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: proceeding”). Here, the only evidence that th .Crim.App.2000) (stating, in motion to suppress context, “[T]he judge may believe or disbelieve all or any part of a witness’s testimony, even if that testimony is not controverted”). Appellant’s and Sanchez’s after-the-fact, out-of-court averrals about appellant’s ability to understand the proceedings and waivers he signed were untimely factual statements in appellant’s self-interest. Even though the State did not offer affidavits to controvert appellant’s and Sanchez’s affidavits, it was within the trial court’s discretion to disbelieve the assertions contained in those affidavits that appellant does not read or speak English. See Charles, 146 S.W.3d at 210; Shanklin, 190 S.W.3d at 167; see also Phuong Anh Thi Le, 300 S.W.3d at 327 (<HOLDING>). The trial court, and not this Court, is in Options: A. holding that the court should make factual findings from the record evidence as if it were conducting a trial on the record B. holding that in reviewing trial courts ruling on habeas corpus petition reviewing court must defer to all of trial courts implied factual findings supported by record C. recognizing that the bia must defer to the factual findings of the ij unless they are clearly erroneous D. holding that as long as the findings are supported by substantial evidence the board must defer to the hearing committees credibility determinations because they are subsidiary findings of basic facts E. holding that appellate court must defer to all implied factual findings supported by record

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that appellate court must defer to all implied factual findings supported by record
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of a violation committed by an independent contractor, or (3) when the production-operator's miners are exposed to the hazard, or (4) when the production-operator has control over the condition that needs abatement. 45 Fed.Reg. at 44497. 4 . The Commission relied on the final point notwithstanding its acknowledgment that “the Enforcement Guidelines are not binding on the Secretary.” Commission Decision, 27 F.M.S.H.R.C. at 273 n. 19. 5 . Section 110 of the Mine Act, which under the Coal Act was 30 U.S.C. § 819 (1976), states: The operator of a coal or other mine in which a violation occurs of a mandatory health or safety standard ... shall be assessed a civil penalty by the Secretary.... 30 U.S.C. § 820(a) (emphasis added). 6 . See, e.g., Lincoln, 508 U.S. at 192, 113 S.Ct. 2024 (<HOLDING>); Steenholdt v. FAA, 314 F.3d 633, 634 Options: A. holding that a courts role in reviewing an administrative agency decision is limited to determining if there is substantial evidence in the record as a whole to support the agencys findings and conclusions and to determine if the administrative decision is premised upon an erroneous conclusion of law B. recognizing general rule that when an administrative agencys order is appealed to a court agencys power and authority over the matter is suspended because courts jurisdiction over subject matter must be complete and not interfered with or frustrated by concurrent action of administrative agency C. holding that an administrative agencys decision may not be based upon inadmissible expert opinion D. holding that an agencys allocation of funds from a lumpsum appropriation is another administrative decision traditionally regarded as committed to agency discretion E. holding that judicial review of an administrative agencys decision is limited solely to whether given the relevant standard and facts the agencys decision was arbitrary illegal capricious or unreasonable

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an agencys allocation of funds from a lumpsum appropriation is another administrative decision traditionally regarded as committed to agency discretion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: for discovery. It asserts that Elliott failed to demonstrate good cause for such discovery because the Commonwealth provided him with a copy of a report concerning Nar-done’s death, and Elliott fails to indicate what further documents exist to support his claim. The PCRA court’s ruling is supported by the record and is free from legal error. As recognized by the PCRA court, appellate courts review a trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence for an abuse of discretion. Commonwealth v. Dillon, 592 Pa. 351, 925 A.2d 131, 136 (2007). A trial court may exclude evidence that is irrelevant to the issues presented. Evidence is not relevant “un less the inference sought to be raised by it bears upon a matter in issue and renders the desired inference more probabl , 647 (1996) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, appellate counsel cannot be Options: A. holding that where the commonwealth presented no evidence linking appellant to injuries such evidence had no probative value to the commonwealths theory of the case B. holding that evidence should be excluded where the likelihood that it would confuse the jury and protract the proceedings outweighs its probative value C. holding that the trial court properly excluded evidence relating to a purported additional suspect where the evidence was speculative and had little or no probative value D. recognizing the probative value of objective and reliable hearsay evidence E. holding that the trial court properly excluded evidence that other persons had a motive to kill the victims because inter alia such evidence was speculative

