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: or in community control shall be considered as any part of the time that he shall be sentenced to serve.” We interpreted that provision (since renumbered as section 948.06(3), see ch. 97-299, § 13, Laws of Fla.) as establishing a general rule that “credit cannot be given for time served on community control.” Young, 697 So.2d at 77. Fraser, we explained, merely “recognized a limited exception to this general rule” for those unusual circumstances “when the original term of community control is revoked as illegal.” Id. at 77 n. 6. After Young, three district courts have held that the plain meaning of section 948.06(3) forbids jail-time credit for time spent in community control, with the limited exception adopted in Fraser. See Robinson v. State, 850 So.2d 658, 661 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (<HOLDING>); Griffin v. State, 838 So.2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. Options: A. holding a sentence is not limited to period of incarceration B. holding that credit cannot be awarded for time served on community control C. holding that a sentence of incarceration would constitute deliberate indifference to defendants medical needs D. holding that florida law dictates that credit cannot be given for time served on community control E. holding that time served on community control may not be applied to a postrevocation sentence of incarceration

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that time served on community control may not be applied to a postrevocation sentence of incarceration
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In case any one or more of the provisions of this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, or to any extent, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions contained herein shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Parties recognize and agree that money damages may be insufficient to compensate any party hereto for breaches by another party hereto of the terms hereof and, consequently, that the equitable remedy of specific performance of the terms hereof will be available in the event of any such breach.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: After giving effect to the Transactions and the other transactions contemplated hereby (including at the time of and immediately after giving effect to any Borrowing or the issuance, amendment, renewal or extension of any Letter of Credit, as applicable) (a) the sum of the debt and liabilities (including subordinated and contingent liabilities) of Parent, the Borrower and the other Loan Parties, taken as a whole, does not exceed the fair value of the present assets of Parent, the Borrower and the other Loan Parties, taken as a whole, (b) the present fair saleable value of the assets of Parent, the Borrower and the other Loan Parties, taken as a whole, is greater than the total amount that will be required to pay the probable debt and liabilities (including subordinated and contingent liabilities) of Parent, the Borrower and the other Loan Parties as they become absolute and matured, (c) Parent, the Borrower and the other Loan Parties, taken as a whole, have not incurred, or believe that they will incur, debts or other liabilities including current obligations beyond their ability to pay such debt as they mature in the ordinary course of business and (d) the capital of Parent, the Borrower and the other Loan Parties, taken as a whole, is not unreasonably small to engage in the business of Parent, the Borrower and the other Loan Parties, taken as a whole. For the purpose of this Section 7.24 , the amount of any contingent liability at any time shall be computed as the amount that, in light of all of the facts and circumstances existing at such time, represents the amount that can reasonably be expected to become an actual or matured liability.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you elect to use any third party service or application that is integrated with evernote , you also agree that the licenses granted to evernote in the preceding paragraph shall apply to content that is submitted or uploaded through such third party service or application .

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: to obtain the incorporated document before signing the contract or risk being bound by its terms. In fact, the face of the contract includes the following warning immediately above the incorporation language: “This document has important legal consequences. Consultation with an attorney is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification.” Consequently, Chabad is presumed to have known about, and accepted, the express language of incorporation on the face of the contract and the terms of the incorporated A201-1997, even if the incorporated document was not attached and Chabad failed to obtain and read it. See Nat’l Prop. Holdings, 453 S.W.3d at 425; Lyon Fin. Seros., 257 S.W.3d at 232; Indem. Ins. Co., 101 S.W.2d at 556; see also Raymond James & Assocs., 196 S.W.3d at 318-19 (<HOLDING>). On appeal, Chabad presents two additional Options: A. recognizing that counsel have the authori ty to file an appeal on their clients behalf even when the client does not expressly give them his consent to do so B. holding that when an attorney represents multiple clients and a dispute between the attorney and one client later occurs there is a waiver of the privilege but only by the client asserting the liability C. holding broker and clients agreed to arbitration where newaccount forms signed by clients expressly incorporated separate unsigned client agreement containing arbitration provision even if client agreement was not attached or read by clients because they were presumed to have read newaccount form which placed them on notice of client agreement D. holding that ambiguous agreement between attorney and client must be construed in the clients favor E. holding that attorney breached duty to client by ignoring clients instruction to conduct particular discovery

