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: of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 120 S.Ct. 1073, 145 L.Ed.2d 1060 (2000), however, a plaintiff may also bring a class-of-one equal-protection claim, alleging that the plaintiff “has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment.” 528 U.S. at 564, 120 S.Ct. 1073 (citing Sioux City Bridge Co. v. Dakota Cnty., 260 U.S. 441, 43 S.Ct. 190, 67 L.Ed. 340 (1923); Allegheny Pittsburgh Coal Co. v. Cnty. Comm’n of Webster Cnty., 488 U.S. 336, 109 S.Ct. 633, 102 L.Ed.2d 688 (1989)). Similarly, discrimination against members of a non-protected class, such as White-Anglos, violates equal protection. See McDonald v. Santa Fe. Trail Transp. Co., 427 U.S. 273, 279-80, 96 S.Ct. 2574, 49 L.Ed.2d 493 (1976) (<HOLDING>); Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. Options: A. holding that a claim for discrimination in private employment is not preempted by title vii B. holding unequivocally that 1981 protects against racial discrimination in private employment C. holding that title vii proscribe racial discrimination in private employment against whites on the same terms as racial discrimination against nonwhites D. holding that title vii precludes a claim under section 1981 for racial discrimination against a federal employee E. holding that section 1981 prohibits racial discrimination in private employment against whites as well as nonwhites

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that title vii proscribe racial discrimination in private employment against whites on the same terms as racial discrimination against nonwhites
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: there was “an unlooked for and untoward event which is not expected or designed by the [injured employee],” Gladson v. Piedmont Stores, 57 N.C. App. 579, 579, 292 S.E.2d 18, 18, disc. review denied, 306 N.C. 556, 294 S.E.2d 370 (1982), or “the interruption of the routine work and the introduction thereby of unusual conditions,” Sanderson v. Northeast Construction Co., 77 N.C. App. 117, 121, 334 S.E.2d 392, 394 (1985). The lifting of an object by an employee that is heavier than expected or heavier than the usual nature of the object may constitute an unlooked for and untoward event not expected or designed by the injured employee. Gladson, 57 N.C. App. at 580-81, 292 S.E.2d at 19; see also Calderwood v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hosp. Auth., 135 N.C. App. 112, 116, 519 S.E.2d 61, 63 (1999) (<HOLDING>), disc. review denied, 351 N.C. 351, 543 S.E.2d Options: A. holding that appellant who properly filed an objection in accordance with the notice he received from the trial court had standing to appeal B. holding that a woman who suffered back pain who was medically limited to light lifting and who had problems bending could make a claim C. holding that while the plaintiffs job responsibilities included assisting patients who received epidurals her regular work routine did not require lifting the legs of women weighing 263 pounds who had received epidurals D. holding that requiring plaintiff to learn new skills or the possibility she could have received training did not create an adverse change in her job responsibilities E. holding that the statute of limitations began to run when the plaintiff first received notice of an alleged deficiency from the irs not when he received a final determination of tax liability

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that while the plaintiffs job responsibilities included assisting patients who received epidurals her regular work routine did not require lifting the legs of women weighing 263 pounds who had received epidurals
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 Agreement is awarded pursuant to and is subject to all of the provisions of the Plan, including amendments to the Plan, if any. In the event of a conflict between these Terms and Conditions and the Plan provisions, the Plan provisions will control. The term “ you ” and “ your ” refer to the Awardee named in the Agreement. Capitalized terms that are not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Plan or the Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at issue. The Magistrate Judge held that because UPMC did not retain unprotected supervisors from Montefiore, i.e., supervisors under the age of 40, appellant could not satisfy the fourth element, and summary judgment was therefore appropriate. App. at 56-57, 62. In light of our opinions in Armbruster, Senian, and Billet, all of which held that the fourth element of a prima facie age discrimination case in a RIF context requires the plaintiff to show that unprotected workers were retained, the Magistrate Judge understandably applied this standard rather than requiring Showalter to show that the retained workers were “sufficiently younger” than he was at the time of discharge. See Keller, 130 F.3d at 1108; see also Healy v. New York Life Ins. Co., 860 F.2d 1209, 1214 n. 1 (3d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). Nevertheless, in light of the Supreme Court’s Options: A. holding that fourth element of a prima facie case is satisfied when the employees who were more favorably treated were situated similarly to the plaintiff B. holding prima facie case established where employer fired fiftytwo year old accountant pursuant to rif but retained one younger employee in similar position C. holding in a rif context that the fourth prima facie element is satisfied if the plaintiff can show that he was discharged while the company retained someone younger D. holding to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination a plaintiff must show he 1 E. holding that the fourth prong of a prima facie age discrimination case was satisfied where plaintiff was replaced by two individuals one who was four years younger than plaintiff and the other who was ten years younger