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the trial court properly excluded evidence relating to a purported additional suspect where the evidence was speculative and had little or no probative value
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: for misrepresentation differs from the tort of deceit wherein plaintiff must prove intent on the part of the defendant to mislead or defraud.” Sims v. Craig, 96 N.M. at 35, 627 P.2d at 877. “The theory of liability for this tort[, negligent misrepresentation,] is one of negligence rather than of intent to mislead.” Sims v. Craig, 96 N.M. at 35, 627 P.2d at 877. The tort of negligent misrepresentation is available to a plaintiff that “ ‘cannot or does not wish to rescind, and cannot meet the proof required for the tort of fraud or deceit (as a) ... remedy for damages caused by misrepresentation short of fraud.’ ” Sims v. Craig, 96 N.M. at 35, 627 P.2d at 877 (quoting Maxey v. Quintana, 84 N.M. 38, 41, 499 P.2d 356, 359 (Ct.App.1972)). See Sims v. Craig, 96 N.M. at 35, 627 P.2d at 877 (<HOLDING>). ANALYSIS The Court does not believe that Options: A. holding negligent misrepresentation sufficient B. holding that for the purposes of standing to bring an action to recover on a contract privity is established by proving the defendant was a party to an enforceable contract with either the plaintiff or a party who assigned its cause of action to the plaintiff C. holding that plaintiff stated a claim for breach of contract when it alleged the government failed to purchase insurance for plaintiff as agreed by contract D. holding that the plaintiff could bring an action for negligent misrepresentation although the plaintiff could not sue on the contract because the contract was void E. holding economic loss rule did not bar negligent misrepresentation claim where parties had no contract

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the plaintiff could bring an action for negligent misrepresentation although the plaintiff could not sue on the contract because the contract was void
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: Bulla v. Donahue, 174 Ind.App. 123, 127, 366 N.E.2d 233, 236 (1977). Needless to say, an insurance agent or broker must be knowledgeable about the contents of a policy to “procure a policy consistent with his [client’s] needs.” Id. Given their legal status as experts, knowledgeable of the insurance policy’s contents, the Subagents could not have reasonably relied on Guffey’s misrepresentations about the front-end load. The plain terms of the Flex II show that the policy’s guaranteed cash value does not exceed the premiums paid until the seventh year of the policy’s life. R. at 1193. The Subagents are held to have known about the front-end load and, hence, cannot complain that they suffered fraud through reasonable reliance. Cf. Plymale v. Upright, 419 N.E.2d 756, 762 (Ind.Ct.App.1981) (<HOLDING>). CONCLUSION In light of our discussion above, Options: A. holding that a person cannot reasonably rely on a misrepresentation when the contents of a written instrument contradict the alleged misrepresentation B. holding misrepresentation claim to be preempted C. holding negligent misrepresentation sufficient D. holding as to a fraudulent misrepresentation claim under michigan law that the sixyear statute of limitations begins to run when the misrepresentation was perpetrated and not when the plaintiff discovered or should have discovered the misrepresentation E. holding that contractor could not show that it reasonably relied upon alleged misrepresentation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a person cannot reasonably rely on a misrepresentation when the contents of a written instrument contradict the alleged misrepresentation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: various sexual or assaultive offenses). 5 . The following is an example of an article-38.37 jury charge instruction: You are instructed that if there is any testimony before you in this case regarding the Defendant’s having committed offenses against the alleged victim other than the offense alleged against him in the Indictment in this case, you cannot consider said testimony for any purpose unless you find and believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant committed such other offenses, if any were committed, and even then you may only consider the same in determining the state of mind of the Defe 7.07, section 3(a) instruction: The State has introduced evidence of extraneous crimes or bad 6642 at *3 (Tex.App.-Amarillo Feb.21, 2002, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication) (<HOLDING>). In contrast, the San Antonio and Dallas Options: A. holding that trial court did not err B. holding that trial court did not err in failing to sua sponte provide instruction regarding extraneous offenses during guiltinnocence C. holding that trial courts failure to give reasonabledoubt instruction sua sponte during punishment phase for extraneous offenses offered during punishment was harmless error in part because the jury assessed punishment far below maximum available despite states plea for maximum D. holding trial court did not err in failing to define manufacture E. holding that in admitting evidence the failure of the trial court to give a limiting instruction sua sponte is not reversible error

