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: strengths and weaknesses of the proposed settlement.” Girsh, 521 F.2d at 157. We later explained in Community Bank that our finding regarding objector discovery in Girsh "was predicated on the total inadequacy of the record upon which the settlement was approved,” as well as the fact that the objector was denied meaningful participation at the fairness hearing. Cmty. Bank, 418 F.3d at 316. We concluded, therefore, that “Girsh cannot stand for the proposition that, as a general matter, objectors have an absolute right to discovery.” Id. "On the other hand, we [have] recognized that discovery may be appropriate if lead counsel has not conducted adequate discovery or if the discovery conducted by lead counsel is not made available to objectors.” Id.; see also Prudential, 148 F.3d at 325 (<HOLDING>). Here, because we will remand for further Options: A. holding that district court did not abuse its discretion by denying motion to extend discovery where no effort was made to explain why the requested discovery could not have taken place within the original discovery period B. holding the district court acted well within its discretion in denying an objectors request for discovery where the objector was able to present his arguments to the court during the fairness hearing and where the court found the objector had ample opportunity to avail himself of the substantial discovery provided to lead counsel but failed to do so and that additional discovery was unnecessary because the objector focused primarily on legal issues C. holding that it was within the trial courts discretion to refuse any additional discovery and that the courts refusal to allow additional discovery was not an abuse of discretion D. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a rule 56f motion for a continuance where the movant had ample time in which to pursue the discovery that it now claims is essential E. holding that a discovery exception to a statute of limitation applies only to the discovery of facts not discovery of the law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding the district court acted well within its discretion in denying an objectors request for discovery where the objector was able to present his arguments to the court during the fairness hearing and where the court found the objector had ample opportunity to avail himself of the substantial discovery provided to lead counsel but failed to do so and that additional discovery was unnecessary because the objector focused primarily on legal issues
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive agrees not to engage at any time in any form of conduct or make any statements or representations, or direct any other person or entity to engage in any conduct or make any statements or representations, that disparage, criticize or otherwise impair the reputation of the Company, its affiliates, parents and subsidiaries and their respective past and present officers, directors, stockholders, partners, members, agents and employees. Nothing contained in this Section 6.3 shall preclude Executive from providing truthful testimony or statements pursuant to subpoena or other legal process or in response to inquiries from any government agency or entity.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to be heard on the motion have been misled but also show that correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.” E.D. Mich. Local Rule 7.1(h)(3); see Graham ex rel. Estate of Graham v. Cnty. of Washtenaw, 358 F.3d 377, 385 (6th Cir.2004). Here, the district court found that Moniz “simply is attempting to re-argue [] issues which were already ruled upon by the Court when it dismissed his Complaint,” and thus denied the motion to reconsider. R. 14 (Dist. Ct. Order at 3) (Page ID # 129). This court has stated that a district court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to reconsider where the motion “merely raise[s] arguments that were already ruled upon.” Graham, 358 F.3d at 385; see also Lommen v. McIntyre, 125 Fed.Appx. 655, 659 (6th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). There was no abuse of discretion in the Options: A. holding that the district court did not err by concluding that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for continuance motion to withdraw and motion for reconsideration and rehearing B. holding it was not an abuse of discretion to deny funds C. holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to consider an argument not presented to the board in a motion for reconsideration D. holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to deny a motion for reconsideration where the motion presented nothing new and merely rephrased allegations in the complaint E. holding under third circuit law that the denial of a motion for reconsideration is reviewed for abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to deny a motion for reconsideration where the motion presented nothing new and merely rephrased allegations in the complaint
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: RCW 4.24.550 created an implied duty to warn of the presence of a sex offender. Clerk’s Papers at 316-17. Its conclusion follows inexorably from the plain language of the statute: “Except as may otherwise be provided by law, nothing in this section shall impose any liability upon a public official, public employee, or public agency for failing to release information authorized under this section.” Former RCW 4.24.550(6). Thus, former RCW 4.24.550 neither imposed a duty to warn nor conferred immunity from liability for failure to warn. B. Mason County Had No “Take Charge” Duty To Warn the Osborns ¶ eeable victims of criminals, mental patients, and others leaving its custody. See Petersen, 100 Wn.2d at 428-29. See also Doyle v. United States, 530 F. Supp. 1278, 1288 (C.D. Cal. 1982) (<HOLDING>); Hoff v. Vacaville Unified Sch. Dist., 19 Cal. Options: A. holding that a failure to warn was not a policy judgment B. holding a duty to warn arises only when the potential victim is known and foreseeable C. holding that no duty to warn exists when hazards are known through general knowledge D. holding that common law duty to warn arises when a person being released from custody has made a specific threat of harm directed at a specific individual E. holding all that is required to impose a duty to warn is that the defendant knew or should have known of a specific threat made to harm a specific person

