flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: The answer to this question lies in subsection (b)(3), as amended in 1992, which states: “For purposes of all penalties and remedies established for violations of subsection (a)(1) of this section, the prohibited activity established herein as it applies to each such device shall be deemed a separate violation.” Although section (b) generally deals with criminal penalties, the plain language of subsection (b)(3) refers to “penalties and remedies,” indicating the legislative intent to treat each device as a separate violation when fashioning civil sanctions. See Columbia Cable TV Co. v. McCary, 954 F.Supp. 124, 128 (D.S.C.1996) (treating each decoder device distributed by defendant as a separate violation); Time Warner Cable v. Freedom Elecs., Inc., 897 F.Supp. 1454, 1459 (S.D.Fla.1996) (<HOLDING>); but see Continental Cablevision, Inc. v. Options: A. holding that a violation of a rightofway statute is negligence as a matter of law B. holding that each converterdecoder manufactured or distributed in violation of 553 is a separate violation of the statute C. holding that violation of state law was not a per se constitutional violation D. holding that in determining whether a discovery violation warrants the sanction of exclusion of evidence a court must look to whether the violation was substantial the timing of the violation the reason for the violation the degree of prejudice to the parties whether such prejudice may be cured by a postponement and the desirability of a continuance E. holding portions of the coercion of public servant or voter statute unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the first amendment and in violation of the separation of powers

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that each converterdecoder manufactured or distributed in violation of 553 is a separate violation of the statute
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 and all notices to the Corporation will be addressed to the Corporation ’ s Chief Executive Officer at the Corporation ’ s principal place of business on file with the Secretary of State of the State of Nevada . Any and all notices or other communications or deliveries to be provided by the Corporation to any Holder hereunder will be in writing and delivered personally, by electronic mail or facsimile, sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier service addressed to each Holder at the electronic mail, facsimile telephone number or address of such Holder appearing on the books of the Corporation, or if no such electronic mail, facsimile telephone number or address appears, at the principal place of business of the Holder. Any notice or other communication or deliveries hereunder will be deemed given and effective on the earliest of (1) the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile or electronic mail prior to 5:30 p.m. Eastern time, (2) the date after the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile or electronic mail later than 5:30 p.m. but prior to 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on such date, (3) the second business day following the date of mailing, if sent by nationally recognized overnight courier service, or (4) upon actual receipt by the party to whom such notice is required to be given, regardless of how sent.

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: (4th Cir.2001) (quoting Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 433 n. 7, 115 S.Ct. 1555, 131 L.Ed.2d 490 (1995)). In denying the motion, the district court rendered detailed factual findings with regard to each appellant, specifically assessing the effect of Gibson’s testimony on the trial, and the additional evidence supporting the verdicts. Appellants argue that the district court erred in denying the motion for a new trial. We disagree. As demonstrated by the district court’s findings, the government presented overwhelming evidence— separate and apart from Gibson’s testimony — establishing: (1) that each of the appellants participated in the conspiracy; (2) their respective roles in the conspiracy; and (3) the vast amounts of crack being distributed by them. Cf. White, 238 F.3d at 540 (<HOLDING>). Consequently, Gibson’s testimony was, in Options: A. holding that upon remand if the trial court determined that the testimony in a newly discovered evidence claim was reliable the trial court must review that new evidence as well as brady claims that were previously rejected in a prior postconviction motion because the evidence was equally accessible to the defense and there was no reasonable probability that the result of the trial would have been different had the evidence been disclosed B. holding that though the government may have failed to disclose exculpatory testimony in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendants involvement in narcotics sales there was no reasonable probability that a defense based upon that testimony would have been successful C. holding expert testimony provided no evidence as to causation since testimony was not based upon reasonable medical probability D. holding that even if attorney had secured defense witnesses 2255 relief was not warranted where the evidence against defendant at trial was so overwhelming that no reasonable probability exists that the result of the proceeding would have been different E. holding that the prosecution must disclose to the defense all exculpatory evidence known to the state or in its possession

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that though the government may have failed to disclose exculpatory testimony in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendants involvement in narcotics sales there was no reasonable probability that a defense based upon that testimony would have been successful
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if we do update these terms , you are free to decide whether to accept the updated terms or to stop using our service ( see `` how is my account closed '' below ) ; your continued use of the service after the effectiveness of that update will be deemed to represent your agreement with , and consent to be bound by , the new terms .