assistant: The best answer is C. holding in a rif context that the fourth prima facie element is satisfied if the plaintiff can show that he was discharged while the company retained someone younger
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 Landlord and Tenant hereby represents and warrants to the other that all necessary action has been taken to enter this Seventh Amendment and that the person signing this Seventh Amendment on its behalf has been duly authorized to do so.

assistant: Authority
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: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement (the “ Closing ”) shall take place on the execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto, at the offices of Buyer or at such other place as Seller and Buyer may mutually agree upon in writing. The date on which the Closing is to occur is herein referred to as the “ Closing Date ”.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of a breach or threatened breach by the Executive of any of the provisions of this Agreement, the Executive hereby consents and agrees that the Company shall be entitled, in addition to other available remedies, to a temporary or permanent injunction or other equitable relief against such breach or threatened breach from any court of competent jurisdiction, without the necessity of showing any actual damages or that money damages would not afford an adequate remedy, and without the necessity of posting any bond or other security. The aforementioned equitable relief shall be in addition to, not in lieu of, legal remedies, monetary damages or other available forms of relief. Should the Executive fail to abide by any of the terms of this Agreement, including the covenants contained in Section 7 hereof, the Company may, in addition to any other remedies it may have, reclaim any amounts paid to the Executive under the provisions of this Agreement or terminate any benefits or payments that are later due under this Agreement, without waiving the Release provided herein.

assistant: Remedies
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: was established in this circuit that a constructive amendment required reversal, even under plain error review. See Olson, 925 F.2d at 1175 (“[A constructive] amendment always requires reversal because it deprives a defendant of his right to be tried on the grand jury’s charge.”); United States v. Solis, 841 F.2d 307, 309 (9th Cir.1988) (same); United States v. Pazsint, 703 F.2d 420, 424 (9th Cir.1983) (same). However, in United States v. Shipsey, 190 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir.1999), we stated that “fw]e have not had occasion to determine whether reversal is always required after United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 735, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993), which recognizes more discretion for courts reviewing for plain error.” Id. at 1087; see also Olano, 507 U.S. at 735, 113 S.Ct. 1770 (<HOLDING>). . In Shipsey, we found it unnecessary to Options: A. holding that even if a defendant is able to show that there was a plain error that affected his substantial rights a court of appeals is not required to reverse a conviction unless it finds that the error seriously affected the fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings B. recognizing that plain error analysis requires 1 error 2 that is plain 3 that affects defendants substantial rights and 4 that seriously affects fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings C. holding that a plain error did not seriously affect the fairness integrity or public reputation of the judicial proceedings even though the error was assumed to have affected substantial rights D. holding that plain error exists when 1 an error was committed 2 that was plain 3 that affected the defendants substantial rights and 4 the error seriously affects the fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings E. holding that plain error will be identified only if 1 there is error 2 that is clear or obvious rather than subject to reasonable dispute 3 that affects defendants substantial rights and 4 that seriously impugns fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that even if a defendant is able to show that there was a plain error that affected his substantial rights a court of appeals is not required to reverse a conviction unless it finds that the error seriously affected the fairness integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts. A Party may enter into this Agreement by executing a counterpart, but this Agreement shall not be effective until each Party has executed at least one counterpart. Each counterpart shall constitute an original of this Agreement but all the counterparts together constitute the same instrument.

