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: None of the representations and warranties of in this Agreement contains, or on the closing date of this Placement (the “Closing” or “Closing Date”) will contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omits, or on the Closing will omit, to state any material fact required to be stated herein or therein in order for the statements herein or therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not to be misleading.

assistant: Disclosures
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: If the aggregate Commitments are increased in accordance with this Section, the Administrative Agent and the Parent shall determine the effective date (the “ Increase Effective Date ”) and the final allocation of such increase. The Administrative Agent shall promptly notify the Parent and the Banks of the final allocation of such increase and the Increase Effective Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Options shall vest and become exercisable in such manner and on such date or dates or upon such event or events as determined by the Committee. Except as set forth in Sections 11, 13(i) and 13(j) hereto, the Committee shall not accelerate vesting of an Option. Options shall expire after such period, as may be determined by the Committee, not to exceed ten (10) years from the Date of Grant (the “ Option Period ”); provided , that if the Option Period (other than in the case of an Incentive Stock Option) would expire at a time when trading in the shares of Common Stock is prohibited by the Company’s insider trading policy (or Company-imposed “blackout period”), then the Option Period shall be automatically extended until the thirtieth (30 th ) day following the expiration of such prohibition. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall the Option Period exceed five (5) years from the Date of Grant in the case of an Incentive Stock Option granted to a Participant who on the Date of Grant owns stock representing more than 10% of the voting power of all classes of stock of the Company or any Affiliate of the Company.

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: All news releases, publicity or advertising by Borrower or its Affiliates through any media intended to reach the general public which refers to the Loan Documents or the financing evidenced by the Loan Documents or to Lender shall be subject to the prior written approval of Lender. The foregoing is not intended to nor shall it prohibit any required filings by Guarantor under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Lender shall have the right to issue any of the foregoing without Borrower’s approval and Borrower authorizes Lender to issue press releases, advertisements and other promotional materials in connection with Lender’s own promotional and marketing activities, and such materials may describe the Loan in general terms or in detail and Lender’s participation therein in the Loan.

assistant: Publicity
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: subsequent purchasers is concerned, the only duty resting upon a mortgagee is the due registration of the mortgage in the office of the probate judge, which is conclusive notice to all the world of everything that appears from the face of the mortgage.” Christopher v. Shockley, 199 Ala. 681, 682, 75 So. 158, 158 (1917) (emphasis added). We conclude that the constructive notice provided by § 35-4-90 extends to those who, like subsequent purchasers, are under a duty to search the chain of title for claims against a parcel of property but that it does not extend to those who, like Geanie, have an antecedent claim to the property at issue and therefore have no reason to search for subsequently arising claims to the property. See, generally, Pierce v. Rwmmell, 535 So.2d 594, 597 (Ala.1988) (<HOLDING>). Although we conclude that the statute of Options: A. holding that for purposes of the aggravated assault statute if the instrument used is a firearm as defined by section 7900016 then that instrument is a deadly weapon as a matter of law regardless of whether it is loaded or capable of being fired and holding that for purposes of the aggravated assault statute if the instrument is not a firearm then courts are to apply an objective test and look to the nature and actual use of the instrument and not to the subjective fear of the victim or intent of the perpetrator in determining whether the instrument is a deadly weapon B. holding that recording of an instrument provided constructive notice to subsequent purchasers not to those with an interest antecedent to the making of the instrument C. holding that intent is a separate element and evidence relating to intent is irrelevant to determining whether an object is a criminal instrument D. holding that recording is notice to one bound to search the record E. holding if the language of a deed or other written instrument is clear and unambiguous the intention of the parties is gathered from the instrument it is what the grant or said and not what he intended to say

