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: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, including any claimed breach of the Agreement, or any other dispute between the Parties of any nature, shall be brought on the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County, Florida, this Court being the sole, exclusive, and mandatory venue and jurisdiction for any disputes between the Parties arising from or relating to this Agreement. If any action is filed, by any Party, relating to a breach of this Agreement and/or enforcement of this Agreement, Executive expressly agrees and consents to jurisdiction in the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County, Florida and waives any claim that the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County, Florida is an inconvenient forum. Should either Party file an action to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action shall be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in bringing such action, in addition to any other remedies available in law or in equity.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Guarantor hereby waive promptness, diligence, notice of acceptance and any other notice with respect to any of the Obligations and this Guaranty and any requirement that the Holders or exhaust any right or take any action against Borrower or any other Guarantor, person or entity or any collateral. Guarantor acknowledge that it will receive direct and indirect benefits from the SEA and financing arrangements contemplated herein and that the waiver set forth in this Section 3.3 is knowingly made in contemplation of such benefits. Guarantor hereby waives any right to revoke this Guaranty and acknowledge that this Guaranty is continuing in nature and applies to all Obligations, whether existing now or in the future.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: yahoo reserves the right at any time and from time to time to modify or discontinue , temporarily or permanently , the yahoo services ( or any part thereof ) with or without notice .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Upon or in connection with any payment in respect of the Award, the Corporation shall first deduct from any cash portion of such payment the full amount of any taxes which the Corporation may be required to withhold with respect to such payment, and to the extent the aggregate cash portion of such payment is in sufficient to satisfy the Corporation’s applicable withholding obligations, the Corporation shall then automatically reduce the number of any shares of Common Stock to be delivered in payment by (or otherwise reacquire) the appropriate number of whole shares, valued at their then fair market value (as determined under the Plan), to satisfy any remaining withholding obligations of the Corporation with respect to such payment, at the applicable withholding rates. In the event that the Corporation cannot legally satisfy such withholding obligations by reduction of shares, or in the event that the withholding procedure described in the preceding sentence is insufficient to satisfy the Corporation’s applicable withholding obligations with respect to any payment under the Award, the Corporation shall be entitled to require a cash payment by or on behalf of the Participant and/or to deduct from other compensation payable to the Participant any sums required by federal, state or local law to be withheld with respect to such payment. The Participant agrees to take any further actions and execute any additional documents as may be necessary to effectuate the provisions of this Section 9.

assistant: Withholdings
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 extent required by law, the Company shall withhold or cause to be withheld income and other taxes incurred by the Recipient by reason of a grant of Shares, and the Recipient agrees that he or she shall upon the request of the Company pay to the Company an amount sufficient to satisfy its tax withholding obligations from time to time (including as Shares become vested).

assistant: Tax Withholdings
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: libel, or slander), real estate, goods and chattels, and other property may, in the manner and to the extent provided by law and by this rule, be attached and held to satisfy any judgment for damages and costs which the plaintiff may recover.” V.R.C.R 4.1(a) (emphasis added). The phrase “to the extent provided by law” implicitly limits the availability of attachment to the scope defined by laws external to the rule — including our common law. ¶ 11. This Court has long held that “[t]he estate of the wife and the husband’s interest in her tenancy by the entirety, if validly created, is protected from the husband’s sole creditors.” Rose v. Morrell, 128 Vt. 110, 112, 259 A.2d 8, 10 (1969); see also Bellows Falls Trust Co. v. Gibbs, 148 Vt. 633, 633, 534 A.2d 210, 211 (1987) (mem.) (<HOLDING>); Lowell v. Lowell, 138 Vt. 514, 515-16, 419 Options: A. holding that neither spouse has a share of tenancy by entirety property which can be disposed of or encumbered without the joinder of the other spouse B. holding that when a spouse has given separate property to the marital community section 2640 preserves to the contributing spouse the equity value of his or her separate property contribution unless that retained interest is waived C. holding that absent an actionable injury to one spouse the other spouse cannot recover for loss of consortium D. holding that a spouse is not necessarily an agent of the debtor E. holding that spouse could not claim exemption in property that was only property of other spouses estate

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that neither spouse has a share of tenancy by entirety property which can be disposed of or encumbered without the joinder of the other spouse
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the Closing Date, the Parent Borrower and its Subsidiaries are, on a consolidated basis, and after giving effect to the Transactions and the incurrence of all Indebtedness and obligations being incurred in connection herewith and therewith, Solvent.

