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: their children because no conflicting interests were implicated. See Burke v. Smith, 252 F.3d 1260, 1264 (11th Cir.2001) ("[U]nless a conflict of interest exists between the representative and minor, a district court need not even consider the question whether a guardian ad litem should be appointed.”); Gonzalez-Gonzalez-Jimenez de Ruiz v. United States, 231 F.Supp.2d 1187, 1196 (M.D.Fla.2002) aff'd sub nom. Gonzalez-Jiminez De Ruiz v. United States, 378 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir.2004) (noting that "[tjypically, the next friend who sues on behalf of the minor is that minor’s parent” and finding that the mother of the minor plaintiffs, as a party to the suit, was not required to bring the action as a "next friend”); see also Croce v. Bromley Corp., 623 F.2d 1084, 1093 (5th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). 17 . The court concluded that "the instant Options: A. holding that claim belongs to child but allowing mother to assert it on childs behalf B. holding a fathers duty to support his minor child did not include a duty to contribute to the cost of the minor childs college education C. holding that the minor was otherwise represented because the childs legal guardian his mother brought the action on his behalf D. holding in a paternity action that the selection and change of the childs surname from the name chosen by the mother must be based on the trial courts determination that renaming is in the childs best interests and the record must affirmatively show such a name change is required for the welfare of the minor child E. holding in syllabus point 4 that when a childs mental health records are sought to be produced and the child is not directly represented in the proceeding the child should be joined as a party and a guardian ad litem must be appointed by the circuit court to protect the childs rights

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the minor was otherwise represented because the childs legal guardian his mother brought the action on his behalf
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: Employee agrees that to the maximum extent permitted by law, he shall not make any statement, whether written or oral, that is willfully disparaging of the Company, the members of its Board of Directors, and its senior management team. The Company agrees that it shall instruct its senior management team with knowledge of this Agreement and members of its Board of Directors not to make any statement that is willfully disparaging of Employee. Nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit or limit the ability of the Parties (and in the case of the Company, its current and former employees and members of its Board of Directors) from enforcing the terms of this Agreement or testifying truthfully (including opinion testimony) in any legal proceeding, and/or in response to a valid subpoena issued in connection with a legitimate Court or administrative proceeding, including but not limited to depositions.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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 Licensor has sufficient corporate power and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement and each of the Ancillary Agreements to which each is (or will be) a party, and to perform its obligations hereunder and thereunder. The execution, delivery and performance by the Licensor of this Agreement and each of the Ancillary Agreements to which each is (or will be) a party has been duly and validly authorized by the Licensor and no additional limited liability company or corporate (as applicable) authorization or consent by the Licensor is required in connection therewith.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that ground was inappropriate. 5 . Walter Energy potentially could have asserted a claim against the Audley defendants based on similar federal securities-regulation statutes; however, it has elected not to do so, stating in its complaint that "the claims asserted herein are based entirely on Alabama law, and no claims are asserted under any federal law.” 6 . Our holding on this issue obviates the need to review the trial court’s alternate basis for dismissing Walter Energy’s Alabama Securities Act claim, specifically, that Walter Energy lacks standing to pursue such a claim because it has not alleged that it purchased any shares of Walter Energy stock following the Audley defendants’ alleged scheme to manipulate the share price. See, e.g., Cowin v. Bresler, 741 F.2d 410 (D.C.Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). 7 . Walter Energy does not explain in its Options: A. holding that stepgrandfather who was neither a biological nor an adoptive grandparent lacked standing to seek access to stepgrandchildren B. holding that a party that was neither a purchaser nor a seller of the securities involved lacked standing to seek injunctive relief under the federal counterpart to 8617 C. holding because the district court refused to grant plaintiff reinstatement or any other injunctive relief the damage award was neither incidental to nor intertwined with any other relief D. holding that neither injunctive nor declaratory relief is available to private litigants under the fdcpa E. holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to seek injunctive relief because they failed to demonstrate any likelihood that they would end up back in jail where alleged constitutional violations occurred

