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: waived under the Act on actions for personal injury caused by a condition or use of real property if the governmental unit would be liable to the claimant according to Texas law. See id. § 101.021(2). To properly state a claim involving the “condition” of property, it is sufficient to allege that defective or inadequate property contributed to the injury. See Salcedo v. El Paso Hosp. Dist., 659 S.W.2d 30, 31-32 (Tex.1983). Gay alleged such a claim by questioning the City’s negligence in maintaining the street and sewer system, which proximately caused her fall. Accordingly, the City was not entitled to sovereign immunity. We overrule its first issue. IV. Improper Designation Of Fact Witness During Discovery In its third issue, th 31-32 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist .] 1993, writ denied) (<HOLDING>). However, we liken the circumstances in this Options: A. holding that the extension phone exemption applied to situations where a parent records his childs phone conversations from a phone extension within the parents home without any analysis of the recording partys purpose B. holding that a witnesss prior inconsistent statements are admissible even in the event of that witnesss actual or feigned memory loss C. holding sufficient location information given even in the absence of witnesss phone number D. holding witnesss business address even though witnesss middle name omitted enough information because party could locate witness E. holding in the absence of exceptional circumstances deference should be given to trial court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding sufficient location information given even in the absence of witnesss phone number
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this First Amendment are deemed incorporated as of the closing of the Merger Transaction into the Employment Agreement, Lock-Up Agreement and Restrictive Covenant Agreement, as applicable, as if fully set forth therein.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Use the proceeds of any Loan made hereunder for any purpose other than (a) on the Effective Date, (i) to replace by amendment and restatement the Existing Obligations, (ii) to pay transactional fees, costs, and expenses incurred in connection with this Agreement and the other Loan Documents and (b) thereafter, consistent with the terms and conditions hereof, for their lawful and general corporate purposes, including without limitation to finance Permitted Acquisitions, Permitted Investments and the Spartech Acquisition; provided, that no part of the proceeds of the Loans made to Borrowers will be used to purchase or carry any Margin Stock or to extend credit to others for the purpose of purchasing or carrying any such Margin Stock or for any purpose that violates the provisions of Regulation T, U or X of the Board of Governors of the United States Federal Reserve.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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 Court will reverse a decision to grant or to deny remand only for an abuse of discretion. Fisher v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 696 A.2d 895 (Pa.Cmwlth.1997). The Referee questioned Procito about her reasons for quitting and gave her the opportunity to call and to question her witness. Testimony and proposed testimony about why her partner quit her job was irrelevant. Finally, Procito would not be entitled to benefits even if the following the spouse doctrine were applied because the necessity to relocate must be caused by circumstances beyond the control of the spouse and must not be a matter of personal preference. A personal preference is not necessary or compelling. Hammond v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 131 Pa.Cmwlth. 166, 569 A.2d 1013 (1990) (<HOLDING>). II Several standard principles govern the Options: A. holding that fedrcivp 26b3 does not require absolute protection for opinion work product and noting that these materials may be discovered and admitted when mental impressions are at issue in the case and the need for the materials is compelling B. recognizing that it is not enough merely to mention a possible argument in the most skeletal way leaving the court to do counsels work C. holding that wifes move to oregon was a matter of personal preference and husbands leaving work and following to preserve the family was not for necessitous and compelling cause D. holding that new statute which required proof that asbestos exposure was substantial contributing factor to claimants medical condition could be applied to pending cases and did not abrogate claimants vested right because she was still able to pursue her cause of action and recover for injury caused by her husbands exposure to asbestos statute merely affected methods and procedure by which that action was recognized protected and enforced not the cause of action itself E. holding opinion work product may be discovered when mental impressions are at issue and need for material is compelling

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that wifes move to oregon was a matter of personal preference and husbands leaving work and following to preserve the family was not for necessitous and compelling cause
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 may be executed by the parties hereto separately in one or more counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Transmission by a party to another party (or its counsel) via facsimile, electronic mail or other method of electronic communication of a signed copy of this Amendment (or a signature page of this Amendment) shall be as fully effective as delivery by such transmitting party to the other parties hereto of a counterpart of this Amendment that had been manually signed by such transmitting party.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Seller is a corporation duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of Delaware and has all powers and authority, and all licenses, permits, franchises, authorizations, consents and approvals of all Governmental Authorities, required to own its property and conduct its business as now conducted and to exercise its rights and to perform its obligations under the Counterparty License Agreement. The Seller is duly qualified to transact business and is in good standing in every jurisdiction in which such qualification or good standing is required by Applicable Law (except where the failure to be so qualified or in good standing would not be a Material Adverse Change).