assistant: Solvency
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 amendment or waiver of any provision of this Agreement or the Notes, nor consent to any departure by the Borrower therefrom, shall in any event be effective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by the Borrower and the Required Lenders, and then such waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which given; provided, however, that no amendment, waiver or consent shall, unless in writing and signed by the Borrower and each Lender affected thereby, do any of the following: (a) waive any of the conditions specified in Section 3.01, (b) increase the Commitments of the Lenders (other than as provided in Sections 2.18 or 2.19, provided that, any increase in the aggregate Revolving Credit Commitments in excess of $1,500,000,000 will require the consent of all of the Lenders), (c) reduce the principal of, or interest on, the Advances or any fees or, to the extent then accrued, other amounts payable hereunder, (d) postpone any date fixed for any payment of principal of, or interest on, the Advances or any fees or, to the extent then accrued, other amounts payable hereunder (other than as provided in Section 2.18), (e) change the definition of “Required Lenders” or the percentage of the Revolving Credit Commitments, the aggregate Available Amount of outstanding Letters of Credit or of the aggregate unpaid principal amount of the Advances, or the number of Lenders, that shall be required for the Lenders or any of them to take any action hereunder, (f) alter the manner in which payment or prepayments of principal, interest or other amounts hereunder shall be applied as among the Lenders or (g) amend this Section 8.01; and provided further that no amendment, waiver or consent shall, unless in writing and signed by the Agent in addition to the Lenders required above to take such action, affect the rights or duties of the Agent under this Agreement or any Note; and provided further that no amendment, waiver or consent shall, unless in writing and signed by the Issuing Banks in addition to the Lenders required above to take such action, adversely affect the rights or obligations of the Issuing Banks under this Agreement.

assistant: Amendments
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 exhaustion and also speaks to the facts of this case: “The case brief must present all arguments that continue in the submitter’s view to be relevant to the... final results, including any arguments presented before the date of publication of the ... preliminary results.” 19 C.F.R. § 351.309(c)(2) (2004) (emphasis added). Although Plaintiff advocated against collapsing in its two submissions prior to the preliminary results, Commerce concluded otherwise. At that point, if Plaintiff believed that the collapsing issue was relevant to the Final Results, Plaintiff needed to include that issue in its case brief, as required by the regulation. Commerce would then have known that Plaintiff had not waived the issue. See Corus Staal BV v. United States, 30 CIT_,_, Slip. Op. 06-112, at p. 16 (<HOLDING>). In its briefs before this court, Plaintiff Options: A. holding that plaintiff could not look to the courts for relief because he did not exhaust his administrative remedies under the adea B. holding that bivens plaintiff was not required to exhaust administrative remedies where administrative remedy program provided only for injunctive relief C. holding that a plaintiff need not exhaust his administrative remedies to bring a retaliation claim D. holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies where plaintiff sent a letter to the attorney general grieving the initial agency determination instead of following the administrative appeal process specified by agency regulations E. holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies by failing to include issue in case brief

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies by failing to include issue in case brief
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 money, funds, or other assets from the financial institution. United States v. Christo, 129 F.3d 578, 580 (11th Cir.1997) (citing United States v. Mancuso, 42 F.3d 836, 847 (4th Cir.1994)). Any conduct charged in the indictment which may have placed the bank at a financial risk occurred prior to June 19, 1987. Once Anderson had control of the money, the scheme ended. Otherwise, under the government’s theory, the scheme could continue as long as Anderson maintained control of the money, thus defeating the purpose of criminal statutes of limitations. So long as she did not take part in any additional conduct that would have placed the bank at a separate, distinguishable risk, the statute of limitations continues to run. Cf. United States v. Meador, 138 F.3d 986, 994 (5th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). The conduct on which the government hangs its Options: A. holding that the legislature never intended for the dismissal and renewal statutes to overcome the statute of repose B. holding that criminal statutes of limitation should be construed in favor of the accused C. recognizing risks in construing statutes of limitations in favor of repose D. holding that statute of repose was not subject to toiling provision applicable to statute of limitations because among other reasons it would ignore fundamental distinctions between ordinary statutes of limitations and statutes of repose E. holding that provision has the characteristics of a statute of repose