assistant: The best answer is B. holding a duty to warn arises only when the potential victim is known and foreseeable
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: 375 U.S. 22 84 S.Ct. 83 11 L.Ed.2d 43 Eugene F. SHOCKEYv.ILLINOIS. No. 20, Misc. Supreme Court of the United States October 14, 1963 John R. Snively, for petitioner. William G. Clark, Atty. Gen. of Illinois, for respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Illinois. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Illinois for further consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811. 2 Mr. Justice HARLAN, for the reasons stated in Daegele v. Kansas, 375 U.S. 1, 84 S.Ct. 89, would have withheld disposition of this petition for certiorari until the disposition, after argument, of that case.

assistant: 2
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: remedies available to him. Nevertheless, Jacquez-Perez’s petition must fail. In expanding the definition of “aggravated felony,” Congress explicitly stated that the expanded definition “applies regardless of whether the conviction was entered before ... the date of enactment [September 30, 1996],” IIRIRA § 321(b) (codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)), and that the new definition “shall apply to actions taken on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, regardless of when the conviction occurred,” id. § 321(c). See also I.N.S. v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 318-19 & n. 43, 121 S.Ct. 2271, 150 L.Ed.2d 347 (2001) (using these sections as an example of Congress’s unambiguous intent to apply the expanded definition retroactively); Tran v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 937, 941 (6th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Here, the relevant “action taken” is ICE Options: A. recognizing that 1996 amendment to definition of aggravated felony applies retroactively B. holding that the expanded definition of aggravated felony applies retroactively in actions taken on or after september 30 1996 C. recognizing that 1996 amendment specifically applies regardless of date of prior conviction constituting aggravated felony D. holding that 212c applies to all applications for relief filed after november 29 1990 regardless of when conviction occurred for offenses within the original definition of aggravated felony E. holding that an ij or bia decision that occurs after september 30 1996 is an action taken that triggers iiriras aggravated felony rules

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the expanded definition of aggravated felony applies retroactively in actions taken on or after september 30 1996
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: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, up to an aggregate of $2,050,000 in principal amount of the Debentures. Each Purchaser shall deliver to the Company, via wire transfer or a certified check, immediately available funds equal to such Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser, and the Company shall deliver to each Purchaser its respective Debenture and a Warrant, as determined pursuant to Section 2.2(a), and the Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of EGS or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive acknowledges that a violation by Executive of any of the covenants contained in Section 7, 8, 9,10 or 11 would cause irreparable damage to the Company in an amount that would be material but not readily ascertainable, and that any remedy at law (including the payment of damages) would be inadequate. Accordingly, Executive agrees that, notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the Company may be entitled (without the necessity of showing economic loss or other actual damage and without the requirement to post a bond) to injunctive relief (including temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions and/or permanent injunctions) in any court of competent jurisdiction for any actual or threatened breach of any of the covenants set forth in Section 7, 8, 9,10 or 11 in addition to any other legal or equitable remedies it may have. The preceding sentence shall not be construed as a waiver of the rights that the Company may have for damages under this Agreement or otherwise, and all of the Company's rights shall be unrestricted.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at the time of either Mercer’s trial, in 1987, or his direct appeal, in 1989, been held unconstitutional by either New York state or the federal courts. See Victor v. Nebraska, 511 U.S. 1, 5, 114 S.Ct. 1239, 127 L.Ed.2d 583 (1994) (citing Cage, supra, in support of statement that “[i]n only one case have we held that a definition of reasonable doubt violated the Due Process Clause.”). However, whether an accused’s trial counsel has provided effective assistance must be considered based upon the prevailing law at the time of the challenged representation. See Strickland, supra, at 690, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (“strategic choices made after thorough investigation of law and facts relevant to plausible options are virtually unchallengeable”); Jameson v. Coughlin, 22 F.3d 427, 429 (2d Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Javino, 960 F.2d 1137, 1146 Options: A. holding counsels failure to object to victim impact testimony and evidence was not ineffective assistance of counsel when the trial record was silent as to counsels strategy B. holding that counsels appellate strategy was reasonable given relevant new york supreme court appellate division precedents at the time of the appeal as a court must judge the reasonableness of the counsels challenged conduct on the facts ofthe particular case viewed as of the time of counsels conduct and quoting strickland supra at 690 104 sct 2052 C. holding that a fair assessment of attorney performance requires that every effort be made to eliminate the distorting effects of hindsight to reconstruct the circumstances of counsels challenged conduct and to evaluate the conduct from counsels perspective at the time D. recognizing that defendant must show 1 that counsels performance was deficient and 2 that counsels errors prejudiced the defense E. holding that the court of appeals in applying state law on appeal of a diversity action must apply law of the state as it existed at the time of its decision rather than as it stood at the time the case was decided in district court

