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: proceedings that we have come to expect in criminal proceedings. Accordingly, while the separation of investigative, prosecutorial, and adjudicative functions is a hallmark of criminal proceedings, due process does not require the strict adherence to separation of functions in civil matters. [Thus], some combination of overlapping of functions in an administrative proceeding is not inconsistent with fundamental fairness. Id. (citations omitted). We also have addressed this issue, albeit tangentially, in an attorney disciplinary proceeding. In Moncier, we considered whether members of a hearing panel should have recused themselves on the ground of alleged bias due to the combination of investigative and adjudicative functions in the Board. As we wrote: When an assertio 4 (1975) (<HOLDING>); Goldstein v. Comm’n on Practice of Supreme Options: A. holding that the combination of investigatory and adjudicatory functions in one judicial disciplinary agency does not violate due process B. holding a continuance of lawyer disciplinary proceedings pending resolution of related criminal proceedings is not constitutionally required C. holding that michigans lawyer disciplinary proceedings do not violate due process because the functions of investigation prosecution adjudication and review are functionally separate and are handled by different individuals D. holding that lack of notice of charges in disciplinary proceedings violates the due process clause E. recognizing that individuals are generally not similarly situated when different decision makers are involved in the respective disciplinary action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that michigans lawyer disciplinary proceedings do not violate due process because the functions of investigation prosecution adjudication and review are functionally separate and are handled by different individuals
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 been admissible, merely because appellant chose to testify. We note the State’s argument that appellant’s motion should be summarily denied because his story is so “dubious” that there is no reasonable probability that any reasonable jury would have acquitted, based on his testimony. We decline to decide whether appellant’s story is reasonable or to speculate as to whether a jury would have found his testimony believable. We believe that the trial court should initially make that determination, but only after the issue of whether or not the advice was erroneous has been resolved. We also recognize that some cases have held that no prejudice need be shown when the defendant’s right to testify has been abridged in any way. See Gill v. State, 632 So.2d 660, 662 (Fla 2d DCA 1994) (<HOLDING>). Contra State v. Oisorio, 657 So.2d 4 (Fla. 3d Options: A. holding that where the defendant claims that he was deprived of the right to testify by reason of ineffective assistance of trial counsel the defendant need not also satisfy the second prong of strickland v washington 466 us 668 687 104 sct 2052 2064 80 led2d 674 693 1984 specifically that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense B. holding that to establish a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel a defendant must demonstrate that counsel was constitutionally deficient and as a result defendant was prejudiced C. holding that where the defendant claims he was deprived of the right to testify by reason of ineffective assistance of trial counsel both prongs of the strickland test must be satisfied in order to obtain postconviction relief D. holding that the prejudice prong of strickland was not met in a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to the prosecutors misstatement of law where the trial court properly instructed the jury E. holding that the ninth circuit erred in granting habeas relief because the state courts decision was not an unreasonable application of strickland v washington 466 us 668 104 sct 2052 80 led2d 674 1984