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: If any part of the Plan is declared by any court or governmental authority to be unlawful or invalid, such unlawfulness or invalidity shall not invalidate any other part of the Plan. Any Section or part of a Section so declared to be unlawful or invalid shall, if possible, be construed in a manner which will give effect to the terms of such Section or part of a Section to the fullest extent possible while remaining lawful and valid.

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: for its adjusters to follow, (2) failed to train its employees on the specifics of Oklahoma insurance law, and (3) failed to independently investigate Plaintiffs insurance claim. As for Plaintiffs first two allegations of bad faith, we are not persuaded an insurer acts in bad faith under Oklahoma law by simply failing to adopt written standards or provide state-specific training to its employees. We see no basis in the record for a finding of bad faith with respect to Defendant’s general handling of claims and training of employees. As for Plaintiffs third bad-faith allegation, there is no evidence in the record to support a claim that Defendant’s investigation was incomplete or biased in any way. See Timberlake Constr. Co. v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 71 F.3d 335, 345 (10th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff further argues Defendant acted in Options: A. holding that even though insurance company could have completed claim investigation more quickly delay was not clear and convincing evidence for jury to determine presence of bad faith B. holding that the defendants were not liable for failing to perform the thorough professional investigation the plaintiff would have preferred C. holding that there is no constitutional duty to do a better investigation and that a decision not to conduct a more thorough investigation does not invade an accuseds rights D. holding that under oklahoma law a bad faith claim premised on inadequate investigation must be supported by a showing that material facts were overlooked or that a more thorough investigation would have produced relevant information E. holding investigation was not deficient in part because counsel hired an experienced death penalty investigator who conducted a thorough investigation into defendants history

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that under oklahoma law a bad faith claim premised on inadequate investigation must be supported by a showing that material facts were overlooked or that a more thorough investigation would have produced relevant information
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Seller is not (i) in violation of any judgment, order, injunction, award or decree which is binding on any of them or any of their assets, properties, operations or business which violation, by itself or in conjunction with any other such violation, would materially and adversely affect the consummation of the transaction contemplated hereby; or (ii) in violation of any law or regulation or any other requirement of any governmental body, court or arbitrator relating to him or it, or to his or its assets, operations or businesses which violation, by itself or in conjunction with other violations of any other law, regulation or other requirement, would materially adversely affect the consummation of the transaction contemplated hereby.

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: see also Sayne, 418 F.2d at 685 (“Unique rules of ‘wide latitude’ govern reception of evidence in Section 3184 hearings.”). “[P]rocedurally, [this] appears to make for a broad hearing. Substantively, however, the scope of the hearing is very limited as to matters raised by Respondent.” Cervantes Valles, 268 F.Supp.2d at 772 (citing In re Extradition of Contreras, 800 F.Supp. 1462, 1464 (S.D.Tex.1992)). Specifically, under the general rule of non-contradiction in foreign extradition cases, evidence explaining away or completely rebutting the existence of probable cause appears to be the only admissible evidence which Respondent can present at the probable cause hearing. Id. (citing Contreras, 800 F.Supp. at 1464); see Garza v. United States, 180 Fed.Appx. 522, 523 (5th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Although courts have struggled to clarify the Options: A. holding that it was not erroneous for committing court to refuse to admit an affidavit from a private investigator that provided evidence of a witnesss lack of credibility when the affidavit would not have explained away the witnesss testimony but only challenged its credibility B. holding that under hubbard a trial courts error in excluding bias evidence would be harmless if either 1 despite the exclusion the jury nonetheless had an adequate opportunity to assess the witnesss credibility or 2 the witnesss credibility was not important to the outcome of the trial emphasis added C. holding that conviction on appeal is not admissible to impeach witnesss credibility D. holding that a witnesss testimony or an exhibit may not explicitly and directly contain an opinion as to a trial witnesss credibility E. holding that a trial witnesss testimony as to the credibility of another witness was prejudicial error

