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: Neither Party shall be entitled to assign this Agreement without prior written permission from the other Party, which permission shall not be unreasonably withheld; provided , however , that notwithstanding the foregoing, a Party may assign this Agreement without any obligation to obtain the other Party’s prior written permission: (i) to any of its Affiliates or (ii) in connection with any merger, sale or other transfer of all or substantially all assets, sale of equity interests or other change of control transaction involving such Party (or, in the case of GENOCEA, involving any product or products to which this Agreement relates). In case of a succession the successor shall execute and deliver to ONCOVIR or GENOCEA as the case may be, an instrument in form, scope and substance agreeing to be bound by and to perform all its predecessor’s obligations under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to support Plaintiffs timely claims. Morgan, 536 U.S. at 113, 122 S.Ct. 2061. Moreover, Plaintiff may sue directly under § 1983 for alleged discriminatory acts that occurred less than two years before she filed her complaint. See Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Civish, 382 F.3d 969, 974 (9th Cir.2004); Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 12-542 (establishing two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims in Arizona). 2. The district court erred when it granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Count I, Plaintiffs claim for gender discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), except to the extent that the court entered summary judgment for Defendants Benbow and Alexander in their individual capacities. See Holly D. v. Cal. Inst. of Tech., 339 F.3d 1158, 1179 (9th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to Options: A. holding individual employees may be liable under title vii B. recognizing title vii does not provide the exclusive remedy for all employment discrimination claims even if the title vii and section 1983 claim factually overlap C. holding that relief granted under title vii is against the employer not individual employees whose actions constituted a violation of title vii emphasis in original D. holding that individual employees are not liable under title vii E. holding that title vii does not provide for a damages claim against supervisors or fellow employees

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that title vii does not provide for a damages claim against supervisors or fellow employees
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: must satisfy each fac by VECO, Inc. v. Rosebrock, 970 P.2d 906, 924 n. 36 (Alaska 1999) (disapproving of possible broad interpretation and requiring employee's act to have at least some motivation to serve corporation}. 16 . Alaskan Village, Inc. v. Smalley, 720 P.2d 945, 948 (Alaska 1986). 17 . Norcon, Inc. v. Kotowski, 971 P.2d 158, 175 (Alaska 1999). 18 . 720 P.2d at 948-49. 19 . Goddard v. Grand Trunk Rwy., 57 Me. 202, 222-23 (1869), as quoted in Embrey v. Holly, 293 Md. 128, 442 A.2d 966, 970 (1982) (quoting this language as justification for following the course of employment approach); see also Miller v. Blanton, 213 Ark. 246, 210 S.W.2d 293, 297 (1948) ("Having, by the constitution of their being, to act solely by ston & Strawn, 184 Ariz. 120, 907 P.2d 506, 521 (App. 1995) (<HOLDING>). 22 . See Alaska Evidence Rule 103(a)(1); see Options: A. holding that punitive damages award against vicariously liable law firm was not excessive in part because the award is proportionate to the law firms financial position B. holding a court may not award punitive damages C. holding that it was appropriate for trial court to award separate punitive damages awards against an employee and his vicariously liable employer because this would enable each award to be based on the two defendants differing financial status D. holding that evidence of a defendants financial condition is a prerequisite to an award of punitive damages E. recognizing the financial position of the defendant as a factor in assessing a punitive damages award

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that punitive damages award against vicariously liable law firm was not excessive in part because the award is proportionate to the law firms financial position
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: in addition , host agrees to pay co-host for all co-host services completed prior to co-host 's termination within 14 days of co-host 's termination via the resolution center .

