flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If the Indemnified Parties have a reasonable basis to believe that any Hazardous Substances exists on the Property in violation of any Environmental Laws that, in the sole and reasonable judgment of the Indemnified Parties, endangers or may potentially endanger any tenant or other occupant of the Property or their guests or the general public or may materially and adversely affect the value of the Property, at Indemnified Parties’ option, upon reasonable advance notice to Indemnitor, Indemnitor shall, at Indemnitor’s expense, promptly cause an engineer or consultant reasonably satisfactory to the Indemnified Parties to conduct any environmental assessment or audit (the scope of which shall be determined in the reasonable discretion of the Indemnified Parties to protect its security interest in the Property) and take any samples of soil, groundwater or other water, air or building materials, or any other testing requested by Indemnitee and promptly deliver the results of any such assessment, audit, sampling or other testing; provided, however, in the event Indemnitor fails to conduct an environmental assessment or audit as required hereunder or fails to promptly deliver the results of such environmental assessment or audit to the Indemnified Parties, the Indemnified Parties and any other Person designated by the Indemnified Parties, including, but not limited to, any receiver, and any environmental consultant, shall have the right, but not the obligation, to enter upon the Property during the normal business hours of Indemnitor upon reasonable advance notice to Indemnitor, to assess any and all aspects of the environmental condition of the Property and its use, including, but not limited to, conducting any environmental assessment or audit (the scope of which shall be determined in the reasonable discretion of the Indemnified Parties to protect its security interest in the Property) and taking samples of soil, groundwater or other water, air or building materials, and reasonably conducting other invasive testing if a prudent institutional lender would reasonably require such invasive testing, provided that Indemnified Parties and their agents and representatives restore the Property to its condition prior to any such entry and indemnify Indemnitor for any damage caused thereby. Indemnitor shall cooperate with and provide the Indemnified Parties and any such Person designated by the Indemnified Parties with access to the Property. The parties to this Agreement acknowledge and agree that in no event shall any action by any Indemnitee hereunder be deemed or construed as participation on the part of such Indemnitee in the management of the Property.

assistant: Cooperation
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: estopped— the applicable res judicata doctrine — from raising the jurisdictional issue here. We recently addressed whether a party could relitigate in an attorney’s fee proceeding the determination of subject matter jurisdiction in the underlying action. See Zambrano v. INS, 282 F.3d 1145, 1151 (9th Cir.2002), as amended, 00-16191, 302 F.3d 909, 2002 WL 2012583 (Sept. 4, 2002). We explained that the district court had “fully decided the issue of jurisdiction, and that judgment has now become final.” Id. Accordingly, we held, consistent with “tra ditional notions of issue and claim preclusion,” that the plaintiffs could not relitigate jurisdiction in the fee proceedings. Id; see also Carpenters S. Cal. Admin. Corp. v. Knight (In re Knight), 207 F.3d 1115, 1116, 1117 (9th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). Similarly here, Plaintiffs cannot reliti-gate Options: A. holding the court lacked jurisdiction where the defendant failed to file a notice of appeal on the attorneys fee issue because a supplemental notice of appeal is required for us to have jurisdiction over an attorneys fees issue that becomes final subsequent to the initial notice of appeal B. holding that in the attorneys fee proceeding we must accept as true the district courts determination that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case because the plaintiff did not appeal the dismissal C. holding an intervenor in the underlying district court case lacked article iii standing to pursue an appeal where the only remaining controversy in the suit was a dispute over the award of attorneys fees because the fee award was wholly unrelated to the subject matter of the litigation D. holding after we found standing following a district courts dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction that the merits will be for the district court to decide on remand E. holding that the information must establish that the court has jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the parties