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it was not erroneous for committing court to refuse to admit an affidavit from a private investigator that provided evidence of a witnesss lack of credibility when the affidavit would not have explained away the witnesss testimony but only challenged its credibility
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 entire principal.” See Note, id. (emphasis added). These definitions establish that a final, balloon payment is distinct and separate from the preceding “periodic payments.” Accordingly, it is only the periodic payments — and not the balloon payment— that are subject to the “equal monthly amounts” directive of § 1325(a)(5)(B)(iii)(I). In reaching a contrary conclusion, courts seem to make one of two errors. First, some courts overlook the “if’ in § 1325(a)(5)(B)(iii)(I), assuming that all secured claims must be paid by periodic payments; however, this interpretation renders the “if’ superfluous, and goes against legislative history and the more careful analysis rendered by other courts. See, e.g., United States v. McClure (In re McClure), No. (M.D.Ga. Sept. 30, 2011), ECF 10 (<HOLDING>). Second, many courts, such as Hamilton and its Options: A. holding that agreement for periodic child support payments is governed by law of contracts B. holding that the lower court failed to account for payments made in connection with the marital home including mortgage payments C. holding that where the policy includes indemnification coverage to the corporation proceeds are not property of the estate where there is no proof of payments by corporation of payments D. holding social security disability payments and military disability payments are separate property after dissolution of marriage E. recognizing that payments to secured creditors are only required in equal monthly amounts if property to be distributed is in the form of periodic payments

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that payments to secured creditors are only required in equal monthly amounts if property to be distributed is in the form of periodic payments
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 rights to all inventions and designs related to any of the businesses of the Company or its affiliates, made or conceived in part or wholly by you individually or jointly during the Term belong to the Company regardless of whether they are legally protected.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 193 N.W.2d 744 (1972). Moreover, we determine probable cause by an objective standard of reasonableness: whether the known facts and circumstances are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable prudence in the belief that contraband or evidence of crime will be found. See State v. Craven, 253 Neb. 601, 571 N.W.2d 612 (1997). Here, Reilly had probable cause to search the car because of the dog’s alert. A dog’s identification of drugs in luggage or in a car provides probable cause that drugs are present. U.S. v. Bloomfield, 40 F.3d 910 (8th Cir. 1994). But a person’s mere proximity to others independently suspected of criminal activity does not, without more, give rise to probable cause to search that person. See Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85, 100 S. Ct. 338, 62 L. Ed. 238 (1979) (<HOLDING>). Specifically, probable cause to search a car Options: A. holding that a visual body cavity search requires probable cause and a search warrant B. holding that an arrest warrant without a search warrant does not permit law enforcement authorities to enter a third partys home to legally search for the subject of the arrest warrant C. holding that there was not arguable probable cause to conduct extensive searches on night club and its patrons where only evidence was of one patron selling drugs D. holding that search warrant for tavern and its bartender did not permit body searches of all bars patrons E. holding that detaining club patrons in handcuffs for three hours after subjecting them to strip searches and warrant checks was unlawful

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that search warrant for tavern and its bartender did not permit body searches of all bars patrons
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 parties irrevocably agrees that any legal action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or for recognition and enforcement of any judgment in respect hereof brought by the other party or its successors or assigns may be brought and determined in any New York State or federal court sitting in the Borough of Manhattan in The City of New York (or, if such court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, in any appropriate New York State or federal court), and each of the parties hereby irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the aforesaid courts for itself and with respect to its property, generally and unconditionally, with regard to any such action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby (and agrees not to commence any action, suit or proceeding relating thereto except in such courts). Each of the parties further agrees to accept service of process in any manner permitted by such courts. Each of the parties hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives, and agrees not to assert, by way of motion or as a defense, counterclaim or otherwise, in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby, (a) any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of the above-named courts for any reason other than the failure lawfully to serve process, (b) that it or its property is exempt or immune from jurisdiction of any such court or from any legal process commenced in such courts (whether through service of notice, attachment prior to judgment, attachment in aid of execution of judgment, execution of judgment or otherwise) and (c) to the fullest extent permitted by law, that (i) the suit, action or proceeding in any such court is brought in an inconvenient forum, (ii) the venue of such suit, action or proceeding is improper or (iii) this Agreement, or the subject matter hereof, may not be enforced in or by such courts.

