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: threatened to use a firearm during the commission of the crime”; (2) where the defendant admitted to use or threatened use; and (3) where the court convened a special proceeding and found use or threatened use of a firearm. Or Laws 1979, ch 779, § 2. The third option, action by the sentencing judge, could only occur if, before sentencing, the judge determined that the “conviction” did not necessarily establish use or threatened use of a firearm. That order of events — “conviction” followed by sentencing — indicates that the legislature intended the term “conviction” in ORS 161.610 to mean the finding of guilt as to the underlying criminal charge, and not that finding of guilt combined with the attendant criminal sentence. Compare State v. Isbell, 178 Or App 523, 527, 38 P3d 272 (2001) (<HOLDING>), and State v. Allison, 143 Or App 241, 246, Options: A. holding that because any precedes the list of items a felon is prohibited from possessing double jeopardy precludes more than one conviction for possession of any of the items listed B. holding that for sentencing purposes the government does not need to allege a defendants prior conviction or prove the fact of a prior conviction where that fact is not an element of the present crime C. holding that the term conviction means a finding of guilt and not a judgment where it refers to an event that precedes sentencing D. holding that where trial court is trier of fact and has made an affirmative deadly weapon finding it retains discretion to enter finding in judgment E. holding that trial court may arrest judgment on conviction for possession with intent to deliver and enter judgment of guilt on simple possession

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the term conviction means a finding of guilt and not a judgment where it refers to an event that precedes sentencing
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party shall deliver all notices, requests, consents, claims, demands, waivers and other communications under this Agreement in writing and addressed to the other Party at its address set forth below (or to such other address that the receiving Party may designate from time to time in accordance with this section). Each Party shall deliver all n otices by personal delivery, nationally recognized overnight courier, or certified or registered mail (in each case, return receipt requested, postage prepaid). Notwithstanding the foregoing, for the purposes of SECTION 7.1 , SECTION 7.2 , SECTION 7.3 , and Error! Reference source not found. , n otice given by facsimile or e-mail (with confirmation of transmission) will satisfy the requirements of this SECTION 13.4 . Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, a n otice is effective only (a) on receipt by the receiving Party, and (b) if the Party giving the n otice has complied with the requirements of this SECTION 13.4 .

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: the evidence of childhood abuse could have easily raised inferences that evoked sympathy for the eighteen-year-old Cox. Such evidence could have explained why Cox ended up in a gang and how Cox ended up in a position where he was aiding Williams in the perpetration of the murders. Indeed, one of Cox’s attorneys acknowledged that the omitted childhood abuse' evidence “would have been helpful to [the] defense” and “consistent with the themes that [they] presented in mitigation.” Where, as here, “counsel offers no strategic reason for failing to perform what would otherwise constitute the duty of a reasonably competent counsel, we may not invent such a strategy by engaging in a ‘post hoc rationalization of counsel’s conduct’.” See Richter v. Hickman, 578 F.3d 944, 959 (9th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the Supreme Court has acknowledged Options: A. holding that the defendant could not establish prejudice for trial counsels failure to hire an expert when the experts testimony would not have changed the nature of the states evidence B. holding that counsels strategic decisions were hard to attack C. holding counsels failure to object to victim impact testimony and evidence was not ineffective assistance of counsel when the trial record was silent as to counsels strategy D. holding that the failure to inform the defendant of his right to a sixperson jury and the failure to consult the defendant as to his wishes was an error for which a new trial was the only remedy E. holding that counsels failure to consult blood experts was not a strategic choice because counsel offered no reasoned explanation for the failure

