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: During the Employment Period, Executive shall be entitled to participate in any benefit and compensation plans, including but not limited to medical, disability, and life insurance 401K and deferred compensation plans (but excluding any severance or bonus plans unless specifically referenced in this Agreement) offered by the Company as in effect from time to time (collectively, “ Benefit Plans ”), on the same basis as those generally made available to other senior executives of the Company (other than the CEO), to the extent Executive may be eligible to do so under the terms of any such Benefit Plan; Executive understands that any such Benefit Plans may be terminated or amended from time to time by the Company in its sole discretion.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: we reserve the right to send electronic mail to you , for the purpose of informing you of changes or additions to the service or of any betterpoints.uk related products and services .

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: ease, and as a standard practice in her business, of accepting a money order from the customer payable to the Clerk of the Court to pay filing fees. The U.S. Trustee points out that several courts have held that this practice violates § 110(g)(1), which provides that a BPP shall not “collect or receive any payment from the debtor ... for the court fees in connection with filing the petition.” See, e.g., In re Green, 197 B.R. 878, 879-881 (Bankr.D.Ariz.1996) (concluding that where BPP took possession of the filing fee and controlled the ultimate filing of the petition, the BPP violated § 110(g)(1)). Ms. Scott responds to the U.S. Trustee’s contention by noting other courts have construed the statute to allow this practice. E.g., In re Reed, 208 B.R. 695, 696-698 (Bankr.N.D.Cal.1997) (<HOLDING>). No Ninth Circuit appellate guidance exists Options: A. holding that petitioner had failed to exhaust alternative remedies for review of his fee agreement because the ssa notified petitioner he could obtain his fee by filing a fee petition B. holding that where a contract for legal services fails to expressly provide for the amount of the fee a reasonable fee is implied C. holding that due process prohibits a state from denying indigent parties access to its divorce court based on their inability to pay filing fees and costs D. holding that 110 only prohibits bpp from accepting money for its own account to cover the filing fee E. recognizing conflict between filing motion to dismiss and fee application and noting postponement of fee application resulted in no prejudice to any party

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that 110 only prohibits bpp from accepting money for its own account to cover the filing fee
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 Third Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original document, and all of which, together with this writing, shall be deemed one instrument. Facsimile and PDF signatures are deemed equivalent to original signatures for purposes of this Third Amendment.

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: No insurance policies of Seller are to be transferred to Purchaser, and no apportionment of the premiums therefor shall be made. Purchaser acknowledges that it shall be responsible for securing its own insurance for the Property.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of a drug.” Blain v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 240 F.R.D. 179, 194 (E.D.Pa.2007). As noted in Blain, Some states require no warning, see Robak v. Abbott Labs., 797 F.Supp. 475, 476 (D.Md.1992), while others have varying levels of requirements for adequate warning of an off-label use. Miles Labs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 133 Cal.App.3d 587, 184 Cal.Rptr. 98 (1982) (manufacturer liable for failure to warn of risks of off-label uses of its product if the manufacturer knew or should have known of the off-label use and that use accounted for a significant portion of the manufacturer’s sales of the drug); Peterson v. Parke Davis & Co., 705 P.2d 1001, 1003 (Colo.Ct.App.1985); Reeder v. Hammond, 125 Mich.App. 223, 336 N.W.2d 3, 5-6 (1983) 3-7118, 1997 WL 201571, at *9 (N.D.Ill. Apr. 10, 1997) (<HOLDING>). As a general rule, under New York law, “[t]he Options: A. recognizing under illinois law that pharmaceutical manufacturer has duty to warn of any dangers associated with offlabel use of product if such dangers were reasonably known B. recognizing under alabama law that drugs manufacturer owed duty to warn about potential dangers of using prescription drug for an offlabel to patients prescribing physician by drugs manufacturer C. holding that manufacturer had no duty to warn its purchasers retailer and transporter of gas of dangers where those purchasers had operated a gas business for years were familiar with the trade journals and already knew the dangers D. holding a manufacturer had no postsale duty to warn of dangers associated with an auger because numerous hodder factors were not present E. holding manufacture had no duty to warn of the dangers of smoking because the dangers of cigarette smoking have long been known to the community

