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: has the right, and the ready ability, to obtain copies of documents gathered or created by its attorneys pursuant to their representation of that client, such documents are clearly within the client's control."); 7-34 James C. Francis & Robert M. Bloom, Moore's Federal Practice-Civil § 84.14 (2011) ("Documents in the possession of a party's attorney may be considered to be within the control of the party within the meaning of Rule 34.... In addition, 'if an attorney comes into possession of a document as attorney for that party his [or her] possession of the documents is the possession of the party'" (footnotes and citations omitted)). Because this court has similarly defined "control," see Michael v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 138 Colo. 450, 454, 334 P.2d 1090, 1093 (1959) (<HOLDING>), I would hold that such documents are within a Options: A. holding that possession custody or control in crcp 26 and 34 requires the production of doeuments which are obtainable by the order or direction of the litigant B. holding that possession of a pistol in public requires knowing possession C. holding that once the defendant has submitted to the control of the officer and the process of taking him or her to the police station has commenced his or her arrest is complete and he or she is in custody for the purposes of the escape statute D. holding that the phrase possession or custody in 5225b requires actual and not merely constructive possession E. holding that ownership or possession or actual control is needed

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that possession custody or control in crcp 26 and 34 requires the production of doeuments which are obtainable by the order or direction of the litigant
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: 334, 336 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1997, pet. denied); In re Fuentes, 960 S.W.2d 261, 264 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1997, orig. proceeding); First Nat'l Bank of Giddings, Tex. v. Birnbaum, 826 S.W.2d 189, 190-91 (Tex.App.—Austin 1992, no writ) (op. on reh’g); Energo Int’l Corp. v. Modern Indus. Heating, Inc., 722 S.W.2d 149, 151 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1986, no writ). One reason for not considering docket entries on appeal is that they are inherently unreliable. See, e.g., Energo, 722 S.W.2d at 151 n. 2. An exception to this rule is that docket entries may be examined to correct clerical errors in judgments or orders or to determine the meaning of words used in a judgment or order. See N-S-W Corp. v. Snell, 561 S.W.2d 798, 799 (Tex W.2d 439, 441 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, no writ) (<HOLDING>); First Nat’l Bank of Giddings, Tex., 826 Options: A. holding that appellant did not preserve error because he failed to obtain ruling on motion for continuance B. holding appellant failed to preserve error when trial judge overruled objection without comment and record gave no indication of basis for objection asserted on appeal C. holding that appellant failed to preserve error because it did not present appellate complaint to trial court D. holding that court lacked jurisdiction for appeal where only evidence of application for turnover relief was in the trial courts docket sheet E. holding that appellant failed to preserve error for appeal where only indication that trial court ruled on a motion to transfer venue was a docket sheet notation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that appellant failed to preserve error for appeal where only indication that trial court ruled on a motion to transfer venue was a docket sheet notation
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: suffered chromosomal change, the allegedly negligent act drawn into question was performed while [the servicemen were] in the service.” Monaco, 661 F.2d at 133. Thus, the inquiry must focus on whether the negligent act is the basis for the “type of claim[ ] that, if generally permitted, would involve the judiciary in sensitive military affairs at the expense of military discipline and effectiveness.” Shearer, 473 U.S. at 59, 105 S.Ct. 3039. We conclude that the plaintiffs cannot escape the fact that the negligent acts alleged in their complaint find their basis in the military’s decision to inoculate its soldiers with drugs and to expose them to pesticides, and the issue of whether they can allege or demonstrate injury is irrelevant to the analysis. See, e.g., Monaco, 661 F.2d at 134 (<HOLDING>). The plaintiffs also argue that the operative Options: A. holding that allegation of procedural injury does not affect the issues of injury in fact or causation B. holding that the fact that a plaintiff may seek relief from injury not based on the injury of the serviceman does not change the substantive analysis because the court must still examine the governments activity in relation to military personnel on active duty C. holding that in determining whether a duty exists a court should consider the following factors 1 the reasonable foreseeability of injury 2 the reasonable likelihood of injury 3 the magnitude of the burden that guarding against injury places on the defendant and 4 the consequences of placing that burden on the defendant emphasis added D. holding that in order to establish standing a plaintiff must show 1 it has suffered an injury in fact 2 the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and 3 it is likely as opposed to merely speculative that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision E. holding that to have standing a plaintiff must establish an injury in fact a casual connection between the injury and that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the fact that a plaintiff may seek relief from injury not based on the injury of the serviceman does not change the substantive analysis because the court must still examine the governments activity in relation to military personnel on active duty
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 and the Separation Agreement contain the Parties’ entire agreement with regard to the separation of Executive’s employment, and supersede and replace any prior agreements as to those matters, whether oral or written, including without limitation, the Company’s Amended and Restated Severance Plan. Executive acknowledges and agrees that there are no other agreements, written, oral or implied, and that Executive may not rely on any prior negotiations, discussions, representations or agreements. This Release may be modified only in writing, and such writing must be signed by both parties and recited that it is intended to modify this Release. This Release may be executed in separate counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original and all of which taken together constitute one and the same 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Agent shall have received (i) all fees required to be paid to them by the U.S. Borrower mutually agreed prior to the Incremental Amendment No. 2 Effective Date and (ii) all out-of-pocket expenses (including the reasonable documented fees and expenses of external legal counsel) for which invoices have been presented to such U.S. Borrower at least three business days prior to the Incremental Amendment No. 2 Effective Date.