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing risks in construing statutes of limitations in favor of repose
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower’s use of the proceeds of the Commitment shall be solely for working capital and other general corporate purposes of Parent and its Subsidiaries and for Acquisitions and the repayment of existing Indebtedness. Borrower will not, directly or indirectly, use the proceeds of the Loans, or lend, contribute or otherwise make available such proceeds to any Subsidiary, joint venture partner or other Person, (a) to fund activities or business of or with any Person, or in any country or territory, in each case that, at the time of such funding, is, or whose government is, the subject of Sanctions, or (b) in furtherance of an offer, promise to pay, or the authorization thereof, or any other offering of value, to any Person in violation of any Anti-Corruption Laws.

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: Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 1 of the SHA, for so long as the SHA shall remain in effect, the Board of Trustees may appoint from among its members one or more committees, composed of one or more Trustees, to serve at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

assistant: Qualifications
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: at 6) (citing Rybarczyk, 235 F.3d at 986; EEOC v. Wooster Brush Co. Emps. Relief Ass’n, 727 F.2d 566, 579 (6th Cir.1984); Lorenzen v. Emps. Ret. Plan of Sperry & Hutchinson Co., 896 F.2d 228, 236-37 (7th Cir.1990)); Katsaros v. Cody, 744 F.2d 270, 281 (2d Cir.1984). COOK, Circuit Judge, joined by MOORE, Circuit Judge. Though we concur with Judge Gwin’s conclusions with respect to the statute-of-limitations, ICCTA-retroactivity, and prejudgment-interest issues, we write separately on the issue of damages. Courts speak through judgments, and the judgment appealed here represents Comerica’s first adverse judgment as opposed to “calculation” or “finding” as referenced by the dissent on damages. See California v. Rooney, 483 U.S. 307, 311, 107 S.Ct. 2852, 97 L.Ed.2d 258 (1987) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Further, the district court incorrectly held Options: A. recognizing that our courts will normally not enforce foreign tax judgments B. holding that judgments rendered by courts not having authority to enter such are not subject to collateral attack because judges entering those judgments were de facto officers C. holding that the discovery rule does not apply to bill of review claims to set aside probate judgments D. recognizing that judgments of arizona courts on foreign judgments will not be conclusive in the jurisdiction of origin E. holding that courts review judgments not statements in opinions

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that courts review judgments not statements in opinions
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: compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a) (emphasis added). Citing this language, we have extended Title VII to situations where a defendant has interfered with an individual’s employment relationship with a third party. See Pardazi v. Cullman Med. Ctr., 838 F.2d 1155, 1156 (11th Cir. 1988) (concluding that Title VII covered a doctor’s claim that a hospital discriminated against him in denying him privileges which interfered with his employment at a separate corporation). Thus, Scott’s Charge of Discrimination against the Hospital — even if ultimately unsuccessful at trial — was cognizable under Title VII, so filing it was certainly a protected activity. See Rollins v. State of Fla. Dep’t of Law Enforcement, 868 F.2d 397, 400 (11th Cir. 1989) (<HOLDING>). We also conclude that Scott established a Options: A. holding that an employee seeking the protection of the opposition clause must demonstrate a good faith reasonable belief that the challenged practice violates title vii B. recognizing that title vii protects individuals from retaliation regardless of the merit of their complaints so long as they can show a good faith reasonable belief that the challenged practices violate title vii C. holding that relief granted under title vii is against the employer not individual employees whose actions constituted a violation of title vii emphasis in original D. holding that title vii protects an employees spouse from retaliation even though thirdparty claims are beyond the literal language of the statute E. holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that title vii protects individuals from retaliation regardless of the merit of their complaints so long as they can show a good faith reasonable belief that the challenged practices violate title vii
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, together with the agreements and Exhibits referenced herein, constitutes the entire agreement, and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings, negotiations and statements, both written and oral, among the Parties or any of their Affiliates with respect to the subject matter contained herein except for such other agreements as are referenced herein which shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with their terms. Other than as provided herein, this Agreement shall not be assigned without the prior consent of the Parties hereto.