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: Except as determined by the Compensation Committee of the Trust’s Board of Trustees (the “Committee”) at any time, upon the failure of the Participant to be employed by the Trust or any of its affiliates for any reason, all unvested restricted shares shall be forfeited by the Participant to the Trust without the payment of any consideration by the Trust; provided, that except as specified in the Plan, in the event of a Participant’s retirement, permanent disability, other termination of employment or death, or in cases of special circumstances, the Committee may, in its sole discretion, when it finds that a waiver would be in the best interests of the Trust, waive in whole or in part any or all remaining restrictions with respect to such Participant’s restricted shares. Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything to the contrary herein, the terms of that certain Employment Agreement, dated as of ________________, by and between the Trust and Participant (as it may be amended and/or restated from time to time, the “Employment Agreement”) shall govern the Award in the event Participant’s employment by the Trust is terminated (i) involuntarily, either by the Trust without “Cause” or by the Participant for “Good Reason,” or (ii) because of the Participant’s death or “disability,” or (iii) within ___ months after a “Change in Control” either by the Trust without “Cause” or by the Participant for “Good Reason” (as all such terms are defined in the Employment Agreement).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: sacrifice was an integral part of their religion was neither bizarre nor incredible), such evidence may be relevant to overcome any claim that the impact of the challenged law is de minimis. Moreover, a rule that bans a practice that is not “central” to an adherent’s religious practice might nonetheless impose a substantial burden, if the practice is important and based on a sincere religious belief. A court may also consider whether the litigants’ beliefs find any support in the religion to which they subscribe, or whether the litigants are merely relying on a self-serving view of religious practice. This inquiry is not a matter of deciding whether appellants’ beliefs accord in every particular with the religious orthodoxy of their church. See Smith, 494 U.S. at 887, 110 S.Ct. at 1604 (<HOLDING>) (citing Hernandez v. Comm’r, 490 U.S. 680, Options: A. holding that courts should avoid interpretations of statutes which would produce absurd results B. holding that federal courts are bound by state interpretations of state law C. holding that courts should not question the validity of particular litigants interpretations of their creeds D. holding that an agencys rulings interpretations and opinions of an act administered by the agency while not controlling upon the courts by reason of their authority do constitute a body of experience and informed judgment to which courts and litigants may properly resort for guidance E. holding that the scope and application of state exemptions are defined by the state courts and that we are bound by their interpretations

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that courts should not question the validity of particular litigants interpretations of their creeds
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 ABL Agent and each Term Loan Debt Agent agrees and acknowl- edges that if it shall at any time hold a Senior Lien on any Junior Secured Obligations Collateral that can be perfected by the possession or control of such Collateral or of any account in which such Collateral is held, and if such Collateral or any such account is in fact in the possession or under the control of the Senior Representative, the Senior Representative shall also hold such Collateral as gratuitous bailee for the Junior Representatives for the sole purpose of perfecting the Junior Lien of the Junior Representatives on such Collateral. It is agreed that the obligations of the Senior Representative and the rights of the Junior Representatives and the other Junior Secured Obligations Secured Parties in connection with any such bailment arrangement will be in all respects subject to the provisions of Article 2 . Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the ABL Agent and each Term Loan Debt Agent will be deemed to make no representation as to the adequacy of the steps taken by it to perfect the Junior Lien on any such Collateral and shall have no responsibility, duty, obligation or liability to the Junior Representatives or other Junior Secured Obligations Secured Party or any other person for such perfection or failure to perfect, it being understood that the sole purpose of this Article is to enable the Junior Secured Obligations Secured Par- ties to obtain a perfected Junior Lien in such Collateral to the extent, if any, that such perfection results from the possession or control of such Collateral or any such account by the ABL Agent or any Term Loan Debt Agent. Subject to Section 2.07 and to the ABL Agent or any Term Loan Debt Agent receiving such indemnifications as shall be required by such ABL Agent or any Term Loan Debt Agent, from and after the associated Discharge of Senior Secured Debt Obligations, the ABL Agent or any Term Loan Debt Agent, as applicable, shall take all such actions in its power as shall reasonably be requested by any Junior Representative (at the sole cost and expense of the Grantors) to transfer possession of such Collateral in its possession (in each case to the extent such Junior Representative has a Lien on such Collateral after giving effect to any prior or concurrent releases of Liens) to such Junior Representative (and with respect to any Collateral constituting ABL Priority Collateral (other than Canadian Collateral), to each Term Loan Debt Agent for the benefit of all applicable Junior Secured Obligations Secured Parties).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: against the asserted governmental interest in protecting the right of privacy. See Cardtoons, L.C. v. Major League Baseball Players Ass’n, 95 F.3d 959, 972 (10th Cir.1996). The Court finds that the purported state interest, protecting the privacy rights of the students while they are in the Quad, an outdoor area which is open to the public, is insufficient to warrant restricting Plaintiff Davis’ First Amendment right to videotape and post his preaching. Preaching and spreading the message of the Gospel is a core form of protected speech, and regulating, in this manner , Davis’ right to videotape his message would block an important avenue of self expression and unduly restrict the marketplace of ideas. See Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398, 403-07, 83 S.Ct. 1790, 10 L.Ed.2d 965 (1963) (<HOLDING>). b. Governmental Interest: New York Civil Options: A. holding that narrowtailoring requires a state to act with precision and to use the least restrictive means of achieving its compelling interest B. holding that the government interest in preventing crime is compelling C. holding that when the government acts to enforce public rights the mere fact that the government has no pecuniary interest in the controversy is not sufficient to exclude it from the courts D. holding that the government may not burden conduct motivated by a sincerely held religious belief unless the government acts by the least restrictive means to further a compelling state interest E. holding where 1 the government provided the defendant with all the necessary drugmaking materials 2 the government provided instructions on how to make the drugs and 3 the defendant sought out the materials and help from the undercover government agents the case set the outer limits to which the government may go in the quest to ferret out and prosecute crimes but the governments conduct did not rise to the level of a due process violation

