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: the same ‘scheme or artifice to defraud’ language, and the construction of either statute informs the application of the other”). See also Carpenter, 108 S.Ct. at 320 n. 6 (stating that “[t]he mail and wire fraud statutes share the same language in relevant part, and accordingly we apply the same analysis to both sets of offenses here”); United States v. Evans, 844 F.2d 36 (2d Cir.1988) (referring to the wire and mail fraud counts collectively as the “federal fraud” counts, because both statutes share the same relevant language, and applying the same post-McNally intangible rights argument to both); United States v. Eckhardt, 843 F.2d 989 (7th Cir.1988) (applying Gimbel); United States v. Santa-Manzano, 842 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.1988); United States v. Covino, 837 F.2d 65, 71 (2d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Cooke, 833 F.2d 109, 110 Options: A. holding that rule 9bs heightened pleading requirement applies to allegations of mail and wire fraud used as predicate acts for a rico claim B. holding that in the context of mail and wire fraud a plaintiff must have justifiably relied to his detriment on the defendants material misrepresentations C. holding that plaintiffs allegation that defendant engaged in multiple instances of mail and wire fraud did not allege pattern of racketeering activity with sufficient particularity D. holding that a plaintiff cannot avoid the securities fraud exception by pleading mail fraud or wire fraud if the conduct giving rise to those offenses also amounts to securities fraud E. holding that wire and mail fraud statutes are construed identically

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that wire and mail fraud statutes are construed identically
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: school work. The district court thus correctly held that his due process claim accrued by that date and that the instant lawsuit, filed on January 13, 2009, was untimely. Even taking into account a 145-day tolling period— credited by the district court for the time when Storman’s adverse rating was on remand to the DOE under a state court order — the limitations period on Storman’s due process claim ran out in December 2009, one month before he filed his complaint. In urging otherwise, Storman argues, for the first time on appeal, that his due process claim “sounds in malicious prosecution,” Appellant’s Br. at 17-18, and thus did not accrue until the termination of disciplinary proceedings in his favor. See Palmer v. New York, 57 A.D.3d 364, 364, 870 N.Y.S.2d 11, 12 (1st Dep’t 2008) (<HOLDING>). In Storman’s view, this occurred on May 11, Options: A. holding the same for malicious prosecution B. holding that a 1983 due process claim that essentially contests the fairness of the plaintiffs prosecution is similar to his malicious prosecution claim and claims resembling malicious prosecution do not accrue until the prosecution has terminated in the plaintiffs favor C. holding that section 1983 claims alleging due process violations stemming from malicious prosecution are unavailable when a state malicious prosecution action exists D. holding that unlike malicious prosecution claim false arrest claim accrues on the date of the arrest E. holding that malicious prosecution claim accrues when underlying prosecution is terminated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that malicious prosecution claim accrues when underlying prosecution is terminated
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Parties shall with reasonable diligence do all things and provide all reasonable assurances as may be required to consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, and each Party shall provide such further documents or instruments required by any other Party as may be reasonably necessary or desirable to effect the purpose of this Agreement and to carry out its provisions, whether before or after the Closing Date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: as the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002. 2 . To be sure, the judgment against Mathews was entered prior to, and thus is not consistent with, the OSC's decision in Blair. But, as noted, Mathews did not appeal from the judgment, and there is no indication in the record on appeal that he has sought, let alone been granted, relief from the judgment based upon Blair. 3 . The judgment entered against the Wilcoxes should also, in my view, be considered nondischargeable under the majority’s narrow interpretation of § 523(a)(19), given the state district court's finding regarding the Wilcoxes' knowing involvement in Schubert's criminal scheme. The same would also be true under the Sherman majority's similarly narrow interpretation of § 523(a)(19). See 658 F.3d at 1019 Options: A. holding that 523a19 prevents the discharge of debts for securitiesrelated wrongdoings where the debtor is responsible for that wrongdoing B. holding plaintiff responsible for attorney error C. holding that the state would presumably be responsible for any debts incurred because the park authority submits its budget to the georgia legislature D. holding that 9613f1 is the exclusive vehicle for responsible parties to obtain contribution from other responsible parties E. holding the defendant responsible for the greater of the actual or intended loss