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that counsels failure to consult blood experts was not a strategic choice because counsel offered no reasoned explanation for the failure
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: 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II). Because Petitioner is removable by reason of having committed a controlled substance offense, we lack jurisdiction over the petition for review, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). We further lack jurisdiction over the petition for review, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)®, because Petitioner challenges a discretionary decision — the denial of his application for cancellation of removal in the exercise of discretion. We lack jurisdiction to review a decision by the BIA denying an alien’s application for cancellation of removal in the exercise of discretion. Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 978 (9th Cir.2009). Petitioner has not set forth a colorable constitutional claim over which we otherwise could exercise jurisdiction. See id. (<HOLDING>). PETITION Options: A. holding that this is not a hybridrights case because plaintiffs demonstrated no colorable claim of infringement on the constitutional right B. holding that a judge did not act in clear absence of all jurisdiction where he had colorable authority to take the action in question C. holding that any challenge of an immigration judges discretionary determination must present a colorable claim in order for this court to exercise jurisdiction citing martinezrosas v gonzales 424 f3d 926 930 9th cir2005 D. holding that an appellate court must give deference to the trial judges determination of juror competency E. holding that similar argument did not raise a colorable question of law for purposes of jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that any challenge of an immigration judges discretionary determination must present a colorable claim in order for this court to exercise jurisdiction citing martinezrosas v gonzales 424 f3d 926 930 9th cir2005
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 Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 446 (4th ed.1994). 6 Malingering is the intentional production of false or grossly exaggerated physical or psychological symptoms motivated by external incentives, such as obtaining compensation or drugs, avoiding work or military duty, or evading criminal prosecution. American Psychiatric Association, supra, at 683. 7 The record does not reflect whether Dr. Nadel agreed to testify for defendants. If Dr. Nadel had been unwilling to do so, defendants could not have compelled his testimony. See Graham v. Gielchinsky, 126 N.J. 361, 369, 599 A.2d 149 (noting New Jersey in minority of jurisdictions not permitting compulsion of expert testimony); see also Genovese v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations, 234 N.J.Super. 375, 380, 560 A.2d 1272 (App.Div.) (<HOLDING>), certif. denied, 118 N.J. 195, 570 A.2d 960 Options: A. holding that an administrative agencys decision may not be based upon inadmissible expert opinion B. holding opinion of expert may not ordinarily be compelled against experts wishes C. holding that an insurer had conclusively established a reasonable basis for denying a claim when it relied on an experts opinion even though another expert had expressed a conflicting opinion D. holding that an experts opinion must be based on facts in evidence or within his or her knowledge and that the admission of an experts opinion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion E. holding even though experts are permitted to give an opinion they may not offer an opinion regarding the credibility of others

assistant: The best answer is B. holding opinion of expert may not ordinarily be compelled against experts wishes
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: Sublandlord and Subtenant each hereby represents, warrants and covenants to Landlord that, as of the date hereof and throughout the term of the Lease, it is not (i) an “employee benefit plan” as defined in Section 3(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ ERISA ”), that is subject to Title I of ERISA, (ii) a “plan” as defined in Section 4975(e)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “ Code ”), that is subject to Section 4975 of the Code, or (iii) an entity deemed to hold “plan assets” of any such employee benefit plan or plan. In addition, Sublandlord and Subtenant each represents, warrants and covenants to Landlord that it is not a “governmental plan” as defined in Section 3(32) of ERISA and is not subject to State statutes regulating investments of and fiduciary obligations with respect to government plans which would be violated by the transactions contemplated by the Lease or this Consent Agreement.

assistant: Erisa
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: we vacated Kosinski’s initial sentence, explaining that the use of non-jury-found facts in applying mandatory guidelines presented the same constitutional problem at issue in Booker. Kosinski I, 127 Fed.Appx. at 750-51. And when the district court on remand resentenced Kosinski without making any findings whatsoever regarding the tax-loss amount — laboring “under the misapprehension that it simply could not do so” after Booker — we vacated the sentence again, clarifying that the district court “should recognize and exercise its discretion to consider — or not to consider — [Kosinski’s] tax loss.” Kosinski II, 480 F.3d at 777. That discretion undermines the Kosinskis’ contention that the district court’s tax-loss finding was necessary to the final judgment. Cf. Hickman, 183 F.3d at 538 (<HOLDING>); Morse v. Comm’r, 419 F.3d 829, 834 (8th Options: A. holding that a bor determination could not have preclusive effect on the different issue the jury faced B. holding that the appealability of a judgment does not hinder its preclusive effect C. holding that the court erred in failing to inform the defendant that it could impose restitution but that the error did not affect the defendants substantial rights because the court informed the defendant that it could impose a maximum fine of an amount higher than the restitution amount imposed D. holding that a district courts discretionary determination of the amount of restitution a criminal taxevasion defendant had to pay was unnecessary to the judgment and thus could not be given preclusive effect E. holding that courts must look to the state that rendered the judgment to determine whether the courts of that state would afford the judgment preclusive effect

