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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: After giving effect to the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, the Company has capital sufficient to carry on its business and transactions and is solvent and able to pay its debts as they mature. No transfer of property is being made and no Indebtedness is being incurred in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud either present or future creditors of the Company or any Subsidiary of the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: solid waste collection contract. Wash. Rev.Code § 81.77 only requires that a WUTC Certificate be obtained by the time performance commences. Nevertheless, the Air Force’s Final Justification concluded: ,“[o]fferors on the previous solicitation are expected to show an interest in this procurement, however, they will not be eligible to compete as prime contractors without a certificate for this geographic area issued by the WUTC.” AR at 777. The record in this case does not support that conclusion. The law is clear that a contracting officer must make reasonable efforts to ascertain if it is likely that at least two small businesses capable of performing the work will submit offers. See 15 U.S.C. § 657a(b)(2)(B); see also MCS Management, Inc. v. United States, 48 Fed.Cl. 506, 511 (2001) (<HOLDING>) aff’d, 25 Fed.Appx. 957 (Fed.Cir. 2001); see Options: A. holding that although 15 usc 657a and relevant far provisions do not require a particular method to assess small business availability a contracting officer must make reasonable efforts to determine whether offers will be received from at least two responsible small businesses at fair market prices B. holding that the alleged disclosure must at least be reasonable for the perceived whistleblower doctrine to apply C. holding misrepresentation must at least be partial cause of plaintiffs injury D. holding under facts presented that probation officer was entitled to at least qualified immunity E. holding that appellant was deprived of a fair trial where the jury was instructed in such a way that it was not required to find at least two elements of the offense of capital murder to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that although 15 usc 657a and relevant far provisions do not require a particular method to assess small business availability a contracting officer must make reasonable efforts to determine whether offers will be received from at least two responsible small businesses at fair market prices
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: No other explanation is found in the record. The court, for example, did not make a specific determination of when Orlando entered the conspiracy, nor did it indicate “the scope of the criminal activity [Orlando] agreed to jointly undertake.” U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § IB 1.3, cmt. n. 2. This failure to make specific findings to justify holding Orlando accountable for $449,000 of laundered money is even more apparent in comparison with the court’s disposition of Daniels’s objections to her PSR. The court included the factual determinations that it made at Daniels’s sentencing hearing in the findings that it prepared in response to her objections pursuant to Rule 32(c)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Although the government contends that the di (6th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). The government’s focus on the evidence Options: A. holding that the admission of expert testimony was prejudicial where the testimony was pervasive B. holding that the district court committed prejudicial error in admitting expert testimony about the structure of drug trafficking organizations because the testimony portrayed the defendant as a member of such an organization and implied the defendant knew the drugs were in his vehicle C. holding a proffer of testimony is required to preserve the issue of whether testimony was properly excluded by the trial judge and an appellate court will not consider error alleged in the exclusion of testimony unless the record on appeal shows fairly what the excluded testimony would have been D. holding the excluded testimony was relevant to whether a signature was that of a deceased party and since a statement regarding the issue was the only testimony that could be given by the witness no offer to prove was necessary because the substance of the evidence was apparent from the context of the question asked E. holding that the district court complied with the requirements of lb13alb where it made specific references to testimony in the record relating to the scope of the defendants involvement in the drug trafficking conspiracy noted that the relevant testimony was unrefuted and stated that the testimony was internally consistent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district court complied with the requirements of lb13alb where it made specific references to testimony in the record relating to the scope of the defendants involvement in the drug trafficking conspiracy noted that the relevant testimony was unrefuted and stated that the testimony was internally consistent
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: exculpatory findings.” Standing as it does, “could have” is merely an introduction to speculation and is not a substitute for “concrete evidence.” Id. There was no abuse of discretion, and there is no basis to disturb the judge’s denial of the motion to suppress. See Commonwealth v. O’Day, ante 296, 307 (2003) (affirming denial of motion to dismiss due to inadequate showing that Commonwealth’s intentional destruction of infernal device denied defendant access to exculpatory evidence); Commonwealth v. Cintron, supra at 785 (affirming denial of motion to dismiss or suppress due to defendant’s failure to show that access to original fingerprint would have provided evidence more favorable than did access to photographs of fingerprint); Commonwealth v. Gomes, 403 Mass. 258, 277 (1988) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Neal, 392 Mass. 1, 12 (1984) Options: A. holding the tenday requirement was ministerial and the defendant failed to show he was prejudiced by the delay B. holding that defendant failed to show that lack of photographs of test plates used to analyze blood stains prejudiced his case C. holding blood test taken for independent medical purpose is not same as blood test taken pursuant to section 3755a D. holding that a defendants right to an independent blood alcohol test means the right to a test that is not subject to government manipulation E. holding that funds for an accountant were appropriately denied where defendant did not show that lack of an accountant prejudiced his case

