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: judicial review of an arbitration award. See UHC Management Co., 148 F.3d at 998 (“ “We may not set an award aside simply because ... the arbitrators erred in interpreting the law or in determining the facts.’ ”) (quoting Stroh Container Co., 783 F.2d at 751). This third challenge is nonetheless partially cognizable, but only to the extent it can be read as an assertion that there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators, a statutory ground under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(2), as a claim of misconduct by the arbitrators in refusing to hear evidence or to provide a reasonable opportunity to present evidence, another statutory ground under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(3), or as an extra-statutory challenge to the “fundamental fairness” of the proceedings. See P & P Indus., Inc., 179 F.3d at 870 (<HOLDING>). Hoffman’s fourth challenge is to the denial Options: A. recognizing such a ground for judicial review of arbitration awards in this circuit B. holding right to be fundamental C. holding that section 34810 is an adequate and independent state ground D. recognizing plain or fundamental error E. recognizing review for fundamental unfairness of the proceedings as an independent extrastatutory ground

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing review for fundamental unfairness of the proceedings as an independent extrastatutory ground
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, INCLUDING THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE PARTIES HERETO, SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-1401 AND 5-1402 OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BUT WITHOUT REGARD TO ANY OTHER CONFLICTS OF LAW PROVISIONS THEREOF, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE PERFECTION OF A SECURITY INTEREST OR REMEDIES HEREUNDER, IN RESPECT OF ANY PARTICULAR COLLATERAL ARE GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF A JURISDICTION OTHER THAN THE STATE OF NEW YORK).

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: “[t]he ultimate question ... is whether [the contractor] adequately disclosed to the Government the ‘accurate, complete, and current’ ... costs .... [and] whether the Government relied on the overstated costs to its detriment.” 576 F.2d at 914 (emphasis added). In other words, a contract price has been increased by defective cost or pricing data when the government relied on the defective data to its detriment in agreeing to the contract price. That reliance on defective data is a necessary element of a TINA claim was reinforced by this court’s decision in Universal Restoration, Inc. v. United States, in which we found that the government could not recover on its TINA claim, even though the contract price was calculated using defective data. 798 F.2d 1400, 1402, 1406 (Fed.Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). In that case, we held that the presumption Options: A. holding that if a decision below is correct it will not be disturbed on appeal even though the lower court relied upon wrong reasons B. holding that government could not recover under tina even though billings were calculated on the basis of the 115 markup for overhead and the court aceepted as correct that universals overhead rate was in fact lower than 115 C. holding that the addition of a enough cereal to dog food to place it in a tariff provision with a lower rate of duty was within the importers right to fashion merchandise to obtain a lower rate of duty D. holding that appellant waived the issue on appeal by not raising it in its opening brief even though the lower courts decision was based on that point E. holding on appeal the judgment of the lower court is presumed to be correct and the burden is on the appellant to present to us a sufficient record from which we can determine whether the lower court has erred in the respect complained of

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that government could not recover under tina even though billings were calculated on the basis of the 115 markup for overhead and the court aceepted as correct that universals overhead rate was in fact lower than 115
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: its borders. The Trustee, however, argues that the state of New Hampshire is prohibited from imposing its laws on Ohio residents. The Trustee confuses state action with Congress’ discretion to make a federal choice of law. [T]he trustee’s concerns regarding extraterritorial effects of state law are misplaced. We are dealing with a federal statute which has incorporated state law into its application. Upon incorporation, that state law became a part of the federal statutory scheme; so it is federal law being given effect, not state law. In re Stockburger, 192 B.R. 908, 910 (E.D.Tenn.1996), aff'd, 106 F.3d 402, 1997 WL 41202 (6th Cir.1997) (analyzing application of prior version of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)); see also Bartlett v. Giguere (In re Bartlett), 168 B.R. 488, 494 (Bankr. D.N.H.1994) (<HOLDING>). “Nowhere does § 522(b) refer to the location Options: A. holding act qualifies as exemption statute under exemption 3 B. holding that the exemption right under 522 is a matter of federal law as to applicability even though the amount and items of exemption are defined and set forth in existing state statutes C. holding that under code 522 the debtors exemption may be denied where there is a finding of fraudulent bankruptcy planning D. holding that when interpreting tax exemption statutes we strictly construe the statute in favor of taxation and against exemption E. holding a debtors claim for loss of consortium to be entitled to an exemption under the oklahoma exemption statute and collecting other bankruptcy decisions recognizing a debtor spouses loss of consortium as the basis for allowing an exemption under federal and various state exemption statutes