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing under illinois law that pharmaceutical manufacturer has duty to warn of any dangers associated with offlabel use of product if such dangers were reasonably known
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a visual inspection.” Hudgens Memorandum Opinion at 19. In Crawford, the district court stated simply that it found no “factual basis” for McSwain’s conclusion regarding the cracks’ visibility to the naked eye. Crawford Memorandum Opinion at 14. In reviewing these determinations for abuse of discretion, we are mindful of the repeated emphasis the Supreme Court has placed upon the district court’s “gatekeep-ing” role in the determination of whether expert evidence should be admitted. See Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 152, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 143 L.Ed.2d 238 (1999) (concluding “that the trial judge must have considerable leeway in deciding in a particular case how to go about determining whether particular expert testimony is reliable”); Joiner, 522 U.S. at 146, 118 S.Ct. 512 (<HOLDING>). Even when a decision to strike expert Options: A. holding that an expert opinion on a question of law is inadmissible B. holding district court is not required to admit opinion evidence that is connected to existing data only by the ipse dixit of the expert C. recognizing that while a testifying expert may rely upon facts or data made known to the expert before the hearing and even may rely upon opinions if reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field the ipse dixit of that reliance does not make those facts data or opinions true particularly where they are derived largely from hearsay D. recognizing district courts authority to exclude opinion evidence that is connected to existing data only by the ipse dixit of the expert should it conclude that there is simply too great an analytical gap between the data and the opinion proffered E. holding agency may not rely on expert opinion without disclosing hard data supporting opinion to the public

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing district courts authority to exclude opinion evidence that is connected to existing data only by the ipse dixit of the expert should it conclude that there is simply too great an analytical gap between the data and the opinion proffered
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: quasi-judicial functions which are applicable to land use including comprehensive planning, zoning, and controlling storm-water drainage and flood waters. Therefore, we hold that the proposed initiative is constitutionally deficient because it violates the single-subject requirement. Id. (emphasis supplied) (citation omitted). Unlike the proposed amendment in People’s Property Rights, which applied broadly to any type of land use and thus involved multiple levels and branches of government, the proposed amendment in this 'case calls for only one discrete change in the established scheme of comprehensive land-use plans — the local government legislative process of enactment and amendment. Cf. Coastal Dev. of N. Fla., Inc. v. City of Jacksonville Beach, 788 So.2d 204, 208-09 (Fla.2001) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the proposed amendment would not Options: A. holding acts of voting to be quintessentially legislative and the introduction of a budget to be formally legislative B. holding that provision in comprehensive plan requiring developer to demonstrate that proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plans general intent and purpose was unreasonably vague subjective and did not furnish ground for denial of specialuse permit C. recognizing prior decision holding that adoption of and amendments to local comprehensive plans are legislative acts and holding that smallscale development amendments to local comprehensive plans are also legislative acts D. holding local regulation of hazardous waste disposal facilities preempted by comprehensive and detailed state regulatory scheme E. holding that the llupa does not provide for judicial review of requests to change zoning or comprehensive zoning plans