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that in the attorneys fee proceeding we must accept as true the district courts determination that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case because the plaintiff did not appeal the dismissal
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: hardship would result were the petitioner not admitted to the United States. It is an issue of first impression in this circuit whether we have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that an alien does not satisfy the extreme-hardship standard of § 1182(i)(l). The REAL ID Act of 2005 instructs us to treat this petition as a petition for review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Pub.L. No. 109-13, § 106(d), 119 Stat. 231, 311. Relevant here is subsection (a)(2)(B)(i) of § 1252, which provides that courts lack jurisdiction to review “any judgment regarding the granting of relief under ... [8 U.S.C. § 1182(i) ].” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)®. We have held that the term “judgment” in this subsection refers to discretionary decisions. See De La Vega v. Gonzales, 436 F.3d 141, 144 (2d Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the decisive issue in this case is Options: A. holding that section 1252a2bii barred jurisdiction of decisions specified by statute as discretionary but did not bar decisions specified by regulation as discretionary B. holding that the trial court erred by granting the defendants motion to dismiss C. holding that 1252a2bs ban on review of judgments regarding the granting of relief precludes review of only discretionary decisions D. holding that a state is not a person within the meaning of 1983 E. holding explicitly what the court deemed was strongly implied by sepulveda v gonzales 407 f3d 59 2d cir2005namely that discretionary decisions regarding the granting of relief under a provision referenced by 1252a2b are judgments within the meaning of that subsection

assistant: The best answer is E. holding explicitly what the court deemed was strongly implied by sepulveda v gonzales 407 f3d 59 2d cir2005namely that discretionary decisions regarding the granting of relief under a provision referenced by 1252a2b are judgments within the meaning of that subsection
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 and the security interest in the Collateral evidenced by this Agreement shall terminate automatically and be of no further force or effect upon the distribution of all Escrowed Property in accordance with Section 3 hereof; provided , however , that the obligations of the Issuers under Section 2(c) and Section 5 (and any existing claims thereunder) shall survive termination of this Agreement and the resignation or removal of the Escrow Agent and/or the Trustee, as applicable. At such time, upon the written request of the Issuer, the Escrow Agent shall deliver to the Issuers all of the Escrowed Property hereunder that has not been disbursed or applied by the Escrow Agent in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and the Indenture. Such delivery shall be without warranty by or recourse to the Escrow Agent in its capacity as such, except as to the absence of any liens on the Escrowed Property created by the Escrow Agent, and shall be at the sole expense of the Issuers.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any court of competent jurisdiction shall at any time deem that the term of any Restrictive Covenant is too lengthy, or the scope or subject matter of any Restrictive Covenant exceeds the limitations imposed by applicable law, the parties agree that provisions of Sections 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.6 shall be amended to the minimum extent necessary such that the provision is enforceable or permissible by such applicable law and be enforced as amended.

assistant: Modifications
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 computations of interest based on clause (a) of the definition of Base Rate shall be made by the Agent on the basis of a year of 365 or 366 days, as the case may be. All computations of interest based on the Eurodollar Rate, the Federal Funds Rate or clause (c) of the definition of Base Rate and of Facility Fees shall be made by the Agent, and all computations of interest pursuant to Section 2.9 shall be made by a Lender, on the basis of a year of 360 days, in each case for the actual number of days (including the first day but excluding the last day) occurring in the period for which such interest or fees are payable. Each determination by the Agent (or, in the case of Section 2.9, by a Lender) of an interest rate hereunder shall be conclusive and binding for all purposes, absent manifest error.