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the exemption right under 522 is a matter of federal law as to applicability even though the amount and items of exemption are defined and set forth in existing state statutes
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: At any time after the date hereof, at the reasonable request of Stillwater, the Company shall do or cause to be done all such further acts, and shall execute and deliver such further instruments, assignments, transfers, conveyances, or documents, as may reasonably be required in order to implement and carry out the intent and purpose of this Letter Agreement and any documents executed in connection herewith.

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: “ ‘Summary judgment is proper only if (1) no genuine issue of material fact exists, viewing every possible inference in favor of the party against whom summary judgment has been entered and (2) the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’ ” Hardey v. Shell, 144 So.3d 668, 671 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (quoting Armiger v. Associated Outdoor Clubs, Inc., 48 So.3d 864, 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)). We review a final summary judgment de novo. Volusia Cnty. v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126, 130 (Fla.2000). We first note that the Medical Center contends that because the Mays sue of the Mays’ failure to file a reply before the trial court. Thus, it cannot make a tipsy coachman argument on that basis here. See Fitzsimmons v. State, 935 So.2d 125, 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (<HOLDING>). On the merits then, the issue is whether the Options: A. holding that where state failed to raise alternative argument below and thus defense did not have an opportunity to respond it would be improper to rely on the tipsy eoachman doctrine to affirm the trial courts ruling B. holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court C. holding that unpleaded affirmative defense was properly considered by the district court where plaintiff had notice of the defense and an opportunity to respond D. holding that government lost right to raise lack of expectation of privacy argument on appeal when it failed to raise argument below E. holding that the supreme court will not address an argument on appeal if a party has failed to obtain a ruling below

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that where state failed to raise alternative argument below and thus defense did not have an opportunity to respond it would be improper to rely on the tipsy eoachman doctrine to affirm the trial courts ruling
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: With respect to any third party claims (including, without limitation, ongoing litigations) that implicate Patriot (or its officers or directors) during the time Shields was employed with Patriot, Shields shall use all commercially reasonable efforts to cooperate fully and assist Patriot in its defense of any such claims. Upon reasonable request, Shields shall make himself available to Patriot’s designated counsel (including counsel for any officers or directors of Patriot) to discuss facts and other issues concerning any transactions or matters for which Shields has personal knowledge. Any such communications shall maintain a privileged status that may only be waived by written consent of Patriot. Shields also agrees that if is subpoenaed by any person or entity (including any governmental entity) to give testimony or provide documents (in a deposition, court proceeding or otherwise), that in any way relates to his employment with Patriot, Shields shall give prompt notice of such request to Patriot (24 hours or less) and shall make no disclosure until Patriot has had a reasonable opportunity to contest the right of the requesting person or entity to such disclosure. In the event Shields’ cooperation under this Section results in reasonable out of pocket expenses for Shields, Patriot shall reimburse Shields for such reasonable expenses after submission by Shields of proof of the expenses. Time is of the essence with respect to any requests made for Shields to cooperate under this section.

