the laws of the United States of America and the State of Texas, U.S.A. (without regard to, and without giving effect to, their conflict of laws rules).

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: All notices, demands, requests, consents, approvals, and other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and, unless otherwise specified herein, shall be (i) personally served, (ii) deposited in the mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, (iii) delivered by reputable air courier service with charges prepaid, or (iv) transmitted by hand delivery, telegram, or facsimile, addressed as set forth below or to such other address as such party shall have specified most recently by written notice. Any notice or other communication required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be deemed effective (a) upon hand delivery or delivery by facsimile, with accurate confirmation generated by the transmitting facsimile machine, at the address or number designated below (if delivered on a Trading Day during normal business hours where such notice is to be received), or the first Trading Day following such delivery (if delivered other than on a Trading Day during normal business hours where such notice is to be received) or (b) on the second Trading Day following the date of mailing by express courier service, fully prepaid, addressed to such address, or upon actual receipt of such mailing, whichever shall first occur. The addresses for such communications shall be: (i) if to the Company, to: The Greater Cannabis Company, Inc., 15 Walker Ave, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD 21208, Attn: Aitan Zacharin, Chief Executive Officer, email: aitan@gcanrx.com, with a copy by email only to (which shall not constitute notice): Mark Radom, email: mark@gcanrx.com, and (ii) if to the Holders, to: the addresses and fax numbers indicated on the signature pages of the Exchange Agreement, with an additional copy by fax only to (which shall not constitute notice): Grushko & Mittman, P.C., 515 Rockaway Avenue, Valley Stream, New York 11581, Attn: Eliezer Drew, Esq., facsimile: (212) 697-3575.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: equipment necessary to rescue an infant from a locked car was not entitled to sovereign immunity because he was driving in routine traffic and was ordered to obey all traffic laws. Collier, 268 Va. at 391 (Justice Kinser and Justice Koontz dissenting, arguing a child locked in a car presents the possibility of loss of life that should be analyzed under the framework of whether effectuating the governmental purpose embraces “special risks”). Although the Courts recognize a certain degree of judgment and discretion is required for a government employee to transport an individual as part of his or her job, when the actionable conduct occurs during routine driving situations, the driver is not entitled to sovereign immunity. See Fitzgerald v. Perry, 84 Va. Cir. 96, 98 (Roanoke County 2012) (<HOLDING>); see also Ferro v. Shifflett, 72 Va. Cir. 298, Options: A. holding no immunity to an officer who was transporting an inmate in need of prenatal care because the special security risks inherent in transporting a prisoner did not impact the deputys operation of the vehicle at the time of the accident B. holding that suspect was not in custody when officer handcuffed him for officer safety while transporting him to police station C. holding that in pennsylvania there is a rule that proof of the ownership of a business vehicle involved in an accident raises a presumption that the operation of the automobile was for the owners business purposes D. holding that business use exclusion did not apply to preclude coverage of an insured after a car accident when the insured had been transporting a refrigerator in his personal vehicle as a favor to a friend had no expectation of compensation except being reimbursed for the cost of gas and it was an isolated incident E. holding that probable cause exists when the facts and circumstances known to the police officer and of which he has reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient to warrant a prudent man in believing that the accused had committed or was committing an offense in situations where the arresting officer has not observed the operation of the vehicle such facts and circumstances would necessarily have to include a relationship between the time there was evidence to show the influence of intoxicants and the time of operation of the vehicle internal citations omitted