assistant: Fees
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 Section 10.15(d) , any legal action or proceeding with respect to any Loan Document shall be brought exclusively in the courts of the State of New York located in the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan, or of the United States of America for the Southern District of New York and, by execution and delivery of this Agreement, each Credit Party hereby accepts for itself and in respect of its Property, generally and unconditionally, the jurisdiction of the aforesaid courts. Each Credit Party hereby irrevocably waives any objection, including any objection to the laying of venue or based on the grounds of forum non conveniens that any of them may now or hereafter have to the bringing of any such action or proceeding in such jurisdictions.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Employment Term, the Executive shall be entitled to receive prompt reimbursement for all reasonable business expenses incurred by him on behalf of the Company in accordance with the Company’s policies and procedures in effect from time to time.

assistant: Expenses
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: coverage of her own automobile insurance policy, which was in effect from July 26, 1988, to July 26, 1989. She seeks to collect on the underinsured motorist coverage of the two policies for her parents’ two automobiles. Their policies are in effect on a calendar-year basis. This set of facts parallels in all material particulars that in Plymouth Rock Assur. Corp. v. McAlpine, 32 Mass. App. Ct. 755 (1992), although the claimant’s principal contention in this case is different. Under the law in effect in 1988, Karen Joseph would have been able to combine, or “stack,” the underinsured coverages of the three household policies. Wincek v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 28 Mass. App. Ct. 901 (1989). See also LeCuyer v. Metropolitan Property & Liab. Ins. Co., 401 Mass. 709, 711 (1988) (<HOLDING>). This result was predicated on the then Options: A. holding that insureds failure to list his brother as a member of the household was a material misrepresentation that provided the insurance company with grounds to rescind the policy B. holding that coverage was excluded where insured failed to notify insurance company of all operators and household members as required C. holding that a household exclusion in the policy was void insofar as it denied coverage in the amount required by 3031902 but it was valid as to any coverage exceeding that amount D. holding that household exclusion clauses in policies of automobile liability insurance are contrary to public policy E. recognizing stacking of separate household policies but declining to permit stacking where three household vehicles are insured under a single policy