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that trial court did not err in failing to sua sponte provide instruction regarding extraneous offenses during guiltinnocence
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 inference of express malice,” the privilege has been abused and “protection withdrawn” (id.). Nearly a century later in Park Knoll Assoc. v. Schmidt, 59 N.Y.2d 205, 464 N.Y.S.2d 424, 451 N.E.2d 182 (1983), this Court held that relevant statements made in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings are afforded absolute protection so that those discharging a public function may speak freely to zealously represent their clients without fear of reprisal or financial hazard (see id. at 209, 464 N.Y.S.2d 424, 451 N.E.2d 182). The privilege attaches to such statements irrespective of an attorney’s motive for making them (see Wiener v. Weintraub, 22 N.Y.2d 330, 331, 292 N.Y.S.2d 667, 239 N.E.2d 540 [1968]). Texas law is similar. See, e.g., James v. Brown, 637 S.W.2d 914, 916-17 (Tex. 1982)(<HOLDING>). In addition, TBG fails to state a claim to Options: A. holding that a choice of law provision in a lease did not serve as a basis for jurisdiction B. holding that the defendants failure to timely serve a notice of appeal and docketing statement did not prejudice the plaintiff and therefore would not serve as a basis to dismiss the appeal C. holding that if the dismissal was merely a formal means of securing a negotiated settlement it cannot serve as the basis for a malicious prosecution action D. holding that protected speech cannot serve as the basis for a violation of city ordinances at issue E. holding that communications during a judicial proceeding cannot serve as the basis for a civil action for libel or slander

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that communications during a judicial proceeding cannot serve as the basis for a civil action for libel or slander
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During and following the Employment Period, the Company shall fully indemnify the Executive for any liability to the fullest extent permitted under applicable state law. In addition, the Company agrees to continue and maintain, at the Company’s sole expense, a directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy covering the Executive both during and, while potential liability exists, after the Employment Period that is no less favorable than the policy covering other active directors and senior officers of the Company from time to time.

assistant: Indemnifications
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 payments to be made by the Borrower shall be made without condition or deduction for any counterclaim, defense, recoupment or setoff. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all payments by the Borrower hereunder shall be made with respect to Loans, to the Administrative Agent, for the account of the respective Lenders to which such payment is owed. Each such payment shall be made at the Administrative Agent’s Office in Dollars and in immediately available funds not later than 12:00 p.m. on the date specified herein. Subject to Section 2.17 , the Administrative Agent will promptly distribute to each Lender its Applicable Percentage (or other applicable share as provided herein) of each such payment with respect to Loans in like funds as received by wire transfer to such Lender’s Lending Office. All payments received by the Administrative Agent after 12:00 p.m. may, in the Administrative Agent’s sole discretion, be deemed received on the next succeeding Business Day and any applicable interest or fee shall continue to accrue. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, if any payment to be made by the Borrower shall come due on a day other than a Business Day, payment shall be made on the next following Business Day, and such extension of time shall be reflected in computing interest or fees, as applicable.