assistant: Contract by using
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) Comply with the requirements of all Laws (other than Laws referred to in clause (b) hereof), orders, writs, injunctions and decrees applicable to it or to its business or property, except if the failure to comply therewith would not reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a Material Adverse Effect, and (b) comply with Anti-Money Laundering Laws, Anti-Corruption Laws or Sanctions Laws or Regulations. None of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries nor, to the knowledge of the Borrower, any director or officer of any of the foregoing, (i) is a Designated Person or (ii) is the subject or target of any U.S. sanctions administered by OFAC.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: form, and context of Karl's testimony establish that her speech related to a matter of public concern. 3 . In a recent decision extending absolute immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to grand jury witnesses, the Supreme Court "[saw] no sound reason to draw a distinction for this purpose between grand jury and trial wit nesses,” notwithstanding the secrecy of grand jury proceedings. Rehberg v. Paulk, - U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1497, 1500, 182 L.Ed.2d 593 (2012). Trial witnesses have long been afforded abso 5 . See Mt. Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 287, 97 S.Ct. 568, 50 L.Ed.2d 471 (1977). 6 . Caw's attempt to seek shelter in what he characterizes as an out-of-circuit split of authority is equally unavailing. Compare Morales v. Jones, 494 F.3d 590, 595 (7th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>), with Morris v. Crow, 142 F.3d 1379, 1382-83 Options: A. holding that a police officers deposition in a fellow officers 1983 action alleging unlawful retaliation was protected speech B. holding that alleged discrimination in merit pay increases and salary raises against tenured professor alleging retaliation for his protected speech would constitute denials of governmental benefits redressable by 1983 C. holding that an action brought pursuant to 1983 cannot lie against federal officers D. holding that even if the plaintiff had asserted a cause of action under the virginia wrongful death act against the city police officers the police officers would be entitled to sovereign immunity E. holding that the plaintiffs reports of his fellow police officers discriminatory treatment of minority citizens was not protected activity under title vii

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a police officers deposition in a fellow officers 1983 action alleging unlawful retaliation was protected speech
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of any dispute under clause (g) of the definition of Major Decision between Owner Member and/or its appointed Manager(s), on the one hand, and Investor Member and/or the SLG or RXR Realty appointed Managers, on the other hand, either Participating Member may submit such dispute to final and binding arbitration in New York, NY, administered by JAMS in accordance with JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures, as in effect at that time, by an arbitrator with at least ten years of experience in tax matters relating to real estate operating companies owning properties similar to the Property and located in Manhattan. Each Participating Member shall submit to such arbitrator its position on each matter in dispute and any applicable materials that it desires that such arbitrator consider in making its determination within 7 Business Days following the appointment of the arbitrator. Such arbitrator shall consider only the materials submitted to it for resolution. Each Participating Member shall cooperate with JAMS and with the other Participating Member in scheduling the arbitration proceedings so that a final non-appealable award is rendered within 30 calendar days after submission thereof to arbitration, and any notice requirements under Paragraph 14(b) of the JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures or otherwise may be shortened by such arbitrator in its discretion. The non-prevailing party in such arbitration shall pay all fees and disbursements due to JAMS and the arbitrator as well as the reasonable costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and disbursements) of the prevailing party incurred in connection with such arbitration. The arbitrator shall be (i) a disinterested and impartial person and (ii) selected in accordance with Paragraph “12(c)” et seq. of the JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures. Such arbitrator shall be bound by the provisions of this Agreement and by Applicable Law and shall select the position proposed by either the Owner Member or the Investor Member for each disputed item (and no other position), which, in his or her opinion, would be consistent with applicable legal requirements, not adversely affect the REIT qualification or any reasonable REIT qualification concern of such Participating Member or its affiliates and is more consistent with the prevailing practices for similar entities owning Class A office buildings in Manhattan, and shall notify the Participating Members of its determination. The position selected by the arbitrator with respect to the disputed item shall be deemed Board Approval with respect thereto. Any decision rendered by such arbitrator with respect to any matter in dispute shall be final, conclusive and binding upon the Company and the Participating Members and may be entered and enforced in any court having jurisdiction over the Company and either Participating Member.

assistant: Arbitration
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 expressly amended by this Amendment, the Omnibus Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. In the event that any provision of this Amendment conflicts with any provision of the Omnibus Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control. No term or provision of this Amendment may be amended, waived or modified unless such amendment, waiver or modification is in writing and signed by each of the parties hereto.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if we discontinue the use of virtual money or virtual goods , we will provide at least 60 days ' advance notice to you by posting a notice on the site or app or through other communications .