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing prior decision holding that adoption of and amendments to local comprehensive plans are legislative acts and holding that smallscale development amendments to local comprehensive plans are also legislative acts
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: Employer has employed and hereby continues to employ Employee, and Employee hereby accepts such continued employment, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in this Agreement. Employee shall be employed by Employer but may serve (and if requested by Employer shall serve) as an officer and/or director of any subsidiary or affiliate of 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: (rejecting a claim that the federal government instead of the levee district owed compensation, the court noted that it was clear “that the Pontchartrain Levee District and not the United States of America appropriated the necessary rights of way in connection with the construction of the Diamond Levee Setback.”). We are aware that in cases similar to ours the United States of America was sought to be made a party and removed the cases to federal court. The federal district courts, finding that the only claims were those for indemnity (see Part V-B, post), dismissed the United States as a party, finding that the indemnity claims were premature, and remanded the cases to the state court. See Olivier Plantation, LLC v. St. Bernard Parish, 744 F.Supp.2d 575, 584-585 (E.D.La.2010) (<HOLDING>); Pizani v. St. Bernard Parish, unpub., 2013 WL Options: A. holding that just because a claim implicates a federal issue or involves construction of federal law does not necessarily give rise to a federal question and confer removal jurisdiction on a federal court B. holding that a federal district court may decide whether an activity is an unfair labor practice under the nlra when the matter is raised as a defense to a claim under an independent federal remedy over which the federal district courts do have jurisdiction C. holding that the district court was not divested of subject matter jurisdiction upon the dismissal of the plaintiffs federal claims D. holding the fourteenth amendment does not apply to the actions of the federal government E. holding that a determination of whether the defendants actions constituted a taking under the louisiana constitution does not implicate any issues of federal law and thus does not provides a basis for a federal district court to exercise federal subject matter jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a determination of whether the defendants actions constituted a taking under the louisiana constitution does not implicate any issues of federal law and thus does not provides a basis for a federal district court to exercise federal subject matter jurisdiction
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: Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law. If any provision of this Agreement, as applied to any party or to any circumstance, shall be found by a court or arbitrator to be invalid or unenforceable under applicable law, such provision will be ineffective only to the extent of such invalidity or unenforceability, without invalidating or rendering unenforceable the remainder of such provision and any such invalidity or unenforceability shall in no way affect any other provision of this Agreement, the application of any provision in any other circumstance, or the validity or enforceability of this Agreement.

assistant: Severability
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: IV for a definition of "underwater.” 3 . Lam v. Investors Thrift (In re Lam), 211 B.R. 36 (9th Cir. BAP 1997), appeal dismissed, 192 F.3d 1309 (9th Cir.1999). See infra, section IV, for a detailed discussion of Lam. 4 . Debtors’ motions were titled "Motion to Extinguish Lien of .... ” 5 . See supra, footnote 2. 6 . In re 1441 Veteran Street Co., 144 F.3d at 1291-92. 7 . A chapter 13 debtor who confirms a chapter 13 plan but fails to completely perform that plan may be eligible, on motion, to receive a "hardship” discharge, but that hardship discharge is not the "superdischarge” of chapter 13, it is the lesser discharge an eligible debtor may obtain in a chapter 7 case. 8 . Under state la see also, Hagemann v. The Chemical Mort. Co. (In re Hagemann), 86 B.R. 125 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 1988) (<HOLDING>); accord Chandler Bank of Lyons v. Ray, 804 Options: A. holding that unless security interest or lien is avoided bankruptcy discharge has little if any impact on creditors ability to proceed in rem against property securing claim B. holding immunity from liability is not jurisdictional C. holding that discharged debtor is protected only from in personam liability not in rem liability on lien given as security for mortgage loan D. holding that operates as a charge of debtors in personam tax liability not debtors in rem tax liability E. holding that reversal for a new trial on liability is appropriate only where the error complained of affects only the issues of liability