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 523a19 prevents the discharge of debts for securitiesrelated wrongdoings where the debtor is responsible for that wrongdoing
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: (i) Immediately after the consummation of the transactions to occur on the date hereof and immediately following the making of each Credit Extension and after giving effect to the application of the proceeds of such Credit Extensions, (a) the fair value of the assets of the Company and its Subsidiaries on a consolidated basis, at a fair valuation, will exceed the debts and liabilities, subordinated, contingent or otherwise, of the Company and its Subsidiaries on a consolidated basis; (b) the present fair saleable value of the Property of the Company and its Subsidiaries on a consolidated basis will be greater than the amount that will be required to pay the probable liability of the Company and its Subsidiaries on a consolidated basis on their debts and other liabilities, subordinated, contingent or otherwise, as such debts and other liabilities become absolute and matured; (c) the Company and its Subsidiaries on a consolidated basis will be able to pay their debts and liabilities, subordinated, contingent or otherwise, as such debts and liabilities become absolute and matured; and (d) the Company and its Subsidiaries on a consolidated basis will not have unreasonably small capital with which to conduct the businesses in which they are engaged as such businesses are now conducted and are proposed to be conducted after the date hereof.

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: This Subscription Agreement shall terminate and be void and of no further force and effect, and all rights and obligations of the parties hereunder shall terminate without any further liability on the part of any party in respect thereof, upon the earlier to occur of (a) such date and time as the Transaction Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms, (b) upon the mutual written agreement of each of the parties hereto to terminate this Subscription Agreement, (c) the Company’s notification to the undersigned in writing that it has abandoned its plans to move forward with the Transaction and/or terminates the undersigned’s obligations with respect to the Subscription without the delivery of the Acquired Shares having occurred, (d) September 13, 2019, if the Closing has not occurred by such date, or (e) if any of the conditions to Closing set forth in Section 3 of this Subscription Agreement are not satisfied, or are not capable of being satisfied, on or prior to the Closing and, as a result thereof, the transactions contemplated by this Subscription Agreement will not be or are not consummated at the Closing; provided, that nothing herein will relieve any party from liability for any willful breach hereof prior to the time of termination, and each party will be entitled to any remedies at law or in equity to recover losses, liabilities or damages arising from such breach. The Company shall notify the undersigned of the termination of the Transaction Agreement promptly after the termination of such agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party hereto agrees to consult with the other parties hereto before issuing or making, and to provide each other reasonable prior opportunity to review, comment upon and concur with, and use all reasonable efforts to agree on, any press release, public statement or disclosure with respect to this Agreement or the other Transaction Documents or the transactions contemplated hereby or thereby. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Company agrees not to issue any such press release, public statement or disclosure in respect of the Purchaser or its Affiliates without the prior written consent of the Purchaser.

assistant: Publicity
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 merits of these motions — were rendered moot by that order and are revived by this Court’s vacating the new trial order. Therefore, the majority’s opinion effectively deciding those motio ial while retaining jurisdiction over the proceedings necessarily mooted the pending motions for entry of judgment on the verdict and entry of JNOV. Under the mootness doctrine, this Court has no jurisdiction to render a judgment and opinion granting or denying either of those mooted motions. Upon this Court’s vacating the trial court’s order granting a new trial in response to this mandamus petition, the trial court still retains jurisdiction over the case until entry of final judgment in that court. See In re Baylor Med. Ctr. at Garland, 280 S.W.3d 227, 230-32 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>). The judgment rendered by this Court, Options: A. holding that a resentencing court may reconsider a defendants criminal history category as long as the appellate court did not expressly or implicitly limit the remand to only a portion of the sentence B. holding that this court may reconsider an erroneous ruling as long as the appeal is current C. holding that superior court erred in reversing trial courts order granting new trial and remanding for a new trial limited to apportionment of damages D. recognizing that a reviewing court should not reconsider credibility determinations made by the alj as long as they find some support in the record E. holding trial court has jurisdiction to reconsider new trial order as long as case is pending