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing stacking of separate household policies but declining to permit stacking where three household vehicles are insured under a single policy
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: first of all. You knew the defendant before this incident? A Yes, I do. Q How do you know him? A I have stopped him several times. Augustine’s counsel immediately objected to this statement, and the trial court sustained the objection and struck the comment from the record. Moreover, when the jury was not present the trial court noted the potential prejudice of the statement and offered to give a curative instruction. But, in an effort to not draw more attention to the statement, Augustine’s counsel declined the curative instruction. Augustine’s counsel, however, did not move for a mistrial and the trial court did not grant a mistrial sua sponte. Accordingly, we will only review Augustine’s claim for plain error. See United States v. Taylor, 514 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (10th Cir. 2008) (<HOLDING>). Under the plain error rule, an appellate Options: A. holding that in order to raise prejudicial comments of trial court on appeal defendant must object to comments when made and move for a mistrial B. holding that defendants who do not object to jury instructions at trial are subject to a plain error standard of review on appeal C. holding that plain error is the appropriate standard of review when a defendant objects to a prosecutors comments at trial does not move for a mistrial and then on appeal argues that the comments deprived him of a fair trial D. holding ineffective assistance of counsel claim for failure to object to prosecutors comments cognizable in postconviction motion since court unable to review on appeal because trial counsel failed to preserve error E. holding that trial judges admonition of the jury to disregard prosecutors comments on the defendants failure to testify did not cure the error

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plain error is the appropriate standard of review when a defendant objects to a prosecutors comments at trial does not move for a mistrial and then on appeal argues that the comments deprived him of a fair trial
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: plans and relationship to passengers, followed by a question about possession of contraband and a request to search, are not sufficient to render an otherwise consensual encounter coercive.”); United States v. Angell, 11 F.3d 806, 809-10 (8th Cir.1993) (“In the light of the totality of the circumstances, we conclude that [the officer’s] actual language [of ‘Stay there’ or ‘Hold it right there’], although perhaps somewhat more peremptory than precatory in tone, did not convert what would clearly have been a consensual encounter into a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.”); Brown v. City of Oneonta, 195 F.3d 111, 122 (2d Cir.1999) (similar); United States v. Sanchez, 89 F.3d 715, 718 (10th Cir.1996) (similar); United States v. Polk, 97 F.3d 1096, 1098 (8th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). The totality of circumstances amounted to a Options: A. holding that the display of a badge for the second time and informing the individual that the officer is on narcotics detail does not standing alone constitute a fourth amendment seizure B. holding the use of deadly force standing alone does not constitute a seizure and absent an actual physical restraint or physical seizure the alleged unreasonableness of the officers conduct cannot serve as a basis for a 1983 cause of action C. holding seizure of evidence in plain view reasonable under fourth amendment D. holding that impoundment of a vehicle can be a seizure under the fourth amendment E. holding that fourth amendment seizure continues throughout the time the person remains in the custody of the arresting officers

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the display of a badge for the second time and informing the individual that the officer is on narcotics detail does not standing alone constitute a fourth amendment seizure
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: right to cross-examine, and to offer evidence of his own” where the sentencing proceeding effectively adds a new charge requiring additional fact-finding and leading to additional punishment, explicitly declined to overrule Williams. See Specht, 386 U.S. at 608, 87 S.Ct. 1209. Although a stronger argument can be made that the death-eligibility phase of a capital sentencing proceeding is similar to a proceeding qualifying for enhanced due process protections under Specht, there is a constitutionally significant distinction between statutory aggravating factors necessary to establish death-eligibility and nonstatutory aggravating factors that may be considered only after a defendant has been determined to be death eligible. See United States v. Bourgeois, 423 F.3d 501, 507 (5th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>) (relying on Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. Options: A. holding imposition of the death penalty proportionate where the trial court found two aggravating circumstances ccp and contemporaneous murder two statutory mitigating factors and a number of nonstatutory mitigating factors B. holding that failure to charge nonstatutory aggravating factors in indictment is not constitutional error because under the fdpa only statutory factors expose a criminal defendant to the death penalty C. holding that if the imposition of the death penalty depends on the existence of aggravating factors a jury must find those factors beyond a reasonable doubt D. holding that the fifth amendment does not require the government to charge nonstatutory aggravating factors in the indictment because the finding of a nonstatutory aggravated alone will not support imposition of the death penalty E. holding that the grand jury need not find nonstatutory aggravating factors