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that discharged debtor is protected only from in personam liability not in rem liability on lien given as security for mortgage loan
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 corporate, partnership, limited liability company or similar action, as applicable on the part of such Warrant Holder, necessary for the authorization, execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement, the Warrant Exercise and the performance of all of such Warrant Holder’s obligations hereunder have been taken or will be taken prior to the applicable Closing. This Agreement has been duly executed by the Warrant Holder and constitutes valid and legally binding obligations of such Warrant Holder, enforceable against such Warrant Holder in accordance with their respective terms, subject to the laws of general application relating to bankruptcy, insolvency and the relief of debtors and rules of law governing specific performance, injunctive relief or other equitable remedies.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. City of San Buenaventura, 155 Cal. App.4th 104, 109, 65 Cal.Rptr.3d 762 (2007) (“Persons dealing with a public agency are presumed to know the law with respect to any agency’s authority to contract”); Bollow v. Fed. Reserve Bank of San Francis co, 650 F.2d 1093, 1100 (9th Cir.1981) (federal employee charged with knowledge that his superior did not have legal authority to make assurances at issue: “it is well established that anyone who deals with the government assumes the risk that the agent acting in the government’s behalf has exceeded the bounds of his authority”). Plaintiffs claims for violation of due process fail because the retirees have no vested property right to continue to receive the pooling benefit. See Nunez v. City of Los Angeles, 147 F.3d 867, 872-73 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Finally, Plaintiff has not raised a genuine Options: A. holding due process requires that jurisdiction be based on more than a mere ownership interest in an entity located in the forum B. holding that unilateral expectation of continued service at a particular stateoperated leprosy hospital did not give rise to a due process claim C. holding that mere negligence does not implicate the right to due process D. holding that asserting a mere protected interest in a process itself is not a cognizable claim E. holding that a property interest sufficient to support a due process claim requires a binding assurance and not a mere unilateral expectation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a property interest sufficient to support a due process claim requires a binding assurance and not a mere unilateral expectation
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: consent is obtained during custody, see Schneckloth, 412 U.S. at 240, n. 29, 93 S.Ct. 2041, ‘custody alone has never been enough in itself to demonstrate ... coerced ... consent to search.’ ” Barnett, 989 F.2d at 555 (quoting United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411, 424, 96 S.Ct. 820, 46 L.Ed.2d 598 (1976)). Here, Agent Blanco’s testimony contradicted Merced-Morales’ allegation of being coerced and held at gunpoint. The trial court observed both witnesses and determined that Agent Blanco’s testimony was more credible. Where, as here, “there are two competing interpretations of the evidence, the district court’s choice of one of them cannot be clearly erroneous.” United States v. Cruz Jiménez, 894 F.2d 1, 7 (1st Cir.1990); see also United States v. Zapata, 18 F.3d 971, 974 (1st Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we conclude that appellant’s Options: A. holding total deference is given to the trial courts determination of historical facts supported by the record especially when the trial courts findings turn on evaluating a witnesss credibility and demeanor B. recognizing that we can consider trial evidence in reviewing the denial of a pretrial suppression motion C. recognizing trial courts ability to ascertain the demeanor and credibility of expert witness D. holding trial judges denial of a suppression motion is entitled to considerable deference because he had opportunity to hear testimony observe witness demeanor and evaluate facts first hand E. recognizing the considerable deference afforded to regulations concerning medicare

assistant: The best answer is D. holding trial judges denial of a suppression motion is entitled to considerable deference because he had opportunity to hear testimony observe witness demeanor and evaluate facts first hand
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: to grant a mistrial is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Emmanuel, 565 F.3d at 1334. “The district court is in the best position to evaluate the prejudicial effe elicit a repetition of the statement when he again asked Jasmin what he had told Miller about why Miller should not go with Danny Glover. While this may have been improper, the district court prevented Jasmin from answering, sustained an objection, and offered to give a limiting instruction to the jury. In any event, Miller has not shown that there is a reasonable probability that this statement changed the outcome of the trial. Given the remainder of Jasmin’s properly admitted testimony about Miller’s involvement in a drug conspiracy, this statement added nothing to the government’s case. See Emmanuel, 565 F.3d at 1334-35 (<HOLDING>). The district court, which was in the best Options: A. holding that the purpose of the credit statute is to provide credit for confinement where 1 bail has been set for the defendant and 2 the defendant was financially unable to post the bail B. holding that where the defendant was in default the district court correctly accepted the fact allegations of the complaint as true C. holding that a mistrial was not warranted because the statement that the defendant had been in prison before was volunteered unexpected and added nothing to the governments case D. holding that the court correctly denied a mistrial when the statement that the witness saw the defendant when the defendant was signing in as a condition of bail was brief and added nothing to the governments case E. holding that statement that declarant saw defendant outside was admissible under rule 8081 because the statement explained an event or condition