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: Hall and explained that Hall’s conduct in committing murder — his lack of emotion, connection to drug trafficking and willingness to kill for hire — justified such a severe punishment. Even if the offense level in § 2A1.1(a) does not fit every murder, Hall has not shown that it fails to fit this murder. As a result, the district court did not abuse its discretion in relying upon the base offense level in § 2A1.1(a) to determine Hall’s appropriate sentence. AFFIRMED. 1 . Both the probation office and the district court applied the 2007 edition of the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual to determine Hall’s advisory sentencing range. 2 . The other circuits addressing this question have done so with similar results. See United States v. Bauer, 626 F.3d 406, 409 (8th Cir. 2010) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Rogers, 521 F.3d 5, 12 (1st Options: A. holding that 5g13c applied because the defendants case involved multiple undischarged terms of imprisonment only one of which was used to enhance his instant sentence B. holding that because the defendant was not imprisoned incarcerated in a penal institution when he was sentenced he was not subject to an undischarged term of imprisonment and could not invoke 5g13 C. holding that the concurrent sentencing requirement of 5g13b is only triggered when there is an undischarged term of imprisonment at the time of sentencing D. holding that 3584a allows the district judge to specify the sequence of service of terms of imprisonment only when sentences are imposed at the same time or the other sentence is an undischarged term of imprisonment to which the defendant is already subject E. holding that 5gl3b does not apply when the undischarged term of imprisonment results from multiple offenses only some of which were taken into account in determining the defendants offense level

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 5g13c applied because the defendants case involved multiple undischarged terms of imprisonment only one of which was used to enhance his instant sentence
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: No authorization, consent, approval or other order of, or declaration to or filing with, any governmental agency or body or other person is required for the valid authorization, execution, delivery and performance by such Seller of this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated thereby.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: The order was entitled "Amended” because a previous order granting summary judgment omitted dismissal of the counterclaim. These dismissals are not at issue on appeal. 3 . In the motions for summary judgment, appellees did not specifically address Methodist’s request for declaratory judgment. However, Methodist requested merely a declaratory judgment "that the ... claims fertile pre-existing injuries of [Riegert and Fulton-Perez] are entirely Zurich’s responsibility.” Thus, this relief depended on Methodist’s prevailing on its other theories. Further, on appeal, Methodist does not contend the trial court granted more relief than requested in the motions for summary judgment. See Beathard Joint Venture v. W. Houston Airport Corp., 72 S.W.3d 426, 436 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2002, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). Thus, we will review summary judgment on the Options: A. holding that where an appellant fails to raise arguments regarding an issue on appeal that issue is deemed abandoned B. holding that a defendant who fails to raise a specific issue as the basis for suppression in a motion to suppress to the district court has waived the right to raise that issue on appeal C. holding that evidence filed less than 21 days before original summaryjudgment hearing was timely even though trial court never granted leave to file late evidence because the summaryjudgment hearing was reset to a date more than 21 days after the evidence was filed D. holding that a party must obtain a distinct ruling on an issue in order to raise it on appeal E. recognizing appellant must raise issue on appeal that more relief than requested in motion was improperly granted in summaryjudgment order