assistant: Cooperation
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 will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the United States and the state of California without reference to conflict of laws principles. Each party consents to the jurisdiction and venue of the U. S. District Court, Southern California District Court, or if such court does not have jurisdiction or will not accept jurisdiction, in any court of general jurisdiction in the state of California.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Title and risk of loss to Products shall pass from the Company to Aron as Products pass the Products Delivery Point; provided that if Products are delivered from the Refinery into a Specified Lien Location, then title and risk of loss to such Products shall remain with the Company. If Products pass directly from a Specified Lien Location to an Included Location, title and risk of loss to such Products shall pass from the Company to Aron as Products pass the Products Delivery Point of such Included Location. Aron shall retain title through the Included Product Pipelines and in the Included Third Party Product Storage Tanks. With respect to Products held in Included Locations, title and risk of loss to Products shall pass from Aron to the Company as Products pass at the Products Offtake Point, provided that title and risk of loss shall remain with Aron during Product transfers between Included Locations at which Products are held.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the parties hereto hereby irrevocably waives all right to trial by jury in any action, proceeding or counterclaim (whether based on contract, tort or otherwise) arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the actions of the parties hereto in the negotiation, administration, performance or enforcement thereof.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: within 72 hours, as required by Alabama Rule of Criminal Procedure 4.3. It is axiomatic, however, that § 1983 pro vides no cause of action for violation of state-law procedural requirements, even if those requirements were instituted in part to ensure compliance with the federal Constitution. Rights “created only by state law ... are not subject to substantive due process protection ... because substantive due process rights are created only by the Constitution.” McKinney v. Pate, 20 F.3d 1550, 1556 (11th Cir.1994) (en banc) (quotations and citation omitted). “[Vjiolation of state law ... is not enough by itself to support a claim under section 1983.” Knight v. Jacobson, 300 F.3d 1272, 1276 (11th Cir.2002); see also Vaughn v. City of Athens, 176 Fed.Appx. 974, 976 (11th Cir. 2006) (<HOLDING>). Second, plaintiff contends that the City’s Options: A. holding that there is no substantive due process right under the fourteenth amendment to be free from malicious prosecution B. holding the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment extends the right to jury trial to defendants in serious criminal cases in state courts C. holding immaterial a claimed fourteenth amendment due process right under alabama tort law D. holding that there is no fourteenth amendment substantive due process right to be free from malicious prosecution and suggesting that such a cause of action might lie under the fourth amendment E. holding that the fourteenth amendment incorporated the sixth amendment right to counsel

assistant: The best answer is C. holding immaterial a claimed fourteenth amendment due process right under alabama tort law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Guaranty shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of Texas. Each Guarantor hereby irrevocably submits to the jurisdiction of any Texas state or federal court sitting in Dallas, Texas in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Guaranty and the other Credit Documents, and each Guarantor hereby irrevocably agrees that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding may be heard and determined in such court. Each Guarantor hereby irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent it may effectively do so, any right it may have to the defense of an inconvenient forum to the maintenance of such action or proceeding. Each Guarantor hereby agrees that service of copies of the summons and complaint and any other process which may be served in any such action or proceeding may be made by mailing or delivering a copy of such process to such Guarantor at its address set forth in the Credit Agreement or set forth on the signature page of this Guaranty. Each Guarantor agrees that a final judgment in any such action or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law. Nothing in this Section shall affect the rights of any Beneficiary to serve legal process in any other manner permitted by law or affect the right of any Beneficiary to bring any action or proceeding against any Guarantor or its Property in the courts of any other jurisdiction.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The LOC and Revolving Note are hereby modified to: (i) have a maturity date of September 18, 2018 (the “Extended Maturity Date”); and (ii) the following language shall be deleted “ The interest rate charged on this Revolving Note (hereinafter defined as “Note”) shall be adjusted daily (the Interest Adjustment Date) until the Maturity Date (as hereinafter defined) and shall be an annual rate of interest equal to the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate plus 2.25%, provided that in no case shall the interest rate charged hereon be less than an annual rate of interest of five and one half percent (5.5%)(the Interest Rate”) and replaced with the following “ The interest rate charged on this Revolving Note (hereinafter defined as “Note”) shall be adjusted daily (the Interest Adjustment Date) until the Extended Maturity Date (as hereinafter defined) and shall be an annual rate of interest equal to the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate plus 1.25%, provided that in no case shall the interest rate charged hereon be less than an annual rate of interest of five and one quarter percent (5.25%)(the Interest Rate”). The Revolving Note, as modified, shall be referred to as the “2017 Revolving Note”. Borrower shall (i) make monthly payments of such amount of interest as accrues in arrears on the outstanding principal balance of the 2017 Revolving Note due on the eighteenth (18 th ) day of each month beginning on the eighteenth (18 th ) day of April, 2017 and continuing thereafter on the eighteenth (18 th ) day of each month until the Extended Maturity Date and (ii) repay principal owed on the 2017 Revolving Note as and when principal payments are required under the Loan Agreement. All payments shall be applied first to any amounts owing to Lender other than interest and principal, second to accrued interest and third to the principal balance. Except as specifically modified herein, all other terms of the 2017 Revolving Note shall remain in full force and effect.

