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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and assistance to be provided to claimants by VA, are not retroactively applicable to proceedings that were complete before VA and were on appeal to this Court or the Federal Circuit when the VCAA was enacted.” Stephens v. Principi, 16 Vet.App. 191, 193 (2002) (per curiam order) (citing Bernklau, 291 F.3d at 803-06). Here, the VCAA was enacted after the September 14, 2000, BVA decision on appeal but during the 120-day period within which the appellant could file a timely NOA, see 38 U.S.C. § 7266(a). Because, as of the November 9, 2000, enactment of the VCAA, the 120-day judicial-appeal period had not yet expired and the appellant had not filed an NOA, the claims denied by the September 2000 BVA decision were still pending before VA. See Teten v. West, 13 Vet.App. 560, 563 (2000) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the proceedings were not “complete Options: A. holding that because veteran had never before submitted due process issue to bva he had not exhausted his administrative remedies and court declined to address merits of that claim B. holding that because debtor retained control of property a transfer had not yet occurred C. holding that the appellant had not changed his residence from his registered address despite the fact that the house had never had electricity service during the time that he had lived there D. holding that veterans claim had remained pending before va at time of his death because 120day judicialappeal period had not yet expired and he had not filed noa E. holding the practice of requiring borrower to certify at closing the threeday period had expired and the transaction had not been rescinded has the serious potential for actual harm

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that veterans claim had remained pending before va at time of his death because 120day judicialappeal period had not yet expired and he had not filed noa
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: (1986). See also 1-2 Weinstein’s Evidence § 103 at [7][a] (2005). Plain error is an error that affects the defendant's substantial rights and would seriously affect the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial pro 1) (ruling that the practice of chiropractic is the practice of medicine in a restricted form); McKissick v. Frye, 255 Kan. 566, 876 P.2d 1371, 1390 (1994) (stating that the practice of chiropractic is recognized as a healing art so that a chiropractor is qualified to testify regarding future medical care the plaintiff would need); Rodgers v. Sparks, 228 Neb. 191, 421 N.W.2d 785, 790 (1988) (ruling that chiropractic testimony was "competent medical testimony” on the issues of causation and permanent impairment); and Knapp v. Wilkins, 786 So.2d 457, 462 (Ala.2000) Options: A. recognizing that a licensed chiropractor is a health care provider competent to testify as a medical expert B. holding that an assisted living facility licensed to provide personal care was not licensed to engage primarily in providing nursing care C. holding that standard of care need not be listed separately in report when same standard applies to each health care provider D. holding that nurse who is familiar with the standard of care at another similar hospital can qualify by experience to testify as a medical expert in a medical malpractice action E. holding that an expert is not competent to testify as to statutory interpretation

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that a licensed chiropractor is a health care provider competent to testify as a medical expert
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: 1998))). I 14 In light of Dennis's inadequate briefing, we decline to disturb the district court's finding of reasonable suspicion. We note that the factors employed by the district court are generally the types of factors that this and other courts have relied on to analyze reasonable suspicion, and that the district court's finding does not appear unreasonable on its face. Cases examining combinations of arguably innocuous cireum-stances have come down both ways on the issue of reasonable suspicion. Compare, eg., State v. Humphrey, 937 P.2d 137, 141-43 (Utah Ct.App.1997) (upholding finding of reasonable suspicion based on "past criminal activity, nervousness, anger, and traveling back from a known drug community"), with State v. Alvey, 2007 UT App 161, ¶¶ 2-7, 577 Utah Adv. Rep. 15 (<HOLDING>). While a careful analysis of these and similar Options: A. holding that a level two detention was illegal where defendant with known eriminal history was discovered walking in circles in bank parking lot at 280 am B. holding that the presence requirement of the carjacking statute was satisfied when keys were taken from a bank employee whose car was parked in a parking lot outside the bank C. holding that an injury occurring in a parking lot which was leased but not controlled by an employer was compensable because the employer instructed its employees to park in that lot D. holding that the police officer had reasonable suspicion when he saw a vehicle moving with its lights off in the parking lot of a closed business in a rural area at 300 am E. holding that claimant was entitled to workers compensation because he was injured in a parking lot which was leased by his employer