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: EACH PARTY WAIVES ALL RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL WITH RESPECT TO ANY DISPUTE RELATING TO OR ARISING OUT OF THIS AGREEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THIS WAIVER IS MADE KNOWINGLY, VOLUNTARILY, AND AFTER CONSULTING WITH (OR HAVING HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSULT WITH) COUNSEL OF ITS OWN CHOOSING AS TO THE MEANING OF THIS WAIVER.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by someone other than the person authorized to request a transfer or without the necessary number of endorsements. ¶ 18. Instead, she is arguing the Bank breached the provision of the CDs in which the Bank required the person requesting a transfer to “present the certificate” at the time of the request. She claims this provision obligated the Bank to require presentment in order to protect her as joint owner. She further claims she relied on this provision to her detriment, believing that, so long as she retained possession of the certificates, Ronnie could not exercise his right of withdrawal or transfer. ¶ 19. But we find neither the language of the provision requiring presentment nor the terms of the CDs as a whole support Tammy’s contention. See Epperson, 93 So.3d at 16 (¶ 17) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 20. Page two of the CDs begins with Options: A. holding that the interpretation of an unambiguous contract is a question of law B. recognizing court must enforce unambiguous contract according to its terms C. holding that when a contract is unambiguous the court will enforce the plain meaning of the contract as the intention of the parties D. holding that when the contract language is unambiguous we take these words to represent the parties intent and the plain meaning of this language governs its interpretation E. holding that where the language of the contract is unambiguous and conveys a definite meaning the court may decide the meaning of the contract as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that when a contract is unambiguous the court will enforce the plain meaning of the contract as the intention of 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No waiver by either party hereto of any default, misrepresentation, or breach of warranty or covenant hereunder, whether intentional or not, may be deemed to extend to any prior or subsequent default, misrepresentation, or breach of warranty or covenant hereunder or affect in any way any rights arising because of any prior or subsequent occurrence.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with asymptomatic HIV infection does not have protected status to invoke disability discrimination laws) and with Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 118 S.Ct. 2196, 141 L.Ed.2d 540 (1998) (some persons with asymptomatic HIV infection may be able to invoke the protection of disability discrimination laws); compare also Myers v. Hose, 50 F.3d 278, 284 (4th Cir.1995) (stating that in the Fourth Circuit, reassignment to a vacant position is not a form of reasonable accommodation) with Syllabus Point 4 of Skaggs v. Elk Run Coal Co., Inc., 198 W.Va. 51, 479 S.E.2d 561, (1996) (Justice Cleckley writing for the Court, holding that reassignment to a vacant position may in a given case be a form of reasonable accommodation); compare also Haynes v. Rhone-Poulenc, 206 W.Va. 18, 521 S.E.2d 331 (1999) (<HOLDING>) with McDonald v. Pennsylvania, 62 F.3d 92 (3d Options: A. holding the commission cannot rely on a va rating to find a claimant was totally disabled B. holding disability discrimination claim barred C. holding that a temporarily totally disabled person may invoke protection under disability discrimination laws D. holding that a totally disabled claimant whose preexisting osteoarthritis was temporarily aggravated by her employment was entitled to temporary total disability benefits but not permanent total disability benefits because there was no causal connection between the temporary aggravation and the permanent disability E. holding without applying the doctrine of judicial estoppel that the plaintiff who made sworn statements of total disability in a social security disability application and then testified at her deposition that she was not totally disabled failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether she was a qualified individual with a disability within the meaning of the ada

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a temporarily totally disabled person may invoke protection under disability discrimination laws
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: not actionable as a tortious misrepresentation of facts. Thus, a claim of equitable estoppel lies in tort, whereas a claim of promissory estoppel lies in contract. Id. at 716 (citations omitted). Thus, DeLo-zier’s claim was contractual and was not barred by the CGIA. Id. As Berg and DeLozier illustrate, a claim that is supported by allegations of misrepresentation or fraud is likely a claim that could lie in tort. See Berg, 919 P.2d at 259; DeLozier, 917 P.2d at 716-17; see also Patzer v. City of Loveland, 80 P.3d 908, 912 (Colo.App.2003) (explaining that a claim that is based not on a promised performance in the future, but rather on an alleged misrepresentation of facts is fundamentally a tort claim barred by the CGIA); Lehman v. City of Louisville, 857 P.2d 455, 457 (Colo.App.1992) (<HOLDING>). In sum, these eases apply our general rule Options: A. holding that a ttca claim based on an officers allegedly negligent use of his service weapon was a claim for intentional tort not negligence B. holding that when the essence of the claim is either negligent or intentional misrepresentation the claim could lie in tort C. holding negligent misrepresentation sufficient D. holding estoppel claim could not lie in tort where the facts that support the claim could not support a claim for fraud or misrepresentation E. holding that although the form of relief alone does not govern the categorization of a claim as a tort or other type of action a trial court must consider the nature of the relief sought to determine whether a particular claim lies in tort or could lie in tort