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the government may not burden conduct motivated by a sincerely held religious belief unless the government acts by the least restrictive means to further a compelling state interest
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: Florida’s sales and use tax to the majority of services marketed in the state, courts cannot realistically require the legislature to dictate every conceivable application of the law down to the most minute detail. As we noted in Microtel, Inc. v. Florida Public Service Commi lacking in guidelines that neither the agency nor the courts can determine whether the agency is carrying out the intent of the legislature.” Id. at 918-19. As in AT & T, there is “no indication that the legislative policy-making function has been usurped by or improperly transferred to the PSC,” or any indication that' its disputed order is “aimed at anything more than fostering [the legislative policy] to the fullest extent now possible.” 515 So.2d at 743; see also S.E. Volusia Hosp. Dist., 438 So.2d at 820 (<HOLDING>). We accordingly find no separation of powers Options: A. recognizing that when an interpretation upholding the constitutionality of a statute is available to this court it must adopt that construction B. holding that this court may independently review the administrative construction of a statute C. holding an administrative interpretation cannot change the meaning of a statute or control the courts interpretation of it D. holding that courts adopt statutes interpretation that is supported by statutes plain language if statute is unambiguous unless such interpretation would lead to absurd results E. recognizing that the standard of review for issues of statutory interpretation and construction is de novo

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that when an interpretation upholding the constitutionality of a statute is available to this court it must adopt that construction
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York. The provisions of Sections 10.9 and 10.10 of the Credit Agreement shall apply to this Amendment to the same extent as if fully set forth herein.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Lenders and the Administrative Agent shall have received all fees required to be paid, and all expenses for which invoices have been presented (including the reasonable fees and expenses of legal counsel), on or before the Effective Date. All such amounts will be paid with proceeds of Loans made on the Effective Date and will be reflected in the funding instructions given by the Borrower to the Administrative Agent on or before the 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: The first claim in Moore’s 8.850 motion alleged that her trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object when the State introduced a firearm taken from her home into evidence, along with photographs of other firearms that had been stored in her home. In summarily denying this claim, the trial court confusingly reasons that this “evidence was relevant, and Counsel clarified that none of the firearms found inside the Defendant’s residence could have fired the caliber of projectile recovered from the victim.” (emphasis added) Of course, if there was no evidence linking any of these firearms to the charged crime, evidence of the firearms would be irrelevant, and should have been excluded upon proper objection. See, e.g., Sosa v. State, 639 So.2d 173 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (<HOLDING>); Huhn v. State, 511 So.2d 583 (Fla. 4th DCA Options: A. holding there was no rule 404b violation where the evidence was admitted to show knowledge and knowledge was an element of the crime charged B. holding it is fundamental error to convict a defendant of crime not charged and which is not a lesser included offense of the charged crime C. holding that it was error to admit into evidence 880 cartridges found in defendants car where there was no link established between the cartridges and the crime charged D. holding that it was error to admit into evidence a gun purchased by the defendant which was not connected with the charged crimes E. holding that counsel did not admit the defendant was guilty of a crime when counsel noted that if the evidence established the commission of any crime that crime was voluntary manslaughter not murder