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing appellant must raise issue on appeal that more relief than requested in motion was improperly granted in summaryjudgment order
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: Therefore, she argues that providing corroboration for her testimony was not reasonably possible. See id. However, while Mary alleges that Ronald threatened her in private, she does not address the lack of corroboration for her other claims. Further, Mary and Ronald did not live in isolation. Mary worked outside the home and visited family members throughout the marriage. Ronald and Mary shared their home with their two adult children and a grandchild who was in Mary’s custody. Neither of the couple’s children, who should have known of Ronald’s cruel and inhuman treatment of Mary, testified at the trial. Their children would have witnessed Ronald’s controlling behavior and the negative impact Mary claims Ronald’s behavior caused on her health. See Cochran, 912 So.2d at 1089 (¶¶ 14-15) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 15. Ronald admitted at trial that he had Options: A. holding that allegations that employees supervisors yelled at her told her she was a poor manager and gave her poor evaluations chastised her in front of customers and once required her to work with an injured back were insufficient to state title vii claim B. holding that nonsignatory wife asserting in her individual capacity claims for damages such as her own mental anguish and loss of consortium earnings companionship society and inheritance lacked the type of privity contemplated for the contracting parties to bind her to a contract that she did not sign in her individual capacity C. holding that because a claimant testified that she had no insurance and could not afford treatment her failure to take medication for her symptoms is not a clear and convincing reason for discrediting her symptom testimony D. holding that the former wife did not waive her attorneyclient privilege simply because the credibility of her claim that she relied on her husbands representations could be impeached by deposing her former attorney E. holding that wife must provide corroboration for her allegations of cruel and inhuman treatment despite her claim that the parties were isolated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that wife must provide corroboration for her allegations of cruel and inhuman treatment despite her claim that the parties were isolated
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: benefits. See Dorey v. Forster Mfg. Co., 591 A.2d 240, 241 (Me.1991). By reason of the policies expressed in Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938), the state’s rule barring suitors from bringing such an action de novo in its own courts must be applied to bar an original diversity action in the forum’s federal courts. See Feinstein v. Massachusetts Gen. Hosp., 643 F.2d 880, 888 (1st Cir.1981) (stating that Erie policies requiring adherence to state door-closing statutes likewise require a federal court to apply state-created administrative limitations on rights to recovery) (citing Woods v. Interstate Realty Co., 337 U.S. 535, 69 S.Ct. 1235, 93 L.Ed. 1524 (1949)); Construction Aggregates Corp. v. Rivera de Vicenty, 573 F.2d 86, 96 (1st Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>); accord Dial v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Options: A. holding that in litigation arising from a product related injury in the forum state there are significant differences between the exercise of jurisdiction over a retailer who simply sold the product locally and the exercise of jurisdiction over a manufacturer whose products were sold over a large area B. holding that because maryland law expressly creates right to file workers compensation claim action exists for wrongful discharge for termination based solely on the filing of a workers compensation claim C. holding that federal jurisdiction over rico claims is concurrent and not exclusive D. holding over E. holding that if puerto rico does not give its own courts jurisdiction over a claim collaterally attacking workers compensation rates for locally hired workers a federal court cannot exercise diversity jurisdiction over the claim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that if puerto rico does not give its own courts jurisdiction over a claim collaterally attacking workers compensation rates for locally hired workers a federal court cannot exercise diversity jurisdiction over the claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Award Agreement, the Plan and all actions taken in connection herewith and therewith shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Illinois, without reference to principles of conflict of laws, except as superseded by applicable federal 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: Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement to the contrary (including, without limitation, the provisions of Section 4.4.4 ), all claims against, and liabilities of, Tenant or Landlord arising prior to any date of termination or expiration of this Agreement with respect to the Leased Property shall survive such termination or expiration. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be changed, waived, discharged or terminated except by an instrument in writing signed by all the parties thereto. All the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective permitted successors and assigns. Each term or provision of this Agreement to be performed by Tenant shall be construed as an independent covenant and condition. Time is of the essence with respect to the exercise of any rights of Tenant or Landlord under this Agreement. Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement (including, without limitation, the provisions of Section 4.4.4 ), any obligations (including without limitation, any monetary, repair and indemnification obligations) arising prior to the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement of Tenant and Landlord shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed to create or impose any liabilities or obligations and no such liabilities or obligations shall be imposed on any of the shareholders, beneficial owners, direct or indirect, officers, directors, trustees, employees or agents of Landlord or Tenant for the payment or performance of the obligations or liabilities of Landlord or Tenant hereunder. Further, in the event Landlord shall be in Default under this Agreement, and if as a consequence of such Default, Tenant shall recover a money judgment against Landlord, such judgment shall be satisfied only out of the proceeds of sale received upon execution of such judgment against the right, title and interest of Landlord in the Leased Property.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: see also Young Br. at 12-13 (conceding that "the district court did not directly use the weight of the PCC in determining [Young’s] offense level,” but that the weight of PCC was used to determine the quantity of pure PCP "supposedly capable of being produced from the PCC”). 6 . In 1991, Note 2 was an application note to § 2D1.4, which provided that "if a defendant is convicted of a conspiracy ... to commit any offense involving a controlled substance, the offense level shall be the same as if the object of the conspiracy ... had been completed.” U.S.S.G. § 2D1.4. The Sentencing Commission deleted § 2D 1.4 in 1992, and moved the relevant text of Note 2 to Application Note 12 of § 2D1.1. See U.S.S.G. app. C, amend. 447; United States v. Ynfante, 78 F.3d 677, 680-81 (D.C.Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). 7 . The principal deficiency Young asserts is Options: A. holding rule 38 applies to frivolous criminal appeals as well as civil appeals B. holding that cr 60b applies to criminal as well as civil judgments C. holding that amended note 12 applies to choate as well as inchoate offenses D. holding that sentence factor manipulation applies to statutory minimums as well as to the guidelines E. holding that it is within the power of the legislature to determine that the community should be beautiful as well as healthy spacious as well as clean wellbalanced as well as carefully patrolled

