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: most severe sanction that this court can impose upon attorneys. Our constitution allows judges to “hold their offices so long as they behave well.” N.H. Const. pt. I, art. 35. When they do not, we are empowered to implement the constitutional mandate by taking the necessary disciplinary measures short of removal. In re Mussman, 112 N.H. 99, 102-03 (1972). Thus, indefinite suspension falls within the ambit of the exercise of our constitutional authority. It has never been the tradition of the jurisprudence of this court to refuse to exercise judicial power when there was an established need for it and there was no constitutional barrier to its exercise. Id. Therefore, this court has previously recognized its authority to indefinitely suspend a judge. See In re Mussman, 112 N.H. at 103 (<HOLDING>); In re Mussman, 113 N.H. 54, 57 (1973) Options: A. recognizing our authority to order suspension of a judge B. holding that in absence of changed circumstances and except there be some other most cogent reason when judge makes or denies interlocutory order and when appeal lies as of right from such order it should not be reconsidered even by judge who made the order much less by another judge C. recognizing the range of discretion of the trial judge D. holding that arbitrator had authority to choose between suspension and termination where the authority was vested in the company to suspend andor discharge E. holding that a postconsent reference order signed by the district judge was required to vest authority in a magistrate judge for disposition of a summary judgment motion

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing our authority to order suspension of a judge
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: neither FERC nor this Court have the discretion to contravene clear congressional intent, field preemption should apply. The ripeness of N.E. Hub’s conflict preemption claim is therefore irrelevant. III. Finally, I address the merits of N.E. Hub’s field preemption claim. First of all, it is clearly ripe. We require that a claim satisfy three elements in order to be ripe for decision: “adversity of the interests of the parties, conclusiveness of the judicial judgment and the practical help, or utility, of that judgment.” Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology, 912 F.2d 643, 647 (3d Cir.1990). All three are satisfied. The state proceedings' themselves constitute an injury establishing adversity of interest. See Sayles Hydro Assocs. v. Maughan, 985 F.2d 451, 454 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). A decree indicating that FERC’s 7(c) Options: A. holding that in light of the presumption against preemption there is no field preemption of state unfair competition claims that rely on a substantial question of federal patent law because congress has not expressed its clear and manifest intention to preempt that area of law B. holding removal and preemption are distinct concepts erisa preemption does not allow removal unless complete preemption exists C. holding that a field preemption claim was ripe because the plaintiff did not challenge the states ultimate substantive decision but rather its authority to conduct proceedings D. holding that it was the degree of fdas involvement in the approval process of a particular device not the pma process itself that resulted in preemption of state cause of action E. holding that in the field preemption context the hardship is the process itself

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that in the field preemption context the hardship is the process itself
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 Guarantors jointly and severally agree that, as between the Guarantors and the Secured Parties, the obligations of the Borrowers under this Agreement and the Notes, if any, may be declared to be forthwith due and payable as provided in Section 8.01 (and shall be deemed to have become automatically due and payable in the circumstances provided in Section 8.01 ) for purposes of Section 7.01 , notwithstanding any stay, injunction or other prohibition preventing such declaration (or such obligations from becoming automatically due and payable) as against the Borrowers and that, in the event of such declaration (or such obligations being deemed to have become automatically due and payable), such obligations (whether or not due and payable by the Borrowers) shall forthwith become due and payable by the Guarantors for purposes of this Section 7 .