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a level two detention was illegal where defendant with known eriminal history was discovered walking in circles in bank parking lot at 280 am
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No failure by any Lender, the L/C Issuer or the Agent to exercise, and no delay by any such Person in exercising, any right, remedy, power or privilege hereunder or under any other Loan Document shall operate as a waiver thereof; nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right, remedy, power or privilege hereunder preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, remedy, power or privilege. The rights, remedies, powers and privileges herein provided, and provided under each other Loan Document, are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights, remedies, powers and privileges provided by law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall not, and shall use its commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that no Affiliate of the Company shall, sell, offer for sale or solicit offers to buy or otherwise negotiate in respect of any security (as defined in Section 2 of the Securities Act) that will be integrated with the offer or sale of the Shares in a manner that would require the registration under the Securities Act of the sale of the Shares to the Purchasers, or that will be integrated with the offer or sale of the Shares for purposes of the rules and regulations of any trading market such that it would require stockholder approval prior to the closing of such other transaction unless stockholder approval is obtained before the closing of such subsequent transaction.

assistant: Integration
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: Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Partnership is authorized to withhold from distributions and allocations to the Partners, and to pay over to any federal, state, local or foreign governmental authority any amounts believed in good faith to be required to be so withheld or paid over pursuant to the Code or any provision of any other federal, state, local or foreign law and, for all purposes under this Agreement, shall treat such amounts (together with any amounts that are withheld from payments to the Partnership or any of its Subsidiaries attributable to a direct or indirect Partner of the Partnership) as distributed to those Partners with respect to which such amounts were withheld. If the Partnership is obligated to pay any amount to a taxing authority on behalf of (or in respect of an obligation of) a Partner (including, federal, state and local or other withholding taxes), then such Partner shall indemnify the Partnership in full for the entire amount of any Tax (but not any interest, penalties and expenses associated with such payment). If the Partnership elects to withhold or make any payment to any federal, state, local or foreign governmental authority in respect of a payment that otherwise would be made to any Partner, such Partner shall cooperate with the General Partner by providing such information or forms as are reasonably requested by the General Partner in connection with such withholding or the making of such payments. Each Partner who is an employee of the Partnership, Opco, their Subsidiaries or of an Affiliated Entity (or whose stock or other beneficial interest is owned by such an employee) authorizes the Partnership to withhold additional amounts for payment on behalf of such Partner of federal, state and local income tax from the compensation paid to such Partner (or owner of stock or other beneficial interest of a corporate or other entity Partner).

assistant: 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: decline to set a particular amount that constitutes a substantial reduction; this is a question for the trier of fact to determine, examining the totality of the circumstances. Because the commissioner did not consider whether Terry acted reasonably by leaving when faced with a reduction in pay and whether exhausting her alternatives by testing would have been futile, we remand for a new hearing. Terry requests attorney fees. RCW 50.32.160 provides that if this court overturns or modifies the commissioner’s ruling, the claimant is entitled to reasonable attorney fees. Accordingly, Terry is entitled to attorney fees upon timely filing an affidavit of attorney fees with this court. Agid and Ellington, JJ., concur. 1 Tapper v. Employment Sec. Dep’t, 122 Wn.2d 397, 406, 858 P.2d 494 (1993) (<HOLDING>). 2 Sweitzer v. Department of Empl. Sec., 43 Options: A. holding the findings of fact required to support an alimony award are sufficient if findings of fact have been made on the ultimate facts at issue in the case and the findings of fact show the trial court properly applied the law in the case B. holding because defendant does not argue in his brief that these findings of fact are not supported by evidence in the record this court is bound by the trial courts findings of fact C. holding that the court may not overturn the administrative law judges factual findings as long as they are supported by competent substantial evidence D. holding that it is the commissioners findings of fact to the extent they modify or replace the administrative law judges findings that are relevant on appeal E. holding that trial court made sufficient findings of fact when it dismissed appeal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that it is the commissioners findings of fact to the extent they modify or replace the administrative law judges findings that are relevant 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: does not extend to implied trusts, which are imposed on transactions by operation of law as a matter of equity. See Capitol Indem. Corp. v. Interstate Agency (In re Interstate Agency), 760 F.2d 121, 124 (6th Cir.1985) (construing § 17(a)(4), predecessor to § 523(a)(4)); Carlisle Cashway v. Johnson (In re Johnson), 691 F.2d 249, 251 (6th Cir.1982) (construing § 17(a)(4)). The stat utory trust created pursuant to the provisions of PACA satisfies the express or technical trust requirements of § 523(a)(4). Cf. Capitol Indem. Corp. v. Interstate Agency (In re Interstate Agency), 760 F.2d at 124 (section 1207(1) of the Michigan Insurance Code establishes an insurance agency relationship as an express trust fiduciary relationship); Carlisle Cashway v. Johnson (In re Johnson), 691 F.2d at 252 (<HOLDING>). Other courts that have considered this Options: A. holding notice of balance due satisfies notice and demand requirements B. holding such service satisfies due process C. holding that the trust fund doctrine was inapplicable where the corporation had filed bankruptcy D. holding that the michigan building contract fund act satisfies the express or technical trust requirements of 17a4 E. holding that the fraud or defalcation prong of 523a4 requires the showing of an express trust