assistant: The best answer is E. holding trial court has jurisdiction to reconsider new trial order as long as case is pending
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with Avery Coleman. The District Court admitted this evidence not to permit the prosecution to show Coleman’s propensity to possess a firearm or narcotics, but instead ‘as proof of ... knowledge’ of their presence in the apartment, a permissible purpose pursuant Rule 404(b).”); United States v. Cassell, 292 F.3d 788, 793 (D.C.Cir.2002) (noting, in the context of a felon in possession case, that “[w]e have previously held that ‘in cases where a defendant is charged with unlawful possession of something, evidence that he possessed the same or similar things at other times is often quite relevant to his knowledge and intent with regard to the crime charged’ ” (quoting United States v. King, 254 F.3d 1098, 1100 (D.C.Cir.2001))); United States v. Moorehead, 57 F.3d 875, 878 (9th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Pelusio, 725 F.2d 161, Options: A. holding that in a prosecution for possession of an unregistered firearm evidence of an armed robbery committed with the firearm was admissible B. holding alford plea admissible in prosecution for felon in possession of firearm C. holding that actual knowledge of a coconspirator possessing a firearm qualifies as foreseeability D. holding that prior possession of a firearm is admissible to show knowledge in a prosecution for knowingly possessing a similar weapon E. holding that possession of a weapon is not in an of itself a crime

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that prior possession of a firearm is admissible to show knowledge in a prosecution for knowingly possessing a similar weapon
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 Freemans’ testimony, Sorchych asserted in his answer to the First Amended Complaint that he had not approved or agreed to contribute payment for the roadway’s maintenance and repair, but that he had offered his efforts and the reasonable use of his tractor for such maintenance and repair. Additionally, in his testimony at trial, Sorchych denied discussing the topic of contributing monetarily to maintenance with the Freemans. 9 . See also Seymour v. Hairis Trust & Sav. Bank of Chicago, 264 Ill.App.3d 583, 201 Ill.Dec. 553, 636 N.E.2d 985, 994 (1994) (stating that, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, the owner of an easement has not only the right but the sole duty to keep the easement in repair); Lynch v. Keck, 147 Ind.App. 570, 263 N.E.2d 176, 183 (1970) (<HOLDING>); Island Improvement Ass'n of Upper Greenwood Options: A. holding that an express easement ran with the dominant estate B. holding that an easement is not a separate estate when dominant and servient tracts are under the same ownership C. holding that owners of a dominant estate had a duty to keep the easement in a proper state of repair to avoid damaging the servient estate through erosion D. holding that the burden on the servient estate cannot be increased without the consent of the owners of the servient estate and that the owner of the dominant estate to which the appurtenant easement is attached has no power to convey or expand use of that easement in connection with a tract of land owned by another E. recognizing that the dominant easement owner not the servient estate owner bears responsibility for maintaining an easement