assistant: Organizations
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: • reverse-engineering , decompiling , disassembling , modifying , or creating derivative works based on the spotify service , content or any part thereof unless permitted by applicable law ;

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: Sergio M. Aguirre appeals the district court’s denial of his federal habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253(c). We affirm. 1. The state court’s conclusion that the 2010 amendment to California Penal Code § 2933.6 does not violate the Ex Post Fac-to Clause was not contrary to clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); Nevarez v. Barnes, 749 F.3d 1124, 1128-29 (9th Cir.2014) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). 2. Nor was the state court’s decision “based Options: A. holding that the ex post facto clause has no application to deportation B. holding that the supreme courts ex post facto precedents do not clearly establish that amended section 29336 violates the ex post facto clause C. holding that parole guidelines are subject to the ex post facto clause D. holding that revocation of medical license does not violate the ex post facto clause E. holding that state work release regulation was not an ex post facto law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the supreme courts ex post facto precedents do not clearly establish that amended section 29336 violates the ex post facto clause
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: when her mother called her. Given the similarities between the two encounters, appellant’s prior behavior with M.B. indicates that the incident with K.T. was, not a mistake or misunderstanding, See Robisheaux v. State, 483 S.W.3d 205, 219-20 (Tex.App.—Austin Jan. 7, 2016, pet. ref'd) (concluding that offenses were “remarkably], similar” when victims were 'around the same age and defendant engaged in similar behavior toward both victims). Moreover, the State was required to show appellant intended to induce K.T. to engage in sexual performance. Thus, the trial court reasonably could have 'concluded that the'State’s need for the evidence was considerable. See Gigliobianco, 210 S.W.3d at 642; see also Checo v. State, 402 S.W.3d 440, 452 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.]. 2013, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>). M.B.’s- testimony that appellant bound her, Options: A. recognizing continuing harm from defendants knowing possession of child pornography B. holding admission of videos containing child pornography was probative of intent to sexually assault a child C. holding an unborn child is not a child for purposes of criminal prosecution of mistreatment of a child D. holding that private possession of child pornography is not protected by the first amendment E. holding district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting images and videos of child pornography because the stipulation was not an adequate substitute for the evidence offered

assistant: The best answer is B. holding admission of videos containing child pornography was probative of intent to sexually assault a child
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 state here exceeded 15 months, a limit that we have treated as a rough outer boundary of reasonableness in misdemeanor cases. See State v. Davids, 193 Or App 178, 183, 90 P3d 1 (2004), aff’d, 339 Or 96, 116 P3d 894 (2005) (observing that “the courts generally have concluded that state-caused delays to which a defendant has not consented of 15 months or more are generally unreasonable”). In addition, unlike in Spicer, the unjustified delay here did not constitute the majority of the total period of delay attributable to the state. Moreover, this is 09, rev den, 348 Or 523 (2010) (17.5-month delay attributable to the state on misdemeanor offenses did not require dismissal where each portion of the delay was reasonable); State v. Cunningham, 232 Or App 135, 146-47, 221 P3d 165 (2009) (<HOLDING>). Under all the attendant circumstances in this Options: A. holding that teachers request for four months leave was not a reasonable accommodation B. holding that petitioners unexplained hence unjustified delay of at least six months was not reasonable for purposes of california law C. holding that dismissal was required where overall length of prosecution was 16 months state was responsible for 13 months of delay and six months of that delay was due to simple neglect D. holding that a 15month delay of which four months were unexplained was reasonable in a felony prosecution E. holding only two months of four year and eight month delay attributable to commonwealth where defendant fled and concealed his whereabouts for four years and six months

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a 15month delay of which four months were unexplained was reasonable in a felony prosecution
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: blizzard entertainment has the right to obtain certain identification information about your computer and its operating system , including the identification numbers of your hard drives , central processing unit , ip addresses and operating systems , for identification purposes without any further notice to you .