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it was error to admit into evidence 880 cartridges found in defendants car where there was no link established between the cartridges and the crime charged
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: unit, and is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss.” Section 523(a)(7) creates an exception to discharge for both criminal and civil penalties. Pennsylvania Dep’t of Pub. Welfare v. Davenport, 495 U.S. 552, 110 S.Ct. 2126, 109 L.Ed.2d 588 (1990); see also United States Dep’t of Housing & Urban Dev. v. Cost Control Mktg. & Sales Mgmt. of Virginia, Inc., 64 F.3d 920 (4th Cir.1995) (finding a civil judgment for disgorgement of profits under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act nondis-chargeable); United States v. WRW Corp., 986 F.2d 138 (6th Cir.1993) (concluding civil penalties imposed for violations of safety standards under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act were excepted from discharge); Forney v. Hoseley (In re Hoseley), 96.1 I.B.C.R. 37 (Bankr.D.Idaho 1996) (<HOLDING>). Here, Debtor does not dispute that the awards Options: A. holding that filing of request for lump sum settlement constituted institution of a proceeding under the texas workmans compensation act B. holding that plaintiff could recover damages under both the lanham act and the copyright act because the profits awarded under the federal trademark statute constitute compensation rather than a penalty while statutory damages are awarded under the copyright act are designed to serve a variety of purposes other than compensation including deterrence and punishment C. holding that portion of civil judg ment awarded under the idaho workmans compensation act was nondischargeable D. holding that liquidated damages under fair labor standards act constitutes compensation for the retention of a workmans pay which might result in damages too obscure and difficult of proof for estimate other than by liquidated damages E. holding that treble damages awarded under the civil theft statute are remedial not punitive

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that portion of civil judg ment awarded under the idaho workmans compensation act was nondischargeable
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: applied in employment discrimination cases, although the burden of production shifts to the defendant after the plaintiff makes out a pri-ma facie case, the "ultimate burden of persuading the trier of fact ... remains at all times with the plaintiff”). 21 . Cf. Zurich Ins. Co. v. Ont. (Human Rights Comm’n), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 321, ¶ 119 (Can.) (referring to "the rule of evidence that the burden of proof should lie on the person most likely to be in possession of the relevant facts”); McInerney v. MacDonald, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 138, ¶ 30 (Can.) ("The burden of proof should fall on the party who is in the best position to obtain the facts.”). 22 . See Schaible Elec. Ltd. v. Melloul-Blamey Constr., Inc., [2004] 35 C.L.R. (3d) 141, ¶¶ 105-26 (Ont.) (standing merely for R. 653, 655-56 (Ont.) (<HOLDING>). 23 . In oral argument before this Court, Options: A. holding that seller was entitled to recover contract price of goods where buyer failed to make effective rejection under the ucc B. holding merely that to the extent a breaching party claims that the appropriate measure of damages is the difference between the contract price and the market price it holds the burden of proving that there is in fact an available market for the goods in issue C. holding that where buyer had opportunity to inspect goods and failed to inform seller in timely manner of defects buyer deemed to have accepted goods pursuant to 672606 D. holding that title revested in seller under california law when buyer revoked his acceptance of goods E. holding merely that to the extent a breaching buyer wishes to invoke the presumption that a nonbreaching seller will resell the contractedfor goods in the open market it holds the burden of proving that there is in fact an available market for those goods