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a district courts discretionary determination of the amount of restitution a criminal taxevasion defendant had to pay was unnecessary to the judgment and thus could not be given preclusive effect
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: Hamilton v. Tenn. Secondary Sch. Athletic Ass’n, 552 F.2d 681, 682 (6th Cir.1976) (privilege of participation in interscholastie sports is outside due process protections); Albach v. Odle 531 F.2d 983, 984 (10th Cir.1976) (interscholastic athletic participation not a constitutionally protected right); Zehner v. Central Berkshire Reg’l Sch. Dist., 921 F.Supp. 850, 862 (D.Mass.1995) (taking part in interscholastic athletics was not constitutionally protected claim of entitlement); Simkins, 434 N.W.2d at 368 (interscholastie participation is mere expectancy); Bruce v. S.C. High Sch. League, 258 S.C. 546, 189 S.E.2d 817, 819 (1972) (participation in high school extracurricular activities is a privilege); Menke v. Ohio High Sch. Athletic Ass’n, 2 Ohio App.3d 244, 441 N.E.2d 620, 623 (1981) (<HOLDING>); Whipple, 629 P.2d at 386 (“While we think Options: A. holding high school which allowed student secular noncurricular activities to meet on school property was required to provide equal access to a christian student group B. holding drug testing high school student athletes was constitutional C. holding right to be fundamental D. holding that no special relationship existed between the school and student E. holding that student has no fundamental right to participate in high school athletics

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that student has no fundamental right to participate in high school athletics
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: omitted); accord Frederick v. State, 270 Ga. App. 397, 398 (606 SE2d 615) (2004). 12 Bostic, 332 Ga. App. at 606-07 (punctuation omitted) (emphasis in original); accord Handley v. State, 294 Ga. App. 236, 237 (668 SE2d 855) (2008); State v. Sanders, 274 Ga. App. 393, 396 (617 SE2d 633) (2005). 13 Bostic, 332 Ga. App. at 607; see also Handley, 294 Ga. App. at 237 (“Evidence which shows only that a defendant had alcohol in her body while driving provides insufficient probable cause to arrest for DUI.” (punctuation omitted)); State v. Ellison, 271 G SE2d 478) (2010) (“[W]hile bloodshot eyes and slightly paled skin may support a finding of impairment, such evidence does not require a finding of impairment.” (punctuation omitted) (emphasis omitted)). 20 See Bostic, 332 Ga. App. at 607-08 (<HOLDING>). 21 See Bostic, 332 Ga. App. at 607-08 Options: A. holding that there was insufficient probable cause for a dui arrest when inter alia although the defendants eyes were bloodshot and watery there was no evidence that her eyes were glassy or unfocused B. holding that there was probable cause to arrest defendant for dui where among other factors the officer observed defendant driving erratically and defendants eyes were glassy C. holding that there was sufficient probable cause for the defendants dui arrest when the evidence showed that the officer smelled the odor of alcohol on the defendants breath the defendants eyes were bloodshot and watery and his breath test was positive for alcohol D. holding that although two officers detected a strong odor of alcohol coming from the defendants person that fact did not support an arrest for dui when there was no evidence presented whatsoever as to the defendants manner of driving that her speech was slurred her gait unsteady or her eyes red and glassy E. holding that the trial court was authorized to conclude that probable cause supported an arrest for dui when evidence showed that the officer detected the odor of alcohol coming from the defendants vehicle the defendant admitted to having consumed alcohol her breath tested positive for the presence of alcohol her speech was slurred and her eyes were red and watery and she failed the oneleg stand field sobriety test