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that recording of an instrument provided constructive notice to subsequent purchasers not to those with an interest antecedent to the making of the instrument
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: To the extent permitted by applicable law, each Guarantor hereby waives promptness, diligence, protest, notice of acceptance and any other notice or formality of any kind with respect to any of the Guaranteed Obligations and this Guaranty and any requirement that the Collateral Agent exhaust any right or take any action against any Transaction Party or any other Person or any Collateral. Each Guarantor acknowledges that it will receive direct and indirect benefits from the financing arrangements contemplated herein and that the waiver set forth in this Section 4 is knowingly made in contemplation of such benefits. The Guarantors hereby waive any right to revoke this Guaranty, and acknowledge that this Guaranty is continuing in nature and applies to all Guaranteed Obligations, whether existing now or in the future. Without limiting the foregoing, to the extent permitted by applicable law, each Guarantor hereby unconditionally and irrevocably waives (a) any defense arising by reason of any claim or defense based upon an election of remedies by the Collateral Agent or any Buyer that in any manner impairs, reduces, releases or otherwise adversely affects the subrogation, reimbursement, exoneration, contribution or indemnification rights of such Guarantor or other rights of such Guarantor to proceed against any of the other Transaction Parties, any other guarantor or any other Person or any Collateral, and (b) any defense based on any right of set-off or counterclaim against or in respect of the Guaranteed Obligations of such Guarantor hereunder. Each Guarantor hereby unconditionally and irrevocably waives any duty on the part of the Collateral Agent or any Buyer to disclose to such Guarantor any matter, fact or thing relating to the business, condition (financial or otherwise), operations, performance, properties or prospects of any other Transaction Party or any of its Subsidiaries now or hereafter known by the Collateral Agent or a Buyer.

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: for directed verdict because the evidence was insufficient to show venue was proper in Fort Bend County. Appellant’s second point of error complains that venue in Fort Bend County was improper because the venue facts established at trial were insufficient to show beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant attempted to use his perjurious testimony in Fort Bend County. Venue in a criminal case need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence, which may be either direct or circumstantial. Tex.Code CRim. Proc. Ann. art. 13.17 (Vernon 1977); Black v. State, 645 S.W.2d 789, 790 (Tex.Crim.App.1983). This is so even though the jury — as in this case — is erroneously charged that venue must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. See Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234, 240 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (<HOLDING>). Evidence is sufficient to establish venue if, Options: A. holding that sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction is not measured by the jury charge actually given but rather measured by the elements of the offense as defined by a hypothetically correct charge B. holding that the sufficiency of evidence to prove malice as an element of negligent credentialing as contrasted from exemplary damages would be measured by the clear and convincing evidence standard provided in the charge submitted even though the law only required it to be proved by a preponderance of the evidence C. holding that sufficiency of the evidence is measured against a hypothetically correct jury charge D. holding when no objection is made to jury issue sufficiency of the evidence is measured against charge given by court rather than some other unidentified law E. holding that because trial court actually gave part of a jury charge that appellant claimed was improperly omitted and because remainder of courts charge adequately defined one of the legal terms at issue the courts jury charge taken as a whole was not misleading and did not constitute reversible error

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction is not measured by the jury charge actually given but rather measured by the elements of the offense as defined by a hypothetically correct charge
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: within statutory range. See Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-103(c) (Repl. 2006) (rape is a Class Y felony); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-125(b)(l) (second-degree sexual assault is a Class B felony); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-401(a)(l) (a sentence for a Class Y felony may range from 120 months to 480 months or life); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-401(a)(3) (a sentence for a Class B felony may range from 60 months’ imprisonment to 240 months’ imprisonment). Pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-4-403(a), the trial court had authority to exercise its discretion and order that the sentences imposed on Clayton be served consecutively. This court has previously rejected the argument that imposition of consecutive sentences is cruel and unusual punishment. See Thompson v. State, 280 Ark. 265, 658 S.W.2d 350 (1983) (<HOLDING>); see also Thompson v. State, 2013 Ark. 179, at Options: A. holding cruel and unusual punishment complaint not preserved B. holding that a cruel and unusual punishment claim is not jurisdictional and therefore may not be raised for the first time on appeal C. holding that what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment is a question of law D. holding that the cumulative effect of consecutive sentences does not make punishment cruel and unusual E. holding the constitutional right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment may be waived