assistant: Submission To 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that we should require Cambodian officials to give a version of the Miranda warnings to United States citizens suspected of child trafficking crimes. See U.S. Dep’t of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, at 15-16 (2003), available at http://www.state. gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2003 (noting that countries that do not make significant efforts to comply with certain minimum standards laid out by the U.S. State Department could lose U.S. financial assistance). 7 . See, e.g., Kilday, 481, F.2d at 655-56 (Miranda warnings unnecessary even though defendant was arrested in connection with a bank robbery that occurred in the United States, was questioned by an Interpol agent, and an American consular official was present as an interpreter during the interrogation); Heller, 625 F.2d at 599-600 (<HOLDING>). 8 . Frank does not challenge Congress’s Options: A. holding that the defendant was entitled to a new trial where the only witnesses to a drug transaction other than the defendant were an fbi agent and a cl B. holding exclusionary rule did not apply when defendant was apprehended by british officials based on tip by american agent defendant and evidence were seized before american agents arrived defendant was charged initially with violating british law and american agent only interviewed defendant after obtaining permission from british authorities C. holding that agent entrapped defendant by goading defendant and repeatedly requesting drugs from him D. holding testimony of undercover drug agent regarding tips that defendant was selling drugs and description of defendant were inadmissible hearsay given the statements specifically referred to defendant E. holding that where defendant was not subject to custodial interrogation agent did not violate the fifth amendment by contacting defendant for questioning after defendant refused to answer questions without a lawyer present

assistant: The best answer is B. holding exclusionary rule did not apply when defendant was apprehended by british officials based on tip by american agent defendant and evidence were seized before american agents arrived defendant was charged initially with violating british law and american agent only interviewed defendant after obtaining permission from british authorities
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 waiver or course of dealing shall be established by (a) the failure or delay of the Administrative Agent or any Lender to require strict performance by Borrowers with any terms of the Loan Documents, or to exercise any rights or remedies with respect to Collateral or otherwise; (b) the making of any Loan during a Default, Event of Default or other failure to satisfy any conditions precedent; or (c) acceptance by the Administrative Agent or any Lender of any payment or performance by an Obligor under any Loan Documents in a manner other than that specified therein. It is expressly acknowledged by Borrowers that any failure to satisfy a financial covenant on a measurement date shall not be cured or remedied by satisfaction of such covenant on a subsequent date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and facially neutral and there is no allegation that it has any discriminatory effect.” Br. of Appellees 36. Additionally, the City maintains that the Ordinance is consistent with the purpose and plain language of the Consent Decree. A. 1. In assessing a First Amendment claim relating to private speech on government property, we must first identify the nature of the forum at issue — here, the City’s flag standards affixed to its light posts. See Capitol Square Review & Advisory Bd. v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753, 761, 115 S.Ct. 2440, 132 L.Ed.2d 650 (1995) (explaining that “[t]he right to use government property for one’s private expression depends upon” the nature of the property); Int’l Soc’y for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lee, 505 U.S. 672, 678, 112 S.Ct. 2701, 120 L.Ed.2d 541 (1992) (<HOLDING>). As our Court has recognized, “[i]n deciding Options: A. holding mexico to be available and adequate forum after rejecting arguments that forum was inadequate due to restrictions on discovery and damages B. recognizing forum based approach to assessing speech restrictions that government places on its property C. holding that first amendment protections apply to compelled speech as well as restrictions on speech D. recognizing that code is speech E. holding that even in a public forum the government may impose reasonable restrictions on the time place or manner of protected speech provided the restrictions are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech that they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest and that they leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing forum based approach to assessing speech restrictions that government places on its property
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 834 A.2d 505, 512 (Pa. 2003). 95 . Armbruster v. Horowitz, 813 A.2d 698, 702 (Pa. 2002). 96 . Harman ex rel. Harman v. Borah, 756 A.2d 1116, 1122 (Pa. 2000). 97 . Renna v. Schadt, 64 A.3d 658,670 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013) (internal citations omitted). 98 . Harman, 756 A.2d at 1122. 99 . Id. 100 . 11 A.3d 456 (Pa. 2011). 101 . Calender v. Allegheney County Sanitary Auth., 222 A.2d 461, 463 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1966). 102 . Restatement (Second) of Torts §414 (1965). 103 . Restatement (Second) of Torts §414 com. (a). 104 . Id. 105 . Restatement (Second) of Torts §414 com. (c). 106 . 317 A.2d 280 (Pa. 1974). 107 . id at 282. 108 . Farabaugh v. Pennsylvania Turnpike Com’n, 911 A.2d 1264, 1271 (Pa. 2006). 109 . Id. at 1275. See also LaChance v. Michael Baker Corp., 869 A.2d 1054 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005) (<HOLDING>). 110 . Id. at 1282. 111 . 11 A.3d456 (Pa. Options: A. holding that retained control exception did not apply where landowner contractually retained and exercised right to safety inspections but did not exercise any other control over the manner or operational details of the project because contract language was standard and it was against public policy to impose liability on landowner for addressing safety in the contract B. holding that the principal must have control and supervision over the details of the agents work C. holding that to establish a prima facie case of control person liability a plaintiff must establish that the alleged control person actually participated in ie exercised control over the operations of the primary violator in general internal quotations omitted D. holding that a public trust that exercised control over the beneficiarys employment did not change the benefit plan into a government plan because the trust did not establish the plan or control it E. holding that any attempt by way of contract to deprive a city of control over exercise of it police powers is void