assistant: The best answer is E. holding merely that to the extent a breaching buyer wishes to invoke the presumption that a nonbreaching seller will resell the contractedfor goods in the open market it holds the burden of proving that there is in fact an available market for those goods
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 will agree to endeavor to construct, occupy and maintain the Project in accordance with all applicable federal, state, county and municipal laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, including, without limitation, all environmental laws; provided, however, the Company shall be permitted to contest in good faith, at its expense and in its name or in the name of the Development Authority, the validity or application of any such laws, ordinances, rules or regulations.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: they apply to the software applications you download from the windows store or the xbox store , including any updates or supplements for the application , unless the application comes with separate terms , in which case those terms apply .

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: WESTERN has materially complied with all laws, statutes, ordinances, orders, rules, and all judgments, decisions and orders entered by any federal, state, local or foreign court or governmental authority or instrumentality applicable or relating to WESTERN or its businesses or properties ("WESTERN Applicable Laws").

assistant: Compliance With 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: to do so caused Appellant egregious harm. (2) Overly Broad Definition of Reckless Because' the applicable mental state of a result-oriented offense relates to the “result of the conduct” rather than the “nature of the conduct,” a charge containing the full statutory definition of the applicable mens rea is erroneous. Cook, 884 S.W.2d at 491; Anaya, 381 S.W.3d at 664. Here, Appellant contends felony-murder is a “result-oriented offense,” and therefore, the full statutory definition of “reckless” given by the trial court was inapplicable. Citing Price v. State, 457 S.W.3d 437, 441 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015)- (finding a “trial court errs when it fails to limit the language in regard to the applicable culpable mental states to the appropriate conduct element”) and Cook, 884 S.W.2d at 491 (<HOLDING>), she concludes the trial'court erred by Options: A. holding that a trial court errs by failing to limit the definitions of the culpable mental states as they relate to the conduct elements involved in the particular offense B. holding that trial court was not required to include all statutory definitions in its instructions but rather should refer only to those definitions having a rational basis in the evidence adduced at trial and not otherwise excludable C. holding that trial counsel did not act unreasonably in failing to raise the issue of the defendants mental health at trial D. holding defendant culpable for the natural and probable consequence of his conduct E. holding that statutory appeal bonds relate to the jurisdiction of the court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a trial court errs by failing to limit the definitions of the culpable mental states as they relate to the conduct elements involved in the particular offense
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: action against defendants, this argument is misguided. Generally, a counterclaim may not be asserted in a shareholders’ de d corporation comprised of three major stockholders. Therefore, Livingston and Winn would not be precluded from bringing a counterclaim in state court, and this Court has full confidence that all the issues can be adjudicated in the state action. Accordingly, the Court agrees with defendants that this federal action is a parallel proceeding to the state action. 2. Exceptional Circumstances This Court must next decide whether “exceptional circumstances” exist to warrant abstention. The Supreme Court has articulated four factors for consideration in Colorado River: (1) whether a state or federal court has assumed jurisdiction over a res; .2d 210, 213 (7th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). The Ninth Circuit has also added that another Options: A. recognizing doctrine B. recognizing that the colorado river doctrine is necessary to ensure judicial economy and deter abusive reactive litigation C. holding that the district court could not stay erisa and 1934 act claims under colorado river D. recognizing that the supreme court has referred to the policy of avoiding piecemeal litigation as by far the most important colorado river factor E. holding that colorado river abstention test is inapplicable where the declaratory judgment act is involved