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that there was insufficient probable cause for a dui arrest when inter alia although the defendants eyes were bloodshot and watery there was no evidence that her eyes were glassy or unfocused
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: guidelines) with Minn.Stat. § 518.54, subd. 4a (2004) (“[s]upport order” includes rulings requiring a party to provide “monetary support, child care, [or] medical support”). Because the substantially changed circumstances required by Minn.Stat. § 518.64, subd. 2, to modify child support must render the existing support obligation unreasonable and unfair, the changed circumstances must pertain to the portion of the obligation sought to be modified. Thus, if multiple types of child support are involved in multiple motions to modify, the mere statement in a prior order that there was no substantial change in circumstances rendering the existing obligation unreasonable and unfair does not necessarily justify invoking res judicata in a subsequent proceeding. See Loo, 520 N.W.2d at 744 (<HOLDING>). Here, the CSM’s statements from the bench in Options: A. holding that untimeliness is sufficient grounds for denying a motion to quash B. holding untimeliness of motion to modify medical insurance payment did not preclude motion to modify maintenance C. holding the court had no jurisdiction to modify a validly imposed sentence on prisoners own motion D. holding that a postjudgment motion to incorporate a sanction as part of the final judgment is a motion to modify the judgment and extends the trial courts jurisdiction E. holding that an order addressing each parents motion to modify but failed to reference wifes motion to enforce an out of state judgment was not a final appealable order

assistant: The best answer is B. holding untimeliness of motion to modify medical insurance payment did not preclude motion to modify maintenance
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: (b) Receiving Party may disclose Confidential Information of Disclosing Party in accordance with a judicial or other governmental order, provided that Receiving Party either (i) gives the undersigned Disclosing Party reasonable notice prior to such disclosure to allow Disclosing Party a reasonable opportunity to seek a protective order or equivalent, 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: Administrative Loan Party shall give Administrative Agent notice of each of the following (which may be made by telephone if promptly confirmed in writing) promptly but in any event within 10 days after any Responsible Officer of any Loan Party knows of it: (a) the creation, or filing with the IRS or any other Governmental Authority, of any Contractual Obligation or other document extending, or having the effect of extending, the period for assessment or collection of any Taxes with respect to any Tax Affiliate, and (b) the creation of any Contractual Obligation of any Tax Affiliate, or the receipt of any request directed to any Tax Affiliate, to make any adjustment under Section 481(a) of the Code, by reason of a change in accounting method or otherwise, which would have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If Tenant requests the consent of Landlord under any provision of this Lease for any act that Tenant proposes to do hereunder, including, without limitation, assignment or subletting of the Premises, Tenant shall, as a condition to doing any such act and the receipt of such consent, reimburse Landlord promptly for any and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by Landlord in connection therewith, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees.

