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: It is not a dispute over compliance with IGRA, and does not belong in federal court. Congress did not define “member” when it enacted IGRA, nor would federally imposed criteria be consonant with federal Indian policy. The great weight of authority holds that tribes have exclusive authority to determine membership issues. See Martinez v. Southern Ute Tribe, 249 F.2d 915, 920 (10th Cir.1957), cert. denied, 357 U.S. 924, 78 S.Ct. 1374, 2 L.Ed.2d 1376 (1958) (“[t]he Courts have consistently recognized that in the absence of express legislation by Congress to the contrary, a tribe has complete authority to determine all questions of its own membership as a political entity”); see also Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 72 n. 32, 98 S.Ct. 1670, 1684 n. 32, 56 L.Ed.2d 106 (1978) (<HOLDING>). A sovereign tribe’s ability to determine its Options: A. holding that federal court lacks jurisdiction to decide tribal membership disputes B. holding that an indian tribes exercise of criminal jurisdiction over nonindians is inconsistent with the domesticdependent status of the tribes and that tribes may not assume such jurisdiction without congressional authorization C. holding that federal courts lacked jurisdiction to determine whether a tribes membership requirements violated icra and noting that a tribes right to define its own membership for tribal purposes has long been recognized as central to its existence as an independent political community D. holding that indian tribes lack tribal jurisdiction over crimes committed by nonmember indians within the tribes reservation E. holding the icra not to abrogate tribal sovereign immunity because nothing on the face of title i of the icra purports to subject tribes to the jurisdiction of the federal courts in civil actions for injunctive or declaratory relief

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that federal courts lacked jurisdiction to determine whether a tribes membership requirements violated icra and noting that a tribes right to define its own membership for tribal purposes has long been recognized as central to its existence as an independent political community
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 execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement, the Note by the Company and the consummation by the Company of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby (including, without limitation, the issuance and reservation for issuance of the Conversion Shares) will not (i) conflict with or result in a violation of any provision of the Certificate of Incorporation or By-laws, or (ii) violate or conflict with, or result in a breach of any provision of, or constitute a default (or an event which with notice or lapse of time or both could become a default) under, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation of, any agreement, indenture, patent, patent license or instrument to which the Company or any of its subsidiaries is a party, or (iii) result in a violation of any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment or decree (including federal and state securities laws and regulations and regulations of any self-regulatory organizations to which the Company or its securities are subject) applicable to the Company or any of its subsidiaries or by which any property or asset of the Company or any of its subsidiaries is bound or affected (except for such conflicts, defaults, terminations, amendments, accelerations, cancellations and violations as would not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect). All consents, authorizations, orders, filings and registrations which the Company is required to obtain pursuant to the preceding sentence have been obtained or effected on or prior to the date hereof. The Company is not in violation of the listing requirements of the Over-the-Counter Quotations Bureau (the “OTCQB”) and does not reasonably anticipate that the Common Stock will be delisted by the OTCQB in the foreseeable future, nor are the Company’s securities “chilled” by FINRA. The Company and its subsidiaries are unaware of any facts or circumstances, which might give rise to any of the foregoing.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: Second Circuit, for instance, recognized that an inmate can bring a First Amendment right to petition claim when prison officials “intentionally file[ ] false disciplinary charges against him in retaliation for his cooperation with a state administrative investigation of alleged incidents of inmate abuse at the prison.” Franco v. Kelly, 854 F.2d 584, 589 (2d Cir. 1988). The court later recognized the right in the context of retaliation against inmates for filing grievances. Gayle v. Gonyea, 313 F.3d 677, 682 (2d Cir. 2002) (“An allegation that a prison official filed false disciplinary charges in retaliation for the exercise of a constitutionally protected right, such as the filing of a grievance, states a claim under § 1983.”) (citing Franco, 854 F.2d at 589-90). The S 9th Cir. 2009) (<HOLDING>); Boxer X v. Harris, 437 F.3d 1107, 1112 (11th Options: A. recognizing that prisoners undoubtedly exercise first amendment petition right when filing grievances and stating that prison officials may not retaliate against prisoners for filing grievances B. holding that an inmate has a first amendment right to file grievances against prison officials C. holding no first amendment right to file frivolous grievances D. recognizing first amendment retaliation right E. recognizing first amendment petition right where inmate alleged retaliation for filing grievances

