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: During a Collateral Period, and without limiting the foregoing, the Parent Guarantor and the Borrower will, and will cause each Loan Party that owns any Collateral to, execute and deliver, or cause to be executed and delivered, to the Administrative Agent such documents, agreements and instruments, and will take or cause to be taken such further actions (including the filing and recording of financing statements), which may be required by Applicable Law and which the Administrative Agent may, from time to time during a Collateral Period, reasonably request to carry out the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents and to ensure perfection and priority of the Liens created or intended to be created by the Collateral Documents, all at the expense of the Borrower; provided , however, that no Pledged Subsidiary shall be permitted to certificate its Equity Interests or make an election under Article 8 of the UCC unless such certificates are promptly delivered to the Administrative Agent, together with an endorsement in blank.

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: Dist.] 1997, no writ); Linton v. Airbus Industrie, 934 S.W.2d 754, 757 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, w , 457 S.W.2d 649, 651-52 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1970, writ ref’d n.r.e.), cited with approval in U-Anchor Adver., 553 S.W.2d at 764 (noting that jurisdiction existed over an Arizona wholesaler, even though the parties' contract was solicited in Arizona by the Texas manufacturer, because payments were to be made in Texas, the Arizona wholesaler placed several orders with the Texas manufacturer, the goods were delivered F.O.B. Houston, and some orders were to he delivered directly to Texas retailers, indicating the Arizona wholesaler's expectation of profits from Texas); and J.D. Fields & Co. v. W.H. Streit, Inc., 21 S.W.3d 599, 604-05 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). However, the fact that a state’s law governs Options: A. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident guarantor of debt to texas creditor based only on sending a guaranty agreement to texas and discussing the general pattern of texas cases holding likewise B. holding that jurisdiction existed over two georgia residents who leased a machine from a texas resident because they 1 solicited and negotiated the lease agreement by two telephone calls to texas 2 sent correspondence and payments by mail to texas 3 paid for the transfer of the machine from texas and 4 caused their insurance agent to contact the texas resident in texas to arrange coverage for the machine C. holding that where the entity was incorporated in texas and the shareholders reside in texas and the bankruptcy case is pending in texas texas law not arizona law should be applied D. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident printing customer despite the fact that texas printer solicited the business in alabama and nonresident sent no personnel to texas because nonresident placed additional orders from which it expected to profit sent payments to texas sent and received printing materials to and from texas paid for shipping of printed goods from texas and sent payments to texas the transactions were governed by texas law and substantial part of performance occurred in texas E. holding sending two employees to work in texas and using an office in texas for limited purposes did not support finding of general jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident guarantor of debt to texas creditor based only on sending a guaranty agreement to texas and discussing the general pattern of texas cases holding likewise
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: in addition , you agree not to upload , post , e-mail or otherwise send or transmit any material designed to interrupt , destroy or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment associated with the netflix service , including any software viruses or any other computer code , files or programs .

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: the Eleventh Amendment analysis. See, e.g., Barde v. Board of Trustees of Regional Comm. Colleges, 207 Conn. 59, 64, 539 A.2d 1000 (1988) (“Although the named defendant here is the board of trustees of regional community colleges, these colleges are state public institutions and the real party in interest is the state.”); Rogan v. Board of Trustees, 178 Conn. 579, 582-84, 424 A.2d 274 (1979) (board of trustees of state colleges is entitled to sovereign immunity); Hynes v. Southern Conn. State Univ., 2001 WL 822330, * 1 (Conn.Super. June 15, 2001) (SCSU is entitled to sovereign immunity); Dery v. Southern Conn. State Univ., 1998 WL 738060 (Conn.Super. Oct. 8, 1998) (same); see also Narumanchi v. Board of Trustees of the Conn. State Univ., 1986 WL 15753, * 5-6 (D.Conn. Oct. 6, 1986) (<HOLDING>). Significant control is retained by the Options: A. holding that the csu board of trustees and individual trustees sued in their official capacity are a political arm of the state and as such are immune from suit B. holding state of north carolina and state official sued in their official capacity are immune from 1983 and 1985 actions in federal court C. holding that punitive damages are not recoverable against a state official sued in his or her official capacity D. holding that members of the city council in their official capacity are not immune from a section 1983 suit against the municipality for deprivation of liberty interest in reputation without due process E. holding that state and its officers sued in their official capacity for damages are not persons suable under 1983