assistant: Costs
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 will be provided indemnification to the maximum extent permitted by the Company’s Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws, with the indemnification to be on terms determined by the Board of Directors for the Company or any of its committees, but on term is no less favorable than provided to any other Company executive officer or director and subject to the terms of any separate written indemnification agreement. During Employee’s employment, Employee will be named as an insured on the Company’s directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage (“D&O Coverage”) that the Company provides generally to directors and officers of the Company. as may be amended from time to time for such directors and officers. The Company shall maintain this D&O Coverage at all times during Employee’s employment at a level and with coverages consistent with the D&O Coverage currently maintained by the Company. Upon termination of the Employee’s employment for any reason, the Company will cause such policies to cover Employee in respect of acts and omissions during the period of employment as if the Employee was still an officer, director and/or employee, as applicable.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of ‘persons’ within the meaning of this provision.”). “This means, of course, that the stop must be supported by a reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity, see Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 439, 104 S.Ct. 3138, 82 L.Ed.2d 317 (1984), and that the detention must be reasonable under the circumstances, Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 809-10, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996).” Chhien, 266 F.3d at 5-6. A reasonable, articulable suspicion is “more than a naked hunch,” but less than “either probable cause or evidence of a direct connection linking the suspect to the suspected crime.” Id. at 6. “In determining whether, in the absence of probable cause, an investigatory seizure and search violates the Fourth Amendment, [the First Circuit] 09 (8th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Williams, 359 F.3d 1019 (8th Options: A. holding that the sugar tree ruse did not violate the fourth amendment when officers only stopped vehicles for minor traffic violations B. holding that police officers may stop vehicles when they observe minor traffic violations C. recognizing private damage action for fourth amendment violations by federal officers D. holding that the sugar tree checkpoint program violated the fourth amendment when officers operating the checkpoint were instructed to stop every vehicle that took the exit regardless of whether a traffic violation had occurred E. holding the purpose of a checkpoint was valid when officers stopped vehicles to look for any violations on the vehicles such as drivers license equipment or inspection

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the sugar tree ruse did not violate the fourth amendment when officers only stopped vehicles for minor traffic violations
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 in this Agreement to the contrary, the Company’s obligations under Sections 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 shall terminate if Executive does not execute and deliver to the Company a release substantially in the form attached hereto as Appendix A within [forty-five (45) days] of termination of employment or revokes such release within any applicable revocation period.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EMPLOYEE agrees to use EMPLOYEE’s best efforts in the performance of employment duties assigned to EMPLOYEE from time to time and to, at all times, act in good faith and in the best interests of SYNTEL. EMPLOYEE agrees to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures established by SYNTEL.

assistant: Duties
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: without power to modify child support arrearages directly, it should be equally unable to do so by restricting execution on those judgments. See Smith v. Smith, 797 S.W.2d 798, 800-801 (Mo.App. 1990) (“A party in whose favor a judgment has been rendered may have an execution. ... Husband, in his petition to quash [the writ of execution], in effect sought to relitigate the division of property made by the trial court. As the trial court determined, this was an improper ‘collateral attack upon the judgment.’ ”). The superior court was not permitted to consider Demers’s good faith in reducing his arrearages to judgment; restricting CSED’s ability to execute the judgment based upon Demers’s good faith is accordingly impermissible. See Hooks v. Hooks, 13 Kan.App.2d 105, 762 P.2d 846 (1988) (<HOLDING>). CSED submitted the required documentation of Options: A. holding trial court lacked authority to impose electronic monitoring condition and deleting the provision as a condition of applicants deferred adjudication probation B. holding that the district court lacked authority to enforce a foreign judgment where the plaintiff filed only an affidavit describing the foreign judgment and not a certified copy of the judgment itself in the first instance C. holding that in the absence of statutory authority trial court lacked discretion to condition execution of childsupport judgment upon regular payments towards the arrearages D. holding that a foreign judgment for alimony and child support arrearages was not subject to attack in wyoming except on grounds that would permit attack upon any other money judgment such as want of jurisdiction in the court entering the judgment or lack of service so as to vest jurisdiction over the defendant E. holding that the trial court lacked authority to renew spousal support payments pursuant to a motion that was filed after the expiration of time during which spousal support was required to be paid under the original judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that in the absence of statutory authority trial court lacked discretion to condition execution of childsupport judgment upon regular payments towards the arrearages
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 Loan Party has implemented and maintains in effect policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance by such Loan Party, its Subsidiaries and their respective directors, officers, employees and agents with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions, and such Loan Party, its Subsidiaries and their respective officers and directors and to the knowledge of such Loan Party, its employees and agents, are in compliance with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions in all material respects and are not knowingly engaged in any activity that would reasonably be expected to result in any Loan Party being designated as a Sanctioned Person. None of (a) any Loan Party, any Subsidiary or any of their respective directors, officers or employees, or (b) to the knowledge of any such Loan Party, or any Subsidiary, any agent of such Loan Party or any Subsidiary that will act in any capacity in connection with or benefit from the credit facility established hereby, is a Sanctioned Person. No Borrowing or Letter of Credit, use of proceeds or other transaction contemplated by this Agreement will violate any Anti-Corruption Law or applicable Sanctions.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: an appeal”). 46 .See, e.g., Milton v. United States, 105 F.2d 253, 255 (5th Cir.1939) ("The word ‘filed’ ... is, as applied to court proceedings, a word of art, having a long established and well understood meaning, deriving from the practice of filing papers on a string or wire. It requires of one filing a suit, merely the depositing of the instrument with the custodian for the purpose of being filed.... [I]t charges him with no further duty[.]”); Black’s Law Dictionary 660 (8th ed. 1999) (defining "file” as "To deliver a legal document to the court clerk or record custodian for placement into the official record”). The distinction between filing and service is well-established in our jurisprudence. See, e.g., Varela v. Hi-Lo Powered Stirrups, 424 A.2d 61, 67-68 (D.C.1980) (en banc) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis in the original). 47 . See Henderson Options: A. recognizing the clear understanding that the manner by which an action is commenced via filing of the complaint with the court presents a completely different and separable array of considerations from the manner by which service of process is to be made B. holding that plaintiffs amended complaint was not barred by the applicable statute of limitations where the amendment merely expanded on plaintiffs negligence theories and stating that in a tort action an amendment may vary the statement of the original complaint as to the manner in which the plaintiff was injured or as to the manner of the defendants breach of duty C. holding that dismissal of a complaint pursuant to former 1915d now 1915e is not appropriate where a plaintiff has made a partial payment of filing fees and that in such cases the court must treat the complaint in the same manner as one for which in forma pauperis status has not been granted D. holding that the relevant time of inquiry is the date of the filing of the complaint E. recognizing that it is well settled law that an action is commenced by the service of a summons and without valid service of process the trial court has no jurisdiction to act

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the clear understanding that the manner by which an action is commenced via filing of the complaint with the court presents a completely different and separable array of considerations from the manner by which service of process is to be made
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 Board may amend, modify or terminate this Agreement, including but not limited to, substituting another option of the same or a different type and changing the date of exercise or realization. The Participant’s consent to such action shall be required unless (i) the Board determines that the action, taking into account any related action, does not materially and adversely affect the Participant or (ii) the change is permitted under Section 9.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Retiring Employee specifically acknowledges and agrees that the Company, in providing the Retirement Benefits, has relied on the agreements and covenants of Retiring Employee contained in this Agreement and that the terms of this Agreement are reasonable and necessary for the protection of the Company. Retiring Employee specifically acknowledges and agrees that any breach or threatened breach by Retiring Employee of his or her agreements and covenants contained herein would cause the Company irreparable harm not compensable solely in damages. Retiring Employee further acknowledges and agrees that it is essential to the effective enforcement of this Agreement that Company be entitled to the remedies of specific performance, injunctive relief and similar remedies and Retiring Employee agrees to the granting of any such remedies upon a breach or threatened breach by Retiring Employee of any of the terms hereof. The Company also shall be entitled to pursue any other remedies (at law or in equity) available to it for any breach or threatened breach of this Agreement, including the recovery of money damages.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of April 1, 2019 the Company agrees to continue to employ Executive. Executive agrees to serve in the position of Chief Executive Officer of Genesis Healthcare, Inc. (“GEN”), as a director of GEN, and as an executive officer and/or director of and any direct or indirect subsidiaries of GEN (the “ Company Group ”) without additional compensation. Executive agrees to perform such services and have such duties and responsibilities, not inconsistent with his position as Chief Executive Officer of GEN customarily associated with and incidental to such positions and as may from time to time be reasonably assigned to him by the Board of Directors of GEN (the “Board”). For purposes of this Agreement, a transfer of the Executive’s employment among members of the Company Group shall not be deemed to be a termination of the Executive’s employment, and the entity to which Executive’s employment is transferred shall thereafter be deemed to be the Company for purposes of this Agreement.

assistant: Positions
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 sets forth the entire understanding of the Parties relating to the Executive’s employment with Interlink Electronics and merges and supersedes any prior or contemporaneous agreements between the Parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof, including, without limitation, that certain Employment Agreement, dated July 13, 2010, between Executive and the Company, which prior agreement is terminated.