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: Law,, the Wetlands Law was passed at a time when there was intense focus.on the proposed rabbinical college but when no studies or analysis had been conducted of the needs, or nature, of wetlands in the Village. The juxtaposition of these facts supports Plaintiffs’ claim that Defendants adopted the Wetlands Law as a pre-textual means to unlawfully target Plaintiffs’ land use-plans for the Subject Property. Second, in addition to some of the suggestive comments described above, a number of arguably discriminatory comments made by Village officials and community members prior to the passage of the Challenged Laws suggest animus towards the Hasidic Jewish community. See Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim Radin Inc. v. Vill. of New Hempstead by its Bd. of Tr., 98 F.Supp.2d 347, 355 (S.D.N.Y.2000) (<HOLDING>). These statements are undisputed as described Options: A. holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony B. holding that discriminatory comments by the mayor present grounds for allowing a jury to judge the credibility and motivation of the mjayor as well as the motivation that can be attributed to the vjillage itself in passing the disputed provisions C. holding that the postconviction court is the sole judge of the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses D. recognizing that although the question of the credibility of witnesses is one for the jury alone such rule does not mean that the jury is at liberty under the guise of passing upon the credibility of a witness to disregard his testimony when from no reasonable point of view is it open to doubt E. holding jury as judge of credibility may believe all some or none of the testimony

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that discriminatory comments by the mayor present grounds for allowing a jury to judge the credibility and motivation of the mjayor as well as the motivation that can be attributed to the vjillage itself in passing the disputed provisions
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: risk of harm. The depressions in the walkway had been there since it was constructed more than eighteen years ago. Yet, there was no evidence of other falls attributable to this condition. Nor was there evidence of any complaints about this condition. Dietz argues that her own deposition testimony regarding the circumstances of her fall, while not conclusive evidence, constitutes sufficient evidence of the unreasonable risk of harm to defeat summary judgment. We disagree. Standing alone, Dietz’s testimony does no more than create a mere surmise or suspicion of an unreasonable risk of harm. We conclude Dietz failed to bring forth evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding the existence of a condition posing an unreasonable risk of harm. See Brinson, 228 S.W.3d at 163 (<HOLDING>). We, therefore, hold the trial court properly Options: A. holding evidence insufficient to support conviction for possession when none of the defendants had any proprietary interest nor previous association with the premises and there was no evidence of how long the defendants had been on the premises prior to the arrival of the police B. holding evidence insufficient to support conviction when none of the defendants had any proprietary interest nor previous association with the premises and there was no evidence of how long the defendants had been on the premises prior to the arrival of the police C. holding premises owner had no duty to protect when the risk the police officer was subjected to was one inherent in that occupation D. holding that negligence in premises defect context generally means failure to use ordinary care to reduce or eliminate unreasonable risk of harm created by premises condition about which owner or occupier of land is aware E. holding the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the premises owner when the evidence showed no one had been injured by the condition in question and the premises owner had received no complaints about the condition in question during a tenyear period

assistant: The best answer is E. holding the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the premises owner when the evidence showed no one had been injured by the condition in question and the premises owner had received no complaints about the condition in question during a tenyear period
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: support under section 14.05(a) must have been filed before the children reached eighteen years of age. Otherwise, relator argues, the 303rd Court did not have jurisdiction to consider the motion or sign the order extending the child support, and, therefore, the order is void. Relator cites Red v. Red, 552 S.W.2d 90, 92 (Tex.1977), in which the supreme court held that modification of a divorce decree to include payments for a child who requires continuous care and personal supervision because of a mental or physical disability and who is not able to support himself must be sought before the child turns eighteen. Thereafter, the court held, there is no pending order subject to modification. See also Attaway v. Attaway, 704 S.W.2d 492, 494-95 (Tex.App. — Corpus Christi 1986, no writ) (<HOLDING>). Red and Attaway, however, dealt with Options: A. recognizing that nonparent standing turns on the quality of the relationship between the nonparent and the child B. holding that a judgment for attorneys fees may be rendered in the nature of child support regardless of whether the underlying action is one of enforcement or modification C. holding that the modification order itself must be signed before the child turns eighteen D. holding that the order on the wifes petition for modification of child support was a final order because it disposed of all the issues except for the ancillary issue of attorneys fees E. holding that jurisdiction existed to enforce a consent order issued by the department despite a pending appeal before the board seeking modification