assistant: The best answer is A. holding no immunity to an officer who was transporting an inmate in need of prenatal care because the special security risks inherent in transporting a prisoner did not impact the deputys operation of the vehicle at the time of the accident
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with such notice and hearing’).” 101 So.3d at 752. Thus, the failure to serve a motion in accordance with Rule 5 might result in a violation of an opposing party’s due-process rights and can render a judgment entered pursuant to the motion void. See Pirtek USA, LLC v. Whitehead, 51 So.3d 291, 295 (Ala.2010) (quoting Orix Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Murphy, 9 So.3d 1241, 1244 (Ala.2008), quoting in turn Ins. Mgmt. & Admin., Inc. v. Palomar Ins. Corp., 590 So.2d 209, 212 (Ala.1991)) (“ ‘ “A judgment is void ... if the court rendering it ... acted in a manner inconsistent with due process.” ’ ”). Our supreme court has recognized that the failure to serve a motion or other paper in compliance with Rule 5(a) will not always result in a due-process violation. See Woodruff, 101 So.3d at 752-53 (<HOLDING>). But, in this case, we hold that Morris has Options: A. holding that the trial court erred by granting the defendants motion to dismiss B. holding that the trial court did not err by failing to hold an oral hearing on a motion to dismiss an appeal because the appellant was afforded a full opportunity to respond to the motion C. holding that the court implicitly denied the plaintiffs motion to strike certain submissions because the court in its opinion granting defendants motion to dismiss relied on defendants materials D. holding plaintiffs reference to and attachment of franchise agreement excerpts in opposition to defendants motion did not convert motion to dismiss to motion for summary judgment because plaintiff did not introduce support for arguments beyond the allegations in the complaint E. holding that the trial court did not violate due process in considering the defendants motion to dismiss because the defendant had corrected its error in not serving its motion to dismiss on the plaintiff and because the plaintiff had received adequate time to consider and respond to the arguments made in the motion

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the trial court did not violate due process in considering the defendants motion to dismiss because the defendant had corrected its error in not serving its motion to dismiss on the plaintiff and because the plaintiff had received adequate time to consider and respond to the arguments made in the motion
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 a period of eighteen (18) months following the Closing Date, the employment of each Transferred Employee by the Buyer or any of its Affiliates shall be on terms and conditions set forth in Section 10.1(b) or (c) , as applicable; provided the Transferred Employee remains a common law or statutory employee of the Buyer, one of its Affiliates or the PEO (as applicable).

assistant: Benefits
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: section 1983 provides a remedy for improper extradition in violation of the extradition clause and statute [including some state statutes].”); McBride v. Soos, 594 F.2d 610, 613 (7th Cir.1979) ("[W]here plaintiff has alleged violation of rights protected by federal law, and violation of rights protected by state law derived from federal law, we hold that a complaint which charges abuse of the extradition power by noncompliance with applicable law states a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983."); Wirth v. Surles, 562 F.2d 319, 322 (4th Cir.1977) ("Where the violation of state law causes the deprivation of rights protected by the Constitution and statutes of the United States, a cause of action is stated under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.”). But see Barton v. Norrod, 106 F.3d 1289, 1295-96 & n. 6 (<HOLDING>); see also id. at 1296 n. 6 (listing district Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law B. recognizing that state agencies which are independent of the state are citizens of the state C. holding that the extradition procedures are a matter of state law D. holding that since the constitutional and statutory extradition provisions are not designed to protect fugitives but rather are designed to facilitate the administration of justice between states the failure to comply with established procedures does not deprive the fugitive of any protected right and therefore provides no basis for a 1983 claim E. holding that defendant was bound by plea bargain to reimburse state for extradition costs despite the fact that the state would not otherwise have authority to require reimbursement