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendant failed to show that lack of photographs of test plates used to analyze blood stains prejudiced his case
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: but that has no other connection with a State or a local government or the Federal Government. The relationship must be an active one in which the department, agency, or instrumentality is actually carrying out some governmental function. S.Rep. No. 989, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 24 (1978), reprinted, in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5787, 5810. It is undisputed that PHH is a private corporation that originates, funds, and services mortgages for profit, and not a “governmental unit” as contemplated by the statutes. Therefore, section 525(a) does not apply to the ease at bar. Section 525(b) also does not apply primarily because debtors are not employees of PHH. Section 525(b) states: No private employer may terminate the employment of, or discriminate with respect to employment against, an indi x.1989) (<HOLDING>). Courts are also willing to read beyond the Options: A. holding that an alibi instruction would not have been appropriate where the government offered both direct participation and accessory theories explaining that a conviction may be based on aiding and abetting even if defendants offered persuasive alibis B. holding that statements offered to establish defendants state of mind in making an employment decision and not offered for the truth of the matter asserted are not hearsay C. holding that the district court made sufficient factual findings and adequately determined the scope of defendants participation in a conspiracy under 1b13 even though the district court did not expressly determine the scope of the defendants participation D. holding employer phone company violated section 525b when debtor account specialist was not offered participation in the commission advancement program because of debtors bankruptcy when all other account specialists were offered participation E. holding that when the district court imposed drug testing in connection with a special condition of substance abuse program participation it was not required to specify the number of drug tests a defendant must undergo as a part of the treatment program

assistant: The best answer is D. holding employer phone company violated section 525b when debtor account specialist was not offered participation in the commission advancement program because of debtors bankruptcy when all other account specialists were offered participation
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: and circumstances presented obviously would not be “legitimate.” The standard adopted herein accords with the objective of assessing whether a business or economic justification is legitimate. Vendors holding claims that are separately classified from other unsecured claims must be providing genuine operational or financial benefits to the debtor, and the preferential treatment offered to those vendors must be reasonably calculated to induce their continued support of the debtor. This legal standard also is consistent with authorities from outside the Ninth Circuit holding that the separate classification of trade claims may be justified by a ‘“reasonable purpose,’ legitimate basis or necessary business objective.” See, e.g., In re Jersey Med. Ctr., 817 F.2d 1055, 1061 (3d Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); In re One Times Square Assoc. Ltd. P’ship, Options: A. holding that classification of claims or interests must be reasonable and recognizing reasonableness of distinguishing trade creditors claims B. holding that claims including constitutional claims must be asserted in trial court to be raised on appeal C. holding that the claims of defrauded shareholders could be subordinated to the claims of general creditors even though both were presumably innocent D. holding that separate classification of similar claims is allowed but only for reasons independent of the debtors motivation to secure the vote of an impaired assenting class of claims E. holding claims must be raised on direct appeal or waived

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that classification of claims or interests must be reasonable and recognizing reasonableness of distinguishing trade creditors claims
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: this terms of use agreement ( the `` agreement '' ) governs your use of or access to our mobile application and our website , available at : sync.me ( collectively , the `` service '' ) .

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 485 U.S. 264 108 S.Ct. 1253 99 L.Ed.2d 288 Alexander HAIG, et al., petitioners,v.Gladys BISSONETTE, et al. No. 86-987 Supreme Court of the United States March 21, 1988 On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. PER CURIAM. 1 Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U.S.C. § 1, and since a majority of the qualified Justices are of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is affirmed under 28 U.S.C. § 2109, which provides that under these circumstances the Court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affirmance by an equally divided Court. 2 Petition for Rehearing Dismissed May 16, 1988. 3 See 486 U.S. 1019, 108 S.Ct. 1760. 4 THE CHIEF JUSTICE, Justice O'CONNOR, Justice SCALIA, and Justice KENNEDY took no part in this decision.

assistant: 9
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 shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon Employer, its successors and assigns, but without the prior written consent of Executive, this Agreement may not be assigned other than to an affiliate of Employer or in connection with a merger or sale of all or substantially all of the assets of Employer or a similar transaction in which the successor or assignee assumes (whether by operation of law or express assumption) all obligations of Employer hereunder. Employer and The Taubman Realty Group Limited Partnership (“ TRG ”) shall remain liable (including pursuant to the Guaranty) notwithstanding any such assignment and assumption. The obligations and duties of Executive hereunder are personal and otherwise not assignable. Amounts payable to Executive hereunder shall not be subject to sale, transfer, pledge, assignment or alienation other than by will or the laws of descent and distribution.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Maintain with financially sound and reputable insurance companies, insurance with respect to its properties and business against loss or damage of the kinds customarily insured against by Persons engaged in the same or similar business, of such types and in such amounts (after giving effect to any self-insurance reasonable and customary for similarly situated Persons engaged in the same or similar businesses as Holdings and its Subsidiaries) as are customarily carried under similar circumstances by such other Persons.

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 DSUs are 100% vested; provided, however, that the DSU shall not be settled with the Grantee until his or her separation from service as a Non-Employee Director with the Company as described in Section 9 below.

assistant: Vesting
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 Obligor acknowledges receipt of a copy of this Agreement. The Obligor waives any notice of acceptance of this Agreement by the Secured Parties. The Obligor also waives the right to receive a copy of any financing statement or financing change statement that may be registered in connection with this Agreement or any verification statement issued with respect to a registration, if waiver is not otherwise prohibited by law. The Obligor agrees that the Agent may from time to time provide information regarding this Agreement, the Collateral and the Obligations to persons that the Agent believes in good faith are entitled to the information under applicable law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: noted, if transfer of title were held to moot any challenge to the public purpose, all condemning authorities could insulate the public purpose requirement from judicial review by utilizing the quick-take procedures. This is a rigid rule that does not always satisfy our test for mootness. We have recognized that equitable relief may remain available even after the condemning authority has acquired title to the property. See County of Blue Earth v. Stauffenberg, 264 N.W.2d 647, 649-50 (Minn.1978) (stating that although a taking may be completed by the time the necessity of the governmental taking is finally reviewed by this court, the governmental body that took the property can be compelled to return it to its previous owner); see also In re Rapp, 621 N.W.2d 781, 784 (Minn.App.2001) (<HOLDING>). Adopting respondent’s bright line rule would Options: A. holding that because the property owner argued only a theory of taking that was no longer a valid theory property owner did not demonstrate his entitlement to relief B. holding where the commonwealth is not in possession of property in question petition for return of property is moot C. holding that in condemnation proceedings the landowner has the burden of establishing the value of the property D. holding that property owner still has relief in the form of the return of his property though condemnation was complete and a highway was constructed across the property E. holding that the property held by the revocable trust in which the trustee was the beneficiary and the property was his permanent residence was a constitutionally protected homestead property

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that property owner still has relief in the form of the return of his property though condemnation was complete and a highway was constructed across the property
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: we respond to clear and complete notices of alleged infringement of copyright , trademark or other intellectual property laws that satisfy the requirements in these terms ( which we believe to comply with the united states digital millennium copyright and other applicable laws ) .

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: Plaintiffs demand a complete record of how the Notes were handled and their whereabouts, and conclude that “[t]his court retains the capacity and is the only venue to grant the relief sought by [Plaintiffs.” Id. c. The Government’s Reply. The Government replies that, although Plaintiffs’ Response challenges the validity of the Notice of Deficiency and the Certificate of Assessment and Payment for the years at issue, Plaintiffs have presented no evidence that the IRS did not assess taxes in the amount stated on the 1996-1999 Certificates. Gov’t Resp. at 2. A Certificate of Assessment and Payment is “presumed to be correct, and is prima facie evidence that the IRS made the assessments reflected in the Certificate.” Id. (citing Rocovich v. United States, 933 F.2d 991, 994 (Fed.Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>)); see also Rohmann v. United States, 25 Cl.Ct. Options: A. holding claim that an assessment is made in violation of section 193155 is an action to contest an assessment and is governed by section 1941712 B. holding that a court would abuse its discretion by relying on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence C. holding that a certificate of assessment and payment is presumptive proof of a valid assessment by the irs D. holding that full payment of the assessment is also required for tax refund suits brought in the united states court of federal claims E. holding that form 4340 showing notice of assessment and demand for payment is admissible under the federal rules of evidence

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a certificate of assessment and payment is presumptive proof of a valid assessment by the irs
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: about the crimes committed until one year from this date, and then only upon the condition that the child has successfully completed his program of rehabilitation and demonstrated a maturity to his counselors and this Court that would allow him to speak appropriately about the events of his past criminal activity. Any compensation that he receives for such comments shall go totally toward restitution payments due to the victims. ML objects to this condition on constitutional grounds. A special condition of probation is constitutional if it bears a relationship to the crime for which the offender is convicted, relates to conduct which is in itself criminal, or requires or forbids conduct which is reasonably related to future, criminality. See Biller v. State, 618 So.2d 734 (Fla.1993) (<HOLDING>). The Biller court said: In Rodriguez [v. Options: A. holding that a requirement that the defendant not use or possess alcoholic beverages should not have been imposed as a special condition of probation B. holding that the requirement that a defendant pay for drug testing is a special condition of probation which must be pronounced at sentencing C. recognizing that before a special condition of probation may be imposed there must be an oral pronouncement of the condition at sentencing D. holding special conditions of probation must be imposed at sentencing and may not be imposed at resentencing E. holding that a defendant is not entitled to credit for time served as a condition of probation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a requirement that the defendant not use or possess alcoholic beverages should not have been imposed as a special condition of probation
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: Do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect its legal existence, except, in the case of a Subsidiary of the Borrower, (i) where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, (ii) as otherwise permitted under Section 6.05 of the First Lien Credit Agreement as in effect on the Closing Date and the Second Lien Credit Agreement as in effect on the Closing Date, and (iii) for the liquidation or dissolution of Subsidiaries of the Borrower if the assets of such Subsidiaries to the extent they exceed estimated liabilities are acquired by the Borrower or a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of the Borrower in such liquidation or dissolution.

assistant: Existence
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: grievances.” Hernandez v. United States, 38 Fed.Cl. 532, 536 (1997). To that end, the statute provides a fairly elaborate administrative process for handling complaints of retaliatory personnel actions that commences with a complaint filed with the Inspector General and can culminate in an appeal to the Secretary of Defense. 10 U.S.C. § 1034(c)-(h). The existence of this comprehensive scheme establishes that Congress did not intend to provide plaintiffs with a private cause of action to enforce their rights under the MWPA in court. Soeken v. United States, 47 Fed.Cl. 430, 433 (2000) (observing that the Act “provides solely an administrative process for handling complaints of improper retaliatory personnel actions”); see also Acquisto v. United States, 70 F.3d 1010, 1011 (8th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Instead, to the extent that Dr. Options: A. holding that comprehensive administrative scheme signals that congress did not intend to permit service members to assert a private cause of action in federal court under the mwpa B. holding that private rights of action to enforce federal law must be created by congress courts may not create a cause of action absent statutory intent C. recognizing the cause of action D. holding that claims by federal employee were barred under bush even though one claim was against coworkers because the purpose of denying a private cause of action to federal employees is to ensure that they do not bypass comprehensive and carefully balanced statutory and administrative remedies in order to seek direct judicial relief E. holding that provision in comprehensive plan requiring developer to demonstrate that proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plans general intent and purpose was unreasonably vague subjective and did not furnish ground for denial of specialuse permit

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that comprehensive administrative scheme signals that congress did not intend to permit service members to assert a private cause of action in federal court under the mwpa
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: are entirely different and could not be confused. See Brookfield Commc’ns, Inc. v. W. Coast Entm’t Corp., 174 F.3d 1036, 1054 (9th Cir.1999) (“Where the two marks are entirely dissimilar, there is no likelihood-of-confusion.... Nothing further need be said.”). Moreover, Derrico merely used Sun-tree’s mark to truthfully refer to Suntree’s own product. Such use is not confusing “because it does not imply sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder.” New Kids on the Block v. News Am. Publ’g, Inc., 971 F.2d 302, 308 (9th Cir.1992). In fact, many circuits have held that “[s]uch nominative use of a mark ... lies outside the strictures of trademark law.” Id.; see also Bd. of Supervisors for La. State Univ. Agric. & Mech. Coll. v. Smack Apparel Co., 550 F.3d 465, 488 (5th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>); Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. LendingTree, Options: A. holding limited use of a mark did not constitute prior use in commerce sufficient to establish rights in the mark B. holding that the essential wrong of trademark infringement the appropriation of the good will of anothers established mark may be effectively accomplished by advertising matter associating that others distinguishing mark with the product of defendant C. holding that the fair use defense is available only so long as such use does not lead to customer confusion as to the source of the goods or services D. holding that it is permissible to use anothers mark truthfully to identify anothers goods or services E. recognizing that where one produces counterfeit goods in an apparent attempt to capitalize upon the popularity of and demand for anothers product there is a presumption of a likelihood of confusion

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that it is permissible to use anothers mark truthfully to identify anothers goods or services
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, to establish a conspiracy, (1) two or more people must come to a mutual understanding to try to accomplish the unlawful conduct charged in the indictment, (2) the defendant must knowingly and willfully join such a conspiracy, and (3) a person who has no knowledge of a conspiracy, but who happens to act in a way which advances some purpose of one, does not thereby become a conspirator. 803 F.2d 1124, 1128-29 (11th Cir.1986). In this case, as in Lively, the court instructed the jury that to establish a conspiracy, (1) two or more people must come to a mutual understanding to try to accomplish the unlawful conduct charged in the indictment, (2) the defendant must knowingly and willfully join such a conspiracy, and (3) that a person who has no knowle , 1355 (11th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Having found no constitutional violation, we Options: A. holding that an indictment gave sufficient notice when the indictment charged the elements of the offense B. holding that the amendment of the indictment was permissible under the statutory predecessor to code 192231 because the amendment did not within the meaning of the statute change the nature of the offense charged in the original indictment C. holding that there is no sixth amendment right to jury sentencing D. holding that there is no fifth amendment right to have all facts used to enhance a defendants guidelines range charged in the indictment E. holding apprendi does not upset the longstanding practice of giving aiding and abetting jury instructions even when that theory is not charged in the indictment thus there is no fifth amendment violation

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that there is no fifth amendment right to have all facts used to enhance a defendants guidelines range charged in the indictment
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: you may terminate your account at any time , for any reason , by following the instructions in `` settings '' in the service , however you will need to manage your in app purchases through your mobile device platform ( e.g. , itunes , google play ) .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed by one or more of the parties thereto on any number of separate counterparts (including by facsimile or other electronic transmission), and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Any signature page delivered by telecopy machine or transmitted electronically in Portable Document Format (.pdf) shall be valid and binding to the same extent as an original signature page.

assistant: Counterparts
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 discretion by providing a copy of the victim's videotaped interview to the jury, I generally concur with the majority's opinion. I write separately because I do not fully agree with the majority's broad approach, its criticisms, and suggestions. Trial courts have 1). While Montoya addressed Crim. P. 57(b)'s command to look to the rules of civil procedure when no rule of criminal procedure controls, and more specifically C.R.C.P. 47(m) (dealing with evidence juries may take into deliberations), it recognized that C.R.C.P. 47(m) did not address videotaped statements. 778 P.2d at 626. CRCP. 47(m) was later changed, but those later changes did not address videotaped statements. See People v. McKinney, 80 P.3d 823, 829 (Colo.App.2008), rev'd on other grounds, 99 P.3d 1038 (Colo.2004), (<HOLDING>). Though trial courts must look to the rules of Options: A. holding that statements made in the course of negotiation were not contracts and such statements were merged into the final written agreement B. holding that permitting written statements into the jury room was not an abuse of discretion under the new crcp 47m C. holding that the sixth amendment confrontation clause was not violated by the admission of hearsay statements under a georgia statute permitting an exception for statements by coconspirators where there was sufficient indicia of reliability supporting the truth of the statements D. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion E. holding that the judges restriction of the class was not an abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that permitting written statements into the jury room was not an abuse of discretion under the new crcp 47m
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: as we rely upon your rights to upload and distribute your content , you represent and warrant to evernote that ( 1 ) you have the unfettered legal rights and authority to submit your content to evernote , to make any other use , publication or other distribution of that content in your use of the service , and to grant the rights granted to evernote under these terms ; and ( 2 ) your content complies with our user guidelines and these terms .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notices, requests, demands and other communications provided for by this Agreement shall be sufficient if in writing and delivered in person or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, to the Executive at the last address the Executive has filed in writing with the Company, or to the Company at its main office, attention of the Board of Directors.

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: some time, that fractional period of time served on the first day — that something — is more accurately reflected by rounding up to the number one, not down to the number zero, a number used to denote the absence of anything at all. 12 . Even if we were to accept Appellant’s calculation that he has served 393 days in jail, he would still be seven days shy of the maximum sentence. 3 . Appellant does not contend that he was indigent at this time, nor does he argue that these days should be included. Appellant was released on bond on February 14, 2014. We note that the result would not change if we were to include this time served. 4 . Appellant concedes he is not entitled to credit for this time served as a condition of his community supervision sentence. See Harris, 946 S.W.2d at 80 Options: A. holding defendant agreed to submit to searches as a condition of probation B. holding that a defendant is not entitled to credit for time served as a condition of probation C. holding that upon revocation of probation a court must grant credit for time served on probation and community control towards any newly imposed term of imprisonment and probation so that the total period of control probation and imprisonment does not exceed the statutory maximum D. holding that credit cannot be awarded for time served on community control E. holding that defendant can waive credit for time served as part of a plea agreement when the record clearly shows such waiver

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a defendant is not entitled to credit for time served as a condition of probation
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 Offer Letter may be assigned by the Company to an Affiliate (including Cott) or any successor to its business or operations. Your rights hereunder may not be transferred by you except by will or by the laws of descent and distribution and except insofar as applicable law may otherwise require. Any purported assignment in violation of the preceding sentence shall be void.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 263, 292, 119 S.Ct. 1936, 144 L.Ed.2d 286 (1999). To the extent Brown asserts a violation of California law in this regard, we cannot consider that aspect of this claim. See Lewis v. Jeffers, 497 U.S. 764, 780, 110 S.Ct. 3092, 111 L.Ed.2d 606 (1990) (“[FJederal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state law.”). Finally, Brown contends that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to evidence suggesting that Brown had a pri- or criminal record. But the evidence to which Brown contends trial counsel should have objected does not support such an inference, and so we cannot say that counsel was deficient in this regard. Thus the California Court of Appeal did not unrea sonably reject this claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (<HOLDING>). We construe Brown’s briefing of uncertified Options: A. holding by implication that where a claimant fails to return to the secretary a formal claim application within one year of the submission of his informal claim his informal claim is not a cognizable claim for effective date purposes B. holding that if 506 does not apply to an allowed claim such claim cannot become a secured claim C. holding that courts need not reach both prongs of an ineffectiveassistance claim if the claim fails on one of them D. holding that if the state court addresses both the procedural default and the merits of a federal claim in the alternative a federal court should apply the state procedural bar and decline to reach the merits of the claim E. holding that trial court properly found that claim was timebarred when the gravamen of claim for breach of fiduciary duties was an alleged failure to correctly read an ultrasound and reach proper diagnosis and accordingly the claim amounted to a claim of negligence that went to the propriety of the defendants medical skill and judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that courts need not reach both prongs of an ineffectiveassistance claim if the claim fails on one of them
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: Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, all amounts to be paid or deposited by the Borrower or the Servicer hereunder shall be paid or deposited in accordance with the terms hereof no later than 12:00 p.m., Charlotte, North Carolina time, on the day when due in Dollars in immediately available funds to the depository account or accounts specified by the Administrative Agent. Except as otherwise provided in Section 2.07, the Borrower shall, to the extent permitted by Applicable Law, pay to the Lenders interest on all amounts not paid or deposited when due hereunder at a per annum rate equal to the Interest Rate, payable on demand; provided, however, that such total Interest Rate shall not at any time exceed the Maximum Lawful Rate. Whenever any payment hereunder (i) shall be stated to be due on a day other than a Business Day, such payment shall be made, without penalty, on the next succeeding Business Day, except in the case where the next succeeding Business Day would occur in the succeeding calendar month, in which case such payment shall be due on the preceding Business Day or (ii) is received after 12:00 p.m., Charlotte, North Carolina time, such payment shall be deemed to have been received on the next succeeding Business Day, and any such extension of time shall in such case be included in the computation of payment of Interest, other interest or any fee payable hereunder, as the case may be.

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: on appeal. 4 . Because we ultimately conclude that the judgment should be reversed, we express no opinion as to whether the standard employed by the district court in imposing liability is correct in light of the Supreme Court’s recent pronouncements in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S.Ct. 2275, 141 L.Ed.2d 662 (1998) and Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 118 S.Ct. 2257, 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998) on employer liability for Title VII violations. 5 . Another line of cases finds standing under Title VII where plaintiffs have claimed that discrimination against third parties caused them to lose the benefits of interracial association. Those cases rely upon Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 409 U.S. 205, 211-12, 93 S.Ct. 364, 34 L.Ed.2d 415 (1972) (<HOLDING>). See Clayton v. White Hall Sch. Dist., 875 Options: A. holding that title vii proscribe racial discrimination in private employment against whites on the same terms as racial discrimination against nonwhites B. holding that physician was an independent contractor and thus could not sue hospital under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 C. holding that employers have standing to sue D. holding that title vii proscribes racial discrimination against whites upon the same standards as racial discrimination against nonwhites E. holding white tenants of apartment complex have standing to sue for landlords discrimination against nonwhites under wording and legislative history of title viii of the civil rights act of 1968

assistant: The best answer is E. holding white tenants of apartment complex have standing to sue for landlords discrimination against nonwhites under wording and legislative history of title viii of the civil rights act of 1968
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 Executive shall perform such management duties for the Company and its affiliates as may from time to time be assigned and which are consistent with his title of Chief Executive Officer. The Executive hereby promises to perform and discharge, well and faithfully, all duties of his position. If Executive is elected as a director or officer of any affiliate of the Company, the Executive shall serve in such capacity or capacities without further compensation.

assistant: 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: You acknowledge that this Retirement Agreement constitutes the complete understanding between the Company and you regarding its subject matter and supersedes any and all agreements, understandings, and discussions, whether written or oral, between you and any of the Company Entities and Persons. No other promises or agreements shall be binding on the Company unless in writing and signed by both the Company and you after the date of this Retirement Agreement. This Retirement Agreement shall be construed as though both parties had participated equally in its drafting, and shall not be construed against either party as the drafting party.

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: All of the terms of this Agreement shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of, and be enforceable by and against Buyer and Seller, and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, and permitted assigns. The representations and warranties of the parties shall survive the execution of this Agreement. This Agreement sets forth the entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, arrangements, and understandings relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may not be assigned, pledged, hypothecated, or in any other way transferred or encumbered by any party without the prior written consent of the other parties.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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: 927, 931 (Mo.App.1997) (noting that the State also had used some of its peremptory challenges to remove Caucasian venirepersons who had remained silent throughout voir dire). Second, the prosecutor stated that Montiel appeared unkempt. A venireper-son’s appearance can provide a valid, race-neutral reason for being peremptorily struck. See, e.g., Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 769, 115 S.Ct. 1769, 131 L.Ed.2d 834 (1995) (a juror’s long, unkempt hair, mustache and beard provided a race-neutral, nondiseriminatory reason for the strike); State v. Blankenship, 830 S.W.2d 1, 15 (Mo. banc 1992) (noting that the venireperson’s “appearance” was one of the nonpretextual, race-neutral explanations supporting the peremptory challenge); State v. Washington, 288 S.W.3d 312, 316-17 (Mo.App.2009) (<HOLDING>). Third, a venireperson’s prior criminal Options: A. holding that a defendants exercise of peremptory challenges is not denied or impaired when the defendant chooses to use a peremptory challenge to remove a juror who should have been excused for cause B. holding prebatson that challenge to africanamericans who had limited education was raceneutral C. holding that there was a raceneutral reason the states use of a peremptory challenge against a venireperson who had a very individualistic hairstyle D. holding that age is an acceptable raceneutral reason for striking a prospective juror E. holding that a venireperson who does not live in the county is subject to challenge

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that there was a raceneutral reason the states use of a peremptory challenge against a venireperson who had a very individualistic hairstyle