assistant: The best answer is C. holding broker and clients agreed to arbitration where newaccount forms signed by clients expressly incorporated separate unsigned client agreement containing arbitration provision even if client agreement was not attached or read by clients because they were presumed to have read newaccount form which placed them on notice of client agreement
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: in this subsection, the term ‘any person’ includes any State____” Id. § 3(a) & (c). Instances in which Congress has explicitly included states but not the federal government is conclusive evidence of congressional intent to exclude the federal government. See Department of Energy v. Ohio, 503 U.S. 607, 617-18, 112 S.Ct. 1627, 1634, 118 L.Ed.2d 255 (1992) (“Its omission has to be seen as a pointed one when so many other governmental entities are specified”). This legislative intent is even more obvious when one considers the historical context: the amendment was enacted without any mention of the federal government against a legal backdrop of cases holding that the Lanham Act did not apply to state or federal governments. See Woelffer v. Happy States, 626 F.Supp. 499, 504 (N.D.Ill.1985) (<HOLDING>); Serra v. General Servs. Admin., 667 F.Supp. Options: A. holding that the ats does not waive the united states sovereign immunity B. holding that a state may waive its sovereign immunity C. holding that the lanham act did not waive states sovereign immunity D. holding that removal to federal court does not waive tribal sovereign immunity E. holding that an act of legislature may be required to waive sovereign immunity

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the lanham act did not waive states sovereign immunity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided above, your right to receive a credit of Share Units shall be forfeited automatically without further action or notice in the event that you cease to be continuously employed by Teradata through December 31, 2018.

assistant: Forfeitures
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: have done Kim little good since she could not have realistically contested the changed reason, mental health classification,” which caused her removal from the temporary release program. 182 F.3d 113, 119 (2d Cir.1999). Similarly, where, as here, the TRC had discretion to make a considered judgment about whether Anderson should continue his participation in the temporary release program, due process requires some opportunity for Anderson to argue that the charges sustained in the Tier III hearing did not warrant revocation of his supervised release. See Morrissey, 408 U.S. at 488, 92 S.Ct. 2593 (“The parolee must have an opportunity to be heard and to show, if he can, ... that circumstances in mitigation suggest that the violation does not warrant revocation.”); Friedl, 210 F.3d at 85 (<HOLDING>). In sum, we affirm the district court’s Options: A. holding that hall street restricts the grounds for vacatur to those set forth in section 10 of the faa B. holding that plea in bar may be based only on grounds set forth in statute C. holding that the pleading standard set forth in twombly applies to all civil actions D. holding that requirements similar to those set forth in morrissey would logically apply to revocation of work release E. holding that it is generally sufficient that an indictment set forth the offense in the words of the statute itself

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that requirements similar to those set forth in morrissey would logically apply to revocation of work release
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 future PIP benefits by executing the release. In so arguing, Bear River relies on language in its insurance policy with the Walls stating that the insured shall not be entitled to receive “duplicate benefits.” However, as Bear River recognizes in its brief, the duty to pay PIP benefits to the insured is governed by Utah law. Utah’s no-fault statute requires that insurance policies bought to satisfy the security requirements of Utah law contain provisions providing for minimum PIP benefits. See Utah Code Ann. § 31A-22-302(2) (1994). Therefore, an insurance policy may not limit the insured’s right to receive minimum PIP benefits as provided by Utah law, as this would violate those provisions of the Utah no-fault statute. See Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Call, 712 P.2d 231, 233-36 (Utah 1985) (<HOLDING>); Larsen v. Allstate Ins. Co., 857 P.2d 263, Options: A. holding household or family exclusion clause in automobile insurance policy contravenes statutory requirements found in utahs nofault statute as to minimum benefits which must be provided to all persons sustaining personal injuries B. holding that the mcca was not obligated to indemnify a claim under a california automobile insurance policy that was reformed into a michigan nofault automobile insurance policy five years after the subject accident and stating that the mcca can refuse to indemnify claims paid under mcl 5003163 C. holding that united states in ftca action may rely on immunities available to a private automobile owner covered by new jerseys nofault insurance law even though it was not literally the owner of an automobile under the new jersey statute D. holding that household exclusion clauses in policies of automobile liability insurance are contrary to public policy E. holding that in order for claim to be within scope of coverage of title insurance policy it must be specifically provided for