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the modification order itself must be signed before the child turns eighteen
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: 885 F.2d 1305, 1312 (7th Cir.1989). Thus, the court will deny defendants’ motion to dismiss COUNT II of plaintiffs complaint for failure to exhaust remedies. Similarly, Ms. Carter did not even hint "in .her EEOC charge that she was harassed based on race (COUNT V); nor did she amend her EEOC charge to indicate that she reapplied for a job with RUS and was discriminatorily denied a position (COUNT III). Such harassment and discriminatory failure to rehire allegations are not reasonably related to a charge of discriminatory termination. See, e.g., Miller v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 755 F.2d 20 (2nd Cir.1985) (failure to rehire claim dismissed because not reasonably within scope of discriminatory termination EEOC charge); Oxman v. WLS-TV, 12 F.3d 652, 660 (7th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Rush v. McDonald’s Corp., 966 F.2d 1104, Options: A. holding that discriminatory failure to rehire and termination are not reasonably related B. holding that retaliation claim was reasonably related to prior sex discrimination claim C. holding that a failure to accommodate claim is separate and distinct from a claim of discriminatory treatment under the ada and pointing out that a failure to accommodate claim and a claim of discriminatory treatment under the ada are not like or reasonably related to one another and one cannot expect a failure to accommodate claim to develop from an investigation into a claim that an employee was terminated because of a disability D. holding that plaintiffs claims of discriminatory demotion and termination as set forth in eeoc charge were not like or related to his claims of harassment by another individual E. holding that an atwill employee may sue under 1981 for racially discriminatory termination

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that discriminatory failure to rehire and termination are not reasonably related
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 Plan, the Grant Notice and this Agreement (including all Exhibits thereto, if any) constitute the entire agreement of the parties and supersede in their entirety all prior undertakings and agreements of the Company and its affiliates and Holder 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: on the remaining counts based on a higher base offense level than used in the original sentence after concluding that there was an error in the original sentencing. Smith, 103 F.3d at 535. Several courts considering resentencing after § 924(c) vacatur have reopened the sentences on the remaining counts and required consideration of not only changes which would increase the remaining sentence, but of the prisoner’s new arguments for decreases in his sentence as well. See Easterling, 157 F.3d at 1225 (on resentencing, district court required to consider whether defendant should receive three-level downward departure for acceptance of responsibility available under current guidelines rather than two-level departure he originally received); United States v. Core, 125 F.3d 74 (2d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); Reyes v. United States, 944 F.Supp. 260 Options: A. holding that the district court may consider evidence of a defendants postsentence rehabilitation and that such evidence may support a downward variance from the federal sentencing guidelines B. holding that resentencing should consider all sentencing arguments and remanding for court to consider defendants argument for downward departure based on postconviction rehabilitation C. holding that when a defendants sentence has been set aside on appeal a trial court at resentencing may consider evidence of the defendants postsentencing rehabilitation D. holding district courts may consider rehabilitation when deciding whether to impose a more lenient sentence at a defendants resentencing E. holding that the district court had the discretion to grant a downward departure for postsentence rehabilitation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that resentencing should consider all sentencing arguments and remanding for court to consider defendants argument for downward departure based on postconviction rehabilitation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any payment to any Participant or Beneficiary in accordance with the provisions of the Plan shall, to the extent thereof, be in full satisfaction of all claims against the Company, the Committee, the Plan Administrator and the trustee of the Trust under the Plan, and the Committee may require such Participant or Beneficiary, as a condition precedent to such payment pursuant to the Plan, to execute a receipt and release to such effect on or before the date on which the payment is payable pursuant to this Plan.

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: This Agreement and the exhibits and schedules attached hereto constitute the entire agreement and understanding between the parties hereto in respect of the subject matter hereof and supersede any prior or contemporaneous agreements or understandings between the parties, written or oral, which relate to the subject matter hereof but specifically excluding any confidentiality agreements entered into between the parties or their affiliates. Amendments to this Agreement may only be made in writing and executed by Purchaser and Seller.