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing first amendment petition right where inmate alleged retaliation for filing grievances
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 First Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (without giving effect to any choice or conflict of laws provision or rule that would cause the application of the laws of any other jurisdiction).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement will not be assigned by Purchaser or Seller without the prior written consent of the non-assigning party; provided, however, that Purchaser may assign all or a portion of its rights and obligations hereunder to one or more wholly-owned subsidiaries of Purchaser; and provided further, that any party may assign its rights and obligations hereunder to a person that acquires control of such party by merger, consolidation or a sale of all or substantially all of such party's assets or by acquisition of voting stock of such party representing more than fifty percent (50%) of the total voting power of all outstanding securities of such party, provided such person agrees in writing to be bound by all of its assignor's obligations under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which shall be considered one and the same agreement and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by each of the parties and delivered to the other parties. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Agreement by facsimile or other electronic image scan transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall use its commercially reasonable efforts to cause the Registration Statement to remain effective with a current prospectus through and including the expiration date of the Warrants (or the date all Warrants have been exercised or duly called, if earlier), and shall notify the Representative immediately and confirm the notice in writing: (i) of the effectiveness of the Registration Statement and any amendment thereto; (ii) of the issuance by the Commission of any stop order or of the initiation, or to the Company’s knowledge, the threatening, of any proceeding for that purpose; (iii) of the issuance by any state securities commission of any proceedings for the suspension of the qualification of the Public Securities for offering or sale in any jurisdiction or of the initiation, or to the Company’s knowledge, the threatening, of any proceeding for that purpose; (iv) of the mailing and delivery to the Commission for filing of any amendment or supplement to the Prospectus; (v) of the receipt of any comments or request for any additional information from the Commission related to the Prospectus; and (vi) of the happening of any event during the period described in this Section 3(d) that, in the judgment of the Company, makes any statement of a material fact made in the Registration Statement, the Pricing Disclosure Package or the Prospectus untrue or that requires the making of any changes in (a) the Registration Statement in order to make the statements therein not misleading, or (b) in the Pricing Disclosure Package or the Prospectus in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. If the Commission or any state securities commission shall enter a stop order or suspend such qualification at any time, the Company shall make every reasonable effort to obtain promptly the lifting of such order.

assistant: Effectiveness
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 represent and warrant that : ( i ) you either are the sole and exclusive owner of all user content or you have all rights , licenses , consents and releases necessary to grant uber the license to the user content as set forth above ; and ( ii ) neither the user content nor your submission , uploading , publishing or otherwise making available of such user content nor uber 's use of the user content as permitted herein will infringe , misappropriate or violate a third party 's intellectual property or proprietary rights , or rights of publicity or privacy , or result in the violation of any applicable law or regulation .

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: The Company shall use the net proceeds from the sale of the Securities hereunder for working capital purposes and as otherwise described under the section titled “Use of Proceeds” in the Prospectus Supplement, and shall not use such proceeds: (a) for the satisfaction of any portion of the Company’s debt (other than payment of trade payables in the ordinary course of the Company’s business and prior practices); (b) for the redemption of any Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents; (c) for the settlement of any outstanding litigation; or (d) in violation of FCPA or OFAC regulations.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise expressly provided herein (including Section 2.02(c)(viii), Section 4.08, Section 5.04 and Section 5.05), each party hereto shall bear its own costs and expenses (including attorneys’ fees) incurred in connection with this Agreement and the Transactions.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: had been willing to account for whether estate assets were or were not used to purchase the WSFS Claim, the Debtor’s undisclosed involvement in the transaction constituted a violation of his fiduciary obligation as a debtor-in-possession. See, e.g., Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Cybergenics Corp. ex rel. Cybergenics Corp. v. Chinery, et al., 330 F.3d 548, 573 (3d Cir.2003) (recognizing that a debtor has a fiduciary duty to maximize the value of its estate); In re Sharon Steel Corp., 871 F.2d 1217, 1228 (3d Cir.1989); In re Pacific Forest Indus., Inc., 95 B.R. 740, 743 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.1989). The Third Circuit has recognized that the availability of claims for purchase at a discount constitutes a corporate opportunity. In re Papercraft Corp., 160 F.3d 982, 988 (3d Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); Brown v. Presbyterian Ministers, 484 F.2d 998 Options: A. holding that insider violated fiduciary duty by failing to disclose to debtors board its intent to purchase claims B. holding that several claims including one for breach of fiduciary duty against a volunteer school board member were timely without addressing the merits of the claims C. holding that employer breached fiduciary duty to disclose that it was considering allowing employees to participate in benefit plan D. holding that an independent fiduciary duty arises from a brokers purchase and sale of securities E. holding that whether attorney complied with fiduciary duty to disclose all material information was question of fact