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that counsels appellate strategy was reasonable given relevant new york supreme court appellate division precedents at the time of the appeal as a court must judge the reasonableness of the counsels challenged conduct on the facts ofthe particular case viewed as of the time of counsels conduct and quoting strickland supra at 690 104 sct 2052
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 Employee shall not at any time, publicly or privately, verbally or in writing, directly or indirectly, make or cause or induce to be made any defaming and/or disparaging, derogatory, misleading or false statement about the Company or its products, or any current or former directors, officers, employees, or agents of the Company, or the business or other related strategy, plans, policies, practices or operations of the Company to any person or entity, including members of the investment community, press, customers, competitors, employees and advisors of the Company. Truthful disclosure to any government agency regarding possible violations of federal law or regulation in accordance with any whistleblower protection provisions of state or federal law or regulation shall not be deemed to violate this paragraph. In the event that the Company believes that the Employee has disparaged the Company, its services, products or any of their current or former affiliates, members, offices, directors, employees or agents, the Company shall notify the Employee of the disparaging remarks and may, in its discretion, request cessation and/or correction of the disparaging remarks, and Employee agrees to meet and confer within five days following receipt of such notification of any disparaging statement. In such meeting, the parties shall use their best efforts to identify a mutually agreeable remedy that will resolve and/or cure any possible harm resulting from the allegedly disparaging statement. If appropriate, the parties shall issue a joint statement that shall cure any disparaging comment.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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 and the other Loan Documents shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby and thereby, except that neither the Borrower nor any other Loan Party may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder or thereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an assignee in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.06(b) , (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.06(d) , or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of Section 10.06(f) (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in Section 10.06(d) and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent, the other Agents, the L/C Issuers and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

assistant: Successors
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 among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings and negotiations, both written and oral among the parties 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is conditioned upon the consent of [the Company,] the Issuing Lenders and the Administrative Agent pursuant to Section 11.06(c) of the Credit Agreement. The execution of this Agreement by each of them is evidence of their consent. Pursuant to Section 11.06(c), the Company agrees, if so requested by the Assignee, to execute and deliver a Note and to cause each Eligible Subsidiary to execute and deliver a Note payable to the order of the Assignee to evidence the assignment and assumption provided for herein.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: one exception, have emphasized the circumscribed scope of the Rule and its limited application to tort litigation. Certain of these cases have considered the type of action being asserted. See, e.g., Temporaries Incorporated v. Krane, 325 Pa.Super. 103, 472 A.2d 668, 674 (1984)(“While we have found no cases dealing with the application of Rule 238 to an action for tortious interference with contract, the rule itself applies only to certain actions and does not encompass every action.”). Virtually all cases emphasize the narrow breadth of the Rule. See Reliance, supra, at 44 (“The penalty may only be imposed, however, in tort cases. The rule makes no provision for recovery of delay damages in contract cases.”); see also Anchorstar v. Mack Trucks, Inc., 533 Pa. 177, 620 A.2d 1120 (1993)(<HOLDING>); Colodonato v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 504 Options: A. holding rule not applicable to claims for loss of consortium and citing reliance supra in support thereof B. holding that a loss of consortium is separate and independent from the primary action C. recognizing loss of consortium claims D. holding that wifes recovery for loss of consortium should not be reduced by the proportion of negligence attributable to husband because claim for loss of consortium is independent of the damages claim of the injured spouse E. recognizing cause of action for loss of consortium