assistant: The best answer is A. holding household or family exclusion clause in automobile insurance policy contravenes statutory requirements found in utahs nofault statute as to minimum benefits which must be provided to all persons sustaining personal injuries
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: decision that the outcry statement is reliable and admissible under article 38.072 is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Broderick v. State, 89 S.W.3d 696, 698 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. refd). At a hearing outside the jury’s presence, appellant argued that only the first person to whom a sexually abused child made a statement qualified as the outcry witness. Appellant argued that, because J.C.’s mother was the first person to whom J.C. made a statement about the offense, only she could testify as to any outcry statement under article 38.072. The Court of Criminal Appeals in Garcia v. State held that, at least where the child makes only a “general allusion” of sexual abuse to the first person, but gives a more detailed account to a second Fort Worth 1992, pet. refd) (<HOLDING>). The Court in Garcia stated the following: In Options: A. holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was factually sufficient to support termination B. holding that a mother and her two children failed to establish a 1983 claim where there was no evidence that threats made to the mother were directly aimed at the relationship between parent and child C. holding that mother was not proper outcry witness despite being first person child told of fathers abuse because mother refused to admit statement was made to her refused to cooperate with authorities and had been convicted of related offense D. holding that evidence was sufficient to support trial courts best interest finding where mother allowed child to be in contact with individual who had physically abused her mother was not capable of caring for child on her own mother admitted at trial she had not found stable employment and child was doing well in her current placement E. holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was legally sufficient to support termination

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that mother was not proper outcry witness despite being first person child told of fathers abuse because mother refused to admit statement was made to her refused to cooperate with authorities and had been convicted of related offense
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: father is property of their respective bankruptcy estates. This is a core matter as it “concern[s] the administration of the estate.” § 157(b)(2); see also In re Southmark Corp., 163 F.3d 925, 930 (5th Cir. 1999). This Court may only hear a case in which venue is proper. 28 U.S.C. § 1408. In their petitions, both Ramirez and Eck-hardt state their residence is located in Laredo, Texas. [LR ECF No. 1 at 1]; [RE ECF No. 1 at 2]. Therefore, venue is proper. B. Constitutional Authority to Enter a Final Order This Court has an independent duty to evaluate whether it has the constitutional authority to sign a final order. Stem v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 131 S.Ct. 2594, 180 L.Ed.2d 475 (2011).But see Wellness. Int’l Network v. Sharif, — U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 1932, 1938-39, 191 L.Ed.2d 911 (2015) (<HOLDING>). The instant issue solely determines whether Options: A. holding that a federal court may refuse to exercise continuing jurisdiction even though the parties have agreed to it parties cannot confer jurisdiction by stipulation or consent B. holding that in bankruptcyrelated matters any one party may remove the state court action without the consent of the other parties C. holding that parties may consent to jurisdiction on noncore matters D. holding that lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by consent E. holding that parties may stipulate to facts from which jurisdiction may be inferred