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the extradition procedures are a matter of state 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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007) 1 Statement of STEVENS and KENNEDY, JJ. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES LAKHDAR BOUMEDIENE ET AL. 06–1195 v. GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL. KHALED A. F. AL ODAH, NEXT FRIEND OF FAWZI KHALID ABDULLAH FAHAD AL ODAH, ET AL. 06–1196 v. UNITED STATES ET AL. ON PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Nos. 06–1195 and 06–1196. Decided April 2, 2007 The petitions for writs of certiorari are denied. Statement of JUSTICE STEVENS and JUSTICE KENNEDY respecting the denial of certiorari. Despite the obvious importance of the issues raised in these cases, we are persuaded that traditional rules gov erning our decision of constitutional questions, see Ash- wander v. TVA, 297 U.S. 288, 341 (1936) (Brandeis, J., concurring), and our practice of requiring the exhaustion of available remedies as a precondition to accepting juris diction over applications for the writ of habeas corpus, cf. Ex parte Hawk, 321 U.S. 114 (1944) (per curiam), make it appropriate to deny these petitions at this time. However, “[t]his Court has frequently recognized that the policy underlying the exhaustion-of-remedies doctrine does not require the exhaustion of inadequate remedies.” Marino v. Ragen, 332 U.S. 561, 570, n. 12 (1947) (Rutledge, J., concurring). If petitioners later seek to establish that the 2 BOUMEDIENE v. BUSH Statement of STEVENS and KENNEDY, JJ. Government has unreasonably delayed proceedings under the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, Tit. X, 119 Stat. 2739, or some other and ongoing injury, alternative means exist for us to consider our jurisdiction over the allegations made by petitioners before the Court of Appeals. See 28 U.S. C. §§1651(a), 2241. Were the Government to take additional steps to prejudice the position of petitioners in seeking review in this Court, “courts of competent jurisdic tion,” including this Court, “should act promptly to ensure that the office and purposes of the writ of habeas corpus are not compromised.” Padilla v. Hanft, 547 U.S. 1062, 1064 (2006) (KENNEDY, J., concurring in denial of certio rari). And as always, denial of certiorari does not consti tute an expression of any opinion on the merits. See Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466, 480–481 (2004) (majority opinion of STEVENS, J.); id., at 487 (KENNEDY, J., concurring in judgment).

assistant: 1
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: Id. at (a). Action may only be taken, however, in “the superior court of the county of the residence of the taxpayer,” id. at (a)(4), or, if the taxpayer is a nonresident, in the Superior Court of Fulton County or in the superior court of the county in which the state revenue commissioner resides. Id. at (a)(4)(B). These provisions are not enough to confer jurisdiction on federal courts in Georgia. See Ford Motor Co., 323 U.S. at 465-66, 65 S.Ct. at 351-52 (“The provision in this section which vests original jurisdiction of suits for refund in the ‘circuit or superior court of the county in which the taxpayer resides or is located’ indicates that the state legislature contemplated suit in the state courts.” (footnote omitted)); Henderson v. Carter, 229 Ga. 876, 195 S.E.2d 4 (1972) (<HOLDING>). This Court is thus barred from hearing Options: A. holding unconstitutional the provision in a georgia abortion statute limiting abortions to georgia residents B. holding that georgia refund statute signifies state waiver of immunity only to the extent provided by the express terms of the statute C. holding that when a statute is patterned after a similar provision in another states statute it is proper to resort to judicial constructions placed on the statute by the courts of the state whose statute provided the model in determining the proper construction D. holding that the title of the statute did not limit the reach of the statute E. holding that the alien tort statute itself is not a waiver of sovereign immunity