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: do not find that MBI has waived this argument on appeal. See Ind. Appellate Rule 49(B). 3 . We also note that MBI did not present any expert testimony, or any other evidence, that would suggest that Orlando's permanent injury to his knee was not caused by the accident. 4 . The prospective juror was struck from the jury pool prior to trial. 5 . MBI also argues that Orlando was only asking for $75,000 in damages. However, Orlando clearly argued that $75,000 was where he thought the jury should begin its discussion for damages, but he did not limit his damages to this amount. Tr. p. 223. 6 . MBI also argues that "[i]f there is no evidence to establish the loss of earning capacity, there can be no recovery on that issue.” Scott v. Nabours, 156 Ind.App. 317, 321, 296 N.E.2d 438, 441 (1973) (<HOLDING>). However, the final jury instructions gave a Options: A. holding the trial court did not err by withdrawing the issue of loss of earning capacity from the jury when there was no evidence in that regard B. holding that the trial court did not err in charging the jury that the defendant was in the custody of the victim officer when he shot and killed the officer due to the undisputed evidence presented at trial including the defendants pretrial statement to police admitting that fact C. holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment D. holding that the trial court correctly instructed the jury that the defendant had to establish by evidence that outweighed the evidence against him that he lacked the capacity to form specific intent E. holding that trial court did not err

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the trial court did not err by withdrawing the issue of loss of earning capacity from the jury when there was no evidence in that regard
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: CURIAM. Pro se plaintiff-appellant Martin Bramson appeals from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. After carefully reviewing the parties’ briefs and the record, we affirm. We briefly address Bramson’s arguments. First, Bramson claims that the Federal Bureau of Prisons may not set the timing and amount of his restitution and fine payments through the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program (“IFRP”) without submitting any such plan to the sentencing court for its approval. While district courts may not delegate to probation or the Bureau of Prisons designation of the timing and amount of court-ordered payments, see United States v. Merric, 166 F.3d 406, 409 (1st Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>), this case is distinguishable. Contrary to Options: A. holding defendant cannot establish prejudice merely by alleging court held probation revocation hearing after defendants period of probation expired B. holding that district court could not delegate to probation the obligation of scheduling defendants installment payments C. holding that where defendant admitted to two violations of probation and was sentenced therefor court could not enter second order of revocation and resentence defendant on third charge of violation of probation which was pending at time defendants probation was first revoked D. holding that probation is not a sentence E. holding a sentencing court is not required to grant probation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that district court could not delegate to probation the obligation of scheduling defendants installment 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the expertise offered here.” Id. at 589 n. 8, 113 2 (1997) (expressly rejecting the idea that Daubert principles apply to only scientific principles or methods). Other Courts held that the Daubert factors were only applicable to testimony bearing on scientific knowledge. McKendall v. Crown Control Corp., 9th Cir., 122 F.3d 803, 806 (1997); Compton v. Subaru of America, Inc., 10th Cir., 82 F.3d 1513, 1518 (1996) (“The language in Daubert makes clear the factors outlined by the Court are applicable only when a proffered expert relies on some principle or methodology. In other words, application of the Daubert factors is unwarranted in cases where expert testimony is based solely on experience or training”); Iacobelli Const., Inc. v. County of Monroe, 2d Cir., 32 F.3d 19, 25 (1994) (<HOLDING>). The United States Supreme Court attempted to Options: A. holding that daubert applies not only to testimony based on scientific knowledge but also to testimony based on technical and other specialized knowledge B. holding that rule 702 admissibility determinations are reviewable under an abuse of discretion standard C. holding that daubert sought only to clarify the standard for evaluating scientific knowledge under rule 702 D. holding that the general principles of rule 702 recognized by the daubert decision are applicable to other species of expert testimony E. holding that federal rule of evidence 702 superceded the frye standard of admissibility of scientific evidence and that under rule 702 the district court had to determine that proffered expert testimony was both reliable and relevant

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that daubert sought only to clarify the standard for evaluating scientific knowledge under rule 702
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 Borrower shall, at all times, pay and discharge all Taxes prior to the date on which they become delinquent or penalties attach, unless the amount is not material to it or its financial condition or such Taxes are being Properly Contested.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the admissibility of DNA evidence is contested, the trial court must hold a hearing, outside the presence of the jury, and, pursuant to § 36 — 18—30[, Ala.Code 1975], determine whether the proponent of the evidence sufficiently establishes affirmative answers to these two questions: “I. Are the theory and the technique (i.e., the principle and the methodology) on which the proffered DNA forensic evidence is based ‘reliable’? “II. Are the theory and the technique (i.e., the principle and the methodology) on which the proffered DNA evidence is based ‘relevant’ to understanding the evidence or to determining a fact in issue? “Trial courts should make the ‘relevance’ assessment by addressing the ‘fit’ between what the scientific theory and technique are supposed 197 [ (8th Cir.1993) ] (<HOLDING>). We recognize that the state of scientific Options: A. recognizing that pleadings in the underlying case are subject to judicial notice by an appellate court B. holding that another courts decision is a proper subject of judicial notice C. holding that the reliability of the restriction fragment length polymorphism rflp procedure was subject to judicial notice D. holding that reliability of the polymerase chain reaction pcr method of dna typing would be subject to judicial notice in future cases E. holding that the existence and content of a police report are not properly the subject of judicial notice