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: against AirTouch; it merely reached a different conclusion based on different factors. The City has demonstrated the absence of a material issue of fact on this point. 3. Does the City’s Decision Prohibit or Have the Effect of Prohibiting the Provision of Personal Wireless Services? Section 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II) mandates that, in regulating personal wireless service facilities, the government’s decision may not “prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services.” 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II) (Supp hat “local zoning policies and decisions have the effect of prohibiting wireless services if they result in ‘significant gaps’ in the availability of wireless services”). The City’s position was adopted by the Fourth Circuit. See Virginia Beach, 155 F.3d at 428 (<HOLDING>). The Court agrees with the weight of circuit Options: A. holding that state bans on samesex marriage are unconstitutional B. holding that 332c7b iii does not apply only to general bans and stating that prohibiting only general bans would 1 require a court to wait for a series of denied applications and 2 lead to the untenable result that once personal wire services are available within the jurisdiction of a state or local government the state or local government could deny any further applications with impunity C. holding that cue review applies only to prior final decisions of agencies of original jurisdiction ros and not to prior decisions of the board D. holding that 332c7biii applies only to blanket prohibitions and general bans or policies and not to individual zoning decisions E. holding that teague applies only to procedural rules and not to decisions of the supreme court deciding the meaning of criminal statutes

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that 332c7biii applies only to blanket prohibitions and general bans or policies and not to individual zoning decisions
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 and performance by the Company of its obligations under the Transaction Documents, including the issuance to the Investors of the Subscription Shares upon subscription therefor, and the compliance by each of the Company’s Subsidiaries with the provisions of the Policy Agreement, do not (assuming all the Authorizations referred to in Section 3.01(d) ( Status of Authorizations ) of the Company Disclosure Letter have been obtained): (i) conflict with or result in a breach of any of the terms, conditions or provisions of, or constitute a default, or require any consent under, any indenture, mortgage, agreement or other instrument or arrangement to which the Company or any Subsidiary is a party or by which the Company or any Subsidiary is bound; (ii) violate any of the terms or provisions of the Company’s Charter or the respective constitutional documents of any Subsidiary, as applicable; or (iii) violate any Authorization, judgment, decree or order or any statute, law, rule, regulation or requirement applicable to the Company or any Subsidiary.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To comply in all material respects with the laws (including any fictitious or trade name statute), regulations, and orders of any government body with authority over such Borrower’s business, except in such instances in which (a) any such law, regulation or order is being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings diligently conducted; or (b) the failure to comply therewith would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the second hearing, the child’s guardian ad litem asked the court to clarify whether that proceeding was an action under the dependency statute. The trial court responded by saying, “I looked back through the file. There is nothing that does indicate that this is a dependency case.” In its June 7, 2001, judgment, the trial court did not make a finding that the child was dependent, and the language of that judgment indicates that the trial court determined that this action was not governed by § 12-15-1 et seq., Ala.Code 1975. After carefully reviewing the evidence in the record on appeal, we agree with the trial court that this case is a custody dispute and that it did not fall within the scope of the dependency statute. See S.T.S. v. C.T., 746 So.2d 1017, 1020 (Ala.Civ.App.1999) (<HOLDING>). The mother correctly contends that because Options: A. holding that under the facts of that case the action primarily involved a custody dispute and therefore that the trial court erred in determining the case by applying the dependency statute B. holding that for all intents and purposes the instant case is the same action that was brought previously we therefore find the application of the doctrine of the law of the case to be appropriate C. holding that there was no probable cause to arrest the plaintiff because the facts of the case amounted to a contract dispute D. holding that reinstatement in an age discrimination case lies within the discretion of the trial court after careful consideration of the particular facts of the case E. holding that where trial court erred in applying established law to the facts of the case it must be reversed and remanded for a new hearing to give the trial court an opportunity to address the issue

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that under the facts of that case the action primarily involved a custody dispute and therefore that the trial court erred in determining the case by applying the dependency statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: may include in the appeal the purely legal issues that were argued unsuccessfully in the motion for summary judgment, and the appellant need not have renewed that legal issue during trial to preserve it. See Johnson v. Alaska State Dep’t of Fish & Game, 836 P.2d 896, 904 n. 11 (Alaska 1991) (“Denials of summary judgment also may be reviewable on appeal when final judgment in a case comes after trial, but only if the facts applicable to the summary judgment ruling were not in dispute and the basis of the ruling is a matter of law.”); Bureau of Highways, Ky. v. Leneave, 751 S.W.2d 36, 37 (Ky.Ct.App.1988) (relying on Gumm v. Combs, 302 S.W.2d 616, 617 (Ky.1957)); Presbyterian Univ. Hosp. v. Wilson, 99 Md. App. 305, 637 A.2d 486, 490-91 (1994), affd, 337 Md. 541, 654 A.2d 1324 (1995) (<HOLDING>); DeJonge v. Mutual of Enumclaw, 104 Or.App. Options: A. holding a ruling on a motion for summary judgment adjudicating the rights of a party is a final judgment subject to appeal B. holding that we will not review under any standard the pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment after a full trial and final judgment on the merits C. holding that pure issue of law is preserved by motion for summary judgment and is reviewable after final judgment D. holding that the courts denial of either a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment is not a final judgment and is not reviewable E. holding the denial of a motion for summary judgment on an issue which is later submitted to the jury is not reviewable