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that parties may consent to jurisdiction on noncore matters
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: Barron was bound by Ms. Chapman’s act of agreeing to the entire Admission Agreement, including the arbitration clause. Defendants’ view is that Ms. Chapman was authorized to take all steps necessary to admit Ms. Barron to Betty Dare, and those steps included electing a dispute resolution forum. {26} California courts have taken a similar view to that expressed by Defendants, and have concluded that [a]n agent or fiduciary has the auth thority to bind a principal to arbitration does not have to be specifically or separately granted. Rather, an agent with authority to complete the documents for admission is likewise permitted to decide on behalf of the principal whether future disputes with the facility should be arbitrated or litigated. See Garrison, 33 Cal.Rptr.3d at 352, 358, 360-61 (<HOLDING>). As the Garrison court explained, “[w]hether Options: A. holding that a healthcare power of attorney includes the authority to bind the principal to an optional arbitration agreement because among other reasons an agent has authority to do everything necessary or proper and usual in the ordinary course of business for effecting the purpose of his agency and that the decision to enter into such agreements in connection with placement in a healthcare facility is a proper and usual exercise of an agents powers internal quotation marks and citation omitted B. holding that a principal is not hable for the actions of an agent when these actions exceed the agents authority and the thirdparty has knowledge that the agent does not have the authority asserted C. holding that unless that power is restricted by the principal an agent under a california statutory healthcare power of attorney has the power to execute applicable admission forms including arbitration agreements D. holding that a principal is bound by a contract entered into by the principals agent on her behalf if the agent had authority to bind the principal E. holding that a healthcare power of attorney conferred by a resident to his wife explicitly limited the powers of the agent to those set out in writing in the document

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a healthcare power of attorney includes the authority to bind the principal to an optional arbitration agreement because among other reasons an agent has authority to do everything necessary or proper and usual in the ordinary course of business for effecting the purpose of his agency and that the decision to enter into such agreements in connection with placement in a healthcare facility is a proper and usual exercise of an agents powers internal quotation marks and citation omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In addition to the late charges referred to above, which are intended to defray Landlord’s costs resulting from late payments, any payment from Tenant to Landlord not paid when due shall at Landlord’s option bear interest from the date due until paid to Landlord by Tenant at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum or the maximum lawful rate that Landlord may charge to Tenant under applicable laws, whichever is less (the “Interest Rate” ). Acceptance of any late charge and/or interest shall not constitute a waiver of Tenant’s default with respect to the overdue sum or prevent Landlord from exercising any of its other rights and remedies under this Lease.

assistant: Interests
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: not merely a ‘conspiracy to conspire’ as alleged by appellants, but is an overall conspiracy to violate a substantive provision of RICO Thus, the underlying acts of racketeering in a RICO conspiracy are not considered to be the objects of the conspiracy, but simply conduct that is relevant to the central objective — participating in a criminal enterprise. The existence of relevant conduct is determined at sentencing by a preponderance of the evidence. See, e.g., United States v. Voyles, 995 F.2d 91, 93 n. 3 (6th Cir.1993). At resentencing, then, the district court would only be required to find that the defendants conspired to murder Bowman by a preponderance of the evidence in order for this offense to be used to calculate the defendants’ base offense level. See Carrozza, 4 F.3d at 80 (<HOLDING>); United States v. Ruggiero, 100 F.3d 284, 291 Options: A. holding that best interest of child need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence B. holding in the context a rico conspiracy that the applicability of relevant conduct need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence not beyond a reasonable doubt C. holding that uncharged conduct may be considered at sentencing when that conduct is proven by a preponderance of the evidence D. holding that prior convictions relevant only to the sentencing of an offender found guilty of the charged crime do not need to be charged in an indictment or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt E. holding that territorial jurisdiction must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

assistant: The best answer is B. holding in the context a rico conspiracy that the applicability of relevant conduct need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence not beyond a reasonable doubt
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: the following rules are not meant to be exhaustive , and blizzard entertainment reserves the right to determine which conduct it considers to be outside the spirit of the game and to take disciplinary measures in accordance with article vii of the terms of use .