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that insider violated fiduciary duty by failing to disclose to debtors board its intent to purchase claims
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: Schedule 6.1.2 states as of the date hereof the name of each of the Borrower's Subsidiaries , each such Subsidiary’s jurisdiction of incorporation or formation, percentage of ownership, equity interest owner, and if such Subsidiary is a Significant Subsidiary, Inactive Subsidiary, Project Subsidiary and/or Regulated Subsidiary. Each of the Loan Parties own the equity interests in each of such Subsidiaries it purports to own, free and clear in each case of any Lien.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement is prohibited by law or otherwise determined to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the provision that would otherwise be prohibited, invalid or unenforceable shall be deemed amended to apply to the broadest extent that it would be valid and enforceable, and the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Agreement so long as this Agreement as so modified continues to express, without material change, the original intentions of the parties as to the subject matter hereof and the prohibited nature, invalidity or unenforceability of the provision(s) in question does not substantially impair the respective expectations or reciprocal obligations of the parties or the practical realization of the benefits that would otherwise be conferred upon the parties.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 140, 144, 112 S.Ct. 1081, 117 L.Ed.2d 291 (1992) (“Where Congress specifically mandates, exhaustion is required.”). It noted our decision in Wyner that the SEHO does not have jurisdiction to enforce its own orders but that 'California’s CRP provides an avenue to enforce those decisions. The district court assumed “technically correct,” however, the Porters’ argument that Wyner did not make resort to the CRP obligatory but rather held only “that issues of non-compliance with an SEHO order may be brought before the [CRP].” Porter, 123 F.Supp.2d at 1196 (emphasis in original). Th IDEA establishes “elaborate and highly specific procedural safeguards,” evidencing that “Congress placed every bit as much emphasis upon compliance with procedures ... as it did upon the measurement of C.1985) (<HOLDING>). Requiring exhaustion of California’s CRP to Options: A. holding that state may not subject children and their parents to an additional step not required by the eha B. recognizing that competing interests of parents children and the state requires additional analysis C. recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children D. holding that courts may require one or both parents to pay for a courtappointed attorney for their children E. recognizing that because the state has cognizable interests in the safety of children in its jurisdiction neglectful parents may be separated from their children

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that state may not subject children and their parents to an additional step not required by the eha
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 shall do and perform or cause to be done and performed all such further acts and shall execute and deliver all such other agreements, certificates, instruments and documents as any other party hereto reasonably may request in order to carry out the intent and accomplish the purposes of this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to Section 4 herein, the term of this Agreement shall be 36 months, commencing on the Effective Date (the “Term”) to July 1, 2019. The Term may be further extended upon mutual agreement by the parties.

assistant: Terms
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: has established that the defendant possessed the requisite intent at the time and place of the alleged crimes. Generally, a district court has considerable latitude in choosing jury instructions. State v. Baird, 654 N.W.2d 105, 113 (Minn.2002). A reviewing court will not reverse a trial court’s decision on jury instructions unless the trial court abused its discretion. State v. Persitz, 518 N.W.2d 843, 848 (Minn.1994). Our court has previously permitted a flight jury instruction. See State v. McLaughlin, 250 Minn. 309, 319, 84 N.W.2d 664, 671-72 (1957). But, in more recent cases we have instructed the district courts to avoid “jury instructions advising that a particular fact may be inferred from other particular facts, if proved.” State v. Litzau, 650 N.W.2d 177, 185-86 (Minn.2002) (<HOLDING>); see also State v. Olson, 482 N.W.2d 212, Options: A. holding reversal warranted where a permissive inference instruction on possession of a controlled substance contributed to the cumulative prejudicial effect of the errors in defendants trial B. holding that possession of listed chemical with intent to manufacture controlled substance is controlled substance offense C. holding that although neither of the trial courts errors when considered in isolation were necessarily sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial the cumulative effect of the errors created sufficient prejudice to deny defendant a fair trial D. holding it was reversible error to give the jury a permissive inference instruction on possession of a controlled substance E. holding that mens rea required for possession of a controlled substance is knowledge that defendant possessed a controlled substance