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the court correctly denied a mistrial when the statement that the witness saw the defendant when the defendant was signing in as a condition of bail was brief and added nothing to the governments case
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: order dismissing without leave to amend his action alleging that the United States Congress violated the False Claims Act by failing to rescind the Eleventh Amendment sua sponte because it is preempted by Article III of the Constitution. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review a district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and standing de novo. Rattlesnake Coal. v. EPA, 509 F.3d 1095, 1100 (9th Cir.2007). We affirm. The district court properly concluded that LaFreniere lacks standing under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(1), because LaFreniere has not alleged that the United States suffered an injury in fact. See Vt. Agency of Natural Res. v. United States ex rel. Stevens, 529 U.S. 765, 773-74, 120 S.Ct. 1858, 146 L.Ed.2d 836 (2000) (<HOLDING>). The district court also properly dismissed Options: A. holding that standing of a qui tam plaintiff under the false claims act requires an injury to the united states B. holding that apparel cleaners submission of false statements of their receipts a percentage of which were to be paid to the united states did not constitute false claims within the meaning of the federal false claims act C. holding that the fca effectively assigns the governments claims to qui tam plaintiffs who then may sue based upon an injury to the federal treasury D. holding that a state or agency is not a person subject to qui tam liability under the false claims act E. holding that to be protected by the fca when confronting an employer the employee must sufficiently allege activity with a nexus to a qui tam action or fraud against the united states government

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that standing of a qui tam plaintiff under the false claims act requires an injury to the united states
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: ( v ) post , display , or transmit content that is obscene , hateful , involves terrorism , or is racially , ethnically or otherwise objectionable ; or

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: “regardless of whether the respondent has been tried, acquitted, or convicted in a court for the alleged criminal offense.” This language makes it clear that a disciplinary violation premised on a violation of law is separate from the initiation or outcome of criminal proceedings based on the same conduct. Behm’s argument that he cannot be found to have violated the rules at issue without an express finding of intent is also without merit. While this Court has held that “in order to sustain a violation of rule 4-8.4(c), the Bar must prove intent,” this Court has also stated that the intent ele ment can be satisfied “merely by showing that the conduct was deliberate or knowing.” Fla. Bar v. Brown, 905 So.2d 76, 81 (Fla.2005); see also Fla. Bar v. Riggs, 944 So.2d 167, 171 (Fla.2006) (<HOLDING>); Fla. Bar v. Barley, 881 So.2d 163, 169 Options: A. holding that attorneys engaging in conduct involving dishonesty amounts to conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law B. holding intent as an element for disciplining an attorney for engaging in conduct involving dishonesty fraud deceit or misrepresentation is proven by establishing that the conduct was deliberate or knowing C. holding that an infamous crime under the arkansas constitution is a crime involving elements of deceit and dishonesty D. holding that reliance is not an element to be proven under securities fraud in indiana E. holding that in the context of federal immigration law the amount of loss to the victim of fraud or deceit does not refer to an element of the fraud or deceit but rather refers to the particular circumstances in which an offender committed fraud or deceit