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that owners of a dominant estate had a duty to keep the easement in a proper state of repair to avoid damaging the servient estate through erosion
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: academia , inc. ( `` academia.edu '' or `` we '' ) offers a social networking service which enables its users , including graduate students and academics , to create academic profile pages and to connect with other users , including graduate students and academics , around the world with the same research interests ( the `` services '' ) through our website , accessible at academia.edu ( the `` site '' ) .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 2007 decision to deny a rehearing on the termination, renders this case moot. However, we need not decide this issue given our conclusion that no federal jurisdiction exists in this case. 5 . Indeed, the district court’s depiction of these studies as “FERC mandated” is a mis-characterization of the role played by these studies in the FERC licensing scheme. The studies outlined by FERC are necessary to complete the license application; the only penalty for failure to conduct these studies appears to be the termination of the ILP. 6 . Alternatively, MHC contends that federal subject matter jurisdiction exists because the FPA preempts the actions taken by Metro Parks. In doing so, MHC urges us to look to Town of Springfield v. Vermont Environmental Bd., 521 F.Supp. 243, 249 (D.Vt.1981) (<HOLDING>). However, in the instant case, Metro Parks has Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law B. holding the state law claims were not preempted C. holding that vermonts licensing scheme was preempted by the fpa because it enabled the state to thwart a federal project by withholding a state permit D. recognizing state laws can be preempted by federal regulations as well as by federal legislation E. holding that permitting a state official to proceed with a highway project despite alleged nepa violations by federal participants in the project would make a sham of the reconsideration required by federal law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that vermonts licensing scheme was preempted by the fpa because it enabled the state to thwart a federal project by withholding a state permit
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 a result of the uncertainty in the application of sections 4999 and 280G of the Code, it is possible that the Payments to be made to you, or provided for your benefit, either have been made or will not be made by AKS which, in either case, will be inconsistent with the limitations provided in Section F(1) (hereinafter referred to as an “Excess Payment” or “Underpayment,” respectively). If it is established pursuant to a final determination of a court or an Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) proceeding which has been finally and conclusively resolved, that an Excess Payment has been made, such Excess Payment shall be deemed for all purposes to be a loan to you made on the date you received the Excess Payment and you shall repay the Excess Payment to AKS on demand (but not less than ten days after written notice is received by you) together with interest on the Excess Payment at the “Applicable Federal Rate” (as defined in section 1274(d) of the Code) from the date of your receipt of such Excess Payment until the date of such repayment. In the event that it is determined by (a) the Accounting Firm, AKS or the IRS, (b) pursuant to a determination by a court, or (c) upon the resolution to your satisfaction of the Dispute, that an Underpayment has occurred, AKS shall pay an amount equal to the Underpayment to you within ten days of such determination or resolution together with interest on such amount at the Applicable Federal Rate from the date such amount would have been paid to you until the date of payment.

assistant: Adjustments
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: Purchaser and its representatives shall hold in strictest confidence all data and information obtained from Seller regarding the Property or obtained through physical access to the Property granted by Seller, whether obtained before or after the execution and delivery of this Agreement, and shall not disclose the same to others prior to Closing; provided, however, that it is understood and agreed that Purchaser may disclose such data and information to Title Company and Purchaser’s actual and potential lenders and insurers and to the employees, consultants, contractors, accountants and attorneys of Purchaser, Title Company and Purchaser’s actual and potential lenders and insurers (collectively, the “Disclosure Parties”) provided that such persons agree to treat such data and information confidentially. In the event this Agreement is terminated, and to the extent Purchaser has received hard copies of any confidential materials from Seller, Purchaser shall promptly return to Seller any such hard copies of confidential materials. In the event of a breach or threatened breach by Purchaser or its agents or representatives of this Section 10.1, Seller shall be entitled, as Seller’s sole remedy, to seek an injunction restraining Purchaser or its agents or representatives from disclosing, in whole or in part, such confidential information. The provisions of this Section 10.1 shall survive Closing. Notwithstanding the foregoing or Section 10.2 hereof, no information obtained by Purchaser or any Disclosure Parties shall be deemed confidential or subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement if such information (i) was publicly known or made generally available in the public domain prior to the time of disclosure, (ii) becomes publicly known or made generally available after disclosure through no action or inaction of Purchaser or any Disclosure Parties, (iii) is in the possession of Purchaser or any Disclosure Parties without confidentiality restrictions at the time of such disclosure, or (iv) is independently discovered or developed by Purchaser or any Disclosure Parties. In addition, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, Purchaser and any Disclosure Parties may disclose any such information to third parties to the extent required by law or judicial process, and if Purchaser (or its assigns) acquires title to the Property, this Section 10.1 shall automatically become null and void at such time and have no further effect.