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that georgia refund statute signifies state waiver of immunity only to the extent provided by the express terms of the statute
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: final when the mandate issued from the supreme court affirming the judgment on May 24, 1999, and that the two-year time limitation of rule 3.850(b) began to run at that time, thus rendering his January 4, 2002, motion untimely. Snipes argues that the time limitation of the rule did not commence until this court’s affirmance of his sentence on remand became final on January 16, 2001. The unequivocal language of rule 3.850(b) supports Snipes’ contention: A motion to vacate a sentence that exceeds the limits provided by law may be filed at any time. No other motion shall be filed or considered pursuant to this rule if filed more than 2 years after the judgment and sentence become final in a noncapital case.... (Emphasis added.) See also Oliver v. State, 734 So.2d 1083 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (<HOLDING>). We also note the well-established principle Options: A. recognizing an exception to the twoyear time bar imposed on rule 3850 claims when the claim asserted is based on facts that were unknown to the movant and could not have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence B. holding that defendants 3850 motion for postconviction relief was procedurally barred as successive where the defendants current rule 3850 motion is one that could have or should have been raised in his first rule 3850 motion C. holding that the twoyear time limitation of rule 3850 does not commence until the sentence becomes final D. holding that a court may not change the term of sentence by subsequent amendment after the sentence becomes final E. holding that rule 3850 motion was not time barred where the order did not place any time limitation on when the defendant would refile his rule 3850 motion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the twoyear time limitation of rule 3850 does not commence until the sentence becomes final
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: County[, 387 Md. 52, 874 A.2d 470 (2005)]? (4) Whether the highly restricted Agricultural Zone area may be used for an S.M. facility, private driveway, and lot area for lots developed in the adjoining Rural-Residential Zone Area, where the Agricultural Zone itself would not permit that lot density? (5) Whether the Court of Special Appeals allowed the equivalent of a disguised rezoning or unauthorized density transfer (a.k.a. De facto rezoning of the property)? 20 . We focus, for the purposes of this opinion, primarily on the purposes and underlying reasons for establishment of the R.C. 2 and R.C. 5 zones. For a more extensive historical discussion of the Resource Conservation Zones in Baltimore County, see Security Mgmt. Corp. v. Baltimore County, 104 Md.App. 234, 655 A.2d 1326 (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 339 Md. 643, 664 A.2d 886 Options: A. holding that extension of exclusive liability to project owners did not violate due process or equal protection rights of injured workers B. holding that placement of property in baltimore countys rc4 resource conservation zone did not constitute a deprivation of the landowners constitutional rights to either equal protection or substantive due process C. recognizing privilege for adjoining landowners defamatory statements about plaintiff to zoning board given landowners private interest in the protection of her property to advance D. holding transfer eligibility rule did not deny the student equal protection of the laws or procedural or substantive due process under the fourteenth amendment E. holding that florida statute did not constitute an unreasonable exercise of the states police power and rejecting due process and equal protection challenges

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that placement of property in baltimore countys rc4 resource conservation zone did not constitute a deprivation of the landowners constitutional rights to either equal protection or substantive due process
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: still must demonstrate, “through submissions of evi-dentiary quality, that a trial worthy issue persists.” Iverson v. City of Boston, 452 F.3d 94, 98 (1st Cir. 2006). Moreover, “[o]n issues where the non Movant bears the ultimate burden of proof, [she] must present definite, competent evidence to rebut the motion.” Mesnick v. Gen. Elec. Co., 950 F.2d 816, 822 (1st Cir.1991). These showings may not rest upon “conclusory allegations, improbable inferences, and unsupported speculation.” Medina-Muñoz v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 896 F.2d 5, 8 (1st Cir.1990). The evidence offered by the non-moving party “cannot be merely colorable, but must be sufficiently probative to show differing versions of fact which justify a trial.” Id.; See also Horta v. Sullivan, 4 F.3d 2, 7-8 (1st Cir. 1993) (<HOLDING>). “The mere existence of a scintilla of Options: A. holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion B. holding that hearsay evidence may be considered on summary judgment if the same evidence would be admissible in another form at trial C. holding that a district court may not grant summary judgment without giving plaintiff an opportunity to submit materials admissible in a summary judgment proceeding or allowing a hearing on defendants motion D. holding that a trial court can only consider admissible evidence in ruling on a motion for summary judgment E. holding that the materials attached to the motion for summary judgment must be admissible and usable at trial

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the materials attached to the motion for summary judgment must be admissible and usable at trial
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 individual executing this Agreement on behalf of a partnership, corporation, limited liability company or other entity represents and warrants that he or she is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of such entity, and that this Agreement is binding on such entity.