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: linden lab will solely determine any disposition of the electronic data stored on its servers and will have no obligation to reproduce , process , transfer , extract or recreate any data from its servers .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the Agreement Date Schedule 5 lists all Intellectual Property that is registered or issued or is the subject of an application to register or have issued and owned by each Grantor on the date hereof, including for each of the foregoing items (a) the owner, (b) the title, (c) the jurisdiction in which such item has been registered or otherwise arises or in which an application for registration has been filed and (d) as applicable, the registration or application number and registration or application date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Forest cited in its reasoning on the point—Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Chief Industries, Inc., 106 F.3d 1409 (8th Cir.1997)— actually concluded that the University of Minnesota was a “merchant” in its purchase of a grain dryer and thus does not stand for the proposition that an entity must have specialized knowledge in the particular good involved in order to be considered a merchant, only that such knowledge is sufficient to be classified as a merchant. Id. at 1411-12. The Minnesota Forest restrictive reading of “merchant” is at odds not only with the language of UCC section 2-104(1), but also with cases that find entities to be merchants based on familiarity with business practices. See, e.g., K & M Joint Venture v. Smith Int’l, Inc., 669 F.2d 1106, 1115 (6th Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>); Columbus Trade Exch., Inc. v. AMCA Int’l Options: A. holding that with respect to tortious interference recognized standards of business ethics and business customs and practices are pertinent B. holding that experienced contractor familiar with business practices is merchant with respect to buying certain equipment despite lack of special knowledge of that equipment C. holding that the government could not charge contractor excess cost of relet contract where government caused a delay in contract performance in which contractor was to use his own equipment original contractors costs increased and government refused to allow original contractor to perform at cost but allowed new contractor to use government equipment and paid new contractor a different rate D. holding that a general contractors right to forbid the work from being performed in a dangerous manner and the fact that he would have stopped the work and required protective equipment had he seen the employee of the independent contractor not using such equipment merely showed the possibility of control not actual control E. holding description all personal property sufficient to cover equipment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that experienced contractor familiar with business practices is merchant with respect to buying certain equipment despite lack of special knowledge of that equipment
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 may otherwise be publicly disclosed by the Purchaser or the Company, Shareholder shall hold any confidential information provided by the Purchaser or the Company or in the possession of the Shareholders, regarding this Agreement, the Arrangement Agreement and the Plan of Arrangement or otherwise, in strict confidence and shall not divulge any such information to any third person; provided , however , that Shareholder may disclose such information (i) to his, her or its attorneys, accountants, consultants, trustees, beneficiaries and other professionals to the extent necessary to obtain their services in connection with monitoring Shareholder’s interests in the Company and Shareholder’s rights under the Arrangement Agreement or other agreements entered into in connection with the Plan of Arrangement, including his, her or its rights to receive proceeds pursuant to or as a result of the Plan of Arrangement (provided such advisors are subject to rules of ethical or professional rules of such Person’s profession or have at least as restrictive confidentiality provisions as the Company), and (ii) to any existing Affiliate, officer, director, employee, partner, member, shareholder, parent or subsidiary of Shareholder in the ordinary course of his, her or its business, provided in each case that such Shareholder informs the Person receiving the information that such information is confidential and such Person agrees in writing to abide by the terms of this Section 4 . Neither Shareholder, nor any of his, her or its Affiliates (other than the Company, whose actions shall be governed by the Arrangement Agreement), shall issue or cause the publication of any press release or other public announcement with respect to this Agreement, the Arrangement Agreement, the Plan of Arrangement or the other transactions contemplated hereby or thereby without the prior written consent of the Purchaser, except as may be required by applicable law in which circumstance such announcing party shall make reasonable efforts to consult with the Purchaser to the extent practicable. The Shareholders further acknowledge and agree that non-public materials provided to the Shareholder Director and communications relating to the Board shall be deemed confidential information.

assistant: Confidentiality
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: doubt, we will affirm the conviction. Id. Here, Sparks claims that “[n]o evidence at trial could lead to the conclusion that [Sparks] had anything at all to do with the burglary which constitutes the underlying charge for this felony murder conviction. [Sparks] did not enter the house.” Sparks’ Br. p. 19. However, our review of the evidence reveals that Sparks participated in the crime by knocking on the doors of the targeted victims. Sparks also functioned as a “lookout” who remained outside Scott’s house with a cell phone so that he could warn the young men if the police or another visitor arrived at Scott’s house. A “lookout” is an accomplice to the crime and subject to being tried as a principal. Terry v. State, 545 N.E.2d 831, 831 (Ind.1989). See also Exum, 812 N.E.2d at 208 (<HOLDING>). There is sufficient evidence to support Options: A. holding that when defendant was guilty of burglary but the only evidence that he was armed was from his own statement existence of the firearm went only to the degree of the offense and was not as an element of proof B. holding that defendant who was not the leader of the robbery was not carrying a firearm and may not have been in the apartment when his accomplice died was criminally liable for the actions of his coperpetrators C. holding that the mandatory minimum sentencing provision applies if the defendant knew that his accomplice possessed a firearm and used it during the commission of the crime D. holding that an enhancement for an express threat of death may not be applied to the sentence for robbery when the threat is related to the use of the firearm and the defendant has a 924c sentence for the same firearm E. holding that in a prosecution for possession of an unregistered firearm evidence of an armed robbery committed with the firearm was admissible