assistant: The best answer is B. holding intent as an element for disciplining an attorney for engaging in conduct involving dishonesty fraud deceit or misrepresentation is proven by establishing that the conduct was deliberate or knowing
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: Shares of Restricted Stock shall be evidenced by a written Award Certificate, and shall be subject to such restrictions and risk of forfeiture as determined by the Board, and shall be granted under and pursuant to the terms of the Incentive Plan. Unless and until provided otherwise by the Board, the Restricted Stock granted pursuant to Section 7.1 and Section 7.2 herein shall vest and become non-forfeitable over two (2) years in equal quarterly installments beginning on the first day of the first quarter following the Restricted Stock grant date. Notwithstanding the foregoing vesting schedule, the shares of Restricted Stock shall become fully vested on the earlier occurrence of: (i) the termination of the Independent Director’s or the Non-Management Director’s service as a director of the Company due to his or her death or Disability; or (ii) a Change in Control of the Company. If the Independent Director’s or the Non-Management Director’s service as a director of the Company terminates other than as described in clause (i) of the foregoing sentence, then the Independent Director or the Non-Management Director shall forfeit all of his or her right, title and interest in and to any unvested shares of Restricted Stock as of the date of such termination from the Board and such Restricted Stock shall be reconveyed to the Company without further consideration or any act or action by the Independent Director or the Non-Management Director.

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: for Mr. Renninger’s deposition and five hours for Mr. Robert’s deposition was excessive. I find that these hours were appropriate considering the importance of these depositions. The gravity of Mr. Renninger’s testimony is exhibited in the length of his deposition, lasting from 9:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. with 40 exhibits. Thus, I find it reasonable that Mr. Surkin took the time to prepare for these key witnesses’ depositions. Defendant also objects to hours spent during the administrative phase of Plaintiffs case. I find it unreasonable that Defendant objects to the time spent with client during the administrative phase of his case. First, these hours were brought to the Court’s attention numerous times and have already been addressed. See Hensley, 461 U.S. at 437 & n. 12, 103 S.Ct. 1933 (<HOLDING>). Second, the administrative phase is an Options: A. holding trial court erred in awarding attorneys fees to physicians in absence of any evidence of attorneys fees B. holding that oncors request for the trial judge rather than the jury to determine the reasonableness of its attorneys fees and the failure to submit the question of attorneys fees to the jury resulted in a waiver of oncors claim for the recovery of attorneys fees C. holding that the debtor must request attorneys fees in the answer to a complaint in a 523a case D. holding that request for attorneys fees should not result in a second major litigation E. holding that no reason existed to create a uniform national rule in admiralty where the case concerned attorneys fees and whether the contractual provision which provided for attorneys fees should allow a party to recover attorneys fees where it succeeded on all but one minor issue

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that request for attorneys fees should not result in a second major litigation
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 parties hereto acknowledge and agree that, to the extent applicable, this Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with, and incorporate the terms and conditions required by, Section 409A. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, in the event that the Company determines that any amounts payable hereunder will be immediately taxable to the Employee under Section 409A, the Company reserves the right subject to Employee written consent, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld, to (i) adopt such amendments to this Agreement and appropriate policies and procedures, including amendments and policies with retroactive effect, that the Company determines to be necessary or appropriate to preserve the intended tax treatment of the benefits provided by this Agreement, to preserve the economic benefits of this Agreement and to avoid less favorable accounting or tax consequences for the Company and/or (ii) take such other actions as the Company determines to be necessary or appropriate to exempt the amounts payable hereunder from Section 409A or to comply with the requirements of Section 409A and thereby avoid the application of penalty taxes thereunder.