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that where the defendant claims that he was deprived of the right to testify by reason of ineffective assistance of trial counsel the defendant need not also satisfy the second prong of strickland v washington 466 us 668 687 104 sct 2052 2064 80 led2d 674 693 1984 specifically that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense
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: Customer represents and warrants that (i) it has the legal right and authority, and will continue to own or maintain the legal right and authority, during the term of this Agreement, to place and use any Customer Equipment as contemplated under this Agreement; (ii) the performance of its obligations and use of the Services (by Customer, its customers or users) will not violate any applicable laws, regulations or the Acceptable Use Policy or cause a breach of any agreements with any third parties or unreasonably interfere with other Data Foundry customers’ use of Data Foundry services, and (iii) all equipment, materials and other tangible items placed by Customer at Internet Data Centers will be used in compliance with all applicable manufacturer specifications.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: he had already filed a motion to reconsider is supported by the record. Jiang’s first motion was filed and titled as a “Motion to Reconsider”; had it been a motion to reconsider, it would have automatically been rejected (as the BIA observed). That the BIA gave Jiang the benefit of the doubt by considering his first motion also as a motion to reopen (rather than simply denying it peremptorily as a motion to reconsider) does not afford a second opportunity to file essentially the same motion, in contravention of BIA regulations. Moreover, the BIA’s opinion on the first motion concluded: “[t]he motion to reopen and reconsider is denied.” In any event, Jiang’s second motion presents essentially the same meritless arguments as his first. See Waldron v. INS, 17 F.3d 511, 518 (2d Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). Jiang argues also that he had ineffective Options: A. holding that although no governmental action contributed to the eyewitness identification and no due process rights were implicated fairness required preclusion of the evidence B. holding that where no factual dispute is raised no hearing is required C. holding that district court has no jurisdiction to take further action where there was no remand order D. holding parental rights are constitutionally protected fundamental interest E. holding no remand required where no fundamental rights are implicated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding no remand required where no fundamental rights are implicated
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: Payments shall be made at such place as Lender may direct in lawful money of the United States of America. The full amount of this Note shall be paid by Borrower to Lender on or before the Maturity Date. Provided that the full amount of this Note is paid by Borrower to Lender on or before the Maturity Date, this Note shall not accrue interest during its term.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: demanding his resignation were possible outcomes of the meeting. Cf. Calhoun v. Gaines, 982 F.2d 1470, 1476 (10th Cir.1992) (relied upon by Plaintiff) (reasoning that the plaintiff did not have sufficient notice that “his employment [was] in jeopardy of termination” where the plaintiff could have reasonably inferred that meeting was for the sole purpose of discussing contract modifications and performance objectives, “rather than a proceeding to discuss the appropriateness of a termination decision”). Second, the Court rejects Plaintiffs argument that twenty-four hours was an insufficient notice period. The Tenth Circuit has indicated that there is no set length of time that must be provided and that termination immediately following notice may be sufficient. See West, 967 F.2d at 368 (<HOLDING>); Powell v. Mikulecky, 891 F.2d 1454, 1459 Options: A. holding that threatening employee to mind her own business investigating her videotaping her without her permission and forcing her to take polygraph could not be considered adverse employment actions because they had no effect on conditions of employment B. holding that the plaintiff made out a prima facie case of age discrimination based upon a showing that she was a member of the protected group she was qualified and capable of doing her job she was discharged and that her manager called her old woman thus evincing agebased animus sufficient to demonstrate discriminatory intent C. holding that employee had sufficient notice because she knew in advance of her termination that the county attorney proposed to eliminate her job D. holding that the plaintiffs evidence of pretext which included but was not limited to her supervisors statement that she had enough of the plaintiff going to her supervisor about her was not sufficient to preclude summary judgment E. holding that the former wife did not waive her attorneyclient privilege simply because the credibility of her claim that she relied on her husbands representations could be impeached by deposing her former attorney

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that employee had sufficient notice because she knew in advance of her termination that the county attorney proposed to eliminate her job
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 LITIGATION BASED HEREON, OR ARISING OUT OF, UNDER, OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY, SHALL BE BROUGHT AND MAINTAINED EXCLUSIVELY IN THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK OR IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK OR THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE. EACH MEMBER HEREBY EXPRESSLY AND IRREVOCABLY SUBMITS TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK OR THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH LITIGATION AS SET FORTH ABOVE. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, EACH MEMBER FURTHER IRREVOCABLY CONSENTS TO THE SERVICE OF PROCESS BY REGISTERED MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID, OR BY PERSONAL SERVICE WITHIN OR WITHOUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK OR DELAWARE. EACH MEMBER HEREBY EXPRESSLY AND IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ANY OBJECTION WHICH IT MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE TO THE LAYING OF VENUE OF ANY SUCH LITIGATION BROUGHT IN ANY SUCH COURT REFERRED TO ABOVE AND ANY CLAIM THAT ANY SUCH LITIGATION HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN AN INCONVENIENT FORUM.