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the michigan building contract fund act satisfies the express or technical trust requirements of 17a4
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: majority of the seized items on the basis that Music City’s inventory was contraband and thus could not be returned, regardless of whether or not the government properly obtained and executed its search warrant. However, the court did order the return of cigarette holders as well as a plastic tube called a “head rush,” thought to be a component that could be used in making a “bong,” which the government acknowledged were improperly seized. II. A. There is no criminal indictment or proceeding pending against Music City. Thus, Music City’s Rule 41(e) motion for the return of its property was really in the nature of a civil proceeding invoking the court’s equitable powers, rather than a criminal proceeding. See White Fabricating Co. v. United States, 903 F.2d 404, 407-08, (6th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); Delta Engineering v. United States, 41 F.3d Options: A. holding that district court has discretion under appropriate circumstances to rule on summary judgment motion before addressing pending class certification motion B. holding that rule 41e motion for return of seized property is treated as a civil equitable proceeding when criminal proceedings against moving party are not yet pending C. holding that rule 4as timing requirements apply to an appeal from an order granting or denying a criminal defendants motion for the return of property under fedrcrimp 41e D. holding that a district court has jurisdiction to consider a rule 41e motion filed after criminal proceedings had been completed E. holding that a district court has jurisdiction to entertain a rule 41e motion for the return of property before a criminal prosecution has begun believing such a motion to be in effect a civil action

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a district court has jurisdiction to entertain a rule 41e motion for the return of property before a criminal prosecution has begun believing such a motion to be in effect a civil action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Company and the Investor: (a) agrees that any legal suit, action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby shall be instituted exclusively in the courts of the State of New York located in the City and County of New York or in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York; (b) waives any objection that it may now or hereafter have to the venue of any such suit, action or proceeding; and (c) irrevocably consents to the jurisdiction of the aforesaid courts in any such suit, action or proceeding. Each of the Company and the Investor agrees that a final judgment in any such action or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Inc v Doebler, 442 F3d 812, 823 (CA 3, 2006), quoting an earlier version of McCarthy, Trademarks & Unfair Competition (alteration in the original). Stated another way, naked licensing also involves “allowing others to use the mark without exercising ‘reasonable control over the nature and quality of the goods, services, or business on which the [mark] is used by the licensee’.” Eva’s Bridal, 639 F3d at 789 (citation omitted) (alteration in original). A mark holder that engages in naked licensing thus destroys its mark — it is no longer able to serve as a meaningful source identifier to consumers and accordingly loses its significance as a mark — and the protections afforded to actual marks under the Lanham Act. FreecycleSunnyvale v Freecycle Network, 626 F3d 509, 516 (CA 9, 2010) (<HOLDING>) (citation and quotation marks omitted); see Options: A. holding that the defendants reference to the plaintiffs trademark in the metatags of the defendants web page was a violation of trademark law B. holding that naked licensing is inherently deceptive and constitutes abandonment of any rights to the trademark by the licensor C. holding that proof of unauthorized use of an original trademark by one whose license to use the trademark had been terminated is sufficient to establish the likelihood of confusion prong D. holding that the continued use of licensed trademark after termination of franchise agreement constituted trademark infringement and breach of contract E. holding grant of naked license to be a fraud on the public and unlawful

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that naked licensing is inherently deceptive and constitutes abandonment of any rights to the trademark by the licensor
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 Administrative Agent, the Co-Collateral Agents, the Arrangers and the Lenders shall have received the fees (including reasonable fees, disbursements and other charges of counsel to the Agents) to be received on the Restatement Effective Date referred to herein and in the Fee Letter and, to the extent invoiced at least two Business Days prior to the Restatement Effective Date (or such lesser time as agreed by the U.S. Borrower) all reasonable out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred by the Agents and the Lead Arranger in connection with the negotiation of the Loan Documents and due diligence with respect thereto.