assistant: The best answer is A. holding reversal warranted where a permissive inference instruction on possession of a controlled substance contributed to the cumulative prejudicial effect of the errors in defendants trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: not only because of the form, but also, because it is an appearance by a corporation, and not the work of an attorney. This court has held that because Rule 7, of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, applies only to individuals, a corporate entity may only appear in court though an attorney. Dell Development Corp. v. Best Industrial Uniform Supply Co., Inc., 743 S.W.2d 302, 303 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ denied). As we stated in Dell, “where a corporation chooses to represent itself through a non-attorney officer, it does so at its own risk; to do so may be viewed as negligence.” Id. However, the failure of appellant to file an answer through an attorney does not prevent the response from precluding a default judgment. See also R.T.A International, 915 S.W.2d at 151 (<HOLDING>). Appellant’s first point of error is Options: A. holding that the plaintiff did not establish a waiver where the defendants answer had put the plaintiff on notice of an arbitration defense B. holding appellant could not obtain a new trial so that jury could answer liability question because the charge instructed the jury not to answer the question based on its answer to a prior question and because appellant did not object to this instruction C. holding that where answer omits certain formalities required by the rules of procedure it does not render the answer ineffective so as to entitle the plaintiff to a default judgment D. holding failure to object to conditioning instructions waived error arising from the jurys failure to answer question when answer could not be implied and that lack of objection waived right to new trial to have jury answer questions E. holding that the defense of insufficient process was waived because it was not raised by the defendant in its answer but later in its response to the plaintiffs request for default judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where answer omits certain formalities required by the rules of procedure it does not render the answer ineffective so as to entitle the plaintiff to a default judgment
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 the Federal Rules.”). So in examining whether the district court abused its discretion in granting Kramer’s motion in limine, we review the court’s balancing of the equities to each of the parties—whether a sufficient “justifying reason” was stated for the bar of Plaintiff-Appellant’s Fourth Amendment claim, despite our liberal pleading and amendment practices. When a district court makes discretionary decisions of this nature, we do not always require the court to explicitly balance the equities as to each of the parties. For example, we have before noted that where allowing a significant late amendment causes “apparent” delay and prejudice, a district court does not err in not stating that reasoning outright. See Sanders v. Venture Stores, Inc., 56 F.3d 771, 773-74 (7th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). But here, the district court resolved a close Options: A. holding that a justifying reason must be apparent for denial of a motion to amend B. holding district court abused discretion in denying leave to amend complaint to add count when no prejudice resulted from two and onehalf year delay and facts underlying new and old counts were similar C. holding that district court erred in denying leave to amend complaint to add new legal theories even though trial was approaching D. holding that though the court did not expressly state its reason for denying leave to amend it was apparent what delay and prejudice would be caused by plaintiffs motion which sought to add four new individual defendants as well as additional counts under two federal statutes and a statelaw claim E. holding district court abused discretion in denying leave to amend complaint to add claim when party opposing motion made no showing of prejudice from delay

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that though the court did not expressly state its reason for denying leave to amend it was apparent what delay and prejudice would be caused by plaintiffs motion which sought to add four new individual defendants as well as additional counts under two federal statutes and a statelaw claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 355 U.S. 595 78 S.Ct. 495 2 L.Ed.2d 517 UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner,v.William V. MASSEI. No. 98. Argued Jan. 9, 1958. Decided March 3, 1958. Mr. Roger Fisher, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Mr. Richard Maguire, Boston, Mass., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The Court of Appeals has based its remand in part on the absence of 'proof of likely source,' which it regards as an 'indispensable' element of the net worth method citing Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 75 S.Ct. 127, 99 L.Ed. 150, in support of its conclusion. In Holland we held that proof of a likely source was 'sufficient' to convict in a net worth case where the Government did not negative all the possible nontaxable sources of the alleged net worth increase. This was not intended to imply that proof of a likely source was necessary in every case. On the contrary, should all possible sources of nontaxable income be negatived, there would be no necessity for proof of a likely source. The above explanation must be taken into consideration in applying the Holland doctrine to this case. A new trial being permissible under the terms of the order of the Court of Appeals, we affirm its judgment. 2 Affirmed. 3 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS would affirm the judgment below on the opinion of the Court of Appeals, 1 Cir., 241 F.2d 895, 900—901.