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that retained control exception did not apply where landowner contractually retained and exercised right to safety inspections but did not exercise any other control over the manner or operational details of the project because contract language was standard and it was against public policy to impose liability on landowner for addressing safety in the contract
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) Keep and maintain its property material to the conduct of its business (if any) in good working order and condition, ordinary wear and tear excepted, and in compliance with all material applicable standards, rules or regulations imposed by any Governmental Authority or by any insurance policy (if any) held by the Loan Parties.

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: or obtained because of the prospect of litigation. But the converse of this is that even though litigation is already in prospect, there is no work product immunity for documents prepared in the regular course of business rather than for purposes of litigation. Bieter Co. v. Blomquist, 156 F.R.D. 173, 180 (D.Minn.1994) (quotation omitted). Litigation was in prospect or ongoing when the billing documents were prepared, so the issue becomes which parts of them were prepared in the regular course of business and which parts were prepared for the purpose of litigation. Only “opinions, conclusions, legal theories, or mental impressions of counsel” qualify as work product. Dennie, 387 N.W.2d at 406. Generally, billing records do not fall into this category. See Bieter, 156 F.R.D. at 180 (<HOLDING>). However, work descriptions that contain Options: A. holding that municipal court records were admissible under official records or public documents exception B. holding that 14501c1 preempted statelaw claims of fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation and money had and received related to billing practices of motor carrier of property C. holding that the disclosure of billing invoices and cost reports were neither allegations of fraud nor fraudulent transactions D. holding that records relating to a student court were not education records E. holding that billing records were discoverable and citing rayman v am charter fed sav loan assn 148 frd 647 660 dneb1993 attorney billing statements not subject to workproduct protection