assistant: The best answer is A. holding rule not applicable to claims for loss of consortium and citing reliance supra in support thereof
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: 78 F.3d 397, 399 (8th Cir.1996). Minnesota Mutual argues, however, that our review is foreclosed because Parkhill did not indicate in his notice of appeal that he intended to appeal the district court’s denial of class certification. We agree and conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review the denial. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c)(1)(B) provides that the notice of appeal must “designate the judgment, order, or part thereof being appealed.” When determining whether an appeal from a particular district court action is properly taken, we construe the notice of appeal liberally and permit review where the intent of the appeal is obvious and the adverse party incurs no prejudice. Moore v. Robertson Fire Prot. Dist., 249 F.3d 786, 788 Inc., 153 F.3d 622, 625-26 (8th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); Bosley v. Kearney R-1 Sch. Dist., 140 F.3d Options: A. holding that notice indicating appeal was from judgment on date of jury verdict was insufficient to preserve appeal from earlier order granting summary judgment B. holding that court lacked jurisdiction on appeal from injunction because the order was simply an interpretation of an earlier order C. holding that notice of judgment was insufficient D. holding that notice indicating the appeal was from summary judgment order was insufficient to confer appellate jurisdiction to reach appellants challenge to earlier order compelling arbitration E. holding that an order compelling arbitration in an independent proceeding is appealable as a final order because in that context the order compelling arbitration resolves the sole issue before the court

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that notice indicating the appeal was from summary judgment order was insufficient to confer appellate jurisdiction to reach appellants challenge to earlier order compelling arbitration
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the federal rules, recognized that it was to be “guided by court decisions interpreting these rules.” Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules, 63 Fed.Reg. at 48,084. The majority relies on TBMP § 523.04 which states that where a party “fails to file a motion to challenge the sufficiency of the response [to its discovery request], it may not thereafter be heard to complain about the sufficiency thereof.” It is far from clear whether this provision was designed to deal with the supplementation requirement, or whether it was limited to deal with the failure to provide initial responses. In any event, unlike the regulations, this section of the TBMP does not have the force and effect of law. See In re Pennington Seed, Inc., 466 F.3d 1053, 1059 (Fed.Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). In the past, we have declined to follow Options: A. holding that directive not promulgated according to apa procedure lacks force and effect of law B. holding that the continued use of licensed trademark after termination of franchise agreement constituted trademark infringement and breach of contract C. holding that the trademark manual of examining procedure tmep does not have the force and effect of law D. holding that compliance with registration statute did not abrogate common law and statutory trademark law E. holding that the defendants reference to the plaintiffs trademark in the metatags of the defendants web page was a violation of trademark law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the trademark manual of examining procedure tmep does not have the force and effect of law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to Section 15 of this Agreement, the payment date(s) with respect to all PSUs in which a Participant becomes vested shall be the earlier of (i) the payment date(s) set forth on the Notice or, (ii) in the event Participant becomes vested in the Award pursuant to Section 9.1 of the Plan no later than 60 days following such event.

assistant: Payments
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: viber does not make any representations or warranties as to the security of any information ( including , without limitation , credit card and other personal information ) you might be requested to give any third-party , and you irrevocably waive any claim against us with respect to such sites .

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: Interstate Emerging hereby waives the Claimed Breach and acknowledges that an Event of Default under Section 7.7 of the Credit Agreement as a result of the Company’s acquisition of Ebonex IPR Limited is not continuing.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: copy of any of the 66 Extension Notices, which it claims were generated and mailed to FORD and to FORD’s surety, and the Defendant cannot even produce the computer tapes which allegedly produced the Extension Notices in the subject entries. (Id.) Plaintiff maintains Ford and its surety conducted extensive searches of their records kept in the regular course of business but located no evidence that the notices had ever been received. Ford also argues “[v]arious courts have held that the failure to receive a notice through the mail raises a presumption that it was not mailed” and asserts this presumption shifts the burden back to the Government to prove the fact of mailing. (Pl.’s Br. at 38-39 (citing F.W. Myers & Co., Inc. v. United States, 6 CIT 215, 217, 574 F.Supp. 1064, 1066 (1983) (<HOLDING>)).) Ford concludes the evidence in this case Options: A. holding that nonreceipt of notice of hearing is not irregularity when notice is sent in precise accord with requirements of court rules B. holding affidavit stating we searched our files and were unable to locate any notice of customs service action on this protest and we believe that no notification was sent to us was sufficient to raise the presumption of nonreceipt of notice C. holding that our use of the subjunctive in mentioning an argument in passing suggests that we knew that we were not addressing and that we could not address that argument D. holding that notice of administrative forfeiture sent to prisoner did not require actual notice to the property owner only notice reasonably calculated to apprise a party of the pendency of the action E. holding that the invocation of a presumption of notice requires the agency to prove that the notice was properly addressed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding affidavit stating we searched our files and were unable to locate any notice of customs service action on this protest and we believe that no notification was sent to us was sufficient to raise the presumption of nonreceipt of notice
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No broker, finder, financial advisor or investment banker is entitled to any broker’s, finder’s, financial advisor’s or investment banker’s fee or commission in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement based upon arrangements made by and on behalf of the Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding any reference in this Agreement to an arbitrator or an arbitration proceeding, no party hereto shall be deemed to have agreed to enter into or participate or be bound by any arbitration unless such party separately and specifically so agrees in writing.