assistant: Confidentiality
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: excised the language offensive to Cunningham from HRS § 706-662, see supra note 2, and inserted it into HRS § 706-661, see supra note 1. However, for the reasons discussed infra in section II.D.l, we do not believe, in light of Cunningham, that sections 23 and 24 of Act 230 would survive scrutiny in the federal courts. 17 . Any aggravating fact that HRS § 706-662 requires the sentencing court to find as a precondition to an extended prison term is now constitutionally infirm if not exempt under Cunningham, such as prior or concurrent convictions or a fact admitted by the defendant. 549 U.S. at -, 127 S.Ct. at 860; see also supra note 15. This court recognized the constitutional infirmities contained in HRS § 706-662(5) and (6) in Tafoya, 91 Hawai'i at 271-72, 982 P.2d at 900-01 (<HOLDING>) and in Kaua, 102 Hawai'i at 13, 72 P.3d at 485 Options: A. holding that a proper review of the sufficiency of the evidence under the due process clause gives full play to the responsibility of the trier of fact fairly to resolve conflicts in the testimony to weigh the evidence and to draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts B. holding that when an appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction the relevant question is whether after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt C. holding that when reviewing the sufficiency of evidence to support a state criminal conviction the relevant question under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment is whether after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt D. holding that the facts pertaining to the victims special status and the defendants knowledge of that status were intrinsic to the crime and hence that the sixth amendment required that the facts be found by the trier of fact E. holding that the issue of defendants actual knowledge should not be resolved on summary judgment but should be left to the trier of fact

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the facts pertaining to the victims special status and the defendants knowledge of that status were intrinsic to the crime and hence that the sixth amendment required that the facts be found by the 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Triatlantic Ventures, Inc., 931 P.2d 122, 125 (Utah 1997). Therefore, we do not address the fourth issue in the text of the opinion. 3 . Plaintiffs’ contention that Torrey illegally discriminates is not an argument that some nonresidents are treated differently than other nonresidents. That is apparently not the case, as it seems that all nonresidents are subject to the same connection fee and rate schedule. Rather, plaintiffs maintain that the prohibited discrimination 8 S.E.2d 823 (1950); Forest City v. City of Oregon, 569 S.W.2d 330 (Mo.Ct.App.1978) (statute allowing municipalities to sell water "upon such terms and under such rules and regulations as it may deem proper” made issue one of contract); Fairway Manor, Inc. v. Board of Comm'rs, 36 Ohio St.3d 85, 521 N.E.2d 818 (1988) (<HOLDING>); Calcaterra v. City of Columbia, 315 S.C. 196, Options: A. holding that a court should allow the contractuallybargained for default rate under section 506b without examining the reasonableness of these rates provided they fall within the range of acceptable rates B. holding that the plaintiff utility company deserved a remedy for confiscatory rates C. holding that nonresident rates are matter of contract that will not be reviewed for reasonableness D. holding that constitutionally conferred right to operate utility without restraint or restriction by general assembly limits courts role to reviewing resident rates for reasonableness E. holding commission cannot authorize utility to increase rates based solely on return on stock and warning of potential danger of tying rates to one factor over which the utility exercises total control without regard for the interests of the consumer