assistant: Authority
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 finding that insurance is not a “service”); Estate of Migliaccio v. Midland Nat’l. Life Ins. Co., 436 F.Supp.2d 1095, 1108-09 (C.D.Cal.2006) (dismissing CLRA claim on the ground that annuities, which are defined in the California Insurance Code as part of life insurance, are not “goods” or “services”); Bacon ex rel. Moroney v. Am. Int'l Group, 415 F.Supp.2d 1027, 1035-36 (N.D.Cal.2006) (same); Newland v. Progressive Corp., No. CIV-S-05-01405 DFL PAN, 2006 WL 2536625 at *5 (E.D.Cal. Aug. 31, 2006) (insurance is neither a “good” nor a “service” within the meaning of the CLRA); Bufano v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., No. B166899, 2004 WL 2526422, at *7 (Cal.Ct.App. Nov. 9, 2004) (same); Lynch v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., No. A094846, 2001 WL 1660035 at *7 (Cal.Ct.App. Dec. 28, 2001) (<HOLDING>). As the parties have pointed out, the Options: A. holding that plaintiff could recover medical fees not actually paid by the insurance company pursuant to an insurance contract B. holding that under minnesota law an insurance policy or provision not filed with the commissioner of insurance is unenforceable C. holding that insurance is not a good or service and noting that insurance is a contract by which indemnification is provided for loss arising from a contingent or unknown event D. holding that additional free title insurance provided a benefit to class members regardless of whether they made a claim on that insurance E. holding that new yorks public policy does not bar insurance coverage for disparate impact employment discrimination but noting that the state of new york insurance department has stated that it is against public policy to provide insurance coverage for intentional acts of discrimination

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that insurance is not a good or service and noting that insurance is a contract by which indemnification is provided for loss arising from a contingent or unknown event
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: vi ) no information or advice , whether expressed , implied , oral or written , obtained by you from atlas solutions group inc. or through any resources we provide shall create any warranty , guarantee , or conditions of any kind , except for those expressly outlined in this user 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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 366 U.S. 208 81 S.Ct. 1050 6 L.Ed.2d 233 Lewis Lloyd ANDERSONv.STATE OF ALABAMA. No. 326. Supreme Court of the United States May 1, 1961 Jack Greenberg (Peter A. Hall, Fred D. Gray, Orzell Billingsley and Thurgood Marshall, on the briefs), for petitioner. David W. Clark, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Alabama (MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen. on the briefs), for respondent. Mr. Jack Greenberg, New York City, for petitioner. Mr. David W. Clark, Montgomery, Ala., for respondent. On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Alabama. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment is reversed. Pierre v. Louisiana, 306 U.S. 354, 59 S.Ct. 536, 83 L.Ed. 757; Cassell v. Texas, 339 U.S. 282, 70 S.Ct. 629, 94 L.Ed. 839; Hernandez v. Texas, 347 U.S. 475, 74 S.Ct. 667, 98 L.Ed. 866.

assistant: 2
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 communications and notices pursuant hereto to either Party must be in writing personally delivered, sent by facsimile or email, and shall be deemed to have been duly given at the address, fax number or email for each Party set forth below.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the EchoStar receivers into the World Cable system, the Defendants were able to effectuate a more seamless rebroadcasting of the decrypted signal. However, the Second Circuit has clearly held that “the DMCA does not concern itself with the use of [protected] materials after circumvention has occurred”. Corley, 273 F.3d at 443. By way of analogy, Congress explained that: “The act of circumventing a technological protection measure put in place by a copyright owner to control access to a copyrighted work is the electronic equivalent of breaking into a locked room in order to obtain a copy of a book.” H.R.Rep. No. 105-551, pt. 1, at 17 (1998). In this case, the room was already unlocked, and therefore the Defendants did not have to “br LC, 657 F.Supp.2d 878, 889 (N.D.Ohio 2009) (<HOLDING>); Egilman v. Keller & Heckman, LLP., 401 Options: A. holding that the use of passwords without authorization is no different than the unauthorized use of other technologies to gain access to copyrighted material and therefore it avoids and bypasses a technological measure in violation of the dmca B. holding that an appellants due process rights were not violated when he did not receive brady material before his transfer hearing because he will be able to make effective use of any brady material at trial C. holding that the total denial of all access to the law library for seven months violated the plaintiffs constitutional right of access to the courts D. holding that reasonable access includes general facility access without notice and patient access with twentyfour hour notice E. holding that a defendant does not circumvent or bypass any technological measure when he uses the approved methodology to access the copyrighted material