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the reliability of the restriction fragment length polymorphism rflp procedure was subject to judicial 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: state civil and criminal law would apply and the owner would be subject to state law jurisdiction. Id. at 255, 112 S.Ct. 683; see also South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc., 476 U.S. 498, 508-09, 106 S.Ct. 2039, 90 L.Ed.2d 490 (1986). As the Court explained: “With the issue of the patent, the title not only passed from the United States but the prior trust and the incidental restrictions against alienation were terminated. This put an end to the authority theret Mass.1982); Bay Mills Indian Cmty. v. State, 244 Mich.App. 739, 626 N.W.2d 169, 174 (2001); Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation, 130 Wash.2d 862, 929 P.2d 379, 387 (1996); cf. City of Sher-rill, N.Y. v. Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y., 544 U.S. 197, 202-03, 125 S.Ct. 1478, 161 L.Ed.2d 386 (2005) (<HOLDING>). Thus, once a tribe owns land in fee simple, 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 even though the complaint sought money damages and land was actually recovered the attorneys lien attached to the land C. 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 D. holding that the oneida tribe could not unilaterally revive its ancient sovereignty over land through openmarket purchases from current titleholders even though the land had previously been reservation land E. holding that trust land is a reservation under 1151a

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the oneida tribe could not unilaterally revive its ancient sovereignty over land through openmarket purchases from current titleholders even though the land had previously been reservation 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: This Agreement and all of the provisions hereof will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns, but neither this Agreement nor any of the rights, interests, or obligations hereunder may be assigned by either Party, without the prior written consent of the other Party. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Buyer shall be permitted to assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement and any other Ancillary Agreement, individually or collectively, to one or more wholly-owned, direct or indirect subsidiaries with prior written notice to Seller; provided , however , that no such assignment shall relieve Buyer of, or constitute a discharge of, any of Buyer’s liabilities and obligations under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: argue, inmate observance of Ramadan, with its requirements for month long daytime fasting, multiple daily prayers and special diets, is wholly incompatible with the SDC boot camp regimen. There is likewise no doubt that the effective implementation of the program for all participants is a valid penological concern and objective. It follows, in summary, that defendants did not violate Blagman’s First Amendment rights by implementing a twenty week boot camp program designed to aid in the rehabilitation of eligible inmates, even though the program had the incidental effect of precluding Blagman from engaging in religious rituals or practices that are inconsistent with the program’s regimen. See, e.g., Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 892, 110 S.Ct. 1595,108 L.Ed.2d 876 (1990) (<HOLDING>). C. Intimidation Claim Blagman’s third claim Options: A. recognizing that facially neutral statute may contravene the fourteenth amendment if enacted with discriminatory purpose B. holding that a law did not violate the first amendment because it did not burden the exchange of ideas and noting most laws restricting a states initiative process would not implicate the first amendment C. holding that facially neutral laws or acts of general applicability do not violate the first amendment merely because of their incidental effects D. holding that statute which prohibited polygamy did not violate first amendment E. holding the statutory scheme of two federal laws was not void for vagueness and did not violate equal protection or due process even though the defendants conduct violated both laws

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that facially neutral laws or acts of general applicability do not violate the first amendment merely because of their incidental effects
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement contains the entire understanding between and among the parties and supersedes any prior understandings and agreements among them respecting the subject matter of this Agreement. Any amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement of that amendment is sought. This Agreement shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