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: to express questioning, and we must conclude that defendant made his statements as a result of custodial interrogation. Since defendant's statements were made in response to custodial interrogation without benefit of Miranda warnings, they cannot, therefore, be admissible. As the Supreme Court summarized its holding in Miranda: Our holding will be spelled out with some specificity in the pages which follow but briefly stated it is this: the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. at 444. See also State v. Miner, 22 Wn. App. 480, 482, 591 P.2d 812 (1979) (<HOLDING>). The State's argument that defendant's Options: A. holding that miranda does not apply to statements of the defendant which are voluntary and unsolicited and not the product of custodial interrogation B. holding that statements elicited during custodial interrogation of child are inadmissible unless parents are present C. holding that a consent to search is not an interrogation within the meaning of miranda D. holding that voluntary statements to police initiated by witness are not interrogation and therefore are nontestimonial E. holding that 510 does not apply to unsolicited complaints

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that miranda does not apply to statements of the defendant which are voluntary and unsolicited and not the product of custodial interrogation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of the invalidity of any provision of this Agreement, such provision is deemed stricken from this Agreement, which will continue in full force and effect as if the offending provision were never a part 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: 1187 (D.C.Cir.2008), in which we held that we “retained jurisdiction over cases pending pursuant to former § 1605(a)(7) when the Congress enacted the NDAA.” Id. at 1191. CONCLUSION We affirm the district court’s denial of Libya’s motion to dismiss on the ground of sovereign immunity. We dismiss the appeal with regard to the other issues raised by Libya. 1 . We note that plaintiffs concession regarding punitive damages applies only to its claims filed under the 1996 Amendment to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976. Pub.L. No. 104-132, § 221, 110 Stat. 1214, 1241-42, repealed by national Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, Pub.L. No. 110-181, § 1083, 122 Stat. 3, 338-44 (codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1605A); see Simon v. Republic of Iraq, 529 F.3d 1187, 1191 (D.C.Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>). It does not apply to any claim that may be Options: A. holding that a clear indication from congress is the simplest way to show that a statute is enacted under the fourteenth amendment B. holding that the commissions rulemaking authority under 201b extends to the implementation of provisions enacted in 1996 C. recognizing that congress has specifically abrogated the eleventh amendment defense when legislating pursuant to 5 of the fourteenth amendment and its article i 8 plenary power over commerce but refusing to extend authority to abrogate to legislation enacted pursuant to the indian commerce clause the indian gaming regulatory act D. holding that congress could abrogate the eleventh amendment pursuant to the commerce clause E. holding that the courts retained jurisdiction over cases pending pursuant to the 1996 amendment when the congress enacted the new terrorism exception

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the courts retained jurisdiction over cases pending pursuant to the 1996 amendment when the congress enacted the new terrorism exception
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 Release will be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of New York without regard to the principles of conflicts of law. If any provision of this Release is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, void or unenforceable, such provision shall have no effect; however, the remaining provisions will be enforced to the maximum extent possible. The parties acknowledge and agree that, except as otherwise set forth herein, this Release constitutes the complete understanding between the parties with regard to the matters set forth herein and, except as otherwise set forth herein, supersede any and all agreements, understandings, and discussions, whether written or oral, between the parties. No other promises or agreements are binding unless in writing and signed by each of the parties after the Release Effective Date (as defined below). Should any provision of this Release require interpretation or construction, it is agreed by the parties that the entity interpreting or constructing this Release shall not apply a presumption against one party by reason of the rule of construction that a document is to be construed more strictly against the party who prepared the document.