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that failure to charge nonstatutory aggravating factors in indictment is not constitutional error because under the fdpa only statutory factors expose a criminal defendant to the death penalty
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: Without limiting the general effect of Sections 4.1 and 4.2 , the Parties further agree that they each shall be deemed to have, with respect to all Released Claims released by them, waived any and all provisions, rights and benefits conferred by any law of any jurisdiction, state or territory of the United States (including but not limited to Maryland and Delaware), or any principle of common law, which provides that a general release does not extend to unknown claims of a creditor which if known would have affected the creditor’s settlement with the debtor. The Parties agree and acknowledge that they may hereafter discover facts in addition to or different from those which any Party now knows or believes to be true with respect to Released Claims, but the Parties agree that they each shall be deemed to have fully, finally, and forever settled and released any and all of the Giants Released Claims and any and all of the Jaguar Released Claims, respectively, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, contingent or non-contingent, accrued or unaccrued, whether or not concealed or hidden, which now exist, or heretofore have existed upon any theory of law or equity now existing or coming into existence in the future. The Parties acknowledge that the foregoing waivers were separately bargained for and are material elements of this Agreement of which the releases and waivers are a part.

assistant: Releases
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: 404 U.S. 15 92 S.Ct. 250 30 L.Ed.2d 142 Evelle J. YOUNGER et al., appellants,v.Robert O. GILMORE, Jr., et al. No. 70-9. Supreme Court of the United States November 8, 1971 George R. Nock, San Francisco, Cal., for appellants. John E. Wahl, San Francisco, Cal., for appellees. PER CURIAM. 1 On this appeal we postponed the question of jurisdiction pending the hearing of the case on the merits. Lynch v. Gilmore, 401 U.S. 906, 91 S.Ct. 864, 27 L.Ed.2d 804 (1971). 2 Having heard the case on its merits, we find that this Court does have jurisdiction (Alabama State Teachers Ass'n v. Alabama Public School and College Authority, 393 U.S. 400, 89 S.Ct. 681, 21 L.Ed.2d 631 (1969)) and affirm the judgment of the District Court for the Northern District of California. Johnson v. Avery, 393 U.S. 483, 89 S.Ct. 747, 21 L.Ed.2d 718 (1969).

assistant: 4
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 Authorizations necessary under applicable Laws to be obtained by Subject Companies for the conduct of its business have been duly obtained, were validly issued, are in full force and effect, are not subject to appeal, and are free from conditions or requirements, compliance with which, individually or in the aggregate, could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. The information set forth in each application and all other written materials submitted by or on behalf of a Subject Company to the applicable Government Authority in connection with each such Authorization is accurate and complete in all material respects and does not omit to state any material fact necessary to make such information not misleading. The Subject Companies are in compliance in all material respects with the terms and conditions of each Authorization described in the first sentence hereof.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: For the purpose of this Agreement, notices and all other communications provided for in this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when delivered or mailed by United States registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to the respective addresses set forth on the first page of this Agreement, provided that all notices to the Company shall be directed to the attention of the Office of the Vice President‑General Counsel of the Company, or to such other address as either party may have furnished to the other in writing in accordance herewith, except that notice of change of address shall be effective only upon receipt.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The terms and provisions of the Plan are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in their entirety. Participant hereby agrees to be bound by the terms of the Plan, Participant’s MEP Program and this Agreement and acknowledges that the Award is granted subject to and in accordance with the Plan, Participant’s MEP Program and this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between any provision of this Agreement, Participant’s MEP Program and the Plan, the provisions of the Plan shall control. By execution below, Participant acknowledges receipt of a copy of the 2010 Stock Incentive Plan Summary and Prospectus. A copy of the Plan and Participant’s MEP Program is available, without charge, upon request from the Company’s Stock Plan Administrator.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise specified herein, the terms and provisions hereof shall in no manner impair, limit, restrict or otherwise affect the obligations of Borrowers or any third party to Agent and Lenders as evidenced by the Credit Documents. Borrowers hereby acknowledge, agree, and represent that (a) as of the date of this Amendment, there are no claims or offsets against, or defenses or counterclaims to, the terms or provisions of the Credit Documents or the other obligations created or evidenced by the Credit Documents; (b) as of the date of this Amendment, no Borrower has any claims, offsets, defenses or counterclaims arising from any of Agent’s or any existing or prior Lender’s acts or omissions with respect to the Credit Documents or Agent’s or any existing or prior Lender’s performance under the Credit Documents; and (c) Borrowers promise to pay to the order of Agent and Lenders the indebtedness evidenced by the Notes according to the terms thereof. In consideration of the modification of certain provisions of the Credit Documents, all as herein provided, and the other benefits received by Borrowers hereunder, Borrowers hereby RELEASE, RELINQUISH and forever DISCHARGE Agent and Lenders, and their predecessors, successors, assigns, shareholders, principals, parents, subsidiaries, agents, officers, directors, employees, attorneys and representatives (collectively, the “ Released Parties ”), of and from any and all present claims, demands, actions and causes of action of any and every kind or character, whether known or unknown, which a Borrower has or may have against Released Parties arising out of or with respect to any and all transactions relating to the Loan Agreement, the Notes, and the other Credit Documents occurring prior to the date hereof.