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: their Eighth Amendment analyses. For example, in MacLean v. State Board of Retirement, 432 Mass. 339, 733 N.E.2d 1053 (Mass.2000), the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts examined the gravity of the offense, the maximum fine that could be imposed, the extent of the unlawful activity, the amount of illegal gain in relation to the penalty, and the harm caused. See id. at 1061-62; see also Bajakajian, 524 U.S. at 339-40, 118 S.Ct. 2028 (comparing the amount of the forfeiture, $357,144, to the gravity of the offense; examining also the harm that the respondent caused); United States v. Lippert, 148 F.3d 974, 978 (8th Cir.1998) (taking into account maximum fine that could have been imposed). ¶ 19 Applying these factors here, we conclude that the $135,000 fine asses th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>), with Commonwealth v. 5444 Spruce St., 574 Pa. Options: A. holding the measure of damages is the difference between the value of the automobile prior to the upset and its value when prepared and presented to the plaintiff for acceptance B. holding that forfeiture of farm worth 245000 was not grossly disproportional because the farms value was roughly equal to the wholesale value of the marijuana that was brought to the farm or distributed from the farm during the life of the conspiracy C. holding determination of property value in case to decide if assessed value was excessive is not a liquidated demand where only evidence of property value was the conclusory allegation of value in plaintiffs unsworn petition D. holding that the failure to place a dollar value on a possible decrease in property value was not unreasonable E. holding the aggregate value of the land and its improvements is the controlling value

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that forfeiture of farm worth 245000 was not grossly disproportional because the farms value was roughly equal to the wholesale value of the marijuana that was brought to the farm or distributed from the farm during the life of the conspiracy
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 3.21 sets forth a true, complete and correct description of all material insurance maintained by or on behalf of Parent, the Borrower Parties or the other Subsidiaries as of the Closing Date. As of such date, such insurance is in full force and effect.

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 shall, at its expense and at any time and from time to time, promptly execute and deliver all further instruments and documents and take all further action that may be necessary or desirable or that the Collateral Agent or the Secured Party may reasonably request in order (i) to perfect and protect the security interest created hereby; (ii) to enable the Collateral Agent to exercise and enforce its rights and remedies hereunder with respect to the Collateral; or (iii) to otherwise effect the purposes of this Agreement, including, without limitation (A) executing and filing such financing or continuation statements, or amendments thereto, as may be necessary or desirable or that the Collateral Agent may request in order to perfect and preserve the security interest created hereby, (B) executing and delivering, and causing depositaries and security intermediaries to execute and deliver, control agreements in respect of deposit accounts and investment property, and (C) furnishing to the Collateral Agent from time to time statements and schedules further identifying and describing the Collateral and such other reports in connection with the Collateral as the Collateral Agent may reasonably request, all in reasonable detail.