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that when the essence of the claim is either negligent or intentional misrepresentation the claim could lie in tort
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Executive hereby (a) reaffirms the rights and obligations contained within the Restrictive Covenants, and (b) understands, acknowledges and agrees that such rights and obligations shall survive the Executive’s termination of employment with the Company and remain in full force and effect in accordance with all of the terms and conditions thereof. All post-employment restricted periods applicable to the Restrictive Covenants shall commence as of the Separation Date. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, no provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted so as to impede the Executive (or any other individual) from reporting possible violations of federal law or regulation to any governmental agency or entity, including but not limited to the Department of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Congress, and any agency Inspector General, or making other disclosures under the whistleblower provisions of federal law or regulation. The Executive does not need the prior authorization of the Company to make any such reports or disclosures and the Executive shall not be not required to notify the Company that such reports or disclosures have been made. Nothing in the Agreement or the General Release is intended to conflict with 18 U.S.C. § 1833(b) or create liability for disclosures of trade secrets that are expressly allowed by 18 U.S.C. § 1833(b). 18 U.S.C. § 1833(b) provides that “An individual shall not be held criminally or civilly liable under any Federal or State trade secret law for the disclosure of a trade secret that—(A) is made—(i) in confidence to a Federal, State, or local government official, either directly or indirectly, or to an attorney; and (ii) solely for the purpose of reporting or investigating a suspected violation of law; or (B) is made in a complaint or other document filed in a lawsuit or other proceeding, if such filing is made under seal.” Accordingly, the parties to this Agreement have the right to disclose in confidence trade secrets to federal, state, and local government officials, or to an attorney, for the sole purpose of reporting or investigating suspected violation of law. The parties also have the right to disclose trade secrets in a document filed in a lawsuit or other proceeding, but only if the filing is made under seal and protected from public disclosure.

assistant: Survival
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 that this Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Wisconsin without giving effect to any conflicts of law provisions. The parties also agree that any action or suit brought by any party to enforce or adjudicate the rights of the parties to and under this Agreement shall be brought in the Circuit Court for Manitowoc County, Wisconsin, this Court being the sole, exclusive, and mandatory venue and jurisdiction for any disputes between the parties arising from or relating to this Agreement. If any action is filed, by any party, relating to a breach of this Agreement and/or enforcement of this Agreement, Employee expressly agrees and consents to jurisdiction in the Circuit Court for Manitowoc County, Wisconsin and waives any claim that the Circuit Court for Manitowoc County, Wisconsin is an inconvenient forum.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: lot was located directly in front of the restaurant entrance and exit; vehicles would drip oil and other liquids on the surface of the parking lot; the parking lot sloped down away from the restaurant; and that there was a specific company procedure for using degreasers on the surface of the parking lot. The district court did not err in submitting the issue whether the dangerous condition was open and obvious to the jury in instruction No. 14. Whether the challenged condition was so openly and obviously dangerous that a reasonably prudent individual would not attempt it essentially asks whether that individual was eontributorily negligent, which is usually a question pf fact for the jury (or the trial court as fact-finder). See, e.g., Dixon v. General Grocery Co., 293 S.W.2d at 419 (<HOLDING>); Summa v. Morgan Real Estate Co., 350 Mo. 205, Options: A. holding danger was not so obvious to invitee as to relieve defendant of liability as a matter of law B. holding as a matter of law that natural condition present was open and obvious to all who would encounter it C. holding danger was so open and obvious to plaintiff that as a matter of law he knew or should have known of danger D. holding that an obvious joke told during an obvious comedy performance was not defamatory as a matter of law E. recognizing adequacy of notice as a matter of obvious constitutional magnitude