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: No failure of Landlord to exercise any right or remedy consequent upon a default in any covenant, agreement, term or condition of this Lease, and no acceptance of full or partial Rent by Landlord during the continuance of any such default, shall constitute a waiver of any such default or of such covenant, agreement, term or condition. No covenant, agreement, term or condition of this Lease to be performed or complied with by either party, and no default thereof, shall be waived, altered or modified except by a written instrument executed by that party. No waiver of any default shall affect or alter this Lease, but each and every covenant, agreement, term and condition of this Lease shall continue in full force and effect with respect to any other then existing or subsequent default thereof.

assistant: No Waivers
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (<HOLDING>); Ex parte Lesher, 651 S.W.2d 734, 735-36 Options: A. holding injunction was proper after state court entered a temporary restraining order against defendants many of whom were also defendants in a federal multidistrict action because the restraining order would interfere with the multidistrict courts ability to dispose of the action before it B. holding temporary restraining order void for lack of requirement of separate bond C. holding that the failure of the applicant to file a bond before the issuance of the temporary injunction renders the injunction void ab initio D. holding that violations of a courts temporary restraining order can be redressed as an unlawful act claim under the ucl E. holding that failure to include right to appeal in statute indicated legislature did not intend to permit appeal from denial of temporary restraining order

assistant: The best answer is B. holding temporary restraining order void for lack of requirement of separate bond
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: 1972, decided March 10, 1972, Pa. Commonwealth Ct., aff’d, 451 Pa. 404, 304 A. 2d 491 (1973), (regarding which tribunals in Pennsylvania enjoy jurisdiction to entertain appeals from decisions of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board regarding municipal and county employees under the Public Employe Relations Act, Act of July 23, 1970, P. L. 563, §1502, as amended, 43 P.S. §1101.1502); see also Hartman v. Commonwealth, 6 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 409, 295 A. 2d 850 (1972), (regarding which tribunals in Pennsylvania enjoy jurisdiction to entertain appeals de novo from decisions of the Department of Transportation regarding suspension of motor vehicle inspection station licenses). However, cf. Pittsburgh v. P.U. C. and Duquesne Light Company, 3 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 546, 284 A. 2d 808 (1971), (<HOLDING>). We reach this conclusion reluctantly not Options: A. holding that other statutory procedures incident to appeal set forth in article xi of the public utility law act of may 28 1937 p l 1053 as amended 66 ps 1101 et seq are not repealed by enactment of the aoja B. holding that denial of vsf benefits to disabled retirees does not violate the ada the rehabilitation act 29 usc 791 et seq or the age discrimination in employment act of 1967 29 usc 621 et seq and that plaintiffs due process and first amendment claims were frivolous C. holding that because the federal arbitration act 9 usc 1 et seq preempts michigans lemon law mcl 2571401 et seq the plaintiffs lemon law claim should have been resolved through binding arbitration D. holding that prejudgment interest ordinarily should be awarded on damages pursuant to claims under the copyright act of 1909 17 usc 1 et seq 1976 ed superceded by the copyright act of 1976 17 usc 101 et seq E. holding buckhannon applicable to the equal access to justice act 28 usc 2412 et seq which authorizes attorneys fees for prevailing parties

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that other statutory procedures incident to appeal set forth in article xi of the public utility law act of may 28 1937 p l 1053 as amended 66 ps 1101 et seq are not repealed by enactment of the aoja
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) The Non-Extended Revolving Credit Commitments shall automatically terminate on the Non-Extended Revolving Credit Maturity Date. The Extended Revolving Credit Commitments (other than Incremental Revolving Credit Commitments, which shall automatically terminate as provided in the relevant Incremental Assumption Agreement) and the Swingline Commitment shall automatically terminate on the Extended Revolving Credit Maturity Date. The L/C Commitment shall automatically terminate on the earlier to occur of (i) the termination of the Extended Revolving Credit Commitments and (ii) the date that is 30 days prior to the Extended Revolving Credit Maturity Date.