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: If any provision of this Agreement or the other Loan Documents is held to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, (a) the legality, validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents shall not be affected or impaired thereby and (b) the parties shall endeavor in good faith negotiations to replace the illegal, invalid or unenforceable provisions with valid provisions the economic effect of which comes as close as possible to that of the illegal, invalid or unenforceable provisions. The invalidity of a provision in a particular jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction. Without limiting the foregoing provisions of this Section, if and to the extent that the enforceability of any provisions in this Agreement relating to Defaulting Lenders shall be limited by bankruptcy or other debtor relief laws, as determined in good faith by the Administrative Agent, any Issuing Bank or the Swingline Lender, as applicable, then such provisions 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: secular” for a reasonable observer. McCreary County, 354 F.3d at 460. The Bill of Rights is not only a cherished secular document — it is a legal document securing the rights of parties appearing in DeWeese’s courtroom and binding DeW-eese as a jurist. “The Ten Commandments are several thousands of years old, [are] not a product of ... American culture and, many believe, are the word of God.” Id. They bind no jurist and are not “law” in any courtroom, notwithstanding any similarities or historical associations between the Decalogue and our Constitution, the Bill of Rights, statutes, and common law. Thus, even though the Ten'Commandments poster is posted opposite the Bill of Rights, a “reasonable person will think religion, not history.” Indiana Civil Liberties Union, 259 F.3d at 773 (<HOLDING>), cited in McCreary County, 354 F.3d at 460. By Options: A. holding that expert testimony usually is necessary to establish a causal connection between an injury and its source unless the connection is a kind that would be obvious to laymen such as a broken leg from being struck by an automobile B. holding the connection is an element C. holding that defending party may establish a right to summary judgment by showing that the plaintiff after an adequate period of discovery has not been able to produce and will not be able to produce evidence sufficient to allow the trier of fact to find the existence of any one of the claimants elements D. holding discharge less than two months after plaintiff filed a sexual harassment complaint with management and ten days after filing a complaint with state human rights office provided prima facie evidence of a causal connection between protected activity and retaliation E. holding that reasonable observer would not be able to make an analytical connection between ten commandments bill of rights and preamble to indiana constitution

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that reasonable observer would not be able to make an analytical connection between ten commandments bill of rights and preamble to indiana constitution
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in common areas is generally premised on the control a landlord maintains over the common areas.” (Footnote omitted). The duty to maintain these areas in a reasonably safe condition extends not only to the tenant but “includes the members of his family, his guests, his invitees, and others on the land in the right of the tenant.” Landay v. Cohn, 220 Md. 24, 27, 150 A.2d 739, 741 (1959). “It has been held that a child on the land at the invitation of the child of the tenant is entitled to the benefit of the landlord’s obligation in this respect.” Landay v. Cohn, supra, 220 Md. at 27-28, 150 A.2d at 741. Other cases recognizing that the landlord owes a duty to maintain common areas in a reasonably safe condition include, e.g., Scott v. Watson, 278 Md. 160, 169, 359 A.2d 548, 554 (1976) (<HOLDING>); Macke Laundry Service Co. v. Weber, 267 Md. Options: A. holding landlord and tenants obligations mutually dependent B. holding that a landlord may have a duty to exercise reasonable care for the safety of its tenants in common areas C. holding that a landlord has a duty of reasonable care over common areas or other areas over which the landlord has retained control D. holding tenants leasing house by oral agreement were coinsureds both landlord and tenants had liability insurance E. holding that defendants had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the common areas of an apartment building

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a landlord may have a duty to exercise reasonable care for the safety of its tenants in common areas
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous oral or written understandings, statements, representations or promises with respect to its subject matter, including but not limited to the Prior Employment Agreement, which is amended and restated hereby in its entirety. This Agreement was the subject of negotiation between the parties and, therefore, the parties agree that the rule of construction requiring that the agreement be construed against the drafter shall not apply to the interpretation of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: argues that the district court already had adjusted his punishment by sentencing him under U.S.S.G. § 2A2.1 (first degree murder) instead of U.S.S.G. § 2A2.2 (aggravated assault). The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 provides that a district court may depart from the sentencing range set by the Sentencing Guidelines only when it finds that “there exists an aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating the guidelines.” 18 U.S.C. § 3558(b). Here, the district court departed upward because criminal history category VI, which requires only 13 criminal history points, did not adequately reflect Defendant’s 25 criminal history points. United States v. Osborne, 948 F.2d 210, 212 (6th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Review of a sentence that departs from the Options: A. holding that when a defendant qualifies as a career felon it is not necessary to ascertain the defendants criminal history category because the sentencing guidelines mandate a criminal history category of vi B. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing an upward variance after finding that the defendants criminal history category of i understated the seriousness of his criminal history C. holding that 24 criminal history points was so high that even placement in category vi did not adequately reflect the seriousness of the defendants criminal past D. holding a court may consider a defendants criminal history even if that history is included in the defendants criminal history category E. holding that request for departure in sentencing based on a criminal history category that overstated defendants record violated plea agreement that prohibited departure requests but did not stipulate to a specific criminal history category

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that 24 criminal history points was so high that even placement in category vi did not adequately reflect the seriousness of the defendants criminal past
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: liability under Title VII in the case of Fantini v. Salem State College, 557 F.3d 22, 28-32 (1st Cir.2009)—the court notes the existence of jurisprudence that the analytical framework for ADEA discrimination was patterned after the framework for Title VII cases and the precedents are generally interchangeable. Hazel v. U.S. Postmaster General, 7 F.3d 1, 3-4 (1st Cir.1993); Mesnick v. General Elec. Co., 950 F.2d 816 (1st Cir.1991). The framework being McDonnell Douglas analysis of liability. Notwithstanding, the matter of personal supervisory liability is patterned under the Fair Labor Standards Act as the enforce ment sections of the ADEA are patterned after the Fair Labor Standards Act. Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, 528 U.S. 62, 67-69, 120 S.Ct. 631, 145 L.Ed.2d 522 (2000) (<HOLDING>). “Section 626(b) [of ADEA] also permits Options: A. holding claims based on the fair labor standards act subject to arbitration B. holding that the otca limitations period applied to a claim alleging a breach of the fair labor standards act by the state C. holding that enforcement sections and coverage as to state employees of adea are patterned after the fair labor standards act 29 us 1938 flsa D. holding that the inability to proceed as a class does not deprive plaintiffs of substantive rights under the fair labor standards act flsa E. holding that application of fair labor standards act flsa to transportation employees employed by local government does not contravene the commerce clause because labor conditions of those employees affect interstate commerce

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that enforcement sections and coverage as to state employees of adea are patterned after the fair labor standards act 29 us 1938 flsa
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 193 L.Ed.2d 694 (2016) (per curiam) (“It is this Court’s responsibility to say what a [federal] statute means, and once the Court has spoken, it is the duty of other courts to respect that understanding of the governing rule of law.”); Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1059, 1067, 185 L.Ed.2d 72 (2013) (“State courts adjudicating civil RICO claims will ... be guided by federal court interpretations of the relevant federal criminal statutes, just as federal courts sitting in diversity are guided by state court interpretations of state law.”). But the state court proceedings in which such a claim is pursued are governed by the procedural law of the forum, in this case Indiana procedural law. Cf. Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 78, 58 S.Ct. 817, 822, 82 L.Ed. 1188, 1194 (1938) (<HOLDING>); Brill v. Regent Commc’ns., Inc., 12 N.E.3d Options: A. holding that courts apply the procedural law of the forum and the substantive law of the jurisdiction originating the claim B. holding that federal courts should apply state substantive law C. holding that in diversity cases federal courts are to apply state substantive law and federal procedural law D. holding in the conflict of laws context that district courts sitting in diversity jurisdiction must apply the substantive law of the forum state E. holding that in cases of a false conflict of law a court may apply the law of the forum state

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that courts apply the procedural law of the forum and the substantive law of the jurisdiction originating the claim
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 failure by any of the Parties hereto to comply with any of the obligations, agreements or conditions set forth herein may be waived by the other Party or Parties, provided that any such waiver will be binding on any Party only if such waiver is set forth in a writing executed by such party; provided, however, that any such waiver shall not operate or be construed as a continuing waiver or as a waiver of any other obligation, agreement or condition.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “industry wide safety standards,” and the manufacturer relied on the safety standards. 101 Wn. App. at 857-62. No duty can exist under the rescue doctrine without this privity of reliance. ¶14 In sum, a public entity has a duty under the rescue doctrine when an injured party reasonably relies, or is in privity with a third party that reasonably relies, on its promise to aid or warn. See, e.g., Bratton v. Welp, 145 Wn.2d 572, 576-77, 39 P.3d 959 (2002); Babcock v. Mason County Fire Dist. No. 6, 144 Wn.2d 774, 778, 30 P.3d 1261 (2001) (finding no duty to aid because reliance was unreasonable); Beal v. City of Seattle, 134 Wn.2d 769, 785, 954 P.2d 237 (1998) (analyzing duty to aid under “special relationship” doctrine); Honcoop v. State, 111 Wn.2d 182, 192-93, 759 P.2d 1188 (1988) (<HOLDING>). But the Osborns relied on neither Mason Options: A. holding the voluntary assumption of a duty will give rise to liability if the performance is not done with reasonable care B. holding that no duty to warn exists when hazards are known through general knowledge C. holding that such a duty exists D. holding duty to warn exists only if public entity makes assurances that could give rise to justifiable reliance E. holding trade association voluntarily assumed the duty to warn because manufacturers relied upon assurances

assistant: The best answer is D. holding duty to warn exists only if public entity makes assurances that could give rise to justifiable reliance
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: consult with defendant. Instead, Aifer decided on her own that defendant should not testify at the penalty-phase retrial. The next question is whether counsel’s deficiency prejudiced defendant. Defendant argues that we should forego this analysis because of the fundamental nature of the right to testify. He posits that the impact of a defendant’s own words on a jury is too speculative to support a finding of harmless error. Consequently, defendant urges the adoption of a per se rule that the denial of the right to testify is presumptively prejudicial. Alternatively, defendant requests that we require the State to prove that the denial of the right to testify was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24, 87 S.Ct 824, 828, 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967) (<HOLDING>). Previously, we have evaluated claims Options: A. holding that in order to conclude that federal constitutional error is harmless court must find that error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt B. holding that appellate court should review error in trial procedure to determine if it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt C. holding that before a federal constitutional error can be held harmless the court must be able to declare a belief that it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt D. recognizing that where the error involved defies analysis by harmless error standards or the data is insufficient to conduct a meaningful harmless error analysis then the error will not be proven harmless beyond a reasonable doubt E. holding that federal appellate courts are authorized to engage in constitutional harmless error analysis in the first instance when a state appellate court does not undertake such an analysis and that such error must be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that in order to conclude that federal constitutional error is harmless court must find that error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless otherwise provided herein, top heavy plan provisions shall apply to Plan Years beginning after December 31, 2001. For Plan Years prior to January 1, 2002, the top heavy status of the Plan shall be determined according to the provisions of the Plan then in effect.

assistant: Effective Dates
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: To the extent necessary to carry out the intent of the parties, the obligations of each party hereunder, including, without limitation, your obligations under paragraphs 6, 7, 8 and 9 and the Company’s obligations under paragraphs 3, 7(c), 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 20, shall remain in full force and effect for the entire period provided therein notwithstanding the termination of your employment for any reason or the expiration of the Contract Period.

assistant: Survival
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 obligations of the parties pursuant to Sections 3.11, 4.2 and 4.3 (if applicable), 5 through 9, 13, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23 and 25 , as applicable, shall survive the Executive’s Termination of Employment hereunder for the period designated under each of those respective sections.

assistant: Survival
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: F.Supp.2d 362, 365 (S.D.N.Y.2009) (quoting Virgin Atl. Airways, Ltd. v. Nat’l Mediation Bd., 956 F.2d 1245, 1255 (2d Cir.1992)). 10 . Grand Crossing, LIP. v. U.S. Underwriters Ins. Co., No. 03 Civ. 5429, 2008 WL 4525400, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 6, 2008) (quoting S.E.C. v. Ashbury Capital Partners, No. 00 Civ. 7898, 2001 WL 604044, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 31, 2001)). Accord Commerce Funding Corp. v. Comprehensive Habilitation Servs., Inc., 233 F.R.D. 355, 361 (S.D.N.Y.2005) ("[A] movant may not raise on a motion for reconsideration any matter that it did not raise previously to the court on the underlying motion sought to be reconsidered.”). 11 . U.S. v. Treacy, No. 08 CR 366, 2009 WL 47496, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 8, 2009) (citation and quotation marks omitted). Accord Shrader, 70 F.3d at 257 (<HOLDING>). 12 . Makas v. Orlando, No. 06 Civ. 14305, Options: A. holding that a party may not use a rule 60b motion as an occasion to relitigate its case B. holding that constitutional questions will not be decided if case can be decided on other grounds C. holding that the bia may deny a motion to reopen on the ground that the movant has not established prima facie eligibility for the underlying relief sought D. holding that district court lacked power to decide personal jurisdiction issue already decided by district of columbia superior court E. holding that a court will deny the motion when the movant seeks solely to relitigate an issue already decided