assistant: General
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 and the Member shall not issue any press release or make any public announcement relating to the subject matter of this Agreement without the prior written consent of Buyer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Agreement shall prevent any party, after notification to the other party to the extent legally permissible, from making any announcement or publication required by applicable Law or from making any filings with Governmental Authorities that, based on advice of legal counsel, is required in connection with the execution and delivery of this Agreement or the consummation of the Transactions.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Purchaser has been duly organized and is validly existing and in good standing as a limited partnership under the laws of the State of Texas, with the power and authority to own its properties and to conduct its business as such properties are currently owned and such business is currently conducted, and had at all relevant times, and has, full power, authority and legal right to acquire and own the Railcars and Leases Conveyed hereunder.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: leaving both criminal and administrative detainees vulnerable to torture and ill-treatment. However, the AI Report neither indicates whether repatriated Chinese nationals who left illegally are routinely imprisoned or detained administratively, nor, if so, whether they are consistently mistreated or tortured. Furthermore, although Weng’s Mend indicated in his letter that he was detained for his illegal departure, the exact circumstances of his departure and reasons for detention are not clear, and Weng failed to explain how his smuggling experience was similar to that of his Mend. Thus, the IJ reasonably found that Weng failed to prove a clear probability that he would be tortured if returned to China. See Mu Xiang Lin v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 432 F.3d 156, 159-60 (2d Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). For the foregoing reasons, the petition for Options: A. holding that to qualify for protection under the convention against torture an alien must show that he will more likely than not be tortured in his home country if removed B. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to consider petitioners argument that the evidence in the record clearly establishes that he is more likely than not to face torture if removed citation quotation marks and brackets omitted C. holding that cat applicant must establish that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to his native country D. holding that a reasonable factfinder would not be compelled to conclude that the petitioner would more likely than not be subjected to torture if removed to china based solely on the fact that she had illegally departed china without more particularized evidence E. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to review whether alien established that he will more likely than not be tortured if removed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a reasonable factfinder would not be compelled to conclude that the petitioner would more likely than not be subjected to torture if removed to china based solely on the fact that she had illegally departed china without more particularized evidence
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: Seller is a limited partnership validly existing and in good standing under the laws of its state of formation with the limited partnership power to own all of its properties and assets and to carry on its business as it is currently being conducted. Seller is duly qualified to do business and is in good standing in every jurisdiction in which the failure to be so qualified or in good standing would have a Material Adverse Effect on the Mint Business or on Seller’s ability to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and precludes a conviction for driving without a valid license, although the driver may still be subject to a small fine for not having the license in his immediate possession when stopped. Understood this way, Appellant’s constitutional complaints based on “retroactive amnesty’ lose their premise. 3. Appellant is ineligible for a Georgia driver’s license because he is an illegal immigrant, and he argues that his inability to have taken advantage of OCGA § 40-5-20 (a)’s safe-harbor provision for this reason violates due process and equal protection, urging us to apply heightened scrutiny to those claims. However, to the consternation of generations of American teenagers, there is no fundamental right to a driver’s license. See Quitter v. Bowman, 262 Ga. 769, 771 (425 SE2d 641) (1993) (<HOLDING>). And illegal immigrants have never been Options: A. holding right to be fundamental B. holding that there is no fundamental right to run for office C. recognizing that a criminal defendants right to a fair trial is fundamental D. holding that the right to vote is fundamental E. holding that the right to drive is not a fundamental right

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the right to drive is not a fundamental right
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: Notices and communications hereunder must be in writing and either personally delivered or sent by registered or certified United States mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid. Notices to the Company must be addressed to Torchmark Corporation, 3700 South Stonebridge Drive, McKinney, Texas 75070, Attn: Corporate Secretary, or any other address designated by the Company in a written notice to Grantee. Notices to Grantee will be directed to the address of Grantee then currently on file with the Company, or at any other address given by Grantee in a written notice to the Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AMENDMENT AND THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES UNDER THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (WITHOUT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT CONFLICT OF LAW PRINCIPLES THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICATION OF THE LAW OF ANOTHER JURISDICTION).

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you are entitled to terminate this agreement under the conditions set forth in section xi and xii herein , as well as for personal bankruptcy , imprisonment , hospitalization for a period exceeding three ( 3 ) months , or for any other legitimate reason as may be specified by applicable law or relevant court decision , subject to prior written notice by mail to the following address : blizzard entertainment s.a.s. - support clients - tsa 60001 , 78008 versailles cedex , france .