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a party that was neither a purchaser nor a seller of the securities involved lacked standing to seek injunctive relief under the federal counterpart to 8617
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: part, vacated in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 . This consent form pertained to Judge's masto-pexy surgery. On the same day, Judge signed a consent form for abdominoplasty surgery with functionally identical language: "I consent to the photographing or televising of the operation(s) or procedure(s) to be performed, including appropriate portions of my body, for medical, scientific or educational purposes, provided my identity is not revealed by the pictures." The parties make no distinction between the language used in each form. 2 . Judge eventually settled with the news organization and dismissed her claims against it. 3 . Judge has not challenged the district court's determination that a plainti Ill.Dec. 916, 554 N.E.2d 988, 994 (1990) (<HOLDING>) with West v. Media Gen. Convergence, Inc., 53 Options: A. holding that a claim for falselight invasion of privacy requires the pleading of special damages B. holding that a false light claim requires pleading and proof of special damages C. recognizing falselight invasion of privacy D. holding that the fact that federal rule of civil procedure 9b requires a heightened pleading standard for some claims but not for a section 1983 claim against a municipality means that the rules do not require a heightened pleading standard for such a claim E. holding that statute outlawing use of contraceptive devices was an unlawful invasion of the privacy of marital relationship

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a claim for falselight invasion of privacy requires the pleading of special 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: candidates after discussing and sharing their impressions with each other, Def.’s Statement ¶¶ 22, 23; PL’s Statement ¶¶ 22, 23. As discussed above, the general use of a panel to conduct a round of preliminary interview as well as Arquette’s non-participation fell squarely within the FDIC guidelines. See FDIC Guidelines at 2. And although the plaintiff insists that the “obvious explanation” for Arquette’s choice not to interview all thirteen candidates herself is that she “wanted to remove [herself] from picking and choosing among a diverse and unfiltered pool of candidates,” PL’s Opp’n at 36, narrowing the pool of candidates through the use of a preliminary round of interviews hardly suggests a discriminatory motive, see Pollard v. Quest Diagnostics, 610 F.Supp.2d 1, 22 (D.D.C.2009) (<HOLDING>). Given the strength of the defendant’s Options: A. recognizing that stray remarks are insufficient to raise an inference of discrimination and concluding that a comment by the decisionmaker that he selected a candidate for a promotion because the candidate was a bright intelligent knowledgeable young man was a stray remark that did not raise an inference of age discrimination B. holding that the mere fact that two caucasian candidates were referred to second level interviews without more was insufficient to raise an inference of discrimination because the plaintiff must have shown the employer acted because of his membership in a protected class C. holding that evidence of overt discrimination coupled with a showing that the employer had falsely stated that an outside consultant had made the termination decision were adequate to raise an inference of illegal age discrimination D. holding plaintiff failed to raise inference of discrimination where only evidence plaintiff adduced was fact that decisionmaker was different race E. holding that the trial courts in camera interviews were within its discretion because the defendant had waived his right to be present during the juror interviews