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the colorado river doctrine is necessary to ensure judicial economy and deter abusive reactive litigation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, requests and demands and other communications to or upon the Agent or any Pledgor hereunder shall be effected in the manner provided for in Section 8.2 of the Note Purchase Agreement; provided that any notice, request, demand or other communication to the Pledgor shall be addressed to the Pledgor at its address on the signature page to this Agreement. Notices sent by hand or overnight courier service, or mailed by certified or registered mail, shall be deemed to have been given when received; notices sent by facsimile shall be deemed to have been given when sent (except that, if not given during normal business hours for the recipient, shall be deemed to have been given at the opening of business on the next Business Day for the recipient).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: whether Rohrig stands for the proposition that the community-caretaking exception can justify warrantless entries into private residences. See, e.g., Williams, 354 F3d at 508 (“[Djespite references to the doctrine in Rohrig, we doubt that community caretaking will generally justify warrantless entries into private homes.”). 45 Ray v Warren Twp, 626 F3d 170, 177 (CA 3, 2010). 46 See, e.g., Ortiz v State, 24 So 3d 596, 615 (Fla App, 2009) (Orfinger, J., dissenting) (“Other than situations involving the medical emergency exception, until today, the community caretaker exception has not been applied in Florida as a separate exception to the Fourth Amendment to validate an entry into a residence.”). 47 See, e.g., State v Ford, 2010 VT 39, ¶¶ 11-21; 188 Vt 17, 24-29; 998 A2d 684 (2010) (<HOLDING>). 48 United States v Quezada, 448 F3d 1005 (CA Options: A. holding that in every warrantless entry into private residence state has burden to demonstrate that exigencies of situation made entry imperative B. recognizing the rule and the exception but holding facts did not support claim to exception C. recognizing exception D. recognizing the existence of both the communitycaretaking and emergencyaid exceptions but holding an officers entry into a private residence unconstitutional because it failed to satisfy the emergencyaid exception E. recognizing an exception to a california announcement and entry statute

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing the existence of both the communitycaretaking and emergencyaid exceptions but holding an officers entry into a private residence unconstitutional because it failed to satisfy the emergencyaid exception
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any of the Agents may resign as such at any time upon at least 30 days’ prior notice to the Borrower and all Lenders. If the Administrative Agent at any time shall resign, the Required Lenders may appoint another Lender as the successor Administrative Agent which shall thereupon become the Administrative Agent hereunder. If no successor Administrative Agent shall have been so appointed by the Required Lenders, and shall have accepted such appointment, within 30 days after the retiring Administrative Agent’s giving notice of resignation, then the retiring Administrative Agent may, on behalf of the Lenders, appoint a successor Administrative Agent, which shall be one of the Lenders or a commercial banking institution organized under the laws of the U.S. (or any State thereof) or a U.S. branch or agency of a commercial banking institution, and having a combined capital and surplus of at least $500,000,000. Upon the acceptance of any appointment as the Administrative Agent hereunder by a successor Administrative Agent, such successor Administrative Agent shall be entitled to receive from the retiring Administrative Agent such documents of transfer and assignment as such successor Administrative Agent may reasonably request, and shall thereupon succeed to and become vested with all rights, powers, privileges and duties of the retiring Administrative Agent, and the retiring Administrative Agent shall be discharged from its duties and obligations under this Agreement. After a retiring Administrative Agent’s resignation hereunder as an Administrative Agent, the provisions of this Article IX shall inure to its benefit as to any actions taken or omitted to be taken by it while it was the Administrative Agent under this Agreement, and Section 10.4 (and, with respect to the Administrative Agent, Section 10.3 ) shall continue to inure to its benefit.

assistant: Successors
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 hereby represents that it has dealt with no financial advisors, brokers, underwriters, placement agents, agents or finders in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. Borrower hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Lender, Administrative Agent and Collateral Agent and their respective Related Parties harmless from and against any and all claims, liabilities, costs and expenses of any kind (including attorneys’ fees and expenses) in any way relating to or arising from a claim by any Person that such Person acted on behalf of CPLV Tenant or any of its Affiliates or Borrower or any of its Affiliates in connection with the transactions contemplated herein. The provisions of this Section 10.21 shall survive the expiration and termination of this Agreement and the payment of the Debt.