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the cumulative effect of consecutive sentences does not make punishment cruel and unusual
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: Supreme Court created Bankruptcy Rule 3001 for a reason — so that debtors and other parties in interest can see and read the documents upon which claims are based in order to make an initial assessment of their validity. This Court does not believe that the Supreme Court contemplated that creditors could ignore Bankruptcy Rule 3001’s requirements unless and until a debtor complains and then cry “no harm, no foul” by producing documents that should have been produced initially. This latter scenario subverts the fundamental process by which the American legal system is based — that a claimant must come forward with at least some evidence that its claims are valid before collecting on their claims. Raleigh v. Ill. Dep’t of Revenue, 530 U.S. 15, 21, 120 S.Ct. 1951, 147 L.Ed.2d 13 (2000) (<HOLDING>). Though efficiency and the speedy resolution Options: A. recognizing burden B. recognizing that the burden of proof is an essential element of the claim itself and that one who asserts a claim has the burden of proof that normally comes with it C. holding that the burden of proof is on the claimant D. recognizing that even where a party has the burden of proof at trial that party need not produce proof supporting his claim in response to a motion for summary judgment unless the movant has first presented evidence that would negate an element of the nonmovants claim or indicates that the nonmovant will be unable to meet his burden at trial it is never enough simply to state that the nonmoving party cannot meet its burden at trial E. holding burden of proof is on one asserting an affirmative defense

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the burden of proof is an essential element of the claim itself and that one who asserts a claim has the burden of proof that normally comes with it
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the Forfeiture Action The first question presented on this appeal is whether administrative forfeiture actions brought within the 120-day time period sufficiently comply with the letter of the law, as provided in § 924(d)(1), when the judicial proceedings are not brought also within the permissible 120 days. Section 924(d)(1) provides, in part: “Any action or proceeding for the forfeiture of firearms or ammunition shall be commenced within one hundred a 738, 741 (S.D.Tex.1998), aff'd, 54 Fed. Appx. 405, 2002 WL 31688616, at *1 (5th Cir. Oct.28, 2002) (concluding that the statute required “either an administrative forfeiture proceeding or a judicial forfeiture action within 120 days of a seizure”); United States v. Fourteen Various Firearms, 889 F.Supp. 875, 877 (E.D.Va.1995) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Twelve Miscellaneous Options: A. holding in pertinent part that this court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal B. holding that the appellate court had jurisdiction to hear the interlocutory appeal on a restraining order and the district court retained jurisdiction to proceed with the trial C. holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because both the administrative and the judicial forfeiture actions were not commenced within the 120day timeframe D. holding the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal where the circuit court had the power to remand the agency decision for further proceedings E. holding that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because it was filed without proper authority

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because both the administrative and the judicial forfeiture actions were not commenced within the 120day timeframe
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: 81 Mich. L.Rev. 399, 428-31 (1982). Y. ALTERNATIVELY, LOUISIANA R.S. 9:5644(0 CONSTITUTIONALLY COULD NOT REVIVE AN OTHERWISE PRESCRIBED ACTION. Defendant argues that applying subsection C of the 1985 revival statute, Louisiana R.S. 9:5644(C), to an action already prescribed on the effective date of the statute would violate the Louisiana constitution. I agree, and I grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment on this alternative basis. I have concluded that the School Board’s claim is prescribed even if the 1985 statute can constitutionally be applied. Nevertheless, for the sake of completeness, I reiterate my view expressed in 1992 that the Louisiana Supreme Court would agree with defendant’s contention. City of New Orleans v. W.R. Grace & Co.—Conn., 1992 WL 125371 (E.D.La.1992) (<HOLDING>), aff'd, 985 F.2d 558 (5th Cir.1993) (affirmed Options: A. holding that to the extent plaintiffs present action is based on conduct subsequent to the original action it is not barred by the prior litigation B. holding that a subsequent action was not barred because the initial court did not have jurisdiction over the claim C. holding that illegal state regulation can be accomplished either by an award of damages or by legislative enactment D. holding that in reference to lars 95644b onee a plaintiffs case of action is barred by liberative prescription it cannot under the louisiana constitution be revived by a subsequent legislative enactment E. recognizing that the zoning code of a homerule city is a legislative enactment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that in reference to lars 95644b onee a plaintiffs case of action is barred by liberative prescription it cannot under the louisiana constitution be revived by a subsequent legislative enactment
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 understand that generally we do not pre-screen or monitor the content posted by users of these various communication tools , which means that if you choose to use these tools to submit any type of content to our website , then it is your personal responsibility to use these tools in a responsible and ethical manner .