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that amended note 12 applies to choate as well as inchoate offenses
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 with respect to the Indebtedness set forth on Schedule III attached hereto, neither the Guarantor nor any of its Subsidiaries is in default under or with respect to any agreement, instrument or undertaking to which it is a party or by which it is bound in any respect which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. No Series 2002-1 Early Amortization Event, Potential Series 2002-1 Early Amortization Event, Event of Default or Default has occurred and is continuing.

assistant: No Defaults
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 Lender Party (in its capacities as a Lender, a Swing Line Bank (if applicable), and as an Issuing Bank (if applicable) and on behalf of itself and its Affiliates as potential Hedge Banks) hereby appoints and authorizes the Administrative Agent to take such action as agent on its behalf and to exercise such powers and discretion under this Agreement and the other Loan Documents as are delegated to the Administrative Agent by the terms hereof and thereof, together with such powers and discretion as are reasonably incidental thereto. As to any matters not expressly provided for by the Loan Documents (including, without limitation, enforcement or collection of the Notes, the Advances and the Obligations), the Administrative Agent shall not be required to exercise any discretion or take any action, but shall be required to act or to refrain from acting (and shall be fully protected in so acting or refraining from acting) upon the instructions of the Required Lenders, and such instructions shall be binding upon all Lender Parties; provided , however , that the Administrative Agent shall not be required to take any action that exposes it to personal liability or that is contrary to this Agreement or applicable law or regulations. The Administrative Agent agrees to give to each Lender Party prompt notice of each notice given to it by any Borrower pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any Loan Document, no Person identified as a syndication agent, joint lead arranger or joint bookrunner, in such Person’s capacity as such, shall have any obligations or duties to any Loan Party, the Administrative Agent or any other Secured Party under any of such Loan Documents. Each initial Lender hereby authorizes the Administrative Agent to execute and deliver the Post‑Closing Letter Agreement on behalf of such Lender.

assistant: Authorizations
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) The Employee timely shall pay to the Company such amount as the Company may be required, under all applicable federal, state, local or other laws or regulations, to withhold and pay over as income or other withholding taxes (the “Required Tax Payments”) with respect to the Award. If the Employee shall fail to timely advance the Required Tax Payments, the Company may, in its discretion, deduct any Required Tax Payments from any amount then or thereafter payable by the Company or any Affiliate to the Employee.

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: This Agreement, including the Employee Inventions and Confidentiality Agreement, sets forth the terms of your service with the Company and supersedes any prior representations or agreements, whether written or oral. This Agreement may not be modified or amended except by a written agreement signed by you and an authorized officer of the Company.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 354 So.2d 353, 358 (Fla.1977) (“The 1977 Legislature’s inclusion of an effective date of July 1, 1977, in Ch. 77-281 effectively rebuts any argument that retroactive application of the law was intended.”); Foreman; Middlebrooks v. Department of State, Div. of Licensing, 565 So.2d 727 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). If the Legislature intended to make the statute retroactive it could easily have said so, as it did when it enacted the 2003 version of section 489.128. It is not our function to divine legislative intent of retroactivity with guess or assumption. If there is not clear evidence that the Legislature intended to apply the statute retroactively, and there is not with regard to the 2000 version of section 489.128, we must answer the first inquiry in favor on non-retroactivity. See Mivan (<HOLDING>). Hence, our inquiry as to the retroactive Options: A. holding that the 2000 version of section 489128 may not be retroactively applied B. holding generally that new rules of law should not be applied retroactively in habeas corpus cases C. holding that kotecki limit applied retroactively D. holding that consumer lien avoidance powers of section 522f cannot be applied retroactively E. holding the batson rule was not to be applied retroactively to a state conviction on federal habeas review

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the 2000 version of section 489128 may not be retroactively applied
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 contained herein to the contrary, all payments made by the Company or its subsidiaries to the Employee pursuant to this Section 2 shall be reduced by applicable tax withholdings and any other deductions required by law.