assistant: Consent To Jurisdiction
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 Note and all matters related hereto shall be governed, construed and interpreted strictly in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without regard to its principles of conflicts of law. Any suit, action or proceeding seeking to enforce any provision of, or based on any matter arising out of or in connection with, this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby shall be brought in the state or federal courts located in Wilmington, Delaware.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: public domain. It is the character of the relator’s discovery and investigation that controls this inquiry. Id. (emphasis added). We conclude that the extent of reliance on information already in the public domain should be a consideration during the original source inquiry, even if that information is not a public disclosure within the meaning of § 3730(e)(4)(A). While it is true that reliance solely on “public disclosures” under § 3730(e)(4)(A) is always insufficient under § 3730(e)(4)(B) to confer original source status, reliance on public information that does not qualify as a public disclosure under § 3730(e)(4)(A) may also preclude original source status depending on the extent of that reliance and the nature of the information in the public domain. See BaHh, 44 F.3d at 703-04 (<HOLDING>). Thus, in deciding whether a relator’s Options: A. holding that a relator did not have direct knowledge of an alleged fraud when the knowledge was obtained in part by review of publiclyfiled payroll records B. recognizing common knowledge exception C. holding that rule 9b was not satisfied where the relator was a doctor who did not allege firsthand knowledge of the hospitals submission of false claims D. holding that the knowledge requisite to knowing violation of a statute is factual knowledge as distinguished from knowledge of the law E. holding there was no rule 404b violation where the evidence was admitted to show knowledge and knowledge was an element of the crime charged

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a relator did not have direct knowledge of an alleged fraud when the knowledge was obtained in part by review of publiclyfiled payroll 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the hearing officer. Despite the district court’s determination that the hearing officer’s decision was arbitrary and capricious, there is substantial evidence to support the administrative decision and no indication that the hearing officer made any errors of law. We conclude that the district court erred in disturbing the decision of the hearing officer, which was supported by substantial evidence. See Torres, 105 Nev. at 560, 779 P.2d at 961. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the district court and reinstate the decision of the hearing officer. 1 Root also argues that the district court has final appellate jurisdiction over administrative matters. We considered and rejected this argument in the recent case of State, Dep’t Mtr. Veh. v. Bremer, 113 Nev. 805, 942 P.2d 145 (1997) (<HOLDING>). 2 In 1995, NRS 484.382 was revised to Options: A. holding that there is nothing for a court to review when an agency has never issued a final and binding judgment that has the force of law B. holding that the supreme court has final appellate review of agency decisions C. holding that this courts review of board decisions is limited to final orders or final decisions D. holding that the court of appeals lacks the authority to overrule decisions of the supreme court of north carolina and has a responsibility to follow those decisions until otherwise ordered by the supreme court E. recognizing that our supreme court does not overrule binding precedent sub silentio and noting that because an appellate court opinion did not mention a contradicting supreme court decision the conflict between the two decisions was not called to the attention of the court which denied review of the appellate decision