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a defendant does not circumvent or bypass any technological measure when he uses the approved methodology to access the copyrighted material
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: Optionee (a) acknowledges that the Plan and the prospectus relating thereto are available to the Optionee on the website maintained by the Company’s third party stock plan administrator; (b) represents that he or she has read and is familiar with the terms and provisions thereof, has had an opportunity to obtain the advice of counsel of his or her choice prior to executing this Agreement and fully understands all provisions of the Agreement and the Plan; (c) accepts this Option subject to all of the terms and provisions thereof; (d) consents and agrees to all amendments that have been made to the Plan since it was adopted in 2007 (and for the avoidance of doubt consents and agrees to each amended term reflected in the Plan as in effect on the date of this Agreement), and consents and agrees that all options and restricted stock units, if any, held by the Optionee that were previously granted under the Plan as it has existed from time to time are now governed by the Plan as in effect on the date of this Agreement (except to the extent the Committee has expressly provided that a particular Plan amendment does not apply retroactively); and (e) agrees to accept as binding, conclusive and final all decisions or interpretations of the Committee upon any questions arising under the Plan or this Agreement.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you acknowledge that vivino has no control over , and no duty to take any action regarding : which users gains access to the service ; what content you access via the service ; what effects the content may have on you ; how you may interpret or use the content ; or what actions you may take as a result of having been exposed to the content .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: A Participant’s interest in the Company Stock Fund shall be expressed in whole and fractional notional units of the Company Stock Fund. The Company Stock Fund shall track an investment in Company Stock in the same manner as the 401(k) Plan’s company stock fund. Accordingly, the value of a unit in the Plan’s Company Stock Fund shall be the same as the value of a unit in the 401(k) Plan’s company stock fund. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if and to the extent that a company stock fund is no longer maintained under the 401(k) Plan, the Plan Administrator shall establish such rules and procedures as are necessary to maintain the Company Stock Fund hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Administrative Agent Fees . The Borrower agrees to pay to the Administrative Agent, for its own account, the fees payable pursuant to the Fee Letter, in each case in the amounts and at the times specified in such Fee Letter.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: N.E.2d 1042 (1978). Those courts so holding generally rely on and cite Saine v. Hospital Authority of Hall County, 502 F.2d 1033 (5th Cir. 1974). It is my opinion that such courts have misinterpreted Sainé. In Sainé the Fifth Circuit upheld an individual plaintiff’s right to sue for damages and injunctive relief for a hospital’s failure to comply with the indigent’s medical care requirements of Hill-Burton. Recently that same court stated that Sainé stands for the proposition that “[t]he free care obligation is legally enforceable, and vests a cause of action in the indigent beneficiaries to sue for the free care.” Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas v. Harris, 638 F.2d 1381, 1384 (5th Cir. 1981). See also Hospital Center at Orange v. Cook, 177 N.J.Super. 289, 426 A.2d 526 (App.Div.1981) (<HOLDING>) (overruling Cooper Medical Center v. Joyner, Options: A. recognizing private right of action B. holding that the private right of action available to individual indigents can be used either affirmatively or defensively C. holding that a private right of action exists D. holding that no private right of action exists E. holding that state can restore civil rights either affirmatively or automatically individually or generally

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the private right of action available to individual indigents can be used either affirmatively or defensively
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: 1112, 1119 (5th Cir.1987) (“If a prisoner challenges a single hearing as constitutionally defective, he must first exhaust state habeas remedies.”); Alexander v. Ware, 714 F.2d 416, 419 (5th Cir.1983) ("If a prisoner challenges a 'single allegedly defective [disciplinary] hearing,’ he attacks, in essence, the fact and duration of his custody.’’). In such cases, we have required prisoners to exhaust the TDCJ grievance procedures. See Baxter v. Estelle, 614 F.2d 1030, 1031-32 (5th Cir.1980) ("[A] federal court may not grant ha-beas corpus relief to a petitioner who has failed to exhaust all administrative remedies, including an appeal to the Director of Corrections.”), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1085, 101 S.Ct. 873, 66 L.Ed.2d 810 (1981); Lerma v. Estelle, 585 F.2d 1297, 1299 (5th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 848, 100 S.Ct. 95, 62 Options: A. holding that a prisoner exhausted his administrative remedies even though his grievance was untimely B. holding that if adequate administrative remedies are available it is improper to seek relief in court before those remedies are exhausted C. holding that a texas prisoner who had not exhausted his clearly available administrative remedies was properly denied habeas relief in the district court D. holding that the prisoner has the burden of demonstrating he has exhausted his administrative remedies in his complaint E. holding that administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to filing a claim in court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a texas prisoner who had not exhausted his clearly available administrative remedies was properly denied habeas relief in the district court
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: (i) The acquisition of ownership, directly or indirectly, beneficially or of record, by any Person or group (within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission thereunder as in effect on the date hereof) of Equity Interests representing more than 40% of the aggregate ordinary voting power represented by the issued and outstanding Equity Interests of the Company; (ii) during any period of 12 consecutive months, individuals who at the beginning of any such 12-month period constituted the Board of Directors of the Company (together with any new directors whose election by such Board or whose nomination for election by the shareholders of the Company was approved by a vote of a majority of the directors then still in office who were either directors at the beginning of such period or whose election or nomination for election was previously so approved) cease for any reason to constitute a majority of the Board of Directors of the Company; or (iii) other than a Permitted Transfer, there is any sale, exchange, conveyance, transfer, mortgage, assignment, pledge or encumbrance of any direct or indirect ownership of the Mall Owner.

assistant: Change In Control
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: to be present if the insured acknowledges his signature to the witness. ¶ 18. Lea also makes a policy argument that Congress intended to create an inflexible rule for administrative convenience. See Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Manning, 568 F.2d 922, 926 (2nd Cir.1977). However, a more stringent requirement of present witnesses would frustrate the dual Congressional purposes of the regulation: alleviating administrative difficulties with the insurance company and avoiding delays in payment to beneficiaries upon the death of the insured. O’Neal, 653 F.Supp. at 722. When the regulations do not provide for a given factual problem or error, courts have preferred a more commonsense approach in interpreting these regulations. See Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Hurford, 983 F.Supp. 1045, 1047 (D.Ka.1997) (<HOLDING>); Terry v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 354 F.3d 527, Options: A. recognizing that strict compliance with 1557 is required B. holding that strict compliance is not required C. holding that assuming compliance with a standard form and the absence of conflict with statute the parties to a contract of insurance are free to incorporate such provisions and conditions as they desire D. holding form designating 200 of insurance proceeds to various beneficiaries in strict compliance with regulations E. recognizing that the government generally has the right to insist on performance in strict compliance with the contract specifications

assistant: The best answer is D. holding form designating 200 of insurance proceeds to various beneficiaries in strict compliance with regulations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: “Information” means any and all confidential information or data exchanged, submitted or otherwise disclosed in respect of or further to the Purpose or prepared for or in relation to the Purpose, including but not limited to written proposal documentation, due diligence materials, contractual documentation, reports, and the fact that the Parties have entered into this Agreement and are discussing and considering a business relationship; Other than as set out in this clause, none of the Parties will make any public announcements, statements or otherwise publicise the subject matter of this Agreement (or its existence) without the prior written consent of the other Parties and no Party will use the business names or trade marks of any other Party in any way without that Party’s prior written consent.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: A breach of any of the terms of this Confidential Settlement Agreement, including the material falsity of any express representation or warranty, and the failure to perform under any covenant or agreements herein, will entitle the non-breaching Party to exercise any and all remedies available at law or in equity, subject only to any express limitations stated in this Confidential Settlement Agreement. In no event will this Confidential Settlement Agreement be revoked, rescinded, or terminated for any reason. The rights and remedies of the Parties hereunder are cumulative and are in addition to, and not in substitution for, any other rights and remedies available at law or in equity or otherwise and whether arising herefrom or from any other cause of action available to the Parties. No single or partial exercise by a Party of any right or remedy precludes or otherwise affects the exercise of any other right or remedy to which that Party may be entitled.

assistant: Remedies