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: The Employer in its sole discretion may terminate this Plan at any time and for any reason whatsoever. Upon termination of the Plan, the Committee shall take those actions necessary to administer the Eligible Employee’s benefit accrued under the Plan through the day before the effective date of such termination; provided, however, that termination of the Plan shall not adversely affect the value of the Eligible Employee’s benefit, as it existed as of the day before the effective date of such termination, or the timing or method of distribution of the Eligible Employee’s benefit, without the Eligible Employee’s prior written consent. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the termination of the Plan shall not give rise to accelerated or automatic vesting of the Eligible Employee’s benefit.

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: Any RSUs (including any Dividend Equivalents credited thereupon) that are not vested upon your Termination of Employment shall, upon such Termination of Employment, terminate and be forfeited in their entirety as of the date of such Termination of Employment.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: consistent with this opinion. 1 . West 2000. 2 . West 2000. 3 . Emphasis added. 4 . Emphasis added. 5 . Neither the bankruptcy court nor the district court addressed future costs; they are not at issue here. 6 . In re Soileau, 488 F.3d 302, 305 (5th Cir.2007) (citing In re Berryman Prods. Inc., 159 F.3d 941, 943 (5th Cir.1998)). 7 . 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7). 8 . 260 F.3d 400, 403 (5th Cir.2001) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1133 (6th ed.1990); Black’s Law Dictionary 1153 (7th ed.1999)). 9 . See, e.g., Pa. Dep’t of Pub. Welfare v. Davenport, 495 U.S. 552, 565, 110 S.Ct. 2126, 109 L.Ed.2d 588 (1990) (Blackmun, J., dissenting) (“When analyzing a bankruptcy statute, the Court, of course, looks to its plain language.”); Kelly v. Robinson, 479 U.S. 36, 43, 107 S.Ct. 353, 93 L.Ed.2d 216 (1986) (<HOLDING>). 10 . Kelly, 479 U.S. at 48 n. 9, 107 S.Ct. Options: A. recognizing that this courts construction of a statute becomes as much apart of the statute as the words of the statute itself and that change is a matter that addresses itself to the general assembly not this court B. holding that the starting point in every case involving construction of a statute is the language itself quoting blue chip stamps v manor drug stores 421 us 723 756 95 sct 1917 44 led2d 539 1975 powell j concurring C. holding that if the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous a court must derive legislative intent from the words used without involving rules of construction or speculating as to what the legislature intended D. holding that review of the construction of a sentencing statute is de novo E. holding principle of statutory construction is to give effect to every clause and word of a statute

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the starting point in every case involving construction of a statute is the language itself quoting blue chip stamps v manor drug stores 421 us 723 756 95 sct 1917 44 led2d 539 1975 powell j concurring
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 District Court’s Handling of the Fetzer Criminal Verdict Correctional Officer Fetzer was one of the officers that Bounds named as having used excessive force during the riot suppression that was the root of the First Amendment retaliation claim. Officer Fetzer faced criminal charges in United States v. Fetzer, Cr. A No. 99-41 (D.Del.), but was later acquitted. Appellants sought to use his acquittal in the criminal proceedings to rebut the testimony against Fetzer in the instant civil appeal. We have held that evidence of an acquittal from a criminal proceeding is inadmissible in a civil proceeding unless used in “limited occasions when otherwise inadmissible testimony may be admitted as rebuttal.” Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Sunshine Supermarket, Inc., 753 F.2d 321, 325 (3d Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). It has been explained elsewhere: The Options: A. holding grooming evidence inadmissible under r 403 under the facts of the case but not foreclosing admissibility in every case and not addressing r 702 B. holding evidence of an acquittal in a criminal arson case inadmissible in a civil arson case C. holding that there is a qualified first amendment right of access to proceedings and documents relating to disqualification of a judge in a criminal case and to conflicts of interest between attorneys in a criminal case D. holding that an order disqualifying counsel in a civil case is not a final judgment E. holding that final judgment in a criminal case means sentence