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: that phrase and conclude that Congress really intended to include within the definition of 'student' a person who has not been in attendance at an institution." We respectfully disagree. Whether the attendance spoken of in the statute is one that has occurred in the past or is presently occurring when the request for records is made is not unambiguously addressed by the statute. However, it is addressed by the Secretary of the Department of Education, who was designated by Congress to implement the Act. 8 Under 34 C.F.R. § 99.1, an "educational agency" is included within FERPA if it "provides educational services" or "performs service functions for, public elementary, or secondary schools or post secondary institutions." This definition is broad enough to extend to the entiti k. 1991) (<HOLDING>); Lawson v. Edwardsburg Pub. Sch., No. Options: A. holding that seventeen missing records does not constitute improper record keeping because the fact that the records are not at the station does not mean that the records are incorrect or inaccurate B. holding that the point on appeal and the objection in the trial court must be the same in order for it to be preserved for appeal C. holding that a person who requests public records is a necessary party and must be joined in any action brought under rcw 4256540 D. holding that records relating to a student court were not education records E. holding that requests for records of another must be denied and relying on the dicta in tarka without even mentioning the cfr

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that requests for records of another must be denied and relying on the dicta in tarka without even mentioning the cfr
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: 920, 99 S.Ct. 1244, 59 L.Ed.2d 472 (1979). Evidence is relevant “if it makes the existence of any fact at issue more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.” United States v. Williams, 900 F.2d 823, 826 (5th Cir.1990). As we stated in Beechum, “[i]t is derogative of the search for truth to allow a defendant to tell his story of innocence without facing him with evidence impeaching that story.” 582 F.2d at 909. Evidence that Bonner was previously convicted of a cocaine delivery offense tends to refute his story that he was merely “in the wrong place at the wrong time,” and makes it more probable that he had the requisite “state of mind” or “intent” to participate in the present cocaine-related offenses. See United States v. Cheramie, 51 F.3d 538, 541-42 (5th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we hold that the district court Options: A. holding that a prior conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine is admissible under rule 609 B. holding that evidence of prior drug transactions was admissible under rule 404b to show inter alia intent to enter into the drug conspiracy and knowledge of the conspiracy C. holding that a prior conviction for using a communications device to facilitate the distribution of cocaine was admissible under rule 404b to prove that the defendant had the requisite intent to distribute cocaine D. holding that the defendants prior distribution of crack was admissible to prove that he had intent and knowledge regarding crack found in a gym bag E. holding evidence of prior drug sales admissible under 404b to show knowledge and intent where defendant claimed he did not know that the gym bag he took possession of contained two kilograms of cocaine