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: The Borrower agrees to reimburse the Administrative Agent upon demand for all reasonable and documented third party out-of-pocket expenses paid or incurred by the Administrative Agent, including, without limitation, reasonable fees, charges and disbursements of outside counsel to the Administrative Agent, in connection with preparation, negotiation and execution of this Waiver and Amendment No. 7 and any other document required to be furnished herewith, including, without limitation, all written invoices in respect of the foregoing delivered to the Borrower prior to the Effective Date. The Borrower acknowledges and agrees that any extension of the Facility Termination Date subsequent to the date hereof shall require its payment of a $10,000 work fee to each Lender. No Lender has agreed or committed to any such future extension, and any such extension shall be approved or declined by each Lender in its sole discretion. Such work fee shall be in addition to any other fees required by the Lenders at the time of any such extension.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 356 U.S. 41 78 S.Ct. 671 2 L.Ed.2d 571 Fred FERGUSON, petitioner,v.ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY. No. 799. Supreme Court of the United States March 17, 1958 Jo B. Gardner, for petitioner. James L. Homire and Frank C. Mann, for respondent. On petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Missouri. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. We hold that the proofs were sufficient to submit to the jury the question whether employer negligence played a part in producing the petitioner's injury. Wilkerson v. McCarthy, 336 U.S. 53, 69 S.Ct. 413, 93 L.Ed. 497; Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 77 S.Ct. 443, 1 L.Ed.2d 493; Webb v. Illinois Central R. Co., 352 U.S. 512, 77 S.Ct. 451, 1 L.Ed.2d 503; Shaw v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 353 U.S. 920, 77 S.Ct. 680, 1 L.Ed.2d 718; Futrelle v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 353 U.S. 920, 77 S.Ct. 682, 1 L.Ed.2d 718; Deen v. Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co., 353 U.S. 925, 77 S.Ct. 715, 1 L.Ed.2d 721; Thomson v. Texas & Pacific R. Co., 353 U.S. 926, 77 S.Ct. 698, 1 L.Ed.2d 722; Arnold v. Panhandle & S. F. R. Co., 353 U.S. 360, 77 S.Ct. 840, 1 L.Ed.2d 889; Ringhiser v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 354 U.S. 901, 77 S.Ct. 1093, 1 L.Ed.2d 1268; McBride v. Toledo Terminal R. Co., 354 U.S. 517, 77 S.Ct. 1398, 1 L.Ed.2d 1534; Gibson v. Thompson, 355 U.S. 18, 78 S.Ct. 2, 2 L.Ed.2d 1; Honeycutt v. Wabash R. Co., 355 U.S. 424, 78 S.Ct. 393. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Missouri is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion. 2 Mr. Justice HARLAN concurs in the result for the reasons given in his Memorandum in Gibson v. Thompson, 355 U.S. 18, 78 S.Ct. 2. For the reasons set forth in his opinion in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 524, 77 S.Ct. 443. 3 Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER is of the view that the writ of certiorari is improvidently granted. 4 Mr. Justice WHITTAKER dissents.

assistant: 8
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: applies, if a "collapse" occurred from specified causes (including defective methods in construction), the Policy covers Masonic Temple's damage. As such, in order to deny coverage in good faith, Indiana Farmers must have rested its decision on a rational contention that earth movement as contemplated by the policy occurred AND that no collapse occurred. Indiana Farmers asserts, and Masonic Temple agrees, that no Indiana cases have specifically defined either the phrase "earth movement" or the term "collapse" contained within a commercial insurance policy. With respect to interpretations of the term "collapse," both Masonic Temple and Indiana Farmers acknowledge a split of authority in other jurisdictions. See e.g., American Concept Ins. Co. v. Jones, 985 F.Supp. 1220 (D.Utah 1996) (<HOLDING>) and Williams v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., Options: A. holding error was structural because of the difficulty of assessing the effect of the error B. holding that a substantial structural failure short of collapse to rubble is a collapse C. recognizing categorical approach to structural errors that presumptively satisfy the third prong of olano and listing classes of cases that present structural errors D. holding that complete denial of summation amounts to structural error and that existing case law did not clearly establish the restriction of summation as structural error E. holding that preserved apprendiblakely error like the failure to submit an element to the jury in neder is not structural error and is instead subject to harmlesserror review

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a substantial structural failure short of collapse to rubble is a collapse
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 Awardee shall, not later than the date as of which the exercise of this Stock Option becomes a taxable event for Federal income tax purposes, pay to the Company or make arrangements satisfactory to the Administrator for payment of any Federal, state, and local taxes required by law to be withheld on account of such taxable event. The Company is authorized to cause the minimum required tax withholding obligation to be satisfied, in whole or in part, by withholding from shares of Stock to be issued to the Awardee a number of shares of Stock with an aggregate Fair Market Value that would satisfy the minimum required tax withholding amount due.