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: v. Carlson et al., 1994 WL 83270 (8th Cir. March 16, 1994 (D.Minn)) (finding Witzke’s § 1983 action “meritless” and “frivolous”). Moreover, this court notes that those courts which have addressed the retroactive applicability of § 1915(g) are all in agreement that there is no impermissible retroactive effect by applying the statute to complaints which were filed prior to April 26, 1996, the enactment date of the PLRA See, e.g., Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir.1996) (finding that § 1915(g) did not impose new or additional liabilities, and, thus, it could be applied retroactively); Green v. Nottingham, 90 F.3d 415, 420 (10th Cir.1996) (finding that § 1915(g) announces procedural rule and has no retroactive effect); Lyon v. Vande Krol, 940 F.Supp. 1433, 1436 (S.D.Iowa 1996) (<HOLDING>); McCray v. Kralik, 1996 WL 378273 (S.D.N.Y. Options: A. holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively B. holding that the rule announced by booker does not operate retroactively C. holding that 1915g does not operate retroactively simply because dismissals entered before the enactment of the plra are considered in applying 1915g D. holding that for purposes of counting strikes under 1915g it is irrelevant whether the strikes occurred prior to or after the effective date of the aedpa E. holding that the fair sentencing act does not apply retroactively to defendants whose criminal conduct occurred before its enactment even if those defendants were sentenced after its enactment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that 1915g does not operate retroactively simply because dismissals entered before the enactment of the plra are considered in applying 1915g
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 hereby represents and warrants to the other Party that, as of the Effective Date, none of such Party's employees or consultants (i) are debarred under Section 306(a) or 306(b) of the FD&C Act or by the applicable Laws of any Regulatory Authority; (ii) have, to such Party's Knowledge, been charged with, or convicted of, any felony or misdemeanor within the ambit of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1320a-7(a), 1320a-7(b)(l)-(3), or pursuant to the applicable Laws of any Regulatory Authority, or are proposed for exclusion, or the subject of exclusion or debarment proceedings by a Regulatory Authority, during the employee's or consultant's employment or contract term; and (iii) are excluded, suspended or debarred from participation, or otherwise ineligible to participate, in any U.S. or non-U.S. health care programs (or have, to such Party's Knowledge, been convicted of a criminal offense that falls within the scope of 42 U.S.C. §1320a-7 but not yet excluded, debarred, suspended, or otherwise declared ineligible), or excluded, suspended or debarred by a Regulatory Authority from participation, or otherwise ineligible to participate, in any procurement or nonprocurement programs.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive shall receive a Base Salary at an annual rate of $365,000, payable semi-monthly in equal installments in accordance with the Company’s normal payroll practices. The CEO shall provide Executive with annual performance reviews, and, thereafter, Executive shall be entitled to such increase in Base Salary as the CEO and the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors (hereinafter the “Compensation Committee”), in consultation with the independent members of the Board of Directors, may from time to time establish in their sole discretion.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that appellant was seen throwing either a plastic or a glass bottle, which was filled with some liquid, into the air in an arc, and hitting a tree. The object that was thrown was never recovered, and there was no testimony that the officer heard glass breaking. Although Officer Reddick presumed that had the object not hit the tree, it would have hit him, the fact is that the tree was there and Officer Reddick was not hit by the object. An analogous case is D.B.C. v. State, 341 So.2d 230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), where the sole witness to the incident testified that he saw appellant and two other boys throwing “something” in the direction of the train, but did not see what they were throwing. The trial court denied D.B.C.’s motion for judgment of acquittal, but was reversed on d DCA 1984)(<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we reverse appellant’s Options: A. holding a motor vehicle can be a deadly weapon by the manner of its use B. holding that after being chased by a carfull of angry men it would have been reasonable for mr rivera a private citizen to believe that deadly force was necessary even if only a single unarmed pursuer had approached his nowstopped car because the pursuer and his friends had already threatened riveras life and the lives of other innocent people by engaging in a highspeed chase and throwing deadly missiles namely a bottle of soda and a can of tuna C. holding that the throwing of a grapefruit at a passing tanker truck thereby shattering its windshield and superficially cutting the driver constituted the crime of throwing a deadly missile into an occupied vehicle D. holding officers decision to use deadly force to stop truck driver was not objectively unreasonable because officer believed driver posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm to the officers in the pursuit as well as other innocent motorists E. holding that after making an arrest of the driver of a vehicle the police may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the throwing of a grapefruit at a passing tanker truck thereby shattering its windshield and superficially cutting the driver constituted the crime of throwing a deadly missile into an occupied vehicle
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 Any notice which either party hereto may be required or permitted to give to the other shall be in writing and may be delivered personally, by intraoffice mail, by fax, by electronic mail or other electronic means, or via a postal service, postage prepaid, to such electronic mail or postal address and directed to such person as the Company may notify the Participant from time to time; and to the Participant at the Participant’s electronic mail or postal address as shown on the records of the Company from time to time, or at such other electronic mail or postal address as the Participant, by notice to the Company, may designate in writing from time to time.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, and all of the rights and obligations of the Parties in connection with the employment relationship established hereby, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the substantive laws of the State of New York without giving effect to principles relating to conflicts of law.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THE LENDER AND EACH GRANTOR HEREBY KNOWINGLY, VOLUNTARILY AND INTENTIONALLY WAIVE TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW ANY RIGHTS THEY MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY LITIGATION BASED HEREON, OR ARISING OUT OF, UNDER, OR IN CONNECTION WITH, THIS SECURITY AGREEMENT, OR ANY COURSE OF CONDUCT, COURSE OF DEALING, STATEMENTS (WHETHER ORAL OR WRITTEN) OR ACTIONS OF THE LENDER OR ANY GRANTOR IN CONNECTION HEREWITH. EACH GRANTOR ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT IT HAS RECEIVED FULL AND SUFFICIENT CONSIDERATION FOR THIS PROVISION (AND EACH OTHER PROVISION OF EACH OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT TO WHICH IT IS A PARTY) AND THAT THIS PROVISION IS A MATERIAL INDUCEMENT FOR THE LENDER TO ENTER INTO THE LOAN DOCUMENTS.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company, the Grantee, and the Grantee’s assignees pursuant to Section 9 (the “parties”) agree that any suit, action, or proceeding arising out of or relating to the Notice or this Option Agreement shall be brought in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California (or should such court lack jurisdiction to hear such action, suit or proceeding, in a California state court in the County of San Diego) and that the parties shall submit to the jurisdiction of such court. The parties irrevocably waive, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any objection the party may have to the laying of venue for any such suit, action or proceeding brought in such court. If any one or more provisions of this Section 15 shall for any reason be held invalid or unenforceable, it is the specific intent of the parties that such provisions shall be modified to the minimum extent necessary to make it or its application valid and enforceable.