assistant: Terminations
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: Due to the personal nature of the Services to be rendered hereunder, CONSULTANT may not assign this Consulting Agreement. SUNESIS may assign this Consulting Agreement without the consent of CONSULTANT. Subject to the foregoing, this Consulting Agreement will inure to the benefit of and be binding upon each of the heirs, assigns and successors of the respective parties.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Credit Parties, jointly and severally, hereby indemnifies and holds the Lender Indemnitees, their successors and assigns, and each of them, harmless from and against any and all charges, complaints, claims, counter-claims, liabilities, obligations, promises, agreements, controversies, damages, actions, causes of action, cross-actions, threats, setoffs, equities, judgments, accounts, suits, liens, rights, demands, benefits, costs, losses, debts, expenses, and other distributions, of every kind and nature whatsoever, payable by any of the Lender Indemnitees to any Person, including reasonable attorneys' and paralegals' fees and expenses, court costs, settlement amounts, costs of investigation and interest thereon from the time such amounts are due at the highest non-usurious rate of interest permitted by applicable law (collectively, the " Claims "), through all negotiations, mediations, arbitrations, trial and appellate levels, as a result of, or arising out of, or relating to any matters relating to this Amendment, the Credit Agreement, or any other Loan Documents. The foregoing indemnification obligations shall survive the termination of the Credit Agreement or any of the Loan Documents, and repayment of the Obligations.

assistant: Indemnifications
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 subsequently entering a new order and judgment, we believe that the district court in effect vacated the earlier order. See Nichols v. Nichols, 98 N.M. 322, 326-27, 648 P.2d 780, 784-85 (1982). Notably, “[t]he fact that the court did not state in the second judgment that the first had been vacated or withdrawn is irrelevant, especially in light of the rule that when there are two conflicting judgments rendered by a court upon the same rights of the same parties that which is later in time prevails.” Id.; see Gilmore v. Gilmore, 106 N.M. 788, 790-91, 750 P.2d 1114, 1116-17 (Ct.App.1988) (concluding that based on the law of successive judgments, the more recent judgment supersedes any earlier judgments); Hort v. Gen. Elec. Co., 92 N.M. 359, 360, 588 P.2d 560, 561 (Ct.App.1978) (<HOLDING>). {13} Further, we observe that Respondent does Options: A. holding that a default judgment was not void because the bankruptcy court that entered the judgment had proper jurisdiction over the party seeking relief B. holding the judgment premature citing one case holding the judgment void and another holding the judgment irregular C. holding that a second judgment controls over an earlier judgment entered in the same case D. holding that the trial court in entering judgment affirming an earlier judgment for an award of attorney fees after having discovered that it mistakenly entered the earlier judgment before the expiration of time for the filing of objections had the inherent power under orcp 71 cs modification authority to change the effective date of the judgment without vacating or setting aside the judgment E. recognizing that a specific statute controls over a general one

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a second judgment controls over an earlier judgment entered in the same 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No authorization, consent, license or exemption from, or filing or registration with, any Governmental Authority, nor any approval or consent of any other Person, is or will be necessary to the valid execution, delivery or performance by any Credit Party or any Subsidiary of any Loan Document, except for the filing of UCC financing statements and Intellectual Property security agreements and such approvals which have been obtained prior to the date of this Agreement and remain in full force and effect.

assistant: Approvals
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: ERISA plan. Id. at 1292-93. As the Fifth Circuit later explained, Cefalu “rejected the contention that preemption was avoided because the former employee was not seeking recovery from the plan itself or its assets, but only from his former employer.” Lee v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co., 894 F.2d 755, 757 (5th Cir.1990); see also Memorial Hosp. System v. Northbrook Life Ins. Co., 904 F.2d 236, 245 (5th Cir.1990) (“We have [ ] held in this circuit that ERISA preempts state law claims, based on breach of contract, fraud, or negligent misrepresentation, that have the effect of orally modifying the express terms of an ERISA plan and increasing plan benefits for participants or beneficiaries who claim to have been misled.”); Olson v. Gen. Dynamics Carp., 960 F.2d 1418 (9th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Similarly, in Anderson v. John Morrell & Co., Options: A. holding that fraudulent oral misrepresentation of the level of benefits does not provide the basis for a nonpreempted claim even though erisa may also provide no remedy B. holding the flsa does not provide the exclusive remedy for violations of its mandates C. holding that 42 usc 1983 does not provide a remedy for flsa violations D. holding that title vii did not provide exclusive remedy for sex discrimination in public employment claim could also be brought under equal protection clause E. holding that 1983 does not provide a remedy if there is no violation of federal law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that fraudulent oral misrepresentation of the level of benefits does not provide the basis for a nonpreempted claim even though erisa may also provide no remedy
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 notices, requests, demands and other communications to New Pledgor provided for under the Security Agreement and any other Loan Document shall be addressed to New Pledgor at the address specified on the signature page of this Agreement, or at such other address as shall be designated by New Pledgor in a written notice to the Administrative Agent and the Lenders.