assistant: Tax Withholdings
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: claim concerning the mismanagement of the furniture and jewelry departments, we side with defendants on this issue too. Our reasoning is simple. Defendants’ original partial summary-judgment motion asked the judge to reject “the entirety” of the implied-covenant claim as a matter of law. But in its opposition, Old K’s did not suggest that these mismanagement faux pas provided a separate basis for its implied-covenant claim—the pertinent part of its opposition focused only on its idea that the liquidation decision violated the implied covenant. And this omission—as the district judge himself ruled—constitutes waiver of any implied-covenant claim premised on the mismanagement of the furniture and jewelry departments. See Iverson v. City of Boston, 452 F.3d 94, 103 (1st Cir. 2006) (<HOLDING>). Ever persistent, Old K’s argues that it Options: A. holding that plaintiffs are ordinarily entitled to instructions consonant with their theory of the case where evidentiary support for the theory exists B. holding that the pretrial order did not adequately disclose a theory because it did not give notice of that theory C. holding that plaintiffs failure to mentionlet alone adequately to developthe theory in their opposition to the defendants dispositive motion defeats their belated attempt to advance the theory on appeal D. holding summary judgment appropriate when the facts in evidence supported another plausible theory not the plaintiffs theory of the case E. holding that the failure to draw the district courts attention to an applicable legal theory waives pursuit of that theory in this court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plaintiffs failure to mentionlet alone adequately to developthe theory in their opposition to the defendants dispositive motion defeats their belated attempt to advance the theory on appeal
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: (9th Cir.2005) (attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988); Kaass Law v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 799 F.3d 1290, 1293 (9th Cir.2015) (sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927). We affirm in part, but reverse the sanctions awarded against The Bach Law Firm under 28 U.S.C. § 1927. See Kaass Law, 799 F.3d at 1293. Gamage argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the defendants because she raised genuine issues of material fact about whether she plagiarized a draft of her dissertation. We disagree. Gamage admitted that she failed to conform to the University of Nevada-Las Vegas’s plagiarism policy in parts of her dissertation and that she made “mistakes.” She received more process than was due. See, e.g., Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 581, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975) (<HOLDING>). Gamage also asserts that the district court Options: A. holding that procedural due process requires that a student suspended for disciplinary reasons be given oral or written notice of the charges against her and if she denies them an explanation of the evidence the authorities have and an opportunity to present her side of the story B. holding an inmate has a due process right to 1 advance written notice of the disciplinary charges 2an opportunity to call witness and present evidence and 3 a written statement of the evidence relied upon and the reasons for the disciplinary action C. holding that lack of notice of charges in disciplinary proceedings violates the due process clause D. holding that procedural due process requires adequate notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard E. holding that an applicant who convincingly demonstrated that she could not rely on the authorities to protect her from her fathers abuse and that by turning to governmental authorities for help her circumstances may well have worsened was not required to report private persecution to government authorities to qualify for asylum

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that procedural due process requires that a student suspended for disciplinary reasons be given oral or written notice of the charges against her and if she denies them an explanation of the evidence the authorities have and an opportunity to present her side of the story
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Seller and Purchaser each agree to provide the other party with written notice of any default by the other party under this Agreement, and a period of five Business Days following the other party’s receipt of such notice within which to cure such default; provided, however, that no such notice and opportunity to cure shall be applicable with respect to a party’s failure to timely close, nor shall any such notice and cure period extend beyond the Closing Date.

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 Corporation shall be entitled to withhold on and report the making of such payments as may be required by law as determined in the reasonable discretion of the Corporation. Except for any tax amounts withheld by the Corporation from any compensation that Employee may receive in connection with Employee’s employment with the Corporation and any employer taxes required to be paid by the Corporation under applicable laws or regulations, Employee is solely responsible for payment of any and all taxes owed in connection with any compensation, benefits, reimbursement amounts or other payments Employee receives from the Corporation under this Agreement or otherwise in connection with Employee’s employment with the Corporation. The Corporation does not guarantee any particular tax consequence or result with respect to any payment made by the Corporation.

assistant: Taxes
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 Party irrevocably acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement is not and shall not be deemed to be a solicitation for consents to the Plan. The acceptance of the Plan by each of the Restructuring Support Parties will not be solicited until such Parties have received the Disclosure Statement and related ballots in accordance with applicable law, and will be subject to sections 1125, 1126, and 1127 of the Bankruptcy Code. In addition, this Agreement does not constitute an offer to issue or sell securities to any Person, or the solicitation of an offer to acquire or buy securities, in any jurisdiction where such offer or solicitation would be unlawful.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any provision of any Loan Document being held illegal, invalid or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall not affect any part of such provision not held illegal, invalid or unenforceable, any other provision of any Loan Document or any part of such provision in any other jurisdiction. Without limiting the foregoing provisions of this Section, if and to the extent that the enforceability of any provision of this Agreement relating to Defaulting Lenders shall be limited by Debtor Relief Laws, as determined in good faith by the Administrative Agent then such provision shall be deemed to be in effect only to the extent not so limited.