assistant: The best answer is E. holding evidence of prior drug sales admissible under 404b to show knowledge and intent where defendant claimed he did not know that the gym bag he took possession of contained two kilograms of cocaine
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 questions concerning the construction, validity, enforcement and interpretation of this Note shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Florida, without regard to the principles of conflict of laws thereof. Each party agrees that all legal proceedings concerning the interpretation, enforcement and defense of the transactions contemplated by any of the Transaction Documents (whether brought against a party hereto or its respective Affiliates, directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents) shall be commenced in the state and federal courts sitting in Broward County, Florida (the " Florida Courts "). Each party hereto hereby irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Florida Courts for the adjudication of any dispute hereunder or in connection herewith or with any transaction contemplated hereby or discussed herein (including with respect to the enforcement of any of the Transaction Documents), and hereby irrevocably waives, and agrees not to assert in any suit, action or proceeding, any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of such Florida Courts, or such Florida Courts are improper or inconvenient venue for such proceeding. Each party hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any such suit, action or proceeding by mailing a copy thereof via registered or certified mail or overnight delivery (with evidence of delivery) to such party at the address in effect for notices to it under this Note and agrees that such service shall constitute good and sufficient service of process and notice thereof. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any other manner permitted by applicable law. Each party hereto hereby irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any and all right to trial by jury in any legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this Note or the transactions contemplated hereby. If any party shall commence an action or proceeding to enforce any provisions of this Note, then the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be reimbursed by the other party for its attorneys fees and other costs and expenses incurred in the investigation, preparation and prosecution of such action or proceeding.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 270 A.2d 702 (1970), appeal dismissed, 402 U.S. 902, 91 S.Ct. 1377, 28 L.Ed.2d 643 (1971); Peoples Exp. Co., Inc. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 10 N.J. Tax 417, 433 (Tax 1989). Such statutory deadlines may not be relaxed. F.M.C. Stores, supra, 100 N.J. at 424-25, 495 A.2d 1313; Black Whale Inc. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 15 N.J.Tax 338, 347 (Tax 1995). “Statutes of limitation in tax statutes are strictly construed in order to provide finality and predictability of revenue to state and local government.” Bonanno v. Director, Div. Taxation, 12 N.J. Tax 552, 556 (Tax 1992). See also, F.M.C. Stores Co., supra, 100 N.J. at 424-25, 495 A.2d 1313. Cf. Commercial Refrigeration and Fixture Co. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 184 N.J.Super. 387, 2 N.J. Tax 415, 419, 446 A.2d 210 (Tax 1981) (<HOLDING>). As explained in Franklin Tp. v. Dep’t of Options: A. holding that after the then twoyear limitation period for the filing of a refund application had passed the state was entitled to assume that its tax revenues need not be refunded under any circumstance B. holding that a taxpayer only has a refund right after the irs has credited the refund to other underpaid taxes therefore the refund was not part of the bankruptcy estate C. holding that because the amount of the debtors obligation to the government exceeded the amount of their income tax refund the refund did not become property of the estate and could not be exempted D. holding that a refund may include additional taxes paid after the filing of a refund claim so long as the total does not exceed the portion of tax paid prior to the administrative claim E. holding that an erroneous rebate refund revives tax liability because the ultimate source of the irss claim to the amount erroneously refunded is a tax owed

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that after the then twoyear limitation period for the filing of a refund application had passed the state was entitled to assume that its tax revenues need not be refunded under any circumstance
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 Amendment shall become effective as of the first date (the “ Amendment Effective Date ”) on which the Administrative Agent (or its counsel) shall have received (a) from the Borrower and the Lenders constituting the Required Lenders either (A) counterparts of this Amendment signed on behalf of the Borrower and such Lenders or (B) written evidence satisfactory to the Administrative Agent (which may include a facsimile or other electronic transmission of a signed counterpart of the Amendment) that such parties have signed counterparts of the Amendment and (b) from the Borrower payment of all fees and expenses required to be paid or reimbursed hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the Exhibits attached hereto contain the entire understanding among the parties to this Agreement and supersede any prior understandings or agreements among them respecting the within subject matter. There are no representations, agreements, arrangements or understandings, oral or written, between or among the parties hereto relating to the subject matter of this Agreement which are not fully expressed in this Agreement; provided that an LTIP Unit may be subject to a Vesting Agreement and a Limited Partner may enter into a deficit restoration obligation agreement.