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: the employee was invited to an employer-sponsored dinner meeting. After attending the meeting, while on her way home, the employee was severely injured in an automobile accident. After accepting the Commission’s finding that the employee had been required to attend the dinner, the court held the em ployee’s journey was covered under the special mission exception: Here, claimant was attending an off-premises dinner meeting, after normal working hours, under at least the implied direction of her employer, and travel to and from the meeting was a necessity. These special circumstances justify the Commission’s determination that claimant’s injuries while returning from the meeting were compensable. Id. at 916. See also Brown v. City of Wheeling, 212 W.Va. 121, 569 S.E.2d 197, 203 (2002) (<HOLDING>); State of Utah (Tax Commission) v. Industrial Options: A. holding the employee was clearly within the zone of her employment even though not at her work station because she was on the universitys premises the campus B. holding that it was appellants burden to prove that her husbands death occurred in the scope of employment and that she was eligible for widows benefits C. holding that threatening employee to mind her own business investigating her videotaping her without her permission and forcing her to take polygraph could not be considered adverse employment actions because they had no effect on conditions of employment D. holding that the employers party was a social event thus the employee was not acting within the scope of her employment when drinking at a party or when she was driving home afterwards E. holding that the employee was acting within the course of her employment when she died while returning from the workrelated session because her death occurred on a public highway which was brought within the scope of her employment by her employers requirement that she attend training at the state police academy

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the employee was acting within the course of her employment when she died while returning from the workrelated session because her death occurred on a public highway which was brought within the scope of her employment by her employers requirement that she attend training at the state police academy
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: Buyer is a corporation duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Nevada, has full legal power to carry on its business as now conducted, is authorized to hold title to the Properties and is in good standing and duly qualified to conduct its business in Texas.

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: other practices may be relevant in determining legitimate use and skype reserves the right to take any unlawful , prohibited , abnormal or unusual activity into account in making its determination .

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: premised on the idea that “there is no justification for providing a federal forum where there are non-diverse parties on both sides of the lawsuit.” Exxon, 545 U.S. at 562, 125 S.Ct. 2611. T F.Supp.2d 318, 322 (D.Conn.2007) (finding that the inclusion of a state agency as a defendant "destroy[ed] complete diversity”); Tomback v. UnumProvident Corp., No. 05 Civ. 3157, 2005 WL 2596449, at *3 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 13, 2005) (finding no diversity jurisdiction due to inclusion of the California Commissioner of Insurance in a suit against diverse insurers); Batton v. Georgia Gulf 261 F.Supp.2d 575, 583 (M.D.La.2003) (finding that "[njowhere is there any provision allowing diversity jurisdiction where a non-citizen state is a party”); Jakoubek v. Fortis Benefits Ins. Co., 3 25 So.2d 880, 881 (1946) (<HOLDING>)). The Florida District Court relied on the Options: A. holding that the federal action at issue must be authorized B. holding that in context of patent claim at issue if means only if C. recognizing that although there was no property in a dead body at common law the one whose duty it is to care for the body of the deceased is entitled to possession of the body as it is when death comes and that it is an actionable wrong for another to interfere with that right by withholding the body or mutilating it in any way D. recognizing fiduciary exception in the erisa context E. recognizing fsba as corporate body in context of whether it was authorized to issue refunding bonds

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing fsba as corporate body in context of whether it was authorized to issue refunding bonds