assistant: Representations
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: Second Am. Compl. ¶¶ 13-18. Temporarily re- moving a prisoner from his cell to maintain order and security is an acceptable non-punitive purpose. Bell, 441 U.S. at 546-47, 99 S.Ct. 1861 (“Maintaining institutional security and preserving internal order and discipline are essential goals that may require limitation or retraction of the retained constitutional rights of both convicted prisoners and pretrial detainees.”). Nor has Senalan set forth any legal conclusions — let alone facts — that would suggest that the temporary confinement was excessive in light of this purpose. And Senalan makes no allegations that the second cell posed any risk to him. In fact, Senalan has not alleged that being confined in the booking cell even posed any risk to his safety. Cf Zarnes, 64 F.3d at 290 (<HOLDING>). Senalan only alleges that he was removed from Options: A. holding that the inmate had no cognizable due process claim because he had no liberty interest in being free from disciplinary segregation B. holding that a detention officers alleged negligent conduct of failing to medically screen an inmate who later committed suicide in a holding cell in violation of the police departments policies was not the proximate cause of the inmates death when there was no evidence that the inmate would have been unable to kill himself if he had been medically screened and any claim that the inmate would have presented as suicidal in such screening was purely speculative C. holding that the due process clause permits the state to treat a prison inmate who has a serious mental illness with antipsychotic drugs against his will if the inmate is dangerous to himself or others and the treatment is in the inmates medical interest D. holding that the due process clause permits the state to involuntarily treat a prison inmate who is seriously mentally ill if the inmate is dangerous to himself or others and the treatment is in the inmates medical interest E. holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate
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: Executive shall be entitled to paid vacation time of not less than 25 business days for each calendar year of the Employment Period (prorated for 2016 and any other partial year, based on a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the number of days employed in such partial year and the denominator of which shall be 365 (or 366 in a leap year)). Executive shall also be entitled to all paid holidays and to reasonable personal and sick leave in accordance with the policies of the Corporation applicable to its executive management. Unused vacation and personal and/or sick leave may not be carried over by Executive from one calendar year to the next. Notwithstanding the foregoing, such vacation, holidays and personal and/or sick leave shall not accrue as a monetary liability of the Corporation.