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: The burden is on Elliott to show his entitlement to the relief sought. Williams, 199 S.W.3d at 464; see also Escalante v. Rowan, 251 S.W.3d 720, 727 (Tex.App.-[14th Dist.] 2008, pet. filed); Hall v. Provost, 232 S.W.3d 926, 929 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2007, no pet.); Franka v. Velasquez, 216 S.W.3d 409, 413 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2006, no pet.). Elliott did not make any assertion before the trial court, and makes none before this Court, that the acts for which Kele-men sued him were in the general scope of his employment. Further, the record contains no evidence to support a finding that Elliott’s general scope of employment included the assault of Kelemen. We thus conclude that Elliott failed to meet the burden required for dismissal under section 101.106(f). See Escalante, 251 S.W.3d at 727 (<HOLDING>). Any dismissal under section 101.106(f) would Options: A. holding that a school board policy prohibiting employees from sending their children to private schools interfered with employees constitutional right to control the education of their children B. holding that probation department employees are not county employees C. holding that when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties the employees are not speaking as citizens for first amendment purposes and the constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline D. holding inter alia that pursuant to hrs 3868 employer entitled to reimbursement from portion of employees settlement with thirdparty tortfeasor properly allocable to employees tort claim E. holding employees not entitled to dismissal pursuant to section 101106f where employees failed to present the trial court with a sufficient record to satisfy their burden

assistant: The best answer is E. holding employees not entitled to dismissal pursuant to section 101106f where employees failed to present the trial court with a sufficient record to satisfy their burden
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 incidents cited by the plaintiff were not “similar to the violation at issue” so as to “put [the defendant] on notice that specific training was necessary to avoid this constitutional violation.”). Here, Plaintiffs allegations concerning a pattern of constitutional violations are con- ' elusory, at best. Throughout the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have failed to properly train their officers and that such failure showed deliberate indifference to Plaintiffs constitutional rights. See Compl. ¶¶ 67, 118. However, alone, those allegations are not sufficient to raise a plausible claim that the City “knew of, and acquiesced in, a pattern of constitutional violations,” Gallimore, 38 F.Supp.3d at 726, because such allegations are conclusory, see Lee, 2013 WL 1155590, at *7 (<HOLDING>). Importantly, Plaintiffs additional factual Options: A. holding that the plaintiff had offered insufficient evidence to establish deliberate indifference in a failuretotrain claim in part because the plaintiff did not present evidence that the training received was inadequate or evidence of any specific additional training that the employees should have received B. holding that a difference of medical opinion was insufficient as a matter of law to establish deliberate indifference C. holding that disagreement with a doctors judgment does not support a claim of deliberate indifference D. holding that allegations that training was inadequate the inadequate training constituted deliberate indifference and the risk of constitutional injury as a result of such deliberate indifference is very obvious were a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action and were mere conclusions that did not without additional facts state a claim for failuretotrain liability E. holding that a sentence of incarceration would constitute deliberate indifference to defendants medical needs

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that allegations that training was inadequate the inadequate training constituted deliberate indifference and the risk of constitutional injury as a result of such deliberate indifference is very obvious were a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action and were mere conclusions that did not without additional facts state a claim for failuretotrain liability
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: with Mr. Shuck and did not grow or use marijuana. You asked him if he uses marijuana and they asked him if he uses marijuana, and he denied he ever distributed marijuana. I am allowing this testimony [i.e., of Ms. Armbruster]. Id. at 492-93. In other words, the district court expressly admitted Ms. Armbruster’s testimony regarding purchasing marijuana from Mr. Watson, and using it with him, during a period earlier than the charged crimes to impeach Mr. Watson's testimony that he never used or distributed marijuana. 19 . This is not to say that rebuttal-witness testimony is categorically only admissible as impeachment evidence (as opposed to substantive evidence). Indeed, in certain circumstances, rebuttal evidence can constitute substantive evidence. See Harris, 557 F.3d at 942-43 (<HOLDING>). However, in this case, the challenged Options: A. holding that a plaintiff could not show that she engaged in protected activity because she did not present evidence that she informed her employer that her complaints were based on race or age discrimination B. holding that an ij need not first identify the particular pieces of missing relevant evidence and show that this evidence was reasonably available to the applicant when he or she is not otherwise credible C. holding that admission of one defendants deposition was proper where she was present at the deposition even though she was represented at the time by the same counsel as her codefendants D. holding that the challenged evidence the government introduced in rebuttal was substantive evidence and not relevant for impeachment purposes because it was not offered to show that the witness was not a credible person but to show that she was not at the defendants home during the relevant time making her testimony that she did not see any drugrelated activity while at the defendants home irrelevant E. holding that a plaintiff can show that she is qualified by presenting credible evidence that she continued to possess the objective qualifications she held when she was hired