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the supreme court has final appellate review of agency decisions
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: arbitration those judicial remedies that the drafting party with superior bargaining power is likely to need, while providing no such exemption for the non-drafting party with inferior bargaining power. See Rivera v. American General Financial Services, Inc., 2011-NMSC-033, ¶¶ 53-54, 150 N.M. 398, 259 P.3d at 818-19; Cordova v. World Fin. Corp. of N.M., 2009-NMSC-021, ¶ 32, 146 N.M. 256, 208 P.3d at 907-10. By contrast, an arbitration agreement that contains a bilateral carve-out that explicitly excludes from mandatory arbitration a certain set of claims is not substantively unconscionable, even if the party with superior bargaining power is more likely to assert the excluded claims in a judicial forum. See Dalton v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., 2016-NMSC-035, ¶ 21, 385 P.3d at 624 (<HOLDING>). Hatton marshals three arguments for Options: A. holding that an arbitration agreement between a lender and a borrower that included a bilateral exception for claims less than 10000 was not substantively unconscionable even if one party is substantively more likely to bring small claims actions B. holding that based upon the facts presented the arbitration provisions restricting or banning class actions are substantively unconscionable C. holding district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to sever numerous substantively unconscionable terms from arbitration agreement D. holding unconscionable arbitration provision that applied to all claims brought by borrower in reverse mortgage contract but not claims brought by the drafting party the lender E. holding that a 30day limitations provision is substantively unconscionable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an arbitration agreement between a lender and a borrower that included a bilateral exception for claims less than 10000 was not substantively unconscionable even if one party is substantively more likely to bring small claims actions
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: All distributions under the Plan are subject to withholding of all applicable federal, state, local and foreign taxes, and the Committee may condition the settlement of the PBS RSUs on satisfaction of the applicable withholding obligations. The Company, Carnival plc or any Affiliate of the Company or Carnival plc has the right, but not the obligation, to withhold or retain any Shares or other property deliverable to the Participant in connection with the grant of PBS RSUs or from any compensation or other amounts owing to the Participant the amount (in cash, Shares or other property) of any required tax withholding in respect of the Shares and to take such other action as may be necessary in the opinion of the Company to satisfy all obligations for the payment of such taxes.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) In exchange for the Severance Benefits and other valuable consideration, Employee, for [himself/herself] and for [his/her] heirs, executors, administrators and assigns (referred to collectively as “ Releasors ”), forever releases and discharges the Employer and any and all of the Employer’s parent companies, partners, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors and assigns and any and all of its and their past and/or present officers, directors, partners, agents, employees, representatives, counsel, employee benefit plans and their fiduciaries and administrators, successors and assigns (referred to collectively as the “ Releasees ”), from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, fees and liabilities of any kind whatsoever, whether known or unknown, which Releasors ever had, now have or may have against Releasees by reason of any actual or alleged act, omission, transaction, practice, conduct, occurrence or other matter up to and including the date Employee signs this Agreement and Release.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All communications hereunder will be in writing and effective only on receipt, and, if sent to the Managers, will be mailed, delivered or telefaxed to Citigroup Global Markets Inc. General Counsel (fax no.: (212) 816‑7912) and confirmed to the General Counsel, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., at 388 Greenwich Street, New York, New York, 10013, Attention: General Counsel; Goldman, Sachs & Co., 200 West Street, New York, New York 10282-2198, Attention: Registration Department; and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, One Bryant Park, New York, New York 10036, attention of Syndicate Department (facsimile: (646) 855-3073), with a copy to ECM Legal (facsimile: (212) 230-8730); or, if sent to the Partnership Parties, will be mailed, delivered or telefaxed to Holly Logistics Services, L.L.C., 2828 N. Harwood St., Suite 1300, Dallas, Texas 75201, attention of Stephen D. Wise, Vice President and Treasurer (facsimile: (214) 237-3051), and confirmed to the address of the Partnership set forth in the Registration Statement, Attention: General Counsel.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: did not appear at a hearing set in August 1998. 49. Mr. Cuellar had been unable to contact the respondent for some time and the respondent has not contacted him. At the August 1998 hearing, the Judge informed Mr. Cuellar that he should obtain new counsel to represent him. 50. Mr. Cuellar continued to attempt to contact the respondent without sue-cess. He received no refund of the unearned advanced fee paid to the respondent. Based on the facts set forth above, and having had no further evidence presented at the hearing, the PDJ and Hearing Board find that the People have not established that Jaramillo abandoned his client by clear and convincing evidence. Cf. People v. Carvell, No. 99PDJ096 (Colo. PDJ September 11, 2000), 29 Colo. Law. 137 (November 2000), 2000 Colo. Discipl. LEXIS 26, (<HOLDING>). Although the evidence is sufficient to Options: A. holding client is not liable for actions of attorney who misled client as to the status of case B. holding an attorney is an agent of the client and therefore cannot conspire with the client C. holding that individual attorneys and professional corporation were liable for excessive fees retained and owed to client D. holding that an attorney may only undertake to represent a new client against a former client where there is no confidential information received from the former client that is in any way relevant to representation of the current client E. holding that to find abandonment rather than merely neglect there must be proof that the attorneyduring a given time periodwas required to accomplish specific professional tasks for the client failed to accomplish those tasks and failed to communicate with the client and that the proof must objectively indicate that the attorney has deserted rejected andor relinquished the professional responsibilities owed to the client