assistant: 1
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: sa-blefish fisheries, but upon the work he performed during his marriage to Betty Jo. As the trial court noted, in order to fish during the qualifying years for the IFQs, Greg expended marital assets and effort, and Betty Jo is entitled to share in the benefits received from these efforts. Greg also contends that Ferguson should not control because the court in Ferguson did not consider the “economic impact [on the fisher] of a marital division” of IFQs. Greg contends that the IFQ program acts as a legal disability to fishers, and that quota shares are analogous to workers’ compensation benefits or early retirement benefits in that their transferability compensates a fisher for lost future earnings which are not marital property. See Miller v. Miller, 739 P.2d 163, 165-66 (Alaska 1987) (<HOLDING>); In re Frahm, 45 Cal.App.4th 536, 53 Options: A. holding that health benefits earned during marriage are marital asset of insured spouse B. holding that workers compensation disability benefits received by disabled spouse are marital property only to the extent that they compensate for loss of earnings during the marriage C. holding that money invested in voluntary investment plan during marriage was marital property because it was property acquired during marriage D. holding that retirement benefits are marital property because they would be a form of deferred compensation funded by money earned during the parties marriage E. holding trial court had no authority to award portion of the marital property to wifes children from another marriage even though money they received by way of social security benefits were commingled with the marital estate and used in part for the aequisition of marital property

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that workers compensation disability benefits received by disabled spouse are marital property only to the extent that they compensate for loss of earnings during the marriage
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 all of the provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns; provided that neither this Agreement nor any of the rights, interests or obligations hereunder may be assigned by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of Company and Buyer; provided , however , that notwithstanding the foregoing, Buyer may at any time in its sole discretion and without the consent of any other Party assign, in whole or in part, (a) its right to purchase the Company Shares to one or more of its Affiliates (provided that no such assignment shall release Buyer from its obligations hereunder); (b) its rights under this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements for collateral security purposes to any lender providing financing to Buyer, such permitted assign or any of their Affiliates, and any such lender may exercise all of the rights and remedies of such assignee hereunder and thereunder; and (c) its rights under this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements to any subsequent purchaser of Buyer, its parent or any of its divisions or any material portion of its assets (whether such sale is structured as a sale of stock, sale of assets, merger, recapitalization or otherwise).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and custody proceedings — a subject in which “the states have an especially strong interest.” Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin, Krim & Ballon v. Rosenstiel, 490 F.2d 509, 516 (2d Cir.1973) (Friendly, J.). In particular, Falco challenges the State court’s order that he pay half the fees of the attorney appointed to represent his children in the divorce proceeding. Although there is some disagreement among New York courts about whether the fees for such court-appointed counsel should be borne by the public or by the parents, compare Redder v. Redder, 17 A.D.3d 10, 792 N.Y.S.2d 201, 204-05 (3d Dep’t 2005) (suggesting that the State should pay for a court-appointed attorney for the child in a custody proceeding), with Plovnick v. Klinger, 10 A.D.3d 84, 781 N.Y.S.2d 360, 363-66 (2d Dep’t 2004) (<HOLDING>), there is no discernible disagreement that Options: A. holding that courts may require one or both parents to pay for a courtappointed attorney for their children B. holding court could not require parents to divulge incriminating information but court could consider parents failure to undergo meaningful therapy in deciding whether parents could regain their children C. holding that it is plain error for a trial court to require a defendant to pay courtappointed attorney fees in the absence of legally sufficient evidence that defendant has the ability to pay the amount imposed D. recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children E. holding that it is in the interest of both parents and children that parents have ultimate authority to make medical decisions for their children unless neutral fact finder determines through due process hearing that parent is not acting in childs best interests