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that constitutionally conferred right to operate utility without restraint or restriction by general assembly limits courts role to reviewing resident rates for reasonableness
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Neither the Company nor any Subsidiary shall amend, restate, modify, repeal or waive any provision of the Company or such Subsidiary’s Governing Documents, except (i) to comply with the terms of Section 5.1 hereto or (ii) amendments, modification, supplements or waivers that do not adversely affect the rights or interests of the Investors.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan may be amended in whole or in part at any time for any reason by the Board; provided, however, that (1) no amendment shall decrease the benefits under the Plan which have accrued prior to the date of such amendment and (2) no amendment shall accelerate any payment under the Plan except as permitted under 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: to paint its interpretation of improper means with too fine a brush, particularly in light of the fact that the Geltman Court cited favorably to the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 767. Id. at 817 n. 10, 551 N.E.2d 20. Comment c to that section states, in pertinent part, that: Violation of recognized ethical codes for a particular area of business activity or of established customs or practices regarding disapproved actions or methods may also be significant in evaluating the nature of the actor’s conduct as a factor in determining whether his interference with the plaintiffs contractual relations was improper or not. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 767 emt. c (1979). Sister state courts are in accord. See, e.g., Toney v. Casey’s General Stores, Inc., 460 N.W.2d 849, 853 (Iowa 1990) (<HOLDING>); Top Service Body Shop, Inc. v. Allstate Ins., Options: A. holding that with respect to tortious interference recognized standards of business ethics and business customs and practices are pertinent B. holding that where both defamation and tortious interference claims are pled and are based on same facts minnesota law requires the application of the actual malice standard to tortious interference claims C. holding that a defendant could not be liable for tortious interference with a business relation where the defendant merely exercised its legal rights D. holding that the delayed discovery doctrine is not applicable to actions for tortious interference with business relationships defamation or unfair and deceptive trade practices E. holding that the first element in a prima facie case of tortious interference with prospective business advantage is the existence of business expectancy

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that with respect to tortious interference recognized standards of business ethics and business customs and practices are pertinent
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 limitations under applicable law, the Committee (and its delegee) is authorized in its discretion to issue Awards and/or to deliver and accept notices, elections, consents, designations and/or other forms or communications to or from Participants by electronic or similar means, including, without limitation, transmissions through e‑mail or specialized software, recorded messages on electronic telephone systems, and other permissible methods, on such basis and for such purposes as it determines from time to time, and all such communications will be deemed to be “written” for purposes of the Plan.

assistant: Records
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: Institution and Principal Investigators shall conduct the Research, or cause the same to be done, in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and guidelines (including good laboratory practices in accordance with 21 CFR Part 58) and the provisions of this Agreement (including the Project Plans), as well as Institution’s internal policies and procedures to the extent they do not conflict with the foregoing. In particular, any animals used in the Research shall be handled, housed and, if applicable, disposed of in accordance with all applicable national, regional and local laws, rules, regulations and guidelines.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: ( f ) to retain a copy , you must either have a printer connected to your personal computer or other device or , alternatively , the ability to save a copy through use of printing service or software such as adobe acrobat ® .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: have held that the AEMLD subsumes traditional negligent failure-to-warn claims. Spain v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 230 F.3d 1300, 1310, 1312 (11th Cir.2000), (“In light of Veal, and because the only allegation in the complaint’s counts for negligence and wantonness that are not in the AEMLD count is that the ‘[defendants negligently designed, manufactured, sold, marketed and/or failed to warn about cigarettes that were unreasonably dangerous ...,’ we are convinced that the negligence and wantonness claims in this case merge into the AEMLD claim, but ‘we also invite that Court to tell us if the conclusions we have reached about’ ” whether “negligence and wantonness claims merge into an AEMLD claim”) ; Johnson v. General Motors Corp., 82 F.Supp.2d 1326, 1328-29 (S.D.Ala.1997) (<HOLDING>). In this case, this Court will stick to the Options: A. holding that plaintiffs failure to warn claim could not proceed independent of plaintiffs aemld claim B. holding that the uscfc did not have jurisdiction over plaintiffs claim because plaintiffs claim of negligence sounds in tort C. holding that a failure to warn was not a policy judgment D. holding that because plaintiffs iied claim is based on the facts that support plaintiffs malicious prosecution claim plaintiffs iied claim did not accrue until the charges against them were dismissed E. holding that causation is an essential element in failure to warn claim