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the mere fact that two caucasian candidates were referred to second level interviews without more was insufficient to raise an inference of discrimination because the plaintiff must have shown the employer acted because of his membership in a protected class
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: 130 S.Ct. 1855; Smith, 130 S.Ct. 1382; Spisak, 130 S.Ct. 676; McDaniel, 130 S.Ct. 665; Knowles, 556 U.S. Ill, 129 S.Ct. 1411; Waddington, 555 U.S. 179, 129 S.Ct. 823; Wright, 552 U.S. 120, 128 S.Ct. 743; Uttecht, 551 U.S. 1, 127 S.Ct. 2218; Schriro, 550 U.S. 465, 127 S.Ct. 1933; Carey, 549 U.S. 70, 127 S.Ct. 649; Rice, 546 U.S. 333, 126 S.Ct. 969; Kane, 546 U.S. 9, 126 S.Ct. 407; Payton, 544 U.S. 133, 125 S.Ct. 1432; Holland, 542 U.S. 649, 124 S.Ct. 2736; Yarborough, 541 U.S. 652, 124 S.Ct. 2140; Middleton, 541 U.S. 433, 124 S.Ct. 1830; Mitchell, 540 U.S. 12, 124 S.Ct. 7; Gentry, 540 U.S. 1, 124 S.Ct. 1; Lockyer, 538 U.S. 63, 123 S.Ct. 1166; Woodford, 537 U.S. 19, 123 S.Ct. 357; Early, 537 U.S. 3, 123 S.Ct. 362; Bell, 535 U.S. 685, 122 S.Ct. 1843. 3 . See Parker, 132 S.Ct. at 2155 (<HOLDING>); Coleman, 132 S.Ct. at 2062 (holding that the Options: A. holding that federal circuit would henceforth apply its own law rather than regional circuit law to questions involving the relationship between patent law and other federal and state law rights B. holding that the sixth circuit erred in finding that the state courts jury instructions were contrary to clearly established federal law C. holding that where the supreme court has expressly left an open question circuit precedent is immaterial and there is no clearly established law for the state court to have unreasonably applied D. holding that the sixth circuit erred by following its own precedent rather than that of the supreme court in determining what is clearly established federal law E. holding that clearly established law is construed as supreme court or tenth circuit decisions on point or the clearly established weight of authority from other courts

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the sixth circuit erred by following its own precedent rather than that of the supreme court in determining what is clearly established federal law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: support of the claimed restriction. Rather, Idrogo merely held that a particular plaintiff bearing no relation to the Apache warrior Gerónimo could not sue for the "return” of Geronimo’s remains because that plaintiff did not satisfy the constitutional in efit American Indians, but rather to strike a balance between the needs of scientists, educators, and historians on the one hand, and American Indians on the other. Plaintiffs’ claim that they are victims of a mistaken over-enforcement of § 3002(a) is within the provision's zone of interests. 15 . The Supreme Court has found Congress’s use of the present tense to be significant when interpreting Congress’s intentions. Gwaltney of Smithfield Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., 484 U.S. 49, 59, 108 S.Ct. 376, 98 L.Ed.2d 306 (1987) (<HOLDING>) (superceded in irrelevant part by statute). Options: A. holding that the limitation act does not apply to claims brought under the clean water act B. holding that congresss use of the present tense in 33 usc 1365 meant that citizens could not maintain a suit for past violations of the clean water act C. holding that denial of permit under section 404 of the clean water act was a taking D. holding that statute authorizing citizen suits against those alleged to be in violation of the clean water act cwa conferred no jurisdiction over cases based on wholly past violations E. holding that adequate notice is a mandatory precondition of a clean water act citizen suit

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that congresss use of the present tense in 33 usc 1365 meant that citizens could not maintain a suit for past violations of the clean water act
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 has not issued any shares of Common Stock or other securities or instruments convertible into, exchangeable for or otherwise entitling the holder thereof to acquire shares of Common Stock that would be integrated with the sale of the Securities to the Purchasers for purposes of the Securities Act or of any applicable stockholder approval provisions, including under the rules and regulations of any exchange or automated quotation system on which any of the securities of the Company are listed or designated. Assuming the accuracy of the representations and warranties of the Purchasers to the Company as set forth in the Agreements, the offer and sale of the Securities by the Company to the Purchasers pursuant to the Agreements will be exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act.

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: Any notice required or permitted under this Agreement shall be deemed given when delivered either personally, by overnight courier, or when deposited in a United States Post Office, postage prepaid, addressed as appropriate, to the Participant either at his/her address set forth below or such other address as he or she may designate in writing to the Company, or to the Company: Attention: Vice President - Legal (or said designee), at the Company's address or such other address as the Company may designate in writing to the Participant.

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: 2008) (per curiam). Other Circuits have held that persons with pre-SORNA sex-offense convictions became subject to the Act’s registration requirements upon the statute’s enactment in July 2006. See, e.g., May, 535 F.3d, at 915-919; United States v. Hinckley, 550 F.3d 926, 929-935 (CA10 2008). Because Carr traveled from Alabama to Indiana before both the enactment of SORNA and the Attorney General’s regulation, we have no occasion to consider whether a pre-SORNA sex offender whose travel and failure to register occurred between July 2006 and February 2007 is subject to liability under § 2250, and we express no view on that question. We similarly express no view as to whether § 72.3 was properly promulgated—a question that has also divided the Circuits. Compare Cain, 583 F.3d, at 419-424 (<HOLDING>), with United States v. Dean, 604 F.3d 1275, Options: A. holding that district court lacked jurisdiction over claim for interim social security benefits during pendency of administrative proceedings B. holding that the attorney general lacked good cause for issuing the interim regulation without adhering to the noticeandcomment and publication requirements of the administrative procedure act apa C. holding that judicial review of final agency action under the administrative procedure act provides the proper procedure to challenge the sufficiency of an eis D. holding that court may not impose procedural requirements on agency decisionmaking that go beyond those of the administrative procedure act E. holding that when an agency fails to follow the proper procedure under the illinois administrative procedure act for the adoption of rules the rule is invalid

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the attorney general lacked good cause for issuing the interim regulation without adhering to the noticeandcomment and publication requirements of the administrative procedure act apa
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 term of each Stock Appreciation Right shall be set by the Committee at the time of grant; provided, however , that no Stock Appreciation Right granted hereunder shall be exercisable after, and each Stock Appreciation Right shall expire, ten (10) years from the date it was granted.

assistant: Terms
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 a state prosecution, but it cannot reprosecute him for the agreement he made with the Outfit to engage in that pattern of conduct just because it finds evidence of ever more heinous actions in support of that agreement. It is worth noting that if the earlier charge had been a substantive one accusing Calabrese of extortion, and the new indictment charged him with the substantive offense of murder, the situation would be entirely different: those are two different offenses. Indeed, the government might this time around have been able to prosecute one or both of these defendants for conspiracy to commit murder for the purpose of gaining entrance to or maintaining a position in an enterprise engaged in racketeering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a). See Basciano, 599 F.3d at 198-99 (<HOLDING>). But that is not the choice that it made. The Options: A. holding that a conspiracy to violate section 1959 is not the same offense as a conspiracy to violate section 1962 B. holding that two conspiracies existed where the members of the second conspiracy did not know about the first conspiracy did not benefit from the first conspiracy and were connected with the first conspiracy only through a middleman C. holding that a person alleging a conspiracy to violate constitutional rights must do more than simply aver that a conspiracy existed D. holding that the prior conspiracy to which honken had pleaded guilty was not the same as the conspiracy underlying the capital offenses E. holding that the notion of enterprise conspiracy has largely rendered the old distinction between single conspiracy and multiple conspiracy irrelevant to rico conspiracy charges

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a conspiracy to violate section 1959 is not the same offense as a conspiracy to violate section 1962
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the Plan constitute the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede in their entirety all prior undertakings and agreements of the Company and the Grantee with respect to the subject matter hereof, and may not be modified adversely to the Grantee’s interest except by means of a writing signed by the Company and the Grantee.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided herein, no Originator will sell, assign (by operation of law or otherwise) or otherwise dispose of, or create or suffer to exist any Adverse Claim (except for Permitted Adverse Claims) upon (including, without limitation, the filing of any financing statement) or with respect to, any Pool Receivable or other Related Rights, or assign any right to receive income in respect thereof.

assistant: Liens
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 amendment, modification, termination or waiver of any provision of this Agreement, nor any consent to any departure therefrom, shall be effective unless the same shall be in writing and signed by the Lender and Borrower.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: instead, the dispute is whether the consent was voluntary. ANALYSIS The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that it is “[t]he right of the people to be secure in then-persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable seizures ... and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.” U.S. Const, amend. IV. Evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment shall not be admissible at trial. See Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 657, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081 (1961) (“[T]he exclusionary rule is an essential part of both the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments .... ”); Sing v. Wainwright, 148 So.2d 19, 20 (Fla.1962) (“This lid and involuntary where the police falsely assert that they have a valid search warrant. See Bumper, 391 U.S. at 548-50, 88 S.Ct. 1788 (<HOLDING>). In Royer, a case originating in Florida, the Options: A. holding that consent was coerced when officers told defendants wife they came to search the premises and she allowed them to enter B. holding that defendants consent was involuntary where defendant consented to search following a warrantless entry and officers explained that absent consent the officers would obtain a warrant C. holding consent invalid when given under coercive circumstances in which police misrepresented that they had a warrant to search the home D. holding that search of backpack constituted a search of defendants person and was not authorized by search warrant for premises E. holding consent involuntary when police told defendants grandmother they had a search warrant and she allowed them to enter and search

assistant: The best answer is E. holding consent involuntary when police told defendants grandmother they had a search warrant and she allowed them to enter and search
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: 25, 1982, appellants moved for a continuance. Their motion was denied and the hearing was held. Both the State and the appellants presented evidence. At the conclusion of the hearing the trial judge found the evidence “overwhelmingly in favor of the State.” On May 26, appellants made a motion to reopen testimony which was denied by the trial judge. Appellants then made a motion for a new trial which was also denied. The Aswells then took this appeal. Assignments # 1 and # 3 Through these assignments of error appellants attack the trial judge’s denial of their motions for a continuance and to reopen testimony. Reopening the record to allow the presentation of additional evidence would have amounted to a post-hearing continuance. Cf. Sather v. White, 388 So.2d 402 (La.App. 1st Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the trial judge’s action with respect Options: A. holding denial of continuance to be an abuse of discretion B. holding that a defendant who stipulated his drug amounts prior to sentencing waived his right to appeal on the issue of the drug amounts C. holding it was error for trial court not to grant a continuance when appellant moved in open court to disqualify judge or in the alternative for a continuance to file a proper motion D. holding states failure to oppose a continuance of preliminary hearing at the request of the defense is not bad faith and presentation of case to grand jury during continuance was proper E. holding the record open for additional testimony amounts to a continuance

assistant: The best answer is E. holding the record open for additional testimony amounts to a continuance
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: Interest on the 2016 Note, unpaid fees and other sums payable thereunder shall be calculated on the basis of a 360 day year consisting of 12 thirty day months. Interest on the 2016 Note and any unpaid fees and other sums payable hereunder shall be calculated on the basis of a 360 day year consisting of 12 thirty day months.

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: applied the Strickland test by looking to the following three elements that must be satisfied: (1) the underlying claim has arguable merit; (2) counsel had no reasonable basis for his actions or failure to act; and (3) the PCRA petitioner suffered prejudice as a result of counsel’s error, with prejudice measured by whether there is a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different. Commonwealth v. Pierce, 515 Pa. 153, 527 A.2d 973, 975 (1987). Counsel is presumed to have rendered effective assistance of counsel. ue is laced with misrepresentations as it omits any discussion of his vicious attack on his own counsel, which precipitated counsel’s withdrawal. It submits that Appellant also ignores the PCRA court’s findings that he assert (3d Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). It was appropriate for the PCRA court to rale Options: A. holding that a defendants unprovoked physical battery of his attorney in the courtroom constituted extremely serious misconduct that amounts to the forfeiture of the right to counsel regardless of whether the defendant intended to relinquish the right B. holding that the forfeiture of the right to counsel unlike the waiver of such right does not require that the defendant intend to relinquish a right but rather may be the result of the defendants extremely serious misconduct or extremely dilatory conduct C. holding that a defendant who stipulated his drug amounts prior to sentencing waived his right to appeal on the issue of the drug amounts D. holding that a defendants unprovoked physical battery of his attorney at a hearing qualifies as the sort of extremely serious misconduct that amounts to the forfeiture of the right to counsel E. recognizing that a criminal defendants right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a defendants unprovoked physical battery of his attorney in the courtroom constituted extremely serious misconduct that amounts to the forfeiture of the right to counsel regardless of whether the defendant intended to relinquish the right
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: S.Ct. 1146, 117 L.Ed.2d 391 (1992). There is no explicit reference to a scienter requirement for any element of the offense described in 36 C.F.R. §§ 251.50, 251.51, and 261.10(k). As to the public welfare or regulatory purpose of the statute, there can be no doubt that regulations of this sort aid the Forest Service in its role of protecting lands under its stewardship and promoting public access, while controlling the potentially deleterious effects that unregulated group-use may have on public resources and health. Further, other courts have declined to impose a scienter requirement when reviewing convictions based upon similar Forest Service regulations. United States v. Doremus, 888 F.2d 630, 634 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1046, 111 S.Ct. 751, 112 L.Ed.2d 772 (1991) (<HOLDING>). In United States v. Kent, 945 F.2d 1441 (9th Options: A. holding that release must specifically identify persons to be discharged in order to ensure that intent of parties is fulfilled B. holding that in chapter 7 context the debtors had no power to transfer the property without the approval of the trustee C. holding that in the commercial mining context no knowledge requirement must be met in order to convict parties of mining without the appropriate permits D. holding that the point on appeal and the objection in the trial court must be the same in order for it to be preserved for appeal E. holding that all five elements of 547b must be met

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that in the commercial mining context no knowledge requirement must be met in order to convict parties of mining without the appropriate permits
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 384 U.S. 155 86 S.Ct. 1383 16 L.Ed.2d 434 TEXASv.UNITED STATES. No. 1218. Supreme Court of the United States May 2, 1966 Waggoner Carr, Atty. Gen. of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Asst. Atty. Gen., and Mary K. Wall, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant. Solicitor General Marshall, for the United States. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663, 86 S.Ct. 1079. 2 Mr. Justice BLACK dissents for the reasons given in his dissenting opinion in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections, supra. 3 Mr. Justice HARLAN, joined by Mr. Justice STEWART, dissents for the reasons given in his dissenting opinion in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections, supra.

assistant: 2
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In addition to such other rights of indemnification as they may have as members of the Board or a committee thereof or as officers or employees of the Company, members of the Board, the Committee and any officers or employees of the Company to whom authority to act for the Board or Committee is delegated will be indemnified by the Company against all reasonable expenses, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in connection with the defense of any action, suit or proceeding, or in connection with any appeal therein, to which they or any of them may be party by reason of any action taken or failure to act under or in connection with the Plan, Award, or any right granted hereunder, and against all amounts in settlement thereof (provided such settlement is approved by independent legal counsel selected by the Company) or paid in satisfaction of a judgment in any such action, suit or proceeding, except in relation to matters as to which it will be adjudged in such action, suit or proceeding that such person is liable for gross negligence, bad faith or intentional misconduct in duties; provided , however , that within sixty (60) days after the institution of such action, suit or proceeding, such person will offer to the Company, in writing, the opportunity at its own expense to handle and defend the same. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Company will pay the expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) of defending any such claim, action, suit or proceeds in advance of its final disposition, upon receipt of such person’s written agreement to repay all amounts advanced if it should ultimately be determined that such person is not entitled to be indemnified under this Section 21.

assistant: Indemnifications
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 have any concerns about your login details or think they have been misused , you should contact support@deliveroo.co.uk straight away to let us know .

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to sell explosives stolen from the United States. The sale occurred on December 29, 1976, and the indictment was filed on December 29, 1981. Id. at 899. The “[defendants moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the prosecution was barred by the five-year period of limitations provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3282.” Id. at 900. “On the premise that the day of the last overt act is counted as the first day of the limitations period,” the defendants in Guerro, lik nciple was equally applicable to criminal prosecutions for substantive offenses as well as conspiracy charges. See Guerro, 694 F.2d at 903. In United States v. Butler, 792 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir.1986), the defendants challenged their convictions for conspiracy to import and possess marijuana, 1534 (9th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>) Admittedly, this Court has noted in conspiracy Options: A. holding that for purposes of oneyear statute of limitations where accident occurred on february 1 1988 a leap year the determination of whether this action is time barred shall be made on the basis of considering a year having 366 days and concluding action filed on february 1 1989 was timely B. holding that a fiveyear limitation period for a crime completed on february 15 1986 expired on february 151991 C. holding that where conversion occurred on september 4 1935 twoyear limitation period expired on and with september 4 1937 D. holding fiveyear limitation period in 28 usc 2462 runs from date of predicate violation not from date of administrative assessment of sanction E. holding that 851es fiveyear limitation is not unconstitutional because it is reasonably tailored to impose enhanced sentences on recidivists

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a fiveyear limitation period for a crime completed on february 15 1986 expired on february 151991
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: The term “Evaluation Materials” does not include information which, you establish through written documentation, (ii) was or becomes available to you on a non-confidential basis from a source other than the Company or its representatives, provided that such source is not prohibited from disclosing such information to you by a contractual, legal or fiduciary obligation to the Company or its representatives, or

assistant: No
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, nor shall it permit any of its subsidiaries to, enter into, renew, extend or be a party to, any transaction or series of related transactions (including, without limitation, the purchase, sale, lease, transfer or exchange of property or assets of any kind or the rendering of services of any kind) with any Affiliate, except in the ordinary course of business in a manner and to an extent consistent with past practice and necessary or desirable for the prudent operation of its business, for fair consideration and on terms no less favorable to it or its subsidiaries than would be obtainable in a comparable arm's length transaction with a Person that is not an Affiliate thereof.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: while we do not and can not review every message or other material posted or sent by users of the service , and are not responsible for any content of these messages or materials , we reserve the right , but are not obligated , to delete , move , or edit messages or materials , including without limitation property profiles , public postings and messages , that we , in our sole discretion , deem to violate the code of conduct set out above or any applicable content guidelines , or to be otherwise unacceptable .

assistant: Content removal
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 set forth below, no public release or announcement concerning the transactions contemplated hereby shall be issued by the Company or the Investors without the prior consent of the Company (in the case of a release or announcement by the Investors) or the Investors (in the case of a release or announcement by the Company) (which consents shall not be unreasonably withheld), except as such release or announcement may be required by law or the applicable rules or regulations of any securities exchange or securities market, in which case the Company or the Investors, as the case may be, shall allow the Investors or the Company, as applicable, to the extent reasonably practicable in the circumstances, reasonable time to comment on such release or announcement in advance of such issuance. By 8:30 a.m. (New York City time) on the trading day immediately following the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the Company shall (i) issue a press release disclosing the execution of this Agreement and describing the transactions contemplated hereby and by the other Transaction Documents and (ii) file a Current Report on Form 8-K attaching the press release described in the foregoing sentence as well as copies of the material Transaction Documents. In addition, the Company will make such other filings and notices in the manner and time required by the SEC or Nasdaq.

assistant: Publicity
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 shall (and shall cause each of its Subsidiaries to) maintain with financially sound and reputable independent insurers, insurance with respect to its properties and business against loss or damage of the kinds customarily insured against by Persons engaged in the same or similar business, of such types and in such amounts as are customarily carried under similar circumstances by such other Persons, including workers’ compensation insurance, public liability and property and casualty insurance.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion. Ostad v. Oregon Health Sci Univ., 327 F.3d 876, 883 (9th Cir.2003) (jury instructions); Bell v. Clackamas Cty., 341 F.3d 858, 865 (9th Cir.2003) (judgment as a matter of law). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing a jury instruction requiting Tomlin to establish that the defendants’ actions were intentional, particularly because the defendants’ testified at trial that their actions were intentional. Cf. Freeman v. Arpaio, 125 F.3d 732, 737 (9th Cir.1997) The district court properly denied Tomlin’s motions for new trial and judgment as a matter of law because the jury’s verdict was properly supported by the law and evidence. See Madrid v. Gomez, 190 F.3d 990, 996 (9th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). AFFIRMED. ** This disposition is not Options: A. holding defendant must demonstrate an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyers performance B. holding that a plaintiff must demonstrate that in the absence of an injunction irreparable injury is likely and not merely a possibility C. holding that movant must demonstrate that irreparable injury is likely in the absence of an injunction D. holding that an inmate alleging denial of access to the courts must show an actual injury E. holding that inmates must demonstrate an actual injury

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that inmates must demonstrate an actual injury
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: 95 L.Ed. 702 (1951). In Finn, the Court held that the plaintiffs claims against two insurance companies and an insurance agent were not “separate” because these claims alleged “a single wrong.” The Court reached this conclusion in part because “[t]he allegations [in the complaint against the first defendant] involve substantially the same facts and transactions as do the allegations [in the complaint against the other defendants].” Id. at 16, 71 S.Ct. at 541. By contrast, Boggs’ claims against Lewis and Safeco involve substantially different facts and transactions. Unlike the negligence claim against Lewis, the claim against Safeco “primarily involves the insurer’s conduct and other events occurring after the automobile accident.” Bailey v. Scholler, 630 F.Supp. 337, 339 (D.Mont.1986) (<HOLDING>). In Finn, the Supreme Court also based its Options: A. holding that a bad faith claim is a tort B. holding that a negligence claim against an insured and a bad faith claim against the insurer are not separate as the first must be proved to prevail on the second C. holding that a plaintiffs negligence claim against a driver and her bad faith claim against the drivers insurer under mca 33182016 are separate and independent for purposes of 28 usc 1441c D. holding that under montana common law an insurer cannot be held liable for bad faith in denying a claim if the insurer had a reasonable basis for contesting the claim E. holding that insured cannot bring an action against its insurer for bad faith failure to settle a claim in the absence of an excess verdict

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a plaintiffs negligence claim against a driver and her bad faith claim against the drivers insurer under mca 33182016 are separate and independent for purposes of 28 usc 1441c
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive represents and warrants that she is not party to any agreement, contract, understanding, covenant, judgment or decree or under any obligation, contractual or otherwise, with any other party that in any way restricts or adversely affects her ability to act for the Corporation in all of the respects contemplated hereby, including but not limited to any obligations to comply with any non-compete or non-solicitation provisions.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: Purchasers may terminate this Agreement (i) at any time prior to the Closing Date by written notice signed by all Purchasers to Company if Purchasers shall decline to purchase the Subordinated Notes for any reason permitted by this Agreement or (ii) on the Closing Date if any condition described in Section 3.2 is not fulfilled by the Company or waived in writing by the Purchasers on or prior to the Closing Date. Any termination pursuant to this Section shall be without liability on the part of (i) Company to Purchasers or (ii) Purchasers to Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If applicable tax laws impose a tax, social insurance, payroll tax, payment on account or other tax-related withholding (“Tax-Related Withholding”) obligation, each affected employee shall, no later than the date of the event creating such obligation, make provision satisfactory to the Company for payment of any Tax-Related Withholding required by law to be withheld in connection with any transaction related to Options granted to or shares acquired by such employee pursuant to the Plan. The affected employee shall, if required by law, pay such amounts to the Company or the relevant Designated Subsidiary. The Company or a Designated Subsidiary may, to the extent permitted by law, deduct any such amounts from any payment of any kind otherwise due to an employee (including the withholding of shares of Common Stock otherwise issuable to the employee at the end of a Plan Period).

assistant: Withholdings