assistant: Venues
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: Bonanza Creek Energy, Inc. (the “ Company ”) has adopted this Second Amended and Restated Executive Change in Control and Severance Benefit Plan (this “ Plan ”) to provide for the payment of severance or change in control benefits to Eligible Individuals (as defined below). The Plan was approved by the Board of Directors of the Company (the “ Board ”) to be effective as of September 26, 2016 (the “ Effective Date ”).

assistant: Effective Dates
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: intended those sections to be read in conjunction with 12 U.S.C. § 360. Section 4-105(d) of the UCC sets out a very practical, commonsensical definition of “collecting” bank as every bank in the collection chain except the payor bank. See, e.g., Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Merchants Nat. Bank (5th Cir.1982) 670 F.2d 548; Union Bank of Benton v. First Nat. Bank (5th Cir.1980) 621 F.2d 790; Engine Parts v. Citizens Bank (1978) 92 N.M. 37, 582 P.2d 809; Wilhelm Foods v. Nat. Bank of North America (S.D.N.Y.1974) 382 F.Supp. 605; Tubin v. Rabin (N.D.Tex.1974) 382 F.Supp. 193. The FRBNY was certainly a link in that chain. Defendant argues further that it is not a collecting bank because it was sent the check by mistake. See Citizens State Bank v. Martin (1980) 227 Kan. 580, 609 P.2d 670, 676 (<HOLDING>). The check, however, was not sent by mistake. Options: A. holding that a bank customer did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records maintained by the bank B. recognizing that a bank customer may have a tort claim against a bank for the wrongful dishonor of a check C. holding that a bank receiving a check because of a encoding error is not a collecting bank D. holding successor national bank liable for punitive damages judgment against bank that merged into successor national bank E. holding a bank liable where a bank officer held checks that were intended to pay the irs for withheld taxes