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the challenged evidence the government introduced in rebuttal was substantive evidence and not relevant for impeachment purposes because it was not offered to show that the witness was not a credible person but to show that she was not at the defendants home during the relevant time making her testimony that she did not see any drugrelated activity while at the defendants home irrelevant
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: We may, subject to your prior written consent (not to be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned), and subject to paragraph 9 above, at our expense, publicly announce as we may choose the capacities in which we or our affiliates have acted hereunder. Any notice given pursuant hereto shall be mailed or hand delivered in writing, if to (a) you, at your address set forth on page one hereof, (b) Barclays, at 745 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York 10019, (c) CGMI, at 390 Greenwich Street, New York, New York 10013 and (d) Royal Bank and RBCCM, at Three World Financial Center, 200 Vesey Street, New York, New York 10281.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event a dispute arises (each, a “ Dispute ”), the Parties will attempt in good faith to resolve such Dispute, failing which either Party may cause such Dispute to be referred to the Executive Officers for resolution. The Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve such Dispute by unanimous consent. If the Parties cannot resolve such Dispute within [***] of the matter being referred to them, then either Party may submit such Dispute to arbitration for final resolution by arbitration request (the “ Arbitration Request ”) under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (the “ Rules ”) by three (3) arbitrators appointed in accordance with the said Rules (each such arbitration, an “ Arbitration ”). Each Arbitration will be conducted in English and all foreign language documents shall be submitted in the original language and, if so requested by any arbitrator or Party, shall also be accompanied by a translation into English. The place of arbitration shall be Zurich, Switzerland. The arbitrators in any Arbitration shall enforce and not modify the terms of this Agreement. The award of the arbitrators shall be final and binding on each Party and its respective successors and assigns. All costs and expenses of any Arbitration, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses and the administrative and arbitrator fees and expenses, shall be borne by the Parties as determined by the arbitrators. For purposes of Article 6(4) of the Rules, the Parties agree that claims arising out of or in connection with this Agreement and the Collaboration Agreement may be determined together in a single arbitration. For purposes of Article 10 of the Rules, the Parties agree that any Party may request the consolidation of any arbitration subject to this Agreement with any arbitration subject to the Collaboration Agreement, even if the parties to the respective arbitrations are not identical. Unless the Parties subsequently agree otherwise, the arbitrations shall be consolidated into the arbitration that commenced first.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and prejudicial and the effect of this error was a violation of Appellant’s due process rights. In response, the trial court explains Detective Peterman’s reading of Mr. Moore’s March 22, 2005, statement corroborated the fact that Mr. Moore identified Appellant as the shooter and as Mr. Moore’s credibility had been attacked by defense counsel, it did not err in allowing Detective Peterman to read the statement. Trial Court Opinion, filed 6/26/07, at 6-7. ¶ 13 We note that Appellant devotes just two pages of his forty-eight page brief to this issue and cites to no case law in support of it. Appellant’s failure to properly develop this claim and to set forth applicable case law to advance it renders this issue also waived. See Commonwealth v. Hunzer, 868 A.2d 498, 516 (Pa.Super.2005) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Ellis, 700 A.2d 948, 957 Options: A. holding that an issue is waived where the defendant failed to develop an argument in his appellate brief and cited no authority B. holding that plaintiff failed to adequately brief an issue where he failed to cite any legal authority for the proposition C. holding waiver results if an appellant fails to properly develop an issue or cite to legal authority to support his contention in his appellate brief D. holding that an appellant waived a claim where he failed to cite any legal authority in support of an argument in his appellate brief E. holding an argument waived for failure to cite authority