assistant: Vacations
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: evidence of its good faith Title VII compliance efforts, and vacated the punitive damage award. The court endorsed UPS’s argument that Fischer “[could not] rely solely upon [UPS]’s failings with regard to him to rebut cognizable evidence” of good faith. Id. Based on its reading of Sackett v. ITC Deltacom, Inc., 374 F.Supp.2d 602 (E.D.Tenn.2005), it concluded that Kolstad required consideration of “the employer’s historical approach to such claims.” Id. We do not understand Sackett or Kol-stad as requiring such a holding, nor do later Sixth Circuit cases. Indeed, none of this court’s cases vacate a jury award of punitive damages or specify the precise showing required to establish good faith as a matter of law. See West v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 374 Fed.Appx. 624, 639-641 (6th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); Parker, 491 F.3d at 604-05 (same); Tisdale, Options: A. holding that the defendant did not establish good faith as a matter of law B. holding that while the creditor has the initial burden to produce some evidence of lack of good faith the ultimate burden is on the debtor to prove his good faith C. holding that bad faith includes lack of good faith in investigating the facts of a complaint D. holding that judgment as a matter of law was proper when the plaintiff did not present any evidence that the defendant was motivated by the eeoc complaint knowledge is necessary to establish causation but it is not sufficient E. holding that it may be decided as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the defendant did not establish good faith as a matter of 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: BORROWER AND EACH OTHER LOAN PARTY IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY SUBMITS, FOR ITSELF AND ITS PROPERTY, TO THE NONEXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS SITTING IN DALLAS COUNTY AND OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AND ANY APPELLATE COURT FROM ANY THEREOF, IN ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT, OR FOR RECOGNITION OR ENFORCEMENT OF ANY JUDGMENT, AND EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY AGREES THAT ALL CLAIMS IN RESPECT OF ANY SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING MAY BE HEARD AND DETERMINED IN SUCH TEXAS STATE COURT OR, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN SUCH FEDERAL COURT. EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO AGREES THAT A FINAL JUDGMENT IN ANY SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING SHALL BE CONCLUSIVE AND MAY BE ENFORCED IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS BY SUIT ON THE JUDGMENT OR IN ANY OTHER MANNER PROVIDED BY LAW. NOTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT OR IN ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT SHALL AFFECT ANY RIGHT THAT ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT, ANY LENDER OR THE L/C ISSUER MAY OTHERWISE HAVE TO BRING ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT AGAINST BORROWER OR ANY OTHER LOAN PARTY OR ITS PROPERTIES IN THE COURTS OF ANY JURISDICTION.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: instead , you hereby grant to instagram a non-exclusive , fully paid and royalty-free , transferable , sub-licensable , worldwide license to use the content that you post on or through the service , subject to the service 's privacy policy , available here http://instagram.com/legal/privacy/ , including but not limited to sections 3 ( `` sharing of your information '' ) , 4 ( `` how we store your information '' ) , and 5 ( `` your choices about your information '' ) .

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: No provision of this Agreement may be amended unless such amendment is approved in writing by Parent and by the Beneficiaries or Blocker Corporation Owner who would be entitled to receive at least two-thirds of the Early Termination Payments payable to all Beneficiaries or Blocker Corporation Owners hereunder if the Company had exercised its right of early termination under Section 4.2 on the date of the most recent Exchange prior to such Amendment (excluding, for purposes of this sentence, all payments made to any Beneficiary or Blocker Corporation Owner pursuant to this Agreement since the date of such most recent Exchange); provided that no such amendment shall be effective if such amendment will have a materially disproportionate effect on the payments certain Beneficiaries or Blocker Corporation Owners may receive under this Agreement unless at least two-thirds of such Beneficiaries or Blocker Corporation Owners materially disproportionately effected (with such two-thirds threshold being measured by the entitlement to Early Termination Payments as set forth in the preceding portion of this sentence) consent in writing to such amendment. No provision of this Agreement may be waived unless such waiver is in writing and signed by the Party against whom the waiver is to be effective.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a more recent diagnosis by a treating physician in favor of an older diagnosis that the treating physician since retracted as inaccurate. Thus, this lack of reasoned explanation in Dr. You’s opinion weighs heavily in favor of finding that Defendant Hartford acted unreasonably in crediting Dr. You’s opinion over that of Dr. Raster. See Black & Decker, 538 U.S. at 834, 123 S.Ct. 1965 (“Plan administrators, of course, may not arbitrarily refuse to credit a claimant’s reliable evidence, including the opinions of a treating physician”); Calvert, 409 F.3d at 293 (“a plan administrator may not arbitrarily disregard the medical evidence proffered by the claimant, including the opinions of her treating physicians”); Glenn v. MetLife (Metro. Life Ins. Co.), 461 F.3d 660, 671 (6th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, when faced with this inconsistency in Options: A. holding that evidence contrary to an administrators decision does not make the decision arbitrary and capricious so long as a reasonable basis appears for the decision B. holding that a plan administrators decision may not be deemed arbitrary and capricious so long as it is possible to offer a reasoned explanation based on the evidence for that decision C. holding that lack of consideration of relevant evidence from treating physician weights heavily in favor of finding administrators decision arbitrary and capricious D. holding that under the arbitrary and capricious standard this court must consider whether the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment E. holding that the plan administrators failure to address the social security administrations finding of the claimants disability rendered the decision arbitrary and capricious