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendant who was not the leader of the robbery was not carrying a firearm and may not have been in the apartment when his accomplice died was criminally liable for the actions of his coperpetrators
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: reversal are rare, this is such a case. The Supreme Court has repeatedly stated, including in the landmark Fulminante ease, that harmless error analysis is not appropriate in cases that “contain a ‘defect affecting the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply an error in the trial process itself.’ ” Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 8, 119 S.Ct. 1827, 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999) (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310, 111 S.Ct. 1246, 113 L.Ed.2d 302 (1991)). According to the Court, nothing “could be more important than the opportunity finally to marshal the evidence for each side before submission of the case to judgment.” Herring, 422 U.S. at 862, 95 S.Ct. 2550; see also United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 659 n. 25, 104 S.Ct. 2039, 80 L.Ed.2d 657 (1984) (<HOLDING>). The majority upholds harmless error review by Options: A. recognizing structural error where counsel was prevented from assisting the accused during a critical stage of the proceeding B. holding the absence of defense counsel during jury reinstruction to be a deprivation of counsel during a critical stage under clearly established federal law C. holding that the filing of a motion for a new trial is a critical stage of the prosecution and that an indigent defendant is constitutionally entitled to the assistance of counsel at that stage D. holding that sentencing is a critical stage of criminal proceedings and the offer of counsel must be renewed at each critical stage where the defendant appears without counsel E. recognizing that brooks protects against denial of counsel at a critical stage of his trial

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing structural error where counsel was prevented from assisting the accused during a critical stage of the proceeding
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: During the Term (defined below), the Employer shall employ Executive to serve as, and the Company shall appoint or cause to be appointed the Executive to the position of, the COO Operations of the Company, upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, and Executive shall report directly to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company (the “ CEO ”), unless otherwise determined by the Board of Directors of the Company (the “ Board ”). In addition, during the Term, Executive shall serve as the COO Operations of the Operating Partnership and the Employer and shall report to the CEO, unless determined otherwise by the Board. For the avoidance of doubt, Executive shall be an employee of the Employer.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “unless the defendant is given an opportunity to participate, his speedy trial rights may be whittled away in the non-adversary context of ex parte communications between the government and the court.” Id. at 743. The Fifth Circuit has similarly held that continuances that are “granted ex parte or sua sponte or occur[] accidentally .. . thwart the purposes of the IAD[] and chisel away defendants’ rights to a speedy trial under the agreement.” Birdwell, 983 F.2d at 1339; see also United States v. Collins, 90 F.3d 1420, 1428 (9th Cir. 1996) (explaining that “there is no provision [in the IAD] for the district court to unilaterally and without a hearing extend the continuance — and its attendant tolling — an additional four days”); Stroble v. Anderson, 587 F.2d 830, 839-40 (6th Cir. 1978) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 940 (1979); Abramson, Options: A. holding that a district courts marginal order granting summary judgment did not meet the strict requirements of rule 58 because a party may reasonably be confused as to the standing of its ease when a decision is rendered in such an informal manner B. holding interpretation may not be inconsistent with regulation C. holding that openended continuances to serve the ends of justice are not prohibited if they are reasonable in length D. holding that both the lodestar and the percentage of the fund methods are permitted E. holding that informal methods of granting continuances are inconsistent with the requirements of the iad

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that informal methods of granting continuances are inconsistent with the requirements of the iad
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 state of the applicable law....”). ¶ 20 New Mexico is also the state where a significant part of the tortious conduct occurred because that is where Appellees purportedly engaged in defective construction and use of asbestos at the Plant. Restatement § 145(2) cmt. e (noting that state of injury likely to be state of conduct when issues involve standards of conduct as that state has natural concern in resolving such issues). We reject Mrs. Pounders’ contention that this factor should be discounted because Appellees chose to conduct their activities in New Mexico as its tort laws are favora e justified expectations of both businesses and injured parties that New Mexico law will apply in any lawsuit arising from conduct and injury in New Mexico. See Jaurequi, 986 F.2d at 175-76 (<HOLDING>). ¶ 22 Finally, in comparing the relevant Options: A. holding state as parens patriae takes strong interest in care and treatment of children within its borders B. recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties C. holding that missouri has interest in providing a forum for victims injured as a result of activities conducted within its borders D. holding that phone and facsimile communications to the forum purchase orders and payments sent to the forum a choice of law clause within the contract regarding the forum state and delivery of the product within the forum state were not enough to satisfy minimum contacts E. recognizing that with respect to regulating or affecting conduct within its borders the place of the wrong has the predominant interest

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that missouri has interest in providing a forum for victims injured as a result of activities conducted within its borders
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Schedule 7.15 sets forth as of the Third Amendment Effective Date a list of all Subsidiaries (excluding Subsidiaries with no assets and no operations) and the number and percentage of the shares of each class of capital stock owned beneficially or of record by the Company or any Subsidiary therein, and the jurisdiction of formation of each such Subsidiary, and designates which Subsidiaries are Material Subsidiaries.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. State, 160 Md.App. 391, 413, 864 A.2d 226 (2004), cert. denied, 386 Md. 181, 872 A.2d 46 (2005). And, “the State bears the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt all statutory prerequisites for the application of an enhanced sentence.” Id. at 415, 864 A.2d 226; see Jones v. State, 324 Md. 32, 37, 595 A.2d 463 (1991). In Deville, 383 Md. at 231-32, 858 A.2d 484, the Court declined to “read § 286(d) to include home detention within the definition of ‘confinement ... in a correctional institution’” and said: “Where the Legislature has not specifically instructed the courts of Maryland to expand the scope of a penal statute, the rule of lenity dictates that we limit such laws to that which can be construed clear from the statute.” See also Melgar, 355 Md. at 342, 734 A.2d 712 (<HOLDING>) According to appellant, C.L. § 5-621 is Options: A. holding that the language of the statute is mandatory and the commission must act within 180 days B. holding that the time in pretrial detention may not be included to satisfy the statutory requirement under 286d of a term of confinement of at least 180 days C. holding that motion challenging pretrial detention was excludable under act D. holding that punitive conditions of pretrial confinement implicate due process E. holding that a private right of action does not arise until 180 days after a charge has been filed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the time in pretrial detention may not be included to satisfy the statutory requirement under 286d of a term of confinement of at least 180 days
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The term of the Loan shall begin on the Effective Date and shall consist of a thirty‑six (36) month interest only payment period ending on July 31, 2019 (the “ Interest Only Period ”), followed by a one hundred twenty (120) month principal and interest payment period ending on the Maturity Date (the “ Amortization Period ”).

assistant: Terms
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: Rodrigues hit him in the head with a hand-held radio. Defendant Rodrigues ordered Barile to tell the doctors at the hospital that he injured himself in a “fall.” Subsequently, Barile made a complaint to the Internal Affairs Division and an investigator was assigned to verify Barile’s claim. On June 11, 1997, a private attorney informed Barile that the law firm had filed a Notice of Intent to sue the City of Hartford. On April 13, 2004, the cessive force against him on December 21, 1996. Thus, Barile had until December 21, 1999, to file his complaint. When considering a ease filed by a prisoner, the courts consider a complaint to have been filed as of the date the inmate gives the complaint to prison officials to be mailed to the court. See Dory v. Ryan, 999 F.2d 679, 682 (2d Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>) (citing Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270, Options: A. holding that prisoners notice of appeal is deemed filed on date he delivered it to prison officials for mailing to court B. holding that an noa filed by a pro se prisoner is deemed filed on the date that the prisoner delivers it to prison authorities for mailing C. holding that prisoners notice of appeal deemed filed on date he delivered it to prison officials for mailing to court D. holding that the date of filing is the time at which a pro se prisoner entrusts the document to prison officials for delivery E. holding that a pro se prisoner complaint is deemed filed as of the date the prisoner gives the complaint to prison officials to be forwarded to the court

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a pro se prisoner complaint is deemed filed as of the date the prisoner gives the complaint to prison officials to be forwarded to the court
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 Holder proposing to make a Proposed Transfer must deliver a written notice (an “ Offer Notice ”) to Parent stating its bona fide intention to offer the ROFO Shares. Such Offer Notice shall contain the number of ROFO Shares to be offered and the material terms and conditions (including price, form of consideration and proposed closing date) of the Proposed Transfer. The Offer Notice shall constitute the selling Holder’s offer to sell the ROFO Shares to Parent, which offer shall be irrevocable for a period of fifteen (15) days from the date thereof (the “ Offer Period ”); provided , however , that the Offer Period shall be seven (7) calendar days from the date of the Offer Notice with respect to any Proposed Transfer of securities pursuant to an effective registration statement filed under the Securities Act (including a registration statement filed pursuant to Section 2 ). To exercise its Right of First Offer under this Section 5 , in whole or in part, Parent must deliver a Parent Notice to the selling Holder during the Offer Period. Parent’s failure to deliver a Parent Notice during the Offer Period will be deemed to be an election not to purchase any of the ROFO Shares specified in the relevant Offer Notice; provided , however , that such election shall not limit Parent’s rights to exercise its Right of First Refusal pursuant to Section 3 in the event that such Holder ultimately proceeds to sell its Parent Shares.

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: credibility determinations, the weighing of evidence, and the drawing of inferences from the facts are the function of the jury, and therefore the evidence of the nonmovant is to be believed and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255, 106 S.Ct. at 2513. The nonmovant need not be given the benefit of every inference but only of every reasonable inference. Brown v. City of Clewiston, 848 F.2d 1534, 1540 n. 12 (11th Cir.1988). IV. Discussion The defendant argues that summary judgment is appropriate because the parties entered into a valid settlement agreement which constitutes a final resolution of the plaintiff’s discrimination claims. See United States Fire Insurance Co. v. Caulkins Indiantown Citrus Co., 931 F.2d 744, 748 (11th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). The Eleventh Circuit has held that a Options: A. holding that the repeal of a statute renders moot the question of its constitutionality and that the constitutionality of the new act does not arise on this appeal and will be decided if and when it is presented B. holding appeal moot on this basis C. holding that the lack of any ongoing appeal of weeks conviction renders moot the question of bail pending direct appeal D. holding that the plaintiffs claim was moot because the construction project which was the subject of the dispute had been completed E. holding that the settlement of a dispute generally renders a case moot

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the settlement of a dispute generally renders a case moot
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 Seller, severally and not jointly, represents and warrants to Buyer that the statements contained in this Section 3(a) are correct and complete as of the date of this Agreement and as of the Closing, except as set forth in the disclosure schedules delivered by Sellers to Buyer on the date hereof (and, together with Target’s disclosure schedules, the “ Disclosure Schedules ”).

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: CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Higgins v. Dyck-O’Neal, Inc., 201 So.3d 157 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (<HOLDING>); see also Dyck-O’Neal, Inc. v. Lanham, 214 Options: A. holding that a party is not entitled to pursue a separate action for deficiency judgment where the foreclosure complaint includes a prayer for a deficiency judgment and the foreclosure court reserves jurisdiction to enter a deficiency judgment B. holding no jurisdiction when trial court granted extension because it found deficiency even though it was not same deficiency complained of by appellant in his motion to dismiss C. holding that a second deficiency notice issued for a taxable year was valid where it determined a deficiency in a different type of tax than did the earlier deficiency notice D. holding that where notice of deficiency fails adequately to describe the basis on which the commissioner relies for his deficiency determination burden shifts to the commissioner to prove the accuracy of the deficiency determination E. holding that after a judgment entry grants a decree of foreclosure and order of sale the foreclosure action cannot be dismissed as the judgment is final

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a party is not entitled to pursue a separate action for deficiency judgment where the foreclosure complaint includes a prayer for a deficiency judgment and the foreclosure court reserves jurisdiction to enter a deficiency judgment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of which taken together shall constitute one agreement, and any of the parties hereto may execute this Agreement by signing any such counterpart. This Agreement shall be effective when it has been executed by the Parent, the Borrower, the Administrative Agent and the Lenders and each party has delivered its signature page to the Administrative Agent by facsimile transmission or pdf.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any determinations as to whether the Discharge of First Lien Priority Obligations, the Discharge of Excess First Lien Obligations, the Discharge of Second Lien Priority Obligations or the Discharge of Excess Second Lien Obligations has occurred shall be made without taking into account any limitations on any such obligations imposed by the Bankruptcy Court or other applicable Bankruptcy Law.

assistant: Interpretations
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: res judicata, or collateral estoppel. It may be cited for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R.App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 1 . A SANE nurse is a registered nurse that has special training to conduct sexual assault examinations on children and adults. 2 . Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) ("[T]he suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material_”). 3 . See, e.g., Eichwedel v. Chandler, 696 F.3d 660, 671 (7th Cir.2012) (“[A] State expressly waives exhaustion for purposes of § 2254(b)(3) where, as here, it concedes clearly and expressly that the claim has been exhausted, regardless of whether that concession is correct.”); D’Ambrosio, 527 F.3d at 495-96 (<HOLDING>); Purnell v. Mo. Dep't of Corr., 753 F.2d 703, Options: A. holding that the legislature imposed a requirement implicitly rather than by means of statutory language expressly stating the requirement B. holding that the warden expressly waived the exhaustion requirement because her counsels conduct during the district court proceedings manifested a clear and unambiguous intent to waive the requirement C. holding that the ftcas exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional D. recognizing that issue exhaustion requirement and requirement exhaustion of remedies are different E. holding that the state expressly waived the exhaustion requirement with a concession in its district court briefing even though the concession was made in error

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the warden expressly waived the exhaustion requirement because her counsels conduct during the district court proceedings manifested a clear and unambiguous intent to waive the requirement
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: Congress never proposed to limit the predicate offense to “some special subclass of burglaries that might be especially dangerous, such as those where ... the building is occupied,” and that Congress’s “choice of language indicate[d] that Congress thought ordinary burglaries ... presented a sufficiently ‘serious potential risk’ to count toward en hancement.” Id. at 588, 597, 110 S.Ct. at 2153, 2158. “The main risk of burglary arises not from the simple physical act of wrongfully entering onto another’s property, but rather from the possibility of a face-to-face confrontation between the burglar and a third party — whether an occupant, a police officer, or a bystander — who comes to investigate.” James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192, 203, 127 S.Ct. 1586, 1594, 167 L.Ed.2d 532 (2007) (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Matthews, 466 F.3d Options: A. holding that burglary is violent felony B. holding that thirddegree burglary is a violent felony C. holding that attempted burglary as defined by florida law is a violent felony under acca D. holding that escape is categorically a violent felony under the acca E. holding a burglary must be of a building or structure in order to qualify as a violent felony for acca purposes

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that attempted burglary as defined by florida law is a violent felony under acca
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: TESARO shall (a) comply, in all material respects, with all Applicable Laws applicable to its operations and the use or sale of the Product and the finished formulated product containing the Product, (b) be responsible for obtaining and maintaining any establishment licenses or permits required by the FDA or other Regulatory Authorities or by Applicable Law that pertains to the handling, storage, and distribution of the Product after TESARO has obtained title to the Product.

assistant: Applicable 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: Wherever possible, each provision of this First Amendment shall be interpreted in such manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any provision of this First Amendment shall be prohibited by or invalid under applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity, without invalidating the remainder of such provision or the remaining provisions of this First Amendment.

assistant: Interpretations
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: traffic stop should have concluded. Accordingly, Clayborn asserts that Detective Hall could not ask for his license and registration because it was not reasonably related to the circumstances that justified the traffic stop. We disagree. On appeal from a district court’s denial of a motion to suppress evidence, this court reviews, the factual findings for clear error and the question of whether a Fourth Amendment violation occurred de novo. United States v. Allegree, 175 F.3d 648, 650 (8th Cir.1999). Clayborn does not challenge the factual finding that Detective Hall’s traffic stop was justified and lawful, because it was based on an objectively reasonable, although mistaken, belief that a traffic violation had occurred. See United States v. Peltier, 217 F.3d 608, 610 (8th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, the issue is whether the Options: A. holding that an officers mistaken belief that the defendant was speeding was not an objectively reasonable purpose for a traffic stop B. holding that a suspects ability to proffer an innocent explanation for the facts does not negate probable cause C. holding that the dismissal of an indictment did not negate the presumption of probable cause D. holding the fact that officers belief proved to be mistaken does not negate a finding of probable cause E. holding that where the defendant obtained a nondefaulted debt under the mistaken belief that the debt was in default and where the defendants subsequent collection activities were based on that mistaken belief the defendant was a debt collector for purposes of the fdcpa

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the fact that officers belief proved to be mistaken does not negate a finding of probable cause