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a bank receiving a check because of a encoding error is not a collecting bank
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: address as 55-03 Van Doren Street; such repetition of one address indicated that the applications might include fraudulent statements; and he ordered all files in the file cabinets seized — even the ones that he had not individually searched. These actions bear none of the hallmarks of a general search: They suggest a fairly systematic inventory, not “indiscriminate rummaging,” and a search for items enumerated in the warrant, not an “exploratory” search for items not mentioned there. Indeed, federal courts have repeatedly held that such actions as were taken by the INS agents in this case, standing alone, do not support a finding that government agents have flagrantly disregarded the terms of a warrant. See, e.g., United States v. Hargus, 128 F.3d 1358, 1363 (10th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>) (collecting cases). Accordingly, even assuming Options: A. holding warrant valid where search warrant application affidavit was signed and probable cause existed for issuance of warrant B. holding that officers were entitled to rely on the judicial officers finding of probable cause in issuing the search warrant unless they knowingly made false statements to obtain the warrant and that a challenge to the adequacy of the officers investigation does not rise to level of clearly established constitutional violation C. holding that the government made a prima facie showing of authenticity of a warrant of removal where the immigration agent who maintained the defendants immigration file testified at trial as to his recordkeeping practices and that the warrant admitted was a true and correct copy of the warrant in the defendants file D. holding that a warrant lacking a description of items to be seized was not facially invalid and finding in the alternative that even if the warrant were found to be deficient the seized evidence was admissible under the good faith exception E. holding that where government agents were authorized by a warrant to search for broad categories of documentary evidence and records belonging to each category were found in every drawer of some file cabinets the officers did not grossly exceed the terms of the warrant when they seized entire file cabinets so that complete suppression was required

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that where government agents were authorized by a warrant to search for broad categories of documentary evidence and records belonging to each category were found in every drawer of some file cabinets the officers did not grossly exceed the terms of the warrant when they seized entire file cabinets so that complete suppression was required
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, certificates for shares of Restricted Stock that have vested shall not be delivered to the Grantee unless and until the Grantee has delivered to the Executive Vice President, Human Resources of the Company (or such other executive officer of the Company performing a similar function), at its corporate headquarters in New York, New York, cash payment, if any, deemed necessary by the Company to enable it to satisfy any federal, foreign or other tax withholding obligations with respect to the shares of Restricted Stock that have vested (the “Tax Amount”) (unless other arrangements acceptable to the Company in its sole discretion have been made). Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in the event that a Grantee has not satisfied the conditions outlined in the immediately preceding sentence within twenty (20) days after the shares of Restricted Stock have vested, the Company may (but shall not be required to), in its sole discretion, at any time by notice to the Grantee, choose to satisfy the conditions outlined in the immediately preceding sentence by unilaterally revoking the Grantee’s right to receive that number of shares of Restricted Stock that have vested with an aggregate value equal to 150% of the Tax Amount. For purposes of the preceding sentence, each share of Restricted Stock shall be deemed to have a value equal to the average closing price of a share of the Common Stock on the Nasdaq Global Market (or such other U.S. exchange or market on which the Common Stock is then primarily traded) on the five (5) trading days up to and including the date of vesting. The Company may from time to time change (or provide alternatives to) the method of tax withholding on the Restricted Stock granted hereunder by notice to the Grantee, it being understood that from and after such notice the Grantee will be bound by the method (or alternatives) specified in any such notice. The Company (in its sole and absolute discretion) may permit all or part of the Tax Amount to be paid with shares of Common Stock owned by the Grantee, or in installments (together with interest) evidenced by the Grantee’s secured promissory note.