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: Each Grantor hereby covenants and agrees that with respect to any Letter of Credit Rights pertaining to letters of credit described in clause (a)(ii) above hereafter arising it shall promptly and in no event later than thirty (30) days of its obtaining rights in such Letter of Credit Rights use its commercially reasonable efforts to obtain the consent of the issuer thereof to the assignment of the proceeds of such letter of credit to the Term Collateral Agent and shall deliver to the Term Collateral Agent a completed Pledge Supplement, substantially in the form of Exhibit A, together with all supplements to Schedules thereto.

assistant: 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a prosecutor cannot misstate the law. See, e.g., Whiting v. State, 797 S.W.2d 45, 48 (Tex.Crim.App.1990) (prosecutor misstated State’s burden of proof on defensive issue). Zuniga teaches that evidence of guilt can preponderate in favor of conviction but still be insufficient to prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Zuniga, 144 S.W.3d at 485. Thus, contrary to the prosecutor’s argument, the notion exists that a jury can believe — by a preponderance of the evidence — that the defendant is guilty but the State did not prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the burden of proof that must be met. We conclude that the trial court erred in overruling Abbott’s objection to the prosecutor’s statement. Cfi Gore v. State, 719 So.2d 1197, 1200 (Fla. 1998) (<HOLDING>). The law on the burden of proof is Options: A. holding that the following prosecutors argument misstated the burden of proof and was error its simple and it comes down to this in simplicity if you believe his story hes not guilty if you believe hes lying to you hes guilty its that simple B. holding that it is not extortion to threaten economic harm when you have a legal right to engage in the activity you threaten C. holding the prosecutors argument if it was there they can bring it to you was not an improper jury argument D. holding that if you do not qualify under the hup test you never get to the statute E. holding that prosecutors remarks that defense counsel was a zealot in the courtroom and thank god hes a defense attorney and not part of the government were improper

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the following prosecutors argument misstated the burden of proof and was error its simple and it comes down to this in simplicity if you believe his story hes not guilty if you believe hes lying to you hes guilty its that simple
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: objectively reasonable factual basis for the statements made by the attorney. - The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts engaged in an illuminating discussion of this issue when it addressed the “question of the standard to be applied in disciplinary proceedings where an attorney invokes the First Amendment protection of free speech when defending against charges that he impugned the integrity of a judge, without basis, during a pending case.” Cobb, 838 N.E.2d at 1211. The Cobb court noted that at least three states have held that an actual malice standard, such as that utilized in a defamation action regarding a public official, should be employed in the attorney discipline setting. Id.; see New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 279-81, 84 S.Ct. 710, 11 L.Ed.2d 686 (1964) (<HOLDING>). The Cobb court further explained, however, Options: A. holding in defamation context that first amendment protects speech regarding a public official unless made with actual malice B. holding a school principal seeking recovery for defamation has the burden of showing actual malice C. holding under federal law that public figure claiming iied based on defamatory nature of speech must prove actual malice D. holding that first amendment protects public employees right to communicate privately or publicly with his employer E. holding public school principals criticized for their official conduct are public officials for purposes of defamation law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding in defamation context that first amendment protects speech regarding a public official unless made with actual malice
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: Defendant’s injuries and scars were substantially different before January 25. Even if the injuries had changed substantially after January 25, Defendant was only minimally prejudiced because the defense had access to at least one photograph of Defendant taken eleven days after the accident, had photos taken of the injuries only one month after the accident, waited until October to have his own forensic pathologist conduct an examination of the injuries, and there was some visible bruising apparently left for jurors to observe at trial. {28} We also find that Defendant was primarily responsible for any impairment to his defense. Defendants must make an effort to discover or obtain evidence, which they are or should be aware of, in support of their defense. Id. at 564, 746 P.2d at 670 (<HOLDING>); see Sodergren v. State, 715 P.2d 170, 178 Options: A. holding that with regard to the defendants claim that destruction of documents impaired his defense defendant has a duty to initiate efforts to discover or obtain evidence of which defendant is aware B. holding the government has an affirmative duty to disclose exculpatory evidence to a criminal defendant C. holding that a defendant whose fluency in english is so impaired that it interferes with his right to confrontation or his capacity as a witness to understand or respond to questions has a constitutional right to an interpreter D. holding that the plaintiff had an implied duty to use reasonable efforts to elicit particular business and to hand it over to the defendant E. holding defendant owes a duty to disclose where the defendant alone has knowledge of material facts which are not accessible to the plaintiff