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that to find abandonment rather than merely neglect there must be proof that the attorneyduring a given time periodwas required to accomplish specific professional tasks for the client failed to accomplish those tasks and failed to communicate with the client and that the proof must objectively indicate that the attorney has deserted rejected andor relinquished the professional responsibilities owed to the client
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: by entering into these terms , you either ( 1 ) acknowledge that you have read and understand the aaa rules ; or ( 2 ) waive reading the aaa rules and waive any claim that the aaa rules are unfair in any way .

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: Sandy gravely disrupted the ability of experts to reach SCI-Greene and perform the necessary evaluations, thus depriving [Applicant] of the opportunity for a full and meaningful clemency hearing. Did the Court err in its original ruling in its conclusion that the filing was ex parte and that it lacked jurisdiction to grant access for the experts and a stay of execution? On November 2, 2012, the common pleas court filed an opinion setting forth the reasoning in support of its order granting access but denying a stay of execution. In terms of the stay matter, the court initially questioned whether it had jurisdiction as no motion was directly before it and in light of Section 9545(c) of the Post Conviction Relief Act. See Commonwealth v. Morris, 565 Pa. 1, 771 A.2d 721, 739-40 (2001) (<HOLDING>). To the degree that jurisdiction was present, Options: A. holding that plaintiffs are not required to have asked for the precise form of relief that the district court may ultimately grant B. holding that a lower court may not exercise its inherent right to grant a stay except within the confines enumerated by 9545c of the post conviction relief act C. holding that the automatic stay applies to the debt ors appeal of an order entered in action brought against the debtor in the lower court D. holding a court of criminal appeals may not exercise its sentence approval powers to criticize a state court conviction E. holding that zoning boards of appeal do not have the inherent power to grant a rehearing

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a lower court may not exercise its inherent right to grant a stay except within the confines enumerated by 9545c of the post conviction relief act
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: overruling Bryant would create a conflict among the circuits, seven of which have held that escapes are inherently risky and thus always constitute a crime of violence under § 4B1.2. United States v. Luster, 305 F.3d 199, 202 (3d Cir.2002), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 1773, 155 L.Ed.2d 528 (2003); United States v. Turner, 285 F.3d 909, 915-16 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 895, 123 S.Ct. 180, 154 L.Ed.2d 163 (2002); United States v. Gay, 251 F.3d 950, 954 (11th Cir.2001); United States v. Nation, 243 F.3d 467, 472 (8th Cir.2001); United States v. Ruiz, 180 F.3d 675, 677 n. 7 (5th Cir.1999); United States v. Harris, 165 F.3d 1062, 1068 (6th Cir.1999); United States v. Dickerson, 77 F.3d 774, 777 (4th Cir.1996); see also United States v. Jackson, 301 F.3d 59, 63 (2d Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 2629, 156 Options: A. holding that crimes subject to a minimum sentence of 15 years under 18 usc 924e1 are properly characterized as class a felonies under 18 usc 3559 B. holding that for purposes of 18 usc 924e involuntary manslaughter in ohio is a violent felony the definition of which is identical for all relevant purposes to the definition of crime of violence in 4b12a C. holding that 18 usc 1919 did not implicitly repeal 18 usc 1001 D. holding for the purposes of 18 usc 924e that being a felon in possession of a firearm is not a violent felony as defined in 18 usc 924e2b E. holding that escapes are categorically risky in the context of 18 usc 924e

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that escapes are categorically risky in the context of 18 usc 924e
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: (1965)). "Section 413 is premised on direct liability for a principal employer's negligence in failing to insure that special precautions are taken in the contractor's work." Thompson, 1999 UT 22, ¶ 28, 979 P.2d 322. 131 Albertsons correctly notes that no Utah court has expressly adopted the peeu-liar risk doctrine. At least three times Utah courts have been presented with the peculiar risk doctrine or its variant, the "inherently dangerous work" doctrine, see Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 416, 427, 427A (1965). Each time the appeal was resolved on other grounds. See Poteet v. White, 2006 UT 63, ¶ 8, 147 P.3d 439 (declining to consider adopting the inherently dangerous work doe-trine "because it is unnecessary to our resolution of the case"); Thompson, 1999 UT 22, ¶ 33, 979 P.2d 322 (<HOLDING>); Johnson v. Department of Transp., 2004 UT App Options: A. holding that provisions of section 40115102 are applicable to the determination of the status of truck drivers as employees or independent contractors under the workers compensation act and discussing legislative history indicating intent to apply these provisions both to workers compensation and unemployment compensation matters B. holding that under the doctrine the district court should have stayed the diversityjurisdiction case pending the state workers compensation commissions final decision on whether the defendant properly paid certain workers compensation claims C. holding 616d030 barred employees actions where employees sued the state industrial insurance system alleging bad faith administration of their workers compensation claims D. holding that the peculiar risk doctrine has no application to employees of independent contractors whose claims fall within the workers compensation system E. holding that the adas bar on claims by independent contractors applied to rehabilitation act claims

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the peculiar risk doctrine has no application to employees of independent contractors whose claims fall within the workers compensation system
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 IRREVOCABLY 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 AGREEMENT OR 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, ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PERSON HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PERSON 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 AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION 12.09 .

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: Each Party expressly acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement, including all exhibits attached hereto: (1) is the final, complete and exclusive statement of the agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof; (2) supersedes any prior or contemporaneous agreements, promises, assurances, guarantees, representations, understandings, conduct, proposals, conditions, commitments, acts, course of dealing, warranties, interpretations or terms of any kind, oral or written (collectively and severally, the “Prior Agreements”), and that any such prior agreements are of no force or effect except as expressly set forth herein; and (3) may not be varied, supplemented or contradicted by evidence of Prior Agreements, or by evidence of subsequent oral agreements. Any agreement hereafter made shall be ineffective to modify, supplement or discharge the terms of this Agreement, in whole or in part, unless such agreement is in writing and signed by the Party against whom enforcement of the modification or supplement is sought.

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 Grantee shall, not later than the date as of which the receipt of this Award becomes a taxable event for U.S. federal income tax purposes, pay to the Company or make arrangements satisfactory to the Administrator for payment of any U.S. federal, state, and local taxes required by law to be withheld on account of such taxable event. The Grantee may elect to have the required minimum tax withholding satisfied, in whole or in part, by authorizing the Company to withhold from the Shares a number of shares of Stock with an aggregate Fair Market Value that would satisfy the withholding amount due.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company will reimburse Simon for all documented and reasonable out-of-pocket expenses he incurs at the request of the Company in connection with Simon’s provision of the Services during the Consultancy Term. Additionally, the Company shall pay Simon’s reasonable legal fees in connection with the negotiation of this Agreement, subject to provision of appropriate invoices and not to exceed $50,000.00 in the aggregate.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Best v. State, 118 S.W.3d 857, 861 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2003, no pet.). 3 . State v. Ross, 32 S.W.3d 853, 855 (Tex.Crim.App.2000); State v. Ballard, 987 S.W.2d 889, 891 (Tex.Crim.App.1999). 4 . Carmouche, 10 S.W.3d at 327; Guzman v. State, 955 S.W.2d 85, 89 (Tex.Crim.App.1997). 5 . Ford, 158 S.W.3d at 493; Carmouche, 10 S.W.3d at 327-28. 6 . Kothe v. State, 152 S.W.3d 54, 61 (Tex.Crim.App.2004); Carmouche, 10 S.W.3d at 327-28; Guzman, 955 S.W.2d at 87. 7 . Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 9, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1873, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968) (citing Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206, 222, 80 S.Ct. 1437, 1446, 4 L.Ed.2d 1669 (1960)). 8 . Id. a 59 Cal.Rptr. 191, 601 P.2d 207, 212 (1979) (noting warrant check permissible if stop not extended solely for that purpose); Jackson, 39 P.3d at 1190 (<HOLDING>). 60 . But see Tucker, 183 S.W.3d at 509 Options: A. holding that passenger conduct can be a factor supporting reasonable suspicion B. holding warrant check not unreasonable where detention not extended solely for that purpose C. holding that requests for identification of all occupants explanation of presence in area and warrant check was within reasonable scope of detention D. holding detention of passenger for warrant check violated fourth amendment absent reasonable suspicion E. holding arrest of individual for refusal to identify violated fourth amendment absent particularized and objective suspicion of criminal activity on his part

assistant: The best answer is D. holding detention of passenger for warrant check violated fourth amendment absent reasonable suspicion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: on the Debtor’s Part Ds do not match those in Schedule J. Further, the payment on the line of credit is not reflected in Schedule J, leaving the Debt- or with a significantly greater monthly deficit than shown in his Part Ds. 15 . The schedules list the house with a value of $195,000, and the two debts to Wells Fargo total $212,634. 16 . In re Riggs, 2006 WL 2990218 (Bankr.W.D.Mo. Oct. 12, 2006). Mo.Rev.Stat. § 408.552 provides in relevant part that an agreement to a credit transaction concerning default is enforceable only to the extent that there is either a payment default or the "lender's prospect of payment, performance, or ability to realize upon the collateral is significantly impaired....” 17 . Mo.Rev.Stat. § 408.551. 18 . Cf. In re Gerling, 175 B.R. 295 (Bankr.W.D.Mo. 1994) (<HOLDING>), with In re Manring, 129 B.R. 198 Options: A. holding that there is no duty to override a plans mandate that company stock be offered as an investment option B. holding that there is no fourth option ridethrough not permitted C. holding where there is no duty to defend there is no duty to indemnify D. holding that even if the doctrine applies to option contracts no conversion would take place until the option were exercised by the party having the right of election E. holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease but providing no more specific time requirement the lessee had a reasonable time to exercise the option within the term of the lease

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that there is no fourth option ridethrough not permitted
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: IA shall have obtained all consents, waivers and approvals required in connection with the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, other than consents, waivers and approvals the absence of which, either alone or in the aggregate, could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect on IA taken as a whole.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Schedule 5.21 sets forth a complete and correct listing of all insurance that is ( a ) maintained by the Loan Parties and ( b ) material to the business and operations of the Parent Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries taken as a whole maintained by Restricted Subsidiaries other than Loan Parties, in each case as of the Closing Date, with the amounts insured (and any deductibles) set forth therein.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company agrees to pay the Executive a base salary (the “ Base Salary ”) at an annual rate of not less than $375,000, payable in accordance with the regular payroll practices of the Company, but not less frequently than monthly. The Executive’s Base Salary shall be subject to annual review by the Board (or a committee thereof).

assistant: Base Salary
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: AXOGEN hereby employs Employee, and Employee hereby accepts such employment, beginning October 29, 2018, all upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, including those set forth in the attached Schedules and Exhibits.