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that plaintiffs failure to warn claim could not proceed independent of plaintiffs aemld claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you do not wish your subscription to renew automatically , or if you want to change or terminate your subscription , you will need to log in to your iap account and follow instructions to cancel your subscription , even if you have otherwise deleted your account with us or if you have deleted the tinder application from your device .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: length, arguably, it did not provide discrete illumination for “malicious,” the second modifier of injury in the section. McAlister v. Slosberg (In re Slosberg), 225 B.R. 9, 16 (Bankr.D.Maine 1998) (describing the Geiger decision as “silent regarding the meaning of ‘malicious,’ although its redefinition of ‘willful’ incorporates much (at first blush some might say all) of what ‘malicious’ once meant in § 523(a)(6)’s context”); see Read & Lundy, Inc. v. Brier (In re Brier), 274 B.R. 37, 43 (Bankr.D.Mass.2002) (quoting heavily from the portions of Slosberg that describe Geiger as “silent” on malicious). While concurring with post-Geiger case law holding that a showing of either intent to injure or proof of the actor’s substantial certainty of the injuri . 284, 285, 1878 WL 10805 (1878) (<HOLDING>); Jackson v. Old Colony St Ry. Co., 206 Mass. Options: A. recognizing an innocent possession defense though the defense in that case is more properly considered a justification defense as life and limb were arguably at stake B. holding that the erroneous omission of a justification defense was harmless where counsel did not invoke the defense during either voir dire or opening statements and where the defense did not appear to be the primary focus of the defensive theory at trial C. holding that consent is not a defense to the charge of second degree assault where the assault occurred in the context of a prison fight between inmates D. holding that absent a defense of legitimate justification liability for assault and batter will lie E. holding claims raised for first time on appeal will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that absent a defense of legitimate justification liability for assault and batter will lie
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party shall carry out its obligations under this Agreement in material compliance with all applicable Laws, including, without limitation, (a) the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and any applicable implementing regulations, and relevant foreign equivalents thereof; (b) GMPs; (c) all other applicable FDA guidelines and relevant guidelines of other applicable Regulatory Authorities; (d) all other applicable laws and regulations, including, without limitation, all applicable federal, national, multinational, state, provincial and local environmental, health and safety laws and regulations in effect at the time and place of manufacture of a Product; and (e) all applicable export and import control laws and regulations.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: For purposes of this Section 13, a " Change in Control " of the Company will mean (a) if any "person" or "group" as those terms are used in Sections 13(d) and 14(d) of the Exchange Act or any successors thereto, is or becomes the "beneficial owner" (as defined in Rule 13d-3 under the Exchange Act or any successor thereto), directly or indirectly, of securities of the Company representing 50% or more of the combined voting power of the Company's then outstanding securities, provided, that the acquisition of additional securities by any person or group that owns 50% or more of the voting power prior to such acquisition of additional securities shall not be a Change in Control, (b) during any twelve-month period, individuals who at the beginning of such period constitute the Board and any new Directors whose election by the Board or nomination for election by the Company's shareholders was approved by at least a majority of the Directors then still in office who either were Directors at the beginning of the period or whose election was previously so approved, cease for any reason to constitute a majority thereof, (c) the shareholders of the Company approve a merger or consolidation of the Company with any other corporation, other than a merger or consolidation (i) which would result in all or a portion of the voting securities of the Company outstanding immediately prior thereto continuing to represent (either by remaining outstanding or by being converted into voting securities of the surviving entity) more than 50% of the combined voting power of the voting securities of the Company or such surviving entity outstanding immediately after such merger or consolidation or (ii) by which the corporate existence of the Company is not affected and following which the Company's chief executive officer and Directors retain their positions with the Company (and constitute at least a majority of the Board) and such merger or consolidation is consummated, or (d) the shareholders of the Company approve an agreement for the sale or disposition by the Company of all or substantially all the Company's assets and such sale or disposition is consummated.