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that courts may require one or both parents to pay for a courtappointed attorney for their children
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: inference that the defendants engage in those activities or “may be present—whether officially or unofficially—in and around the Chagos Archipelago.” Pis.’ Reply to Brown & Root Opp’n at 4. Likewise, assuming ar-guendo that certain former board members were fully aware of the plaintiffs’ removal from Chagos, that knowledge or awareness is not sufficient to infer that they (and by extension, the defendants) engaged in some kind of a conspiracy to remove the plaintiffs. Id. at 5. As a result, the plaintiffs’ optimistic conclusion that these facts “create!] a reasonable basis for Plaintiffs’ conspiracy and continuing involvement theories” is a classic example of a conclusory allegation unsupported by factual data. Pis.’ Reply to Brown & Root Opp’n at 4; accord Byrd, 174 F.3d at 248 n. 8 (<HOLDING>); Exxon Corp., 40 F.3d at 1487-88 (viewing the Options: A. holding that allegations against nondiverse defendants must be factual not conclusory because conclusory allegations do not state a claim B. holding that a conclusory opinion may be rejected C. holding party opposing summary judgment does not show genuine issue for trial by replacing conclusory allegations of the complaint or answer with conclusory allegations of an affidavit D. holding that the plaintiffs allegations that there may well be agency knowledge or documents that could aid his case was plainly conclusory E. holding that a court need not accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the plaintiffs allegations that there may well be agency knowledge or documents that could aid his case was plainly conclusory
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 constitutes the entire agreement and understanding of the parties hereto in respect of the subject matter contained herein, and there are no restrictions, promises, representations, warranties, covenants, conditions or undertakings with respect to the subject matter hereof, other than those expressly set forth or referred to herein. This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements and understandings between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: no one under the age of 13 may provide any personal information to or on 9gag , inc ( including , for example , a name , address , telephone number or email address ) .

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: In addition to the other terms and conditions of the Plan pursuant to which Awards may be granted, the Committee may impose on any Award or the exercise thereof, such additional terms and conditions, not inconsistent with the provisions of the Plan, as the Committee shall determine, including terms requiring forfeiture of Awards in the event of termination of Continuous Service by the Participant and, to the extent permissible under Sections 162(m) and 409A of the Code, terms permitting a Participant to make elections relating to his or her Award. The Committee shall retain full power and discretion to accelerate or waive, at any time, any term or condition of an Award that is not mandatory under the Plan; provided, however , that the Committee shall not have any discretion to accelerate or waive any term or condition of an Award (i) that is intended to qualify as Performance-Based Compensation if such discretion would cause the Award not to so qualify or (ii) that would cause the Participant to incur additional taxes under Section 409A of the Code. Except in cases in which the Committee is authorized to require other forms of consideration under the Plan, or to the extent other forms of consideration must be paid to satisfy the requirements of the Delaware General Corporation Law, no consideration other than services may be required for the grant of any Award.

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: Tenant shall keep the Premises and the Project free from any liens arising out of any work performed or obligations incurred by or for, or materials furnished to, Tenant pursuant to this Lease or otherwise. Landlord shall have the right to post and keep posted on the Premises any notices permitted or required by law or which Landlord may deem to be proper for the protection of Landlord and the Project from such liens. If Tenant does not, within ten (10) days following Tenant’s receipt of notice of any such lien, cause the same to be released of record or bonded against, Landlord shall have, in addition to all other remedies provided herein and by law, the right, but not the obligation, to cause the same to be released by any means as Landlord shall deem proper, including by payment or settlement of the claim giving rise to such lien. All sums paid by Landlord for such purpose, and all expenses incurred by it in connection therewith (including, without limitation, reasonably attorneys’ fees), shall be payable to Landlord by Tenant, as additional rent, on demand, together with interest at the Interest Rate from the date such expenses are incurred by Landlord to the date of the payment thereof by Tenant to Landlord. The bond permitted under this Section shall be issued by a company reasonably acceptable to Landlord.