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that with regard to the defendants claim that destruction of documents impaired his defense defendant has a duty to initiate efforts to discover or obtain evidence of which defendant is aware
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: “documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations[,] and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.” Klamath Water Users Protective Assoc., 532 U.S. at 9, 121 S.Ct. 1060 (emphases added); see also Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. at 150, 95 S.Ct. 1504. There is no requirement that those “governmental decisions” reflect' broad-based policymaking. Indeed, courts routinely find that the privilege applies to individualized governmental decisions. See, e.g., Farley, 11 F.3d at 1389 (finding that privilege applied to FTC documents that “were clearly part of the deliberative process leading to the [Department’s] decision” “to bring an action against Farley”); Guzman v. City of Chi., 2011 WL 55979, at *4 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 7, 2011) (<HOLDING>); E.E.O.C. v. Cont’l Airlines, Inc., 395 Options: A. holding that court was within its discretion to refuse to consider reports that did not meet the supreme courts standards for admitting reports into evidence B. holding that privilege applied to draft summary reports generated during ipras investigation into police officers alleged assault on the plaintiff and her family C. holding that a police officers words during an assault make clear that he was motivated by a protected ground D. holding that the defendant had consented where he allowed the police officers into his apartment building and allowed the officers to follow him into his apartment without impediment or objection to the entry of the police E. holding that police officers have a duty to conduct an investigation into the basis of the witness report

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that privilege applied to draft summary reports generated during ipras investigation into police officers alleged assault on the plaintiff and her family
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of self-defense, and a person is just as capable of defending himself with a marked firearm as with an unmarked firearm. With or without a serial number, a pistol is still a pistol. Furthermore, it cannot be the case that possession of a firearm in the home for self-defense is a protected form of possession under all circumstances. By this rationale, any type of firearm possessed in the home would be protected merely because it could be used for self-defense. Possession of machine guns or short-barreled shotguns — or any other dangerous and unusual weapon' — so long as they were kept in the home, would then fall within the Second Amendment. But the Supreme Court has made clear the Second Amendment does not protect those types of weapons. See Miller, 307 U.S. at 178, 59 S.Ct. 816 (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Fincher, 538 F.3d Options: A. holding that when regulations are intended to have different purposes and are not dependent on each other they are not intertwined B. holding that shortbarreled shotguns are unprotected C. holding that arguments which are not sufficiently developed are waived D. holding that arguments that are not raised or that are not accompanied by factual and legal support are deemed waived E. holding that possession of a shortbarreled shotgun is a violent felony under the accas residual clause because sawedoff shotguns are inherently dangerous and lack usefulness except for violent and criminal purposes internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that shortbarreled shotguns are unprotected
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: any use of the interactive areas or other portions of this website in violation of the foregoing violates the terms of this agreement and may result in , among other things , termination or suspension of your rights to use the interactive areas and/or this website .

assistant: Unilateral termination
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: 14-5171 Use Note 3 (providing that the act resulting in the appearance of immediate danger of death or great bodily harm be described in “enough detail to put the act in the context of the evidence”); UJI 14-5172 Use Note 3 (same). Although Defendant did not testify, Crouch provided ample testimony regarding the series of confrontations and the complicity of all three assailants during the threats against Defendant and Crouch. Based on Crouch’s testimony, the jury could reasonably infer that Defendant, who was in front of the Acura and even closer to the action, saw at least what Crouch did and, like Crouch, was afraid for his life and Crouch’s life based on an apparent threat from all three occupants of the Explorer. See State v. Duarte, 1996-NMCA-038, ¶ 7, 121 N.M. 553, 915 P.2d 309 (<HOLDING>). McCormick’s complicity in the events at the Options: A. holding that intent and knowledge can be proved by circumstantial evidence B. recognizing that jury may infer from the evidence that defendants money came from drug sales C. holding that motive is circumstantial evidence of intent D. recognizing that a jury is permitted to infer an intent to deceive from circumstantial evidence E. recognizing that while it is more difficult to show actual fear without a defendants testimony a jury can infer intent from the circumstantial evidence

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that while it is more difficult to show actual fear without a defendants testimony a jury can infer intent from the circumstantial evidence