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a court will deny the motion when the movant seeks solely to relitigate an issue already decided
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 of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of the Company are set forth in Exhibit 21.1 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015. The Company owns, directly or indirectly, all of the capital stock or other equity interests of each Subsidiary free and clear of any Liens (other than liens held by DBD Credit Funding LLC and Equity Stock Transfer on behalf of certain holders of the Company’s debt), and all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of each Subsidiary are validly issued and are fully paid, non-assessable and free of preemptive and similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. If the Company has no subsidiaries, all other references to the Subsidiaries or any of them in the Transaction Documents shall be disregarded.

assistant: Subsidiaries
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), at least two Business Days before the Closing 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: It should also be noted that Petitioner filed a pro se Response (Diet. # 237) to the Government’s Supplemental Response claiming he is entitled to a downward departure from the conspiracy sentence". This request was withdrawn by Petitioner’s counsel at the hearing held on December 10,1996. The question is, when a habeas corpus motion has been granted vacating petitioner’s § 924(c) sentence under Bailey, does this Court have jurisdiction to consider the enhancement pursuant to § 2Dl.l(b)(l) for “possession” of a firearm and resentence the Petitioner. This is a novel issue which has arisen in the aftermath of Bailey, and the absence of Circuit Court precedent has produced inconsistent results among the District Courts. Compare Rodriguez v. United States, 933 F.Supp. 279 (S.D.N.Y.1996) (<HOLDING>), and Warner v. United States, 926 F.Supp. 1387 Options: A. holding that defendant may be subject to death penalty on resentencing B. holding resentencing is not always required C. holding that resentencing is required D. holding that courts limited jurisdiction precludes twolevel increase on resentencing E. holding that constitution and courts jurisdiction allow for twolevel increase on resentencing

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that courts limited jurisdiction precludes twolevel increase on resentencing
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: there was some separation in time of the negligent acts. For example, we cited the analysis in Butzow v. Wausau Memorial Hosp. 51 Wis. 2d 281, 288-289, 187 N.W.2d 349 (1971)(original tortfeasor and physician jointly and severally liable only for aggravation of damages), and Restatement (Second) of Torts § 879 (1979)(discussing situations where the tortfeasors can be jointly liable only for the aggravation of initial injuries; in other situations, the tortfeasors can be jointly liable for the entire harm). The Farrell court also cited Sumnicht v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., 121 Wis. 2d 338, 359, 360 N.W.2d 2 (1984) (if more than one tortfeasor contributed to the injury, the law of joint and several liability applies); and Arbet v. Gussarson, 66 Wis. 2d 551, 557, 225 N.W.2d 431 (1975) (<HOLDING>). See Farrell, 151 Wis. 2d at 60 n.3. In Options: A. holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to permit a design defect products liability expert to submit an untimely addendum stating a new claim of failure to warn after defense expert refuted the basis of original design defect opinion B. holding that it was not important that the automobiles design defect did not actually cause the initial accident as long as it was a substantial factor in causing burn injury after gas tank erupted C. holding that notice of a defect could not be imputed to a defendant inasmuch as it created the defect D. holding that it is not E. holding that complaint alleging design defect likely to cause damage failed to state a claim

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that it was not important that the automobiles design defect did not actually cause the initial accident as long as it was a substantial factor in causing burn injury after gas tank erupted
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 there is a Change in Control of the Company (as defined in the Plan ), then in the event of the Grantee’s Involuntary Termination Without Cause within two (2) years following the effective date of the Change in Control, all the outstanding Phantom Stock Units shall automatically become 100% vested and free of all restrictions on the Grantee’s termination of Employment date.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you do not terminate your agreement before the date the revised terms become effective , your continued access to or use of the airbnb platform will constitute acceptance of the revised terms .

assistant: Contract by using
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 provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, except that neither the Borrower nor any other Loan Party may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an assignee in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of this Section, (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this Section or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of subsection (e) of this Section (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in subsection (d) of this Section and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

assistant: Successors