assistant: Change In Control
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: Riverboat Amusement Corp., 52 F.3d 560 (5th Cir. 1995), and King v. Grand Casinos of Mississippi, Inc., 697 So.2d 439, 442 (Miss.1997), is misplaced. In Pavone and King, for example, the courts treated whether a floating gaming casino was a vessel for purposes of the Jones Act and the general maritime law, not for purposes of Mississippi state tax law or any other purpose. 10 . See, e.g., Motorola Communications & Elecs., Inc. v. Dale, 665 F.2d 771, 773 (5th Cir. 1982) (citing Richardson v. Borden, 42 Miss. 71, 75-76 (1868)) (describing Mississippi law on fixtures); Bondafoam v. Cook Constr. Co., Inc., 529 So.2d 655, 658 (Miss. 1988) (same); Ziller v. Atkins Motel Co., 244 So.2d 409, 411 (Miss. 1971) (same). 11 . See Watson v. Caffery, 236 Miss. 223, 109 So.2d 862, 866 (1959) (<HOLDING>). 12 . We also note that this issue will not Options: A. holding that in action by property owner to recover land taken by eminent domain current titleholder to land might be necessary party if district court were to restore land to plaintiff B. holding that the term personal property in its broadest legal signification includes everything the subject of ownership not being land or any interest in land C. holding that the deed and not the historical description of the land determines what land constitutes the forfeitable property D. recognizing general proposition that if land is artificially submerged for the statutory period necessary to change ownership of the land title to the submerged land is passed to the state in trust for the public E. holding that land sales contracts were not securities because they involved no investment in an enterprise even if land was bought on expectation that development of the area would increase the value of the land

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the term personal property in its broadest legal signification includes everything the subject of ownership not being land or any interest in land
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS GUARANTY, ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY OR THEREBY (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER THEORY). EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PARTY HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PARTY WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS GUARANTY BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The consolidated and consolidating balance sheets of HT and its Subsidiaries and such other Persons described therein (including the accounts of all Subsidiaries for the respective periods during which a subsidiary relationship existed) as of December 31, 2016, and the related statements of income, changes in stockholder’s equity, and changes in cash flow for the period ended on such date, all accompanied by reports thereon containing opinions without qualification by independent certified public accountants, copies of which have been delivered to Agent, have been prepared in accordance with GAAP, (except for changes in application in which such accountants concur) and present fairly the financial position of any Borrower and its Subsidiaries at such date and the results of their operations for such period. Since December 31, 2016 there has been no change in the condition, financial or otherwise, of HT and its Subsidiaries as shown on the consolidated balance sheet as of such date and no change in the aggregate value of machinery, equipment and Real Property owned by HT and its Subsidiaries, except changes in the Ordinary Course of Business or as otherwise permitted pursuant to this Agreement, none of which individually or in the aggregate has been materially adverse.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: federal courts intervene in the matter. The argument is unavailing, however, where the pending question is whether the Board’s proceedings constitute an effort by the state to impose its regulatory authority in a field preempted by Congress. See Association of Int’l Auto. Mfrs., Inc. v. Commissioner, Massachusetts Dep’t of Envtl. Protection, 208 F.3d 1, 2000 WL 298563, at *3 (1st Cir. March 27, 2000)(finding that the court’s initial invocation of the primary jurisdiction doctrine was unwise where “the ultimate legal determination of whether the Massachusetts regulations are preempted by the [federal Clean Air Act] is a question of federal preemption law for the courts alone to decide”); Volkswagen de Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Puerto Rico Labor Relations Bd., 454 F.2d 38, 41 (1st Cir.1972)(<HOLDING>). The state defendants also move to dismiss Options: A. holding that the plaintiff must exhaust her administrative remedies and it does not matter that the plaintiff was using state law as the vehicle to press her assertion B. holding that plaintiff was not required to exhaust its administrative remedies before the puerto rico labor relations board before invoking the jurisdiction of the federal courts to determine whether the boards assertion of jurisdiction was proper C. recognizing the general rule that parties must exhaust prescribed administrative remedies before seeking relief from federal courts D. holding that plaintiff could not present his erisa estoppel claim to the district court because he did not properly exhaust it before the administrative review board E. holding that federal prisoners need not exhaust their administrative remedies before filing suit in federal court

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that plaintiff was not required to exhaust its administrative remedies before the puerto rico labor relations board before invoking the jurisdiction of the federal courts to determine whether the boards assertion of jurisdiction was proper