assistant: The best answer is A. holding danger was not so obvious to invitee as to relieve defendant of liability as a matter of law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and each other Document constitute the legal, valid and binding obligations of the Company, enforceable against the Company in accordance with their respective terms, except as enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, or similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally or by equitable principles relating to enforceability.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: States v. Mercado, 610 F.3d 841, 846 (3d Cir.2010). Section 924(c) prohibits the use or carrying of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (providing that “any person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence ... uses or carries a firearm, or who, in furtherance of any such crime, possesses a firearm, shall” be subject to an additional sentence depending on the specific facts of the underlying crime). Bag’s testimony and the video surveillance footage were clearly sufficient to show that Hill’s companion carried and made use of a firearm during and in relation to the MetroPCS robbery when he entered the store, brandished the weapon at Bag, and demanded that Bag open the register. United States v. Price, 76 F.3d 626, 528 (3d Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the jury could have permissibly Options: A. holding that carries a firearm includes one who knowingly possesses and conveys a firearm in a vehicle B. holding that fact that robbers issued explicit threats while brandishing and pointing their firearms menacingly was not sufficient to constitute otherwise use of the firearm C. holding that use certainly includes brandishing a firearm quotation marks omitted D. holding that compliance with rule 3 is both a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite to appeal internal quotation marks omitted E. holding defendants minimum sentence could not be increased for brandishing a firearm where based on jury instructions jury convicted defendant of the lesser offense of carrying rather than brandishing the firearm

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that use certainly includes brandishing a firearm quotation marks omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and its exhibits contain the entire agreement and understanding of the Parties with respect to the matters covered herein, and supersede all prior or contemporaneous negotiations, commitments, representations, warranties, agreements and writings with respect to the subject matter hereof, all such other negotiations, commitments, agreements and writings shall have no further force or effect, and the Parties to any such other negotiation, commitment, agreement or writing shall have no further rights or obligations thereunder.

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: (citing Feuer v. Menkes Feuer, Inc., 8 A.D.2d 294, 299, 187 N.Y.S.2d 116 (N.Y.App.Div.1959)). However, if the indemnitor does receive notice of the underlying action, “the general rule is that the indemnitor will be bound by any reasonable good faith settlement the indemnitee might thereafter make.” Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. of Ams. v. Tri-Links Inv. Tr., 74 A.D.3d 32, 39, 900 N.Y.S.2d 246 (N.Y.App.Div.2010) (quoting Coleman v. J.R.’s Tavern, 212 A.D.2d 568, 568, 622 N.Y.S.2d 334 (N.Y.App.Div.1995)). “[T]he test of reasonableness applies not to the fact of liability but only to the amount that may be paid by way of settlement of such liability.” Feuer, 8 A.D.2d at 299, 187 N.Y.S.2d 116; see Luria Bros. & Co. v. Alliance Assurance Co., Ltd., 780 F.2d 1082, 1091 (2d Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). The Defendants and the Plaintiff support Options: A. holding that an indemnitees settlement must be in an amount reasonable in view of the size of possible recovery and degree of probability of claimants success against the indemnitee quoting damanti v as inger 314 f2d 395 397 2d cir1963 cert denied 375 us 834 84 sct 46 11 led2d 64 1963 B. holding uncharged acts of violence evidence of the background of the charges the parties familiarity with one another and their concert of action quoting united states v oleary 739 f2d 135 136 3d cir1984 cert denied 469 us 1107 105 sct 782 83 led2d 776 1985 cert denied 493 us 821 110 sct 78 107 led2d 44 1989 C. holding that the most critical factor in the analysis of a reasonable fee is the degree of success obtained D. recognizing that in the civil context willful conduct may indicate a reckless disregard for obvious or known risks quoting monday v united states 421 f2d 1210 1215 7th cir cert denied 400 us 821 91 sct 38 27 led2d 48 1970 E. holding that a change in law does not affect the res judicata effect of judgments citing chicot county drainage dist v baxter state bank 308 us 371 375 60 sct 317 319 84 led 329 rehg denied 309 us 695 60 sct 581 84 led 1035 1940

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an indemnitees settlement must be in an amount reasonable in view of the size of possible recovery and degree of probability of claimants success against the indemnitee quoting damanti v as inger 314 f2d 395 397 2d cir1963 cert denied 375 us 834 84 sct 46 11 led2d 64 1963
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: Promptly notify Agent and GSO in writing of any claim, litigation, suit or administrative proceeding affecting Borrowers or any Guarantor, whether or not the claim is covered by insurance, and of any litigation, suit or administrative proceeding, which in any such case affects the Collateral or which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 198 N.J.Super. 214, 217, 486 A.2d 932 (App.Div.1985)); see also Buck v. Henry, 207 N.J. 377, 390, 25 A.3d 240; (2011); In re Attorney Gen.’s “Directive on Exit Polling: Media & Non-Partisan Pub. Interest Groups ”, 200 N.J. 283, 297-98, 981 A.2d 64 (2009); DKM Residential Props. Corp. v. Twp. of Montgomery, 182 N.J. 296, 307, 865 A.2d 649 (2005). The Court’s construction of N.J.S.A 39:4— 88(b) gives meaning to all of the! statute’s language, and thereby effects the intent of the Legislature. Moreover, if N.J.S.A 39:4-88(b) precludes only unsafe lane changes, a driver would not violate the statute even by allowing a vehicle to straddle two lanes or swerve back and forth over the lines defining traffic lanes, unless that conduct created a safety issue. See State v. Lewis, 185 N.J p.1998) (<HOLDING>); Rowe v. State, 363 Md. 424, 769 A.2d 879, Options: A. holding that a violation of the rules of professional conduct may not be used as evidence and citing terry cove north for the proposition that the sole remedy for a violation of the rules of professional conduct was the imposition of disciplinary measures B. holding that exclusionary rule only requires exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of constitutional rights and that exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of statutory rights is not necessarily required C. holding that one claim was not preempted because it did not allege the violation of duties created by any welfare plan but a violation of duties as a past employer D. holding that the language of the statute clearly requires proof of a causal connection between the drivers intoxication and the death of another person E. holding that violation of fl stat ann 316089a requires evidence that the drivers conduct created a reasonable safety concern

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that violation of fl stat ann 316089a requires evidence that the drivers conduct created a reasonable safety concern
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 will indemnify and hold harmless niantic , tpc , and tpci and their respective officers , directors , employees , and agents , from and against any claims , disputes , demands , liabilities , damages , losses , and costs and expenses , including , without limitation , reasonable legal and accounting fees arising out of or in any way connected with ( a ) your access to or use of the services or content , ( b ) your user content , or ( c ) your violation of these terms .

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: Promptly after receipt by Indemnitee of notice of the commencement of any Proceeding, Indemnitee shall, if a claim in respect thereof is to be made against the Company under this Agreement, notify the Company of the commencement thereof; but the omission so to notify the Company will not relieve the Company from any liability that it may have to Indemnitee, except as provided in Section 6(c).

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: WL 17173, at *2, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 428, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 1993). Thus, the court must look to the specific language of the forum-selection clause in question to see whether, despite MAK’s assertions, the cause of action stated in Count Eight properly falls under the forum-selection clause. In this case, the License Agreement states that, “[t]he United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan shall have exclusive jurisdiction and venue over all controversies in connection herewith.” License Agreement, Exhibit C to Motion to Dismiss, at 5. The Second Circuit has held that the phrase “in connection with” is synonymous with the phrases “relating to” and “associated with.” See, e.g., Coregis Ins. Co. v. American Health Found., 241 F.3d 123, 128-129 (2d Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); see also Phillips v. Audio Active, Ltd., 494 Options: A. holding in res judicata context that final judgment on the merits is synonymous with dismissal with prejudice B. holding that the phrases in connection with and associated with are synonymous with the terms with respect to with reference to and relating to which mean connected by reason of an established or discoverable relation C. holding the same with respect to an apartment D. holding that the meaning of doubtful terms or phrases may be determined by reference to their relationship with other associated words or phrases noscitur a sociis E. holding that statutory terms should be construed with reference to their associated words and phrases

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the phrases in connection with and associated with are synonymous with the terms with respect to with reference to and relating to which mean connected by reason of an established or discoverable relation
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: Borrower shall deliver to Bank: (i) as soon as available after the end of each calendar month, but in any event not later than the last day of the next calendar month, a company prepared consolidated and consolidating balance sheet and income statement covering Borrower’s operations during such period, in a form reasonably acceptable to Bank and certified by a Responsible Officer; (ii) as soon as available, but in any event within one hundred twenty (120) days after the end of Borrower’s fiscal year, company prepared consolidated and consolidating financial statements of Borrower and its consolidated Subsidiaries prepared in accordance with GAAP, consistently applied, and audited by a certified public accountant; (iii) if applicable, copies of all statements, reports and notices sent or made available generally by Borrower to its security holders or to any holders of Subordinated Debt and all reports on Forms 10-K and 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission; (iv) promptly upon receipt of notice thereof, a report of any legal actions pending or threatened against Borrower or any Subsidiary that could result in damages or costs to Borrower or any Subsidiary of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00) or more; (v) promptly upon receipt, each management letter prepared by Borrower’s independent certified public accounting firm regarding Borrower’s management control systems; (vi) as soon as available, but in any event within sixty (60) days after the end of Borrower’s fiscal year, Borrower’s financial and business projections and budget for the immediately following year, with evidence of approval thereof by Borrower’s board of directors; and (vii) such budgets, sales projections, operating plans or other financial information generally prepared by Borrower in the ordinary course of business as Bank may reasonably request from time to time.

assistant: Financial Statements
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: F.2d 474 (11th Cir.) (concluding that the defendant, who was informed of the possible conflict, and who nonetheless indicated that he wanted the attorney to represent him who was also representing his two brothers, consented to joint representation, waiving any ineffectiveness of counsel claim caused by the alleged conflict of interest), cert. denied,-U.S.-, 114 S.Ct. 275, 126 L.Ed.2d 226 (1993); Martinez, 869 P.2d at 524 ("Although ineffective assistance of counsel may be asserted by a defendant when his counsel has been found to have a conflict of interest, it will not be found if the defendant waived his right to conflict-free representation, and if such waiver is made with full knowledge of the actual conflict.”); In re Noday, 125 Cal.App.3d 507, 521, 178 Cal.Rptr. 653, 660 (1981) (<HOLDING>). 2 . But cf. United States v. Swartz, 975 F.2d Options: A. holding that the defendant validly waived right to conflictfree representation where the defendant knew a conflict existed its effect on his defense and his right to have other counsel appointed B. holding that because the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to separate counsel in light of the courts unambiguous advisement that joint representation could present a very substantial conflict so far as his defense is concerned the defendant was precluded from claiming ineffective assistance of counsel due to the conflict of interest that ultimately developed C. holding that a conflict of interest independent of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel constitute cause where the conflict caused the attorney to interfere with the petitioners right to pursue his 1 claim D. holding that defendants claim for ineffective assistance of counsel due to a conflict of interest was not cognizable on direct appeal E. holding that the defendant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance due to the alleged conflict of interest because the defendant failed to demonstrate a conflict as nothing was presented to refute the attorneys testimony that his loyalty was to his clients

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that because the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to separate counsel in light of the courts unambiguous advisement that joint representation could present a very substantial conflict so far as his defense is concerned the defendant was precluded from claiming ineffective assistance of counsel due to the conflict of interest that ultimately developed
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 Board shall make or provide for such substitution or adjustments in the number of Shares covered by this Agreement and in the kind of shares covered thereby and/or such other equitable substitution or adjustments as the Board may determine to prevent dilution or enlargement of the Participant’s rights that otherwise would result from (i) any stock dividend, extraordinary cash-dividend, stock split, combination of shares, recapitalization, or other change in the capital structure of the Company, (ii) any merger, consolidation, spin-off, split-off, spin-out, split-up, reclassification, reorganization, partial or complete liquidation, or other distribution of assets or issuance of rights or warrants to purchase securities, or (iii) any other corporate transaction or event having an effect similar to any of the foregoing. In the case of a Change in Control, such substitutions and adjustments include, without limitation, canceling any and all RSUs in exchange for cash payments in connection with such an adjustment event.

assistant: Adjustments