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an appellant waived a claim where he failed to cite any legal authority in support of an argument in his appellate brief
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 to the contrary, all agreements, representations and warranties made in this Agreement herein shall not be impaired by any investigation or other act of Buyer or Seller and shall not be merged into the documents executed and delivered at Closing, but rather, except for Article 6, Sections 2.5.4, 3.4, 7.4 and 7.16 which shall survive for the periods indicated in such applicable Article or Section, shall survive the Closing until the earlier of: i) nine (9) months following the Closing Date or ii) November 30, 2018 (the “ Survival Period ”). Any claim by one party hereto against the other for the breach of any agreement, representation or warranty contained herein not made within the foregoing Survival Period will be forever barred, except to the extent such claim related to or alleges any fraudulent act or omission of either party.

assistant: Warranties
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 liability that discuss the Noteholders suggest that the parties intended that the Noteholders be able to sue Aladdin directly, albeit only for acts of gross negligence. Such a reading of the contract does not, as Aladdin argues, fail to give effect to the language of section 29, for section 29 would still prevent non-Noteholders from suing on the PMA. Moreover, given section 8’s limitation on enforcement directly by the Noteholders to the “requisite percentage” in the Indenture, section 29 could plausibly be read as intended to exclude small Note-holders, or secondary market Noteholders, from suing Aladdin directly. In short, it is more than plausible that the parties intended the PMA to inure to the benefit of the Noteholders. See Eternity Global Master Fund Ltd., 375 F.3d at 178 (<HOLDING>). Otherwise, to read the ambiguous language of Options: A. holding that the trial court should have dismissed the employees breach of contract claim B. holding exclusion was not ambiguous C. holding that parol evidence can be presented when the terms of the agreement are ambiguous D. holding contract with ambiguous terms should not be dismissed on pleadings E. holding that if the federal claims are dismissed before trial the state claims should be dismissed as well

assistant: The best answer is D. holding contract with ambiguous terms should not be dismissed on pleadings
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 has been duly executed and delivered by the Borrower and constitutes, and each other Loan Document when executed and delivered by the Borrower and each Guarantor that is party thereto will constitute, a legal, valid and binding obligation of such Loan Party enforceable against the Borrower and each such Guarantor in accordance with its terms, subject to (a) the effects of bankruptcy, insolvency, moratorium, reorganization, fraudulent conveyance or other similar laws affecting creditors’ rights generally, (b) general principles of equity (regardless of whether such enforceability is considered in a proceeding in equity or at law), (c) implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing, and (d) the need for filings and registrations necessary to perfect the Liens on the Collateral granted by the Loan Parties in favor of the Collateral Agent.

assistant: Enforceability
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: Ronnie, I wanted to ask you, since you were the breadwinner for your family, how has this affected it? [Burke:] It’s affected everything. We had to — we had to pull my daughter out of college. She was in the sorority and drill team and all of this stuff. We had to pull her out of college. We almost lost our home. We have been paying it for 20 years, we almost lost it. I had to borrow money from my sister, from my mother. Nancy borrowed some money from her mother. We got behind on all of our bills. All of it. It just — it changed everything. Burke’s testimony is not inconsistent with the receipt of insurance benefits because the testimony was limited to the financial hardship suffered as a result of his reduced earning capacity, not his medical expenses. See Snyder, 191 S.W.3d at 423 (<HOLDING>); Macias, 917 S.W.2d at 374 (holding that Options: A. holding that a wifes minimal involvement in her husbands business coupled with the lack of evidence that she knew of or intended to further her husbands fraudulent schemes was insufficient evidence of conspiracy B. holding that plaintiffs did not have standing because they did not sue the party with the clear ability to act C. holding that jury should decide whether plaintiffs testimony proved reasonable and necessary medical expenses D. holding that plaintiffs wifes testimony that she did not have money to pay for her husbands surgeries did not open door to collateral source testimony because large portion of plaintiffs future medical expenses would not be covered by insurance E. holding that we could not weigh the prejudice suffered as a result of the exclusion of plaintiffs testimony because we had no way of knowing what the plaintiffs testimony would have been

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that plaintiffs wifes testimony that she did not have money to pay for her husbands surgeries did not open door to collateral source testimony because large portion of plaintiffs future medical expenses would not be covered by insurance