assistant: Arbitration
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: FELA applicable to Jones Act cases. See Harrington v. Atl. Sounding Co., Inc., 602 F.3d 113, 120 n. 2 (2d Cir.2010). We rejected this contention in Lindo v. NCL (Bahamas), Ltd., 652 F.3d 1257, 1286-87 (11th Cir.2011), and held that the 2008 amendment did not change the law. Thus, under our prior panel precedent rule, we must conclude that § 6 of the FELA does not apply to Jones Act claims. See United States v. Smith, 122 F.3d 1355, 1359 (11th Cir.1997) (citing Fla. League of Prof'l Lobbyists, Inc. v. Meggs, 87 F.3d 457, 462 (11th Cir.1996)). Finally, Escobal invites us to revisit Bautista v. Star Cruises, 396 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir.2005) and Lindo, 652 F.3d 1257, arguing that these decisions conflict with Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 398 U.S. 306, 90 S.Ct. 1731, 26 L.Ed.2d 252 (1970) (<HOLDING>). We find no conflict between Bautista or Lindo Options: A. holding that the jones act provides an independent basis for subject matter jurisdiction B. holding that injured seamans loss of consortium claim under state law was preempted by jones act C. holding that the jones act did not operate to make negligent crew members liable to their employers for damages paid to other seamen under the jones act because crew members cannot sue each other for negligence D. holding that a usbased company was an employer under the jones act E. holding that jones act claimant against the government must comply with the terms of 2675

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a usbased company was an employer under the jones act
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 amendment to the Plan shall be deemed to be an amendment to this Agreement to the extent that the amendment is applicable hereto; provided, however, that (i) no amendment shall materially adversely affect the rights of Participant under this Agreement without Participant’s written consent, and (ii) Participant’s consent shall not be required to an amendment that is deemed necessary by Corporation to ensure compliance with Section 409A of the Code.

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: amounted to viewpoint discrimination). Our circuit has also applied these principles when announcing that “no arm of government may discriminate against religious speech when speech on other subjects is permitted in the same place at the same time.” Hedges v. Wauconda Community Unit School Dist. No. 118, 9 F.3d 1295, 1297 (7th Cir.1993): The first amendment’s ban on discriminating against religious speech does not depend on whether the school is a “public forum” and, if so, what kind.... Even when the government may forbid a category of speech outright, it may not discriminate on account of the speaker’s viewpoint. Especially not on account of a religious subject matter, which the free exercise clause of the first amendment singles out for protection. Id. at 1298 (citations omitted) (<HOLDING>); see Air Line Pilots Ass’n, Int’l v. Options: A. holding school district violated first amendment when it denied church use of public school facilities to show film series solely because it presented a religious view of family values B. holding that exclusion of religious groups from universitys open forum policy violated the first amendment C. holding that retaliation against a school employee who placed her child in private school violates rights protected under the first amendment and the penumbra of familial privacy rights recognized by the supreme court D. holding that school district policy requiring that students obtain the review and approval of school officials prior to distributing any written material violated free speech rights of students E. holding that school policy prohibiting written material of a religious nature violates the fust amendment