assistant: Employment
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: summarized by the Florida Supreme Court as follows: Where an agreement has been actually entered into, but the contract, deed, or other instrument in its written form does not express what was really intended by the parties thereto, equity has jurisdiction to reform the written instrument so as to conform to the intention, agreement, and understanding of all the parties. Jacobs v. Parodi 50 Fla. 541, 39 So. 833, 837 (1905). Thus, “Florida courts have consistently held that where a mistaken writing is the product of the parties’ mutual mistake, or unilateral mistake on the part of one party and inequitable conduct by the other, the writing should be reformed to accurately reflect the parties’ agreement.” Florida Masters Packing, Inc. v. Craig, 739 So.2d 1288, 1290 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1999) (<HOLDING>); see also Smith v. Royal Auto. Group, Inc., Options: A. holding that unsatisfied execution creditor had rights in property superior to all but prior secured creditors and bona fide purchasers for value B. recognizing that if a creditors claim is subject to a bona fide dispute that creditor lacks standing to file an involuntary petition C. holding that a bona fide purchaser may be considered in privity with its predecessor D. holding that one who acquires legal title with notice of a prior equitable interest in the property is not a bona fide purchaser E. holding that parent tract transferees were bona fide purchasers without notice and thus outparcel deed was not subject to reformation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that parent tract transferees were bona fide purchasers without notice and thus outparcel deed was not subject to reformation
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: because the statute gives the executive branch substantial control over the litigation.”); see also Robinson, 824 F.Supp. at 837. But see Riley, 982 F.Supp. at 1269 n. 5 (noting in a footnote that “the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act also raise serious constitutional concerns as to whether Congress may delegate the executive powers of law enforcement to private parties .. .”)• 3. Appointments Clause Finally, Hektoen argues that the FCA’s qui tam provisions violate the Appointments Clause, which vests the executive branch with the exclusive power to appoint officers to execute the laws of the United States. Numerous other courts have held that qui tam relators are not officers within the meaning of the Appointments Clause. See, e.g., Taxpayers Against Fraud, 41 F.3d at 1041 (<HOLDING>); Kelly, 9 F.3d 743, 757 (holding that Options: A. holding that a public trust that exercised control over the beneficiarys employment did not change the benefit plan into a government plan because the trust did not establish the plan or control it B. holding that the act is constitutional because it restricts who may control the images but not what the defendant may introduce at trial C. holding that it may not D. holding that relators are not officers because the government may take control of such eases whenever it wishes and because the relators position is without tenure or continuous duties E. recognizing that the government agreed not to take a position

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that relators are not officers because the government may take control of such eases whenever it wishes and because the relators position is without tenure or continuous duties
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 343 U.S. 154 72 S.Ct. 598 96 L.Ed. 852 RAYv.BLAIR. No. 649. Argued March 31, 1952. Decided April 3, 1952. Subsequent Opinion April 15, 1952. See 343 U.S. 214, 72 S.Ct. 654. Messrs. Marx Leva, Washington, D.C., Harold M. Cook, Birmingham, Ala., for petitioner. Mr. Horace C. Wilkinson, Birmingham, Ala., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 In this proceeding, an Alabama circuit court entered an order directing petitioner to certify to the Secretary of State of Alabama the name of respondent as a candidate for nomination for Presidential and Vice-Presidential elector in the primary election of the Democratic Party to be held on May 6, 1952. The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed on the single ground that the order was compelled by Article II, Section 1 and the Twelfth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 2 Petitioner applied to this Court for a stay of the judgments and mandates of the Alabama courts and filed a petition for writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the Alabama Supreme Court. On March 24, 1952, we granted certiorari and ordered the judgments and mandates of the courts below stayed pending further consideration and disposition of the case by this Court. The case was assigned for argument on the stay as well as the merits on March 31, 1952. 343 U.S. 901, 72 S.Ct. 637. 3 The question raised in this case has been thoroughly briefed and argued. The Court has fully considered the question and has reached its conclusion. It now announces its decision and enters its judgment in advance of the preparation of a full opinion which, when prepared, will be filed with the Clerk. See 343 U.S. 214, 72 S.Ct. 654. 4 The Court holds that Article II, Section 1 and the Twelfth Amendment of the Constitution do not compel issuance of the order and judgment entered below. 5 The judgment below is reversed. The mandate of this Court is directed to issue forthwith. 6 Reversed. 7 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS and Mr. Justice JACKSON dissent. 8 Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 2