assistant: Liens
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: See Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.1994). The district court properly granted summary judgment as to Stewart’s claims that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his complaint of back pain, and his request for photochromatic glasses, because Stewart’s evidence merely demonstrated a difference in opinion between himself and the prison medical staff as to the appropriate course of treatment. See Franklin v. Oregon, 662 F.2d 1337, 1344 (9th Cir.1981). To the extent Stewart alleged that charging him for the prescription sun glasses evidenced deliberate indifference, summary judgment was proper because it is undisputed that Stewart received the tinted glasses he requested. See Shapley v. Nevada Bd. of State Prison Com’rs, 766 F.2d 404, 408 (9th Cir.1985) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). The district court properly granted summary Options: A. holding that charging fees for medical services did not violate the eighth amendment where prisoner did not allege denial of medical care B. holding that where the victim of a tortfeasor receives gratuitous medical services from a source wholly independent of the tortfeasor the value of the gratuitous medical services may not be deducted from the verdict for overall medical care received C. holding frequent transfers did not amount to denial of medical care D. holding that state medical director of prison medical services corporation was not final policymaker E. recognizing that even when a prisoner files suit under section 1983 alleging medical malpractice against prison medical officials medical malpractice does not become a constitutional violation merely because the victim is a prisoner

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that charging fees for medical services did not violate the eighth amendment where prisoner did not allege denial of medical care
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: subscriber acknowledges that 9gag , inc has no control over , and no duty to take any action regarding : which users gains access to the site ; which content subscriber accesses via the site ; what effects the content may have on subscriber ; how subscriber may interpret or use the content ; or what actions subscriber may take as a result of having been exposed to the content .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notices hereunder must be in writing, delivered personally or sent by registered or certified U.S. mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid. Notices to the Company must be addressed to CommScope Holding Company, Inc., 1100 CommScope Place, SE, Hickory, North Carolina 28602, Attn: Corporate Secretary, or any other address designated by the Company in a written notice to Grantee. Notices to Grantee will be directed to the address of Grantee then currently on file with the Company, or at any other address given by Grantee in a written notice to the Company.

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: Gen. Laws § 21—28—4.01(c)(2)(iii). Based on this change, the Defendant argues that law enforcement officers should be precluded from considering the smell of marijuana when determining if reasonable suspicion exists. (Def.’s Mot. to Suppress 16-17.) The Defendant cites to a case from the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for support. (Id. at 19-20.) For starters, and to state the obvious, the decisions of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts do not bind this Court, particularly when there is a First Circuit case that is controlling on this issue. Moreover, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts declined to adopt the same rule as the state court, citing Staula. See United States v. Thompson, No. 12-10365, 2014 WL 108312, at *3 (D. Mass. Jan. 13, 2014) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, although it too would not be Options: A. holding that the odor of marijuana is still a relevant factor in the totality of the circumstances analysis B. holding that the level of detail in testimony is a relevant factor in the totality of the circumstances test of credibility employed by immigration judges C. holding that the government bears the burden of proving voluntary consent under the totality of the circumstances D. holding reasonable suspicion is based on totality of circumstances E. holding that the reasonableness inquiry is based upon the totality of the circumstances in determining whether or not a search was reasonable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the odor of marijuana is still a relevant factor in the totality of the circumstances analysis
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in two counterparts, and by the different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when executed shall be deemed to be an original but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: S.Ct. 2727, 41 L.Ed.2d 842 (1974), which involved the conduct of sewing a peace symbol onto an American flag, the Court devised a two-part test 'for determining whether conduct has risen to the level of protected expression under the First Amendment. The test asks (1) whether the actor intended to convey a particularized message; and (2) whether the conduct was likely to be understood as communication by the observers, given the surrounding circumstances. See id. at 410-11, 94 S.Ct. 2727. Applying the Spence test here, the plaintiffs’ free speech claim fails. The plaintiffs have not presented evidence to indicate that by attending and cheering at the game, they intended to communicate a particularized message that o y School District, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S.Ct. 733, 21 L.Ed.2d 731 (1969) (<HOLDING>); Aubrey v. Cincinnati, 815 F.Supp. 1100 Options: A. holding that students action wearing black armbands was expressive conduct entitled to first amendment protection B. holding that a school may not prohibit expressive activity unless there are facts which might reasonably have led school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities C. holding that wearing black armband to school to protest vietnam war was expressive conduct D. holding that participating in community service is not expressive conduct E. holding that a public school may not without evidence of substantial disruption punish students for wearing armbands protesting the vietnam war

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that wearing black armband to school to protest vietnam war was expressive conduct