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: As a condition to each party furnishing the Evaluation Material to the other party and the directors, officers, employees, agents or advisors of such party or its subsidiaries or other affiliates (collectively, “Representatives”), each party agrees that the Evaluation Material furnished to it hereunder shall be treated in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Each party agrees that, without the prior written consent of the other party, neither it nor its Representatives will disclose to any other person (other than to such party’s Representatives who agree, or are otherwise bound, not to disclose the following except as contemplated by this Agreement) any of the other party’s Evaluation Material, the fact that discussions between the parties are taking place concerning the Transaction, or any terms or other facts relating to the Transaction. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Evaluation Material shall only be used by a party and its Representatives to evaluate, negotiate, facilitate or pursue a Transaction.

assistant: Yes
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 subsequent extraneous offenses are admissible to show a defendant’s intent as to an earlier offense. See U.S. v. Germosen, 139 F.3d 120, 128 (2nd Cir.1998) (upholding admission of subsequent act under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to show intent regarding charged offense and holding, “[t]he fact that the evidence involved a subsequent rather than prior act is of no moment”); U.S. v. Latney, 108 F.3d 1446, 1449 (D.C.Cir.) (construing Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and holding that it “draws no distinction b Austin 1990, no pet.) (same). Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by rejecting Russell’s contention that the Vogt Street offense was not admissible simply because it occurred after the Fast Freddy’s offense. Cf. Montgomery, 810 S.W.2d at 380 (<HOLDING>). Although, based on the authorities cited by Options: A. holding that the grant of an injunction is reviewed for abuse of discretion but without deference to the legal conclusions of the trial court B. recognizing that an appellate court reviews a trial courts decision whether or not to grant equitable relief only for an abuse of discretion C. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion D. holding not an abuse of discretion to deny funds E. recognizing that an abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court acts without reference to any guiding principles or rules

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that an abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court acts without reference to any guiding principles or rules
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 explicitly specified to the contrary, (a) references to a section, exhibit or schedule means a section of, or schedule or exhibit to this Agreement, unless another agreement is specified, (b) the word “including” (in its various forms) means “including without limitation,” (c) references to a particular statute or regulation include all rules and regulations thereunder and any predecessor or successor statute, rules or regulation, in each case as amended or otherwise modified from time to time, (d) words in the singular or plural form include the plural and singular form, respectively, (e) references to a particular Person include such Person’s successors and assigns to the extent not prohibited by this Agreement, (f) unless otherwise specified “$” is in reference to United States dollars, and (g) the headings contained in this Agreement, in any exhibit or schedule to this Agreement and in the table of contents to this Agreement are for reference purposes only and will not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: relies on Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397, 406 (1979) (Davis), to assert that disabled tenants are not qualified for a reasonable accommodation unless they are “able to meet all of a program’s requirements in spite of handicaps.” This reliance is misplaced. Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287, 299 n.19 (1985) (Alexander), clarified the holding in Davis by stating that “the question of who is ‘otherwise qualified’ and what actions constitute ‘discrimination’ under [§ 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973] would seem to be two sides of a single coin; the ultimate question is the extent to which a grantee is required to make reasonable modifications in its programs for the needs of the handicapped.” See Wynne v. Tufts Univ. Sch. of Med., 932 F.2d 19, 27 (1st Cir. 1991) (<HOLDING>). 16 A joint statement of HUD and the United Options: A. holding the literal language of davis that an otherwise qualified person must meet all of a programs requirements was modified by alexander which in effect modified the all language of davis and articulated the obligation to make reasonable accommodation part of the otherwise qualified inquiry B. holding that instructions are sufficient which substantially follow the language of the statute or use equivalent language C. holding that the court evaluating a claim of qualified immunity must first determine whether the plaintiff states a claim of a constitutional violation at all and then must determine whether the claimed right was clearly established before proceeding to the qualified immunity question D. holding that moral certainty language compensated for willing to act language in an otherwise proper reasonable doubt instruction E. holding that statutes must be read so as to give effect to all statutory language