assistant: The best answer is B. holding evidence of an acquittal in a criminal arson case inadmissible in a civil arson case
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: From time to time, at the reasonable request of MoviePass and without further consideration, prior to the termination of this Agreement, Stockholder shall execute and deliver such reasonable additional documents and take all such further reasonable action as may be reasonably required to consummate and make effective, in the most expeditious manner practicable, the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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: See e.g. Pinebrook Props., Ltd. v. Brookhaven Lake Prop. Owners’ Ass’n, 77 S.W.3d 487, 499 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2002, pet. denied) (applying corporate alter ego veil piercing precedent in analyzing plaintiffs attempts to pierce veil of LLC); In re Secs. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. R.D. Kushnir & Co., 274 B.R. 768, 775-76 (Bankr. N.D.Ill.2002) (concluding that, while Illinois LLC Act precludes piercing on basis of failure to follow formalities, nothing in statute bars piercing LLC veil on other grounds applicable to corporations); Hamilton v. AAI Ventures, L.L.C., 768 So.2d 298, 302 (La.App.2000) (applying corporate veil piercing principles in upholding trial court’s piercing of LLC veil to hold member liable on LLC contract); Kaycee Land & Livestock v. Flahive, 46 P.3d 323, 327 (Wyo.2002) (<HOLDING>). McCarthy has not offered, nor can we find, Options: A. holding that while wyoming llc act was silent as to veil piercing there was no policy or legal reason to treat llcs different from corporations in this regard when llc has caused damage and has inadequate capitalization comingled funds diverted assets or used llc as a mere shell individual members are immune from liability legislative silence cannot be stretched to condone such an illogical result B. holding that prior to engaging in custodial interrogation police must warn a suspect that he has a right to remain silent that any statement he does make may be used as evidence against him and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney either retained or appointed C. holding a party has no standing to appeal unless he or she is an aggrieved party an individual who is not a parent in the eyes of the law has no legal interest in the child and therefore has no standing to appeal D. holding that there was no evidence or inferences to be drawn from the evidence to support the damage award E. holding that an unconstitutional act of congress has no legal effect

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that while wyoming llc act was silent as to veil piercing there was no policy or legal reason to treat llcs different from corporations in this regard when llc has caused damage and has inadequate capitalization comingled funds diverted assets or used llc as a mere shell individual members are immune from liability legislative silence cannot be stretched to condone such an illogical result
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: shall be performed.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.570(c); see also Wilson v. Sandstrom, 317 So.2d 732, 736 (Fla.1975) (“A mandatory temporary injunction may be issued requiring specific performance of a contract.”). If it had appeared to the Steins that Paradigm was not moving quickly enough to complete construction within two years, they could have obtained an injunction to force it to do so. Failure to comply with the injunction requiring it to finish construction within two years would have subjected Paradigm to civil and criminal contempt penalties. Roth v. Roth, 973 So.2d 580, 592 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (recognizing that a party may be held in contempt “for failing to perform a specific act” required by a specific performance judgment); Riley v. Riley, 509 So.2d 1366, 1367-70 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) (<HOLDING>); Firestone v. Ferguson, 372 So.2d 490, 492 Options: A. holding that a judgment that requires the performance of an act is enforceable by civil and criminal contempt penalties emphasis omitted B. holding corporation and its president in criminal contempt because previous order of civil contempt had not been purged C. holding that constitutional due process in civil contempt proceedings requires notice and a hearing but not the right to counsel D. holding the mcarn exception requirefs that the acts complained of warrant the imposition of criminal penalties as opposed to mere civil penalties E. holding that a civil contempt defendant has a right to a jury trial when the act of contempt was not committed in the presence of the court and when the incarceration is in part punitive

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a judgment that requires the performance of an act is enforceable by civil and criminal contempt penalties emphasis omitted
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: confidential and, thus, should remain under seal. For the following reasons, we disagree. R.C. 149.43(B) requires that public records be promptly prepared and made available for inspection at reasonable times upon request. R.C. 149.43(A)(1) defines a “public record” as “any record that is kept by any public office.” However, records that are prohibited from being released by state or federal law are excepted from public inspection. R.C. 149.43(A)(1). For example, in a civil proceeding, records and reports compiled by departments of human services and children’s services boards regarding allegations of child abuse are confidential and privileged. R.C. 2151.421(H)(1); 5153.17; State ex rel. Renfro v. Cuyahoga Cty. Dept. of Human Serv. (1990), 54 Ohio St.3d 25, 27, 560 N.E.2d 230, 232-233 (<HOLDING>). R.C. 2151.421(H)(1), provides: “[A] report Options: A. recognizing that some police records must remain secret and free from public inspection as a matter of public policy B. holding that a public database on a city agencys website was an administrative report subject to public disclosure bar C. recognizing presumption in favor of public inspection and copying of matters received into evidence at public session of trial D. recognizing that public utilities affect the public interest in that they render essential public services to a large number of the general public E. holding that a childabuse report is not a public record and therefore is not subject to public inspection

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a childabuse report is not a public record and therefore is not subject to public inspection
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: a challenge to a regulation that “implicate[d] only the more general contours of the substantive liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.” Kelley, 425 U.S. at 245, 96 S.Ct. at 1444. Unlike the court in Pienta, however, we do not read Kelley as applicable only to challenges based on general liberty interests, and we decline to follow the approach taken in Pienta. There is ample support for Kelley’s status-oriented approach. Regulations limiting even those rights guaranteed by the explicit language of the Bill of Rights are reviewed more deferentially when applied to certain public employees than when applied to ordinary citizens. See United States Civil Serv. Comm’n v. National Ass’n of Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 567, 93 S.Ct. 2880, 2891, 37 L.Ed.2d 796 (1973) (<HOLDING>); Pickering v. Board of Educ., 391 U.S. 563, Options: A. holding that activities of stateregulated political parties constitute state action B. recognizing that discrepancy regarding political activities went to the heart of petitioners claims where those activities formed the basis of the persecution claim C. holding that persecution was on account of political opinion because petitioners prosecutorial investigation into acts of political corruption was by its very nature political D. holding that njeither the right to associate nor the right to participate in political activities is absolute and congress may prohibit federal employees from participating in political activities in view of its interest in maintaining a nonpartisan work force E. recognizing the right of individuals to associate for the advancement of political beliefs and the right of qualified voters regardless of their political persuasion to cast their votes effectively

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that njeither the right to associate nor the right to participate in political activities is absolute and congress may prohibit federal employees from participating in political activities in view of its interest in maintaining a nonpartisan work force
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: did not abuse its discretion by admitting defendants’ exhibits into evidence. An adequate foundation was laid, the exhibits were relevant, and the exhibits were admissible for a nonhearsay purpose. See Haddad v. Lockheed Cal. Corp., 720 F.2d 1454, 1456 (9th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the district court did not abuse Options: A. holding that statements offered to establish defendants state of mind in making an employment decision and not offered for the truth of the matter asserted are not hearsay B. holding that a complaints bare assertions alone were insufficient for certification C. holding that complaints are not hearsay when offered not for the truth of the complaints but instead to show employers receipt of complaints and employers nondiscriminatory intent in its employment practices D. holding that the admission of a report was not hearsay because it was not offered to prove its truth but to impeach the veracity of the witnesss direct testimony E. holding that plaintiff cannot establish pretext because she is unable to show any causal connection her complaints and the adverse action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that complaints are not hearsay when offered not for the truth of the complaints but instead to show employers receipt of complaints and employers nondiscriminatory intent in its employment practices
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the date hereof, the authorized capital stock of the Company consists of: (i) 290,000,000 shares of Common Stock, of which approximately 28,575,440 shares are issued and outstanding; and (ii) 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, of which 0 are issued and outstanding. Except as disclosed in the SEC Documents, no shares are reserved for issuance pursuant to the Company’s stock option plans, no shares are reserved for issuance pursuant to securities (other than the Note and any other convertible promissory note issued to the Buyer) exercisable for, or convertible into or exchangeable for shares of Common Stock and 20,000,000 shares are reserved for issuance upon conversion of the Note. All of such outstanding shares of capital stock are, or upon issuance will be, duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable. No shares of capital stock of the Company are subject to preemptive rights or any other similar rights of the shareholders of the Company or any liens or encumbrances imposed through the actions or failure to act of the Company. Except as disclosed in the SEC Documents, as of the effective date of this Agreement, (i) there are no outstanding options, warrants, scrip, rights to subscribe for, puts, calls, rights of first refusal, agreements, understandings, claims or other commitments or rights of any character whatsoever relating to, or securities or rights convertible into or exchangeable for any shares of capital stock of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, or arrangements by which the Company or any of its Subsidiaries is or may become bound to issue additional shares of capital stock of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, (ii) there are no agreements or arrangements under which the Company or any of its Subsidiaries is obligated to register the sale of any of its or their securities under the 1933 Act and (iii) there are no anti-dilution or price adjustment provisions contained in any security issued by the Company (or in any agreement providing rights to security holders) that will be triggered by the issuance of the Note or the Conversion Shares. The Company has filed in its SEC Documents true and correct copies of the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation as in effect on the date hereof (“Certificate of Incorporation”), the Company’s By-laws, as in effect on the date hereof (the “By-laws”), and the terms of all securities convertible into or exercisable for Common Stock of the Company and the material rights of the holders thereof in respect thereto. The Company shall provide the Buyer with a written update of this representation signed by the Company’s Chief Executive on behalf of the Company as of the Closing Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In consideration of the payments made under this Agreement, Contractor hereby acknowledges and agrees that, as a contractor providing Services during the term of this Agreement, Contractor’s relationship with EFRI is one of high trust and confidence and that Contractor has access to and will make use of a variety of proprietary information of EFRI and its affiliates, including information relating to EFRI’s and its affiliates’ business and affairs, including without limitation, its assets, profits, profit margins, revenues, costs of production, transportation costs, marketing and sales costs, budgets, business plans, regulatory compliance status, legal actions, software programs, manuals, guides, customer lists, client proposals, technical, geological and engineering data, maps, reports and analyses, process and mining technology, and other confidential documents and communications within or concerning EFRI and its affiliates and predecessors and previous owners and operators of EFRI’s assets which are not freely available to outsiders (herein collectively called “ Proprietary Information ”).

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Board and the Committee shall have the right and power at any time, and from time to time, subject to thirty (30) days advance written notice to all adversely affected Covered Executives (which written notice may be satisfied by any public filing of such plan amendment or termination), to amend or terminate this Plan, in whole or in part; provided, that no such amendment or termination shall adversely affect in any material respect the rights of any Covered Executive to whom severance benefits under this Plan became payable prior to the date of such amendment or termination.

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: Neither the Company nor any Subsidiary is required to obtain any consent from, authorization or order of, or make any filing or registration with, any Governmental Authority, any self-regulatory agency or any other Person in order for it to execute, deliver or perform any of its respective obligations under or contemplated by the Transaction Documents, in each case, in accordance with the terms hereof or thereof, other than (i) the filing of a Form D with the SEC under the 1933 Act, (ii) any filings required under the 1934 Act or applicable “blue sky” laws, (iii) the receipt of any and all approvals required under the rules of the Principal Market, and (iv) such other consents which if not obtained or made would not reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a Company Material Adverse Effect.