assistant: Brokers
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 the plan and a party in interest, but its conduct in causing the plan to pay the fee for its own benefit cannot trigger liability under ERISA Section 406(a) because this section deals with transactions between two distinct parties. Self-dealing transactions are addressed by ERISA Section 406(b), which we discuss herein. 4 . ERISA Section 408 provides certain exceptions to Section 406(a) prohibited transactions, 29 U.S.C. § 1108(b), but we need not address whether an exception applies here, as we do not find that the allegations describe a prohibited Section 406(a) transaction. 5 . For example, 406(b) has been found to prohibit transactions involving kick-backs to fiduciaries and self-negotiated loans. See, e.g., Nat'l Sec. Systems, Inc. v. Iola, 700 F.3d 65, 91-93 (3d Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>); Reich, 57 F.3d at 287, 289-290 (holding that Options: A. holding that a fiduciary who receives consideration in connection with a transaction involving plan assets violated section 406b and a nonfiduciary who facilitated that transaction could be liable B. holding that a service provider who accepted compensation prescribed by an armslength agreement was not a fiduciary for compensation purposes and therefore not liable under section 406b C. holding that relief for nonfiduciary liability only available where nonfiduciary is engaged in prohibited transaction under section 1106a1 D. recognizing step transaction doctrine whereby courts must consider all steps of transaction in light of entire transaction so that substance of transaction will control over form of each step E. holding testimony of officer and narcotics investigator who both witnessed drug transaction coupled with audio recording of transaction constituted sufficient corroboration

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a fiduciary who receives consideration in connection with a transaction involving plan assets violated section 406b and a nonfiduciary who facilitated that transaction could be liable
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: Appeals, 677 A.2d 350 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996); City of Lancaster v. Lancaster County, 143 Pa.Cmwlth. 476, 599 A.2d 289 (1991). 33 . Although two appellee briefs were filed, one on behalf of the Pierce plaintiffs and one on behalf of the Clifton plaintiffs, we will present their arguments collectively. 34 . Although not directly addressing the contours of a facial challenge, we have addressed the differences between facial and as-applied challenges in a number of scenarios, often for procedural purposes. See, e.g., Phila. Entm't & Dev. Partners v. City of Philadelphia, 594 Pa. 468, 937 A.2d 385, 392 n. 7 (2007) ("[A]s-applied challenges require application of the ordinance to be ripe, facial challenges are different, and ripe upon mere enactment of the ordinance.”); Beattie, 907 A.2d at 527-29 (<HOLDING>); Lehman v. Pa. State Police, 576 Pa. 365, 839 Options: A. holding that court can exercise equity jurisdiction over taxpayers challenge that property assessment system is unconstitutional facially or asapplied B. holding in the context of an asapplied challenge that when a defendant admits guilt of a substantive crime he cannot reverse course on appeal and claim the criminal statute is unconstitutional C. recognizing that categorical constitutional challenge was fundamentally similar to asapplied constitutional challenge initially raised on appeal D. holding that declaring statute facially unconstitutional deprives trial court of subjectmatter jurisdiction E. holding section 61132b2c facially unconstitutional

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that court can exercise equity jurisdiction over taxpayers challenge that property assessment system is unconstitutional facially or asapplied
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to allege damages through June 30, 2006 is the focus of their motion.”). Because the Government does not oppose Plaintiff supplementing the September 4, 2009 Complaint to seek damages through the end of 2009, the issue before the court is whether Plaintiff may supplement to allege a claim for damages incurred through December 31, 2009, or through December 31, 2010. See System Fuels, 73 Fed.Cl. at 211 (“Supplementation may be limited or curtailed to avoid prejudice.” (citation omitted)). Although Plaintiff may have given the Government an estimate of 2010 damages as early as July 2010, Plaintiff did not identify the specific 2010 damages claimed or provide the Government with supporting documentation of those damages until April 20, 2011 — t 4 Fed.Cl. 727 (2006) (“SMUD III") (<HOLDING>), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 293 Fed.Appx. Options: A. holding that smud is entitled to 53159863 in mitigation costs but staying entry of judgment pending the outcome of this proceeding B. holding that smud was entitled to 39796234 in damages C. holding that a plaintiff is entitled to either statutory treble damages or punitive damages whichever is the greater D. holding that plaintiff was not entitled to a presumption of nominal damages when she had failed to request them E. holding that smud was entitled to mitigation damages for costs incurred from may 15 1997 to december 31 2003