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: the frisk. See Johnson, 555 U.S. at 331-32. Here, the district court failed to apply this dual requirement when it found Dean’s pat-down was justified by officer safety concerns but did not determine whether Dean’s initial detention was justified by reasonable suspicion that Dean was engaged in criminal activity. It appears the district court may have mistakenly applied the line of cases giving law enforcement officers authority to detain occupants of a home during the execution of a search warrant authorizing a search of the home, without any particularized suspicion of criminal activity by the individuals detained. See, e.g., Muehler v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93, 98, 161 L. Ed. 2d 299, 125 S. Ct. 1465 (2005); Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692, 705, 69 L. Ed. 2d 340, 101 S. Ct. 2587 (1981) (<HOLDING>); see also Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85, Options: A. holding that officers may detain the occupants of a house while executing a search warrant B. holding that it is permissible under the fourth amendment to detain occupants of a residence while executing a search warrant of the residence C. holding that a warrant to search for contraband founded on probable cause implicitly carries with it the limited authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted D. holding that officers may detain the occupants of a vehicle while executing a search warrant E. holding that officers executing a search warrant for contraband have the authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a warrant to search for contraband founded on probable cause implicitly carries with it the limited authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As compensation for his services hereunder, during the Term, the Company shall pay the Executive in accordance with its normal payroll practices, an annualized base salary of $412,500 (“ Base Salary ”).

assistant: Base Salary
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 action at law or in equity, including an action for declaratory relief or arbitration, is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation from the other party. Such fees and costs of litigation may be set by the court in the trial of such action or by the arbitrator, as the case may be, or may be enforced in a separate action brought for that purpose. Such fees and costs of litigation shall be in addition to any other relief that may be awarded.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: For U.S. federal income tax purposes, each Borrower is and has at all times been treated as a disregarded entity within the meaning of Treasury Regulation Section 301.7701-2(c). To each Borrower’s knowledge and belief, such Borrower has filed (or has obtained effective extensions for filing) all federal, state, county and municipal tax returns required to have been filed by such Borrower and has paid all Taxes which have become due whether or not shown on such returns or pursuant to any Tax assessments received by such Borrower, other than Taxes which are not yet delinquent. To each Borrower’s knowledge, such tax returns (if any) reflect (in all material respects) the income and taxes of such Borrower for the periods covered thereby, subject only to reasonable adjustments required by the IRS or other applicable tax authority upon audit.

assistant: Taxes
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: Participant may engage in activities otherwise restricted by this Section 6 with the written consent of LII’s Chief Executive Officer if Participant is a Vice President or Executive Vice President, or with the written consent of the independent members of the Board of Directors if Participant is the Chief Executive Officer.

assistant: Consents
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 Lafayette, 377 F.3d 757 (2004) (en banc). That case involved an individual with an extensive history of sex offenses against children, who admitted he was going to the city parks “cruising” and “looking” for children. Id. at 759-60. The city issued a unilateral order banning the plaintiff from the city parks without a hearing. Id. at 760. Unlike this case, the regulation did not implicate the First Amendment so we upheld it under the deferential rational basis review. Id. at 764, 773. Other laws restricting sex offenders’ proximity to schools or parks have been similarly upheld under rational basis review because courts have found they do not implicate the First Amendment or involve a fundamental right. See, e.g., Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84, 123 S.Ct. 1140, 155 L.Ed.2d 164 (2003) (<HOLDING>); Conn. Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. Doe, 538 U.S. Options: A. holding that the ex post facto clause has no application to deportation B. holding that parole guidelines are subject to the ex post facto clause C. holding that district court did not violate ex post facto clause in applying remedial holding of booker at sentencing D. holding that the alaska sex offender registration act did not violate the ex post facto clause E. holding that revocation of medical license does not violate the ex post facto clause