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that lack of consideration of relevant evidence from treating physician weights heavily in favor of finding administrators decision arbitrary and capricious
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: 49, 51 (9th Cir.1994); Hamilton v. Vasquez, 882 F.2d 1469, 1471 (9th Cir.1989), or where disruption in the courtroom is likely in the absence of shackles, see Wilson, 770 F.2d at 1485; see also Stewart v. Corbin, 850 F.2d 492, 497 (9th Cir.1988) (shackling was supported by evidence of prior escapes from immediate physical custody of law enforcement officers, once while handcuffed, and by defendant’s disruptive behavior during trial), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1016, 109 S.Ct. 1737, 104 L.Ed.2d 175 (1989). It is improper, however, where a compelling need is not established, less restrictive alternatives are not pursued, or where the harms were not assessed. See Rhoden v. Rowland, 10 F.3d 1457, 1459 (9th Cir.1993) (“Rhoden I ”); see, e.g., Packer v. Hill, 291 F.3d 569, 583 (9th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>), rev’d on other grounds, 537 U.S. 3, 123 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that a complaint is waived by the failure to object during the witness unsworn testimony B. holding that death of potential alibi witness did not cause actual prejudice because defendant failed to relate the substance of the testimony of the missing witness in sufficient detail and to show witness testimony not available from other sources C. holding that state trial judge erred by placing defendant in leg brace where the only evidence of security risk was unsworn testimony that potential witness planned to do stuff while in town to testify although error did not prejudice defendant D. holding that in order to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to call a witness to testify the claimant must allege 1 the identity of the potential witness 2 that the witness was available to testify at trial 3 the substance of the witnesss testimony and 4 an explanation of how the omission of the testimony prejudiced the case E. holding that judge presiding at trial may not testify in that trial as witness