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that smud was entitled to 39796234 in damages
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: enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia designed to assure adequate medical care and medical facilities for the people of the state. The state’s interest and the state’s involvement, in its sovereign capacity, in the treatment of a specific patient by an attending physician in the University Hospital are slight, equally slight is the control exercised by the state over the physician in the treatment accorded that patient. Id. (emphasis added); see also Gargiulo, 239 Va. at 213, 387 S.E.2d at 790 (“[T]he student function is essential to achievement of the Commonwealth’s goal, one undertaken in the public interest, of training and maintaining a pool of specialists skilled in a particular discipline.”); Carter v. University of Va. Health Sys., 52 Va. Cir. 416 (Charlottesville 2000) (<HOLDING>). But cf. Lilly v. Brink, 51 Va. Cir. 444 Options: A. holding that the united states constitution does not entitle one state to sovereign immunity in a second states courts and stating a claim of immunity in another sovereigns courts necessarily implicates the power and authority of a second sovereign its source must be found either in an agreement or in the voluntary decision of the second to respect the dignity of the first as a matter of comity B. holding that an anesthesiology resident in her second year of postdoctoral training was acting in a student capacity in providing patient care and was thus entitled to sovereign immunity C. holding that individuals acting in a legislative capacity at a regional level are entitled to absolute immunity D. holding that a hearing officer acting in a judicial capacity was entitled to claim judicial immunity and could not be compelled to give testimony about his mental process in deciding a case E. holding that the defense of sovereign immunity is not available in the absence of a statute providing immunity to a municipal corporation in a negligence action

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an anesthesiology resident in her second year of postdoctoral training was acting in a student capacity in providing patient care and was thus entitled to sovereign immunity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: however , because we want to protect you and other users and make sure your experience is positive , we reserve the right at all times ( but will not have an obligation ) to remove or refuse to distribute any user content on the service , to suspend or terminate users , and to block participants of viber public chats without liability to us , including where such user content , in our sole discretion , violates these terms , including these house rules , the public chat & public accounts terms & guidelines or any additional terms , or that we otherwise find objectionable .

assistant: Content removal, Limitation of liability, Unilateral termination
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: deprived of their right to pursue their livelihood and practice their profession as pharmacists without being afforded the required due. process. Focusing on the accreditation requirement in RFP No. 31-06, Stanton-Negley asserts that DPW was fully aware that accreditation was not required of existing providers of specialty pharmacy drugs and that the accreditation process was lengthy; nevertheless, DPW included scription drugs was not terminated as a participant in a Medicaid Program, a lowering of its reimbursement rates for those drugs did not violate protected rights). Finally, Stanton-Negley has no protected property right to submit a bid in response to an RFP. See Durkee Lumber Co., Inc. v. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 903 A.2d 593 (Pa.Cmwlth.2006) (<HOLDING>). Although Stanton-Negley undoubtedly is Options: A. holding that there is no legitimate claim of entitlement to a grievance procedure B. holding that the awardee of a contract may not challenge the decision to terminate that contract by invoking the courts bid protest jurisdiction C. holding that a denial of a bid protest without holding a hearing did not deprive a disappointed bidder of any property rights because there is no legitimate claim of entitlement to a government contract unless the contract actually is awarded D. holding that in the postaward context a disappointed bidder lacked standing to bring a protest action when its submission was nonresponsive to the solicitation E. holding that unsuccessful bidder is awarded its bid preparation costs because the government violated its implied contract to have the involved bids fairly and honestly considered

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a denial of a bid protest without holding a hearing did not deprive a disappointed bidder of any property rights because there is no legitimate claim of entitlement to a government contract unless the contract actually is awarded