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 obligation of the Company to make the payments and provide the benefits to the Executive under Section 6.1, 6.2, or 6.5 is conditioned upon the Executive signing and delivering to the Company a severance and release of claims agreement in a form to be provided by the Company (which will include, at a minimum, a release of all releasable claims and non-disparagement and cooperation obligations) (the “Executive Release”), which Executive Release must become irrevocable within sixty (60) days following the Date of Termination (or such shorter period as the Company may provide, which shall not be less than 30 days following the Date of Termination). The Company shall commence or make, as applicable, the payments under Section 6.1, 6.2, or 6.5 on the first payroll period following the date the Executive Release becomes irrevocable (such date, the “Payment Commencement Date”); provided, however, that if the 60th day following the Date of Termination falls in the calendar year following the year of the Executive’s termination of employment, the Payment Commencement Date shall be the first payroll period of such later calendar year; and provided further that the payment of any amounts pursuant to Section 6.1, 6.2, or 6.5 shall be subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: members; Plaintiffs and putative class members all have to log onto the computer, boot up several computer programs, and perform other duties before accepting calls; Qwest uses the same scheduling system at all call centers nationwide; and Qwest uses the same “Mission Control” monitoring procedures at all call centers. Although the availability requirements vary for different job titles, at this stage of the litigation, the relevant similarities make conditional certification appropriate. Furthermore, at this stage, Plaintiffs are not required to provide evidence showing Qwest’s illegal practice at every location or that Plaintiffs are identically situated to putative class members in all respects. See, e.g., Hipp v. Liberty Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 252 F.3d 1208, 1217 (11th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted). The Court now turns to Options: A. recognizing that in appropriate circumstances the court may limit the parties communications with putative class members prior to decision on conditional certification question in a 216b action B. holding that entry of settlement decree without notice to putative class members violated the due process rights of the class members C. holding that it is not necessary that all putative class members share identical claims D. holding that under 216b pjlaintiffs need show only that their positions are similar not identical to the positions held by the putative class members E. holding that putative class members are not parties to an action prior to class certification

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that under 216b pjlaintiffs need show only that their positions are similar not identical to the positions held by the putative class members
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: however , skype may ( a ) require you to download and install updates ; or ( b ) download and install updates from skype automatically from time to time unless you have chosen ( through your skype client settings ) not to receive automatic updates .

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: the pollution was not “sudden or accidental” as a matter of law, despite the fact that it may have been unintended. This Court agrees with the analysis of Judge Hodges in Industrial Indemnity. Additionally, the doctrines of intra-court comity and stare decisis mandate that this Court rule in a similar fashion. As the Court in United States v. Anaya, 509 F.Supp. 289, 293 (S.D.Fla.1980) held: [Ijmplicit in our desire for uniformity is our disinclination to depart from the doctrine of intra-court comity. The well-recognized doctrine establishes a general rule that, absent unusual or exceptional circumstances, judges of coordinate jurisdictions should follow brethren judges’ rulings (citations omitted). Further, the doctrine of stare decisis mandates that like , 905 F.2d 954 (6th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); EAD Metallurgical, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Options: A. holding that a three and onehalf month temporal proximity is insufficient to create a jury issue on causation B. holding that there must be a temporal connection between the dates of the alleged offense and the evidence pointing to another perpetrator C. holding that circumstantial evidence may support temporal link between defendants intoxication and his driving D. holding that intervening misconduct can sever the temporal proximity connection between the protected conduct and the adverse employment E. holding that the phrase sudden and accidental has a temporal component and does not describe continuous and ongoing pollution events

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the phrase sudden and accidental has a temporal component and does not describe continuous and ongoing pollution events
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: Except as set forth in the SEC Documents, to the knowledge of the Company, none of the Company’s stockholders, officers or directors or any family member or affiliate of any of the foregoing, has either directly or indirectly an interest in, or is a party to, any transaction that is required to be disclosed as a related party transaction pursuant to Item 404 of Regulation S-K promulgated under the Securities Act.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates