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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth on Schedule 4.5 attached hereto, the Company shall use the net proceeds from the sale of the Securities hereunder for working capital purposes and shall not, without the consent of a majority of the Series B Directors, use such proceeds 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 outstanding litigation.

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: career offender purposes. Watson also argues that if Amendment 709 were applied to nullify his career offender status, then he would be entitled to a sentence reduction by virtue of Amendment 706. Section 3582(c)(2) grants district courts the discretion to reduce a previously imposed sentence “if such a reduction is consistent with the applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.” 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The relevant policy statement on retroactive reduction of sentences provides that a sentence reduction is authorized under § 3582(c)(2) only where the applicable guideline range was lowered as a result of an amendment to the Guidelines Manual enumerated under § 1B1.10(c). See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a); United States v. Pelaez, 196 F.3d 1203, 1205 n. 3 (11th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, a reduction in the defendant’s Options: A. holding that the 2000 version of section 489128 may not be retroactively applied B. holding that the protect act amendments to the standard of review apply retroactively C. holding that only the amendments listed in lb110c may be applied retroactively using a 3582c2 motion D. holding that although the amendment at issue was a clarifying amendment and therefore applied retroactively in the context of direct appeals and habeas petitions it could not serve as the basis for a 3582c2 reduction because it was not listed in lb110c E. holding that the 1986 amendments may not be applied retroactively to cut off a defense which existed under the old law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that only the amendments listed in lb110c may be applied retroactively using a 3582c2 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: this user agreement , the user privacy notice , the mobile devices terms , and all policies posted on our sites set out the terms on which ebay offers you access to and use of our sites , services , applications and tools ( collectively `` services '' ) .

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: taxable purposes.”), aff'd, 320 B.R. 357 (N.D.Ill.2005); In re Korhonen, 296 B.R. 492, 496-97 (Bankr.D.Minn.2003)(“[T]he amount discharged would be considered taxable income.”); In re Berscheid, 309 B.R. 5, 14 (Bankr.D.Minn.2002) (“Unle 005)(agreeing with the court below that participation in the ICRP is “an important indicator of good faith”); In re Tirch, 409 F.3d 677, 682-83 (6th Cir.2005)(stating that failure to take advantage of the ICRP is “not a per se indication of a lack of good faith,” but is “probative of [a debtor’s] intent to repay the loans”). Applying the totality of circumstances test, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Eighth Circuit also found eligibility for the ICRP to be relevant but not necessarily dispositive. In re Parker, 328 B.R. 548, 552 (8th Cir. BAP 2005)(<HOLDING>). This court has previously also held that Options: A. holding that debtors payments to investors were for reasonably equivalent value because such payments reduced the amount of the investors claims for rescission B. holding that payments made by third parties on behalf of debtors are disbursements notwithstanding the debtors lack of control over the funds C. holding that a debtors ability to make reduced payments under the icrp is relevant to the inquiry of whether the debtors reasonable future financial resources will cover payment of the debt while still allowing a minimal standard of living D. holding that the relevant time of inquiry is the date of the filing of the complaint E. holding even minimal payment required by the icrp could be beyond the debtors means

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a debtors ability to make reduced payments under the icrp is relevant to the inquiry of whether the debtors reasonable future financial resources will cover payment of the debt while still allowing a minimal standard of living
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 governmental and third-party notifications, filings, consents, waivers and approvals set forth on Schedule 3 and required for the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the Plan shall have been made or received.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event that any court of competent jurisdiction shall determine that any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be unenforceable in any respect, then such provision shall be deemed limited and restricted to the extent that the court shall deem the provision to be enforceable. This Agreement is to be given the broadest interpretation permitted by law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision hereof. The covenants and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be deemed a series of separate covenants and restrictions. If, in any judicial proceeding, a court of competent jurisdiction should refuse to enforce all of the separate covenants and restrictions in this Agreement, then such unenforceable covenants and restrictions shall be deemed eliminated from the provisions of this Agreement for the purpose of such proceeding to the extent necessary to permit the remaining separate covenants and restrictions to be enforced in such proceeding.

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: This Warrant shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with, and all questions concerning the construction, validity, interpretation and performance of this Warrant shall be governed by, the internal laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law provision or rule (whether of the State of Delaware or any other jurisdictions) that would cause the application of the laws of any jurisdictions other than the State of Delaware. The Company hereby irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in the State of Delaware for the adjudication of any dispute hereunder or in connection herewith or with any transaction contemplated hereby or discussed herein, and hereby irrevocably waives, and agrees not to assert in any suit, action or proceeding, any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of any such court, that such suit, action or proceeding is brought in an inconvenient forum or that the venue of such suit, action or proceeding is improper. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any manner permitted by law. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed or operate to preclude the Holder from bringing suit or taking other legal action against the Company in any other jurisdiction to collect on the Company’s obligations to the Holder, to realize on any collateral or any other security for such obligations, or to enforce a judgment or other court ruling in favor of the Holder. THE COMPANY HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO, AND AGREES NOT TO REQUEST, A JURY TRIAL FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF ANY DISPUTE HEREUNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH OR ARISING OUT OF THIS WARRANT OR ANY TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED HEREBY.

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: From the Effective Date until the Closing or termination of this Agreement, Sellers and Purchaser shall use commercially reasonable efforts to take, or cause to be taken, all actions and to do, or cause to be done, all things necessary, proper or advisable to consummate the transactions described in this Agreement, including, without limitation, (a) obtaining all necessary consents, approvals and authorizations required to be obtained from any Governmental Authority or other Person under this Agreement or Applicable Law, and (b) effecting all registrations and filings required under this Agreement or Applicable Law. After Closing, Sellers and Purchaser shall use commercially reasonable efforts (at no cost or expense to such Party, other than any de minimis cost or expense or any cost or expense which the requesting Party agrees in writing to reimburse) to further effect the transactions contemplated in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: added); Boughton v. Cotter Corp., 65 F.3d 823, 827 (10th Cir.1995) (Medical monitoring claims, if brought alone, request injunctive relief and “certification of a class under such circumstances [would be] legally permissible under Rule 23(b)(2).”). In sum, the plaintiffs’ proposed remedy is injunctive in nature and may be pursued under 23(b)(2). (2) SJC Opinion Philip Morris argues that the SJC effectively closed off the possibility of class certification under Rule 23(b)(2) because it held medical monitoring to be a legal, not equitable, claim. Donovan, 914 N.E.2d at 898. Since plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law in the form of payment of future medical expenses, Philip Morris asserts, they are not entitled to an injunction. See Lopez v. Garriga, 917 F.2d 63, 68 (1st Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). It points to several statements made by the Options: A. holding that an injunction is an extraordinary remedy B. holding that movant must demonstrate that irreparable injury is likely in the absence of an injunction C. holding in part that the trial court abused its discretion in granting a temporary injunction in the absence of a showing that the plaintiff did not have an adequate remedy at law D. holding that temporaryinjunction orders simple recitation of conclusory statement that plaintiff will suffer an irreparable injury for which it has no other adequate legal remedy does not satisfy rule 683s requirement that a temporary injunction order specify reasons why plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law E. holding that injunction seeker must demonstrate no adequate remedy at law

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that injunction seeker must demonstrate no adequate remedy at law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except to the extent otherwise provided under the Plan, the restrictions on transferability set forth in Paragraph B, above, shall remain in effect with respect to all of the Shares until, and shall lapse on, the earlier of the first (1st) anniversary of the date of this Agreement or the cessation of the Participant’s membership on the Board of Directors for reasons of death, disability, retirement (i.e., the cessation of membership on the Board of Directors either (1) after ten (10) years of service on the Board of Directors or (2) as of the date of the first annual Shareholders’ meeting of the Company on or after the date the Participant attains age 75, and is no longer eligible to stand for reelection as per the By-laws of the Company).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Upon a Change in Control, any outstanding Restricted Shares will immediately vest in full, provided that if Grantee is a named executive officer of Artisan those outstanding Restricted Shares will be treated in accordance with the terms of the Plan.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No broker, investment banker, financial advisor or other person is entitled to any broker’s, finder’s, financial advisor’s or other similar fee or commission that is payable by ILG, MVW or any of their respective subsidiaries in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement based upon arrangements made by or on behalf of Shareholder.

assistant: Brokers
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: directly reassured Hemphill of the court’s impartiality; and the court made it clear to Hemphill that it was prepared to conduct a trial. The Government’s argument misses the mark. The district court’s commentary occurred before Hemphill agreed to accept the offer and to enter his plea at the plea hearing. For the reasons noted above, the district court’s commentary thereby created pressure in Hemphill’s mind to accept a plea agreement or face a potentially harsher sentence as punishment. See Rodriguez, 197 F.3d at 159-60. Although the district court did indicate that it would be impartial and that Hemphill could proceed to trial, once a court has exerted pressure on a defendant it is difficult, if not impossible, to undo the coercive effects of that pressure. See Pena, 720 F.3d at 575 (<HOLDING>); Rodriguez, 197 F.3d at 160 (“Once the judge Options: A. holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to withdraw guilty plea filed three weeks after entering the plea B. holding that even district courts instruction to disregard an earlier improper condition on entering a plea could not alter defendants perception of courts desired disposition C. holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts D. holding almost any improper argument may be cured by an instruction to disregard E. holding that a jury is presumed to heed the district courts instruction to disregard the fact that the defendants were held in contempt and admonished before the jury

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that even district courts instruction to disregard an earlier improper condition on entering a plea could not alter defendants perception of courts desired disposition
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: important factor which the court should consider, though likelihood of success on the merits should not be the sole factor reviewed. We conclude that it is not desirable to adopt a specific set of factors which the appellate court, in each instance, must review when making its determination. (But cf. Ruiz v. Estelle (5th Cir. 1981), 650 F.2d 555, 565 (four factors to consider when determining whether the party has made a sufficient showing for the court to grant a stay).) Rather, we believe that the court should have a wide degree of latitude when exercising its discretion. There are numerous different factors which may be relevant when the court makes its determination and, by necessity, these factors will vary depending on the facts of the case. 4A C.J.S Appeal & Error §636 (1957) (<HOLDING>); 4 Am. Jur. 2d Appeal & Error §367 (1962) Options: A. recognizing numerous different grounds which may be relied upon for granting a stay and that in general a stay will be allowed or refused on the particular grounds best fitting the exigencies of the individual case and with a view to doing justice between the parties B. holding that court can affirm administrative order only on grounds on which agency relied and noting that the orderly functioning of the process of review requires that the grounds upon which the administrative agency acted be clearly disclosed and adequately sustained C. recognizing that this court may affirm summary judgment on grounds other than those relied upon by the motion justice D. holding that a stay of execution is only appropriate where the movant demonstrates substantial grounds upon which relief might be granted E. holding this court may affirm on any grounds supported by the record even if different from the district courts grounds

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing numerous different grounds which may be relied upon for granting a stay and that in general a stay will be allowed or refused on the particular grounds best fitting the exigencies of the individual case and with a view to doing justice between the parties
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 thirty-day time limit.” (quotation omitted)); In re Vial, 115 F.3d 1192, 1194 n. 3 (4th Cir.1997) (en banc) (noting that “the importance of the issue presented justified” exceeding "the 30-day time limitation established by 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244(b)(3)(D)”); In re Siggers, 132 F.3d 333, 334-35 (6th Cir.1997) ("[Fjailure to comply with the thirty-day provision does not deprive this Court of the power to grant or deny a motion under § 2244(b)(3)(A),” “[b]e-cause the provision is hortatory or advisory rather than mandatory.”); Gray-Bey v. United States, 201 F.3d 866, 867 (7th Cir.2000) ("We agree with our sister circuits ... that the 30-day period may be- extended for those few cases which require reasoned adjudication and cannot be resolved within the Ct. 2519, 159 L.Ed.2d 442 (2004) (<HOLDING>); Beard v. Banks, 542 U.S. 406, 408, 124 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that the rule announced in ring does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct review B. holding that the rule announced in mills v maryland 486 us 367 108 sct 1860 100 led2d 384 1988 doesnt apply retroactively on collateral review C. holding that ring v arizona 536 us 584 122 sct 2428 153 led2d 556 2002 which applied apprendi to arizonas capital sentencing scheme was not a watershed rule and did not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct review D. holding that the rule announced in ring v arizona 536 us 584 122 sct 2428 153 led2d 556 2002 doesnt apply retroactively on collateral review E. holding that harris v united states 536 us 545 122 sct 2406 153 led2d 524 2002 does not overrule mendozapaz

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the rule announced in ring v arizona 536 us 584 122 sct 2428 153 led2d 556 2002 doesnt apply retroactively on collateral review
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Conclusion For the reasons stated above, we vacate Canales’s sentence and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith. VACATED and REMANDED 1 . Canales was arrested for possession of cocaine while on parole for the 1974 federal heroin conviction — the same conviction for which he was later placed in a halfway house in 1990. 2 . As his second point of error, Canales makes a very cursory argument that because he was serving a portion of his sentence in a halfway house when he escaped, he was no longer in prison and thus the district court erred in adding two criminal history points for having committed the offense while he was imprisoned for a criminal justice sentence. See U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(e). This argument is meritless. See United. States v. Vickers, 891 F.2d 86 (5th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). We address this argument simply to clarify Options: A. holding that the enhancement provisions in guideline sections 4a 11d and e apply when the defendant escapes while serving a sentence at a residential center B. holding that when a court miscalculates the guideline range yet imposes a sentence that falls within a properly calculated guideline range the sentence enjoys a presumption of reasonableness C. holding that where the commentary to a guideline is at odds with another provision of the guidelines the guideline prevails D. holding that 3582c2 permits a district court only to substitute an amended guideline for the guideline used at the original sentencing and that a court lacks the authority to correct mistakes in a defendants original sentence E. holding that a sentencing court may warn a defendant of the possibility of a sentence enhancement

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the enhancement provisions in guideline sections 4a 11d and e apply when the defendant escapes while serving a sentence at a residential center
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any and all notices, requests, demands, or other communications provided for hereunder, shall be given in writing by personal service, by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, overnight delivery service, delivery charges prepaid, or by email, facsimile or other electronic means addressed to the intended recipients. A notice shall be deemed to have been received when personally served or delivered or five (5) days after being mailed, or one (1) day after being sent by overnight delivery service or by email, facsimile or other electronic means.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same Agreement. Signatures delivered by facsimile or email shall be deemed effective for all purposes.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Appellant Kevin Shea (“Shea”), a firefighter with the San Francisco Fire Department (“Department”), appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the Department on his Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) disability discrimination claims. We review de novo the grant of summary judgment, and we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. I. Shea alleged in his Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) charges that Chief Gamble discriminated against him on the basis of his disability in ear h 798, 111 Cal. Rptr.2d 87, 29 P.3d 175, 190 (Cal.2001) (<HOLDING>). Here, Shea’s charges that he was Options: A. recognizing similar analysis applies to discrimination and retaliation claims B. holding that even though 24 only refers to actions in state court it applies to state claims brought in federal court C. holding that the continuing violations doctrine applies to disability discrimination claims brought under feha only if the employers unlawful actions are similar in kind have occurred with reasonable frequency and have not acquired a degree of permanence D. holding in the discrimination context that a plaintiff may challenge incidents which occurred outside the statute of limitations period if the various acts of discrimination constitute a continuing pattern of discrimination E. holding that the doctrine may only be predicated on continuing unlawful acts and not on the continuing effects of earlier unlawful conduct

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the continuing violations doctrine applies to disability discrimination claims brought under feha only if the employers unlawful actions are similar in kind have occurred with reasonable frequency and have not acquired a degree of permanence
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 has been no material adverse change in any condition, fact, circumstance or event that would make the financial statements, rent rolls, reports, certificates or other documents submitted in connection with the Loan inaccurate, incomplete or otherwise misleading in any material respect or that otherwise has, or is reasonably likely to have, a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Disclosures
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: which was issued against Moore for possession of a controlled dangerous substance. The Warrant was apparently based on the detective’s observation of the substance in the jacket Moore had been seen wearing. Some time after Moore’s arrest, the substance found in Moore’s jacket tested negative for a controlled dangerous substance. A New Jersey Grand Jury voted no-bill against Moore for conspiracy, burglary, theft, and receiving stolen property. With regard to the second Warrant, Moore was found not guilty on a down-graded charge for failure to make lawful disposition of a controlled substance. Six months later Moore filed a complaint alleging various causes of action against several defen dants. Only Moore’s claim for malicious prosecution was allowed to proceed. The parties Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); see also LAR 3.4. Having concluded that Options: A. holding that notice of appeal was not effectively taken where appeal was filed simultaneously with timely motion for reconsideration because when timely motion for reconsideration is filed a notice of appeal filed prior to disposition of the motion to reconsider has no effect B. holding the court lacked jurisdiction where the defendant failed to file a notice of appeal on the attorneys fee issue because a supplemental notice of appeal is required for us to have jurisdiction over an attorneys fees issue that becomes final subsequent to the initial notice of appeal C. holding that this court has jurisdiction when the appellant has filed a docketing statement indicating an intent to appeal a particular order within the time for filing an appeal D. holding that the appellate court had jurisdiction to hear the interlocutory appeal on a restraining order and the district court retained jurisdiction to proceed with the trial E. holding court had jurisdiction where the appellant filed a motion for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees which evidenced an intent to appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding court had jurisdiction where the appellant filed a motion for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees which evidenced an intent to appeal
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: Other Awards of shares of Common Stock, and other Awards that are valued in whole or in part by reference to, or are otherwise based on, shares of Common Stock or other property, may be granted hereunder to Participants (“ Other Stock-Based-Awards ”). Such Other Stock-Based Awards shall also be available as a form of payment in the settlement of other Awards granted under the Plan or as payment in lieu of compensation to which a Participant is otherwise entitled. Other Stock-Based Awards may be paid in shares of Common Stock or cash, as the Board shall determine.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: claim and the appeal procedures available under the Plan. ERISA does not contain an explicit requirement that employees exhaust the administrative, contractual remedies prior to filing a complaint. Conley v. Pitney Bowes, 34 F.3d 714, 716 (8th Cir.1994). However, the Eighth Circuit has recognized a judicially created exhaustion re quirement under ERISA. Kinkead v. Southwestern Bell Corp. Sickness & Accident Disability Benefit Plan, 111 F.3d 67, 70 (8th Cir.1997). The Eighth Circuit case law subsequent to Kinkead v. Southwestern Bell Corp. Sickness & Accident Disability Benefit Plan has consistently imposed an exhaustion requirement where there is notice provided to the claimant and where there is no showing of futility. See, e.g., Back v. Danka Corp., 335 F.3d 790, 792 (8th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); Galman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 254 Options: A. holding that exhaustion was not required under a federal education statute where the gravamen of the complaint was not that the plaintiff had been denied the type of education the statute guarantees and hence the relief sought was not available through the statutory appeals process B. holding the plaintiff failed to make a prima facie case that the defendants failure to promote him was discriminatory where the plaintiff failed to that show he was qualified for the relevant position C. holding that a subclass of plan participants could sue where the remedy sought by plaintiffs would benefit the plan as a whole and cure any harm that the plan suffered D. holding that a payment is under the plan when the debt is provided for in the plan E. holding exhaustion was not required where the plan failed to notify the plaintiff regarding the availability of a contractual remedy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding exhaustion was not required where the plan failed to notify the plaintiff regarding the availability of a contractual remedy
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: refer directly to someone, often obviously the defendant,” and the inferences from them were ones "a jury ordinarily could make immediately, even were the confession the very first item introduced at trial.” Id. The government urges in this case that if we conclude that a Foster contextual analysis demands exclusion of the co-defendant’s statements, we should reconsider Fosters vitality in light of Gray. As we are satisfied that application of Foster’s holding would not require exclusion, we need not make a holding regarding Foster’s vitality, but note the evolution and clarification of Bruton principles by the Supreme Court after Foster in the course of holding that, in this case, there was no violation of the Confrontation Clause. If the trial court sh 08, 1215 (10th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Peterson, 140 F.3d 819, 822 Options: A. holding that when all references to the defendant in a eodefendants statement are replaced with indefinite pronouns or other general terms the confrontation clause is not violated by the redacted statements admission if when viewed together with other evidence the statement does not create an inevitable association with the defendant and a proper limiting instruction is given B. holding that the fact that a redacted statement may have inferentially incriminated the defendant when read in context with other evidence does not create a bruton violation C. holding that admission of nontestifying oodefendants statement to police that murder defendant came to his apartment and went in bathroom and stayed there for awhile did not violate bruton rule because statement standing alone did not clearly incriminate defendant but only became incriminating when linked with other evidence D. holding that when all references to the defendant in a codefendants statement are replaced with indefinite pronouns or other general terms the confrontation clause is not violated by the redacted statements admission if when viewed together with other evidence the statement does not create an inevitable association with the defendant and a proper limiting instruction is given E. holding that where a defendants name is replaced with a neutral pronoun as long as identification of the defendant is clear or inculpatory only by reference to evidence other than the redacted confession and a limiting instruction is given to the jury there is no bruton violation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the fact that a redacted statement may have inferentially incriminated the defendant when read in context with other evidence does not create a bruton violation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Note, together with the other Transaction Documents, contains the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the matters covered herein and therein and, except as specifically set forth herein or therein, neither Borrower nor Lender makes any representation, warranty, covenant or undertaking with respect to such matters. For the avoidance of doubt, all prior term sheets or other documents between Borrower and Lender, or any affiliate thereof, related to the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents (collectively, “ Prior Documents ”), that may have been entered into between Borrower and Lender, or any affiliate thereof, are hereby null and void and deemed to be replaced in their entirety by the Transaction Documents. To the extent there is a conflict between any term set forth in any Prior Document and the term(s) of the Transaction Documents, the Transaction Documents shall govern.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to substance abuse testing, at any time, as directed by the probation officer. The defendant shall cooperatively participate in a substance abuse treatment program, which may include drug testing and inpatient or residential treatment.... On appeal, Taste first alleges that the district court’s special condition that he “submit to substance abuse testing at any time as directed by the probation officer” constitutes an improper delegation of judicial function to the probation officer. Specifically, he maintains that the district court erred in authorizing the probation department to conduct substance abuse testing at any time during his term of supervision, without issuing a s d not affect Taste’s substantial rights. See United States v. Maciel-Vasquez, 458 F.3d 994, 996 (9th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Padilla, 415 F.3d 211, Options: A. holding that inadmissible testimony did not rise to level of plain error because the overwhelming evidence against defendant leads us to conclude that the error committed did not cause the jury to reach a different verdict than it otherwise would have reached B. holding that any error was harmless and thus not plain error C. holding any improper delegation did not rise to level of plain error D. holding that improper argument about purging jurors community of drug conspiracies did not rise to level of plain error E. holding that an infringement on the defendants fundamental due process right in the form of a comment on the defendants silence by the prosecution did not rise to level of plain error

assistant: The best answer is C. holding any improper delegation did not rise to level of plain error
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 Parent and the Borrower will, and will cause each Restricted Subsidiary to, maintain, with financially sound and reputable insurance companies, insurance in such amounts and against such risks as are customarily maintained by companies engaged in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations. The Parent and the Borrower will cause each Designated Partnership to maintain all appropriate insurance policies to the extent contemplated or required under the limited partnership agreement (or similar governing document) of such Designated Partnership. With respect to insurance policies of the Parent, the Borrower and the Restricted Subsidiaries, the loss payable clauses or provisions in said insurance policy or policies insuring any of the collateral for the Loans shall be endorsed in favor of and made payable to the Administrative Agent as its interests may appear and such policies shall name the Administrative Agent and the Lenders as “additional insureds” and/or “loss payee,” as applicable, and provide that the insurer will endeavor to give at least 30 days prior notice of any cancellation to the Administrative Agent.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If Executive has attained or is over the age of 40 as of the date of Executive’s termination of employment, then each Party has seven days after that Party signs this Agreement to revoke it and this Agreement will become effective on the eighth day after Executive signed this Agreement, so long as it has been signed by the Parties and has not been revoked by either Party before that date (the “Effective Date”). If Executive has not attained the age of 40 as of the date of Executive’s termination of employment, then the “Effective Date” shall be the date on which Executive signs this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company and each of its Subsidiaries have filed all federal, state, local and foreign tax returns which have been required to be filed and paid all taxes shown thereon through the date hereof, to the extent that such taxes have become due and are not being contested in good faith, except where the failure to so file or pay would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. Except as otherwise disclosed in or contemplated by the Registration Statement or the Prospectus, no tax deficiency has been determined adversely to the Company or any of its Subsidiaries which has had, or would reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a Material Adverse Effect. The Company has no knowledge of any federal, state or other governmental tax deficiency, penalty or assessment which has been asserted or threatened against it in writing which would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: also cite In re Jartran, Inc., 886 F.2d 859 (7th Cir.1989), but that case is distinguishable as it deals with administrative expense priority, not post-confirmation assets or claims. We find, moreover, that the trustee is the proper party to bring this action. The Donaldsons admit that the creditors would have standing to bring this claim. Br. at 22. The trustee, as the appointed representative of the creditors, is empowered by the bankruptcy court to represent their interests. “Property of the bankrupt remains in custodia legis in the bankruptcy court during the period ... after the discharge of the trustee ... remaining] dormant, in the estate, until the bankruptcy court again appoints a trustee as enforcing guardian.” Stein v. United Artists Corp., 691 F.2d 885, 893 (9th Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>). D. Res Judicata The Donaldsons contend that Options: A. holding that a debtor must make a specific and unequivocal reservation of claims that would effectively put its creditors on notice of any claim it wishes to pursue after confirmation B. holding that controlling shareholder of postconfirmation debtor could not pursue unlisted preconfirmation claim on behalf of creditors C. holding that the creditors committee could not sue third party aidersandabettors because the participation of the sole shareholder and decisionmaker of the debtor rendered the debtor a participant D. holding confirmation vested property in the debtor and therefore properly of the estate was not liable for postconfirmation taxes incurred by debtor E. holding that sole shareholder could recover on behalf of company but not in individual capacity for former shareholder and officers misappropriation of corporate assets

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that controlling shareholder of postconfirmation debtor could not pursue unlisted preconfirmation claim on behalf of creditors
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: Notices shall be given under this Assignment Agreement in the manner set forth in the Credit Agreement. For the purpose hereof, the addresses of the parties hereto (until notice of a change is delivered) shall be the address set forth under each party’s name on the signature page(s) hereof.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the date of this Agreement, the Company has 100,000 authorized shares of preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share, of which 1,080 shares are issued and outstanding (which shares are convertible into 7,550,000 shares of Common Stock), and 180,000,000 authorized shares of Common Stock, of which 89,771,379 shares are issued and outstanding (plus an additional 3,227,005 shares that are pending issuance).

assistant: Capitalization
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 parties agree to (i) furnish upon request to each other such further information, (ii) execute and deliver to each other such other documents, and (iii) do such other acts and things, all as the other party may reasonably request for the purpose of carrying out the intent of this Agreement and the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: further , you and spotify agree to the jurisdiction of the courts listed below to resolve any dispute , claim , or controversy that arises in connection with the agreements ( and any non-contractual disputes/claims arising out of or in connection with them ) .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as expressly provided in this Article IX , or otherwise agreed in writing by the Parties, the Parties agree that (a) each Party shall not disclose to any Third Party, and shall keep in confidence, all Confidential Information of the other Party, using the same degree of care with which it maintains the confidentiality of its own Confidential Information, but in all cases with no less than a reasonable degree of care and (b) each Party may use the other Party’s Confidential Information only to perform its obligations or exercise its rights under this Agreement.

assistant: Confidentiality
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: damages was displaced by federal statutes, including the CWA.” The Court rejected this argument indicating “nothing in the statutory text points to fragmenting the recovery scheme this way, and we have rejected similar attempts to sever remedies from their causes of action.” In Part IV, to which Justice Stevens specifically dissented, the Court, citing Miles, reiterated that admiralty courts should look to legislative enactments for policy guidance, but where Congress had not specifically acted, the Court had responsibility to fashion controlling rules and remedies in maritime law: To the extent that Justice STEVENS suggests that the very subject of remedies should be treated as congressional in light of the number of statutes dealing with 375, 90 S.Ct. 1772, 26 L.Ed.2d 339 (1970) (<HOLDING>). And for the very reason that our exercise of Options: A. recognizing action for wrongful death based on unseaworthiness B. recognizing cause of action C. holding that a cause of action for wrongful death is an asset of an estate D. recognizing cause of action for wrongful discharge E. recognizing cause of action for wrongful death

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing cause of action for wrongful death