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the alaska sex offender registration act did not violate the ex post facto clause
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by a state or a state agency into a constitutional case.” Id. at 10. This principle is well-established in other circuits as well. These cases appear to rest on either of two distinct propositions. In the first category, some cases have held that not all contract rights constitute property protected by the Constitution. See, e.g., Linan-Faye Constr. Co. v. Hous. Auth, of Camden, 49 F.3d 915, 931— 32 (3d Cir. 1995); Unger, 928 F.2d at 1399; Yatvin, 840 F.2d at 417. Other cases recognize that contract rights can be property for constitutional purposes, and are protected against government actions taken in the government’s sovereign capacity, for example, by a statute eliminating certain contractual rights. See, e.g., Cienega Gardens v. United States, 331 F.3d 1319, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (<HOLDING>). A second category of cases holds that even if Options: A. holding that the physical occupation caused by the mandatory installation of cable television equipment was a compensable taking B. holding cause of action accrues when some compensable damage occurs C. holding that the enactment of elihpa and lihprha which eliminated some contractual rights in the circumstances of that case effected a compensable taking D. holding covenant in an employment agreement executed some 12 years after the initial taking of employment was not incident to the taking of employment E. holding that a cause of action for an unconstitutional taking accrues at the time the taking occurs

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the enactment of elihpa and lihprha which eliminated some contractual rights in the circumstances of that case effected a compensable taking
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: after the robbery in the same vehicle asking questions about her vehicle. Conclusion. Because the defendant has not met his burden to establish a substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice from the omission of the Rodriguez instruction, we affirm the convictions. So ordered. 1 The judge excluded Milagros Fernandez’s statement that she had come to the police in response to news reports that her automobile, the Galant, had been used as the getaway vehicle in the robbery. 2 We note that this case was tried before our most recent eyewitness identification cases, which altered our jurisprudence so as to give effect to certain generally accepted scientific advances in the understanding of the reliability of eyewitness identification. See Commonwealth v. Bastaldo, 472 Mass. 16, 23-30 (2015) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Gomes, 470 Mass. 352, 361-378 Options: A. holding that there is no prejudice where the racial reference was for purposes of identification B. recognizing a trend in recent years to allow such testimony and collecting cases in which such testimony was allowed in cases involving crossracial identification identification after a long delay identification after observation under stress and psychological phenomena as the feedback factor and unconscious transference C. holding that instructions on crossracial identification required prospectively unless parties agree there was no crossracial identification D. holding that where the opportunity for positive identification is good and not weakened by prior failure to identify and the witness is positive in his identification even after crossexamination identification need not be received with caution E. holding court abused its discretion when it excluded psychologists testimony regarding host of identification issues among which was crossracial identification

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that instructions on crossracial identification required prospectively unless parties agree there was no crossracial identification
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: appellee’s consent to seize his buccal cells was involuntary as a matter of law. This is incorrect because Miranda — and by extension Edwards — “serves the Fifth Amendment,” not the Fourth Amendment. Elstad, 470 U.S. at 306, 105 S.Ct. 1285. Within the context of the Fourth Amendment, the Supreme Court in United States v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630, 643-44, 124 S.Ct. 2620, 159 L.Ed.2d 667 (2004), held that the Fourth Amendme lso Burns, 33 M.J. at 320 (reaffirming analysis in Roa and holding that determination of whether consent is voluntary is based on the totality of the circumstances). Thus, an Edwards violation does not implicate the Fourth Amendment or the corresponding military rules of evidence. Burns, 33 M.J. at 320; Roa, 24 M.J. at 300; see also Patane, 542 U.S. at 640, 124 S.Ct. 2620 (<HOLDING>). This does not, however, end our analysis Options: A. holding that the physical fruits of a miranda violation must be suppressed B. holding that the fifth amendment did not require the suppression of the physical fruits of a miranda violation where the statement was voluntary C. holding that suppression of the evidence or dismissal of an indictment are not required to remedy a violation of 6103 D. holding that suppression of derivative evidence from a miranda violation cannot be justified under the supreme courts closefit requirement E. holding that miranda violation did not require suppression of immigrants fingerprints