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that school policy prohibiting written material of a religious nature violates the fust amendment
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: 71 F.3d 1447 (9th Cir. 1995). However, Glacier Bay is inapplicable. That case involved a lawsuit against the United States alleging negligence in the preparation of nautical charts. Id. at 1449. The plaintiffs in Glacier Bay attempted to assert that the term “third party” as used in section (h) could include the United States, but the Ninth Circuit rejected the argument based on the plain reading of the statute. Id. at 1455. Thus, the holding is simply not relevant to the claims and arguments presented here. S.J. Louis also cites several eases that uphold an owner or operator’s liability for an oil spill under section 1321(b), even where a third party’s “act or omission was the immediate cause of the spill.” E.g., United States v. Tex-Tow, Inc., 589 F.2d 1310, 1316 (7th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>). The reasoning behind these cases is not Options: A. holding that im proper means may be wrongful by reason of a statute or other regulation or a recognized rule of common law or perhaps an established standard of a trade or profession B. holding defendant liable for penalty notwithstanding fault of a third party C. holding that although compliance with administrative safety regulations did not establish due care it was evidence of due care D. holding that an owner or operator of a discharging facility is liable to a section 1321b6 civil penalty even where it exercised all due care and a third partys act or omission was the im mediate cause of the spill E. holding that exceptions such as the act or omission of a third party to strict liability under section 13385 of californias water code are affirmative defenses

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an owner or operator of a discharging facility is liable to a section 1321b6 civil penalty even where it exercised all due care and a third partys act or omission was the im mediate cause of the spill
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: 274, 99 S.Ct. 2282, 2293-94, 60 L.Ed.2d 870 (1979). To prevail on a sex discrimination claim, a plaintiff must show that the state discriminated against her because of her sex. Id. at 279, 99 S.Ct. at 2296. Both the district court and the dissent make the erroneous assumption that any inferior programs that NCW inmates receive are necessarily a result of intentional sex discrimination. Indeed, the district court made no findings on whether the plaintiffs carried their burden of proving intentional discrimination nor did it mention that the plaintiffs carried this burden. Rather, the court generally shifted the burden to the defendants to justify differences in prison programming on sex-neutral grounds and thus disprove discriminatory purpose. See, e.g., Klinger, 824 F.Supp. at 1419 (<HOLDING>). The district court’s analysis effectively Options: A. holding that equal protection violation existed where ncw lacked 24hour medical services even though defendants proffered evidence that neither the hastings correctional center nor the omaha correctional center two allmale institutions in the nebraska system had such services either B. holding that employers knowledge of employees injury followed by the employers failure to provide the necessary medical services sufficient to impose liability upon the employer for medical services selected by the employee C. recognizing that generally services that benefit debtor are services that facilitate completion of a case D. holding that juveniles form neither a suspect nor semisuspect class for equal protection purposes E. holding that legal services attorney lacked standing to challenge state court judges alleged retaliation against clients represented by legal services for using legal services relying upon article iii and younger comity

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that equal protection violation existed where ncw lacked 24hour medical services even though defendants proffered evidence that neither the hastings correctional center nor the omaha correctional center two allmale institutions in the nebraska system had such services either
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: (1973), automatically requires disqualification of the decision maker. In Bunnell, the rec ord indicated that in numerous instances the administrative law judge had demonstrated active hostility toward the claimant in an employment disability benefits proceeding, while at the same time exhibiting favoritism toward the employer and the employer’s counsel. 740 P.2d at 1333-34. We ruled that such an atmosphere of partiality violated fundamental principles of due process. Id. at 1334; see also Local No. 3 v. NLRB, 210 F.2d 325, 329-30 (8th Cir.1954) (disqualifying examiner who uniformly rejected evidence offered to support company’s point of view, while accepting evidence supporting union). But see NLRB v. Pittsburgh S.S. Co., 337 U.S. 656, 659, 69 S.Ct. 1283, 1285, 93 L.Ed. 1602 (1949) (<HOLDING>). In Berryhill, the United States Supreme Court Options: A. recognizing that assessing witness credibility is uniquely the function of the trier of fact B. holding that issues of discriminatory intent and actual motivation are questions of fact for the trier of fact C. holding that direct evidence if believed by the trier of fact will prove the particular fact in question without reliance upon inference or presumption D. holding total rejection of an opposed view cannot of itself impugn the integrity or competence of a trier of fact E. holding that a reasonable trier of fact could find that the defendants acted with malice