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: problem specifically arising in the realm of computer [technology],” DDR, 773 F.3d at 1257. Thus, it fails to recite an inventive concept. Accordingly, claim 15 fails to recite patent-eligible subject matter under § 101. 4. Alice Step Two for Remaining Asserted Claims of the ’217 Patent— Evaluation of Abstract Claims for an Inventive Concept Plaintiff has not separately identified an inventive concept for any of the remaining asserted claims of the ’217 patent apart from those already discussed above. Thus, the Court need not address whether any of the additional limitations in the remaining claims provide an inventive concept. Shakur, 514 F.3d at 892 (litigants waive arguments by failing to raise them in an opposition to a motion to dismiss); accord John-Charles, 646 F.3d at 1247 n.4 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, for the same reasons discussed Options: A. holding that the defendant waived argument on appeal by failing to develop a cogent argument B. holding that an issue is waived where the defendant failed to develop an argument in his appellate brief and cited no authority C. holding an argument waived in part because the party failed to develop it in the district court D. holding that the appellant waived this argument E. holding party failed to develop any argument on this front and thus has waived it

assistant: The best answer is E. holding party failed to develop any argument on this front and thus has waived it
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: ¶ 7 In contrast to McLoughlin’s suggestion, the subsection affirmatively grants property owners the ability to prevent counties from initiating downzoning of the owners’ property, see § 11-829(F) (county-initiated downzoning prohibited “without the express written consent of the property owner”), thereby effectively delegating to those property owners the downzoning authority that formerly reposed in counties. However, “[i]t is a well established theory that a legislature may not delegate its authority to private persons over whom the legislature has no supervision or control.” Industrial Comm’n v. C & D Pipeline, Inc., 125 Ariz. 64, 66, 607 P.2d 383, 385 (App. 1979); see Washington ex rel. Seattle Title Trust Co. v. Roberge, 278 U.S. 116, 122, 49 S.Ct. 50, 52, 73 L.Ed. 210, 214 (1928) (<HOLDING>); People ex rel. Chicago Dryer Co. v. City of Options: A. holding that landowner who digs in such a way as to disturb natural state of neighboring land is strictly liable B. holding a landowner not liable for an accident on a country road caused by a tree which fell from the landowners property C. holding unconstitutional a zoning law that purported to give landowners who were not bound by any official duty but wejre free to withhold consent for selfish reasons or arbitrarily and could subject a neighboring landowner to their will or caprice authority to prevent a particular use on a neighbors land D. holding that a landowner could recover for placement of a median strip that could not have occurred but for the taking of the landowners property because the inquiry is how much has the particular public improvement decreased the fair market value of the property taking into consideration the use for which the land was taken and all the reasonably probable effects of its devotion to that use E. holding consent was given involuntarily when a reasonable person would not have felt they had the choice to withhold consent to search

assistant: The best answer is C. holding unconstitutional a zoning law that purported to give landowners who were not bound by any official duty but wejre free to withhold consent for selfish reasons or arbitrarily and could subject a neighboring landowner to their will or caprice authority to prevent a particular use on a neighbors 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: no individual under these age limits may use the services , provide any personal data to under armour , or otherwise submit personal data through the services ( e.g. , a name , address , telephone number , or email address ) .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: STR testing, has been held to be a scientifically correct and reliable technique by a vast majority of courts in other jurisdictions.” Butterfield, 27 P.3d at 1143 (citing cases). The Colorado Supreme Court concluded in 2001: “The majority of courts in other jurisdictions that have considered the issue have held that DNA evidence derived from the PCR testing method satisfies the standards for admissibility under either Frye or Rule 702.” People v. Shreck, 22 P.3d 68, 79 (Colo.2001) (en banc) (citing cases). By 2003, additional cases observed that the majority of jurisdictions addressing the issue held that PCR/STR testing was scientifically rehable and admissible. State v. Whittey, 149 N.H. 463, 821 A.2d 1086, 1094 (2003); see State v. Traylor, 656 N.W.2d 885, 891, 900 (Minn.2003) (<HOLDING>). The Whittey court observed that “PCR-based Options: A. holding under the restrictive frye test that pcrstr testing is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community B. holding that the frye test of general acceptance in the scientific community was superceded by the federal rules C. holding that calculations done by applying product rule were generally accepted in relevant scientific community D. holding that product rule method of dna statistical evidence is now generally accepted in the relevant scientific community E. holding that expert opinion based on scientific technique is inadmissible unless technique is generally accepted as reliable in relevant scientific community

assistant: The best answer is A. holding under the restrictive frye test that pcrstr testing is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community