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that suppression of derivative evidence from a miranda violation cannot be justified under the supreme courts closefit requirement
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (“The adjustment should be applied if the weapon was present, unless it is clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense.”). In deciding whether the government satisfied its initial burden, the defendant’s relevant conduct includes “acts that were part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction.” Stallings, 463 F.3d at 1220 (citation and internal quotations omitted). Moreover, in the context of a conspiracy case such as Gunn’s, the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement may be applied “if the firearm[ ] [is] found in a place where acts in furtherance of the conspiracy took place.” United States v. Pham, 463 F.3d 1239, 1246 (11th Cir.2006) (per curiam) (citation omitted); see also United States v. Hansley, 54 F.3d 709, 716 (11th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Here, the district court properly concluded Options: A. holding that the fortress theory applied where a firearm and marijuana were found on a night stand and cocaine was found in the same room as defendant had easy access to the firearm B. holding that to apply the firearm enhancement the firearm need only reflect the context of the defendants possession and the defendants ability to use the firearm to promote the controlled substance offense C. holding that the defendant on remand may show his eligibility for the safety valve reduction by a preponderance of the evidence even where a 2d11b1 enhancement applied D. holding that the 2d11b1 enhancement was proper where a firearm and drugrelated items were found in the defendants residence where he had also engaged in conspiratorial conversations E. holding that government met its burden with evidence that agents found a firearm and other drugrelated items in the defendants house where defendant engaged in conspiratorial conversations

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the 2d11b1 enhancement was proper where a firearm and drugrelated items were found in the defendants residence where he had also engaged in conspiratorial conversations
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: violate other users ' or third parties ' rights to privacy , publicity and other rights , or harvest , scrap , data aggregate , data mine , screen scrap , index or collect data and information about other users or third parties without their consent , whether manually , or automatically with the use of any means , including without limitation bots , crawlers , spiders , robots , sifters and load testers , without the express written consent of the company , or engage in testing , pen-testing , sniffing or monitoring of the service , its systems , software or hardware in any way ;

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: The Company and Swan hereby mutually agree that the Employment Agreement shall terminate effective immediately (the “Termination Date”). As of the Termination Date, Swan shall no longer serve as CEO of the Company, and shall make no other claims as serving in an officer or director capacity with the Company. The parties acknowledge that Swan has never served as a director or Chairman of the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: court. On remand the district court shall enter judgment in favor of Longfellow for the relief he requested. The judgment should require Sayler to bring his fence to a tight condition as defined by section 113.20 of the 1977 Code of Iowa within ninety days of the judgment, pay all the costs associated with the fence viewers’ proceeding, and tax Sayler the costs of this action. REVERSED AND CASE REMAND ED. 1 . All references to chapter 113 are to the 1977 Code of Iowa. In 1993 the Code editor traiisferred chapter 113 to chapter 359A. 2 . All references to chapter 359A are to the 2003 Code of Iowa. 3 . Although the Code requires the agreement to be in writing, this court has enforced oral agreements between landowners. See Osgood v. Names, 191 Iowa 1227, 1233, 184 N.W. 331, 333 (1921) Options: A. holding part performance of an oral agreement necessary to take the oral agreement out of the statute of frauds must be consistent only with the existence of the alleged oral contract B. holding that defendant did not breach oral agreement because among other things the plaintiff had not established that the term in question was part of the oral contract C. recognizing an oral partition fence agreement to keep in repair a portion of the partition fence D. holding that when the courts oral statements in the plea colloquy conflict with the written agreement the courts oral statements control E. holding that mere possession by a grantee under an oral agreement is not notice

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing an oral partition fence agreement to keep in repair a portion of the partition fence
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 become effective when it shall have been executed by the Borrower and Holdings and the Administrative Agent shall have been notified by each Lender, Swing Line Lender and L/C Issuer that each such Lender, Swing Line Lender and L/C Issuer has executed it and thereafter shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Borrower, each Agent and each Lender and their respective successors and assigns, except that the Borrower shall not have the right to assign its rights hereunder or any interest herein without the prior written consent of the Lenders except as permitted by Section 7.04.