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that state trial judge erred by placing defendant in leg brace where the only evidence of security risk was unsworn testimony that potential witness planned to do stuff while in town to testify although error did not prejudice defendant
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 constitutes the final, complete, and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement between the Parties and supersedes all other prior or contemporaneous oral or written understandings and agreements of the Parties. No Party has been induced to enter into this Agreement by, nor is any Party relying on, any representation or warranty except those expressly set forth in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Section 4 of this Amendment and the obligations of each Lender under the Amended Credit Agreement will become effective on the first date (the “ Amendment No. 1 Effective Date ”) on which the conditions set forth in Section 5.2 of the Amended Credit Agreement have been satisfied.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of New York, without reference to its conflict of law provisions, except that Section 16 and any arbitration proceeding pursuant to Section 16 shall be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) to the extent it is applicable and by New York law to the extent that the FAA is not applicable. Furthermore, as to Section 7, Executive and the Company each agrees and consents to submit to personal jurisdiction in the state of New York in any state or federal court of competent subject matter jurisdiction situated in New York County, New York. Executive and the Company further agree that the sole and exclusive venue for any suit arising out of, or seeking to enforce, the terms of Section 7 of this Agreement shall be in a state or federal court of competent subject matter jurisdiction situated in New York County, New York. In addition, Executive and the Company waive any right to challenge in another court any judgment entered by such New York County court or to assert that any action instituted by the Company in any such court is in the improper venue or should be transferred to a more convenient forum. Further, Executive and the Company waive any right he may otherwise have to a trial by jury in any action to enforce the terms of this Agreement. The parties hereto irrevocably consent to the service of any and all process in any suit, action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement by the mailing of copies of such process to such party at such party’s address specified in Section 25, or such other updated address as has been provided to the other party from time to time in accordance with Section 25. Each party shall bear its own costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses) incurred in connection with any dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: decision to abolish student legal services office, but relating in dicta that “[o]nce the state has created a forum, it may not ... close the forum solely because it disagrees with the messages being communicated in it”); Joyner v. Whiting, 477 F.2d 456 (4th Cir.1973) (prohibiting university from shutting down student newspaper because administration disagreed with segregationist viewpoints being espoused therein); see also Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 533, 113 S.Ct. 2217, 124 L.Ed.2d 472 (1993) (explaining that “if the object of a law is to infringe upon or restrict practices because of their religious motivation, the law is not neutral”); Crawford v. Bd. of Educ. of City of L.A., 458 U.S. 527, 544, 102 S.Ct. 3211, 73 L.Ed.2d 948 (1982) (<HOLDING>). The argument that a legislative motive 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. recognizing that facially neutral statute may contravene the fourteenth amendment if enacted with discriminatory purpose C. holding that the fourteenth amendment only applies to state action D. holding that fourteenth amendment only applies to state action E. holding the sixth amendment applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that facially neutral statute may contravene the fourteenth amendment if enacted with discriminatory purpose
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the Court noted there was “no suggestion, for example, that the company refused to hire aliens of Mexican or Spanish-speaking background while hiring those of other national origins”); Hernandez v. Texas, 347 U.S. 475, 480 n. 12, 74 S.Ct. 667, 98 L.Ed. 866 (1954) (“just as persons of a different race are distinguished by color, these Spanish names provide ready identificati 1973) (finding that a tavern’s rule against speaking foreign languages amounted to racial discrimination against Mexican-Americans); Castro v. Beecher, 334 F.Supp. 930, 934 n. 2 (D.Mass.1971) (definition of class of “Spanish sumamed persons” eneom- passed those “whose primary language is Spanish”), aff'd, in part, rev’d in part, 459 F.2d 725 (1st Cir.1972); Ruiz v. Hull, 1998 WL 203081, *15-18 (Ariz. April 28, 1998) (<HOLDING>). In Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563, 94 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that state official english law violated the first amendment and the fourteenth amendments guarantee of equal protection under a strict scrutiny analysis because it impinges upon both the fundamental right to participate equally in the political process and the right to petition the government for redress B. holding that the sixth amendments guarantee of the assistance of counsel is made obligatory upon the states by the fourteenth amendment C. holding that the equal protection and due process clauses of the fifth and fourteenth amendments do not provide a sufficient basis for jurisdiction because they do not mandate payment of money by the government D. holding that neither the equal protection and due process clauses of the fourteenth amendment nor article i 2 of the constitution guarantee against errors in the administration of an election E. holding that neither the due process clause nor the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment require the appointment of counsel on a petition for discretionary review to a state supreme court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that state official english law violated the first amendment and the fourteenth amendments guarantee of equal protection under a strict scrutiny analysis because it impinges upon both the fundamental right to participate equally in the political process and the right to petition the government for redress
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 current or previous member of the Board, or the Committee, nor any officer or employee of the Company acting on behalf of the Board, or the Committee, shall be personally liable for any action, determination, or interpretation taken or made in good faith with respect to the Plan. All such members of the Board or the Committee and each and every officer or employee of the Company acting on their behalf shall, to the extent permitted by law, be fully indemnified and protected by the Company in respect of any such action, determination or interpretation of the Plan. The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of any other rights of indemnification to which such individuals may be entitled under the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation, or Bylaws, as a matter of law or otherwise.

assistant: Indemnifications