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that billing records were discoverable and citing rayman v am charter fed sav loan assn 148 frd 647 660 dneb1993 attorney billing statements not subject to workproduct protection
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 documentary evidence that Likollari submitted during his original asylum proceedings demonstrates that an unstable political climate, political violence, and excessive force by police officers is not a new development in Albania. See Likollari, 178 Fed.Appx. at 907. Moreover, Camaj’s affidavit was in direct conflict with the 2007 Country Report’s assessment that there were no political prisoners or politically motivated disappearances. Thus, it was not an abuse of discretion for the BIA to find Camaj’s statements about the current country conditions unpersuasive to the extent that the statements conflicted with the Country Reports because this Court has held that the BIA may “rely heavily” on Country Reports. Reyes-Sanchez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 369 F.3d 1239, 1243 (11th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). The BIA, therefore, did not abuse its Options: A. holding that an alj is entitled to rely on vocational experts testimony that is based on assumptions that are supported by evidence in the record B. holding that the ij may not rely on a factually unsupported assertion in a state department report to deem an applicant not credible C. holding that because the court could not consider police reports it could not rely on an attorneys argument based on the police report as the basis for determining the statutory basis for a conviction D. holding that the bia is entitled to rely heavily on state department reports E. holding that a bank is entitled to rely on its deposit agreement when responding to a writ of garnishment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the bia is entitled to rely heavily on state department reports
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 inquiry mandated by Genesco. I. The first question we must address is whether the language in Paragraph 4N calling for the appointment of an independent tax counsel does indeed constitute an enforceable arbitration clause. We believe that the language clearly manifests an intention by the parties to submit certain disputes to a specified third party for binding resolution. It is, in our estimation, irrelevant that the contract language in question does not employ the word “arbitration” as such. Rather, what is important is that the parties clearly intended to submit some disputes to their “ ‘chosen instrument for the definitive settlement of [certain] grievances under ' the Agreement_’” International Longshoremen’s Ass’n v. Hellenic Lines, Ltd., 549 F.Supp. 435, 437 (S.D.N.Y.1982) (<HOLDING>) (quoting General Drivers, Warehousemen & Options: A. holding that arbitration award is binding on the parties B. holding that a third party has authority to consent to a search if the third party is a coinhabitant C. holding that binding review by a designated third party is arbitration even if not denominated as such in the contract D. holding that an arbitration in accordance with aaa rules is a binding arbitration E. holding that the terms arbitration or arbitrate need not be used as long as binding review by a third party is clearly the intention of the parties

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that binding review by a designated third party is arbitration even if not denominated as such in the contract
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: Court explained that “[t]he requirements of the Seventh Amendment were brought into play in this case, even though a stevedor-ing contract is a maritime contract.” Id. at 359, 82 S.Ct. 780. The Court held that “[t]his suit being in the federal courts by reason of diversity of citizenship carried with it, of course, the right to trial by jury,” id. at 360, 82 S.Ct. 780, and that the manner in which the circuit court rejected the jury verdict violated the Seventh Amendment’s prohibition against the reexamination of facts found by a jury. See id. at 364, 82 S.Ct. 780. In our view, Ellerman makes it clear that the Seventh Amendment applies to admiralty claims that are tried “at law” by way of the saving-to-suitors clause. See id. at 359-60, 82 S.Ct. 780; see also Vodusek, 71 F.3d at 152-53 (<HOLDING>); Koch Fuels, Inc. v. Cargo of 13,000 Barrels Options: A. holding that a claim based on a cruise lines negligent mode of operation under florida law is not cognizable under federal admiralty law B. holding claim is cognizable C. holding claim is not cognizable D. holding that courts apply substantive admiralty law to claims that sound in admiralty regardless of whether the complaint invokes diversity or admiralty jurisdiction E. recognizing that the seventh amendment applies to admiralty claim that is cognizable at law