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the literal language of davis that an otherwise qualified person must meet all of a programs requirements was modified by alexander which in effect modified the all language of davis and articulated the obligation to make reasonable accommodation part of the otherwise qualified inquiry
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 term, provision, agreement, covenant or restriction of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction or other authority to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the terms, provisions, agreements, covenants and restrictions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated so long as the economic and legal substance of the transactions contemplated hereby are not affected in any manner materially adverse to any party hereto. Upon such a determination, the parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties hereto as closely as possible in a reasonably acceptable manner in order that the transactions contemplated hereby may be consummated as originally contemplated to the fullest extent possible.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (i) The Seller hereby authorizes and hereby agrees from time to time, at its own expense, promptly to execute (if necessary) and deliver all further instruments and documents, and to take all further actions, that may be necessary or desirable, or that the Administrative Agent may reasonably request, to perfect, protect or more fully evidence the security interest granted pursuant to this Agreement or any other Transaction Document, or to enable the Administrative Agent (on behalf of the Secured Parties) to exercise and enforce the Secured Parties’ rights and remedies under this Agreement and the other Transaction Document. Without limiting the foregoing, the Seller hereby authorizes, and will, upon the request of the Administrative Agent, at the Seller’s own expense, execute (if necessary) and file such financing statements or continuation statements, or amendments thereto, and such other instruments and documents, that may be necessary or desirable, or that the Administrative Agent may reasonably request, to perfect, protect or evidence any of the foregoing.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the States through the Due Process Clause.” Id. It is not self-evident why the McDonald Court did not mention Cooper. Perhaps the omission was an oversight, though we will not conclude lightly that the Supreme Court whiffed on the existence or meaning of its precedent. The more likely explanation is that McDonald was treating Cooper’s statement as superfluous to Cooper’s holding and therefore dictum. Just as Cooper’s statement that the Excessive Fines Clause is enforceable against the States is dictum, so too is McDonald’s statement that the Clause is not. So where does that leave us? Given the lack of clear direction from the Supreme Court, we have a couple of options. One option is to ignore McDonald and follow the le tencourt, 474 Mass. 60, 47 N.E.3d 667, 672 n.7, 681 (Mass. 2016) (<HOLDING>). A second option is to await guidance from the Options: A. holding that rluipa violates establishment clause B. holding that 16913a violates the commerce clause C. holding that the statute as applied violates the commerce clause D. holding forfeiture violates federal excessivefines clause based on cooper without mentioning mcdonald E. holding that lack of notice of charges in disciplinary proceedings violates the due process clause

assistant: The best answer is D. holding forfeiture violates federal excessivefines clause based on cooper without mentioning mcdonald
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: At any time and from time to time, the Borrower, may, by notice to the Administrative Agent, (i) increase the aggregate principal amount of any outstanding Advances or add one or more additional tranches of term loans under the Credit Documents (the “ Incremental Facilities ” and the advances made thereunder, the “ Incremental Advances ”), for the avoidance of doubt no consent of the Lenders or the Administrative Agent is required to any Person providing Incremental Advances to the Borrower.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If one or more of the provisions of this Agreement shall, by any court or an arbitrator, be found to be void or unenforceable, the agreement as a whole shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect, and the provisions in question shall be replaced by an interpretation in conformity with law which comes closer to effecting the Parties original intention.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you agree to only give kudos to other users ( and not to yourself ) and only when deserved , and to refrain from any attempts to manipulate the reward system , e.g. , by creating multiple accounts or artificial responses .

assistant: None