assistant: Binding Effects
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 has been negotiated within the State of Colorado and the rights and obligations of the Parties to this Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the State of Colorado without regard to any jurisdiction’s principles of conflict of laws. Any legal suit, action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be instituted in the State court in Mesa County, Colorado, and each party irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of such courts in any such suit, action or proceeding. The parties irrevocably and unconditionally waive any objection to the laying of venue of any suit, action or proceeding in such courts and irrevocably waive and agree not to plead or claim in any such court that any such suit, action or proceeding brought in any such court has been brought in an inconvenient forum. Each party acknowledges and agrees that any controversy which may arise under this Agreement is likely to involve complicated and difficult issues and, therefore, each such party irrevocably and unconditionally waives any right it may have to a trial by jury in respect of any legal action arising out of or relating to this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: AS AN ADDITIONAL MATERIAL INDUCEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT AND THE LENDERS TO MAKE THE SECOND INITIAL ADVANCE, UPON THE MAKING OF THE SECOND INITIAL ADVANCE, THE BORROWER, ON BEHALF OF ITSELF AND ITS SUCCESSORS, ASSIGNS, LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND CONSTITUENTS (WHETHER OR NOT A PARTY HERETO) (BORROWER AND SUCH SUCCESSORS, ASSIGNS, LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND CONSTITUENTS BEING REFERRED TO HEREIN COLLECTIVELY AND INDIVIDUALLY, AS “OBLIGORS, ET AL.”), FULLY, FINALLY AND COMPLETELY RELEASES AND FOREVER DISCHARGES THE LENDERS, THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT AND THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS, SUCCESSORS, ASSIGNS, AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, PARENTS, OFFICERS, SHAREHOLDERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS, PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE HEIRS, PREDECESSORS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS (COLLECTIVELY AND INDIVIDUALLY, “LENDER, ET AL.”) OF AND FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, CONTROVERSIES, DISPUTES, LIABILITIES, OBLIGATIONS, DEMANDS, DAMAGES, EXPENSES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES), DEBTS, LIENS, ACTIONS AND CAUSES OF ACTION OF ANY AND EVERY NATURE WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY THEREOF RELATING TO THE ADVANCES, AND WAIVES AND RELEASES ANY DEFENSE, RIGHT OF COUNTERCLAIM, RIGHT OF SET-OFF OR DEDUCTION TO THE PAYMENT OF THE INDEBTEDNESS EVIDENCED BY THE LENDER NOTES AND/OR ANY OTHER TRANSACTION DOCUMENT WHICH OBLIGORS, ET AL. MAY HAVE OR MAY CLAIM TO HAVE AGAINST LENDER, ET AL., OR ANY THEREOF, ARISING OUT OF, CONNECTED WITH OR RELATING TO ANY AND ALL ACTS, OMISSIONS OR EVENTS OCCURRING PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MAKING OF THE SECOND INITIAL ADVANCE. THE BORROWER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES, REPRESENTS AND WARRANTS TO THE LENDERS AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT THAT IT AGREES TO ASSUME THE RISK OF ANY AND ALL UNKNOWN, UNANTICIPATED OR MISUNDERSTOOD DEFENSES AND CLAIMS WHICH ARE RELEASED BY THE PROVISIONS HEREOF IN FAVOR OF LENDER, ET AL., AND WAIVES AND RELEASES ALL RIGHTS AND BENEFITS WHICH IT MIGHT OTHERWISE HAVE UNDER ANY FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL LAW OR STATUTE WITH REGARD TO THE RELEASE OF SUCH UNKNOWN, UNANTICIPATED OR MISUNDERSTOOD DEFENSES OR CLAIMS. THE BORROWER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT HAS READ AND UNDERSTANDS EACH OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS RELEASE. THE BORROWER FULLY UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS RELEASE CONSTITUTES A GENERAL RELEASE, AND THAT IT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES. THE BORROWER CONFIRMS THAT IT WILL HEREBY RELEASE ANY AND ALL RELEASED CLAIMS THAT IT MAY INDIVIDUALLY HAVE AS OF THE DATE OF THE MAKING OF THE SECOND INITIAL ADVANCE. THE BORROWER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT HAS HAD A FULL AND FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO OBTAIN A LAWYER’S ADVICE CONCERNING THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THIS RELEASE AND WAIVER.

assistant: Releases