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that the seventh amendment applies to admiralty claim that is cognizable at law
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 Joinder Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the internal laws of the State of Delaware, without regard to any conflict of laws provisions which would require the application of the law of any other 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except with regards to the Prior Confidentiality Agreements, the Legal Activities Letter Agreement, and except with regards to the provisions of the Original Agreement that, by the terms of the Original Agreement, survive the termination of the Original Agreement, it is understood and agreed between Momenta and Baxalta that this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement, both written and oral, between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and that all prior agreements respecting the subject matter hereof, whether written or oral, expressed or implied, shall be of no force or effect. No amendment or change hereof or addition hereto shall be effective or binding on either of the Parties hereto unless reduced to writing and executed by the respective duly authorized representatives of Momenta and Baxalta.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: note that blizzard will not be responsible for the loss of in-game funds or items due to the character migration of either a `` buyer '' or `` seller '' to an auction house transaction .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Upon the occurrence of a default hereunder, Holder may, at its election and without presentment, demand or notice or protest of any kind, all of which are expressly waived by Maker, take any action permitted at law or in equity, including, without limitation declare the entire balance of principal and interest thereon immediately due and payable, together with all costs of collection, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and all expenses incurred in connection with collection of all sums due hereunder. Maker expressly agrees that this Note, or any payment hereunder, may be renewed, modified or extended from time to time and at any time by Holder. This provision shall not, however, be construed as extending the time for payment of any amount hereunder and shall in no event constitute a waiver of Maker’s default with respect to such overdue amount nor prevent Holder from exercising any of its other rights and remedies with respect to such default. At such time as this Note becomes due in full, whether by acceleration (upon default or otherwise), by the occurrence of the Maturity Date or otherwise, if Maker fails to pay all amounts due the unpaid principal balance, accrued interest and costs incurred (and any judgment or decree with respect thereto) shall from and after the date due bear interest until paid at a rate equal to seven and one half percent (7.5%) per annum. The rights, powers, privileges, options and remedies of Holder, as provided in this Note, in the Security Agreement, or otherwise available at law or in equity shall be cumulative and concurrent, and may be pursued singly, successively or together at the sole discretion of Holder, and may be exercised as often as occasion therefor shall occur.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 365 U.S. 646 81 S.Ct. 783 5 L.Ed.2d 855 Leonard SALDANA, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 176. Argued March 20, 1961. Decided April 3, 1961. Mr. Stephen R. Reinhardt, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner. Mr. Herbert A. Bernhard, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner, pro hac vice, by special leave of Court. Mr. Archibald Cox, Sol. Gen., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner was convicted on four counts of a five-count indictment charging offenses under the narcotics laws. 21 U.S.C. § 174, 21 U.S.C.A. § 174. He complains of a number of alleged trial errors. In addition, he points to a series of events occurring during the course of the prosecution which, he says, operated to deprive him of constitutionally guaranteed rights. It is unncessary to detail here the course of those proceedings, since we are advised that a change in the calendar system of the District Court for the Southern District of California insures that what occurred in this case will not occur again. 2 During oral argument in this Court the Solicitor General suggested that the combination of circumstances in this case, beginning with one judge's clearly expressed intention to impose a five-year sentence, and ending with another judge's imposition of a twenty-year sentence under the indictment, was not consistent with that regularity and fairness which should characterize the administration of criminal justice in the federal courts. In the light of the Solicitor General's suggestion, and upon an independent examination of the record, we have concluded that a due regard for the fair administration of justice requires that the convictions under counts 3, 4, and 5 of the indictment be set aside. 28 U.S.C. § 2106, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2106; see Communist Party of United States v. Subversive Activities Control Board, 351 U.S. 115, 124, 76 S.Ct. 663, 668, 100 L.Ed. 1003; Mesarosh v. United States, 352 U.S. 1, 14, 77 S.Ct. 1, 8, 1 L.Ed.2d 1; Marshall v. United States, 360 U.S. 310, 79 S.Ct. 1171, 3 L.Ed.2d 1250. Cf. Petite v. United States, 361 U.S. 529, 80 S.Ct. 450, 4 L.Ed.2d 490. The conviction under count 2, to which the petitioner originally pleaded guilty, is affirmed. 3 Because of this disposition of the case, we do not reach for consideration the alleged trial errors with respect to limitation of cross-examination, sufficiency of the evidence of a 'sale' under count 5, and instructions to the jury as to entrapment. 4 So ordered. 5 Convictions on three counts set aside, and conviction on one count affirmed.

assistant: 1