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the csu board of trustees and individual trustees sued in their official capacity are a political arm of the state and as such are immune from suit
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 your employment with the Company, you will continue to be eligible for the Company’s general employee benefit programs (subject to any required employee contributions) which include paid-time off, medical, dental and vision insurance, life insurance, short-term disability and long-term disability insurance and participation in the Company’s 401(k) retirement savings program and the Company’s employee stock purchase plan). Unused vacation may be carried over each year during your employment or paid to you upon termination consistent with Company policy and limitations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company retains the right to change, add or cease any particular benefit for its employees. In addition to any group and/or executive life insurance benefits made available by the Company to its employees, the Company will maintain life insurance which will pay to your beneficiaries a death benefit equal to one million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law and the bye-laws of the Company and to the extent not covered by insurance directly insuring such person, each officer or employee of the Company or any Affiliate and member or former member of the Committee or the Board shall be indemnified and held harmless by the Company against any cost or expense (including reasonable fees of counsel reasonably acceptable to the Committee) or liability (including any sum paid in settlement of a claim with the approval of the Committee), and advanced amounts necessary to pay the foregoing at the earliest time and to the fullest extent permitted, arising out of any act or omission to act in connection with the administration of the Plan, except to the extent arising out of such officer’s, employee’s, member’s or former member’s own fraud or dishonesty. Such indemnification shall be in addition to any right of indemnification the employees, officers, directors or members or former officers, directors or members may have under applicable law or under the Certificate of Incorporation, memorandum of association, bye-laws or such similar constitutional documents of the Company or any Affiliate. Notwithstanding anything else herein, this indemnification will not apply to the actions or determinations made by an individual with regard to Awards granted to such individual under the Plan.

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: Borrowers agree to pay on demand all reasonable costs and expenses of Agent and the Lenders (including reasonable attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with the preparation, negotiation, execution, delivery and administration of this Amendment and all other instruments or documents provided for herein or delivered or to be delivered hereunder or in connection herewith. All obligations provided herein shall survive any termination of this Amendment and the Credit Agreement as amended hereby.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All payments by Borrower hereunder and under any Revolving Note and Term Note to the Agent or any Lender shall be made without set-off or counterclaim and in such amounts as may be necessary in order that all such payments, after deduction or withholding for or on account of any present or future taxes, levies, imposts, duties or other charges of whatsoever nature imposed by any Governmental Authority or taxing authority thereof (collectively, "Taxes"), shall not be less than the amounts otherwise specified to be paid under this Agreement. The Borrower shall pay all Taxes when due and shall promptly send to the Lender original tax receipts or copies thereof certified by the relevant taxing authority together with such other documentary evidence with respect to such payments as may be required from time to time by the Agent. If the Borrower fails to pay any Taxes to the appropriate taxing authorities when due or fails to remit to the Agent or Lender any such original tax receipts or certified copies thereof as aforesaid or other required documentary evidence, the Borrower shall indemnify the Agent or Lender within thirty (30) days of demand by the Lender or Agent for any taxes, interest or penalties that may become payable by the Agent or Lender as a result of such failure.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Neither a Participant nor a Beneficiary may alienate, assign, transfer, or otherwise encumber his or her rights and interests under the Plan, nor may such interest or right to receive a distribution be taken, either voluntarily or involuntarily, for the satisfaction of the debts of, or other obligations or claims against, such person, and any attempt to do so shall be null and void.

assistant: Interests
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 a Party of any right hereunder or failure to enforce a breach of any of the terms of this Agreement will be valid unless in writing and signed by an authorized representative of each Party hereto. Failure by either Party to enforce any rights under this Agreement will not be construed as a waiver of such rights, nor will a waiver by either Party in one or more instances be construed as constituting a continuing waiver or as a waiver in other instances.

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: which failure to present a ground to the district court has caused no one — not the district judge, not us, not the appellee — any harm of which the law ought to take note.’ ” Russian Media Grp., LLC v. Cable Am., Inc., 598 F.3d 302, 308 (7th Cir.2010) (quoting Amcast Indus. Corp. v. Detrex Corp., 2 F.3d 746, 749-50 (7th Cir.1993)). Here, Beverly’s failure to raise the allocation issue with the district court precluded the parties from further developing the record on the issue, and reasonably permitted the district court to infer that the issue was not so important to the parties as to constitute a material term. Beverly does not offer any reason on appeal that warrants the exercise of discretion here, and we decline to invent one. See S.E.C. v. Yang, 795 F.3d 674, 679 (7th Cir.2015) (<HOLDING>). III. CONCLUSION The judgment of the district Options: A. holding that where the plaintiff made no attempt to contact the defendant by telephone or through his known attorneys service by publication was improper B. holding that a defendant who has successfully challenged his plea in one ease should be allowed to withdraw his plea in a second case when both cases were part of one negotiated settlement of his charges C. holding that venue was improper in the county of death because no other event occurred there D. holding that the case presented no justiciable controversy and that a review of the matter would render an improper advisory opinion E. holding that discretionary review was improper in part because the party made no attempt to demonstrate why his case qualifies as one of these rare cases

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that discretionary review was improper in part because the party made no attempt to demonstrate why his case qualifies as one of these rare cases
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Manager has filed or caused to be filed and shall file or cause to be filed all federal tax returns and all material state and other tax returns that are required to be filed except where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. The Manager has paid or caused to be paid, and shall pay or cause to be paid, all material taxes owed by the Manager pursuant to said returns or pursuant to any assessments made against it or any of its property (other than any amount of tax the validity of which is currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which reserves in accordance with GAAP, to the extent required, have been provided on the books of the Manager).

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As part of the consideration for each Lender’s and the Administrative Agent’s execution of this Amendment and Reaffirmation, each Borrower, on behalf of itself and its successors, assigns, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, employees, agents and attorneys hereby forever, fully, unconditionally and irrevocably waives and releases the Lenders, the Administrative Agent and each of their successors, assigns, parents, subsidiaries, limited partners, shareholder(s), affiliates, officers, directors, employees, attorneys and agents (collectively, the “ Releasees ”) from any and all claims, liabilities, obligations, debts, causes of action (whether at law or in equity or otherwise), defenses, counterclaims, setoffs, of any kind, whether known or unknown, whether liquidated or unliquidated, matured or unmatured, fixed or contingent, directly or indirectly arising out of, connected with, resulting from or related to any act or omission by any Lender or the Administrative Agent or any other Releasee prior to the date hereof (collectively, the “ Claims ”). Each Borrower further agrees that it may not commence, institute, or prosecute any lawsuit, action or other proceeding, whether judicial, administrative or otherwise, to collect or enforce any Claim .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Transaction Documents, together with the Exhibits and Schedules thereto and the respective nondisclosure agreements between the Company and the Purchaser, contain the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all prior agreements and understandings, oral or written, with respect to such matters, which the parties acknowledge have been merged into such documents, exhibits and schedules. At or after the Closing, and without further consideration, the Company will execute and deliver to the Purchaser such further documents as may be reasonably requested in order to give practical effect to the intention of the parties under the Transaction Documents.

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: it of the risk of pecuniary loss that existed in the performance of its duties in brokering the plan. Gallagher avers that the Diocese breached its fiduciary duty by failing to inform it that Gallagher might be liable to cover certain losses incurred from the activities of pedophilic priests. This breach, Gallagher claims, precludes the Diocese from relying on the express warranty to argue that Gallagher is liable for the Diocese’s uninsured losses. Gallagher is correct that it was the agent of the Diocese. See Motors Ins. Co. v. Bud’s Boat Rental, Inc., 917 F.2d 199, 204 (5th Cir.1990) (noting that under Louisiana law, an insurance broker is generally deemed to be the agent of the insured rather than the insurer); Tassin v. Golden Rule Ins. Co., 649 So.2d 1050, 1054 (La.App.1994) (<HOLDING>). Its agency argument fails, though — at least Options: A. holding insureds claim against insurance agent for negligent misrepresentation not preempted by erisa agent told insured he would be covered for workrelated injuries when he in fact was not B. holding that even if an insurance broker is the agent of the insurance company for purposes of soliciting and procuring the policy that would not necessarily make the broker the agent of the insurance company for the purpose of receiving notice of suits and claims C. holding insurance agent has no duty to advise insured of amount of insurance necessary to cover all potential losses D. holding that under georgia law a holder of a master insurance policy is an agent of the insurance company and not the insurer E. holding that insurance broker is generally agent of insured

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that insurance broker is generally agent of insured
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: N.M. at Casa Arena Blanca, LLC, et al., No. 30,477, slip op. (N.M.Ct.App. July 18, 2012), cert. denied, No. 33,762,- N.M. -, 297 P.3d 332 (N.M. Oct. 3, 2012). The letter states that this supplemental authority was submitted “because it addresses the enforceability of the arbitration clause at issue in this case.” The Figueroa court concluded that the arbitration clause, which was virtually identical to the one in this case, could not be enforced because it was unconscionable. If this Rule 28(j) letter was submitted to suggest that we should consider whether the arbitration clause is unconscionable, that issue is not properly before this court because Ms. Patton did not file a cross-appeal from the district court’s decision.. See Trigalet v. Young, 54 F.3d 645, 647 n. 3 (10th Cir.1995) Options: A. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to consider the appeal because it was filed before the final order awarding attorneys fees B. holding that trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider defendants motion to withdraw guilty plea filed beyond term of court in which defendant was sentenced C. holding that because the state failed to properly file the complaint the district court lacked jurisdiction to proceed to trial D. holding that when the district court dismissed rather than transferred a case not within its jurisdiction and a party appealed that dismissal the circuit court could consider only the propriety of the dismissal on appeal and determining that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction on appeal to consider the merits of the action E. holding that court lacked jurisdiction to consider issue when party did not file a crossappeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that court lacked jurisdiction to consider issue when party did not file a crossappeal
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 hereto and its Affiliates shall cooperate with each other in connection with the performance of the Services hereunder; provided , however , that such cooperation shall not unreasonably disrupt the normal operations of Provider, the Recipient or their respective Affiliates.

assistant: Cooperation
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: so in light of the DMAS approval of Medicaid reimbursement, a fact that indicates the degree of care plaintiff required. Indeed, plaintiffs position with respect to REMH is undercut given that it initially denied her admission to its facility and then admitted her, pursuant to an agreement that terminated threatened litigation and resolved pending administrative complaints. In any event, it is undisputed that the plaintiff did not apply to either of MFA’s facilities after discharge from Avante. This is consistent with the plaintiffs view of REMH as her first choice in a nursing facility. Consequently, plaintiffs failure to apply to the facilities after discharge from Avante precludes any finding of discrimination. Cf. Robinson v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 823 F.2d 793, 796 (4th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1042, 108 S.Ct. 773, Options: A. holding that because plaintiff did not apply for a job he could not be rejected in a title vii case B. holding title vii analysis applies in ada case C. holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii D. holding that plaintiff could not show that he was disabled because he conceded that he could do his job despite his impairment E. holding that title vii does not prescribe an employers determination of preferred or required job requirements

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that because plaintiff did not apply for a job he could not be rejected in a title vii case
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: did so, adopting the magistrate’s short opinion. I Illinois law requires that a criminal complaint be sworn. Ill.Rev.Stat. 38 § lll-3(b). Vaughn’s complaint was not properly sworn. Vaughn signed the complaint, but not in the presence of the attesting officer, Sgt. Heatley. Gramenos believes that on this account Vaughn and the police must pay him damages. We will assume that the procedure of attesting the signature out of the presence of the witness violates state law. It does not matter. In a suit under § 1983 the plaintiff must show a violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, not just a violation of state law. The two are not the same. E.g., Carson v. Block, 790 F.2d 562, 565 (7th Cir.1986) (collecting cases); McKinney v. George, 726 F.2d 1183, 1188-89 (7th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). No principle of federal law makes a properly Options: A. holding a warrantless arrest by a law officer is reasonable under the fourth amendment where there is probable cause to believe that a criminal offense has been or is being committed B. holding that a warrantless arrest on probable cause does not violate the fourth amendment even if state law required the police to have prior authorization C. holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment D. holding that state law is immaterial for fourth amendment search analysis and refusing to suppress evidence obtained illegally under state law after warrantless arrest because the arrest rules that the officers violated were those of state law alone and as we have just concluded it is not the province of the fourth amendment to enforce state law that amendment does not require the exclusion of evidence obtained from a constitutionally permissible arrest E. holding that a warrantless arrest does not violate the fourth amendment if at the time of the defendants arrest police had probable cause to believe that an offense has been is being or will be committed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a warrantless arrest on probable cause does not violate the fourth amendment even if state law required the police to have prior authorization
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: accords with the statutory language and structure as a whole. To be an “arranger,” one must “arrange[] for disposal or treatment, or arrange[] with a transporter for transport for disposal or treatment, of hazardous substances .... ” § 9607(a)(3). CERCLA’s definition of “disposal,” in turn, includes “the discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spilling, leaking, or placing of any solid waste or hazardous waste into or on any land or water so that such solid waste or hazardous waste or constituent thereof may enter the environment or be ... discharged into any waters, including ground waters.” § 6903(3) (referred to by § 9601(29)). That “disposal” includes such unintentional processes as “leaking” indicates that “disposal” need not be purposeful. See Carson Harbor Vill., 270 F.3d at 880 (<HOLDING>). Thus, an entity can be an arranger even if it Options: A. holding that compliance with rule 3 is both a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite to appeal internal quotation marks omitted B. holding that sufficient evidence of loss causation exists when the content of the alleged misstatements or omissions caused the financial harm actually suffered by the plaintiffs internal quotation marks omitted citing and quoting suez equity investors lp v torontodominion bank 250 f3d 87 96 2d cir2001 C. holding that leaking may not require affirmative conduct internal quotation marks omitted quoting and adopting interpretation of united states v cdmg realty co 96 f3d 706 714 3d cir1996 D. recognizing that the declaratory judgment act is only procedural and does not create substantive rights internal quotation marks and citations omitted E. recognizing that a court may not apply the modified categorical approach if the statute proscribes only conduct that involves moral turpitude internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that leaking may not require affirmative conduct internal quotation marks omitted quoting and adopting interpretation of united states v cdmg realty co 96 f3d 706 714 3d cir1996
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: 123, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), the Supreme Court recognized an important exception to Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. Under the doctrine established in Young, Eleventh Amendment immunity does not bar some suits for prospective injunctive relief against state officials acting in their official capacities. Coeur dAlene Tribe, — U.S. at -, 117 S.Ct. at 2034. Young applies in two types of cases. The first, not implicated here, is when a litigant has no forum other than federal court in which to redress an alleged violation of rights. See id. at-, 117 S.Ct. at 2035. The second type of case to which Young applies is where the plaintiff seeks relief that requires the interpretation of federal law. Id. at -, 117 S.Ct. at 2036. The Court has recognized tha 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) (<HOLDING>). On the other hand, “[a]n allegation of an Options: A. holding that plaintiffs complaint against tribal officials was barred under doctrine of sovereign immunity because the officials votes individually had no legal effect and it was the official action of the band following the officials votes that caused plaintiffs injuries B. holding an exception to eleventh amendment immunity inapplicable in a suit against state officials on the basis of state law C. holding that plaintiffs claim was not barred by sovereign immunity because he sought specific relief against a government official D. holding that state could not assert sovereign immunity defense where the state had waived immunity in state court and agreed to remove suit to federal court E. holding that sovereign immunity barred a suit against state officials when the relief sought required state officials to retroactively pay federal benefits

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that sovereign immunity barred a suit against state officials when the relief sought required state officials to retroactively pay federal benefits
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive understands and agrees that money damages may not be a sufficient remedy for a breach by Executive of the provisions of Article 4 and that, in the event of any breach or threatened or attempted breach of any provision of Article 4 by Executive, the Bank shall, in addition to and not to the exclusion of any other rights and remedies at law or in equity, be entitled to seek and receive from any court of competent jurisdiction (i) full temporary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining and restraining Executive and each and every other Person concerned therein from the continuation of such violative acts and (ii) a decree for specific performance of the applicable provisions of this Agreement, without being required to furnish any bond or other security. In the event of any litigation brought by either party to enforce rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall recover from the other party its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in connection with such litigation.

assistant: Remedies
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: justification must be based on the entire record of proceedings and can be made even when the government’s litigating position raises an issue of first impression. See Gutierrez v. Barnhart, 274 F.3d 1255, 1261 (9th Cir.2001) (“[T]here is no per se rule that EAJA fees cannot be awarded where the government’s litigation position contains an issue of first impression.”); United States v. Douglas, 55 F.3d 584, 588-89 (11th Cir.1995) (rejecting the government’s contention that its position was substantially justified because it raised a question of first impression); Dalles Irrigation Dist., 91 Fed.Cl. at 698 (same). Moreover, even if prior administrative decisions had supported the government’s position, that position would not necessarily be reasonable. See Geo-Seis, 79 Fed.Cl. at 77-78 (<HOLDING>). Here, however, question of substantial Options: A. holding the governments actions were not substantially justified despite numerous decisions by gao supporting the governments position where gaos prior decisions were contrary to explicit regulations B. holding that this court is not bound by decisions of the appellate division or the third circuit even where those decisions concern the same parties and legal issues C. holding court of appeals lacks jurisdiction over the governments prosecutorial discretion decisions D. holding that decisions by prior panels are binding E. holding that cue review applies only to prior final decisions of agencies of original jurisdiction ros and not to prior decisions of the board

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the governments actions were not substantially justified despite numerous decisions by gao supporting the governments position where gaos prior decisions were contrary to explicit regulations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and sport hunters somewhere, maybe everywhere, are tuning in. And for purposes of causation, these hunters must be tuning in for the first time because there is no dispute that, as a matter of federal law, it has long been legal to hunt captive-bred members of the three antelope species in the United States. Next, at least some hunters who receive the signal will journey to North Africa to search for one of the small number of scimitar-horned oryx, ad-dax and dama gazelle that live in the wild— all because these hunters picked up the signal. This is just so much speculation. 2006 WL 6198320, at *6. 9 . Even if the plaintiff maintained standing to bring suit, Section 127 is valid under the Constitution. The plaintiff argues that under United States v. Kl .3d 1170 (9th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, where there is ambiguity regarding Options: A. holding that ejxcept in matters governed by the federal constitution or by acts of congress the law to be applied in any case is the law of the state B. holding that an unconstitutional act of congress has no legal effect C. holding that where congress has directed the agency to issue a rule without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule congress has amended the law and does not offend the constitution D. holding that the other source of law might be a moneymandating constitutional provision statute or regulation that has been violated or an express or implied contract with the united states E. holding that congress has power to subject the states to wage and hour regulation

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where congress has directed the agency to issue a rule without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule congress has amended the law and does not offend the constitution
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: CURIAM. Verdell Harvey challenges the trial court’s summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Harvey’s motion contained five claims. We affirm the trial court’s rulings without discussion on four of the claims, but we reverse and remand with directions to the trial court on the fifth claim. Harvey was convicted of second-degree murder. In his motion, Harvey alleges that the trial court erred by not reclassifying this conviction from a first-degree felony to a life felony. In other words, Harvey alleges that the trial court erred by imposing a habitual offender sentence because the conviction was a life felony based on the use of a weapon. See, e.g., Nathan v. State, 689 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (<HOLDING>). In order to enhance a conviction based on the Options: A. holding that under the 1991 version of the habitual offender statute defendant could not receive habitual offender sentence for life felony B. holding that a defendant sentenced as an habitual offender who later successfully challenges one of his predicate offenses may have his habitual offender status and sentencing enhancement vacated through postconviction relief or a motion to correct erroneous sentence C. holding that under habitual felony offender statute a sentence includes the sanction of probation D. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in not allowing defendant to present evidence of his subjective belief regarding his status as habitual offender because his belief was irrelevant to offense of driving as habitual offender E. holding that defendants habitual traffic violator conviction could also serve as a predicate felony conviction under the general habitual offender statute

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that under the 1991 version of the habitual offender statute defendant could not receive habitual offender sentence for life felony
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 statutes governing asylum protect not only against persecution by government forces, but also against persecution by non-governmental groups that the government cannot control, including paramilitary or guerilla forces. Ruiz v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 440 F.3d 1247, 1257 (11th Cir.2006). But even in those cases, the political opinion at issue is the victim’s, not the persecutor’s. Id. at 1257-58. Evidence of past persecution that is consistent with either acts of private violence or the petitioner’s failure to cooperate with guerillas, or that merely shows that a person has been the victim of criminal activity, does not constitute evidence of persecution based oh a statutorily protected ground. Id. at 1258; see also Sanchez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 392 F.3d 434, 436, 438 (11th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). The asylum applicant has the burden of Options: A. holding that evidence that is consistent with acts of private violence or that merely shows that a person has been the victim of criminal activity does not constitute evidence of persecution based on a statutorily protected ground B. holding that random criminal acts bore no nexus to a protected ground C. holding that petitioners who apply for withholding of removal must establish that a statutorily protected ground was a reason for their persecution D. holding that persecution by militants for purpose of recruitment does not establish a nexus to a protected ground E. holding that harassment by the farc for refusing to cooperate with their demands for money did not establish a nexus to a statutorily protected ground

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that harassment by the farc for refusing to cooperate with their demands for money did not establish a nexus to a statutorily protected ground
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 in this lawsuit. The only causes of action remaining are those for improper secondary activity under 29 U.S.C. § 187 and for defamation under Rhode Island common law. Plaintiff may not recover punitive damages on its claim of unlawful secondary activity. See International Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. Foust, 442 U.S. 42, 52, 99 S.Ct. 2121, 60 L.Ed.2d 698 (1979); Morton, 377 U.S. at 260-61, 84 S.Ct. 1253; Amoco Oil Co. v. Local 99, Int’l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 536 F.Supp. 1203, 1224 (D.R.I.1982). As the LMRA makes clear, plaintiffs recovery for unlawful secondary pressure is limited to compensatory damages. See 29 U.S.C. § 187(b) (“Whoever shall be injured in his business or property ... shall recover the damages by him sustained.... ”); Morton, 377 U.S. at 260, 84 S.Ct. 1253 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, defendants’ Motions for Summary Options: A. holding that conduct must be beyond the fraud which supported compensatory damages to award punitive damages B. holding that recovery is limited to actual compensatory damages C. holding that punitive damages do not need to be proportional to compensatory damages D. holding that under the first amendment where there is no proof of actual malice damages are limited to actual injury which excludes punitive damages but is not limited to outofpocket loss E. holding that when compensatory damages are nominal a much higher ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages can be contemplated

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that recovery is limited to actual compensatory damages
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 necessary implication that the waters immediately west of northern Whidbey Island are a part of the Lummi’s U & A. Thus, each of Lummi Indian Tribe’s two holdings implies a different result. Therefore, we conclude that Lum-mi Indian Tribe is ambiguous regarding whether the waters immediately to the west of northern Whidbey Island are included within the Lummi U & A, and accordingly that this issue has not yet been decided explicitly or by necessary implication. The law of the case doctrine applies only when the issue was “decided explicitly or by necessary implication in the previous disposition.” Id. (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted); see United Steelworkers of Am. v. Ret. Income Plan For Hourly-Rated Employees of ASARCO, Inc., 512 F.3d 555, 564 (9th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>). We hold that no prior decision in this case Options: A. holding the order is only reviewable if actually considered by the district court B. holding that where the district court decided two issues in the certified order but identified only the damages issue as the controlling question of law the court of appeals could nonetheless address the other issue C. holding that appellate court may only review issues actually presented to and considered by the trial court D. recognizing the issue may be decided as a question of law if the facts are undisputed and support only one inference E. holding that law of the case acts as a bar only when the issue in question was actually considered and decided by the first court

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that law of the case acts as a bar only when the issue in question was actually considered and decided by the first court
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Loan Party has filed or caused to be filed all federal and other material state and other tax returns that are required to be filed by it and all such tax returns are true, correct, and complete in all material respects; each Loan Party has paid all federal and other material state and other taxes and any assessments made against it or any of its property by any Governmental Authority (other than any which are not yet due or the amount or validity of which are currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which reserves in conformity with GAAP have been provided on the books of the relevant Loan Party); no tax Lien has been filed (other than for taxes not yet due or the amount or validity of which are currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which reserves in conformity with GAAP have been provided on the books of the relevant Loan Party) and, no Loan Party is aware of any proposed or pending tax assessments, deficiencies or audits that could, in any such case, be reasonably expected to, individually or in the aggregate, result in 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: with the making of such oral statement; or (3) a statement, however taken or recorded, or a transcription thereof, if any, made by said witness to a grand jury. 18 U.S.C. § 3500(e). Although an in camera inspection is not required in every case, “a Government objection to production may require that the trial court inspect documents or hold a hearing to gather extrinsic evidence bearing on the extent to which the documents are statements producible under [§ ] 3500.” Goldberg v. United States, 425 U.S. 94, 108, 96 S.Ct. 1338, 47 L.Ed.2d 603 (1976). Before an in camera inspection is required, Price must make a “colorable claim” that the documents that she seeks are statements within the meaning of the Jencks Act. See United States v. Willis, 997 F.2d 407, 413-14 (8th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). We conclude that the district court did not Options: A. holding that the district court did not err by refusing to allow the defendant to absent himself from the trial at which his identification would be an integral issue B. holding that the district court did not err in refusing to conduct an in camera inspection where the defendant failed to raise a colorable claim that the fbi 302s that he sought were statements for purposes of the jencks act C. holding that trial court did not err D. holding that a district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to give a mere inspection instruction in a firearm possession case E. holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to consider debtors claim of rescission as an equitable defense to the foreclosure action where that defense was not raised before the clerk

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the district court did not err in refusing to conduct an in camera inspection where the defendant failed to raise a colorable claim that the fbi 302s that he sought were statements for purposes of the jencks act