assistant: The best answer is D. holding total rejection of an opposed view cannot of itself impugn the integrity or competence of a trier of fact
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive has previously entered into the Company's standard form of Indemnification Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit B, providing indemnification to Executive to the maximum extent permitted by law, and in accordance therewith, the Company has agreed to advance any expenses for which indemnification is available to the extent allowed by applicable law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: test. Savage, supra, 120 N.J. at 631, 577 A.2d 455. Notwith standing the unique nature of a defendant’s testimony, we continue to believe that the Strickland/Fritz test, see supra at 251-52, 736 A.2d at 478-79, applies to the issue before us. Several federal courts likewise have required defendants to prove that they have been prejudiced by defense counsel’s failure to inform them of the right to testify. See, e.g., United States v. Tavares, 100 F.3d 995 (D.C.Cir.1996) (rejecting rule under which defense counsel’s performance resulting in denial of defendant’s right to testify constitutes prejudice per se); Ortega v. O’Leary, 843 F.2d 258, 262 (7th Cir.1988) (applying harmless-error analysis to denial of right to testify); Campos v. United States, 930 F.Supp. 787 (E.D.N.Y. 1996) (<HOLDING>). Counsel’s failure to inform defendant of his Options: A. holding that the appropriate vehicle for claims alleging that defense counsel violated a defendants right to testify is a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel B. holding that defendant may raise claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal only if ineffective assistance is conclusive from the record C. holding that analyzing denial of right to testify as claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is soundest approach D. holding no ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim for failure to raise as basis for appeal of conviction ineffective assistance of trial counsel where basis for the latter claim was inadequate E. recognizing a constitutional claim for ineffective assistance of counsel

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that analyzing denial of right to testify as claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is soundest approach
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 provisions that impose an obligation or right, expressly or by common understanding, after the termination or expiration date of this Agreement will survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement and will be binding on the parties hereto.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Agreement Term, the Company will employ Executive as its Chief Financial Officer to perform the duties and responsibilities inherent in such position and such other duties and responsibilities consistent with such position as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company (the “CEO”) shall from time to time reasonably assign to him. On an annual basis, the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) in consultation with Executive and the CEO, will set reasonably attainable, specific goals pursuant to the objectives of the Company as in effect from time to time. Executive shall report directly to the CEO and shall be subject to the supervision of, and shall have such authority as is delegated to Executive by, the CEO, which authority shall be sufficient to perform Executive’s duties hereunder. Executive will be based at the Company’s headquarters in New York, New York. Subject to Section 4.3 below, the location of Executive’s employment is subject to change during the course of the Agreement Term as determined by the CEO in consultation with the Executive. Executive hereby accepts such employment and agrees to undertake the duties and responsibilities inherent in such position and such other duties as may be reasonably assigned to Executive. Executive shall devote substantially all of his business time, energies and attention in the performance of the foregoing services. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall preclude Executive from (i) performing services for such other companies as the Company may designate or permit, (ii) serving, with the prior written consent of the Board, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, as an officer or member of the boards of directors or advisory boards (or their equivalents in the case of a non-corporate entity) of non-competing businesses, (iii) serving as an officer or a member of charitable, educational or civic organizations, (iv) engaging in charitable activities and community affairs, and (v) managing Executive's personal investments and affairs; provided, however, that the activities set out in clauses (i) – (v) shall be limited by Executive so as not to materially interfere, individually or in the aggregate, with the performance of Executive's duties and responsibilities hereunder.

assistant: Titles
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: On or before the tenth (10 th ) Business Day after each calendar month during which this Agreement is in effect, BP Pipelines shall submit an invoice (either in paper format or in such electronic format as is reasonably requested by the Partnership) to the Partnership for (i) the BP Administrative Fee installment due with respect to such month as well as any other compensation and reimbursable expenses due under Section 3.2(a)(ii) (“ Reimbursable Expenses ”) that have been incurred through the end of such month and not previously paid by the Partnership. The Partnership shall, within ten calendar days of receipt, pay such invoice, except for any Reimbursable Expenses therein being disputed in good faith by the Partnership. Any amounts that the Partnership has disputed in good faith and that are later determined by any court or other competent authority having jurisdiction, or by agreement of the Parties, to be owing from the Partnership shall be paid in full within ten calendar days of such determination or agreement, together with interest thereon at the Interest Rate (pro-rated for the number of days for which such payment is delinquent), from the date due under the original invoice until the date of payment.

assistant: Payments