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: it has failed to allege sufficient facts with respect to the conspiracy count. As such, Russo failed to allege sufficient facts on the conversion, civil theft, and conspiracy counts to bring Marilyn Fink within the reach of the long-arm statute. Finally, a review of the record indicates that Marilyn Fink’s activities within Florida have not been “continuous and systematic” as required to subject her to the trial court’s general jurisdiction under section 48.193(2). See Two Worlds United v. Zylstra, 46 So.3d 1175, 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Bafitis v. Ara, 815 So.2d 702, 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal. The trial court should have dismissed the amended complaint as to Marilyn Fink without prejudice. See Henderson v. Elias, 56 So.3d 86, 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (<HOLDING>) (citing World Class Yachts, Inc. v. Murphy, Options: A. holding that dismissal with leave to amend should be granted even if no request to amend was made B. holding that a plaintiff should be allowed to amend the complaint to add a claim C. holding that dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim should generally be without prejudice but if the plaintiff has been given an opportunity amend his complaint and fails to do so the dismissal may be with prejudice D. holding that dismissal of a complaint for insufficient jurisdictional allegations should be without prejudice to amend E. holding that a review committee of the kansas board for discipline of attorneys had the authority to dismiss a complaint against an attorney with or without prejudice and when dismissal was ordered without specifying the nature of the dismissal the dismissal was without prejudice to the filing of later proceedings on the same matter

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that dismissal of a complaint for insufficient jurisdictional allegations should be without prejudice to amend
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 Committee shall specify the manner of adjustment of any performance objectives to the extent necessary to prevent dilution or enlargement of any award as a result of extraordinary events or circumstances, as determined by the Committee, or to exclude the effects of extraordinary, unusual or nonrecurring items; changes in applicable laws, regulations, or accounting principles; currency fluctuations; discontinued operations; noncash items, such as amortization, depreciation or reserves; asset impairment; or any recapitalization, restructuring, reorganization, merger, acquisition, divestiture, consolidation, spin-off, split-up, combination, liquidation, dissolution, sale of assets or other similar corporate transaction. Any adjustment to performance objectives pursuant to this Section 14(c) shall be done in accordance with Code Section 162(m).

assistant: Adjustments
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 settlement of the contingent forward purchase contract for the purchase and sale of the Securities hereunder (the “ Closing ”) shall be held at the same date and time as the closing of the Business Combination (the date of the Closing being referred to as the “ Closing Date ”). At the Closing, the Company will issue to the Subscriber the Units, registered in the name of the Subscriber, against delivery of the aggregate purchase price of $62,500,000 in cash via a wire to an account specified in writing by the Company no later than five (5) business days prior to the Closing.

assistant: Closings
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: 2001) (reversing denial of summary judgment because plaintiff failed to provide “sufficient objective proof of the extent or degree of the alleged physical limitations resulting from the disc injuries”). Jacobson’s deposition testimony as to Molina’s neck and back limitations is based entirely upon Molina’s subjective complaints of pain, which, as stated above, is insufficient. Moreover, that evidence related to Molina’s injury in the days immediately following the accident. Without any objective evidence that these alleged limitations lasted much longer, no reasonable juror could conclude that Molina’s injuries were permanent, significant, or curtailed her customary activities for more than 90 days. See, e.g., Kim v. Kim, 266 A.D.2d 190, 697 N.Y.S.2d 676, 677 (App. Div.2d Dep’t 1999) (<HOLDING>); see also Petrone v. Thornton, 166 A.D.2d 513, Options: A. holding that selfserving deposition testimony standing alone is insufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment B. holding without discussing the plaintiffs burden of persuasion that the plaintiff had presented sufficient evidence to survive summary judgment C. holding that the nonmoving party must produce more than a scintilla of evidence to survive summary judgment D. holding that notice of judgment was insufficient E. holding that evidence of alleged limitations obtained soon after accident was without more insufficient to survive summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that evidence of alleged limitations obtained soon after accident was without more insufficient to survive summary judgment