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that pure issue of law is preserved by motion for summary judgment and is reviewable after final 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms of this Agreement, (i) the Company is authorized to issue equity interests in the Company designated as “LLC Interests,” which shall constitute limited liability company interests under the Act and shall include initially Common Interests and Series A Preferred Interests and (ii) the Manager is expressly authorized, by resolution or resolutions, to create and to issue, out of authorized but unissued LLC Interests, different classes, groups or series of LLC Interests and fix for each such class, group or series such voting powers, full or limited or no voting powers, and such distinctive designations, preferences and relative participating, optional or other special rights and qualifications, limitations or restrictions as determined by the Manager. The Manager shall have the authority to issue such number of LLC Interests of any class, series or tranche pursuant to clauses (i) and (ii) of the immediately preceding sentence as the Manager shall from time to time determine. Other than as set forth in this Agreement, or in the instruments governing the terms of the LLC Interests issued pursuant to clause (ii), each LLC Interest shall be identical in all respects with each other LLC Interest.

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: No interest of any Participant, spouse or Beneficiary under this Plan and no benefit payable hereunder shall be assigned as security for a loan, and any such purported assignment shall be null, void and of no effect, nor shall any such interest or any such benefit be subject in any manner, either voluntarily or involuntarily, to anticipation, sale, transfer, assignment or encumbrance by or through any Participant, spouse or Beneficiary. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, however, the Committee has the discretion to make payments to an alternate payee in accordance with the terms of a domestic relations order (as defined in Code Section 414(p)(1)(B)).

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: The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed severable and the invalidity or unenforceability of any provision shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the other provisions of this Agreement. If any provision of this Agreement, or the application of that provision to any Person or any circumstance, is invalid or unenforceable, then (a) a suitable and equitable provision shall be substituted for that provision in order to carry out, so far as may be valid and enforceable, the intent and purpose of the invalid or unenforceable provision and (b) the remainder of this Agreement and the application of that provision to other Persons or circumstances shall not be affected by such invalidity or unenforceability, nor shall such invalidity or unenforceability affect the validity or enforceability of that provision, or the application of that provision, in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. The terms and provisions of this Agreement are intended solely for the benefit of the IASIS Parties, the MPT Parties, their Affiliates and their respective permitted successors or assigns, and it is not the intention of the parties to confer, and this Agreement shall not confer, third-party beneficiary rights upon any other person other than any Non-Recourse Party with respect to Section 10.16 hereof, provided that the Financing Sources shall be third party beneficiaries of Sections 7.2(b) , 10.7 , 10.8(d) , 10.11 , 10.14 and 10.16 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: grant which is subsequently stolen. Immediately following its description of this scenario, the Smith court observes that “its theft would not then be within the reach of 18 U.S.C. § 641.” Smith, 596 F.2d at 664. Unlike the scenario of an outright recipient who rightfully receives federal funds outright and has monies stolen after first obtaining possession, this case involves a situation where the government’s interest never ceased due to the erroneous nature of the disbursement. See United States v. Miller, 520 F.2d at 1210. The existence of a statutory mechanism for recovery of erroneous funds, 26 U.S.C. § 7405, underscores the continuing and strong federal interest in recovering the erroneous disbursement. See, e.g., United States v. Carr, 706 F.2d 1108, 1109-11 (11th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). But, the fundamental error in the majority’s Options: A. recognizing that taxpayers are not entitled to interest on cash bonds B. recognizing that in 1998 the legislature repealed a previous version of the statute and enacted two statutes in replacement C. recognizing that statutes and regulations concerning their issuance and replacement reveal a strong federal proprietary interest in stolen savings bonds D. recognizing strong public interest in maintaining confidentiality of official records concerning child abuse E. holding that a challenge by taxpayers and property owners to the issuance of municipal bonds was barred by a judgment entered in a prior action

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that statutes and regulations concerning their issuance and replacement reveal a strong federal proprietary interest in stolen savings bonds